Prague Perspectives (I) - Sample

My Ten Theses on the History of the Bolshevik Revolution: a Brief Summary of Political Commentaries from the Decade 1950-1960[1]

Jan Slavík

Translated by Petr Roubal

For thousands years, people were tortured and even burnt at stake for claiming that there is no god. Today – in the second half of the 20^th century – a man could be physically attacked if he publicly proclaimed that in Russia, there was no socialism. These are hard times for a historian whose opinions on the Russian revolution are in sharp contradiction with the communist teaching practiced in Czechoslovakia today.

Here are some of my deviations:

I. Communists believe that capitalism was eliminated in Russia; I claim that in Russia, private capitalism was replaced by state capitalism.

II. Communists believe that in the Soviet Union and its satellites, the exploitation of man by man was eradicated by transferring the means of production into the hands of producers; I claim that in the Soviet Union and today also in Czechoslovakia, the means of production are ultimately in hands of the communist oligarchy. This oligarchy, by having the power to fire any state employee, keeps the entire population and particularly the intelligentsia in supine subordination.

III. Communists believe that the rule of the Bolshevik party in the Soviet Union is the proletarian dictatorship that Marx foresaw as the first phase of the socialist revolution. However, the very leaders of the Bolshevik revolution – Lenin and Stalin – clearly stated, when forced by the opposition, that the rule of the Bolshevik party as the avant-garde of the proletariat was necessitated by the poor culture of the population.

IV. Communists believe that the ills of Stalinism were caused by the cult of personality; I claim that the despotic power of Stalin, the fear of Stalin, and the fantastic adulation of Stalin spring from the economic system just as it did in the despotism of the Pharaohs in Egypt, the Bogdychans in China, the Czars in Russia and others, where the rulers appropriated all or nearly all means of production.

V. Communists believe that today the young, healthy, progressive camp of socialism stands against the ailing, backward camp of capitalism; I claim that they misunderstood both camps. There is no real socialism in the Soviet Union but instead a new form of despotism with some features of socialism. The anti-socialist or rather anti-Soviet camp is not formed by the capitalists. By now, the capitalists would long have been swept away by the communists if it were not for the majority of the workers in the most civilized countries, who soon recognized that the Bolshevik revolutions did not create true socialism. The main opponents of the communist camp are not the capitalist camp but the camp of west-European proletarian socialists.

VI. Communists believe that the contemporary armament in West Germany is the work of revived Hitlerite Nazism supported by the western capitalists. I claim the Bolsheviks were right to say after the World War I that in a defeated Germany, there would arise a revanchist militarism as a consequence of the annexation of German territories. The emergence of German militarism after the World War II is only natural, as not only the defeated Germany was deprived of large territories but also the local population was expelled.

VII. Communists believe that the Bolshevik party was always against war and for the peaceful resolution of all international conflicts. I claim that this is in the sharpest contradiction with all the sources on the history of the Bolshevik party, which clearly testify to the fact that the Bolshevik party for decades was expecting a new revolutionary wave following the impoverishment of the proletariat as a consequence of yet another bloody war between the capitalists states. Such a war should be hastened by the skillful manipulation of capitalist states against each other (see this advice in Lenin’s speech “On concessions,” 1920). If it was true that the Bolshevik party was always against war, the Soviet government could never have signed the treaty with Hitler, which enabled him to start the war with Poland and the western democracies. The promise of neutrality was exactly the maneuver by which Stalin speeded up the war between the capitalist states.

VIII. The expulsion of utterly impoverished Germans and annexation of their territory was in blatant contradiction with socialist internationalism and the standpoint of Karl Marx. It could only be understood as a revolutionary maneuver. Throwing millions of impoverished Germans into Western Germany – ruined economically by the long war – was intended to create a revolutionary explosion, in which the communists (helped by the nearby Red Army) would seize power. However, this revolutionary maneuver of sovietizing Germany failed, the annexed territories has not been returned, and the Soviet Union is now in the position of a reactionary annexationist. It is even more so as the Soviet Union itself appropriated part of the territory of the German nation, regardless of that more land lay fallow back home than the entire territory of Germany.

IX. Communists believe that the great cultural and economic progress achieved in Russia during the Soviet era is due to the socialist system. I claim that this is an illusion. History knows many examples in which a certain cultural and economic progress was achieved even under the rule of bluntly despotic regimes.

X. Communists believe that in Russia socialism was accomplished and even that Russia is on the path towards communism. I claim that – as it is the case with any revolution – the Bolshevik revolution was subjected to heterogony or confusion of goals. The program of the Bolsheviks was to build up socialism; in fact the struggle for socialism led to an increase in level of culture, especially working culture, which will be the main outcome of the Russian revolution, regardless of the fate of Bolshevism itself… This last thesis remains the core point in which I differ from the communists. They see communism as the goal of the Bolshevik revolution. I claim that the attempt to create socialism in Russia is an instrument for reaching a higher cultural level in the country, which was hindered by specific historical developments.

As a historian of revolutions, here I stand. I cannot do otherwise

[1] First published as: SLAVÍK, Jan: Deset tezí. In: VEBER, Václav et al.: Ruská a ukrajinská emigrace v ČSR v letech 1918-1945, vol. 3. Seminář pro dějiny východní Evropy při Ústavu světových dějin FF UK v Praze, Praha 1995, pp. 131-132.