12 Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino LVIII - 1/2018 1.01 UDC: 323.272(47)"1917":930(430)”1918/2018” Andreas Schulz* “What does it have to do with us?” – Rethinking the Russian Revolution in Germany IZVLEČEK »KAJ IMA TO OPRAVITI Z NAMI?« – PONOVNO VREDNOTENJE RUSKE REVOLUCIJE V NEMČIJI Avtor predstavlja pregled razstav in novejših publikacij v Nemčiji, posvečenih stoti obletnici oktobrske revolucije leta 1917. Po stoletju raziskovanja sta veličastnost in herojstvo iz časov rojstva »velike socialistične oktobrske revolucije« že povsem zbledela. Z demistifikacijo se je tako imenovana »svetovna revolucija« premaknila v okvir ruske zgodovine. Vendar ta nacionalizacija revolucije marginalizira globalne posledice Rdečega oktobra, zlasti kadar se boljševiški prevzem oblasti razlaga preprosto kot uspešno prizadevanje za preoblikovanje anarhije v organizirani režim terorja, ki ga je izvajala odločna in požrtvovalna avantgarda. Medtem ko totalitarni pristop zanemarja socialne korenine revolucije, novejše kulturne študije poudarjajo naključne dejavnike in degradirajo revolucionarno vstajo kot eskalacijo državljanske vojne na kontaminiranih »območjih nasilja«. Avtor v drugem delu tega prispevka pusti za sabo vse takšne celovite razlage in velike načrte ter opozori na dolgotrajne strukturne spremembe, ki jih je ruska revolucija povzročila v povojni Evropi. Svoje argumente osredotoči na tri ravni – najprej na politične institucije, nato na gospodarski in družbeni red, nazadnje pa na demografske spremembe. Ključne besede: čaščenje spomina na »svetovno revolucijo«, globalne posledice leta 1917, vplivi Rdečega oktobra na Nemčijo * Professor, PhD, Kommission für Geschichte des Parlamentarismus und der politischen Parteien, Schiffbauerdamm 40, D-10117 Berlin, [email protected] Andreas Schulz: “What does it have to do with us?” – Rethinking the Russian Revolution ... 13 ABSTRACT The author reviews exhibitions and recent publications in Germany which commemorate the centennial of the October Revolution 1917. After a full century of research there is little left of glory and heroism that had been present at the dawn of the ″Great Socialist October Revolution”. A de-mystification has taken place which relocates the proclaimed “World Revolution” into the frame of Russian history. But this nationalization of the revolution tends to marginalize the global effects of the Red October, especially when the Bolshevik seizure of power is simply explained as a successful effort to transform anarchy into an organised regime of terror practised by a determined and self-sacrificing Avantgarde. While the totalitarian approach neglects the social origins of the Revolution, recent cultural studies emphasise contingent factors downrating revolutionary uprisings as an escalation of civil war in contaminated “landscapes of violence”. Leaving behind such entire explanations and grand designs, the second part of this paper wants to draw attention to the enduring structural changes which the Russian Revolution caused in post-war Europe. The author concentrates his arguments on three levels, beginning with the political institutions, secondly, the economic and social order, and thirdly, the demographic change. Keywords: Commemorating the “World Revolution”, Global effects of 1917, Impacts of the Red October on Germany In the calendar of centennial commemorations of the October Revolution in Germany, the exhibition “1917 Revolution – Russland und die Folgen” in the Deutsche Historische Museum in Berlin had a prominent place. “What does the revolution have to do with us?” – is a rhetorical question, which the curators did not specifically answer because they were more interested in the celebrations of the revolutionary heritage in post-soviet Russia.1 But indeed, looking back from 2017, it is evident that nothing is left of the hopes and fears that contemporaries all over the world shared when the Bolsheviks announced the dawn of a new age of mankind under the name of the “Great Socialist October Revolution”.2 With the end of the Cold War, it seemed as if the global revolutionary challenge and the utopian promises, which the Soviet Union held up as the legitimate heir of Leninism, completely disappeared.3 A brief look at the bestseller book list shows that the year 1917 has become a rather forgotten time in history. While the commemoration of the “Great War” from 1914 to 1918 1 Kristiane Janeke, “Einführung,” in: 1917. Revolution: Russland und die Folgen (Berlin: Sandstein Verlag, 2017), 10– 13. 2 Eric J. Hobsbawm, Das Zeitalter der Extreme: Weltgeschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts 1914–1991 (München: Hanser, 1995), 91–93. 3 Jan Claas Behrends et. al., “100 Jahre Roter Oktober. Versuche zur Historisierung der Russischen Revolution,” in: 100 Jahre Roter Oktober. Zur Weltgeschichte der Russian Revolution (Berlin: Christoph Links, 2017), 9. Jan C. Behrends, “Was bleibt vom Kommunismus? Eine historische Betrachtung zum 100. Jahrestag der Russischen Revo- lution,” in: 1917. 100 Jahre Oktoberrevolution und ihre Fernwirkungen auf Deutschland (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2017), 23‒37. 14 Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino LVIII - 1/2018 produced a rich harvest of detailed studies4, which claim to deliver new insights, recent publications about the Russian Revolution of 1917 remain in the shadow of latest historiographical research. Nonetheless, it is worth considering its significant importance once again after a hundred years, despite the fact that the “World Revolution”, which Lenin and the Bolsheviks proclaimed, never happened. A Final Farewell to the World Revolution? A full century of research has de-mystified the Russian Revolution, leaving little of the glory and heroism which had always surrounded memories and historiography.5 Some historians wonder if the revolution really mattered enough to call it a break of continuity in contemporary world history at all. There is a growing tendency to locate the years 1917‒1920 in the frame of Russian history, so that we may speak of a “de-globalisation” and “nationalisation” of the October Revolution. How this rearrangement has changed our general perception of the Russian Revolution will be discussed in the first part of this paper. It is evident that with the end of the Cold War, ideological debates ceased and grand narratives fell silent. However, there is reason enough to consider the immediate impacts and long-term structural changes that the revolution caused. This will be explored in the second part of this paper. Relocating the Russian Revolution It has long been common knowledge that the Russian Revolution was a turning point in world history because it laid the foundations for a global bi-polar division between liberal-capitalist “Western” democracies and the socialist hemisphere, dominated by a Soviet system and based on social collectivism and state economy. Historians in the GDR periodically celebrated the Bolshevik Revolution as the beginning of an age of emancipation which liberated mankind from expropriation and imperialistic wars. Their “bourgeois” counterparts in West Germany agreed with them insofar as they recognised the global historical dimension of the revolution. In the aftermath of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, this perception entirely changed. Only a marginalised group of convinced Marxist-Leninists remains engaged in periodical commemorations of the “Great Socialist October Revolution”, thus preserving the canonical interpretation of the Bolsheviks’ historical mission.6 With 4 Books on First World War are bestsellers, see for example: Jörn Leonhard, Die Büchse der Pandora. Geschichte des Ersten Weltkriegs (München: C.H.Beck, 52014). Herfried Münkler, Der große Krieg. Die Welt 1914–1918 (Berlin: Rowohlt, 42014). 5 Gerd Koenen, “Der ‘Rote Oktober’ als Mythos und Utopicum,” in: Russland und die Folgen, 141–57. 6 See for example the contributions to the 10th conference of Historical Research organised by the “Marxistische Arbeitskreis zur Geschichte der deutschen Arbeiterbewegung bei der Historischen Kommission der Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (PDS)” in 1997: Lothar Berthold, “‘Sie war und bleibt die Große Sozialistische Ok- toberrevolution!’,” in: Die Oktoberrevolution 1917 und ihr Platz in der Geschichte (Bonn: Pahl-Rugenstein, 1997), Andreas Schulz: “What does it have to do with us?” – Rethinking the Russian Revolution ... 15 the vanishing aurora of the “Red October”,7 the main stream of research is re-directing its orientation, substituting the outlook on the global impacts of the revolution with a retrospection on its national origins. Historians are turning their attention to the late Empire, explaining the Russian Revolutions in view of the economic crises and social uprisings which accelerated the breakdown of the Empire.8 The great narratives published in Germany during the last few years tell us about Russian history, thereby emphasising the singularity of the Russian revolutions from February to October 1917. However, nationalising the October Revolution does not necessarily imply neglecting or denying its considerable impacts on other countries, which will be demonstrated later in the paper. It is not a complete revision but rather a de-mystification of the glorious “Great Socialist Revolution” that has taken place, returning Red October back into Russian history. Revolutionary Leviathan Marxist historiography has failed to validate its “scientific” dogma of the inevitability of a socialist world revolution terminating the age of capitalism. Treating history as a continuous progression of mankind