JohnEngelman
Virgin
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2022
- Posts
- 3,768
Bertrand Russell wrote The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism after he visited the Soviet Union shortly following the Russian Revolution. He was a socialist who wanted to like what he saw. He did not, and had the integrity to describe what he saw and to explain his disapproval.
He expected to see a new kind of democracy, one not corrupted by the power the capitalists had over democracy in the West. He saw a new kind of dictatorship, one that combined aspects of the French Revolution with the Islamic religion during the life of Muhammad.
The Bolsheviks claimed to have created “the dictatorship of the proletariat.” Many socialists in the West claimed that the Soviet government was not really a dictatorship, but that it was governed by the proletariat (i.e. the working class). Russell claimed that it really was a dictatorship, and that the Bolsheviks defined “proletariat” as any Russian who agreed with the dictator, Vladimir Lenin. Lenin had never been a factory worker in his life.
Russell claimed to be a Communist. The meaning of words often changes over time. Today we would recognize him as a democratic socialist, or even a social democrat. He defined his ideal this way, “In place of palaces and hovels, futile vice, and useless misery there [should be] wholesome work, enough but not too much, all of it useful, performed by men and women who have no time for pessimism and no occasion for despair.”
Russell did not believe that his ideal could be achieved under capitalism. He believed it could be achieved under socialism. However, he believed that the socialism being developed in the Soviet Union was worse than the capitalism that existed in Western Europe and the United States.
Russell comes close to agreeing with the Bolshevik criticism of democracy in capitalist countries. Political campaigns are expensive. Capitalists have far more money to contribute to pro capitalist parties than socialists have to contribute to pro socialist parties. In addition, the mass media is owned by capitalists who hire journalists who will present positive images of capitalism. Corporate advertising exerts more pressure to fire any journalist who favors socialism.
This was truer then than it is now. In the United States many journalists can freely criticize capitalism, capitalists, and the corporate establishment without jeopardizing their careers.
The only taboo I am aware of in the mass media is the taboo against criticizing blacks, unless one blames what one criticizes on white racism. This taboo is largely self imposed. Blacks lack the political power and the economic power to enforce it.
Since the publication of The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism in 1920 capitalist countries have evolved in ways Russell advocated. They have developed expanded domestic sectors of the economy paid for by progressive taxation.
Although there were elections in the Soviet Union, Russell pointed out that there were even more restrictions against those who opposed Bolshevism than there were in capitalist countries against those who criticized capitalism. Anti Bolshevik candidates were denied the ability to campaign effectively. There was no secret ballot, so those voting against Bolshevik candidates made themselves vulnerable to government persecution.
Bolsheviks including Lenin told Russell that although they could not win an electoral majority in a capitalist country they could somehow attract enough people to overthrow a capitalist government by violence. Russell argued that this was unlikely unless Communists won the support of most in the military and the police. He argued further that this was unlikely unless a capitalist country had suffered a major defeat in war.
Russell argued that if a capitalist democracy is overthrown by a well armed, well organized minority, there is no guarantee that the minority would be Communist. He wrote The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism in 1920. This was before the seizure of power by the Fascists in Italy and the Nazis in Germany. Those seizures graphically illustrate his point.
The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism is remiss in that Russell did not describe how the practice of Bolshevism differed from the theory of Karl Marx. Marx believed that capitalism was good at creating wealth but bad at distributing it. Over time successful businessmen would drive unsuccessful businessmen out of business. These former employers would become angry employees who would join the Communist movement. With fewer employers, employees would find it more difficult to bargain for better wages.
Eventually there would be a vast and fairly poor class of employees and a very small but fabulously rich class of employers. The socialist revolution would be a popular revolution, with the vast majority on one side and a tiny minority on the other side. The new socialist government would not need to be tyrannical. It would have the enjoyable, easy, and popular task of spreading the wealth around.
Karl Marx described this time in Das Kapital, Volume One, Chapter 32 by writing, "The expropriators are expropriated."
In Russia there was no wealth to spread. Even before the First World War Russia was a poor country. After the devastation of the First World War and the Russian Civil War that followed it Russia was vastly poorer.
The socialist revolution in capitalist countries predicted by Marx would not necessarily be violent. Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto in 1847.
https://forum.literotica.com/thread...nse-than-it-used-to-by-john-engelman.1565180/
Back then the only country where factory workers were allowed to vote was the United States. Even in the United States voting rights were restricted to white men. In The Communist Manifesto Marx thought violence would be necessary to replace capitalism. During his life voting rights were extended to factory workers in many capitalist countries. Toward the end of his life Marx began to think that it might be possible to achieve socialism peacefully.
In The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism Bertrand Russell pointed out that the Bolsheviks could not have come close to winning a fair election. Eighty five percent of the population was peasants. They opposed Bolshevism. Many would have approved of a return to Czarist rule. Many, perhaps most, factory workers also opposed the Bolsheviks.
The Russian Revolution was not the popular revolution envisioned by Marx at all. It was a coup by a well organized, well armed group of fanatics. It had succeeded under conditions unlikely to be reproduced in capitalist countries. The dictatorship created by the Russian Revolution was using methods incapable of establishing the ideals Bolsheviks professed to honor.
He expected to see a new kind of democracy, one not corrupted by the power the capitalists had over democracy in the West. He saw a new kind of dictatorship, one that combined aspects of the French Revolution with the Islamic religion during the life of Muhammad.
The Bolsheviks claimed to have created “the dictatorship of the proletariat.” Many socialists in the West claimed that the Soviet government was not really a dictatorship, but that it was governed by the proletariat (i.e. the working class). Russell claimed that it really was a dictatorship, and that the Bolsheviks defined “proletariat” as any Russian who agreed with the dictator, Vladimir Lenin. Lenin had never been a factory worker in his life.
Russell claimed to be a Communist. The meaning of words often changes over time. Today we would recognize him as a democratic socialist, or even a social democrat. He defined his ideal this way, “In place of palaces and hovels, futile vice, and useless misery there [should be] wholesome work, enough but not too much, all of it useful, performed by men and women who have no time for pessimism and no occasion for despair.”
Russell did not believe that his ideal could be achieved under capitalism. He believed it could be achieved under socialism. However, he believed that the socialism being developed in the Soviet Union was worse than the capitalism that existed in Western Europe and the United States.
Russell comes close to agreeing with the Bolshevik criticism of democracy in capitalist countries. Political campaigns are expensive. Capitalists have far more money to contribute to pro capitalist parties than socialists have to contribute to pro socialist parties. In addition, the mass media is owned by capitalists who hire journalists who will present positive images of capitalism. Corporate advertising exerts more pressure to fire any journalist who favors socialism.
This was truer then than it is now. In the United States many journalists can freely criticize capitalism, capitalists, and the corporate establishment without jeopardizing their careers.
The only taboo I am aware of in the mass media is the taboo against criticizing blacks, unless one blames what one criticizes on white racism. This taboo is largely self imposed. Blacks lack the political power and the economic power to enforce it.
Since the publication of The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism in 1920 capitalist countries have evolved in ways Russell advocated. They have developed expanded domestic sectors of the economy paid for by progressive taxation.
Although there were elections in the Soviet Union, Russell pointed out that there were even more restrictions against those who opposed Bolshevism than there were in capitalist countries against those who criticized capitalism. Anti Bolshevik candidates were denied the ability to campaign effectively. There was no secret ballot, so those voting against Bolshevik candidates made themselves vulnerable to government persecution.
Bolsheviks including Lenin told Russell that although they could not win an electoral majority in a capitalist country they could somehow attract enough people to overthrow a capitalist government by violence. Russell argued that this was unlikely unless Communists won the support of most in the military and the police. He argued further that this was unlikely unless a capitalist country had suffered a major defeat in war.
Russell argued that if a capitalist democracy is overthrown by a well armed, well organized minority, there is no guarantee that the minority would be Communist. He wrote The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism in 1920. This was before the seizure of power by the Fascists in Italy and the Nazis in Germany. Those seizures graphically illustrate his point.
The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism is remiss in that Russell did not describe how the practice of Bolshevism differed from the theory of Karl Marx. Marx believed that capitalism was good at creating wealth but bad at distributing it. Over time successful businessmen would drive unsuccessful businessmen out of business. These former employers would become angry employees who would join the Communist movement. With fewer employers, employees would find it more difficult to bargain for better wages.
Eventually there would be a vast and fairly poor class of employees and a very small but fabulously rich class of employers. The socialist revolution would be a popular revolution, with the vast majority on one side and a tiny minority on the other side. The new socialist government would not need to be tyrannical. It would have the enjoyable, easy, and popular task of spreading the wealth around.
Karl Marx described this time in Das Kapital, Volume One, Chapter 32 by writing, "The expropriators are expropriated."
In Russia there was no wealth to spread. Even before the First World War Russia was a poor country. After the devastation of the First World War and the Russian Civil War that followed it Russia was vastly poorer.
The socialist revolution in capitalist countries predicted by Marx would not necessarily be violent. Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto in 1847.
https://forum.literotica.com/thread...nse-than-it-used-to-by-john-engelman.1565180/
Back then the only country where factory workers were allowed to vote was the United States. Even in the United States voting rights were restricted to white men. In The Communist Manifesto Marx thought violence would be necessary to replace capitalism. During his life voting rights were extended to factory workers in many capitalist countries. Toward the end of his life Marx began to think that it might be possible to achieve socialism peacefully.
In The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism Bertrand Russell pointed out that the Bolsheviks could not have come close to winning a fair election. Eighty five percent of the population was peasants. They opposed Bolshevism. Many would have approved of a return to Czarist rule. Many, perhaps most, factory workers also opposed the Bolsheviks.
The Russian Revolution was not the popular revolution envisioned by Marx at all. It was a coup by a well organized, well armed group of fanatics. It had succeeded under conditions unlikely to be reproduced in capitalist countries. The dictatorship created by the Russian Revolution was using methods incapable of establishing the ideals Bolsheviks professed to honor.
Last edited:
