Sei sulla pagina 1di 4

Historian Orlando Figes has stated that Lenins Bolshevik party, Set out with high ideals only

to find out later that the outcome was quite different. To what extent had the original ideals of the Bolshevik party been altered by 1924? By Olga Nazha
Want to learn more about Olga? Read her profile at: http://alpha.tutorlex.com.au/item/olga-nazha/

Under the leadership of Lenin the Bolsheviks rise to power in October 1917 transformed aristocratic Russia into a socialist society. This was partly accomplished by following a set of measured, planned reforms that had been previously prepared and promised to achieve a classless utopia. Inspired by Marxism, the Bolshevik party propagated the belief that Russian society could enter a socialist revolution immediately after the feudal stage and thus avoid the capitalist pitfalls that would accompany such transformations. This was the basic tenet of Leninism. As historian Orlando Figes (revisionist) explains the Bolshevik party set out with high ideals and these included promises of Peace, Bread, Land and All power to the Soviets. However, as he explains the outcome was quite different as these aspriatiations were not completely fulfilled by the government because of a number of factors including the Russian involvement in World War One, the outbreak of Civil War and the establishment of a communist dictatorship, all of which made social and economic life a desperate struggle for all members of society. This essay demonstrates how the Bolsheviks desire to utilise revolutionary ideas to govern the new era of Russian communism were unfortunately compromised in favour of the revolutionaries personal agenda. The results of the first election held (the constituent assembly) were overwhelmingly unfavourable towards the Bolsheviks as they had been out voted by nearly two to one social revolutionaries. Lenin was a revolutionary who believed that the only way to govern was not by compromise but by crushing total opposition. Only scoundrels and imbeciles can think that the proletarian must win a majority of votes in elections (Lenin).As a result His response to the Constituent Assembly (January 18, 1917) was to authorise its dissolution under the armed force of the red guard. Trotsky, a confidant and faithful supporter of Lenin recorded a remark Lenin made to him in private: The dissolution of the Constituent Assembly by the Soviet government means a complete and frank liquidation of the idea of democracy by the idea of dictatorship and according to Richard Pipes (Liberal Historian)such a blatant disregard for the principles upon which the Bolsheviks had established a new order was made clear by the fact that the machine gun became for them the principle instrument of political persuasion. This event illustrated the move to a one party dictatorship. Lenins decree on land (November 8th 1917) sought for private ownership of land to be abolished forever which fulfilled his promise on Land and even though he was placed in a compromising position, to establishing his new society while finding endurance to fulfil his promise made a significant difference in Russia. Although Lenins behaviour was questioned as

to whether he had Russias best interest at heart (Dismissal of the Constituent Assembly), he emerged with many decrees that were democratically pleasing to the people.

Russias involvement in World War One had a strenuous impact on the countrys social and economic society. Lenin and Trotsky, international revolutionaries had demonstrated a questionable loyalty to the ideals they had for Russias future. This was evident when it was revealed that Germany had been providing substantial financial support to Lenin. Their aim was for Lenin to withdraw Russia from the war, which further questions Lenins actions as to whether he wanted peace to fulfil his promise to the Russian people or his promise to his German employers. In addition, the proletariat were dissatisfied with the one party dictatorship as they had been previously promised All power to the Soviets. Also although Lenins promise of peace was fulfilled by signing the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (3rd March 1918) which had significant impact on Russias economy including three billion roubles in war reparations, the loss of a huge land area amounting to a third of European Russia stretching from the Baltic to the Black sea and the cessation of Russias major grain source to Germany and her allies. However, despite the failure of several of Lenins promises he did fulfil his promise of peace at a very expensive price: Intolerably severe are the terms of peace. Nevertheless, history will claim its own...Let us set to work, to organise, organise and organise. Despite all trials the future is ours. According to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, they supported Lenin in his decision by saying In the period of the BrestLitovsk Peace Lenin taught the Party how to retreat in good order when the forces of the enemy are obviously superior to our own, in order to prepare with the utmost energy for a new offensive. Significantly Lenins desire for peace came with major consequences for Russia which made his decree on land unpromising as Germany took control of Ukraine, Russias main grain source which was populated by peasants cultivating the land. The Bolsheviks crushing of the Constituent Assembly (January 1918), followed by their outlawing of all other parties, depicted that they were not prepared to share power. Civil war was a progressive outcome and its seeds were sown early in the unfolding drama of the Bolsheviks claims to power as they were faced with internal threats (Green and White armies) and external threats (Britain, France, Japan, Czech Legion, Poland). The promise of peace was quickly discarded with the outbreak of the civil war (1918). One of the greatest threats used to implement terror was the Cheka, which forced men to fight in the civil war or they would be tortured or instantly killed: The Cheka must defend the revolutio n and conquer the enemy, even if the sword falls occasionally on the heads of the innocent (Dzerzhinsky). Lenins formation of the Cheka attacked the peoples democracy as it was clear that Lenin was determined to establish an absolute Bolshevik rule by suppressing any opposition. The promise of All power to the Soviets was not to be compromised at any cost and was soon to be seen as All power to the Bolsheviks. Violence became emblematic of the Bolsheviks rule. The greatest dangers during war communism were that they were no longer military opposition but economic devastation, social chaos and ideological disillusionment. However, psychologically the war created survival mentality, incredible self belief and ruthless determination. The social impacts of the civil war justified strict sanctions and summary justice of perceived counter revolutionary threats both inside and outside the party which was probably what the Bolshevik party intended on achieving.

Lenins failure to meet the promises outlined by the party caused severe repercussions for Russia. The combination of requisitioning, drought and the general disruption of war created a national famine in 1921. The grain harvests over the past two years produced less than half that was gathered in 1913 and 9.5 billion people died from starvation. The Bolsheviks in response to this tragic event did not admit their failure, and instead redirected the blame towards the Kulaks. This illustrates and example of the lack of accountability by the government an irresponsible government who were incapable of delivering their promises because of the economically instability of the time. As Sheila Fitzpatrick, a revisionist historian explains the Bolsheviks took over a war economy in a state of near collapse, and their first and overwhelming problem was to keep it running. This somewhat sympathetic statement towards the Bolsheviks however cannot ignore the various other dictatorial policies that were implemented to crush the tools of former tsarist generals and agents of interventionists. Following the introduction of the new economic policy Lenins primary focus was to meet Russias urgent need for food instead of upholding the rigid policies of the parties war communism. Robert Service, British Historian offers insight into Lenins change of ideals: Lenin foresaw that force alone would not be enough to quell the peasants, and he decided that in order to sustain the political dictatorship, he had to offer economic relaxations ... Some such gamble was essential for the regime to survive In doing so the Bolsheviks regained some favour from the general public as their focus no longer revolved upon the systematic destruction of anti communist forces and instead made an attempt towards fulfilling their broken promises. Further atrocities by the Bolshevik government were illustrated in early February 1921 when Trotsky ordered the Red Army to cross the late-winter ice linking Kronstadt to Petrograd and crush any opposition. The sailors and workers of Kronstadt produced a manifesto insisting that the Bolshevik government return to the promises that had inspired the revolution. This was an unexpected situation to the Bolsheviks as these people were the main supporters of the Bolsheviks. Lenin moved away from his party policy and decided it was time to soften the severity of war communism. As the New Economic Policy was introduced (8-16 March 1921) Lenin decided to focus on the primary need of Russias urgent need for food. This move justified Lenins intention to tackle famine and in doing so lessen the opposition to Bolshevism. However, according to Lenin the New Economic Policy was equivalent to the treaty of Brest-Litovsk an unfortunate but necessary step. Those favouring ideological considerations, however perceived the change to be undermining the foundations of the party. Electricity was introduced to modernise Russia and its main idea was to overcome the backwardness of the countryside. This introduction was an ultimate symbol and expression of modernity which was one of the benefits that the Bolsheviks contributed to. Thus, throughout the rule of the Bolsheviks, they experienced many unexpected events and were faced with ramifications of their decisions that they had never imagined happening. Throughout their service in 1917-1924 the Bolsheviks did not completely fulfil their promise of peace, bread, land and all power to the soviets, but on the other hand they did provide an adequate amount of reform which was

socially beneficial to the changing needs of the Russian People in the long term. The immediate consequences of the party however were severe and the Russian economy not only had to suffer through the horrors of World War One, Civil War and a dictatorship but ultimately a party who failed to uphold the beliefs and morale of their countrymen. Interested in having Olga as a tutor? Read her profile at: http://alpha.tutorlex.com.au/item/olga-nazha/

Potrebbero piacerti anche