Brest-Litovsk Peace Conference (1917-1918); Soviet Union -- History -- Revolution, 1917-1921
Produced by Julie Barkley, David Starner
and the Online Proofreading Team.
From October to Brest-Litovsk
By Leon Trotzky
Authorized Translation from the Russian
1919
TRANSLATOR'S NOTES:
1. In this book Trotzky (until near the end) uses the Russian Calendar
in indicating dates, which, as the reader will recall, is 13 days behind
the Gregorian Calendar, now introduced in Russia.
2. The abbreviation S. R. and S. R.'s is often used for
"Social-Revolutionist(s)" or "Socialist-Revolutionaries."
3. "Maximalist" often appears instead of "bolshevik," and "minimalist"
instead of "menshevik."
THE MIDDLE-CLASS INTELLECTUALS IN THE REVOLUTION
Events move so quickly at this time, that it is hard to set them down
from memory even in chronological sequence. Neither newspapers nor
documents are at our disposal. And vet the repeated interruptions in the
Brest-Litovsk negotiations create a suspense which, under present
circumstances, is no longer bearable. I shall endeavor, therefore, to
recall the course and the landmarks of the October revolution, reserving
the right to complete and correct this exposition subsequently in the
light of documents.
What characterized our party almost from the very first period of the
revolution, was the conviction that it would ultimately come into power
through the logic of events. I do not refer to the theorists of the
party, who, many years before the revolution--even before the revolution
of 1905--as a result of their analysis of class relations in Russia,
came to the conclusion that the triumphant development of the revolution
must inevitably transfer the power to the proletariat, supported by the
vast masses of the poorest peasants. The chief basis of this prognosis
was the insignificance of the Russian bourgeois democracy and the
concentrated character of Russian industrialism--which makes of the
Russian proletariat a factor of tremendous social importance. The
insignificance of bourgeois democracy is but the complement of the power
and significance of the proletariat. It is true, the war has deceived
many on this point, and, first of all, the leading groups of bourgeois
democracy themselves. The war has assigned a decisive role in the events
of the revolution to the army. The old army meant the peasantry. Had the
revolution developed more normally--that is, under peaceful
circumstances, as it had in 1912--the proletariat would always have held
a dominant position, while the peasant masses would gradually have been
taken in tow by the proletariat and drawn into the whirlpool of the
revolution.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account