Documents menu
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 97 17:20:00 CST
From: David <dmsilver%earthlink.net@WUVMD.Wustl.Edu>
Subject: Red October
Subject: Oct. 1917 Changed the 20th Century
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 97 13:43:36 CST
From: "Workers World" <ww@wwpublish.com>
Organization: WW Publishers
Via Workers World News Service
October 1917 changed the 20th century
By Deirdre Griswold, Workers World, 20 November 1997
[The following is excerpted from a speech by Workers World
editor Deirdre Griswold to a New York meeting celebrating
the 80th anniversary of the Russian Revolution.]
The Soviet Union has been such an overwhelming presence in
world affairs that it is hard to imagine the 20th Century
without it.
How long would the First World War have lasted without the
Russian Revolution? Would the German, British, French and
American generals who sent millions to their deaths in the
trenches have suddenly become pacifists and called off the
war?
In 1916 in the Battle of the Somme, 60,000 soldiers lost
their lives in one day--more than the U.S. lost in the
entire Vietnam War--but that didn't stop the slaughter. The
imperialist generals finally ended it only out of fear that
the revolutionary fervor in Russia would engulf them too.
All the imperialists held colonies. The Russian Revolution
inspired these oppressed nations to fight for their
liberation. Ho Chi Minh, for example, wrote about his great
excitement on first reading Lenin. When the socialist
revolution spread to China, this was taken by all the
colonized peoples as a sign that their time had come. Would
decolonization have happened without these great
revolutions?
There are plenty of people in the progressive movement,
however, who were so disappointed at the Soviet Union's
imperfections, at what it did not or could not do, that they
would write it off altogether. Wish it had never happened.
Perhaps they think that then, somehow, the struggle to get
rid of capitalist oppression and bring down the ruling class
would have been easier, gentler.
They look at the collapse of the USSR as proof that the
revolution was ill-timed, that the Bolsheviks went too far,
that it was an impossible mission in the first place.
Such a view is totally subjective and shows not a shred of
social consciousness. First of all, a revolution is not
something manufactured from above. It is the result of a
great upheaval of the masses.
There were three revolutions in Russia in the first part
of this century. Each one went further than the one before,
but only the October Revolution, under the leadership of
Lenin and the Bolshevik Party, was able to break up the
repressive state machinery--the army, the police, the right-wing
armed bands--that had served the exploiting classes.
That revolution put in power the most democratic form of
rule yet devised--the Soviets--councils of workers, peasants
and soldiers deputies. Didn't that shake the world!
But could the revolution transform Russia--and the other
parts of the vast former czarist empire that joined the
socialist federation--from a woefully underdeveloped country
into an industrialized one overnight, or even in a few
years? Not without help from the more advanced countries
where capitalism had taken root centuries earlier.
But revolutions in the West didn't succeed. Nevertheless,
over decades of struggle, the USSR was able to raise the
means of production on a socialist basis to a level
infinitely higher than that before the revolution, even
though in the main it could not overtake the imperialists.
The capitalists, we should remember, had accumulated much
of their early wealth through the atrocious exploitation of
literally enslaved peoples. The South in the U.S., Haiti,
other sugar and rum producing islands of the Caribbean, the
lands of West Africa, the Dutch East Indies, the British
Raj, French Indochina--what were they but giant slave
plantations during the colonial period? And the wealth
flowed back to Europe or the United States, making possible
rapid industrial development.
The USSR, by contrast, had to pull itself up by its own
bootstraps while aiding in the liberation of the oppressed.
And it had to do so in a hostile capitalist world, fighting
invasion, as in World War II, and a costly cold war.
It is truly amazing that in spite of all this, the USSR
pioneered in so many areas.
Take the role of women, for example. Just last week, the
European Union released a report saying that the percentage
of women in government has dropped sharply. But, on closer
examination, you see that the decline has been almost
entirely in Eastern Europe and Russia since the counter-revolutions.
The Soviets had a much larger percentage of women than did
any of the parliaments of the so-called Western democracies-with
the possible exception of the smaller Scandinavian
states. Soviet doctors were mostly women at a time when
women here could barely get into medical school. Working
women got many months of paid leave before and after giving
birth. Every large workplace had a crSche or nursery. Women
could retire at 55. Education was free, and women entered
the sciences, sports and the arts in great numbers.
We heard only about the long lines in stores and the male
chauvinism. Was there chauvinism? Sure. The chauvinists who
now run Russia didn't spring up over night. But then they
couldn't openly promote and profit from prostitution, as
they do now. They couldn't fire women from their jobs for
taking time off to care for a sick child, as they do now.
They had to give all workers their wages, on time, or there
was hell to pay.
Because, no matter how badly it was deformed, it was a
workers' state and both sides knew it.
We live in a society that can overproduce almost anything-food,
real estate, cars, computers. Yet our work day has
become longer, not shorter. Many, many people are working
two jobs or more. The intensity of labor is tremendous.
Shop clerks now handle hundreds of customers a day.
Workers on assembly lines have every motion timed, down to
the second. Phone company supervisors listen in to make sure
operators don't "waste" a minute by acting human.
But in the USSR, where goods were not as abundant nor the
infrastructure as advanced as in the capitalist countries,
workers enjoyed earlier retirement, much longer vacations,
job-related spas and holidays, free education and health
care, access to sports and recreation, cheap public
transportation, low-cost food and shelter, guaranteed jobs,
and many other benefits. And the intensity of work was much
less.
All these social benefits introduced first in the USSR
made it very difficult for the capitalists in Western
Europe, especially, to grind down workers there in the usual
manner.
The social democratic parties in Western Europe used to
love to take credit for the so-called "welfare state"--but
once the Soviet Union crumbled, they joined the chorus led
by the reactionaries and began giving away much of what the
workers had won. Tony Blair in Britain is but the latest of
this breed. He will never admit it, but the Labor Party
after the war was able to institute a national health plan,
for example, because the European ruling classes were damned
afraid of communism in those years.
And so was the U.S. That's why Washington spent $20
billion on the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe. And it is
now openly admitted that the CIA helped put the social
democrats in power in Italy in that period in order to
counter the strong communist influence.
It has only been since the destruction of the Soviet Union
that the European Gingrich types have been able to mount a
vicious offensive against social benefits. No wonder
Margaret Thatcher liked Gorbachev so much!
When the Wright brothers' plane crashed at Kitty Hawk
after only a few minutes' flight, some said it proved flight
was impossible. Only birds can fly. But for most of thinking
humanity, that flight, brief though it was, was a splendid
confirmation of the laws of aerodynamics.
The Soviet Union lasted more than 70 years. It took to a
new level the struggle for workers' power begun with the
Paris Commune. It gave aid and support to other
revolutionary struggles around the world--one of the reasons
we are meeting in this House of Cuba today. We will study
its lessons and apply its revolutionary spirit in our own
struggle for the socialist future.
(Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint
granted if source is cited. For more information contact
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
ww@workers.org. For subscription info send message to:
info@workers.org. Web: http://workers.org)
|