Report on the Political Situation, 30 July (12 August) 1917

Translated from: ru/1917/1917-08-12_doklad_o_politicheskom_polozhenii_30_iyulya.txt

The question of the current moment is the question of the fate of our revolution, of the forces driving the revolution and the forces undermining it.

How did the revolution begin? With a coalition of four forces: the proletariat, the peasantry, the liberal bourgeoisie, and Allied capital. Why did the proletariat go into revolution? Because it was the mortal enemy of tsarism. Why did the peasantry go? It trusted the proletariat, and it craved land. Why did the liberal bourgeoisie go? Because in the course of the war it had become disillusioned with tsarism. It thought that tsarism would give it the opportunity to conquer new lands. Having no hope for an expansion of the domestic market, it chose the path of least resistance: the path of expanding the foreign market. But it was mistaken: tsarism and its troops were unable even to defend the borders and surrendered fifteen provinces to the enemy. Hence the liberal bourgeoisie's betrayal of tsarism. And Allied capital? It looked upon Russia as an auxiliary enterprise for its imperialist aims. Meanwhile, tsarism, which in the first two years had given hope of maintaining the unity of the front, began inclining toward a separate peace. Hence Allied capital's betrayal of tsarism.

Tsarism found itself isolated and quietly, peacefully expired.

These four forces of the February Revolution, which had marched together, had different aims. The liberal bourgeoisie and Allied capital wanted a small revolution for a big war. But the mass of workers and peasants did not go into revolution for this. They had different aims: 1) to end the war, and 2) to defeat the landlords and the bourgeoisie.

These are the foundations of the revolution's contradictions.

The crisis of 20-21 [3-4 May] April was the first manifestation of these contradictions. Milyukov attempted to convert passive imperialism into active imperialism. As a result of the mass movement, a coalition government was formed. The principle of coalition, as experience has shown, is the best weapon in the hands of the bourgeoisie for deceiving the masses and leading them further behind it. From the moment the coalition government was formed, the mobilization of counter-revolution began from above and below. Meanwhile, the war continues, economic dislocation grows, the revolution continues, assuming an ever more socialist character. The revolution bursts into the sphere of production -- the question of control is raised. The revolution bursts into the agricultural sphere -- the question is raised not only of confiscating the land but also of confiscating the stock, both live and dead. Insofar as the Bolsheviks were the heralds of the proletarian revolution, they correctly defined its character. Those who proposed to limit themselves to consolidating the revolutionary gains were not revolutionaries. The path of compromise, chosen by the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, was doomed to impotence. There was no force, no possibility of stopping the revolution midway. Thus, the fact that our revolution was developing and advancing pushed us onto the path of the necessity of stepping beyond the bourgeois revolution to the socialist revolution.

Some comrades said that since capitalism is weakly developed in our country, it is utopian to raise the question of a socialist revolution. They would be right were it not for the war, were it not for the dislocation, had the foundations of the national economy not been shaken. But these questions of intervention in the economic sphere are being raised in all states as necessary questions. In Germany, this question has been raised and managed without the direct and active participation of the masses. The situation is different here in Russia. Here, the dislocation has assumed more threatening proportions. On the other hand, such freedom as exists here has existed nowhere else under wartime conditions. Then there is the tremendous level of organization of the workers: here, for example, in Petrograd, 66% of the metalworkers are organized. Finally, nowhere has the proletariat had such broad organizations as the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. All this precluded the possibility of the working masses not intervening in economic life. Herein lies the real foundation for raising the question of the socialist revolution here in Russia. Insofar as workers actively intervene in the process of organizing control and exchange, insofar the question of the socialist revolution is practically on the agenda here. And therefore those comrades who object to this point are wrong.

Insofar as the revolution stepped so far forward, it could not fail to arouse the vigilance of the counter-revolutionaries; it was bound to give birth to counter-revolution. This is the first factor in the mobilization of counter-revolution.

The second factor is the adventure initiated by the policy of the offensive at the front and a whole series of breaches of the front, which deprived the government of all prestige and emboldened the counter-revolution, which launched an attack on this government. There are rumors that a period of large-scale provocation has begun in our country. Delegates from the front believe that the offensive, the retreat -- in short, everything that happened at the front -- was prepared in order to dishonor the revolution and bring down the "revolutionary" ministry. I do not know whether these rumors are true or not, but it is remarkable that on 2 [15] July the Cadets left the government. On 3 [16] July, the July events begin, and on 4 [17] July, news arrives of the breach of the front. To say that the Cadets left because of the decision on the Ukrainian question is impossible: the Cadets had themselves declared the necessity of resolving the Ukrainian question. There is a second fact suggesting that a period of provocation has indeed begun: I am referring to the shooting in Ukraine. In connection with these facts, it should be clear to the comrades that the breach of the front was one of the facts designed to discredit the idea of revolution in the eyes of the broad petty-bourgeois masses.

There is yet a third factor that has strengthened the counter-revolutionary forces in Russia: Allied capital. If Allied capital, seeing that tsarism was heading toward a separate peace, betrayed the government of Nicholas, then nothing prevents it from breaking with the current government if it proves incapable of maintaining a "united" front. Milyukov said at one of the sessions that Russia is valued on the international market as a supplier of men and receives money in return. And if it has become clear that the new government, in the person of the Provisional Government, is incapable of maintaining a united offensive front against Germany, then it is not worth subsidizing such a government. And without money, without credit, the government was bound to collapse. Herein lies the secret of the Cadets' having acquired enormous strength during the period of crisis. Kerensky and all the ministers turned out to be puppets in the hands of the Cadets. Wherein lies the Cadets' strength? In the fact that they were backed by Allied capital.

Russia faced two paths:

either the war is ended, all financial ties with imperialism are severed, the revolution moves forward, the foundations of the bourgeois world are shaken, and the era of the workers' revolution begins;

or the other path -- the continuation of the war, the continuation of the offensive, submission to all the orders of Allied capital and the Cadets -- and then complete financial dependence on Allied capital (in the Tauride Palace there were definite rumors that America would give 8 billion, would provide the means to restore the economy) and the triumph of counter-revolution.

A third path cannot exist; no third option is given.

The attempt of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks to present the action of 3-4 [16-17] July -- the action of workers who could no longer endure the policy of capital -- as an armed mutiny is simply laughable. If we are to speak of those responsible, we must bear in mind the objective conditions: 1) the development of the revolution into a socialist one, 2) the breach of the front, which showed the petty bourgeoisie the worthlessness of the coalition government, and 3) Allied capital, which does not wish to subsidize revolution. In the context of these forces, the action of the workers is a small dot that one would hardly notice. The sole culprit of the action is the fact that the counter-revolution became insolent. The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries began to strike to the left, at the Bolsheviks, thereby baring the revolutionary front and delivering themselves and us into the captivity of the counter-revolutionaries. On 3 [16] July, we proposed unity of the revolutionary front against counter-revolution. Our slogan "All Power to the Soviets" meant precisely the creation of a united revolutionary front. But they, fearing to break away from the bourgeoisie, turned their backs on us, which broke the revolutionary front to the benefit of the counter-revolutionaries. If we are to speak of the culprits of counter-revolution, then the culprits are the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, the betrayers of the revolution. If one asks where the Cadets, sitting in their offices and issuing their directives to the CEC, drew their strength, the answer can only be one: from Allied capital, from the fact that Russia needs money, needs an internal loan that the bourgeoisie will not provide, or a guaranteed foreign loan that Allied capital will not provide because it does not like the policy of the coalition government. The counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, Allied capital, and the top echelons of the officer corps -- these are the three pillars of counter-revolution. Our misfortune is that Russia is a petty-bourgeois country, which follows the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks, who enter into agreements with the Cadets, and until the moment the peasantry becomes disillusioned with the idea of compromise between the upper and the lower classes, we shall suffer, and the revolution will be defeated.

But the underground forces of the revolution do not slumber: insofar as the war continues, insofar as the dislocation continues, no repressions, no executions, no Moscow conferences will save the government from new explosions. The peasantry will not receive land, the worker will not receive control over production, the soldier will be returned to his former slavery. Delegates from the front report that among the soldiers the idea of a bloody reckoning is ripening, and insofar as the counter-revolution triumphs, new explosions and new battles are absolutely inevitable. And if the counter-revolutionaries succeed in holding on for another month or two, it will be only because the principle of coalition has not yet been exhausted.

What is the Provisional Government? It is a puppet, a pitiful screen behind which stand the Cadets, the military clique, and Allied capital -- the three pillars of counter-revolution. If the "socialist" ministers were not in the government, the counter-revolutionaries might already have been overthrown. But the characteristic feature of the moment is that counter-revolutionary measures are being carried out by the hands of "socialists." Only by creating such a screen can the counter-revolution still exist for another month or two. But insofar as the forces of the revolution develop, explosions will occur, and the moment will come when the workers will rouse and rally around themselves the poorest strata of the peasantry, raise the banner of the workers' revolution, and open the era of the socialist revolution in the West.

(Reads the resolution.)

I would like to clarify one passage in the resolution: until 3 [16] July, a peaceful victory was possible, a peaceful transition of power to the Soviets. If the Congress of Soviets had decided to take power into its hands, the Cadets, I believe, would not have dared to come out openly against the Soviets, for such an action would have been doomed in advance to failure. But now, after the counter-revolution has organized and consolidated itself, to say that the Soviets can peacefully take power into their hands is to talk into the void. The peaceful period of the revolution has ended; a period that is not peaceful has set in, a period of clashes and explosions...