The Rise and Fall of Stalinism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MARXIST EDUCATION PROGRAMME The Rise and Fall of Stalinism How and why did the bureaucratic dictatorship fail? 7 Marxist Education Series www.workerssocialistparty.co.za R10 CONTENTS The Rise of Stalinism.......................….................................................1 Richard Monroe & Philip Masters, 1990 The Nature of the Soviet Regime.....................................................12 Richard Monroe & Philip Masters, 1990 The Crisis of the Stalinist States.........................................................20 Marxist Workers Tendency, 1982 From Perestroika to Glasnost...........................................................30 Rob Jones, 2009 IF YOU AGREE WITH THEN WHAT YOU READ... JOIN tel: 081 366 7375 SMS: 081 366 7375 WhatsApp: 081 366 7375 US! web: www.workerssocialistparty.co.za/join-wasp email: [email protected] “The basis of bureaucratic rule is the poverty of society in objects of consumption, with the resulting struggle of each against all. When there are enough goods in a store, the purchasers can come whenever they want to. When there are few goods, the purchasers are compelled to stand in line. When the lines are very long, it is necessary to appoint a policeman to keep order. Such is the starting point of the power of the Soviet bureaucracy.” Leon Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed, 1936 Cover image: the 1956 Hungarian Revolution against Stalinist rule The Rise of Stalinism (Chapter 2 of The Legacy of Leon Trotsky) by Richard Monroe & Philip Masters, 1990 On October 25, 1917, the Provisional Government was armies and to the working class across Europe, to support and overthrown in Petrograd. The Russian working class took take forward the Russian revolution. The old parties of the Second state power. The Congress of Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers International split, with big sections, sometimes majorities, rallying Deputies, highest organ of workers’ democracy, was in session to the banner of the Third (Communist) International launched by in the capital. the Bolsheviks. It had nearly 3 million members by 1921. Following Lenin, Trotsky spoke there: “We rest all our hope on This revolutionary wave forced the imperialist powers to call a the possibility that our revolution will unleash the European halt to their military intervention against the revolution. But the revolution. If the insurrectionary peoples of Europe do not West European working class was not able to hold on to its early crush imperialism, then we will be crushed.” (History of the gains. While not finally crushed, the revolutionary wave was Russian Revolution) turned back. The delegates, wrote an observer, “greeted him with an immense Primarily responsible for this were the reformist leaders crusading acclaim, kindling to the daring of it, with the thought of the Second International, who used the authority they of championing mankind.” (John Reed, Ten Days that Shook the still retained to prop up capitalism and its state power. The World) Communist Parties were still too weak and inexperienced to take advantage of this situation, as the Bolsheviks had been able to “At any rate”, remarked Trotsky later, “it could not have entered against the Mensheviks. the mind of any Bolshevik at that time to protest against placing the fate of the Soviet Republic, in an official speech in the name of The treacherous role of the reformist leadership in the 1918-1920 the Bolshevik Party, in direct dependence upon the development revolutionary wave is summed up in one incident. On November of the international revolution”. (HRR) 10, with the imperial regime in Germany on its knees, and power in the hands of the workers and soldiers, Noske, Scheidemann and The capitalist class through Europe launched a furious struggle Ebert of the Social-Democratic Party (SPD) were included in a against the workers’ state, by sabotage, boycott, and war. A civil new republican coalition government. war raged, with peaks and intervals, pitting not only the internal reaction but 17 imperialist armies against the revolution from That night Ebert was phoned by a senior general. “What do you 1918 until the spring of 1921. Trotsky was responsible for the expect of us?” asked Ebert. “Field Marshal Hindenbcrg expects organisation of the Red Army which defeated the military counter- the government to support the officer corps in maintaining strict revolution. discipline and strict order in the army.” “What else?”, replied Ebert. “The officer corps expects that the government will But it was not only the heroic resistance of the Russian masses fight against Bolshevism and places itself at the disposal of the spearheaded by the Red Army which held off counter-revolution. government for such a purpose.” Ebert asked the general to pass Splits among the imperialists were skilfully exploited by the on “the government’s thanks to the Field Marshal”! Bolsheviks. Above all, there was a revolutionary upsurge of the working class through Europe – as a combined result of the The mass of workers and soldiers regarded the SPD as their party. burdens heaped on the masses by the First World War and the But its leaders were conscious agents of counter-revolution. inspiring example of the Russian revolution. Rather than organising the over-throw of the capitalist state, and establishing a new state based on the power of the working class, they induced the masses to accept the authority of a capitalist The post-war revolutionary wave parliament – while they set about rebuilding the armed forces to A strike by Hungarian munitions workers in January 1918 spread break the revolutionary movement. like wildfire through Germany, involving over two million Similar obstacles faced the revolutionary working class movement workers. Then, on 4 November 1918 mutiny broke out at the in every country in Europe. German military base of Kiel and ignited revolution. Within days, A revolutionary situation erupted again in Germany in 1923, but every city in Germany was in the hands of workers’ councils: the German Communist Party failed to lead it to success. For all soviets. the efforts of the Bolsheviks, the Russian revolution remained Mass strikes and army mutinies smashed the imperial Austro- isolated. This was to have terrible consequences for its fate, and Hungarian regime, bringing the disintegration of the empire. A the fate of workers’ revolution worldwide for a whole period. revolutionary soviet government took power in Hungary in March 1919. Bolshevik internationalism France was swept by mass strikes and naval mutiny. British soldiers mutinied, and the Red Flag was hoisted in the industrial Dialego, in his “What is Trotskyism?”, ridicules Trotsky’s: heartland of Scotland. Ireland was in armed revolt against British “astonishing argument that revolution could only succeed in Russia rule. In Italy in 1920 there was a wave of factory occupations. if it is ‘united with the socialist proletariat of Western Europe.’ “ Strikes involving four million workers convulsed the USA in 1919. “Revolution within a ‘national framework’ is doomed”, was, he Bolshevik propaganda appealed to the troops of the invading claims, Trotsky’s position. 1 “On its own it will collapse. Only world revolution is This is the passage which Dialego refers to when describing possible. It is not difficult to see why this analysis made it Trotsky’s “astonishing” arguments. In the course of ‘paraphrasing’ almost impossible for Trotsky to contribute constructively it, Dialego, to say the least, loses some of its meaning! Trotsky to tackling the problems of post-revolutionary Russia – does not say revolution could only succeed in Russia if it is once it had become clear that revolutions in the advanced united with the socialist proletariat in Western Europe – but that a capitalist countries (despite the uprisings in Germany and workers’ government, i.e. a successful revolution, would need to Hungary) were not going to succeed.” unite with the Western proletariat in order to survive indefinitely. The need for workers’ revolution in Europe to ensure the survival Trotsky nowhere says “Only world revolution is possible”! What of the revolution in Russia was, as we have seen, not some he warns is that a revolution in Russia would, “at a certain stage” idiosyncratic notion of Trotsky’s, but the perspective of Bolshevism run up against imperialist-backed counter-revolution, and as a whole. In turn, Dialego’s dismissal of this idea is a rejection not Russia’s backwardness. His perspective of 1909, far from being of “Trotskyism”, but of proletarian internationalism. It abandons “astonishing”, was of course amply borne out by what took place any Marxist understanding of what is needed to achieve socialism. after 1917. It is infected with the contagion of Stalinist ideas of “socialism in Warming to his theme, nevertheless, Dialego continues with his one country”. lecture: Lenin believed that not even a democratic dictatorship of the “Trotsky’s all-or-nothing approach to world revolution proletariat and the peasantry on a capitalist basis could be reflected more than naive optimism. It stemmed from sustained in Russia unless the working class overthrew capitalism his failure to get to grips with the national question. in the West. In 1905 he wrote: “the Russian revolution can Class struggle, as the Communist Manifesto emphasises, achieve victory by its own efforts, but it cannot possibly hold is international in substance, but national in form. It is and consolidate its gains by its own strength. It cannot do precisely because