Local government workers and superior bureaucracy in the beginning of the 20th century: "we" and "they"

The article is devoted to the cooperation of the local government workers and superior bureaucracy in the beginning of the 20 th century. The contradictions between officialdom and local government were obvious, but at the same time they did their best to collaborate with each other. The best example of it is the politics of the minister of internal affairs V. K. Plehve. Though this minister was a rather notorious person for «zemstvo» he tried to deal with it. Plehve was eager to make a compromise with the local government workers and he really did it. He even thought about a political reform in Russia - a kind of «constitution» with consultative representative body. Plehve was killed in 1904. The First Russian Revolution radically changed the political system in the country. But the problem of the collaboration between officialdom and local government did not vanish. Vice versa, «zemstvo» tried to use new political institutions (State Duma) for it’s sake. And the bureaucracy supported local government in this case. It gave them majority of deputies mandates changing the election law in June 3 rd, 1907. The Third (and then the Fourth) Duma had «zemstvo’s» face. It was not very easy for the government to deal with it. The local government workers had their own interests and they were not going to give up anytime. The officialdom and «zemstvo» had to find modus vivendi that was necessary for everyday life in Russia. Actually this situation made Duma stronger. It was more powerful than it was written in Fundamental Laws of April 23 rd, 1906. But not all officials were happy about it. And not all deputies understood the nature of it’s power. The Duma had «zemstvo’s» face, but no Russian political party had it. It was a weak point of the political system of that days. The author made a conclusion that the local government workers and the officials mostly were ready for a dialogue. They supposed that the collaboration between them may have given a chance for a forward movement of Russia. Their confrontation was in the ideological field. It did not mean a lot in the practical work.