Log in

View Full Version : 100 Year Anniversary of Russian Revolution



blindpig
01-05-2017, 10:19 AM
Might as well get started....

This is from RT.....


1917 and its lessons for 2017: Learning from Lenin

https://cdn.rt.com/files/2017.01/original/586d24cdc4618834168b45d9.jpg

If, as my fellow Op-Edger John Wight stated recently, ‘seismic’ was the only word to describe 2016 – what on earth can we say about 1917? This was the year of not one, but two, Russian Revolutions.
It also saw the US break with isolationism and enter the First World War – and the Balfour declaration – which eventually led to the establishment of the state of Israel.

The dramatic events of one hundred years ago still shape our world today. It’s important therefore that we relive the year and study it closely, as there’s much we can learn from it – and in particular from the year’s most influential personality.

If Donald Trump was the Person of the Year in 2016, there’s no doubting who the key figure in 1917 was: Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known as Lenin. The bearded Marxist from Simbirsk began the year in exile, living with his wife in a bedsit at No 14 Spiegelgasse in Zurich, Switzerland, and ended it as the leader of the world’s first communist state.

After the February revolution, which saw Tsar Nicholas II abdicate and a Provisional Government take over in Petrograd, many who had been agitating for change thought it was a case of ‘Mission Accomplished’. But not Lenin. His return to his homeland in April was a historical game changer. “He called for immediate peace, immediate seizure of land by the peasantry, and immediate transfer of all power to the soviets,” records historian Christopher Hill, in his book ‘Lenin and the Russian Revolution.’


The bourgeois Provisional government, at first dominated by conservative and liberal members, broadened its base to include leftists, but fatally, it remained committed to participating in a capitalists’ war.

The Bolsheviks were proscribed in July and Lenin went into hiding once again. But when General Kornilov launched a counter-revolutionary coup attempt in August, the pro-war Prime Minister Kerensky was forced to rely on the support of the Bolshevik-dominated soviets to stay in power. The days of the Provisional Government were numbered, as popular support for the Bolsheviks surged. On October 25 (November 7 in the Gregorian calendar), Lenin and his comrades made their move.

Later, Lenin wrote about the significance of what had been achieved: “For hundreds of years states have been built on the bourgeois model, and now for the first time a non-bourgeois state has been discovered.”


It’s likely that much of the western left-infected by liberalism and obsessed with identity politics and political correctness will mark the centenary of the October revolution this year with a smirk and say ‘nothing to do with us, mate’ and get on with writing their love letters to Hillary Clinton. But there are, I believe, important lessons to be learnt from the strategy employed by Lenin in 1917 – and the left dismisses them at its peril.

As was the case one hundred years ago, a corrupt, arrogant, and hideously out-of-touch establishment lies teetering on the brink. As was the case one hundred years ago, the gap between rich and poor is truly staggering. Only last January, Oxfam revealed that half of the world’s wealth is owned by just 62 people. Yes, that‘s right – 62.


But unlike 100 years ago, it’s the populist right – and not the left – that’s making all the headway. Instead of embracing working-class populism and positioning themselves at the forefront of anti-establishment protests as Lenin and the Bolsheviks did in 1917, the liberal-dominated western left of today seems scared of proletarian rebelliousness, and has instead sided on issue after issue with the neo-liberal militarist establishment.

We see this in the liberal-left’s attachment to parliamentarianism, and the failure to promote more democratic ways of organizing society e.g. the greater use of referenda, the introduction of workers’ councils and peoples’ assemblies and elected people’s courts (interestingly the attachment to Parliamentarianism didn’t seem to apply to Ukraine in 2014 when many ‘liberal-leftists’ in the West supported the violent overthrow of the democratically-elected government).

We also see it in the way that ‘bread-and-butter issues’ which affect the everyday lives of ordinary people are largely ignored with the focus instead on fighting culture wars and promoting wars of ‘liberal intervention’ in the Middle East, which only benefit elite interests.

The fact is that the liberal-left is as detached from working-class concerns today as were the ‘reformist left’ opponents of the Bolsheviks in 1917 – who could only say: “Please wait for the Constituent Assembly elections” when millions of Russians were starving. Lenin was under no illusions about ‘liberal democracy’ and who it benefited. “Democracy for an insignificant minority, democracy for the rich – that is the democracy of capitalist society,” he wrote in 1917.

He knew that Russian involvement in the war had to end. That land had to be given to the peasants without delay. That Russia’s economy had to be radically restructured. His slogan of “Peace! Bread! Land!” resonated throughout the country.

You don’t have to be a Bolshevik, or even a socialist, to admire Lenin’s clarity and sense of purpose.

“In 1917 it was the Bolshevik mastery of the ‘fact’ that was decisive,” says Christopher Hill. “The party knew exactly what it wanted, what concrete concessions to make to different social groups at any given stage, how to convince the masses of population by ‘actions’, its own and their own.”

The centenary of the October revolution and the ‘Ten Days That Shook The World,’ should galvanize the genuine left into action. But if the liberal cuckoos-in-the-nest have their way, it will be the right who once again forge ahead, with working-class support, in 2017.

Follow Neil Clark @NeilClark66

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/372668-lenin-revolution-ussr-soviet/

We justly despise the klepto-capitalists running Russia but I don't think we'll see anything like this in the liberal press here in the 'Land of Liberty'.

Dhalgren
01-05-2017, 10:51 AM
We justly despise the klepto-capitalists running Russia but I don't think we'll see anything like this in the liberal press here in the 'Land of Liberty'.

True. But the constant attempts at comparing present day liberals with 1917 Bolsheviks is moronic. Talking about "the left" only interested in Clinton and it should be trying to emulate Lenin is ludicrous. "The left" who has its nose up Clinton's ass is in no way "left", and certainly in no way proximate to Bolsheviks! You can't just say, "Okay, now I'm going to be more like Lenin! And just drop all this liberal stuff!" It doesn't work that way and it is disheartening that any writer for RT would even write such stuff.

In the piece it talks about the Soviets becoming the backbone of the government - essentially dominating the state. It also says, briefly, the Bolsheviks dominated the Soviets. This means that the Bolsheviks were organized enough and disciplined enough to win elections to the Soviets and maintain their political unity, as a party. The pathway for Bolshevik victory was through the Soviets (and in the immediate formation of soviets within the military - also Bolshevik dominated), and this was only possible because the Bolsheviks were an organized, disciplined, Marxist political party.

It isn't the liberals who need to "get the message" - liberals are right-wing oppressors - it is the working class who need to get the message. The only thing needed is organization, discipline, and a recognition of its power. That is the thing almost every "left" commentator either misses or dismisses, the working class is overwhelmingly powerful, unstoppable, irresistible. With the advent of Trump, ironically, the working class may actually have gotten a glimmer of what has been suppressed and hidden - its power.

blindpig
01-05-2017, 11:39 AM
True. But the constant attempts at comparing present day liberals with 1917 Bolsheviks is moronic. Talking about "the left" only interested in Clinton and it should be trying to emulate Lenin is ludicrous. "The left" who has its nose up Clinton's ass is in no way "left", and certainly in no way proximate to Bolsheviks! You can't just say, "Okay, now I'm going to be more like Lenin! And just drop all this liberal stuff!" It doesn't work that way and it is disheartening that any writer for RT would even write such stuff.

In the piece it talks about the Soviets becoming the backbone of the government - essentially dominating the state. It also says, briefly, the Bolsheviks dominated the Soviets. This means that the Bolsheviks were organized enough and disciplined enough to win elections to the Soviets and maintain their political unity, as a party. The pathway for Bolshevik victory was through the Soviets (and in the immediate formation of soviets within the military - also Bolshevik dominated), and this was only possible because the Bolsheviks were an organized, disciplined, Marxist political party.

It isn't the liberals who need to "get the message" - liberals are right-wing oppressors - it is the working class who need to get the message. The only thing needed is organization, discipline, and a recognition of its power. That is the thing almost every "left" commentator either misses or dismisses, the working class is overwhelmingly powerful, unstoppable, irresistible. With the advent of Trump, ironically, the working class may actually have gotten a glimmer of what has been suppressed and hidden - its power.

You expect more from RT than I do. Dunno if this qualifies as a call to arms for this nebulous 'left', seemed more of a statement of fact: there ain't nothin like Lenin and the
Bolsheviks on the field.

It may well be that Trump is selling rope. If as I expect he falls short of all of the promises that would better the working class the spin will be applied to his reactionary 'successes', wacking Obamacare, The Wall & mass deportation. You would think the economy would decide the success of that but this Cold War hysteria being whipped up is a wild card. Is it possible that Trump would tamp that down? Such are the noises he's making and a pissing contest between the Executive and CIA can't be a bad thing, can it? Seems like 'interested parties' won't let that happen but he's a willful piece of shit and the powers of that office are more considerable than usually recognized. The shitstorm could have a silver lining, but I ain't betting on it.

Still think the dude was totally unprepared to win and probably wishes he didn't. I can hear him on the phone,"Bill! Ya gotta get me outta this, it's ruining my business!" Muffled laughter on the other end........