The Workshop Of The Revolution. I. N. Steinberg 1953
This book is, first and foremost, a record of history. It deals with the revolutionary events in Russia during the critical years of 1917-1921, from the downfall of czarism to the rebellion of Kronstadt. The skeptical reader might ask: Have not enough books and studies been written about that epoch? Has not enough been said both in the defense of the Russian Revolution and in violent opposition to the Bolshevik regime?
The answer is no. It is as yet a long way before all will have been said about those tangled and mystery-shrouded events which have so deeply changed the course of history. The world is still puzzled by the fact that a revolution, begun with such great promise for the Russian people and mankind both, should so tragically have changed its goals and actions. And the world is still searching desperately for an explanation of what occurred. It is, therefore, of signal importance to describe and interpret the Russian revolutionary developments from a viewpoint other than the well-known stereotypes. Indeed, it is amazing how an event of such world-wide scope, which unfolded under the very eyes of our generation, has already set in the hard mould of “official” historiography.
On the one hand, there are accounts by the liberal and moderate socialist groups. They have separated once and for all the rebellious events of October, 1917, from the democratic transformation which occurred in February of the same year. They have proclaimed only “February” and only the Kerensky regime to be acceptable elements in the history of the Russian Revolution. Everything that occurred after those eight months is viewed as a political and social wilderness, stamped by the words-"Bolshevik coup.”
On the other hand, Bolshevik historians and propagandists describe the entire panorama of the revolution merely as preparation and realization of their own political goals. A century-long revolutionary development in the Russian people is being falsified, artificially fitted to the interests of the existent regime. In fact, the regime itself is represented as the only possible outcome of all previous Russian history. The visitor in the Museum of the Revolution in Moscow will find no hint of its roots and foundations, will see no faces, books or documents of any movement other than the Stalinist fraction of Bolshevism.
Both groups of historians, however hostile toward each other, still spring primarily from a common ideological source -the Marxist teachings. Both have either ignored or belittled the most powerful, truly indigenous stream of the Russian nodal spirit, the stream that had for decades sustained the movement of the Narodniki (Populists), proponents of Russian ethical revolutionary socialism. Little attention has been paid to the Populist movement and to the Social-Revolutionary Party as its modern expression; and this applies not only to the movement in general but also to its radical wing in particular. We do not know of a single work that provides the non-Russian reader with a systematic record of the Russian revolutionary process according to the Populist interpretation. Yet it is impossible to find one’s way in that vast labyrinth of ideas and events unless the Populist movement-as a spiritual and political force-is given its rightful place in the Russian revolutionary sphere.
But this book can do more than serve the interests of historic truth; it can also have practical import in our time, thirty-six years after that revolution, for peoples and classes on several continents are in the midst of colonial and social upheavals.
“Asia is in Revolution,” wrote William O. Douglas, Justice of the United States Supreme Court in Washington. “The revolutions which are brewing are not, however, of Communist origin, nor will they end, even if Soviet Russia is crushed through war. The Revolutionaries are hungry men who have been exploited for time out of mind. This is the century of their awakening and mobilization.”
These peoples strive passionately for a new future, but they stand in confusion when the outlines of that future emerge. They are uncertain both about the content of their program and, particularly, about the methods by which they might achieve their goals. It seems to them that the alternatives are either democratic capitalism or totalitarian bolshevism.
As to the ways of democratic reform, these awakening peoples still harbor suspicious misgivings, even when they are proposed by serious and honest political champions. For the democratic powers have too long been associated in the consciousness of these stirring peoples with colonialism, with economic and political exploitation. It is a long and difficult process for them to disassociate their colonial experiences and disappointments from the newly formulated plans and policies of the democratic countries.
Bolshevism attracts them with its extravagant promises of immediate abolition of all exploitation, and with the establishment of social justice and folk culture. It appeals to their aroused emotions with its violent, total opposition to the Western states. But bolshevism also repels them with its brutal methods, with its totalitarian demands and military discipline. And that is why Bolshevik terror is one of the pervading themes of this book.
The masses of mankind, who are now entering upon the world’s stage, thus feel caught between two fires. Bolshevism uses the explosive situation for its own ends, contending that, if these masses desire a revolutionary change, they can achieve it only in Bolshevik forms, and under its leadership-just as it had been successfully achieved in Soviet Russia. “Russia” is identified with the October Revolution and “October” with the Bolshevik Party.
This is false. Russia had been long dedicated to ideals of liberation and, for over a hundred years, had produced countless fighters whose goals were far different from those of bolshevism. The most characteristic Russian formula for liberation has always combined “the greatest revolutionary activity with the deepest humanity.” And as such it is in full contradiction to the Bolshevik system both in theory and practice.
The peoples of the world must therefore know what bolshevism has done to the people, and primarily to the peasants, who had been the backbone of the Russian Revolution. They must know to the last detail what, in Bolshevik Russia, has become of the industrial workers, the quasi-privileged class in the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat,” and what has become of the intellectuals, the once-famous Russian intelligentsia. Rarely has a people come to its revolution with such a tremendous spiritual and moral capital; and rarely has it been so thoroughly drained of it by a self-styled people’s regime.
To avoid falling prey again to such “liberating” enslavement, the peoples of the world must pay close attention to the earliest stages of the Russian Revolution. It is at the beginning of an upheaval, when a people is imbued with enthusiasm and generosity, that its naive trust is most easily perverted by social demagoguery. Thus it is important to study the first months and years of the “Workshop of the Revolution,” to draw lessons from that majestic and tragic period.
In 1917 the Russian people aspired to act for humanity as well as for themselves, and their first steps in that direction were full of hope and promise. But if they were not destined then to maintain their international influence in humane and positive ways, let the sufferings and mute protests of the Russian people act at least now as a fiery warning. In millions of choked voices Russia reminds the world that revolution is not bolshevism, that mankind must wrest the monopoly of revolution from Bolshevik hands. The drama of the revolution which arose and spread on the vast plains of Russia is not a Russian drama alone; it is universal.
I want to mention here with deep satisfaction the help- both technical and spiritual-given me in the preparation of this book by my daughter, Ada Steinberg Siegel.