Political parties of Russia in 1917

The February Revolution of 1917 catches the Bolshevik Party by surprise. As researchers Richard Pipes and Mikhail Voslensky point out, Lenin back in January 1917, in exile, speaking to young Swiss socialists, declared: "We, the elderly, may not live to see the decisive battles of this coming revolution. But I can, I think, express with great confidence the hope that the youth ... will have the happiness not only to fight, but also to win in the coming proletarian revolution". Alexander Shlyapnikov, head of the Russian Bureau of the Central Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks), who was directly in Petrograd before the revolution, noted that "all political groups and organizations of the underground were against the protest in the coming months of 1917".[14]

The leader of the constitutional democrats, Pavel Milyukov, expressed the same spirit when he noted that "January and February [before the revolution] of 1917 passed somehow colorlessly". The Socialist Revolutionary militant Sergey Mstislavsky noted that the revolution found the revolutionaries asleep, "like the evangelical foolish virgins". In the words of Vasily Shulgin, "the revolutionaries are not ready yet, but the revolution is ready".[14]

The Bolshevik Party was banned in 1914, the Bolshevik faction of the State Duma was arrested. During the February Revolution, not a single member of the Central Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks) was in Petrograd – all of them were in exile or emigration.

The police managed to introduce a number of provocateurs into the ranks of the Bolsheviks. The provocateur Roman Malinovsky even managed to become a member of the Central Committee and in 1913 the Chairman of the Bolshevik faction in the Duma, but in 1914 he fled Russia under the threat of exposure.[15] One of the last exposed provocateurs was Shurkanov,[16] a member of the Petrograd Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks), who called on the Bolsheviks to take action during the February Revolution. Richard Pipes also points out that the police managed to infiltrate their agents even in the newspaper Pravda; all Lenin's articles in Pravda until July 1914 were reviewed by the police before being published. In 1913, the chief editor of Pravda was the provocateur Miron Chernomazov (Lyutekov, Moskvich).

The leadership of the party (the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee) was in exile, the Russian Bureau of the Central Committee operated illegally in Russia, the composition of which was constantly changing due to arrests.[17]

During the events, the last Tsarist Minister of Internal Affairs, Alexander Protopopov, arrested the members of the Petrograd Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks) who were in Petrograd, in connection with which the role of the Bolsheviks in the uprising that took place was insignificant, and their influence in the newly formed Petrograd Soviet was minimal.

Immediately after the February Revolution, the Bolsheviks were the third most influential party among the socialists, numbering only about 24 thousand members (in Petrograd – only 2 thousand) and constituted a minority in the Soviets. Although Soviet historiography dates the separation of the Bolsheviks into an independent party by 1912, in fact, at the time of the February Revolution, the demarcation from Menshevism had not yet been completed. Many socialists considered the split of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party into Bolshevik and Menshevik factions as a temporary phenomenon; until 1913, the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks were even represented in the State Duma by one Social Democratic faction.

The Social Democratic faction of the Interdistrictites defended the restoration of a single Russian Social Democratic Labor Party; in 54 of the 68 provincial cities of Russia in March–April 1917 there were joint Bolshevik–Menshevik organizations of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. At the First Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies in June 1917, 73 delegates declared their party affiliation as non–factional Social Democrats.

Just a few days before Lenin's arrival from exile, the All–Russian Conference of Bolsheviks on March 28 in Petrograd discusses the possibility of reuniting with the Mensheviks into a single party, and Stalin notes that "unification is possible along the Zimmerwald–Kienthal line".

At the First Congress of Soviets (June 1917), the Bolsheviks received only 12% of the seats. However, already at this congress, in response to the statements of the Menshevik Tsereteli that "At the moment there is no political party in Russia that would say: give us power, leave, we will take your place", Lenin declared from his seat: "There is such a party!".

From the diaries of Nicholas II, it is clear that back in May 1917 he vaguely imagined how the Bolsheviks differed from other revolutionaries. The May 1 entry noted that the council is being attacked "by some other organizations much more to the left".[18] Leon Trotsky in his work "History of the Russian Revolution" notes that at the beginning of 1917 "the Bolsheviks were little known".

The number of Bolsheviks increases from 24,000 in February 1917 to 240,000 in June and 350,000 by October. Mikhail Voslensky draws attention to the fact that, in contrast to the Socialist Revolutionaries, oriented towards the peasant majority, the Bolsheviks declared their main support of the factory workers, not so numerous, but better organized and more disciplined: "the experience of Land and Freedom showed that the hope for the peasantry as the main revolutionary force it did not justify itself. A handful of revolutionary intelligentsia was too small to turn over the colossus of the tsarist state without relying on some large class ... Such a large class in Russia in those conditions could only be the proletariat, which was rapidly growing in numbers at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. ... The Narodniks' attempt to rely on the majority of the population – the peasantry – has failed, therefore the Leninists are guided by the minority, but organized and disciplined – by the working class in order to seize power by its hands".[19] At the beginning of 1917, the Bolsheviks were not supporters of the "socialization of the land" (that is, the distribution of all land directly to peasant communities), defending the principle of "nationalization of the land" (that is, the transfer of all land to state ownership).[20]

Revolutionary Baltic sailors, 1917

The Bolsheviks put forward a number of populist slogans, among which the key was the demand for an immediate separate peace with Germany ("a democratic peace without annexations and indemnities"), which attracted wavering masses of soldiers and sailors to their side. The sympathies of the workers were attracted by the support for "workers' control" over production and the factory committees. By the fall of 1917, the Bolsheviks also effectively abandoned the slogan of "nationalizing the land" and "intercepting" the Socialist Revolutionary slogan of "socializing" it (that is, distributing it to the peasants).

The Bolshevik Decree on Land, one of the first to be adopted after coming to power, actually carried out a Socialist Revolutionary program.[21] According to Lenin, the Bolsheviks adopted "the decisions of the lower classes, although we did not agree with them". Particularly strongly influenced by Lenin was the publication by the Socialist Revolutionaries at the First All–Russian Congress of Soviets of Peasant Deputies in August 1917 of a consolidated peasant order, generalized of 242 orders. The consolidated mandate directly demanded "equalizing labor" distribution of landlord land among the peasants, with the exception of only a few "highly cultured former landlord farms". Already reading the Decree on Land at the Second All–Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, Lenin stated in his report:

Here voices are heard that the decree and the order itself were drawn up by the Socialist Revolutionaries. So be it. Does it matter who it was drawn up, but, as a democratic government, we cannot bypass the decision of the lower classes, even if we disagreed with it. In the fire of life, applying it in practice, conducting it in the field, the peasants themselves will understand where the truth is. And even if the peasants continue to follow the Socialist Revolutionaries and even if they even give this party a majority at the Constituent Assembly, then here too we will say: so be it. Life is the best teacher, and it will show who is right, and let the peasants from one end, and we will solve this issue from the other end.

In fact, the peasants have already begun mass land grabbing since April 1917; The Interim Government was unable to stop this process. At the same time, the course taken by the Bolsheviks for the immediate construction of "socialism" as a whole in 1917 was incomprehensible to the "masses".

By November 1917, the more energetic and better organized Bolsheviks were pushing back other socialist parties. The influence of the Bolsheviks becomes predominant in the Soviets of large industrial cities, on the fronts and fleets (first of all, on the Northern and Western Fronts and the Baltic Fleet). In the Petrograd Soviet, the Bolsheviks occupy up to 90% of the seats in September–October 1917. At the same time, the popularity of the Bolsheviks in small towns remains insignificant, and Socialist Revolutionaries dominate in the villages.

By October 1917, the number of the Bolshevik party reached 350,000, the Mensheviks – up to 200,000.

The structure of the Bolshevik Party in 1917 was marked by considerable flexibility. After Lenin returned from emigration in April 1917, the Foreign Bureau and the Russian Bureau of the Central Committee, which had become meaningless in connection with the legalization of the party, were abolished, the Military Organization of the Central Committee and the Secretariat of the Central Committee, as well as the Press Bureau were formed.

In August, national sections appeared in the party's structure, primarily Lithuanian and Jewish, a group was formed to lead the trade union movement, a municipal group under the Central Committee. In August, the Political Bureau was formed, but the Central Committee remained the main decision–making center in October–December 1917. The composition of the Central Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks), which made the decision on the armed uprising, was elected in the composition of 21 people at the Sixth Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks) on July 26 – August 3, 1917.

The composition of the Central Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks), which decided on an armed uprising in October 1917, was elected at the Sixth Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks), held on August 8–18, 1917. The historic decision on the uprising was adopted at a meeting on October 23 by a vote, 10 votes to 2 (Kamenev and Zinoviev). The decision was confirmed at an enlarged meeting of the Central Committee on October 16.[22]

Several structures were formed to lead the uprising: the Political Bureau (October 10), the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet (October 12), and the Revolutionary Military Center (October 16).[23] Unlike the Political Bureau and the Military Revolutionary Center, which were institutions of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (Bolsheviks), the Military Revolutionary Committee was an institution of the Petrograd Soviet, that is, a Soviet, and not a party organ. The Political Bureau, first organized on October 23, 1917, did not have the same power at that time as this body received in the last decades of the Soviet Union; the Political Bureau became a permanent body only in 1919.

After the Bolsheviks came to power, the structure of their party continued to change; the number of various national sections in March 1918 reached nine, including the Czechoslovak and Anglo–American sections. Organizations such as the Workers' Bureau and the Organizational Bureau were formed.

Valery Zhuravlev draws attention to a comparison of the composition of parties such as the Bolsheviks and Constitutional Democrats:[25]

• Bolsheviks:
  • Age composition: about half are between 26 and 35 years old, one in fifteen is under 26 years old. As of 1907, the average age of the Bolsheviks was even less than 30 years old.[26]
  • Social composition: every third of the lower strata of the city and village, every second – from the middle strata of provincial cities, every fourth – from the non–capital elite. About 36% are workers.
  • Data collected by the credentials committee of the Fifth Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party on the Bolshevik delegates. Russians among the 105 Bolsheviks were almost 80%. Workers accounted for 36%, writers and representatives of other liberal professions – 27%, commercial and industrial employees – 11%, etc. Higher education had 20% of the Bolshevik delegates, secondary – 32%, the lowest – 37%, home – 2%, 9% declared themselves self–taught. The average age of the Bolshevik delegate was less than 30 years old.[27]
• Constitutional Democrats:
  • Age composition: one in fifteen at the age of 31–35, the bulk is much older. Every third person is over 52 years old.
  • Social composition: mainly the elite of large cities.
  • Ethnic composition: Russians ("Great Russians") – 88%, Jews – 6%.
• Mensheviks:[28]
  • Social composition: radical intelligentsia, "labor aristocracy".
  • National composition (data for 1907): 34% Russians, 29% Georgians, 23% Jews. Among the Mensheviks, an unusually high percentage of Georgians is noted; of the significant Mensheviks, one can single out Nikolay Chkheidze, chairman of the executive committee of the Petrograd Soviet in its first composition, and Irakli Tsereteli, a member of the first composition of the executive committee of the Petrograd Soviet and the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs in the second composition of the Provisional Government.

In 1914, 27 of the 32 members of the Central Committee of the Constitutional Democratic Party were hereditary nobles (including 2 titled), 1 – a personal nobleman, 2 – hereditary honorary citizens, 1 – a bourgeoisie, 1 – a "foreigner" (Jew). 13 members of the Central Committee were landowners, 6 had their own enterprises or were members of the boards and councils of various economic societies. By professional affiliation, 19 members of the Central Committee were zemstvo leaders, 11 had academic degrees, 6 were lawyers, and 1 was an engineer.[29] Among the permanent leaders of the Constitutional Democratic Party were Pavel Milyukov, princes Peter and Pavel Dolgorukov belonging to the Rurik family, Prince Dmitry Shakhovskoy, Prince Vladimir Obolensky, Academician Vladimir Vernadsky, professors Sergey Muromtsev, Vladimir Gessen, Lev Petrazhitsky, Sergei Kotlyarovsky.

The Central Committee of the Constitutional Democratic Party, elected in May 1917, consisted of 66 people, including 5 princes, one baron, one countess, several large bankers and industrialists, about 20 professors, etc. According to the memoirs of Ariadna Tyrkova, "We had almost no youth ... Many Constitutional Democratic professors were extremely popular, but students did not join the professorial party. Only a few high schools had student Constitutional Democratic groups. The student also had to have the courage to preach Constitutional Democracy in the student environment. We were too moderate for the youth".[30]

According to the data cited by Richard Pipes, in 1907, 38% of the Bolsheviks and 26% of the Mensheviks were peasants, and they did not live in the villages, but declassed elements who had gone to the city. Lenin received the main support from the provinces of Central Russia, while the Mensheviks were most popular in Georgia.

Other features of the Bolshevik party were a low level of education (only every fifth – higher and every fourth – incomplete higher), among the Bolshevik elites there is an unusually large proportion of those who were brought up in childhood without fathers (37%).

The researcher Vadim Kozhinov, having analyzed the ethnic composition of the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party in the period 1917–1922, includes 27 Russians, 10 Jews and 11 persons of other nationalities (Latvians, Poles, Georgians, Armenians, etc.).

Another way to compare the composition of parties is to analyze the age, educational and national composition of the deputies of the Constituent Assembly by faction. This analysis shows that the average age of the Bolshevik faction was the smallest and amounted to 34 years. At the same time, the average age of the Socialist Revolutionary faction was 37, the Mensheviks – 42, and the Constitutional Democrats – 48.[31] The level of education also differs greatly by faction: it was the highest among Constitutional Democrats (up to 100% with higher education). Among the Socialist Revolutionary deputies of the Constituent Assembly, 66% of people had higher and incomplete higher education, among the Bolsheviks – 54% (32% higher, 22% – incomplete higher education).

In terms of the ethnic composition of the Constituent Assembly, the most diverse was the Bolshevik faction, in which 54% were Russians, 23% Jews, 6.5% Poles and Balts each. In the Socialist Revolutionary faction, Russians accounted for 72%, Jews – 14%.

Vladimir Lenin was 47 years old in 1917, as can be seen from the above data, he was noticeably older than the bulk of the Bolsheviks. In this environment, it is not surprising that one of Lenin's pseudonyms appeared – "The Old Man", which he, however, began to use as early as 1901–1909.[33][34] Some researchers also mention Lenin's pseudonym – "Beard".

One of the features of the Bolsheviks was a rigid organization based on the principle of democratic centralism, proposed by Lenin in his theoretical work of 1902 "What Is to Be Done?". The principles of building a Bolshevik party developed by Lenin meant strict discipline, the subordination of the lower to the higher and the obligation to fulfill the decisions made, which was described as a "party of a new type".

Rosa Luxemburg, in her article in the Iskra newspaper of July 10, 1904, describes Lenin's approach as follows: "Lenin's point of view is the point of view of merciless centralism ... In this view, the Central Committee, for example, has the right to organize all local party committees and, consequently, to determine the personnel of each individual local organization, to give them a ready–made charter, to dissolve them categorically and re–create them, and as a result, thus indirectly influence the composition of the highest party authority – the congress. Thus, the Central Committee is the only really active core of the party, all the other organizations are only its executive bodies".[35]

The Kshesinskaya mansion, the residence of the Bolsheviks in March–July 1917

According to Trotsky's statement in August 1904, "In internal party politics, these methods of Lenin lead to the fact that ... the Central Committee replaces the party organization and, finally, the dictator replaces the Central Committee". One of the founders of Russian Marxism, the Menshevik Pavel Axelrod, expressed himself even more rudely, calling the Leninist organization "a simplified copy ... of the bureaucratic–autocratic system ... of the Minister of Internal Affairs". Researcher Mikhail Voslensky calls such an organization «a revolutionary "mafia"», "a military organization of agents", "where democracy was considered an unnecessary game, and everything was based on conspiracy and mutual responsibility".

A similar hierarchical centralized organization was created by Lenin, including under the influence of "Narodnaya Volya", which included Lenin's older brother, Alexander Ulyanov, who was hanged in 1887 for attempting to assassinate Alexander III. As far as Lenin himself was able to find out first–hand, "Narodnaya Volya", in contrast to "Earth and Freedom", had a hierarchical command structure of a paramilitary type headed by the executive committee. At the same time, the executive committee made all decisions not by order of the "dictator", but only collectively. According to the data cited by Richard Pipes, in the period 1887–1891, in his views, Lenin actually became a supporter of Narodnaya Volya, on his own initiative looking for the oldest members of the movement in Kazan and Samara and questioning them about the history of the movement and its practical organization. Lenin himself in 1904 describes the principle of "democratic centralism" as follows: "the organizational principle of revolutionary social democracy ... seeks to proceed from above, defending the expansion of the rights and powers of the center in relation to the part". Separately, Lenin emphasizes the need for timely and regular disposal of the party from its ineffective members: "to get rid of an unfit member, the organization of real revolutionaries will not stop at any means".

The principle of centralized but collegial leadership, characteristic of Narodnaya Volya, was also observed in the Bolshevik Party at least until the second half of 1918. Lenin always enjoyed tremendous authority among the Bolsheviks as the founder of the party, a charismatic leader and the main party ideologist, but his power was not absolute. A number of key decisions were taken by a majority vote of the Central Committee, contrary to Lenin's clearly expressed will. Thus, in November 1917, the Central Committee refused to expel Zinoviev and Kamenev from the party, confining itself to a ban "to make statements that run counter to the party's line", and Lenin resigned himself to this decision. In preparation for an armed uprising, the majority of the Central Committee rejected Lenin's demand to start the uprising immediately and postponed it until the Second All–Russian Congress of Soviets was convened, in accordance with Trotsky's proposal. This circumstance aroused extreme concern in Lenin, and he repeatedly "pressed" on his comrades–in–arms, demanding to accelerate the preparation for the uprising.

It also cost Lenin great efforts to "push through" the decision to conclude the Brest Peace Treaty on German terms. The majority of the Central Committee supports Trotsky's formula "no peace, no war", and after the final collapse of this formula, the decision on peace is made by the Central Committee only after Lenin's threat to resign, which threatened the Bolsheviks with a split and a serious political crisis with unpredictable consequences.

Richard Pipes in his research claims that Lenin's power became absolute only by the end of 1918, after he recovered from the assassination attempt on August 30, 1918; a rapid recovery after a seemingly fatal wound was superimposed on the traditional for Russia notions of the sacredness of the tsar. Vladimir Bonch–Bruevich, in the first edition of his memoirs, claimed that the sight of the wounded Lenin reminded him of "the removal from the cross of Christ, crucified by priests, bishops and the rich". The general opinion of the Bolshevik elites was expressed by Kamenev, who had repeatedly argued with Lenin earlier, who declared that "... the further, the more I am convinced that Ilyich is never wrong. In the end, he is always right ... How many times it seemed that he fell through – in the forecast or in the political course, and in the end, both his forecast and the course were always justified".

Another ideological innovation, formulated by Lenin in his "What Is to Be Done?", was the terms "bringing in consciousness" and "vanguard of the working class". Lenin assumed that the factory workers by themselves may not show "consciousness", presenting not political, but only economic demands ("trade unionism"), "the class political consciousness can be brought to the worker only from the outside ... by its own efforts the working class is able to develop only the consciousness of the trade unionist".[36] It was the "party of a new type" that was supposed to deal with this "bringing in of consciousness", acting here as the "vanguard" ("the vanguard of the working class"). As Richard Pipes points out, Lenin arrived at this view through personal contact with workers in the 1890s, "the only period of his life when he had direct contact with the so–called proletariat".

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

What is to Be Done?

According to Lenin's plan, the Bolshevik Party was built as an "organization of professional revolutionaries", since it was assumed that the core of the party would professionally engage only in "revolutionary activities", receiving its content at the expense of the party ("anything talented and "promising" agitator of the workers should not work at the factory for 11 hours. We must make sure that he lives on the means of the Party"). The socialists competing with Lenin did not have such an organization. Lenin called the absence of "professional revolutionaries" in other parties "handicraft".[36]

An attempt to put such principles into practice leads to the fact that at the Second Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (1903) Lenin got into a personal quarrel with the leader of Menshevism Yuli Martov, and the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party – to a split into Bolshevik and Menshevik factions. Since Lenin did not succeed in transforming the entire Social Democratic Party on his own principles, he is taking a course to form his faction into a separate party, forming parallel party structures; thus, at the end of 1904, his supporters formed the Bureau of Majority Committees, in fact a parallel Central Committee of the still united Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. At the Fourth Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (1906) in Stockholm, the Bolsheviks, despite their name, find themselves in the minority. The Fifth Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (1907) in London was accompanied by a bitter struggle between the two factions.

As the historian Yuri Felshtinsky points out, the policy of splitting the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party into Menshevik and Bolshevik factions was supported by the Police Department, which recklessly believed that this would weaken the revolutionary movement. One of the most consistent supporters of the split of the Social Democrats was the police provocateur Roman Malinovsky.[37]

Long–term (1903–1917) factional struggle against the Mensheviks allowed Lenin to accumulate considerable political experience. Richard Pipes in his work "The Russian Revolution. Book 2. The Bolsheviks in the Struggle for Power (1917–1918)" draws attention to the fact that Lenin actively used in 1917–1918 the method he first tested during the split of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party in 1903. If it was impossible to seize any organ, the Bolsheviks formed another, parallel organ from their supporters, bearing the same name. Thus, in November 1917, the Bolsheviks split the Pro–Socialist Revolutionary Second Congress of Soviets of Peasant Deputies, forming a parallel Congress of their supporters, and in January 1918 neutralized the All–Russian Executive Committee of the Railway Trade Union, forming a parallel All–Russian Executive Committee of Railway Workers.

Researcher Mikhail Voslensky, in his fundamental work Nomenclature, comments on Lenin's principles of "bringing consciousness" and "the vanguard of the working class" as follows:

...All of a sudden intellectuals come to the worker... and declare: "Your point of view is not at all of your class. We intellectuals will teach you your class interest". Isn't it strange? Not only strange, but suspicious. And the further you listen to the reasoning of the smart intellectuals, the more suspicious it becomes. Indeed: what is the worker's point of view? He wants to increase his earnings and improve working conditions. For this he is ready to fight, uniting with other workers. So why is this not the class interest of the worker? "This is trade unionism", the intelligentsia scare them with an incomprehensible, but apparently abusive word. "This is a betrayal of the interests of the working class!".

What are these interests, according to the intellectuals who have appeared? It turns out, that the party led by them, the intelligentsia, came to power in the state. Excuse me, whose class – or group – interest are these intellectuals trying to "bring" into the consciousness of the worker: his or their own? Of course, the intellectuals–party members promise the worker that with their coming to power they themselves will vegetate for a pittance and work day and night in the name of his interests, for him rivers of milk will flow in the banks of the jelly. But if the worker is smart, he will realize that the rivers, if they flow, will not be for him, and zealous intellectuals are unlikely to work for him, and no matter how he works for them.

Does it mean that the intellectuals are deceiving him? Certainly. Does it mean that rivers of milk will really flow for them? Unfortunate ones, they do not yet suspect that after their victory rivers of their blood will flow!