The Russian Revolution (part 1): The first massive and conscious revolution in history

2 posts / 0 new
Last post
The Russian Revolution (part 1): The first massive and conscious revolution in history
Printer-friendly version

The discussion that follows was prompted by the article: The Russian Revolution (part 1): The first massive and conscious revolution in history. The discussion was initiated by Fred.
Below is the discussion so far. Feel free to add your own comments!

I wonder if I like this piece

I wonder if I like this piece too much. After all Trotsky was a marvelous writer, but he was undoubtedly on the side of the workers, the soviets and the whole revolutionary endeavor. Similarly John Reed. Can we trust their joyous descriptions of a working class breaking free of it's chains, discovering who and what it is (the bearer of a new society) and bursting into unfettered talk, declamations, new ideas, previously unexpressible thoughts and a passion for learning and communal education previously not seen on the planet?

And can we anticipate a similar outbreak of class creativity soon, as the world economic crisis intensifies, and the class starts to take a lead through massive strikes against the system itself, thus discovering it's strength and historic mission.

And what of the bourgeoisie? They may fear the contagion of revolt, and they may resent their loss of profit through strikes like that coming on Nov.30. They can appear angry at the unions who actually control the class for them; and they want strict discipline of the remaining labour force and the unemployed, and must claw back the social wage where they can, and impose wage restraint. But do they actually know what communism is? Do they really know about class war? Don't they think their system is eternal ( like the third Reich was!) and do they not mostly believe that there is no alternative to capitalism? In this particular article about the Russian revolution the ICC says: " The bourgeoisie sees workers' revolutions as acts of collective madness, a spontaneous chaos that finishes spontaneously. Bourgeois ideology cannot admit that the exploited can act on their own initiative. Collective action, solidarity, conscious action by the majority of workers, such notions bourgeois thought considers to be unnatural (since what is "natural" for the bourgeoisie is the war of each against all and the manipulation of the great mass of humanity by a small elite)."

So the question to be asked in this somewhat confused post, is how far do the bourgeoisie know what they're up against when they continue to suppress and exploit the working class? They are Machiavellian, but do they know why? And have they any idea at all of what behavior their class enemy is capable of - the sort of joyous and class conscious creativity described in tbe article above - as it begins to realize it's revolutionary potential?