~~ recommended by collectivist action ~~
John Reed, Ten Days That Shook the World
The centenary of the Russian Revolution
in 1917 is obviously significant for Marxists.
This year will see attempts to misrepresent
the revolution or questions its democratic
nature or political necessity.
Revolutionary socialists, therefore, must
study the event themselves and understand
how it happened and what its significance
was. A good place to start is with John
Reed’s Ten Days That Shook the World. In
this book, Reed gives a first-hand journalis-
tic account of the revolution as it unfolded
around him.
Reed was a socialist activist and jouralist
from the US who was covering the
October Revolution for the magazine ‘The
Masses’. From his collection of primary
documents and transcripts of speeches and
debates he attended, Reed constructs an
overview of the developing political land-
scape and brings the reader through the
rapidly moving events with impressive clarity.
Reed’s powerful writing style brilliantly
captures the excitement and spirit of the
revolutionary period from the streets of St.
Petersburg to the rapturous halls of the
Congress of Soviets. While he maintained
that the book ‘does not pretend to be any-
thing but a detailed account’ of the revolu-
tion, amongst its pages are counters to the
common criticism of the revolution as well as
several important lessons for revolutionaries
Today.
Immediately in Ten Days That Shook the
World, Reed reveals how Russian society was
in a flux. Ideas were being debated on street
corners and in large halls, all of Russia, he
writes, ‘was learning to read politics, eco-
nomics, history because people wanted to
know.’ The masses were not passive spec-
tators of the political discussion but were
energetic participants.
Reed commented that by October the
period of the February Revolution seemed
conservative by comparison. Russian poli-
tics ‘swung bodily to the Left’ as the masses
grew in confidence and changed the param-
eters of political discourse, ‘until the Cadets
were outlawed as ‘enemies of the people’,
Kerensky became a ‘counter-revolutionist’,
the ‘middle’ Socialist leaders... were too re-
actionary for their following’. (p. 36)
The revolution in October was part of a
wider process of human liberation, as people
were actively involved in conciously shap-
ing their society. The levels of engagement
were so high in fact Reed asked, with ‘such a
deluge of high and hot thoughts that surely
Russia would never again be dumb!’ (p.137)
Lenin described revolutions as ‘festivals of
the oppressed and the exploited’ and this de-
scription certainly matches the events from
Reed’s account.
The mass participation involved contra-
dicts the most common criticism of the rev-
olution, that it was an undemocratic coup
orchestrated by Lenin and the Bolsheviks.
This critique usually contends that the Pro-
visional Government led by Kerensky had
the only democratic mandate. From reading
Ten Days That Shook the World, however,
one understands the flourishing of democ-
racy that had taken place.
The revolution gave power to the Sovi-
ets which were ‘the direct representatives
of millions on millions of common workers,
79 soldiers, peasants’. (p. 36) The Bolshevik
call for ‘all power to the Soviets’ was not
a negation but an extension of democracy,
as it gave direct authority to the masses in
both the political and crucially the economic
Sphere.
Reed’s account is filled with descriptions
of this radical democracy or ‘people power’
in action. ‘Everywhere the same thing hap-
pened. The common soldiers and the indus-
trial workers supported the Soviets by a vast
majority.’ (p. 147) The existence of soviets in
factories and barracks meant that the
masses were truly involved in the organising
their lives. The revolution grew from the
immediate and ‘moderate’ demands of the
masses for land, bread and peace.
Reed’s sympathies were with the pro-
letariat; nevertheless his book recognises
the deep divide in the society and bril-
liantly demonstrates the effect that counter-
revolutionary forces can have at the pivotal
times. New formations such as the Commit-
tee of Salvation were set up to confront the
influence of the Soviets.
Nothing could be more striking than the
contrast between this [Committee of Salvation]
and the Congress of Soviets. There, great
masses of shabby soldiers, grimy workmen,
Peasants - poor men, bent and scarred
in the brute struggle for existence; here
the Menshevik and Socialist Revolutionary
leaders...rubbed shoulders with Cadets...
with journalists, students, intel-ectuals.
This Duma crowd was well fed, well dressed;
I did not see more than three proletarians
among them all. (p. 123)
These class contradictions explain the
reason why most other political parties were
not supportive of the October Revolution.
Reed quotes Trotsky who pointed out that
these ‘parties which march against us... are
isolated, and for ever cut off from the prole-
tariat!’ (p. 141)
This is at the core of the book, Reed
points out that the revolution was not won
by the Bolsheviks but by the people. ‘This
was their battle, for their world; the officers
in command were elected by them... the
anonymous hordes of the people... rose like
a tide and poured over the enemy’ claiming
power for themselves. (p. 201)
Class interests are magnified in a revolu-
tion. Many who were active in the Febru-
ary Revolution, turned against the move-
ment and sided with reactionary forces as
the workers got closer to gaining power.
These lessons are vital for future struggles,
it is important to know the limits of political
Ideologies.
The revolution shown in Ten Days That
Shook the World is not an idealised repre-
sentation. It was not created by the Bolshe-
viks, as Reed wrote it ‘had not come as they
expected it would come, nor as the intelli-
gentsia desired it; but it had come – rough,
strong, impatient of formulas, contemptuous
of sentimentalism; real’ (p. 134)
This ‘real’ revolution threw everything in
the air. It was certainly not guaranteed that
the Bolsheviks would win the majority to
their side. From the collapse of the status
quo emerged various ideological positions.
Workers could be pulled by many competing
ideas. As Reed eloquently explained ‘Old
Russia was no more; human society flowed
molten in primal heat, and from the tossing
sea of flame was emerging the class struggle.’
(p. 147)
The strength of the Bolsheviks was their
ability to react to the revolutionary moment
and offer a leadership which was critical. Af-
ter months of struggle and principled cam-
paigning the popular call for ‘land, bread
and peace’ and ‘All power to the Soviets’
culminated in support for the revolution and
the Bolsheviks. The revolutionary period
was a learning process in which the masses
developed a new consciousness and fought
for a new type of society, a socialist one. The
Bolsheviks remained principled in their cam-
paign to support the emancipation of the
working class.
So plunged the Bolsheviks ahead, irresistible,
overring hesitation and opposition – the
only people in Russia who had a definite
programme of action while others talked for eight long
months. (p. 137)
As Irish revolutionaries in 2017 it is ob-
vious that the conditions we organise in are
vastly different to those of Russia in 1917.
This does not mean though that we should
ignore the lessons that were hard-learned
through struggle by the Russian revolution-
aries.
Ten Days That Shook the World cap-
tures vividly that in times of revolutionary
movements society is in huge fluctuation and
from this breeds a multitude of ideas. The
book demonstrated the need for a revolu-
tionary party to offer leadership. That party
though, like the Bolsheviks, must be rooted
in movements and struggle to build the con-
fidence of the working class.
Not by compromise with the propertied
classes, or with the political leaders; not
by conciliation the old Government mecha-
nism, did the Bolsheviki conquer the power.
Nor by the organised violence of a small clique.
If the masses all over Russia had not been
ready for insurrection it must have failed.
The only reason for Bolshevik success lay
In their accomplishing the vast and
simple desires of the most pro-
found strata of the people, call-
ing them to the work of tearing down
and destroying the old and afterwards,
in the smoke of falling ruins, cooperating
With them to erect the framework of
the new. (p.254)
The simple and most powerful lesson
from Ten Days That Shook the World is
that it is only through the revolutionary self-
emancipation of the working class that a
true socialist alternative can emerge.
No comments:
Post a Comment