During the 1920s, Russia suffered an issue with the establishment of rule of law. Because legal codes do not exist in a communist government, the establishment of rule of law created a ‘counter-revolution '. One voice, Nikolai Bukharin, criticized the process, believing it to be a bourgeois ploy of control; in his writing, Civil Liberties
, revealed his thoughts on Russia in 1923. Bukharin attempted to tell the Russian people to the state of the nation, and how the nation lacked a communist government. Rather, the nation fell under the control of the Bourgeois after the political upheaval of 1918. His writing discussed freedom as a method of control and used Marx and Engels ' for support of his argument towards true communism.
Bukharin
…show more content…
It grabs the attention of the reader, however, the bulk of the text surrounding writing discussed text the economic ‘enslavement ' of the working class. From the solely Marxism perspective, the idea of moral enslavement did not come into the argument. The idea of class struggle, which discussed in this piece, was understood through the exploitation of the workers through freedom. For Bukharin, the placement of moral enslavement into his writing did not fit with the content of the argument. However, it brought into question the morality of Marxism in Bukharin interpretation of Marx.
Lastly, in the final paragraph, Bukharin formed the thesis of his writing. He stated: "The proletarian revolution will put an end to bourgeois "freedom" …bring forth a classless, communist society…without state and law," He told his audience, the working class, that the Proletarian Revolution had not happened, yet, in Russia. Rather, through the belief in personal of freedom and rule of law, the bourgeois still held control of Russia. This article called to the Russian working class to know the Bolshevik Revolution did not befit them. Instead, the bourgeois took control of the government and lied to the lower class through ideological means. In 1923, Bukharin believed Russia was under the bourgeois ' control, and he attempted to enlighten the country to this
...oved to be singularly influential and daunting. This is, perhaps, the greatest obstacles to achieving true democracy in Russia—the authoritarian and repressive traditions that refuse to die out with the passage of time.
During the 19th century, Russia was experiencing a series of changes with its entire nation and society overall. The government was trying to adapt themselves to them at the same time. It was not an easy time period for Russia whatsoever. Vladimir Lenin helped change this.
“ The constitution promised the Soviets freedom of speech, conscious, press, assembly, and demonstrations in conformity with the interest of the working people and in order to strengthen the socialist system.”20 In fact the Soviet people never saw any of these rights. The Constitutional rights could only be used to support the regime, not to criticize it.
...veryone including the bourgeoisie, that the communist government would fall just the same as capitalism does, he logically shows how any government will fail without the support of everyone. The goal of the communist movement was made very clear by Marx, stating, "...formation of the proletariat into a class, the overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, and the conquest of political power by the proletariat." (467) Here he shows that he wants the proletariat to come out on top and invokes a strong sentiment in the working class appealing to both ethos and pathos. He appeals to both of these by showing the proletarians that they can trust the communist movement, it may take some time, but it certainly the working class' best interests at heart. The last statement also invokes a sense of hope and happiness about what the future possibly has in store for the proletariat.
The Russian revolution of February 1917 was a momentous event in the course of Russian history. The causes of the revolution were very critical and even today historians debate on what was the primary cause of the revolution. The revolution began in Petrograd as “a workers’ revolt” in response to bread shortages. It removed Russia from the war and brought about the transformation of the Russian Empire into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic, replacing Russia’s monarchy with the world’s first Communist state. The revolution opened the door for Russia to fully enter the industrial age. Before 1917, Russia was a mostly agrarian nation. The Russian working class had been for many years fed up with the ways they had to live and work and it was only a matter of time before they had to take a stand. Peasants worked many hours for low wages and no land, which caused many families to lose their lives. Some would argue that World War I led to the intense downfall of Russia, while others believe that the main cause was the peasant unrest because of harsh living conditions. Although World War I cost Russia many resources and much land, the primary cause of the Russian Revolution was the peasant unrest due to living conditions because even before the war began in Russia there were outbreaks from peasants due to the lack of food and land that were only going to get worse with time.
Rule of Lenin vs the Tsar The beginning of the 20th century saw a great change in the political structure of the Russia. A country once led under an autocracy leadership. was suddenly changed into a communist state overnight. Dictatorship and communism are at separate ends of the political spectrum. This study so clearly shows both involve the oppression of society and a strict regime in which people are unable to voice their opinions.
Lenin’s pragmatic leadership was the most considerable factor in helping to fortify Bolshevik power. His willingness to take power in October/November 1917 and the successes of the move, through his right-hand man, Trotsky, was critical as it helped give him unquestioned authority within the party despite members of the Central Committee i.e. Zinoviev and Kamenev who suggested industrialisation needed to occur first. This highlighted Lenin’s communist ideology in practice which was essential to the Bolsheviks maintaining power. Following the failure of the Provisional Government, Lenin recognised that it was the Bolshevik’s priority to legitimise their government. As a result, issues of ‘Peace, Bread and Land’ were addressed through the issuing of a number of decrees in late 1917 including decrees on land, peace, Workers’ Rights as well as reforms to marriage and religion. ...
Throughout the time of the Revolution there was never just one individual revolution. There was a series of revolutions that were set in Russia in 1917. Some were crushed in the making and had no result but, others ended up being made a very big deal. These sequences of revolutions ended up dismantling the Tsarist autocracy which also resulted in the creation of the “Russian SFSR”. As a result of these revolutions “the emperor was forced to resign from his post and the old regime was replaced by a provisional government during the first revolution.”2
By February 1917, discontent within the Tsarist society had risen to such a level that a revolution occurred. Originally, the revolution began as several protests about poverty, crime and the conditions in which Russians were forced to work and live in. These protests soon vilified Tsar Nicholas and turned into brutal and violent riots, although it can be argued that the Tsar acted villainous towards his people and thus deserved his status as an enemy of the people. There were many contributing factors that led to the Spring revolution, chiefly the growing vexation of the public that began many years before the war and the catalysis of the war in fuelling the fire of discontent. This essay will discuss the effects of these factors on the breakdown of the Tsarist society by February 1917 and form a supported conclusion on which factor had the largest impact and was, ultimately, the main reason for the breakdown of society and the subsequent revolutions.
In 1918, while the rest of Europe was still engaged in World War I, a newly formed communist government was developing in Russia. Much like 18th century Americans, they had just managed to overthrow what was viewed as a tyrannical government and hoped to form a new nation free of the injustices of the previous rule. Both countries wrote a new constitution as well as a declaration of rights to facilitate this, but their respective documents had vast differences. These disparities stemmed from differences in the ideologies of the new governments. The primary objectives of the Russian Declaration of Rights of the Working and Exploited People and the later constitution were the “abolition of all exploitation of man by man, complete elimination of the division of society into classes, merciless suppression of the exploiters, socialist organization of society, and victory of socialism in all countries.” Americans wanted equality of opportunity and personal freedom instead of the social equality desired by the Russians. The American constitution and Bill of Rights were created to protect personal liberties and individual freedom while the Russians were more concerned with the welfare and equality of the population as a whole. This difference is partially due to the differences in the conditions leading to revolution in each country. The American Revolution was initiated by the wealthy in response to what they considered unfair treatment by a foreign ruler while the Russian revolution was instigated by the poor in reaction to centuries of oppression and exploitation by the wealthy within their own country.
... possibility of passing, one being an Internet censorship bill, that would make illegal the social networking sites of which have been instrumental in organizing revolutions across the globe, as well as the occupy movement. The second being the National Defense Authorization Act of which passed the senate by a vote of ninety-three to seven that would allow the indefinite military detention of any American citizen believed to have engaged in terrorist activities and Americans know how loosely defined the word terrorist has become. It seems the very near feature that may very well hold the cause for a proletariat a revolution with revolutionaries that are not hungry for power, but starving for equality. The type of revolution that may ensue is unknown but it is possible for Marx and Rousseau’s dream to come true, if adopted by the majority and entered into willingly.
Over the next few years, Russia went through a traumatic time of civil war and turmoil. The Bolsheviks’ Red Army fought the white army of farmers, etc. against Lenin and his ways. Lenin and the Bolsheviks won and began to wean Russia of non-conforming parties eventually banning all non-communist as well as removing an assembly elected shortly after the Bolshevik’s gain of power. Lenin’s strict government, however, was about to get a lot stricter with his death in 1924.
Inspired by the works of Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin nonetheless drew his ideology from many other great 19th century philosophers. However, Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” was immensely important to the success of Russia under Leninist rule as it started a new era in history. Viewed as taboo in a capitalist society, Karl Marx started a movement that would permanently change the history of the entire world. Also, around this time, the Populist promoted a doctrine of social and economic equality, although weak in its ideology and method, overall. Lenin was also inspired by the anarchists who sought revolution as an ultimate means to the end of old regimes, in the hope of a new, better society. To his core, a revolutionary, V.I. Lenin was driven to evoke the class struggle that would ultimately transform Russia into a Socialist powerhouse. Through following primarily in the footsteps of Karl Marx, Lenin was to a lesser extent inspired by the Populists, the Anarchists, and the Social Democrats.
Russia had been defeated in all except the war with Turkey and its government and economy had the scars to prove it. A severe lack of food and poor living conditions amongst the peasant population led firstly to strikes and quickly escalated to violent riots. Tsar Nicholas II ruled Russia with an iron hand while much of Europe was moving away from the monarchical system of rule. All lands were owned by the Tsar’s family and Nobel land lords, while the factories and industrial complexes were owned by the capitalists’. There were no unions or labour laws and the justice system had made almost all other laws in favour of the ruling elite.
As communication was poor to the rural areas of Russia, the peasants had little or no knowledge of political parties and so did not support the Bolsheviks in their takeover. When the Bolsheviks changed to the Communist party in 1918, many peasants believed these to be a new party challenging Bolshevism and so made banners saying ’Down with the Communists, Long live the Bolsheviks!’ The national minorities currently part of the Russian empire, predominately Finland and Poland, were demanding independence and Russia’s allies, Britain, France, USA, Japan, etc. were growing ever suspicious of Bolshevism and so were set to intervene if the Bolsheviks were to pull out of World War 1.