Bolshevism and the October Revolution

If the October Revolution had gained a victory, humankind would be at the beginning of the establishment of a world without class, exploitation, State, and any social inequality. There is no revolution in any epoch with these qualities. The last expectation in all previous revolutions, for example, the great French Revolution, was to replace an old form of exploitation with a modern one. But the October Revolution had arisen with a flag to put an end to any kind of exploitation, deprivation, and separation of human beings from their labour products. For those people who knew the October Revolution as such, the explanation of actual causes of the revolution’s failure in Russia has an extraordinary place. In this realm, it is not an event that belongs to the past history of the worker movement. It is rather a living and existing event which by contemplating those experiences would be a light for every conscious worker for our daily struggle in every corner of this world. The failure of the October Revolution namely is the continuation of captivity of human beings in the jail of exploitation, brutality and disfranchisement of capitalism. This also means the inevitable continuing battle of inferior human beings to break this chain. That is the compulsion of the working class and its conscious forerunners to grasp the roots of our defeat in October, and it is necessary to learn from this event in order to pave the ground for proceeding with the worker movement against wage-slavery, and certainly as capitalism exists, referring to the October Revolution and its experiences, is absolutely necessary. The aim of this article is to provide this perspective about the October Revolution. And, therefore, in order to proceed with this goal, some issues must be researched such as the particular problems the working class of Russia must solve between 1903 and 1917. Furthermore some particular political needs in the class power arrangement of the working class of Russian, could not adopt, and therefore, lead to defeat in the October Revolution. The working class of the world needs to learn from the October Revolution in order to proceed with its struggle and gain victory in the next October Revolution.

How will the worker revolution gain victory?

The victory of the worker revolution is tied to the readiness of the worker masses as a class for the establishment of socialism. The answer to this question without a doubt is not an easy task. But, we cannot have any doubt about this issue that without having a powerful socialist council movement of workers and without the working class aiming to put an end to wage-slavery and the establishment of an alternative to existing society – it becomes a subject matter of its own movement that has no chance of any victory. The calling for workers by a Party and following the dissenting workers from this call temporarily breaks up the State machine, but the political power seizure of this event would not be the mastery of the working class. The provisional worker state at the most minimum level or the beginning situation of the victory is a council organization based on a large scale presence of workers and preparation, and the rigid will of a council organization for the establishment of a socialist work organization in order to put an end to any wage-slavery. The formula that ‘the proletariat first conquers the political power, and then establishes socialism’ has no clear indication of any vital issues of the worker revolution. The political power can be seized by the party or the political group based on a large scale presennce of workers dissenting or even all councils that would be formed during the class struggle between the bourgeois and the proletariat as a container of socialist struggle of class. Both of them are able to be under the flag of Communism and implement some programs. But with the first event, some idealistic human beings with many ideas, slogans, and utopia would conquer the power from above the workers. Nothing important would take place. What would happen is that only the name of the model of the government machine would be changed. In the realm of economy, work, production, and the livelihood of human beings and possibly private and individual property would be replaced with State property of capitalism. In the second form, contrarily, the working class has a better chance to put an end to wage-slavery or the establishment of the work organization and a communist civilization of its own. The task of the working class in every step of their struggle against exploitation and all forms of capitalist dominance over their own lives is the socialist revolution. The readiness of the working class for breaking up all of the chains of wage-slavery is only achievable through this struggle with these characteristics. This is a struggle between two different social being’s perspective, and are deeply antagonistic which the proletariat from within this struggle continuously transforms its aims, expectations, demands to the material force against the other one. In this way this force becomes an immense class force with the potential of breaking up this existing system and to replace it with the different horizon. The working class without pursuing this struggle with these characteristics and contents is not ready for the socialist alteration of the old society. Even with the assumption of overthrowing the bourgeois State, they would not be able to conquer political power as a class.

Why did the October Revolution fail?

What has been mentioned above was only an introduction to answer this question. The October Revolution was defeated because the working class of Russia did not make itself ready for a triumphant worker revolution. The issues such as ‘peasant texture of Russian society’, and the attacking by either both imperialist blocs; ‘axis’, ‘the allies’ to Revolution, the civil war and resistance of the Russian bourgeois, starvation and famine, all these factors with all of its effectiveness could only act as catalysts of the failing of the worker movement of Russia. This fact, that the process of events following the October revolution is proven better than any theoretical reasoning. The Russian proletariat during those years with their own labour had established one of the biggest military and industrial giants of the world in the same society with backwardness and ‘peasant’ famines under the ongoing attacks from Imperialism. What had failed were the establishment of a work organization, socialist civilization, and the abolishment of wage-slavery. The current statements regarding the abolition of wage-slavery in Russian society was tied to the German revolution or other industrial countries of those days instead of relying on Marx’s understanding of capitalism and communist contemplation about the actual process of socialist economic changes, and it is a warning to the proletariat for a refusal of worker revolution and a cessation of class struggle. The explanation of the defeat of the October Revolution cannot be explained by these factors or a combination of all of them - it was merely showing the impotence of the Russian worker movement for the establishment of work, existence, and communist civilization’s structure. This is a fact that some current communists believed in. The problem here is that they are summarizing the lack of readiness in the sets of directions and incorrect economic solutions of the Bolshevist Party from 1925 onward. And, this is a jump-off point from seemingly radical analyses, from the communist critique on mistakes, and shortcomings that was ruled on the defeat of the working class of Russia.

If we do not want to be a communist obedient to an ideology of some statement by Lenin, and if we want to be a practical communist of the worker movement of 2000 we have no choice but to research the backgrounds of the October Revolution’s failure in view, direction, solution, and politics of Bolshevism from the years before 1905 till the dusk of the last lightings of the hope of victory of the worker movement from 1919-1920. Bolshevism during all those years was an active tendency within the worker movement, but was not the driving force of an organizer leading the socialistic movement of the working class. The Russian proletariat separated from the method of revolution step by step from Narodism, Mensheviks, social democracy due to instructions and directions of Bolshevism. But, beyond these policies and education, it was not able to find its way to the socialist revolution. Socialism was mostly a utopia in the directions; the propagandas of Bolshevism rather than a current alternative that worker masses in their struggle with capitalism would plan against capitalism and the practical realization of it becomes the subject matter of their own daily struggles of themselves. The working class of Russia not only believed in slogans, the proclamation, and the manifesto of the Bolsheviks but also the possibility of their emancipation from the exploitation and deprivation, and that was exactly based on these beliefs that the working class supported the forerunner of the Bolsheviks. But the exercise of this power for the establishment of such a society was presumed to be a practical realization of these expectations which was not in the agenda of their own current movement.

Bolshevism years before the 1905 Revolution was calling on the Russian workers for a democratic revolution. In this call, the Bolsheviks wanted the workers to unite with peasants and to condone the compromising bourgeois liberals with the tsars, and take leadership of the revolution, and put an end to feudalism. Additionally, to pave the way for the European bourgeois and through this situation they make themselves ready for a socialist revolution. From 1903-1917 the presence of the Bolsheviks within the working class was tangible with all of these directions in which these would all end the democratic revolution - a revolution that the entire bourgeois would benefit from and take away the abstraction of a capitalist accumulation. At the same time, in this way the proletariat was to be the leaders of the revolution and guarantee the freedom, bread, and 8-hour work-day. In those days the Bolsheviks revealed themselves against the bourgeois because the bourgeois was willing to compromise with the tsars who where bargaining for a semi-Constitution. And the obtaining of the leadership of the movement was exceedingly the duty of the proletariat otherwise the democratic revolution would be a failure. The working class was invited to form an independent political party, because the existence of this party is a prerequisite for the victory of the democratic revolution. During those years, socialism was a Utopia for the future history in most of the literature of the Bolsheviks. There was no word that the working class in Russia must and was able to replace the Tsars with the council structure along with the presence of the workers across the country and all dispossessed people. The lack of importance of the council formation of the working class and the organizing of the council movement in order to take the planning of the production into their own hands and the building of this working class power base for socialist organizing of the economy was absent. There was nowhere that the Bolsheviks were telling the workers that to put an end to capitalism we must put an end to the relation of buying and selling their labour power, and that this must be the immediate goal. Subsequently, to control the factories and production centres from the hands of the capitalists and managing those with their own movement and contributing the goods among the citizens based on the interference of council power. Attacking the base and foundation of capitalism and the opening up of the existing landscape, which is a communist civilization in the process of the revolution, did not exist in the directions and the propagandas of Bolshevism. Additionally, transferring the communist living critique of existing society to the working class consciousness and the developing of this consciousness into a material weapon for the worker masses struggle was not on the agenda of the Bolshevik activists.Here, political freedoms and democracy will not be discounted, nor the negation of the importance of these freedoms in order for the development of the necessary conditions for organizing and the growth of the communist movement of the working class. But, what is important here is that Bolshevism had not touched the relation of wage-slavery. Russian society in those days witnessed the actions of tens of millions of the working class. In 1905, around 3 million workers had participated in the general strike against the miserable conditions of their work places or the deprivation of the social and political situation. Additionally, during 1905 the working class of Russia already showed the strong tendency to organize its own council formation. However, the working class at that time was not ready to abolish wage-slavery, but the proletariat socialist solution for organizing the council worker to run society and the production planning for abolishing feudalism property or any kind of private property on land, and inviting peasants to form collective farms, or the socialist direction abolishing any State above the workers and dispossessed people were absent from the Bolsheviks’ efforts. Additionally the consciousness of the possibility of these directions must be a material weapon among workers and peasants. In this condition there is the overthrowing of the Tsar for democracy and political freedom on one hand, which could get all its importance in the process of class struggle and, on the other hand, all of these act as a basis for opening the communist front battle against all of capitalism.

It has been said that probably Bolshevism had sufficiently emphasized the relation between democracy and socialism. But this is not the issue. What is important is that to have a concrete socialist solution and the persuasion of all economic and political demands as a united front against capitalism. Bolshevism showed a completely different way in front of the working class of Russia. The democratic revolution was considered a phase of revolution which was securing the interest of both the proletariat and bourgeois at the same time. The proletariat played the major role in the revolution to prevent conciliation between the bourgeois liberals with the Tsar and bringing the revolution to victory. It was believed that with Bolshevism, the working class had to pave the ground for the development of capitalism in society in order for Russian society to transform from a backward country to an advanced country. And, finally it would be ready for the working class to establish socialism. The democratic revolution becomes a subject matter in terms of the direction of the Bolsheviks being tied to a social democratic view. This kind of view that had drowned all the potentials, powers, horizons, expectations of the class struggle into a meta-class narrative about democracy-seeking and fighting with the government, the Tsarist regime.

The criticism of trade unionism was one of the indicators of the direction of the Bolsheviks. This criticism instead of opening the socialist struggle in front of the working class actually became a militant democracy and in this process - the importance of communist organizing within the realm of economy against the bourgeois was forgotten. Trade unionism was critiqued to some extent but the alternative of it which is worker councils was not paid attention to. The social democracy perception of socialism had swallowed all the revolutionary sets of policies, aims, and in this way had neglected the workers council organization and, subsequently, the party as an organization had emerged above the working class leadership.

The working class of Russia during 1903-1917 had suffered from some fundamental weaknesses. And, subsequently, it stopped the transformation of those directions as a step for its own class struggle against capital. During those days, the working class could establish a boundary regarding the method of fulfillment the democratic revolution with the bourgeois liberals. Concerning the solving of the agrarian issue, the Bolsheviks had separated their way from the Mensheviks, and had a long debate with the right wing of social democracy about the standard of the apparatus of the political party. They condemned the compromising of the social democracy with the bourgeois on the imperialist war. However, with these attempts its own socialist council movement could not be organized against capital. All of those attempts were not sufficient to position the proletariat for the socialist revolution. What could help the working class of Russia in that direction was to organize an anti-wage labour movement. Bolshevism could not play the magnificent role due to the pressure of the social democrat approach regarding socialism.

The working class of Russia had passed beyond the February revolution to the October Revolution on the grounds of its own self-activity of the council movement. And, they aimed to establish a society without wage-labour. However there was not any necessary readiness for this important job. Even its councils, instead of being a container for a large presence and a united class struggle for the establishment of a socialist civilization, were used up as a level of executing the State affair over the working class heads. The statement of all power to the workers council was practically tied up only with political tactic in order to overthrow the Constituent Assembly of the bourgeois and conquer the political power. The October Revolution had smashed the governmental machine of capital temporarily, but even the political power actually was not transformed to the Russian workers council. Without a doubt, the working class was not able to build its own worker’s council socialist organization over a night on war damage, starvation and famine and the backwardness of the society, where it was attacked brutally by two imperialist blocs. But if the revolution was supposed to gain victory it had no other choice in front on it. The formation of a regular army, replacing worker control with a single leader, the gradual elimination of the worker council, the transferring of the business production and the planning of the entire economy to the Council of National Economy, implementing New Economic Policy, praising wage-labouring and resorting to the Taylor system, and giving all the administration to the political bureau, none of them was the manifestation of the political power of workers councils rather, was the establishment of the governmental machine above the workers head and society under the direction of State capitalism. What was victimized during all of these policies and the implementation was the communist solution of the international working class to put an end to wage-slavery. Bolshevism was not able to play its communist role in one of the most sensitive periods of time. But this inability contrary to current analyses was not about either a lack of an ambiguous theory of bolshevism around the abolishment of wage-slavery. This inability was not a new phenomenon for Bolshevism or for the working class of Russia. Those who think this way, they see metaphysically the relation of theory and social solution of one class with its own class movement. The fact is that Bolshevism was not the active agent for organizing the anti-wage-labour movement from its beginning until the October Revolution due to the impact of the social democrat perspective. Bolshevism did not mobilize the working class in the realm of the direct battle against the foundation of capitalism which is wage-slavery. And, in this way was not able to organize a socialist council movement. The reality is that socialism for Bolshevism was nothing more than State capitalism.

People who put an end to the mode of capitalist production and the building of a society without State and wage-slavery were not the character of the Bolshevik movement. Therefore, it was not ready to organize itself for establishing a worker organization and a socialist civilization. The promise of Bolshevism to Russian workers was that within the socialist phase the exploitation and inequalities would be demolished. But how? And, the answer to this question remains a mystery for the future. The working class of Russia with the October Revolution was looking at Bolshevism to do some magic and Bolshevism during the two decades confined its role to these demands. Bolshevism organized society into centralization, a State above the workers head but in the name of a worker state and what the working class of Russia gained was only a name.

In the history of the working class movement two magnificent events are more magnificent than others, the two largest events that shake human beings’ lives and history; the Paris Common and the October Revolution. Both were defeated. In the first one the workers knew that they were defeated, but the second one, the workers did not realize for a long time. The defeat of the Common was a chain for learning to later attack the working class and the beginning of a continuous defeat. The international working class to be free of future clutches need to learn the weaknesses and the mistakes of the Russian working class from 1903 onwards.