Log in

View Full Version : Martov's criticism of Bolshevism



whichfinder
17th August 2012, 11:25
Martov's criticism of Bolshevism

Communist University 2012 Fringe Meeting

Thursday 23 August, 7.30pm

Glenthurston Apartments, 30 Bromley Rd. London, SE6 2TP
(5 min walk from Catford rail station)

[Martov] recognized the Russian Revolution to be a progressive, pro-capitalist, national revolution that cleared the way for the solution of the economic backwardness of the country. He recognized the Russian Revolution as a "bourgeois" revolution, directed in part by the proletariat and impregnated with the utopianism typical of the proletariat of a backward country. He emphasized that the dictatorship of the Bolshevik "professional revolutionists" was not to be confused with the "dictatorship" of the working class, which, according to him, was impossible in a country like Russia. He foresaw that the pretensions to a program of world revolution affected by the Bolsheviks during their "heroic" period served as a sort of camouflage to protect their rule, and would in time give way again to the program of Russian "national socialism," the traditional and real program of Bolshevism.

Martov expected the workers themselves to accomplish their emancipation. He believed that with historic experience, the working class would undergo a political and moral development and overcome in time the current Utopias and swindles in political theory and practice fostered among them by various sets of "leaders." He understood that the socialist revolution could only take place in countries that were economically ripe for socialism. He understood that the political setup produced by the socialist revolution could never be the Jacobin dictatorship of a revolutionary minority but could only be the expression of the majority rule of the population. He believed that after the proletariat of the countries economically ripe for socialism had once seized power, it could never find itself in a situation where its rule was anything else but the majority rule of the population.

─ from Foreward by Integer (1938) to The State and the Socialist Revolution, articles by Martov written between 1919 and 1923.

Organised by the SPGB, 52 Clapham High St, SW4 7UN.

Vladimir Innit Lenin
17th August 2012, 20:29
Finish work at 8pm. Shame. Would love to have come along.

Manic Impressive
17th August 2012, 20:55
Full article is here http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1940s/1940/no-425-january-1940/state-and-socialist-revolution-j-martov
very interesting I reccomend

Die Neue Zeit
18th August 2012, 09:10
I'm sure comrades will join and criticize this position using some recent CPGB and Historical Materialism translations on the subject.

The Idler
18th August 2012, 11:21
Finish work at 8pm. Shame. Would love to have come along.
Would you like it taped?

Vladimir Innit Lenin
18th August 2012, 11:23
Would you like it taped?

Yes please :)

The Idler
5th September 2012, 11:13
http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/audio/martovs-criticism-bolshevism

citizen of industry
5th September 2012, 11:57
Combined and uneven development? Turn the power the workers had already seized in February over to a bourgeoisie that was unwilling and unable to take it? Marxism was popular at the time among petty -bourgeoisie because of the transition from feudalism to capitalism. Rather than a crituque of capitalism, it was used to justify it. Hence the betrayal of the workers and peasants from February until October. Was Kerensky's government, smashing of the soviets and continuation of WWI the correct line, in your opinion?

Lev Bronsteinovich
5th September 2012, 12:46
I'm certainly not against looking at what the Mensheviks had to say. Martov was the best of the bunch, I would think. But it seems some comrades are drawn to his thinking which history discredited in a big way. The Russian bourgeoisie was not capable of carrying out the tasks of the bourgeois revolution. They were too weak, too tied to the aristocracy and too tied to foreign capital. A quick read of Trotsky's "Results and Prospects" aka the Permanent Revolution might help to clarify.

I think it is most interesting to read what Martov had to say during the revolutions of 05 and 17. The Mensheviks were smart and certainly, without the benefit of hindsight, often seemed to be right. After 1917, Martov's history was not so stellar.