CHNN 22, Spring 2008 - School of Social Sciences

sending the President of the Board of Education to open with a speech at the Science Museum,
London. The debates were carefully sequenced and orchestrated to demonstrate the contemporary
and philosophical relevance of the history of science from its place within general historical study
to the contemporary philosophical controversies in biology and physics. There was a programme of
receptions at London clubs, Cambridge and Oxford colleges and the educational institutions of
London.
Into this, the Russians flew to the surprise of all and the consternation of many. There followed a
series of debates on the relevance of the history of science and clashes on the political and social
significance of the subject between the congress ‘mainstream’, the British scientific left and the
Russian delegation. The presence of Bukharin outraged the political right, which mobilized against
him immediately through the leftovers of the 1922 movement, principally the Daily Mail, Morning
Post and Conservative backbench MPs. The more radical British scientists such as Lancelot
Hogben, Joseph Needham, J D Bernal echoed the politicised concerns of some of the Russians and
sought to support them.
The best known of the delegates was Nikolai Bukharin, until recently the head of the Communist
International and a revolutionary firmly under threat from Stalin. Bukharin retained positions
associated with the Academy of Sciences, the role of science in the Five Year Plan and ‘the history
of knowledge’. Two scientists of international reputation, the physicist, Abram Ioffe, and the
geneticist, Nikolai Vavilov attended. Neither were supporters of communism, though both held
important positions in Russian science. The zoologist, Boris Zavadovsky, until recently a
Deborinite ‘dialectician’, the engineer, Vladimir Mitkevich, a zealous Mechanist, and the economist
and historian of science, Modest Rubinstein were relatively unknown. The delegation was
unofficially led by a mathematician, Ernst Kolman, sent to monitor the political orthodoxy of the
other Russians. Finally, an unknown philosopher called Boris Hessen, who worked in physics,
Deborinite philosophy and history of science. Hessen was under suspicion for his political views
and had been forced into samo kritika at the hands of Kolman in the months leading up to the
congress. These delegates sought to engage the congress for a variety of reasons that involved the
complexities of philosophy, history, science an society and their own domestic predicaments.
The intellectual controversy, the public campaign by the newspapers against Bukharin, and the
arguments about politics and science appalled Singer, who saw his entire public relations strategy
endangered by the Russians. He sought to silence their views and to minimize their impact on the
congress, largely through threats and refusing to allow Russian papers. Needham and Hogben,
both on his organizing committee, negotiated an agreement for the Russians to give their papers at
a special session after the formal congress ended. The Russian delegation, recognising the danger
to their own strategy of engagement with the international scientific community, rushed to
translate and print their papers to be given out at this session. The subsequent publication, Science
at the Cross Roads, proved to be of enduring interest. The paper of Boris Hessen on ‘the social and
economic roots of Newton’s Prinkipia’ and that of Bukharin on ‘theory and practice’ in science and
philosophy remain interesting and vibrant papers that require careful examination.
The final level that reveals the unique character and timing of the congress is the social context of
the event. Britain in the summer of 1931 was in the grip of a political and economic maelstrom that
affected every aspect of society. The Labour government teetered on the edge of collapse as the
economic crisis struck Britain. Unemployment benefit had been cut, igniting a wave of protest that
gathered in intensity throughout the summer of 1931. Mass riots were reported in the major cities.
The government was disintegrating as its basis of support in the Labour movement collapsed.
Europe fared even worse with bank runs and mass unemployment in Austria and Germany. Hitler
announced he was ready for power in Germany while India continued to rebel against the British
Empire. The nadir was a matter of weeks away when Ramsey MacDonald joined with the
Conservatives and the naval mutiny at Invergordon exploded. Thus, the atmosphere was taut as the
congress gathered with the political left and right mobilizing as the Labour government crumbled.
Bukharin arriving in London at this juncture was viewed with extreme suspicion by much of the
political establishment and embarrassment by the Labour government.
The presence of the Russian delegation brought the political crisis to the floor of the Science
Museum. This work analyses the streams of social context affecting the event and the political
consciousness of those present.
13