Friday 23 December 2016

4) 1905-1917: Downturn and Revival, War and Revolution

"The secret police department reports warned the government ministers that 'the most energetic and audacious element, ready for tireless struggle, for resistance and continual organisation, is that element, those organisations, and those people who are concentrated around Lenin' "
 
Breadlines in Petrograd

The workers’ movement recovers

After the defeat of the 1905 revolution, the workers struggled valiantly to defend their rights. However, the combination of an industrial recession and the repression of the victorious counter-revolution drove the tired and defeated movement back. By 1910 the number of strikes had fallen back almost to nothing. It was in these years of reaction, where prejudice and scepticism again took hold of the discouraged masses, that the ideas of Menshevism took final shape, leading to the decisive break with the Bolsheviks in 1912.

However, the industrial boom that began in 1910 gave the workers new confidence, healing the memories of past defeats and leading to a new upswing in the movement.

A wave of political strikes against the government broke out in 1912 reaching a crescendo at the beginning of 1914 with over 1 million participants recorded by the factory inspectors in the pre-war months. This was approaching 50% of the entire workforce. The new upswing was not simply a repeat of the 1905 movement but reopened on a higher level, enriched by past experience, and Bolshevism began to rise swiftly on the new revolutionary tide.

The secret police department reports warned the government ministers that "the most energetic and audacious element, ready for tireless struggle, for resistance and continual organisation, is that element, those organisations, and those people who are concentrated around Lenin" (20).

As a matter of interest, the authorities were well-informed about the Bolshevik organisation thanks to secret service infiltrators that had managed, for example, to fill 3 of the 7 places on the Petrograd Bolshevik Committee by 1914!

The agrarian struggle in the villages followed a similar pattern of downturn and then revival although often now diverted into a struggle between rich and poor peasants in the new co-operatives, even reaching the level of armed conflicts over the division of communal land. The big landlords, however, did not totally escape the peasants' anger and land seizures and the burning of harvests and haystacks became more frequent.

By 1914 the atmosphere had reached fever pitch and a revolutionary situation was clearly approaching. However the beginning of the World War cut right across developments. It knocked the movement far backwards, only to powerfully accelerate the march of events later as the war wore on.

The immediate effect on the workers' movement was devastating. Severe penalties were imposed for striking. The workers’ press was closed down. Trade unions and political organisations were brutally repressed.

The Bolsheviks, alone amongst the socialist parties, began after initial hesitation to try and spread anti-war agitation but faced enormous difficulties. In November 1914 the five Bolshevik Duma deputies were arrested, including Kamenev, and sent into exile in Siberia.

Yet these severe sentences provoked hardly a murmur of protest amongst the workers. They were disoriented by the war and the appeals for yet more 'patriotic' production in the factories, not to mention the retreat of nearly all the leaders of the European socialist parties into the camps of their respective national governments in support of the slaughter.

The factory managers, who could hardly show their heads a year before, grew confident while the Bolshevik workers had to keep quiet in fear not only of arrest but also of getting beaten up by other workers. It was as if the war had created a new working-class - and in many ways it had.

The more revolutionary workers had soon been sent to fight at 'the front' and their places taken by politically backward elements from the villages. In Petrograd there was about a 40% change in the workforce.

The Bolsheviks were left without any central organisation, its leaders under arrest or in exile. Local branches were extremely weak and often had no links at all with the workers' districts. Only scattered groups and solitary individuals did anything. Revolutionary ideas were kept alive in small hushed circles in hope of better times to come.

Indeed, the effect of the war was not too long-lasting and by the spring of 1915 the inertness began to slip away. Underneath the surface, the moods of a new explosion had been gradually building up.

The discontent first surfaced in contradictory ways, for example in criticisms that the war was being badly run at the top, but then began to pass over to action. As is so often the case, while the factory workers held back, fearing being sent to the trenches, the less organised sections such as women first felt bold enough to protest.

Food disorders, sometimes riots, broke out over shortages, soon spreading over the whole country. These early battles broke through the lull and led the way to strikes from the organised workers.

The usually grim conditions of the proletariat had sunk even further during the early stage of the war as the bosses drove the numbed workforce harder and harder in their greedy scramble for war profits. Prices had risen far beyond wages and the first strikes, around June 1915, centred on the textile workers, were economic strikes demanding improved conditions.

The protests were stormy after the preceding lull, accompanied with meetings and battles with the police and army in which several workers died. The movement was very raw compared to that of 1912-14, unsurprisingly given the weakness of the workers' organisations and the involvement of new raw layers.

Nevertheless, these struggles were both an important education for these new workers and a warning to the government whose Minister of Justice pointed out - "if there are at present no armed demonstrations of the workers, it is only because they have as yet no organisation" (21).

The Czar's ministers concluded that their only response could be a redoubling of repression against the workers, in particular the Bolsheviks. The big bourgeoisie on the other hand attempted to split the movement by involving elected workers’ representatives on the boards of "Military-Industrial Committees” running the factories.

Using these leaders, often Mensheviks, the bosses hoped to impose a regime of 'industrial patriotism' to hold back the working-class. Despite these moves, the weakened Bolshevik organisation began to revive through the impetus of the strike movement, and began to find their slogans, against the war and the government and for a republic, getting a more sympathetic response.

The strike wave deepened and on the traditional protest-day of January 9th, the eleventh anniversary of the "Bloody Sunday" massacre of workers in 1905, a widespread strike took place whereas almost nothing had occurred in 1915. What was more, to the alarm of the secret police, troops and workers were now often making friendly contacts on demonstrations.

The soldiers and the peasantry
 

The war had caused chaos in the villages. About 10 million rural workers and 2 million horses had been taken to the front. The weaker homesteads began to find it impossible to survive and by 1916 the middle layer of peasants were also going under.

The mood of opposition grew, perhaps rarely taking the form of open protests as in the cities, but then most of the young active forces of the country had been sent to fight. Nevertheless, the soldiers did not forget the injustice of life in the villages as they crouched in the trenches - that is when they weren't thinking about death.

Russia entered the war to serve the interests of French and British imperialism in defeating the German threat to its "allies'" markets. However, it also hoped to be able to carry out some minor robbery of its own in Turkey, Persia and Galicia (Poland).

In fact, Czarism was to be shattered in the imperialist war. As a further example of its combined development, Russia had at its disposal the latest weapons of war, secured from its allies, but neither the capacity to reproduce them in its factories nor transport them to the front with sufficient speed. Thrown into the horror of modern warfare the Russian armies proved totally incapable of competing with the strong German war machine.

Its only limited successes came against the even more decrepit regime of Austria-Hungary. Out of these came some of the more confident generals that were later to lead the white armies' against the Soviet forces in the civil war following the October revolution.

Russia's only real defence against the invader proved to be the vastness of its open spaces. Universal military service simply reproduced the contradictions and crises of the nation into the army itself. The ignorant and useless commanders exactly mirrored the rotten Russian ruling-class while the peasant soldiers’ total lack of any technical experience meant that they could not master modern military technique.

The first few days of battle soon turned into rout. The reactionary generals took out their anger by attacking the peaceful population and destroying their farms. The War Minister placed his "trust in the impenetratable spaces, impassable mud, and the mercy of Saint Nicholas, Protector of Holy Russia" (22) and simply tried to plug the gaps with greater and more frequent mobilisations.

While the Government sat impotently debating whether or not to remove the holy relics from Kiev, the generals retreated. Of the first 15 million men mobilised in the first year or so of the war, 5½ million were killed, wounded or captured. In all, 2½ million were killed in the war, 40% of the total losses of the "Allies".

The soldiers gathered bitter experience of purposeless manoeuvres on soleless shoes and grew demoralised. Soon the peasant army began to disintegrate and, despite floggings and other brutal punishments, desertions grew. Little by little, the consciousness of the soldiers was changing, the old peasant prejudices disappearing.


The sick and deserted brought their longing for peace back to the cities and villages. The revolutionary elements in the army, drowned at first without a trace, began to get a hearing amongst the growing discontent.

The tide of opposition grows

The economic mess grew worse. The Czarist state demanded more and more of the national wealth to pay for the war effort. The war industries grew enormously using up all available resources and drowning peace-time branches of production.

Nothing came of efforts to plan production since the Czarist bureaucracy and the bourgeois Military-Industrial Committees were fighting each other for control of industry. Much of the skilled workforce had been sent to the front, the mines and factories of Poland were lost, the overloaded transport system threatened to grind to a halt.

Nevertheless, the bourgeoisie lived well on the flood of war profits that came showering down. Enormous fortunes were built out of the bloody mess. The lack of fuel and bread in the capital didn't prevent the court jeweller Faberge from doing record business.

The so-called liberal bourgeoisie, far from being a friend of the poor soldiers, were quite happy getting rich from the slaughter. They even tried to use the military defeats to help tighten their grip on economic power at the expense of the nobility who they began to loudly accuse of being linked by family ties to the German enemy.

As the chaos deepened, the industrialists became less and less willing to grant concessions to the workers, while the government replied to the growing opposition with its usual dose of repression.

The workers’ thoughts began to be driven from the economic plane to the political plane - to the belief that 'if only we all strike at once we can finish the whole thing'. While in 1915 2½ times fewer workers participated in political strikes than in economic ones, in 1916 it was only twice as few. By the first months of 1917, political strikes involved six times as many workers as economic strikes. Petrograd, as usual, took the leading role. The tide of opposition was growing ever higher.

By the end of 1916, inflation was rocketing and was now combined with an actual lack of goods to be bought. A wave of meetings and demonstrations ran through the factories uniting all of the masses' grievances - food supplies, the high cost of living, war, government - into one struggle.

Bolshevik leaflets were being distributed, the general strike slogan gaining support. Cases of fraternisation between certain factories and soldiers were observed by the secret police. The Director of Police noted that, in comparison to 1905: "The mood of opposition has gone very far - far beyond anything to be seen in the broad masses during the above-mentioned period of disturbances" (23).

One group of police officials warned the Czar that the revolutionary parties could now "count on the sympathy of an overwhelming majority of the peasantry, which will follow the proletariat the very moment the revolutionary leaders point a finger to other people's land", and, with some justification, they noted that "the danger and strength of these parties lies in the fact that they have an idea, they have money (!), they have a crowd ready and well organised" (24).

The provinces followed the same stages as Petrograd, if a little more slowly, but by 1917, as the strike movement swung decisively from the economic to the political plane, the role of the capital and the most advanced layers like the metalworkers became increasingly important.

The 'Bloody Sunday' anniversary on January 9th 1917 was met with a strike of 150,000 in Petrograd alone. Over 575,000 workers were reported as being involved in political strikes in just the first two months of the year, the lion's share of them in the capital. In every factory a nucleus of activists was forming, usually around the Bolsheviks. The workers now felt that retreat was impossible.

The capitalists and the monarchy

Faced with this mounting onslaught on their power and privilege, the different parties of the ruling classes had been drawn together to fight their common enemy - the masses.

Already by 1915 the bourgeois deputies in the Duma had united into a majority "Progressive Bloc". To the fore in this capitalist gang was Guchkov, a big Moscow industrialist, who was leader of the party of the big commercial, industrial and landowning bourgeoisie, the Octobrists. Alongside him stood Miliukov, a professor of history, leader of the Kadets, the party of the 'liberal' middle bourgeoisie, intelligentsia and progressive landlords.

Miliukov, leader of the Bloc, warned his party that: "We are treading a volcano ... a carelessly dropped match will be enough to start a terrible conflagration. Whatever the government - whether good or bad - a strong government is needed, now more than ever before" (25).

The bourgeoisie hoped that, under the burden of both external defeats and internal dangers, the Czar would be prepared to allow the capitalists to at least have some say in government.

Even a majority of the Czar's own ministers were prepared to do a deal with the Progressive Bloc to try and take some of the pressure off their hated regime. However, Czar Nicholas the Second had no intention of making even the slightest concession that might suggest he was willing to compromise on centuries of Czarist rule.

A group of extreme right-wing bureaucrats advised the Czar, with some perception, of the dangers of doing deals with the weak and unstable bourgeoisie. They saw any concessions as being just the first step on the slippery slope to mob rule. Their advice was instead a policy of ruthless repression.

This would have been a sensible policy for the reaction if only they could count on the same basis of support as in 1905. Unfortunately for the old regime, history had now moved on and the military forces that they wanted to use to put down rebellion were beginning to be seized by rebellion themselves!

Nevertheless, the Czar's harsh reply to the bourgeoisie's pleas was an order to dissolve the Duma - first in 1915, then, after allowing a brief return, to dissolve it again in 1916.

The bourgeoisie meekly accepted his decisions with hardly a whimper of protest. The Czar's advisers quite rightly banked on the fact that the bourgeoisie were far more worried about the threat from the masses than they were about the Czar's government.

As the crisis deepened the Czar, perhaps in a sense aware that history was about to finally catch up with his outdated regime, reassured himself by becoming more and more indifferent to events around him. He surrounded himself with the mediocrity that he felt at ease with, sacking his cleverer ministers.

The pettiness of his diary clearly reveals the Czar's mentality. For example, on the day of his decision to dissolve the Duma he wrote: “Very busy morning. Half hour late to breakfast with the officers. A storm came up and it was very muggy. Signed a decree dissolving the Duma! Dined with Olga and Petia. Read all evening " (26). An 'exclamation mark' was his only show of emotion at this critical time!!


Meanwhile, the Czarina, Alexandra, propelled to power from a relatively lowly German upbringing, began to have more and more influence over the Czar's decisions. She turned the court circle yet further away from the troubles of the real world and towards the mediaeval superstitions of the other world, relying on the opinions of her own 'Christ' on Earth, Rasputin.


 It is often said that every great revolution begins at the top. As things got ever worse, the crisis in society was reflected in splits in the ruling circles. Blamed for everything by the masses, the autocracy began to blame each other - and increasingly the Czar himself - for their desperate position.

Terrified of revolution, the possessing classes made frantic efforts to save their skins. By now, layers of the bureaucracy and even the nobility were pressing for concessions. As Trotsky notes: "Even the moss-covered stones cried out. But nothing was changed. The monarchy would not let the last shreds of power slip out of its hands" (27).

Like all ruling classes faced with revolution, the monarchy was not prepared to willingly give up power. However, the weak-willed Nicholas could agree to neither a policy of conciliations nor make his mind up about setting up a dictatorship. Instead, his regime drifted further into chaos.

In desperation, talk of a "palace revolution” spread in the upper circles of Petrograd society. In all probability this idea of overthrowing the Czar never went beyond mere words and certainly not as far as concrete plans. Neither the aristocracy nor the bourgeoisie had sufficient determination to take such a step, a step which went against everything they had been brought up to believe. They also feared that it might stir up the masses even more.

In the end they settled for a "little" revolution - the murder of Rasputin. As for the Czar and Czarina, the bourgeoisie only went as far as throwing more mud about their links with Germany.

In reality, it was actually certain bourgeois representatives who sounded out the possibility of a separate peace with Germany, fearing the loss of any remaining economic independence to the "Allies" if Russia should suffer a total military collapse.

All these splits at the top filtered down into the psychology of the masses - and, far from weakening the crisis, they sharpened it. In the army, in the village, in the factories, the masses thought to themselves - if even our rulers have to resort to murder to solve their problems why shouldn't we try to use a little force of our own?

The actions of the ruling layers had an opposite effect to that intended - only spurring on their mortal enemy, the proletariat and poor peasantry.

Despite the opposition of almost every section of society, the Czar held on. Notwithstanding all the mighty speeches of Miliukov and others about ministerial incompetence, the bourgeoisie showed themselves incapable and unwilling to take power, as Lenin and Trotsky had long predicted. The spineless bourgeoisie needed a revolution but were too scared of its consequences to carry it out.

In the last session of the Duma, finally convoked on February 14th 1917, Miliukov warned the workers against "dangerous and bad counsel" issuing from "dark sources" and assured the Czar that the Progressive Bloc "will act with words and words only".

The landowner Rodzianko, President of the Duma, later recalled: "We felt the impotence of the Duma, weariness of a futile struggle" (28). Such was the mood of the “revolutionary” bourgeoisie as they entered the whirlpool of the February Revolution!

No comments:

Post a Comment