Lenin Returns to Russia
As soon as the "February Revolution" broke out, Lenin began attempts to return to Russia. The governments of the Allied powers refused him permission to travel through their countries but eventually, as a result of negotiations between Fritz Platten, Secretary of the Swiss Socialist Party, and the German government, 32 Russian political emigres (19 of which were Bolsheviks, among them Lenin) were permitted to travel through Germany in a sealed railway carriage accorded extra-territorial rights. The German government, of course, calculated that the return of these revolutionaries to Russia would be detrimental to the Russian war effort.
Lenin arrived in Petrograd on the evening- of April 16th; and was greeted by an enthusiastic crowd of workers and soldiers.
On the following day he reported to the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet on the circumstances of his journey through Germany.
Lenin's "April Theses"
Later on April 17th., Lenin spoke at a meeting of the Bolshevik delegates to the First Congress of Soviets, presenting his theses on the new situation in Russia following the "February Revolution" -- the "April Theses". The main points of these theses were as follows:
1. The "February Revolution" has brought into being the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry in the shape of the Soviets of Workers’and Soldiers’ Deputies.
"The Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies' -- here you have 'revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry' already realised in life".
(V. I. Lenin: "Letters on Tactics"; in 'Collected Works", Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 120).
2. But alongside the Soviets there came into being out of the "February Revolution" the Provisional Government, representing the interests of the capitalist class.
'The Provisional Government of Lvov and Co. is a dictatorship . . based . . on seizure by force accomplished by a definite class, namely, the bourgeoisie".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution"., in: ibid.; p. 133).
3. Thus, out of the "February Revolution" has arisen a temporary condition of dual power, of two rival governments.
"What has made our revolution so strikingly unique is that it has established dual power . . . What constitutes dual power? The fact that by the side of the Provisional Government, the government of the bourgeoisie, there has developed another, as yet weak; embryonic, but undoubtedly real and growing government -- the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies".
(V. I. Lenin: "On Dual Power", in: ibid.; p. 115).
"There is not the slightest doubt but that such a combination cannot last long. There can be no two powers in a state. One of them is bound to dwindle to nothing, and the entire Russian bourgeoisie is already straining all its energies everywhere and in every possible way in an endeavour to weaken, to set aside, to reduce to nothing the Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers' Deputies, to create one single power for the bourgeoisie'".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution"; in: ibid.;p.l33)
4. Despite its weakness, it is the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry (the Soviet embryonic government) which alone at present possesses effective machinery of force (in the shape of the armed workers and revolutionary soldiers).
"In Petrograd the power is actually in the hands of the workers and soldiers; the new government does not use violence against them, and cannot do so because there is no police, there is no army seperated from the people, there is no all-powerful officialdom placed above the people".
(V. I. Lenin "'Letters on Tactics", in ibid.; p. 121).
5. Nevertheless, the leaders of the Soviets are placing this machinery of force at the disposal of the Provisional Government, and seeking to liquidate the democratic dictatorship of the working-class and peasantry.
"By direct agreements with the bourgeois Provisional Government and by a series of actual concessions to the latter, the Soviet power has surrendered and is surrendering its position to the bourgeoisie".
(V. I. Lenin "On Dual Power, in ibid.; p. 116).
6. This has been possible because of the inadequate class consciousness and organisation of the workers and peasants, which has been influenced by petty-bourgeois ideological pressure:
"The reason (i.e., for the surrender of power to the capitalist class -- Ed.) is in the lack of organisation and class consciousness among the workers and peasants".
(V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 116).
"Russia is now in a state of ebullition. Millions of people, politically asleep for ten years, politically crushed by the terrible pressure of tsarism and slave labour for landowners and manufacturers, have awakened and thrown themselves into politics. Who are these millions of people? Mostly small proprietors, petty bourgeois. . . .
A gigantic petty-bourgeois wave has swept over everything, has overwhelmed the class-conscious proletariat not only numerically but also ideologically".
(V. I. Lenin: 'The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution", in: ibid.; p. 1321).
7. After the "February Revolution" the war remains an imperialist war, and the effort of the Provisional Government remains a reactionary one which the Party must continue to oppose.
"Under the new government of Lvov and Co., owing to the capitalist nature of this government, the war on Russia's part remains a predatory imperialist war".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17, 1917, in Ibid; p. 95).
8. The Party must not, therefore, make the slightest concession to "revolutionary defencism" and must dissociate itself from all who foster revolutionary defencism".
"In our attitude towards the war not the slightest concession must be made to 'revolutionary defencism' ".
(V. I. Lenin; ibid.; p. 95).
9. The capitalist Provisional Government is incapable of solving the fundamental social problems of the workers and poor peasantry.
'The government of the Octobrists and Cadets, of the Guchkovs and Miliukovs, could give neither peace nor bread, nor freedom, even if it were sincere in its desire to do so".
(V. I. Lenin: "Letters from Afar", in: ibid., p. 34)
10. Therefore the revolution must be carried forward to a new stage by the working class in alliance with, and leading, the poor peasantry.
"The present situation in Russia . . represents transition from the first stage of the revolution . . to its second stage which is to place power in the hands of the proletariat and the poorest strata of the peasantry".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies,.April 17, 1917, in Ibid.; p. 97).
11. The Provisional Government needs to be overthrown, but it cannot be overthrown at present.
"The Provisional Government . . should be overthrown, for it is an oligarchical, bourgeois, and not a people’s government. . it cannot be overthrown now; . . generally speaking, it cannot be 'overthrown' by any ordinary method, for it rests on the ‘support’ given to the bourgeoisie by the second government -- the Soviet of 'Workers ' Deputies, which is the only possible revolutionary government directly expressing the mind and the will of the majority of workers and peasants".
(V. I. Lenin: "On Dual Power", in: ibid; p. 116-17).
12. The next step in the revolution is, therefore, to convince the working class and poor peasantry to throw off the domination of the Soviets by the compromising petty bourgeois elements and to transform them into their organs of power.
"Any one who, right now, immediately and irrevocably, separates the proletarian elements of the Soviets . . from the petty bourgeois elements, provides a correct expression of the interests of the movement."
(V. I. Lenin: "Letters on Tactics', in: ibid.; p. 126).
"It must be explained to the masses that the Soviet of Workers' Deputies is the only possible form of revolutionary government and that, therefore, our task is, while this government is submitting to the influence of the bourgeoisie, to present a patient, systematic, and persistent analysis of its errors and tactics, an analysis especially adapted to the practical needs of the masses.
While we are in the minority, we carry on the work of criticism and of exposing errors, advocating all along the necessity of transferring the entire power of state to the Soviets of Workers' Deputies".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17, 1917, in: ibid; p. 99).
13. So long as the Soviets control an effective machinery of force and the Proviosional Government does not, this process of transferrig all power to the Soviets may be accomplished peacefully.
"The essence of the situation (i.e., from March 12th. to July 17th., 1917 -- Ed.) was that the arms were in the hands of the people, and that no coercion was exercised over the people from without. That is what opened up and ensured a peaceful path for the development of the revolution. The slogan 'All power to the Soviets' was a slogan for a peaceful development of the revolution, which was possible between March 12 and July 17".
(V. I. Lenin: "On Slogans", in: "Selected Works", Volume 6; London; 19216; p. 167-68).
14. Thus, the former slogan 'Turn the imperialist war into civil war" is now for the time being incorrect:
"We advocated the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war -- are we not going back on ourselves? But the first civil war in Russia has ended.
. . In this transitional period, as long as the armed force is in the hands of the soldiers, as long as Miliukov and Guchkov have not resorted to violence, this civil war, as far as we are concerned, turns into peaceful, prolonged and patient class propaganda. We discard this slogan for the time being, but only for the time being."
(V. I. Lenin: Report on the Current Situation", in: ibid.; p. 95, 96).
15. The aim of transferring all power to the Soviets is to set up a Russian Soviet Republic, a state of the working class and peasantry.
"Not a parliamentary republic – a return to it from the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies would be a step backward – but a republic of Soviets of Workers', Agricultural Labourers' and Peasants' Deputies througout the land, from top to bottom" .
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17th., 1917, in: "Collected Works", Volume. 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 99).
16. The formation of this Soviet Republic will be a major step in the direction of socialism: however, its immediate programme will not be the introduction of socialism, but the establishment of control by the Soviets over production and distribution:
"The Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies must seize power not for the purpose of building an ordinary bourgeois republic, nor for the purpose of introducing Socialism immediately. The letter could not be accomplished.
. . They must seize power in order to take the first concrete steps towards introducing Socialism".
(V. I. Lenin: Report On the Political Situation, 7th. Conference of RSDLP, in: ibid.; p. 283)
"Not the 'introduction' of Socialism as an immediate task, but the immediate placing of the Soviet of Workers' Deputies in control of social production and distribution of goods".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' end Soldiers'
Deputies, April 17th., 1917,in: ibid.; p. 101).
together with:
"Abolition of the police, the army, the bureaucracy.
All officers to be elected and to be subject to recall at any time, their salaries not to exceed the average wage of a competent worker. .
Confiscation of all private lands.
Nationalisation of all lands in the country, and management of such lands by local Soviets of Agricultural Labourers’ and Peasants’ Deputies. A separate organisation of Soviets of Deputies of the poorest peasants. Creation of model agricultural establishments out of large estates. . . . . .
Immediate merger of all the banks in the country into one general national bank, over which the Soviet of Workers' Deputies should have control."
(V. I. Lenin: "On the Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution", in: ibid.; p. 108).
17. The term "social-democratic has been so brought into disrepute by the social-chauvinists that the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party should change its name to the Russian Communist Party.
"We must call ourselves the Communist Party -- just as Marx and Engels called themselves Communists. ...
The majority . . of the Social-Democratic leaders are betraying Socialism.....
The masses are distracted, baffled, deceived by their leaders.....
Should we aid and abet that deception by retaining the old and worn-out party name, which is as decayed as the Second International? . .
It is high time to cast off the soiled shirt, it is high time to put on clean linen".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution", in: ibid.; p. 154, l56, 157).
18. The "Zimmerwald International"' has already broken down as a result of its persistent centrism; the Party must withdraw from it (except for purposes of information) and found a new revolutionary Third International.
'The chief fault of the Zimmerwald International, the cause of its breakdown (for from a political and ideological viewpoint it has already broken down), was its vacillation, its indecision, when it came to the most important practical end all-determining question of breaking completely with the social-chauvinists and the old social-chauvinist International. . .
We must break with this International immediately. We ought to remain in Zimmerwald only to gather information.
It is precisely we who must found, right now, without delay, a new, revolutionary proletarian International".
(V. I. Lenin ibid.; p. 151, 152).
To sum up, Lenin held that, politically, the "February Revolution" was a bourgeois-democratic revolution which transferred power from the tsarist autocracy to the dual power of the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry (in the shape of the Soviets) and of the capitalist class (in the shape of the Provisional Government). Politically, therefore, the 'February Revolution" represented the completion of the bourgeois-democratic revolution:
"Before the March revolution of 1917, state power in Russia was in the hands of one old class, namely, the feudal noble landlord class, headed by Nicholas Romanov.
After that revolution, state power is in the hands of another class, a new one, namely, the bourgeoisie. . . .
The passing of state power from one class to another is the first, the main, the basic principle of a revolution, both in the strictly scientific and in the practical meaning of that term.
To that extent, the bourgeois or the bourgeois democratic, revolution in Russia is completed.
But at this point we hear the noise of objectors, who readily call themselves 'old Bolsheviks' : Haven't we always maintained, they say, that a bourgeois-democratic revolution is culminated only in a 'revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry'? . . . .
The Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies’ --here you have ‘revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry' already realised in life'.
(V. I Lenin: 'Letters on Tactics’ in: ibid.; p. 119, 120)
Economically and socially, however, particularly in so far as the agrarian revolution (the transfer of the land to the working peasantry) is concerned, the “February Revolution” did not complete the bourgeois-democratic revolution, Economically and socially, the bourgeois-democratic revolution was not completed until the “October Revolution", the political content of which was proletarian-socialist.
“Is the agrarian revolution, which is a phase of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, completed? On the contrary, is it not a fact that it has not yet been?”
(V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 119-120).
“The bourgeois-democratic content of the revolution means purging the social relations (systems and institutions) of the country of mediavalism, serfdom, feudalism. . . .
‘We solved the problems (i.e., economic and social problems -- Ed.) of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in passing, as a ‘by-product’ of the main and real proletarian-revolutionary socialist work”.
(V. I. Lenin: “The Fourth Anniversary of the October Revolution”; in: "Selected Works”; Volume 6; London; 1946; p. 501; 503.
Lenin thus maintained that the Bolshevik strategy and tactics relating to the first, bourgeois-democratic stage of the revolutionary process in Russia had been confirmed by the "February Revolution”, but in a “more multicoloured” Way than could have been anticipated:
“The Bolsheviks’ slogans and ideas have been generally confirmed by history; but as to the concrete situation, things have turned out to be different, more original, more unique, more multicoloured than could have been anticipated by any one”.
(V. I. Lenin: “Letters on Tactics", in: "Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 120).
Trotsky and the "Ideological Rearmament” of the Bolshevik Party
After the "October Revolution” the question naturally arose among Trotsky’s disciples as to how it had come about that the socialist revolution in Russia had been brought about in accordance with a political line advanced by Lenin, who had consistently opposed Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution".
Trotsky's answer was simple, if completely mythical: in May 1917 the Bolshevik Party, on Lenin's initiative, had “rearmed itself” ideologically by accepting Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution"; thus history had "confirmed" the correctness of Trotsky's theory of “permanent revolution”:
"Bolshevism under the leadership of Lenin (though not without internal struggle) accomplished its ideological rearmanent on this most important question in the spring of 1917, that is, before the seizure of power".
(L. Trotsky: Note in "The Year 1905;”(January 1922), cited in: L. Trotsky: 'The Permanent Revolution"; New York; 1970; p. 236).
"Precisely in the period between January 9 and the October strike (in 1905 -- Ed.) the author formed those opinions, which later received the name: 'theory of the permanent revolution’ . . . . .
This appraisal was confirmed as completely correct, though after a lapse of twelve years".
(L. Trotsky: Forward to "The Year 1905" (January 1922), cited in: L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 235).
"I by no means consider that in my disagreements with the Bolsheviks I was wrong on all points.. . .
I consider that my assessment of the motive forces of the revolution was absolutely right.. . .
My polemical articles against the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks . . devoted to an analysis of the internal forces of the revolution and its prospects . . I could republish even now without amendment, since they fully and completely coincide with the position of our Party, beginning with 1917".
(L. Trotsky: Letter to N.S. Olminsky, December 1921 cited in: N. S. Olminsky: Foreword to "Lenin on Trotsky" (1925), cited in: J. V. Stalin: Reply to the Discussion on the Report an "The Social--Democratic Deviation in Our Party', l5th Conference of CPSU (B.), November 3rd., 1926; in “Works”;, Volume 3; Moscow; 1954;p. 349-50).
In fact, of course, Lenin took pains to dissociate himself from Trotsky's theory of "permanent revolution” after his return to Russia in April 1917:
"Trotskyism: 'No Tsar but a workers' government’. This, surely is wrong".
(V. I. Lenin: Report on the Political Situation, Petrograd City Conference of the RSDLP, April 27th, 1917, in: "Collected Works", Volume 20, Book 1; London;
l929, p. 207).
"Had we said: 'No Tsar, but a Dictatorship of the Proletariat' -- it would have meant a leap over the petty bourgeoisie.”
(V.I. Lenin: Concluding Remarks in Connection with the Report on the Political Situation, 7th. Conference of the RSDLP, May 7th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 287).
Lenin did not put forward in April 1917 the strategy of direct advance to the dictatorship of the working class (in alliance with the poor peasantry) as a corrected strategy for the realisation of the bourgeois-democratic revolution.
On the contrary, the bourgeois-democratic revolution, as the first stage of the revolutionary process in Russia, had already been realised, politically, in the “February Revolution”. The strategy of direct advance to the dictatorship of the working class (in alliance with the poor peasantry) was put forward as a new strategy for the new situation following the "February Revolution", a new strategy for the second stage of the revolutionary process.
As Lenin expressed it in his “April Theses”:
"The present situation in Russia. . .represents a transition from the first stage of the revolution to its second stage which is to place power in the hands of the proletariat and the poorest strata of the peasantry”.
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 97).
Trotsky's myth -- that Lenin put forward in April 1917 a "corrected” strategy for the realisation of the bourgeois--democratic revolution similar to that embodied in Trotsky's theory of "permanent revolution” -- is based on a denial of the fact that the 'February Revolution" constituted, politically, a bourgeois-democratic revolution.
In his “History of the Russian Revolution", Trotsky admits this fact:
'The insurrection triumphed. But to whom did it hand over the power snatched from the monarchy? We come here to the central problem of the February revolution. Why and how did the power turn up in the hands of the liberal bourgeoisie?"
(L. Trotsky: "History of the Russian Revolution", Volume 1; London; 1967; p. l55).
But in his "The Permanent Revolution”, Trotsky deliberately confuses the political bourgeois-democratic revolution of March with the bourgeois-democratic revolutionary economic and social changes that followed the revolution of November in order to present the latter as a "bourgeois-democratic revolution" which resulted in the dictatorship of the proletariat:
'
The bourgeois-democratic revolution was realised during the first period after October. . But, as we know, it was not realised in the form of a democratic dictator-ship (i.e., of the working class and peasantry –but in the form of the dictatorship of the proletariat.. . . .
The two lines, the 'permanent' and Lenin's . . were completely fused by the October Revolution”.
(L. Trotsky: “The Permanent Revolution"; New York; 1970; p. 229, 234).
In November 1926 Stalin was justifiably sarcastic about Trotsky's claim that in May 1917 the Party had "rearmed itself" with Trotsky's theory of 'permanent revolution":
'Trotsky cannot but know that Lenin fought against the theory of permanent revolution to the end of his life. But that does not worry Trotsky.
It turns out . . that the theory of permanent revolution 'fully and completely coincided with the position of our Party, beginning with 1917'. . ..
But …how could Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution have coincided with the position of our Party when it is known that our Party, in the person of Lenin, combated this theory all the time? . .
Either our Party did not have a theory of its own, and was later compelled by the course of events to accept Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution; or it did have a theory of its own, but that theory was imperceptibly ousted by Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution, 'beginning with 1917'. . . .
Surely the Bolsheviks had some theory, some estimate of the revolution, some estimate of its motive forces. etc?. . . .
What happened to Leninism, to the theory of Bolshevism, to the Bolshevik estimate of our revolution and its motive forces, etc.?…….
And so, once upon a time there were people known as the Bolsheviks who somehow managed, 'beginning' with 1903, to 'weld' together a party, but who had no revolutionary theory. So they drifted and drifted, ‘beginning' with 1903, until somehow they managed to reach the year 1917. Then, having espied Trotsky with his theory of permanent revolution,' they decided to 'rearm themselves' and 'having rearmed themselves', they lost the last remnants of Leninism, of Lenin's theory of revolution, thus bringing about the 'full coincidence’ of the theory of permanent revolution with the 'position' of our Party.
That is a very interesting fairy-tale, comrades. It, if you like, is one of the splendid conjuring tricks you may see at the circus. But this is not a circus; it is a conference of our Party. Nor, after all, have we hired Trotsky as a circus artist”.
(J. V. Stalin: Reply to the Discussion on the Report "The Social-Democratic Deviation in our Party", l5th. Conference of CPSU (B.), November 3rd., 1926, in:
"Works", Volume 3; Moscow; 1954; p. 350, 351, 353-54).
Lenin arrived in Petrograd on the evening- of April 16th; and was greeted by an enthusiastic crowd of workers and soldiers.
On the following day he reported to the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet on the circumstances of his journey through Germany.
Lenin's "April Theses"
Later on April 17th., Lenin spoke at a meeting of the Bolshevik delegates to the First Congress of Soviets, presenting his theses on the new situation in Russia following the "February Revolution" -- the "April Theses". The main points of these theses were as follows:
1. The "February Revolution" has brought into being the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry in the shape of the Soviets of Workers’and Soldiers’ Deputies.
"The Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies' -- here you have 'revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry' already realised in life".
(V. I. Lenin: "Letters on Tactics"; in 'Collected Works", Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 120).
2. But alongside the Soviets there came into being out of the "February Revolution" the Provisional Government, representing the interests of the capitalist class.
'The Provisional Government of Lvov and Co. is a dictatorship . . based . . on seizure by force accomplished by a definite class, namely, the bourgeoisie".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution"., in: ibid.; p. 133).
3. Thus, out of the "February Revolution" has arisen a temporary condition of dual power, of two rival governments.
"What has made our revolution so strikingly unique is that it has established dual power . . . What constitutes dual power? The fact that by the side of the Provisional Government, the government of the bourgeoisie, there has developed another, as yet weak; embryonic, but undoubtedly real and growing government -- the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies".
(V. I. Lenin: "On Dual Power", in: ibid.; p. 115).
"There is not the slightest doubt but that such a combination cannot last long. There can be no two powers in a state. One of them is bound to dwindle to nothing, and the entire Russian bourgeoisie is already straining all its energies everywhere and in every possible way in an endeavour to weaken, to set aside, to reduce to nothing the Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers' Deputies, to create one single power for the bourgeoisie'".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution"; in: ibid.;p.l33)
4. Despite its weakness, it is the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry (the Soviet embryonic government) which alone at present possesses effective machinery of force (in the shape of the armed workers and revolutionary soldiers).
"In Petrograd the power is actually in the hands of the workers and soldiers; the new government does not use violence against them, and cannot do so because there is no police, there is no army seperated from the people, there is no all-powerful officialdom placed above the people".
(V. I. Lenin "'Letters on Tactics", in ibid.; p. 121).
5. Nevertheless, the leaders of the Soviets are placing this machinery of force at the disposal of the Provisional Government, and seeking to liquidate the democratic dictatorship of the working-class and peasantry.
"By direct agreements with the bourgeois Provisional Government and by a series of actual concessions to the latter, the Soviet power has surrendered and is surrendering its position to the bourgeoisie".
(V. I. Lenin "On Dual Power, in ibid.; p. 116).
6. This has been possible because of the inadequate class consciousness and organisation of the workers and peasants, which has been influenced by petty-bourgeois ideological pressure:
"The reason (i.e., for the surrender of power to the capitalist class -- Ed.) is in the lack of organisation and class consciousness among the workers and peasants".
(V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 116).
"Russia is now in a state of ebullition. Millions of people, politically asleep for ten years, politically crushed by the terrible pressure of tsarism and slave labour for landowners and manufacturers, have awakened and thrown themselves into politics. Who are these millions of people? Mostly small proprietors, petty bourgeois. . . .
A gigantic petty-bourgeois wave has swept over everything, has overwhelmed the class-conscious proletariat not only numerically but also ideologically".
(V. I. Lenin: 'The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution", in: ibid.; p. 1321).
7. After the "February Revolution" the war remains an imperialist war, and the effort of the Provisional Government remains a reactionary one which the Party must continue to oppose.
"Under the new government of Lvov and Co., owing to the capitalist nature of this government, the war on Russia's part remains a predatory imperialist war".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17, 1917, in Ibid; p. 95).
8. The Party must not, therefore, make the slightest concession to "revolutionary defencism" and must dissociate itself from all who foster revolutionary defencism".
"In our attitude towards the war not the slightest concession must be made to 'revolutionary defencism' ".
(V. I. Lenin; ibid.; p. 95).
9. The capitalist Provisional Government is incapable of solving the fundamental social problems of the workers and poor peasantry.
'The government of the Octobrists and Cadets, of the Guchkovs and Miliukovs, could give neither peace nor bread, nor freedom, even if it were sincere in its desire to do so".
(V. I. Lenin: "Letters from Afar", in: ibid., p. 34)
10. Therefore the revolution must be carried forward to a new stage by the working class in alliance with, and leading, the poor peasantry.
"The present situation in Russia . . represents transition from the first stage of the revolution . . to its second stage which is to place power in the hands of the proletariat and the poorest strata of the peasantry".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies,.April 17, 1917, in Ibid.; p. 97).
11. The Provisional Government needs to be overthrown, but it cannot be overthrown at present.
"The Provisional Government . . should be overthrown, for it is an oligarchical, bourgeois, and not a people’s government. . it cannot be overthrown now; . . generally speaking, it cannot be 'overthrown' by any ordinary method, for it rests on the ‘support’ given to the bourgeoisie by the second government -- the Soviet of 'Workers ' Deputies, which is the only possible revolutionary government directly expressing the mind and the will of the majority of workers and peasants".
(V. I. Lenin: "On Dual Power", in: ibid; p. 116-17).
12. The next step in the revolution is, therefore, to convince the working class and poor peasantry to throw off the domination of the Soviets by the compromising petty bourgeois elements and to transform them into their organs of power.
"Any one who, right now, immediately and irrevocably, separates the proletarian elements of the Soviets . . from the petty bourgeois elements, provides a correct expression of the interests of the movement."
(V. I. Lenin: "Letters on Tactics', in: ibid.; p. 126).
"It must be explained to the masses that the Soviet of Workers' Deputies is the only possible form of revolutionary government and that, therefore, our task is, while this government is submitting to the influence of the bourgeoisie, to present a patient, systematic, and persistent analysis of its errors and tactics, an analysis especially adapted to the practical needs of the masses.
While we are in the minority, we carry on the work of criticism and of exposing errors, advocating all along the necessity of transferring the entire power of state to the Soviets of Workers' Deputies".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17, 1917, in: ibid; p. 99).
13. So long as the Soviets control an effective machinery of force and the Proviosional Government does not, this process of transferrig all power to the Soviets may be accomplished peacefully.
"The essence of the situation (i.e., from March 12th. to July 17th., 1917 -- Ed.) was that the arms were in the hands of the people, and that no coercion was exercised over the people from without. That is what opened up and ensured a peaceful path for the development of the revolution. The slogan 'All power to the Soviets' was a slogan for a peaceful development of the revolution, which was possible between March 12 and July 17".
(V. I. Lenin: "On Slogans", in: "Selected Works", Volume 6; London; 19216; p. 167-68).
14. Thus, the former slogan 'Turn the imperialist war into civil war" is now for the time being incorrect:
"We advocated the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war -- are we not going back on ourselves? But the first civil war in Russia has ended.
. . In this transitional period, as long as the armed force is in the hands of the soldiers, as long as Miliukov and Guchkov have not resorted to violence, this civil war, as far as we are concerned, turns into peaceful, prolonged and patient class propaganda. We discard this slogan for the time being, but only for the time being."
(V. I. Lenin: Report on the Current Situation", in: ibid.; p. 95, 96).
15. The aim of transferring all power to the Soviets is to set up a Russian Soviet Republic, a state of the working class and peasantry.
"Not a parliamentary republic – a return to it from the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies would be a step backward – but a republic of Soviets of Workers', Agricultural Labourers' and Peasants' Deputies througout the land, from top to bottom" .
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17th., 1917, in: "Collected Works", Volume. 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 99).
16. The formation of this Soviet Republic will be a major step in the direction of socialism: however, its immediate programme will not be the introduction of socialism, but the establishment of control by the Soviets over production and distribution:
"The Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies must seize power not for the purpose of building an ordinary bourgeois republic, nor for the purpose of introducing Socialism immediately. The letter could not be accomplished.
. . They must seize power in order to take the first concrete steps towards introducing Socialism".
(V. I. Lenin: Report On the Political Situation, 7th. Conference of RSDLP, in: ibid.; p. 283)
"Not the 'introduction' of Socialism as an immediate task, but the immediate placing of the Soviet of Workers' Deputies in control of social production and distribution of goods".
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' end Soldiers'
Deputies, April 17th., 1917,in: ibid.; p. 101).
together with:
"Abolition of the police, the army, the bureaucracy.
All officers to be elected and to be subject to recall at any time, their salaries not to exceed the average wage of a competent worker. .
Confiscation of all private lands.
Nationalisation of all lands in the country, and management of such lands by local Soviets of Agricultural Labourers’ and Peasants’ Deputies. A separate organisation of Soviets of Deputies of the poorest peasants. Creation of model agricultural establishments out of large estates. . . . . .
Immediate merger of all the banks in the country into one general national bank, over which the Soviet of Workers' Deputies should have control."
(V. I. Lenin: "On the Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution", in: ibid.; p. 108).
17. The term "social-democratic has been so brought into disrepute by the social-chauvinists that the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party should change its name to the Russian Communist Party.
"We must call ourselves the Communist Party -- just as Marx and Engels called themselves Communists. ...
The majority . . of the Social-Democratic leaders are betraying Socialism.....
The masses are distracted, baffled, deceived by their leaders.....
Should we aid and abet that deception by retaining the old and worn-out party name, which is as decayed as the Second International? . .
It is high time to cast off the soiled shirt, it is high time to put on clean linen".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution", in: ibid.; p. 154, l56, 157).
18. The "Zimmerwald International"' has already broken down as a result of its persistent centrism; the Party must withdraw from it (except for purposes of information) and found a new revolutionary Third International.
'The chief fault of the Zimmerwald International, the cause of its breakdown (for from a political and ideological viewpoint it has already broken down), was its vacillation, its indecision, when it came to the most important practical end all-determining question of breaking completely with the social-chauvinists and the old social-chauvinist International. . .
We must break with this International immediately. We ought to remain in Zimmerwald only to gather information.
It is precisely we who must found, right now, without delay, a new, revolutionary proletarian International".
(V. I. Lenin ibid.; p. 151, 152).
To sum up, Lenin held that, politically, the "February Revolution" was a bourgeois-democratic revolution which transferred power from the tsarist autocracy to the dual power of the democratic dictatorship of the working class and peasantry (in the shape of the Soviets) and of the capitalist class (in the shape of the Provisional Government). Politically, therefore, the 'February Revolution" represented the completion of the bourgeois-democratic revolution:
"Before the March revolution of 1917, state power in Russia was in the hands of one old class, namely, the feudal noble landlord class, headed by Nicholas Romanov.
After that revolution, state power is in the hands of another class, a new one, namely, the bourgeoisie. . . .
The passing of state power from one class to another is the first, the main, the basic principle of a revolution, both in the strictly scientific and in the practical meaning of that term.
To that extent, the bourgeois or the bourgeois democratic, revolution in Russia is completed.
But at this point we hear the noise of objectors, who readily call themselves 'old Bolsheviks' : Haven't we always maintained, they say, that a bourgeois-democratic revolution is culminated only in a 'revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry'? . . . .
The Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies’ --here you have ‘revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry' already realised in life'.
(V. I Lenin: 'Letters on Tactics’ in: ibid.; p. 119, 120)
Economically and socially, however, particularly in so far as the agrarian revolution (the transfer of the land to the working peasantry) is concerned, the “February Revolution” did not complete the bourgeois-democratic revolution, Economically and socially, the bourgeois-democratic revolution was not completed until the “October Revolution", the political content of which was proletarian-socialist.
“Is the agrarian revolution, which is a phase of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, completed? On the contrary, is it not a fact that it has not yet been?”
(V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 119-120).
“The bourgeois-democratic content of the revolution means purging the social relations (systems and institutions) of the country of mediavalism, serfdom, feudalism. . . .
‘We solved the problems (i.e., economic and social problems -- Ed.) of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in passing, as a ‘by-product’ of the main and real proletarian-revolutionary socialist work”.
(V. I. Lenin: “The Fourth Anniversary of the October Revolution”; in: "Selected Works”; Volume 6; London; 1946; p. 501; 503.
Lenin thus maintained that the Bolshevik strategy and tactics relating to the first, bourgeois-democratic stage of the revolutionary process in Russia had been confirmed by the "February Revolution”, but in a “more multicoloured” Way than could have been anticipated:
“The Bolsheviks’ slogans and ideas have been generally confirmed by history; but as to the concrete situation, things have turned out to be different, more original, more unique, more multicoloured than could have been anticipated by any one”.
(V. I. Lenin: “Letters on Tactics", in: "Collected Works”, Volume 20, Book 1; London; 1929; p. 120).
Trotsky and the "Ideological Rearmament” of the Bolshevik Party
After the "October Revolution” the question naturally arose among Trotsky’s disciples as to how it had come about that the socialist revolution in Russia had been brought about in accordance with a political line advanced by Lenin, who had consistently opposed Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution".
Trotsky's answer was simple, if completely mythical: in May 1917 the Bolshevik Party, on Lenin's initiative, had “rearmed itself” ideologically by accepting Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution"; thus history had "confirmed" the correctness of Trotsky's theory of “permanent revolution”:
"Bolshevism under the leadership of Lenin (though not without internal struggle) accomplished its ideological rearmanent on this most important question in the spring of 1917, that is, before the seizure of power".
(L. Trotsky: Note in "The Year 1905;”(January 1922), cited in: L. Trotsky: 'The Permanent Revolution"; New York; 1970; p. 236).
"Precisely in the period between January 9 and the October strike (in 1905 -- Ed.) the author formed those opinions, which later received the name: 'theory of the permanent revolution’ . . . . .
This appraisal was confirmed as completely correct, though after a lapse of twelve years".
(L. Trotsky: Forward to "The Year 1905" (January 1922), cited in: L. Trotsky: ibid.; p. 235).
"I by no means consider that in my disagreements with the Bolsheviks I was wrong on all points.. . .
I consider that my assessment of the motive forces of the revolution was absolutely right.. . .
My polemical articles against the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks . . devoted to an analysis of the internal forces of the revolution and its prospects . . I could republish even now without amendment, since they fully and completely coincide with the position of our Party, beginning with 1917".
(L. Trotsky: Letter to N.S. Olminsky, December 1921 cited in: N. S. Olminsky: Foreword to "Lenin on Trotsky" (1925), cited in: J. V. Stalin: Reply to the Discussion on the Report an "The Social--Democratic Deviation in Our Party', l5th Conference of CPSU (B.), November 3rd., 1926; in “Works”;, Volume 3; Moscow; 1954;p. 349-50).
In fact, of course, Lenin took pains to dissociate himself from Trotsky's theory of "permanent revolution” after his return to Russia in April 1917:
"Trotskyism: 'No Tsar but a workers' government’. This, surely is wrong".
(V. I. Lenin: Report on the Political Situation, Petrograd City Conference of the RSDLP, April 27th, 1917, in: "Collected Works", Volume 20, Book 1; London;
l929, p. 207).
"Had we said: 'No Tsar, but a Dictatorship of the Proletariat' -- it would have meant a leap over the petty bourgeoisie.”
(V.I. Lenin: Concluding Remarks in Connection with the Report on the Political Situation, 7th. Conference of the RSDLP, May 7th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 287).
Lenin did not put forward in April 1917 the strategy of direct advance to the dictatorship of the working class (in alliance with the poor peasantry) as a corrected strategy for the realisation of the bourgeois-democratic revolution.
On the contrary, the bourgeois-democratic revolution, as the first stage of the revolutionary process in Russia, had already been realised, politically, in the “February Revolution”. The strategy of direct advance to the dictatorship of the working class (in alliance with the poor peasantry) was put forward as a new strategy for the new situation following the "February Revolution", a new strategy for the second stage of the revolutionary process.
As Lenin expressed it in his “April Theses”:
"The present situation in Russia. . .represents a transition from the first stage of the revolution to its second stage which is to place power in the hands of the proletariat and the poorest strata of the peasantry”.
(V. I. Lenin: Speech at a Caucus of the Bolshevik Members of the All-Russian Conference of the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, April 17th., 1917, in: ibid.; p. 97).
Trotsky's myth -- that Lenin put forward in April 1917 a "corrected” strategy for the realisation of the bourgeois--democratic revolution similar to that embodied in Trotsky's theory of "permanent revolution” -- is based on a denial of the fact that the 'February Revolution" constituted, politically, a bourgeois-democratic revolution.
In his “History of the Russian Revolution", Trotsky admits this fact:
'The insurrection triumphed. But to whom did it hand over the power snatched from the monarchy? We come here to the central problem of the February revolution. Why and how did the power turn up in the hands of the liberal bourgeoisie?"
(L. Trotsky: "History of the Russian Revolution", Volume 1; London; 1967; p. l55).
But in his "The Permanent Revolution”, Trotsky deliberately confuses the political bourgeois-democratic revolution of March with the bourgeois-democratic revolutionary economic and social changes that followed the revolution of November in order to present the latter as a "bourgeois-democratic revolution" which resulted in the dictatorship of the proletariat:
'
The bourgeois-democratic revolution was realised during the first period after October. . But, as we know, it was not realised in the form of a democratic dictator-ship (i.e., of the working class and peasantry –but in the form of the dictatorship of the proletariat.. . . .
The two lines, the 'permanent' and Lenin's . . were completely fused by the October Revolution”.
(L. Trotsky: “The Permanent Revolution"; New York; 1970; p. 229, 234).
In November 1926 Stalin was justifiably sarcastic about Trotsky's claim that in May 1917 the Party had "rearmed itself" with Trotsky's theory of 'permanent revolution":
'Trotsky cannot but know that Lenin fought against the theory of permanent revolution to the end of his life. But that does not worry Trotsky.
It turns out . . that the theory of permanent revolution 'fully and completely coincided with the position of our Party, beginning with 1917'. . ..
But …how could Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution have coincided with the position of our Party when it is known that our Party, in the person of Lenin, combated this theory all the time? . .
Either our Party did not have a theory of its own, and was later compelled by the course of events to accept Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution; or it did have a theory of its own, but that theory was imperceptibly ousted by Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution, 'beginning with 1917'. . . .
Surely the Bolsheviks had some theory, some estimate of the revolution, some estimate of its motive forces. etc?. . . .
What happened to Leninism, to the theory of Bolshevism, to the Bolshevik estimate of our revolution and its motive forces, etc.?…….
And so, once upon a time there were people known as the Bolsheviks who somehow managed, 'beginning' with 1903, to 'weld' together a party, but who had no revolutionary theory. So they drifted and drifted, ‘beginning' with 1903, until somehow they managed to reach the year 1917. Then, having espied Trotsky with his theory of permanent revolution,' they decided to 'rearm themselves' and 'having rearmed themselves', they lost the last remnants of Leninism, of Lenin's theory of revolution, thus bringing about the 'full coincidence’ of the theory of permanent revolution with the 'position' of our Party.
That is a very interesting fairy-tale, comrades. It, if you like, is one of the splendid conjuring tricks you may see at the circus. But this is not a circus; it is a conference of our Party. Nor, after all, have we hired Trotsky as a circus artist”.
(J. V. Stalin: Reply to the Discussion on the Report "The Social-Democratic Deviation in our Party", l5th. Conference of CPSU (B.), November 3rd., 1926, in:
"Works", Volume 3; Moscow; 1954; p. 350, 351, 353-54).
NEXT >>> The Opposition to Lenin's Theses
.jpg)
