The change in the personnel of the Provisional Government was not followed by any change in its programme. Everything remained as of old, except that in its fight for the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie the government now had the support of the Soviets.
The coalition with the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks enabled the bourgeoisie to emerge from the April crisis unscathed. But the bourgeoisie could not remove the causes of the crisis. The war continued, with all its costly sacrifice of life. The defencist slogan of “War to a victorious finish” continued to conflict with the class position of the masses, who had no interest in the war. And since the causes of the crisis had not been removed, fresh outbreaks were inevitable. This is why the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party stresses the fact that the slogans of the hour continued to be:
“1. To explain the proletarian line and the proletarian method of ending the war.
“2. To criticise the petty-bourgeois policy of placing trust in the government of the capitalists and compromising with it.
“3. To carry on propaganda and agitation from group to group in every regiment in every factory, and, particularly, among the more backward masses, such as domestic servants and unskilled labourers, since it was on them especially that the bourgeoisie endeavoured to rely in the days of the crisis.
“4. To organise, organise and once more organise the proletariat, in every factory, in every district and in every city quarter.”(1)
The fight for the support of the masses had entered a new phase.
In pursuance of the decision of the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party, the Bolsheviks carried their activities into the barracks and working-class quarters. They worked boldly and skilfully to open the eyes of the people to the counter-revolutionary nature of the Provisional Government and to the compromising policy of the leaders of the Petrograd Soviet.
The Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks made particular efforts to bar the Leninist agitators from the regiments. At public meetings the compromisers showered the Bolsheviks with slander and abuse. But the persistence of the Bolsheviks, their conviction of the justice of their cause, and the clear and precise slogans issued by Lenin’s Party did their work. The soldiers and workers became more and more impervious to the patriotic intoxication of bourgeois speeches; they began more and more frequently to cry, “Down with the pimps!” and to demand that the Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik orators be ejected from the barracks and factories. The simple and direct speeches of the Bolsheviks were listened to with growing attention.
Mass work, which reinforced the ranks of the Bolshevik Party, was developed first of all in the primary workers’ organisations—the factory committees and the trade unions. Having overthrown the autocracy, the Russian working class began to organise with unparalleled speed. In Petrograd and Moscow over 130 trade unions were formed in the months of March and April alone, at which time there were already about 2,000 trade unions in Russia.
This sweeping organisational activity was everywhere led by the Bolsheviks. Their influence spread with particular rapidity in the factory committees. The Petrograd Conference of Factory Committees, held May 30 to June 3, was entirely under the guidance of the Bolsheviks and was strikingly symptomatic of the growing influence of the Bolshevik Party among the working class. By an overwhelming majority, the Conference adopted Lenin’s resolution on measures for combating economic disruption. The resolution of the Mensheviks on this subject received only thirteen votes out of a total of 421. The resolution adopted by the Conference concluded by stating that the social and economic measures it enumerated as being essential for the working class could be successfully carried out only if the power of the State were transferred to the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies. Despite the Menshevik theory that the trade unions should be “neutral” and independent of political parties, the trade unions, under the influence of the Bolshevik slogans, were being increasingly drawn into the political struggle.
The greater part of the working population could not be got at once to recognise the necessity of fighting for Socialism and of consciously supporting the proletarian revolution. They were hostile to the bourgeoisie for dragging out the war, but they were still a long way from realising the possibility of taking power into their own hands. Skilful handling was required to lead them to adopt the class slogan: “All power to the Soviets!” A great part in rallying the toiling population was played by the slogan . . . “Down with the Ten Capitalist Ministers!” Simple and comprehensible, it helped to expose the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries—who stubbornly strove to keep the ten “capitalist Ministers” in the government—and brought home the necessity of transferring power to the Soviets.
The efficiency of the agitational work of the Bolshevik Party lay in the fact that it approached the masses in the right way and formulated their instinctive discontent in the form of trenchant slogans.
Stalin refers to the astonishing success of the Bolshevik Party as follows:
“For the victory of the revolution, if that revolution is really a people’s revolution, a revolution which draws in the masses in their millions, it is not enough that the Party slogans should be right. For the victory of the revolution one more condition is required, namely, that the masses themselves should become convinced by their own experience of the correctness of those slogans. Only then do the slogans of the Party become the slogans of the masses themselves. Only then does the revolution really become a people’s revolution.”(2)
Guided by Lenin, the tactics of the Bolsheviks at this period were to lead the masses step by step to understand the slogans of the Party and to fight for these slogans.
The energetic and persistent work of the Bolshevik Party very soon bore fruit in the shape of two important events: the struggle at the First Congress of Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies and the June demonstration held in Petrograd in connection with this Congress.
The First All-Russian Congress of Soviets opened on June 3. It was attended by over 1,000 delegates, 822 with a right to vote and the remainder with a voice but no vote. The petty-bourgeois Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik bloc had an overwhelming majority at the Congress: the Socialist-Revolutionaries were represented by 285 delegates and the Mensheviks by 248 delegates. Nearly all the smaller groups solidly supported the Mensheviks and the Socialist-Revolutionaries. Only 105 of the delegates were Bolsheviks.
The Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks opened the Congress with great pomp and referred to it as a congress of the “revolutionary democracy.” Under this category the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks included workers, peasants, the petty-bourgeoisie of the towns, salaried employees, officials, members of the liberal professions and, finally just “enlightened people” generally, irrespective of the class they belonged to.
It was to the interest of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries to befog the minds of the proletariat with hazy terminology. Nothing better suited their petty-bourgeois nature or helped them to play a prominent part in political life than the pompous and highly general formula “revolutionary democracy.”
The Congress was attended by representatives of 305 joint Soviets of Workers’, Soldiers’, and Peasants’ Deputies, 53 Soviets from regional and provincial centres, 21 organisations in the army on active service, 8 organisations in the army in the rear and 5 organisations in the navy.
This was the only organised and armed force in the Russian revolution. Nobody could have withstood the strength of the Soviets. Yet the Congress betrayed complete impotence. The Congress refused to organise a government, although it possessed every requisite for the creation of a real power. There was logic and system in this. The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries headed the Soviets, but by fearing to take power without the capitalists they in effect decapitated the revolution. They did everything to repress the revolutionary energies of the workers and peasants. The eager creative spirit of the masses was frittered away. The revolutionary initiative of the awakened people could find no outlet, and was squandered in sterile attempts to reconcile the interests of the workers and the capitalists. Instead of actively opposing the capitalists, who were growing more and more insolent, they advocated arbitration courts, in which all questions would be decided by representatives of the government. Instead of calling for a fight for an immediate improvement of conditions, they advocated waiting until the war came to an end and a Constituent Assembly summoned. Instead of demanding peace, they demanded war to a victorious finish!
The interests of the working class and the land-hungry peasantry were systematically sacrificed to the interests of the bourgeoisie. The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries served as a vehicle for the sway of the bourgeoisie over the workers and peasants.
Since the Soviets refused to take over power, what were their functions reduced to? To hearing reports. They held dreary and interminable discussions on “the nature of the government power.” Lengthy, diluted and non-committal resolutions were adopted. “Met, sat, talked and smoked,” was the ironical comment of the workers on the meetings of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks.
The first item on the agenda of the Congress was the question of policy towards the Provisional Government and the creation of a revolutionary power. The Mensheviks and the Socialist-Revolutionaries resolutely rejected the proposal that power should be transferred to the Soviets. Scared by the sabotage of the bourgeoisie, and accustomed to be at its beck and call, the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks endeavoured to give the masses a perverted idea of the character of the government. At the Congress, Tsereteli, the Menshevik leader, made the emphatic assertion:
“There is no political party in Russia at this juncture which would say: ‘Hand over the power to us, quit, we will take your place. . . .’”(3)
“There is no such party in Russia!” Tsereteli loudly proclaimed amid the tense silence of the audience.
And suddenly, like a thunderbolt, a voice resounded in reply:
“There is such a Party!”
It was the voice of Lenin, hurling this challenge at the Mensheviks in the name of the Bolshevik Party.
The audience was electrified. The drowsy Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik delegates were suddenly jerked into wakefulness and began to buzz with excitement. Delegates rose to their feet to get a glimpse of the man who had hurled this challenge at the bosses. Consternation reigned among the leaders in the presidium. But Lenin was already mounting the rostrum.
“He said that there is no political party in Russia that would express its readiness to take the entire power upon itself,” Lenin said. “I say there is! No party can refuse this, and our party does not refuse it; it is prepared at any minute to take over the entire power.”(4)
The unprincipled, pusillanimous and double-faced tactics of the Mensheviks were countered by the bold and firm policy of the Bolsheviks.
Many of the delegates knew Lenin only from the libellous articles of the bourgeois, Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik press. The rank-and-file delegates wanted to hear the leader of the Bolsheviks, of whom the defenders of the interests of the bourgeoisie and the petty-bourgeoisie wrote so much and so savagely. They wanted to hear from his own lips an exposition of the views of the Bolsheviks. The delegates listened to his calm and confident speech in profound silence.
Observing this, the managers of the Congress greeted Lenin’s declaration with laughter and scornful interjections.
“You may laugh as much as you please,” Lenin retorted, “but if Citizen the Minister confronts us with this question side by side with the Right party, he will receive a suitable reply. . . . Give us your confidence and we will give you our programme.
“This programme was given by our Conference on April 29. Unfortunately, it is being ignored and not taken as a guide. Apparently, a popular explanation of it is required.”(5)
And Lenin went on to expound the principal decisions of the April Conference of the Bolshevik Party.
As his speech progressed, the mood of the delegates, especially of the soldiers, gradually changed. They eagerly listened to what Lenin said of the predatory war, which the government was continuing and of the peace which neither the bourgeois government nor its petty-bourgeois allies desired or were able to bring about. Step by step, Lenin dispersed the mist of lies and slanders and set forth a consistent and extremely clear programme.
The time allotted for Lenin’s speech was expiring. “Don’t give him any more time,” was shouted from the front benches, where the leaders sat. Indescribable tumult prevailed. Protests and demands to extend the time of the speaker were raised, punctuated by applause. The applause spread and gained in vehemence. In face of these protests the presidium was obliged to put the question to the vote and to extend the speaker’s time. The question was decided by the rank-and-file delegates, the soldiers and workers, who were deeply impressed by Lenin’s calm and confident words.
Amidst the applause of these delegates, Lenin concluded his speech with the words:
“The transfer of power to the revolutionary proletariat, supported by the poor peasantry, means a transition to a revolutionary struggle for peace in the surest and most painless forms known to mankind, a transition to a state of affairs in which the power and victory of the revolutionary workers will be ensured in Russia and all over the world.”(6)
Lenin’s declaration that the Bolsheviks were prepared to take over power focused the attention of the whole Congress. The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries who subsequently took the floor confined themselves to controverting Lenin. Kerensky, Skobelev, Chernov, Filippovsky, Dan and others argued the necessity for an agreement with the bourgeoisie and demanded that the Congress should support the government of the Russian capitalists.
The resolution proposed by the Bolshevik fraction contained a vigorous criticism of the Provisional Government. It declared that the latter was incapable of saving the country from economic collapse and of securing peace. The resolution exposed the “Socialist” Mensheviks, who used their authority to screen the counter-revolutionary government. Stressing the fact that the policy of compromise with the bourgeoisie had suffered complete shipwreck, the Bolshevik resolution proposed that power should be transferred to the All-Russian Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies.
What did the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries advance in opposition to the revolutionary tactics of the Bolsheviks? The resolution passed by the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks and adopted by the Congress declared:
“The transfer of the entire power to the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies at this juncture of the Russian revolution would considerably weaken the latter, prematurely repel from it elements which are still capable of serving it, and bode the collapse of the revolution.”(7)
The First Congress of Soviets clearly shows how profound was the gulf between the revolutionary party of the proletariat—the Bolsheviks—and the representatives of the petty-bourgeois parties—the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries. The latter considered the revolution at an end. They did not, and indeed could not, because that would have been contrary to their interests, desire anything more than the transfer of power to the bourgeoisie. This was stated at the Congress without the slightest ambiguity by the Menshevik Dan, who was one of those that criticised Lenin’s programme. He said:
“Even if we now had a cabinet that was entirely Socialist, we must say that this cabinet could conduct no other policy than that of the bourgeois revolutionary democracy. And this we must also bear in mind when—if it should so happen—the power falls into our hands.”(8)
Fortunately for the revolution, it did not happen—the power did not fall into Dan’s hands.
Another remarkable speech made by Lenin at the Congress dealt with the question of war and peace. Lenin subjected the hypocrisy of the compromising and pandering policy of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries on the question of war and peace to devastating criticism. Reminding the Congress of the appeal addressed by the Petrograd Soviet to the peoples of the world on March 14, with its call, “Refuse to serve as instruments of conquest and violence of kings, landlords and bankers,” Lenin said:
“When you say, ‘Refuse to serve as the instruments of your bankers,’ while at the same time you admit your own bankers into the cabinet and seat them side by side with Socialist Ministers, you are reducing all your manifestos to naught and are in practice negating your whole policy. . . .”(9)
“You have become entangled in inextricable contradictions,” Lenin said in the same speech. “. . . You advise other nations to renounce annexations, while you are introducing them in your own country. You say to other nations, ‘Overthrow the bankers,’ but you do not overthrow your own bankers.”(10)
The attitude of the majority of the Congress to the main question—the organisation of the government power—predetermined the remaining questions. By leaving the power in the hands of the bourgeoisie, the Congress reduced its own lukewarm resolutions to naught.
The Bolsheviks proposed and defended their own resolutions on the main questions, thus creating a platform around which to mobilise the masses for the revolutionary struggle. The Bolsheviks appealed to the masses over the heads of the Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik leaders and of the Congress of Soviets. Lenin’s speeches and the Bolshevik resolutions found a wide echo among the working people, inspiring them with disgust at the compromisers and stimulating the class consciousness of the workers.
A vivid illustration of the growth of the influence of the Party among the masses was furnished by the June demonstration, which took place while the Congress was still in session.
[1] Lenin, “Resolution of the Central Committee of the R.S.D.L.P. Adopted on the Morning of April 22, 1917,” Collected Works, (Russ. ed.), Vol. XX, p. 225.
[2] J. Stalin, “The October Revolution and the Tactics of the Russian Communists,” Leninism, (Eng. ed., 1935), Vol. I, p. 129.
[3] Central Archives, The First All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, Vol. I, Moscow, 1930, p. 65.
[4] Lenin, “Speech on the Attitude to the Provisional Government,” Collected Works, (Russ. ed.), Vol. XX, pp. 481-82.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid., p. 488.
[7] Central Archives, The First All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, Vol. I, Moscow, 1930, p. 287.
[8] Ibid., p. 140.
[9] Lenin, “Speech on the War,” Selected Works, (Eng. ed.), Vol. VI, p. 151.
[10] Ibid., pp. 158, 161.
Previous: The National Policy of the Provisional Government
Next: The June Demonstration