February Revolution

[Everyday Anarchy]

I'm interested in what others here on RevLeft know about the February Revolution and how it set the scene for the October Revolution. What is everyone's opinion on the organization of the February Revolution?


If the Bolsheviks led the October Revolution, who led in February? What were some mistakes that they may have made?


Discuss!

[renegadoe]

The february revolution had no "organization" to speak of. It was the outpouring of tens of millions of workers and many peasants into the streets to abdicate and oust the czar. The formation of soviets in the urban areas following the initial outpour. And in contrast, the October "revolution" was actually a coup - a seizure of power by a small military group, "in the name of" the soviets (though they were not consulted until after the Bolsheviks won power).

[ComradeOm]

The february revolution had no "organization" to speak of. It was the outpouring of tens of millions of workers and many peasants into the streets to abdicate and oust the czarAnd the result of this mass outpouring? The moderate socialists (Mensheviks, Social Revolutionaries, et al) refused to take the power presented to them. In turn this led to a further six months of incompetent bourgeois rule


And in contrast, the October "revolution" was actually a coup - a seizure of power by a small military group, "in the name of" the soviets (though they were not consulted until after the Bolsheviks won power).Has this forum really reached the point where this sort of gross historical inaccuracy can pass unnoticed? I suggest that you actually do some reading on the Revolution (and I don't mean Pipes) and perhaps look up the definition of a coup d'etat while you're at it

[spartan]

Has this forum really reached the point where this sort of gross historical inaccuracy can pass unnoticed? I suggest that you actually do some reading on the Revolution (and I don't mean Pipes) and perhaps look up the definition of a coup d'etat while you're at it

A revolution is where a mass of people overthrow the existing ruling order (Usually in a disorganized fashion).

A coup is where certain sections of the ruling order (Military, opposition parties, etc), but with very little power, force the ones at the top of the ruling order to relinquish their power to them.

Februrary 1917 was a revolution that involved millions of people that was unorganized and achieved its objectives of overthrowing the existing oppressive ruling order (Though not of ending Russia's participation in the unpopular WW1).

October 1917 was a coup by a section of the new ruling order, established after the February revolution, who forced the leadership of the new ruling order to relinquish all their power to the organizers of the coup.

[ComradeOm]

A coup is where certain sections of the ruling order (Military, opposition parties, etc), but with very little power, force the ones at the top of the ruling order to relinquish their power to themYou left out the most important criteria - the state apparatus remains intact as the new rulers simply assume control of the state. Conversely a revolution destroys the old state and replaces it with a new one


October 1917 was a coup by a section of the new ruling order, established after the February revolution, who forced the leadership of the new ruling order to relinquish all their power to the organizers of the coup.The Bolsheviks were part of the "new ruling order"? I think you'll find that the Bolsheviks were the only major party to remain removed from the Provisional Government. Certainly they were not part of the ruling class or its state apparatus prior to October. Which is the first blow against the coup theory

Secondly, the Bolsheviks arrived at power via the Second Congress of Soviets which ratified the actions of the various MRCs and moved to replace (not seize) Imperial state structures throughout Russia. If power was centralised in the hands of the Bolsheviks then it was done in a democratic manner that reflected the popularity of the party. Both Lenin and Pipes tend to gloss over the simple fact that in October 1917 the Bolsheviks were a major mass movement

Which brings us onto the final point - the October Revolution was a mass activity. It was not a matter of a handful of intellectuals strolling into the Winter Palace. The Bolsheviks had been winning soviet after soviet since July and clearly represented the urban proletariat. (The later Constituent Assembly would show that they had almost entirely supplanted the Mensheviks in this regard). There was further support from the Left SRs and, regardless of the dominant party in each, throughout the country the local soviets moved to follow the example of Petrograd

Yet those who are unfamiliar with the history persist with the tired old accusation that these incredible events, with the workers and peasants of Russia mobilised like never before, can somehow be reduced to that of a coup. Frankly its ridiculous, completely unfounded, and discredited by almost all recent (ie, post Cold War) historians who deal with the subject

In the end the various differences between the February and October revolutions can be ascribed to a single feature - the latter was organised while the former was not. That in no way diminishes the revolutionary nature of either... unless your definition of a revolution bizarrely states that it be completely disorganised

[lombas]

The February Revolution gave hope to many Russians, but the moderate government could not really exceed its powers outside Petersburg. Tons of workers joined soviets, which actually did function. People began to wonder why they had to take the Petersburg government into account in the first place.

Also, the February Revolution did not give the Germans what they wanted: peace in the east so they could focus on the trenches in the west. That is when they decided to support Lenin and his (then) quite marginal movement in taking over the structures of the soviets and overthrowing what remained of the Petersburg government (contrary to later Soviet propaganda, it was rather peaceful).

In short, the February Revolution failed miserably, and someone was bound to end it.