|
WSWS
: History
: 2005
SEP/WSWS Summer School
Lecture one: The Russian Revolution and the unresolved historical
problems of the 20th century
Part 1
By David North
29 August 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
This is first part of the lecture The Russian Revolution
and the unresolved historical problems of the 20th century
delivered by World Socialist Web Site chairman David North
at the Socialist Equality Party (US) and the WSWS summer school
from August 14 to August 20, 2005, in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The
lecture was published in four parts. (See Part
2, Part 3 and Part
4).
Historical knowledge and class consciousness
Today we are beginning a week-long series of lectures on the
subject of Marxism, the October Revolution and the Historical
Foundations of the Fourth International. In the course of
these lectures we intend to examine the historical events, theoretical
controversies and political struggles out of which the Fourth
International emerged. The central focus of these lectures will
be on the first 40 years of the twentieth century. To some extent,
this limitation is determined by the amount of time we have at
our disposal. There is only so much that can be accomplished in
one week, and to work through even the first four decades of the
last century in just seven days is a rather ambitious undertaking.
And yet there is a certain historical logic in our concentration
on the period between 1900 and 1940.
By the time Leon Trotsky was assassinated in August 1940, all
the major events that determined the essential political characteristics
of the twentieth century had already occurred: The outbreak of
World War I in August 1914; the conquest of political power by
the Bolshevik Party in October 1917 and the subsequent establishment
of the Soviet Union as the first socialist workers state;
the emergence, in the aftermath of World War I, of the United
States as the most powerful imperialist state; the failure of
the German Revolution in 1923, the bureaucratic degeneration of
the Soviet Union; the defeat of the Left Opposition and the expulsion
of Trotsky from the Communist Party and the Third International
in 1927; the betrayal of the Chinese Revolution in 1926-27; the
Wall Street crash of October 1929 and the beginning of the world
capitalist depression; Hitlers rise to power and the victory
of fascism in Germany in January 1933; the Moscow Trials of 1936-38
and the campaign of political genocide against the socialist intelligentsia
and working class in the USSR; the betrayal and defeat of the
Spanish Revolution in 1937-39 under the aegis of the Stalinist-led
Popular Front; the outbreak of World War II in September 1939;
and the beginning of the extermination of European Jewry.
When we say that it was during these four decades that the
essential political characteristics of the twentieth century were
defined, we mean this in the following sense: all the major political
problems that were to confront the international working class
during the post-World War II period could be understood only when
examined through the prism of the strategic lessons of the major
revolutionary and counter-revolutionary experiences of the pre-World
War II era.
The analysis of the policies of social democratic parties after
World War II required an understanding of the historical implications
of the collapse of the Second International in August 1914; the
nature of the Soviet Union, of the regimes established in eastern
Europe in the aftermath of World War II, and of the Maoist regime
established in China in October 1949 could be comprehended only
on the basis of a study of the October Revolution and the protracted
degeneration of the first workers state; and answers to
the problems of the great wave of anti-colonial and anti-imperialist
revolutions that swept Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin
America after 1945 could be found only on the basis of a painstaking
study of the political and theoretical controversies surrounding
Trotskys theory of permanent revolution, which he had initially
formulated in 1905.
The relation between historical knowledge and political analysis
and orientation found its most profound expression in the last
decade of the Soviet Union. By the time Mikhail Gorbachev came
to power in March 1985, the Stalinist regime was in desperate
crisis. The deterioration of the Soviet economy could no longer
be concealed once oil prices, whose rapid rise during the 1970s
had provided a short-term windfall, began to fall sharply. What
measures were to be taken by the Kremlin to reverse the decline?
Issues of policy immediately became entangled with unanswered
questions of Soviet history.
For more than 60 years the Stalinist regime had been engaged
in an unrelenting campaign of historical falsification. The citizens
of the Soviet Union were largely ignorant of the facts of their
own revolutionary history. The works of Trotsky and his co-thinkers
had been censored and suppressed for decades. There existed not
a single credible work of Soviet history. Each new edition of
the official Soviet encyclopedia revised history in accordance
with the political interests and instructions of the Kremlin.
In the Soviet Union, as our late comrade Vadim Rogovin once noted,
the past was as unpredictable as the future!
For those factions within the bureaucracy and privileged nomenklatura
which favored the dismantling of the nationalized industry, the
revival of private property, and the restoration of capitalism,
the Soviet economic crisis was proof that socialism
had failed and that the October Revolution was a catastrophic
historical mistake from which all subsequent Soviet tragedies
flowed inexorably. The economic prescriptions advanced by these
pro-market forces were based on an interpretation of Soviet history
that claimed that Stalinism was the inevitable outcome of the
October Revolution.
The answer to the advocates of capitalist restoration could
not be given simply on the basis of economics. Rather, the refutation
of the pro-capitalist arguments demanded an examination of Soviet
history, the demonstration that Stalinism was neither the necessary
nor inevitable outcome of the October Revolution. It had to be
shown that an alternative to Stalinism was not only theoretically
conceivable, but also that such an alternative had actually existed
in the form of the Left Opposition led by Leon Trotsky.
What I am saying today is more or less what I told an audience
of students and teachers in the Soviet Union, at the Historical
Archival Institute of Moscow University, in November 1989. I began
my lecture on the subject of The Future of Socialism
by noting that in order to discuss the future, it is necessary
to dwell at considerable length on the past. Because how can one
discuss socialism today without dealing with the many controversies
that confront the socialist movement? And, of course, when we
discuss the future of socialism, we are discussing the fate of
the October Revolutionan event which is of world significance
and which has had a profound effect on the working class of every
country. Much of this past, particularly in the Soviet Union,
is still shrouded in mystery and falsification. [1]
There was at that time an immense interest in historical questions
in the USSR. My own lecture, which was organized with less than
24 hours preparation in response to an impromptu invitation by
the director of the Historical Archival Institute, attracted an
audience of several hundred people. The publicity for the meeting
was confined almost entirely to word of mouth. The news quickly
got around that an American Trotskyist would be speaking at the
Institute, and a large number of people turned up.
Though in the brief era of Glasnost it was not a complete
novelty for a Trotskyist to speak publicly, a lecture by an American
Trotskyist was still something of a sensation. The intellectual
climate for such a lecture was extremely favorable. There was
a hunger for historical truth. As Comrade Fred Williams recently
noted in his review of Robert Services miserable Stalin
biography, the Soviet journal Arguments and Facts, which
had been a minor publication in the pre-Glasnost era, saw
its circulation climb exponentially, to 33 million, on the basis
of its publication of essays and long-suppressed documents related
to Soviet history.
Frightened by the widespread and expanding interest in Marxism
and Trotskyism, the bureaucracy sought to preempt this essential
intellectual process of historical clarification, which
would tend to encourage a resurgence of socialist political consciousness,
by accelerating its movement toward the breakup of the USSR. The
precise manner in which the bureaucracy orchestrated the dissolution
of the USSRthe culmination of the Stalinist betrayal of
the October Revolution foreseen by Trotsky more than a half-century
earlieris a subject that remains to be examined with the
necessary detail. But what must be stressed is that a critical
element in the dissolution of the USSRwhose catastrophic
consequences for the people of the former Soviet Union have become
all too clearwas ignorance of history. The burden
of decades of historical falsification could not be overcome in
time for the Soviet working class to orient itself politically,
uphold its independent social interests, and oppose the dissolution
of the Soviet Union and the restoration of capitalism.
There is a great lesson in this historical tragedy. Without
a thorough knowledge of the historical experiences through which
it has passed, the working class cannot defend even its most elementary
social interests, let alone conduct a politically conscious struggle
against the capitalist system.
Historical consciousness is an essential component of class
consciousness. The words of Rosa Luxemburg are as relevant
today as they were when written in early 1915, less than a year
after the outbreak of World War I and the capitulation of the
German Social Democratic Party to Prussian militarism and imperialism:
Historical experience is [the working class] only
teacher. His Via Dolorosa to freedom is covered not only with
unspeakable suffering, but with countless mistakes. The goal of
his journey, his final liberation, depends entirely upon the proletariat,
on whether it understands to learn from its own mistakes.
Self-criticism, cruel, unsparing criticism that goes to the very
root of the evil is life and breath for the proletarian movement.
The catastrophe into which the world has thrust the socialist
proletariat is an unexampled misfortune for humanity. But socialism
is lost only if the international proletariat is unable to measure
the depths of the catastrophe and refuses to understand the lessons
that it teaches.[2]
To be continued
Notes:
[1] The USSR.and Socialism: The Trotskyist
Perspective (Detroit, 1990), pp. 1-2.
[2] The Junius Pamphlet (London, 1970), p. 7.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |