"The Greatest Failure in All History": A Critical Examination of the Actual Workings of Bolshevism in RussiaSpargo, John
History
"The Greatest Failure in All History": A Critical Examination of the Actual Workings of Bolshevism in Russia
Spargo, John
Communism -- Russia
Bitter as the conflict was during this period and throughout 1919, it
was, nevertheless, considerably less violent than during the previous
year. This was due to the fact that the Bolsheviki had modified their
policy in dealing with the peasants in some very important respects.
Precisely as they had manifested particular hatred toward the
bourgeoisie in the cities, and made their appeal to the proletariat,
so they had, from the very first, manifested a special hatred toward
the great body of peasants of the “middle class”--that is to say, the
fairly well-to-do and successful peasant--and made their appeal to the
very poorest and least successful. The peasants who owned their own
farms, possessed decent stock, and perhaps employed some assistance,
were regarded as the “rural bourgeoisie” whom it was necessary to
expropriate. The whole appeal of the Bolsheviki, so far as the peasant
was concerned, was to the element corresponding to the proletariat,
owning nothing. The leaders of the Bolsheviki believed that only the
poorest section of the peasantry could make common cause with the
proletariat; that the greater part of the peasantry belonged with
the bourgeoisie. They relied upon the union of the urban proletariat
and the poorest part of the peasantry, led by the former, to furnish
the sinews of the Revolution. Over and over again Lenin’s speeches
and writings prior to April, 1919, refer to “the proletariat and the
poorest peasants”; over and over again he emphasizes this union, always
with the more or less definite statement that “the proletariat” must
lead and “the poorest peasants” follow.
In April, 1919, at the Congress of the Russian Communist Party, Lenin
read a report on the attitude of the proletariat and the Soviet power
to the peasantry which marked a complete change of attitude, despite
the fact that Lenin intimated that neither he nor the party had ever
believed anything else. “No sensible Socialist ever thought that
we might apply violence to the middle peasantry,” he said. He even
disclaimed any intention to expropriate the rich peasants, if they
would refrain from counter-revolutionary tendencies! Of course, in thus
affirming his orthodoxy while throwing over an important article of his
creed, Lenin was simply conforming to an old and familiar practice.
When we remember how he berated the Menshevist Social Democrats and
declared them not to be Socialists because their party represented
“fairly prosperous peasants,”[11] and the fact that the Soviet
Constitution itself sets forth that the dictatorship to be set up is
“of the urban and rural proletariat and the poorest peasantry,[12]”
Lenin’s attempt to make it appear that he had always regarded the
middle and rich peasantry with such benign toleration can only move us
to laughter.
[11] _The New International_, April, 1918.
[12] Article II, chap. v, paragraph 9.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account