A few Questions

[TheMyth]

Why had the soviets to be repressed by the Bolshevik party ?


Why Centralism Democratic is the best representation for " democracy " ?

[Azraella]

That was only a couple of questions but whatever.

That first question is unreadable.

The second question presupposes that we all approve of a centralized society. I certainly don't. Centralism has it's advantages to be sure, but I prefer the idea that communities can solve their problems themselves.

[TheMyth]

That was only a couple of questions but whatever.

That first question is unreadable.

The second question presupposes that we all approve of a centralized society. I certainly don't. Centralism has it's advantages to be sure, but I prefer the idea that communities can solve their problems themselves.
In the first one i was asking why Soviets got repressed by the Bolshevik party ?

[Firebrand]

Because the bolshevik party was a group of bourgeois intellectuals who no matter what their original intentions might have been were incapable of genuinely carrying out the revolution and so resorted to a coup to seize power and then crushed any elements that could genuinely carry out the revolution in order to maintain their own power.

[Proukunin]

^ that and probably because once Stalin held power everyone was either a Trot or Anarchist who did not COMPLETELY follow party line.

[hatzel]

^ that and probably because once Stalin held power everyone was either a Trot or Anarchist who did not COMPLETELY follow party line.

Now strictly speaking we're not really talking about the same timeframe here, are we?

[Ilyich]

Because the bolshevik party was a group of bourgeois intellectuals...

How exactly were the Bolsheviks bourgeois? Did they own some means of production?


...who no matter what their original intentions might have been were incapable of genuinely carrying out the revolution and so resorted to a coup to seize power...

What would any other socialist revolutionary have done differently in that situation?


...crushed any elements that could genuinely carry out the revolution in order to maintain their own power.

Perhaps the Mensheviks, the Socialist Revolutionaries, or some of the non-socialist parties could have led the proletarian revolution.

[TheMyth]

I would like to see any ML from RevLeft to answer my questions if they don't mind .

@ArtVendelay
The Soviets and People should have lead the revolution not some party that turn out to be some Dictatorship Party and ruined communism name for ages .
In Portugal 74-75 all Socialist measures made by II to V Provisory Gorvernment was made after People demanded .
Agrarian Reform , Establish meaning of productions in the hands of workers not the state, People's Court to judge crimes .
The people occupy free houses and build there Clinics,Colleges and Public parks .
Also take all the land from big owners and then government take a law to protect that.
They creat comission of workers take the lead and was under countrol of factorys,companys and many other things .
PREC is the most strict action of Marxism apllied in portugal and perhaps after the commune of Paris .

[JAM]

The questions raised by The Myth are very pertinent. When some discussion breaks out about the nature of USSR, if it was really socialist or not, the main argument is " no, it was state capitalist". I think the major reason why USSR wasn't socialist was the lack of power and democracy within the working class, more than economic aspects. This became a reality when the soviets were subjugated to the Bolshevik party leadership. After this we couldn't talk anymore about a socialist revolution. If it was state capitalist or not isn't that relevant.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Well, I know you claimed you wanted Marxist-Leninists to answer your question, but I am a Leninist so I will answer them.

Why had the soviets to be repressed by the Bolshevik party ?

The soviets and workers' control were supressed for a number of reasons. One reason was that the backwards country, where most were illiterate, did not permit conditions that were suitable for workers' control, etc. Also, the sabatoge by counter-revolutionaries, the coming civil war, the coming invasion by imperialist nations, etc. did not permit conditions for this. It is also important to remember that we are viewing the Bolshevik revolution from the time period it took place. Democracy was still very flawed by todays standards in that time period (not to say that democracy, especially capitalist democracy isn't flawed today).



Why Centralism Democratic is the best representation for " democracy " ?

Democractic centralism is a tactic to run the party. It seeks "freedom of discussion, unity of action" as Lenin described it. All members are elected and all decisions are to be voted on by the base and once the decision is made it must be fulfilled by all members.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Because the bolshevik party was a group of bourgeois intellectuals
This is wrong. By 1917 the Bolshevik party was basically made up of the most radical soviets, trade unions, factory committees, etc. As user ComradeOm put it, the vanguard party was basically a myth at the start of the October revolution.


who no matter what their original intentions might have been were incapable of genuinely carrying out the revolution and so resorted to a coup to seize power
It was not a coup. The majority of people knew that a revolution was about to occur and supported it. In fact, a member of the Bolsheviks leaked to the press days before the revolution that the Bolsheviks were going to incite revolution, the idea of an insurrection was debated in the party for months, etc. etc. This claim has no historical value.