The Russian Revolution: An Essential Condition for Success

A review of chapter 2 of Lenin's "Left Wing" Communism an Infantile Disorder

Thomas Riggins

In the second chapter of his 1920 work "Left Wing" Communism an Infantile Disorder, Lenin discusses what he considers to have been an essential condition for the victory of the Bolsheviks. My question is: is the Bolshevik model still viable and does it apply across the board to all societies transitioning from capitalism to socialism?

Certainly Lenin is correct when he says that the revolution would not have lasted (i.e., would have collapsed in a month or two) did it not have "the fullest and unreserved support from the entire mass of the working class." I don't think any successful socialist revolution (i.e., peaceful or non-peaceful transition to socialism) can take place without the level of support Lenin says was accorded to the Bolsheviks by the Russian working people. But, this support would not have been enough, Lenin says, without a party subject to "the most rigorous and truly iron discipline."  So the Russian formula was Mass Support + Iron Party = Socialist Revolution [MS +IP = SR].  But can different parties have different amounts of "iron"?

This is an important formula because another way of expressing it is MS + IP = DP where DP stands for "dictatorship of the proletariat" which, Lenin says, is "necessary."  Why does he think the DP is "necessary?" He gives the following five reasons. First, the capitalists are more powerful, as a class, than the workers. Second, capitalist resistance against the workers increases (Lenin says "tenfold") after they lose political power. Third, the capitalist class will get the support of the international capitalist class in its efforts to overthrow the revolution--[ this material support will be much greater than the moral support the workers will get]. Fourth, Russia has a great number of small producers and middle class elements who BY FORCE OF HABIT think in terms of capitalist ideology regardless of what their social interests might be [What's the Matter With Ukraine?] Finally, besides Russia, small-scale production is a world wide phenomenon  and wherever it exists  it "ENGENDERS capitalism and the bourgeoisie continuously, daily, hourly, spontaneously and on a mass scale."

Because of these five conditions Lenin says the DP is absolutely necessary because not only during, but after the revolution, the working people find themselves in a "life-and-death-struggle" with the bourgeoisie and victory is not possible without it (at least in Russian conditions which are the conditions he is presently discussing: whether this is a general rule for all revolutions is another question.) Lenin himself says that the Russian experience shows that their revolution, which he seems to equate with the DP-- i.e., the revolution = "the victorious dictatorship of the proletariat"-- could not have happened without "absolute centralization and discipline of the proletariat" and this is obvious even to "those who are incapable of thinking."

Is this one of the lessons of the Russian Revolution that is applicable to "all" socialist revolutions? Lenin says we should ask ourselves how was it possible for the Bolsheviks to gain the loyalty of the mass of Russian workers? There were three factors that made this possible. First, there was a VANGUARD party with advanced class consciousness which could LEAD the working people in the right political direction. Second, this vanguard was able to in effect MERGE in a way with the masses of the working people-- not only the proletariat (industrial workers in factories and other areas of  capitalist production) "BUT ALSO WITH THE NON-PROLETARIAN masses of working people." Third, that the working masses, from their own daily life experiences, saw and understood that the POLITICAL LINE of the leadership of the vanguard was correct.

 The correct political line cannot be achieved without a correct revolutionary theory, according to Lenin. This theory is not a dogma but has to be tested in the practice of a MASS revolutionary movement. Without these three factors in operation all attempts to get the working masses to follow your line and be "disciplined" in the struggle amount to "phrase-mongering and clowning."

So, the revolution was successful and the DP was instituted in Russia due to the fact that the Bolshevik party was able to discipline the working class and lead it to victory. Can the methods of the Bolshevik party be generalized and applied to other countries and revolutionary movements. Many revolutionaries have thought so and attempted to do so but Lenin himself says that the Bolsheviks succeeded "due simply to a number of historical peculiarities of Russia." This does not seem to be a firm basis for emulation.

What can other countries and movements learn from the Russian revolution? Well, it can't be copied ("historical peculiarities") but two great lessons have been passed on from it. One is the centrality of Marxist thought-- "the only correct revolutionary theory" according to Lenin-- and the other is the necessity of correctly applying this theory through years of struggle and adaptation to the "historical peculiarities" of each individual and particular country and movement. This second requirement is the most perilous as the temptation will always be there to allow temporary and accidental "historical peculiarities" to mask the actual historical forces at work and thus lead to incorrect revisions of Marxist theory resulting in "phrase-mongering and clowning." This is why international meetings of revolutionary parties are so important-- to keep individual parties from isolating themselves from the world movement.

Post your comment

Comments are moderated. See guidelines here.

Comments

  • this is dumb

    Posted by , 05/27/2014 11:27am (3 years ago)

  • The viability of the successful Bolsheviks was due to both the brilliant intellectual and social history of the Russian peoples, and the active, material, political economic"instincts of the intelligent hundreds of thousands-even millions of those seeking "Peace", "Bread", and "Land".
    Needless to say, the brilliant and astonishing newly formed weapon of historical materialism, founded by Marx/Engels, translated to the Russian, set to the material conditions and distinct social, political, cultural and education complex in Russia, largely led by Lenin, filled the bill.
    Is this still"viable"? Does it now "apply"?
    Did this new, revolutionary weapon work, you know, the one that "Shook the World"?
    Of course it did, and of course it is viable and applicable.
    This is not because it is a blunt, crude and bludgeoning weapon, on the contrary, because it is a powerful, generalizable, changeable, adaptable, weapon, whose mode of activity is the study of change, rooted in the real, material conditions of workers everywhere, according to their specific exploitation and oppression-and maybe more importantly, their struggles to be free.
    Yes, this means this applies to the U. S. , now, just as surely as the working people here need, food, housing, medicine, clothing and education, we need the knowledge of 5,000 years of civil rights and social rights, which are truly in line with labor's current struggle for labor rights as we march in Philly.
    It (The Russian Revolution) was just a past phase of the present phase of what's going on all over this planet(and in Philly), which W. E. B. Du Bois recognized in 1906:
    "The morning breaks over the hills, Courage brothers! The battle for humanity is not lost or losing. The Slav is rising in his might, the yellow minions are testing their liberty, the Black Africans are writhing toward the light, and everywhere the laborer is opening the gates of opportunity and peace."
    We cannot, even with our will, isolate ourselves from this movement, our America,".. built on the back of Africa".
    Peace is Prince.

    Posted by peaceapplause, 08/15/2012 5:22pm (5 years ago)

  • This discussion is relevant to us in the United States more,as this is the peak of accumulation of capital on the planet.
    History has given us the ideology,and ideology has transformed the history.Since nations are advancing at
    varied levels of capitalist oppression,resistance of the
    exploited,combined with the level of consciousness of the proletarian masses,will create,new forms of revolutions over the time.Bay of Pigs crisis changed all.
    Let us not forget Mao's famous quote,"Let hundred flowers bloom".The Chinese flower has bloomed for us,with his enlightened,though belated,consent.His flower has given us the highest rate of growth in history.It shines as the unique combination of the Dictatorship and the Democracy of the proletariat,whom the highest peak of capital,is afraid of attacking with weapons,and is locked in unmitigated love for its being the future seat of higher economic growth.Lenin's formulation,unity of working class,the party of the revolution,of non party masses, ability to fight the renewed vengeance of the ruling classes,remains
    true ,a hundred years after his formulations. Ramakant.

    Posted by Ramakant Sharma, 08/12/2012 4:19pm (5 years ago)

  • The CPUSA has a special relationship with the DP in Russia for a number of reasons.
    If we don't believe it, we should read Lenin's Russians and Negroes.
    If we don't believe it, we should read Ten Days that Shook the World by our own John Reed.
    If we don't believe it, we should read the actual history of the CPUSA, along with the consistently solid analysis of Russia, made by our own W. E. B. Du Bois.
    The world movement of the communists and workers demands and has demanded that though we all deal with particulars of our own countries, we need unity to conform and transform these particulars to conditions that help workers world-wide.
    The CPUSA, on the whole, has played a very positive world historical role in this movement, but will not continue to do so unless it continues to embrace this world movement, explaining, explaining, explaining world-wide inter-connections, the way the great Lenin, the great Du Bois, and the great Henry Winston did, that connection between workers.

    Posted by E. E. W. Clay, 08/06/2012 1:40am (5 years ago)

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments