what... all power ?

5 posts / 0 new
Last post
lem_
what... all power ?
Printer-friendly version

ah someone tell me to stop posting ! ?? if it's an issue at all then it's nothing for me to stop you know ?

anyway: idea: all power to the soviets was a little rushed.

the ideology is real and manifest ONLY at that very instant communism is going to be defeated...

?

Alf
too many posts

Lem, if people aren't responding to your threads, it's because it's often not clear what you are trying to say. I certainly think the number of new threads you are starting is adding to the confusion. Better fewer, but better, as Lenin put it. That implies keeping away from the keyboard for a while and 'reflecting'. 

Perhaps we should have a discussion about internet forums as a kind of addictive activity? Not because you are the only sufferer, but because it's a general problem affecting the movement and the way it communicates.

Fred
You are right Alf about the

You are right Alf about the addictive nature of Internet forums, and wanting to post on them, and I suffer from it myself particularly with regard to this ICC forum.  I don't exactly know why of course, and why this one in particular, though I have vague ideas, but  I will resist the temptation now to psychologise on it. 

(Resisting has proved hard indeed!!)

 

 

 

lem_
ok i want to say that is

ok i want to say that is completely understood and to apologise, and i know that may sound self contradictory but i wouldn't hesitate say it in real life too :-)

slothjabber
But it's still a good question

Was the slogan 'all power to the soviets' premature?

 

Personally, I don't think it was. Marx says - and I think it's right, until a better 'prediction' comes along - that though the revolution, in content, will go beyond the nation, in form it will be a 'national' revolution. What I take this to mean is that the working class needs to overthrow the state 'where it is'. In Russia, the working class needed to get rid of the bourgeois-Czarist fusion state that (in my view) characterised Russia in the late C19th and early C20th.

 

Russia, I think we all agree, was not 'ready for socialism'. I hold that no country is ever 'ready for socialism', because that would imply that a country on its own can institute a socialist society. I think that's false.

 

But the working class needs to deal with the state and the economy where it is. Therefore, it must make the attempt at overthrowing the state and re-organising the economy, even if in any country that can only go some way towards anticipating socialist society. It is not until the world revolution is complete and capitalism has been overthrown everywhere that we can talk about the working class reorganising society on a socialist basis.

 

I think that was what the Bolsheviks were expressing - the certainty that the working class had to make the attempt to break capitalism's stranglehold. Lenin and Trotsky were wrong that Germany would soon follow suit (of course the attempt was made there too but with much less success). Yes, if you think that 'all power to the soviets' means 'the workers must construct socialism in Russia alone' then that would be wrong. But if 'all power to the soviets' means 'the workers must overthrow capitalism and the state in Russia, while hoping the rest of the worklld catches up' then I think that's quite correct.