Russia and Its Transition to Communism - Coursework Example

Transition to Communism: Russia Part Russian before the Communist Revolution was awash in Czarist cruelty against individuals and specific groups. The Czar through his special army unites, the Kazaks, exacted terrible revenge on the Czar’s enemies. Intrigue within the court was infamous. Programs of extermination called pograms, much like that of the Nazi era, were aimed at Jews. It was commonplace for Kazaks to attack a village and exterminate men, women and children. As has been suggested, “The Russian state... moved away from policies designed to promote Jewish acculturation and integration” (enotes, par. 1-3), favoring instead the more brutal tactics approved and accepted by its largely Christian population. It is generally accepted that these pograms “were instigated, tolerated, or welcomed by Russian officials, on either the national, provincial, or local level” (enotes, par. 3). Pograms, specifically in Odessa, are also said to have been carried out by competing merchants and later by Russian mobs called, “barefoot brigade.” By the end of the century, they were widespread in Russia, though there is no clear evidence that the government was directly involved. However, some believe that failure or disinterest regarding the welfare of a segment of its population on the part of the Czarist government certainly exacerbated the problem. Russia under the Czars was a violent and dangerous place, populated by the very wealthy and desperately and dangerously poor peasants who lived off the land in feudal servitude. The government was there to protect the rich and powerful, a dangerous landscape of despotism, servility and brutality, ripe for revolution. The Marquis de Custine, whose Letters from Russia (1839) led many to dub him the de Tocqueville of Russia observed that ‘Government in Russia is military discipline in the place of civil order, a state of siege which has become the normal state of society.’ This authoritarian tradition strongly influenced the Russian Marxists...” (Czarist Origins par 2). Because the government was in the hands of one person backed by the powerful Russian Orthodox Church and reinforced by the military, there was little a citizen could do in the face of it. Occasionally, according to Czarist Origins, a dissident in the early days would arise to confront abuses, but over the centuries such confrontations became a pointless violent endeavor. In 1613 “...the Romanov dynasty assumed the throne...(and) carefully cemented their nations tradition of total and autocratic power. (Czarist Origins par. 5-6). What resulted was a government of absolute power of the Czar and his nobles. In the late 18th century, with the threat of revolution in Western countries, the Czars, abhorrent of criticism, suppressed all dissent. Anyone daring to speak out could be sent to prison camps in Siberia or suffer a worse fate. It was in this atmosphere the Russian revolution took place. Why the state after revolution moved to adapt Communist principles can be seen initially seen in the fact that it ‘”long and stubbornly defended the idea of a completely unique course of development for Russia, a detour around capitalism” (Trotsky 3). Speaking of Russia’s choice of communism, Trotsky found, “A backward country assimilates the material and intellectual conquests of the advanced countries. But this does not mean that it follows them slavishly...a backward country does not take things in the same order. The privilege of historic backwardness...permits, or rather compels, the adoption of whatever is ready in advance of any specified date” (Trotsky 3-4). Translated, this means that Russia, while admiring and perhaps emulating the French and American Revolutions simply did not have the social or economic framework to recreate a capitalist, free market economy. It used what it had—a peasantry living in grinding poverty but excited by the idea of banning together in cooperative effort to produce for themselves a better life. The development of the party was a necessary element in this process. Local cells could be developed at which leaders could be chosen and decisions made on production with maximum effort by the group. In addition, local government under the Czar was non-existent. By developing a system that functioned to a great extent on local decision making gave the peasants “the proletariat” a sense of pride and investment in the experiment. Communism as a social system rejects classes, is anathema to imperialism, rejects private property and defines the essence of capitalism an antithetical to the principles of the development of a solid and responsive state. In actuality, it is not for the goals of the state to be in association with communism, but for communism to create the state and thereby its goals. Engles writes: The state is, therefore, by no means a power forced on society from without; just as little is it the reality of the ethical idea, the image and reality of reason, as Hegel maintains. Rather, it is a product of society at a certain stage of development; it is the admission that this society has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself, that it has split into irreconcilable antagonisms which it is powerless to dispel (Lenin, The State and Revolution, 4). The role of Russia’s political culture played a large role in the development of Communism. It has also played a significant role in its so-called demise. Russia lived for many centuries with very strong leaders—Czars. And while resentment existed regarding the abuses of power and the of the upper classes, a certain historical reality exists that today has played out in the form of Russia’s acceptance of Vladimir Putin, a former KGB agent of the Communist regime, as leader. Despite criticism of his heavy handed tactics, he is popular and his initiatives supported. As communist society developed after the revolution, the society itself had no qualms in accepting Stalin as assassin of both Lenin and Trotsky as their leader. Stalin had his men about him as did the Czar. So in essence, Stalin was accepted as the Czar, the great father figure the looked to for direction and approval. Apparently, they still are, in Putin. Part II The transition from a feudal society to a Communist party system required the full cooperation and faith of the proletariat. But philosophical strife threatened to undue the communist juggernaut, and in the end, the transition to communism presented and end product with an unfamiliar face. Russian Communism came into existence and acquired its most distinctive characteristics during the decade and a half preceding the revolution. Its founder was Lenin; its embodiment, the Bolshevik Party which he created.... Fundamental differences nevertheless appeared at an early stage in the movement. A disparity between power and program developed which was to characterize Bolshevism through all the critical years that followed. When the lines were drawn at the barricades in 1917, the Bolshevik Party contained a major constituent group that was alien to Lenins philosophy of organization and power. The stage was then set for the decade and more of political strife that was not to end until the Leftist devotion to the revolutionary program had been altogether extirpated from the party by the monolithic political structure which Stalin built on Lenins foundation (Daniels 9). As one might imagine, and is true in every political movement, the majority cannot be relied upon to fight in the trenches. While they may be supportive of a mass moment, such as the restructuring of Russian society into a communist nirvana, only the few will actually take direct part. Lenin writes, “The masses – even the factory workers -- could not be relied on to become revolutionary-minded” (Daniels 11). Revealing the limitations of interest articulation and aggregation, Lenin proposes, “The history of all countries testifies that the working class, exclusively by its own effort, is in a position to work out only trade-union consciousness"(Daniels 11). In short, what Lenin is saying is that Communism, if it is to succeed on a national level, must be promoted by leaders who believe it its universal premise. Regarding intellectuals, he suggested “strict organizational discipline” (Daniels 11) to counteract their tendency toward individualism (anti-communist behavior) and a preponderance of discussion. This suggestion was actually accepted by Stalin who essentially sent all intellectuals into exile in Siberian prison camps. Today, the common mantra is that Russia has moved away from Communism and embraced a form of capitalism. This may be so, but with reservations expressed by many economists and scholars. What may or may be known is that capitalism has had a foothold in Russian since the days of the Czars, with a brief time off for Communism after the revolution. Not only this, but the capitalism of today, according to Menshikov, has foundations “laid down under a centrally planned economy and a socialist society” (Menshikov par. 3). While there seems, with the onset of capitalistic practices, the general consensus that Russia is no longer communist, that supposition may not be entirely correct. The capitalism of today, it is true, has moved away from the production oriented principles of the communist era and back toward a brand of capitalism practiced in the 19th century “rooted in lucrative government concessions” (Menshikov par. 1). The main challenges in Russia’s transition from communism to capitalism are twofold: a society that has grown up under a protective social umbrella, now thrust into a “do it yourself” environment. The second, and most businessmen and women would agree, challenges of facing corruption and bureaucracy that plague entrepreneurs, big business and small business at the heart of creating a society based on free market and profit. Such controls will be essential if Russia expects to move completely away from the Communist model. Works Cited “Czarist Origins of Communism”. Retrieved from http://economics.gmu.edu/bcaplan/museum/czar.htm Daniels, Robert Vincent. The Conscience of the Revolution: Communist Opposition in Soviet Russia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960. Retrieved from www. questia.com. Enotes. Pograms: Pre-Soviet Russia. http://www.enotes.com/genocide- encyclopedia/pogroms-pre-soviet-russia Lenin, Vladimir. The State and Revolution. Retrieved from http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch01.htm Manshikov, Stanislav. “Russian Capitalism Today.” Monthly Review: July-August, 1999. Retrived from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1132/is_3_51/ai_55330070/ Trotsky, Leon. The History of the Russian Revolution. Max Eastman (trans) Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1957. Retrieved from www.questia.com. Read More