Indicadores de un modelo para medir la Responsabilidad Social Empresarial en las

‘high phrases’ of senior Duma members show the importance of national primary [folks] education. The Third Duma has been working hard to compose suitable education legislation. Even a pro-government school is better than none. It is

409 _{It is not explained in the article that the ‘third of June men’ of the title are the members of the Third State Duma,}

which operated under the legislation brought in on 3 June 1907 when the second convocation was dissolved. The article’s last line promises to discuss the Kadets and the SD elsewhere.

recognised, and not only by revolutionaries, that if a primary school does not use the mother tongue of its pupils, they will know no language well, and even the Duma acknowledges the relevance of the multilingualism of the population to the school question. There are many obstacles to creating foreign-language schools, and such schools remain under Russian control. The Latvian and Polish primary schools are not a step towards independent Latvian or Polish schools, ‘God forbid!’, but nonetheless, ‘the Left Octobrist Kapustin’ sees them as separatist. The commission’s bill excluded Georgians, Armenians and Tatars, and a proposal about the Jewish school was rejected twice, so clearly ‘the patriotic Duma’ will not create a Jewish school. The dispute over whether Ukrainians are a separate nation or Poles, and whether they and Belorussians are Slavs at all, or inorodtsy, has implications for their entitlement to national rights. The bill would make the school a means of ‘more rational russification’, but it may not be passed by the Duma, even though the education minister Schwartz has shown so much real-Russian patriotism that the bill should meet with his approval.411

Section V

(22-24) concerns the question of the local court, which has parallels to the national question. Crimes against people and property have increased so an efficient court is needed. Setting one up is a difficult process. It should be staffed in proportion to the nations in the area it serves. Its relevance to the national question lies in the need for communication in the courtroom. In Austria, the opinions within the Social-Democracy are (i) that judges must know all the languages of the population (which evokes

questions about recognition of minority languages) and (ii) that the judge must be from the same nation as the parties to the case. Granted, the parties might be from different nations. Trials must use the language of the parties, and if this is held as a basic

principle then all other questions become simply technical. This problem is ignored by the ‘third of June legislators’ because they only accept the use of Russian and, for Shcheglovitov, it is purely a matter of “convenience” which will impede justice. Antonov proposed that non-Russian-speakers use their native language in court and if necessary the judge should use an interpreter.412 _{Using an interpreter is inadequate but}

‘better than nothing’. However, Antonov’s proposal will not help ‘us’ as he does not consider Yiddish a language. Requiring judges to know local languages would signify insufficient patriotism and rejection of a potential tool of russification. Therefore, half of Russia will have a court in which communication is impossible, it will be ‘not a court

410 _{Bronis%aw Grosser, Bundist theorist (1883-1912); see Sophia Dubnow-Ehrlich, ‘Bronislav groser,’ Doyres}

bundistn, vol. 1, 319-34; and Joshua D. Zimmerman, ‘Grosser, Bronis%aw,’ YIVO Encyclopedia, 10 Aug. 2010.

411 _{Aleksandr Nikolaevich Shvarts, Minister of National Enlightenment 1908-10 (1848-1915).} 412 _{Nikolay Ivanovich Antonov, Octobrist deputy in all three Dumas, from Kharkov (1859-1938).}

but a caricature’. Such caricatures of governance and public services are only to be

expected from the current government. !

‘Russia now has new saviours: the Russian nationalists. Who are they? Representatives of the nobility, for whom national oppression is a source of countless privileges,

privileges at almost all higher levels in the military, the navy, the public service, even in public agencies, where they are tolerated in the border regions; privileges with land ownership over “foreign-born” people, privileges with loans and subsidies.

Representatives of the priests, for whom oppression of foreign nations is closely linked with oppression of foreign faiths, with increases in religious fanaticism, with

consolidation of their dark power. Representatives of the rich peasants, the “kulaks”, who want to have a monopoly on sucking the blood from the poor village-dwelling masses and are scared that they will have to share it with other, foreign-born, exploiters.’ (13; par. 2-3)

141. D. Katsenelenboygen. ‘Vegen dem tsionisten-kongres in hamburg [About the

Zionist Congress in Hamburg].’ Tsayt-fragen [Vilna], 2, Di velt, Mar. 1910, pp. 86-92 (Yiddish)

Attributed by IYP. Copy from epaveldas.lt.

This fairly long anthology article is signed using a surname from Esther’s mother’s family.413

Consisting of an introductory section, four numbered sections and a concluding paragraph, the article reports on the Zionists’ event from a position of opposition to Zionism.414

It comments on the congress, discusses the history of Zionism and practical considerations with regard to Palestine, and presents the Zionist movement as divided, ineffective and even reactionary, a counterpart to the government’s black reaction. Section I (87-88) describes the ‘gloomy’ opening of the congress. It considers

the history of Zionism, which is a history of disappointment and hopeless blind groping for ‘the magical “alt-nayland”’.415

The Zionist party leadership and internal party

conflict are a miserable, stagnant state of affairs founded on the unattainable prospect of ‘making a utopia into a reality’.416