đŸ Archived View for library.inu.red âș file âș tommy-lawson-from-lenin-to-stalin.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:20:07. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
âĄïž Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: From Lenin to Stalin Author: Tommy Lawson Date: August 9, 2020 Language: en Topics: Lenin, Stalin, Stalinism, history Source: Retrieved on 2020-08-10 from http://www.redblacknotes.com/2020/08/09/from-lenin-to-stalin-an-introduction/
In October, 1917 the Russian working class made history. The embryonic
forms of workersâ democracy in the Soviets gave a landslide mandate to
the Bolshevik Party, under a platform of âPeace, Bread and Land.â Acting
swiftly and in conjunction with other revolutionaries, including many
anarchists, the Bolsheviks captured the Winter Palace in Saint
Petersburg and dismissed the government. The Bolsheviks had also taken
up the slogan âAll Power to the Soviets!â in conjunction with the
anarchist movement. Theoretically, this is what they set about to do.
The whole world was shaken by the events in Russia, unleashing a tide of
inspirational class struggle that swept the globe. Suddenly, the
prospect that workers could run the world themselves became very real.
Within months however, the new taste of freedom began to turn sour.
Armed with the excuse of the civil war the Bolsheviks outlawed other
revolutionary left groups, banned their newspapers, suppressed strikes
and labour leaders were being rounded up and thrown in jail. Workers and
peasants began to complain of the privileges their new communist leaders
had while the masses went hungry.
Anarchists throughout this period had a complicated relationship with
the new regime. As documents like the âSoviet of Workers, Soldiers and
Peasants Deputiesâ by the anarcho-syndicalist G.P Maximoff show, most
anarchists were dedicated to defending the newfound workersâ democracy
through the Soviets. However, they were not prepared to sacrifice the
hard won gains of the revolution at the altar of the Bolshevik party.
Instead, they largely set about constructive projects like the factory
committees and the revolutionary movement for âfree sovietsâ in Ukraine.
As the civil war raged on, conditions became more dire. The Bolsheviks
resorted to all sorts of backwards methods to retain their hold on
power. Not just suppression of freedom for the workers, but including
former Monarchist commanders into their military, gerrymandering Soviet
elections, appointing political commissars in the factories, one man
management and a new production system based on American industrial
capitalist methods. On top of the suppression of the urban proletariat,
the mishandling of relations with the peasantry was an error of
monumental proportions. The Cheka and other disciplinary organisations
were created for the purposes of grain acquisition, often at gunpoint.
Workers and peasants often tried to get around this by direct forms of
trade. As Kropotkin expressed in his letters to Lenin, the governmentâs
interference was only making things worse. The net result of this was
the explosion of a rebellion in the naval base of Kronstadt.
The sailors took up arms in support of a wave of strikes that had broken
out in the city, where the hated Cheka arrested labour leaders. The
sailors arrested their Bolshevik leaders and issued a list of 14
demands. The famous revolutionary sailors called for a return to the
principles of the revolution. In what would prove to be possibly the
most tragic moment of the Russian Revolution, the Bolshevik leadership
lied through the press and to their own party. The Bolshevik leadership
invented a plot involving counter-revolutionary forces from abroad, and
refused to share the real programme of the sailors. Even today, itâs
rare to find a Marxist historian who will provide the full list and
details, for it embarasses the notion that the Bolsheviks were truly a
party for âsocialism from belowâ. Selected units of the Red Army were
sent in to crush the rebellion, and thousands of revolutionaries were
slaughtered.
This moment proved crushing even for many Bolsheviks themselves. Many
resigned from the party. The rank hypocrisy of the party had become
evident even to its most strident supporters. As Victor Serge recounts;
âThe Kronstadt sailors, fighting without competent officers (one of
their number, to be sure, was an ex-officer named Kozlovski, but he
played an unimportant role and had no authority), made poor use of their
artillery. Some escaped to Finland; some fought a savage defensive
battle, from fort to fort and street to street, and died shouting. âLong
live the World Revolution!â. Some even died with the cry: âLong Live the
Communist International!â. Several hundred were taken into Petrograd and
turned over to the Cheka, which months later â criminally, stupidly â
was still shooting little groups of them. These prisoners belonged body
and soul to the revolution; they had given expression to the sufferings
and will of the Russian people; and there was the NEP to show that they
had been right! Furthermore, they had been taken prisoner in a civil
war, and by a government which for a long while had been promising an
amnesty to those of its adversaries who were willing to become its
supporters.â
For the Bolsheviks, working class control and democracy had been
supportable so long as it fit the party programme. By setting themselves
above and outside the Russian working class the party and its new
bureaucracy had quickly come to represent its own interests. The
foundations had been laid for the new totalitarian state.
Often todayâs apologists use the excuse that the Soviets and factory
committees could not be democratic given the decimation of the working
class during the civil war. While it is certainly true that the
destruction wrought-large had a huge impact on the nature of the regime
and its potentials, it is untrue that the working class in Russia had
been destroyed or stopped having revolutionary aspirations. The Russian
working class was not âde-proletarianisedâ, and sources such as
Pirianiâs book prove that in scrupulous detail.
Many modern socialists claim the legacy of the Bolshevik Leon Trotsky,
citing his struggle against Stalin and the last gasp of the âLeft
Oppositionâ within the party, which was expelled in 1927. To anarchists
this seems like an ironic claim to the democratic legacy. Trotsky
crushed the Kronstadt rebellion, betrayed the military alliance with the
Left Socialist and Anarchists Insurrectional Army in the Ukraine, and
actively worked to undermine the earlier democratic movement of the
Workers Opposition in the Bolshevik Party. The following quote is
Trotskyâs attitude towards the Workers Opposition, and it speaks volumes
of his attitude towards the working class:
âThey place the right to elect representatives above the Party, as if
the Party were not entitled to assert its dictatorship, even if that
dictatorship temporarily clashed with the passing moods of the workers
democracy. It is necessary to create amongst us the awareness of the
revolutionary birthright of the party, which is obliged to maintain
dictatorship, regardless of the temporary wavering even in the classâŠ.
The dictatorship does not base itself at every given moment on the
formal principle of democracy.â
For anarchists, we do not believe that there is a line in the sand drawn
with Lenin and Trotsky on one side, and Stalin on the other. The
totalitarian regime that solidified under Stalin had its basis in the
regime developed under the earlier leadership of Lenin, Trotsky and the
other Bolsheviks.
As the Italian revolutionary anarchist Errico Malatesta wrote to Luigi
Fabbri;
âIn reality, what we have is the dictatorship of one party, or rather,
of one partyâs leaders: a genuine dictatorship, with its decrees, its
penal sanctions, its henchmen and, above all, its armed forces which are
at present also deployed in the defense of the revolution against its
external enemies, but which will tomorrow be used to impose the
dictatorsâ will upon the workers, to apply a brake on revolution, to
consolidate the new interests in the process of emerging and protect a
new privileged class against the masses.
General Bonaparte was another one who helped defend the French
Revolution against the European reaction, but in defending it, he
strangled the life out of it. Lenin, Trotsky and their comrades are
assuredly sincere revolutionaries (âŠ) and they will not be turning
traitors-but they are preparing the governmental structures which those
who will come after them will utilize to exploit the Revolution and do
it to death. They will be the first victims of their methods and I am
afraid that the Revolution will go under with them.â
Todayâs socialists do a disservice to the ideal of socialism by
justifying the crushing of revolutionary workers by the Bolshevik party.
For those who really believe in socialism, workersâ democracy is the
path forward, not something to be permitted when it meets the criteria
of a self proclaimed vanguard.
The Russian Revolution in Retreat 1920â24
, Simon Piriani, 2008.
An excellent, highly detailed and researched book drawing on minutes of
party committees and factory organisations that details the destruction
of working class democracy in the Soviet Union. This book completely
undermines the narrative that the counter-revolution began under Stalin.
Bloodstained: 100 Years of Leninist Counter-Revolution
, anthology, 2017.
A collection of seminal essays from important participants and theorists
reflecting on the tragedy of the Russian Revolution. Available as an
e-book from AK Press for $2.
Means and Ends: The Anarchist Critique of Seizing State Power
, Anarchpac, 2019.
A contemporary article on the material reasons anarchists do not
advocate building a âworkers state.â
Factory Committees in the Russian Revolution
, Rod Jones, 1984.
A detailed study of the Russian Factory Committees, the alternatives
they attempted to provide and their suppression by the Bolsheviks.
The Bolsheviks and Workers Control
, Maurice Brinton, 1970.
This infamous pamphlet traces the timeline of decisions made by the
Bolshevik party in undermining the democratic aspirations and control of
the working class.
The State and Revolution; Theory and Practice
, Iain Mckay, 2018.
McKays fantastic essay comparing the theoretical work of Lenin in State
and Revolution with the practice of the Bolsheviks in action.
The Trotskyist School of Falsification
, Iain Mckay, 2020.
Mckay reviews Sergeâs The Life and Death of Leon Trotsky in order to
examine and debunk popular lies about Trotsky, lest anyone think Trotsky
represented some kind of democratic alternative to Stalin.
, Victor Serge, extract from Sergeâs Memoirs of a Revolutionary, 1951.
While Serge continued to support the Bolsheviks, the evidence speaks for
itself.
Resolution of the General Meeting of the Crews of the Ships of the Line, Kronstadt
, 1921.
The 14 point list of demands of the Kronstadt Insurgents.
âThe soviet of workersâ, soldiersâ and peasantsâ deputiesâ
, G.P Maximoff, 1917
A December 1917 article laying out the attitude of anarchists towards
the Soviets, which in turn undermines the bizarre Marxist claim that
anarchists were somehow against soviet democracy.