Future revolutions

1911 9 February - Churchill: "British fleet a necessity but German fleet a luxury"

1911 21 July - Lloyd George warns Germany in his "Mansion House speech" supporting France during the "Agadir crisis". Britain starts preparations for war against Germany. German public opinion becomes anti-British.

1913 23 August. Churchill plans to send troops to France in war against Germany

1913 30 August - Churchill writes Grey that Britain should aid Russia and France in a war with Germany

1913 1 October - Greatest German Army increase since 1871; peacetime strength increased by 136,000 to 760,908 NCOs and men.

1914 Spring; Anglo-French military arrangements are completed even to point of details on billeting arrangements for British troops

1914 May - Anglo-Russian naval talks determine co-operation between fleets

Colonel E.M. House, chief advisor to USA's President Woodrow Wilson, was sent by the President in the Spring of 1914 to evaluate the European situation. Part of his report says: "The situation is extraordinary. It is militarism run stark mad. Unless someone acting for you can bring about a different understanding, there is some day to be an awful cataclysm. No one in Europe can do it. There is too much hatred, too many jealousies. Whenever England consents, France and Russia will close in on Germany and Austria. England does not want Germany wholly crushed, for she would then have to reckon alone with her ancient enemy, Russia; but if Germany insists upon an ever increasing navy, then England will have no choice. The best chance for peace is an understanding between England and Germany in regard to naval armaments and yet there is some disadvantage to us by these two getting too close.(see Brigham Young University Archive of documents on WW1 on the Internet)

The European Socialist parties' policy on a possible European war had been stated already in 1912. In their International Congress in Basle, Switzerland they stated:

"…The most important task within the action of the International devolves upon the working class of Germany, France, and England . . .It is the task of the workers of these countries to demand of their governments that they refuse any support either to Austria-Hungary or Russia, that they abstain from any intervention in the Balkan troubles and maintain absolute neutrality. A war between the three great leading civilized peoples on account of the Serbo-Austrian dispute over a port would be criminal insanity … The Congress views as the greatest danger to the peace of Europe the artificially cultivated hostility between Great Britain and the German Empire. The Congress therefore greets the efforts of the working class of both countries to bridge this hostility. It considers the best means for this purpose to be the conclusion of an accord between Germany and England concerning the limitation of naval armaments and the abolition of the right of naval booty. The Congress calls upon the Socialists of England and Germany to continue their agitation for such an accord. The overcoming of the antagonism between Germany on the one hand, and France and England on the other, would eliminate the greatest danger to the peace of the world, shake the power of Tzarism which exploits this antagonism, render an attack of Austria-Hungary upon Serbia impossible, and secure peace to the world. All the efforts of the International, therefore, are to be directed toward this goal." see : www.marxists.org/history/international/social-democracy/1912/basel-manifesto.htm

Yet instead of voting against war budgets in all Parliaments all Socialist Parties voted for them. This was "The betrayal of the 2^nd Socialist International". WW1 began in August 1914. All believed it will end by Christmas 1914 but it lasted to November 1918. In 1916 its central issue - the biggest naval battle in human history - took place off Jutland (west Denmark). 151 Britain's biggest warships stopped Germany's 99 biggest warships from entering the Atlantic from the North sea. 8000 men died in two hours. Like most WW1 battles it ended in a draw but the German navy never entered the Atlantic. Germany was not defeated militarily in WW1. It surrendered after USA joined WW1 in 1917 and German resources could never match USA’s. This created the Nazi myth that “The Left stabbed the Army in the back”. German seamen rebelled. The Kaiser fled. German Social-Democrats won power. After surrender all 74 German warships were taken to Scapa Flow north of Scotland: Capturing - or sinking – them was Britain’s WW1 aim, but their crews sank them there.

These facts refute all versions of WW1 history claiming WW1 had no specific cause, or had many causes, or was caused by the assassination of the Austrian Crown Prince. WW1 was a power struggle of British BB against German BB caused by German BB efforts to become a naval - and colonial - power and Britain's BB opposition to this.

After WW1 the Versailles Peace Treaty limited the number of warships Germany is allowed to build. This ended German BB hope to acquire colonies overseas - and motivated Hitler to colonize Russia. Britain lost its role of world BB leader to USA which became the world's richest economy by selling arms and food to Europe in the war. WW1 was caused by British and German BB competing for power and profits.
An unexpected WW1 outcome was Lenin's revolution in Russia (October 1917).

Marx's theories became popular after WW1 as this war and revolution confirmed his prediction that BB economies must create economic crises, wars, revolutions.

When WW1 began in August 1914 everyone expected it to end by Christmas 1914. Most people - on all sides - supported it. In 1914 all British soldiers were volunteers. Conscription in Britain began only when volunteering stopped in 1916. In 1914 very few people, among them Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg, the philosopher Bertrand Russell, and Albert Einstein, opposed the war from the start. Most people denounced them as traitors. People reasoned that those who do not support their own nation support the enemy. This was not the case. Einstein and Russell were pacifists and opposed all wars. Lenin and Rosa Luxemburg argued the war was between ruling classes not between Nations. They declared that workers of all countries will only lose by supporting their rulers. This was considered treason by all ruling classes and leaders, and at first - also by ordinary people. However, by 1916, after millions died without victory in sight, most people (especially soldiers) got fed up with the war. Volunteering to the army stopped. Conscription had to be introduced.

Most people everywhere began to crave Peace, but rulers everywhere craved victory.

In 1916 Russian soldiers began to desert. Thousands left the trenches and walked home - on foot. Lenin said: "The soldiers have voted (against the war) with their feet"
Most soldiers were former peasants. On joining the army work on their farms dropped sharply. After two years of war food shortages started and people in cities began to suffer hunger. All knew the food shortage was caused by the war. On February 23^rd, 1917, 90,000 women textile workers demonstrated in St. Petersburg, the capital of Russia, carrying banners saying "We want bread", "End the war". The police fired on the demonstrators and killed some. Next day 180,000 demonstrators carried the same banners adding "Down with Autocracy", "Stop police brutality". The police shot more demonstrators but being outnumbered called the army for help. The soldiers came but refused to shoot demonstrators. Next day the number of demonstrators grew to 240,000. The soldiers sympathized with the demonstrators and joined them. On February 26, Michael Rodzianko, Chairman of the Duma (Russian parliament) sent a telegram to Tsar Nicolai II, saying:

"The situation is serious. The capital is in a state of anarchy. The government is paralyzed; transport service has broken down; food and fuel supplies are completely disorganized. Discontent is general and on the increase. There is wild shooting in the streets; troops are firing at each other. It is urgent that someone enjoying the confidence of the country be entrusted with formation of a new government. There must be no delay. Hesitation is fatal." Next day Rodzianko sent another telegram to the Tsar saying: "The situation is growing worse. Measures should be taken immediately as tomorrow will be too late. The last hour has struck, when the fate of the country and dynasty is being decided. The government is powerless to stop the disorders. The troops of the garrison cannot be relied upon. The reserve battalions of the Guard regiments are in the grips of rebellion, their officers are being killed. Having joined the mobs and the revolt of the people, they are marching on the offices of the Ministry of the Interior and the Imperial Duma. Your Majesty, do not delay. Should the agitation reach the Army, Germany will triumph and the destruction of Russia along with the dynasty is inevitable."

On February 27^th soldiers took over the city's arsenal, liberated political prisoners, and shot policemen. They set up a "Soldiers and Workers Committee".

On March 1^st this committee published its "Order Number 1" declaring:

" To the garrison of the Petrograd District. To all the soldiers of the Guard, Infantry, Artillery and Navy for immediate and precise execution, and to the workers of Petrograd for information. The Committee of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies has decided:

1. All platoons, battalions, regiments, depots, gun batteries, naval squadrons and all various branches of military service of every kind and on warships must immediately set up councils of elected representatives of all soldiers and sailors in the above mentioned military units.

2. All military units which have still not elected their representatives in the Council of Workers' Deputies must elect one representative per company, who should appear with written credentials in the building of the State Duma at 10 a.m on March 2.

3. In all political demonstrations all military unit are subordinated to the Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies and its sub-committees.

4. Orders of the military commission of the State Duma are to be obeyed only if they do not contradict orders and decisions of the Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies.

5. Arms of all kinds, as rifles, machine-guns, armored cars and others must be at the disposition and under the control of platoon and battalion councils and are not in any case to be given out to officers, even upon their command.

6. In the ranks and in fulfilling service duties soldiers must observe strictest military discipline; but outside of service, in their political, civil and private life soldiers cannot be discriminated against as regards those rights which all citizens enjoy.

Standing to attention and compulsory saluting outside of service are abolished.

7. Addressing officers with the titles: Your Excellency, Your Honor, etc., is abolished and is replaced by the forms of address: Mr. General, Mr. Colonel, etc.

Rude treatment of soldiers of all ranks, and especially addressing them as "you there" is forbidden; Soldiers are bound to bring to the attention of the company councils any violation of this rule and any misunderstandings between officers and soldiers. This order is to be read out in all platoons, battalions, regiments, naval units, gun batteries and other front line and home military units. "

This order ended blind obedience of soldiers to officers in the Tsar's Army. Only orders authorized by soldiers’ councils were obeyed. The Tsar's authority vanished.

On March 1, the Tsar Nikolai II replied to Rodzianko: "There is no sacrifice that I would not be willing to make for the welfare and salvation of Mother Russia. Therefore I am ready to abdicate in favour of my son, under the regency of my brother Mikhail Alexandrovich, with the understanding that my son is to remain with me until he becomes of age." The Tsar's brother Michael took over on March 2^nd.

As the demonstrations against the war continued unabated Tsar Michael abdicated on March 3. Next day the employers signed an agreement with the "Soldiers and workers Council" reducing the working day to 8 hours. Prince Lvov replaced the Tsar and set up a temporary government with the Social-Revolutionary Kerensky at its head. On March 20 it abolished all legal restrictions based on ethnic or religious grounds. But it committed itself to continue the war.

States depend on obedience of most citizens to the law, and of soldiers to their officers. When many soldiers disobey their officers the State collapses. Without reliable soldiers rulers cannot enforce their decisions. Mass disobedience had started in the Russian Army in 1916. Many soldiers deserted and walked home. Others stayed in their trenches but disobeyed orders to attack. They all craved peace.

Lenin, the leader of a small revolutionary party known as "Bolsheviks", later as "Communist Party" had called for many years to create a state-owned, planned, economy based on economic equality. He opposed WW1 from the start, calling on soldiers to turn their rifles against their rulers, not against workers of other nations. He was in exile in Switzerland during WW1. In January 1917 he spoke to young Swiss socialists about the 1905 revolution in Russia. He ended by saying:

"We must not be deceived by the present grave-like stillness in Europe. Europe is pregnant with revolution. The monstrous horrors of the imperialist war, the suffering caused by the high cost of living everywhere engender a revolutionary mood; and the ruling classes, the bourgeoisie, and its servants, the governments, are more and more moving into a blind alley from which they can never extricate themselves without tremendous upheavals.

Just as in Russia in 1905 a popular uprising against the tsarist government began under the leadership of the industrial workers with the aim of achieving a democratic republic, so, in Europe, the coming years, precisely because of this predatory war, will lead to popular uprisings under the leadership of the industrial workers against the power of finance capital, against the big banks, against the capitalists; and these upheavals cannot end otherwise than with the expropriation of the bourgeoisie, with the victory of socialism.

We of the older generation may not live to see the decisive battles of this coming revolution. But I can, I believe, express the confident hope that the youth which is working so splendidly in the socialist movement of Switzerland, and of the whole world, will be fortunate enough not only to fight, but also to win, in the coming proletarian revolution. " (see the Lenin Archive on the Internet)

Lenin believed that in industrial societies like Germany and Britain there would be a revolution transferring ownership of the economy to socialist governments but in Russia the revolution would transfer power from the autocratic Tsar to an elected Parliament. After the Tsar's abdication Lenin returned to Russia on April 3^rd and saw that the new government insisted on continuing the war while most soldiers and civilians craved Peace. He declared that his Party would make peace immediately.

During February 1917, many workers went into the streets to demonstrate, demanding: 1) Peace, and 2) An 8 hour working day. When they demonstrated the factories were paralyzed. Massive desertions of soldiers from the front meant that people no longer feared the law or the police. Many directors of factories, of municipalities, engineers, foremen, and policemen, feared reprisals by former subordinates so they fled. Workers in many factories had to act as managers to keep the factory going. They set up councils to do so. Workers, peasants, citizens, soldiers, had to work without administrative staff to guide them so they elected councils and established new authority relations. The councils had to find raw materials, organize work, and perform administrative duties. Employee’s councils emerged in factories, neighbourhoods, army camps and municipalities all over the country. They were not formed by Lenin's Party but by workers, peasants, soldiers, and citizens.

The network of councils ("Soviets") carried out all administrative tasks. They did not decide Foreign policy but they decided the operations of daily life in towns, factories, and in the army. They ran the transport and communication systems, and controlled commerce and supply. This created a "Dual Power" situation. Foreign policy was decided by the government, but daily life was decided by workers’ councils. Government policies contradicted the councils' policies on every issue. It was clear that this situation cannot go on for long. Either the councils take over the role of the government or the government takes over the role of the councils. Every political party had to decide which of the two it prefers as ruler of the country.
Lenin declared: "All Power to the soldiers and workers councils", proposing a new type of a state run by councils elected by soldiers, workers, and peasants. Many liked this idea so they supported Lenin. Russia's population was around 150 million, of which 140 million were illiterate peasants. About 8 million were industrial workers and the army numbered 2 million soldiers. Most of the land was owned by the Nobility. The peasant-soldiers deserting the army returned home and expropriated the lands from the nobility. They asked Lenin what he intended to do with the land.

He expressed his views in a leaflet a few days before the October revolution saying:

".. Comrades! Look around you, see what is happening in the countryside, see what is happening in the army, and you will realize that the peasants and the soldiers cannot tolerate it any longer. An uprising of the peasants from whom the land has hitherto been withheld by fraud is flooding like a broad river the whole of Russia.

The peasants cannot tolerate their situation any longer. Kerensky sends troops to suppress the peasants and to defend the landowners. Kerensky has again come to an agreement with Kornilov's generals and officers who stand for the landowners. Neither the workers in the cities nor the soldiers at the front can tolerate this military suppression of the just struggle of the peasants for the land.

And what is going on in the army at the front? Dubasov, a non-Party officer, has declared before all of Russia: "The soldiers will not fight any longer." The soldiers are exhausted, they are barefooted and starving, they do not want to fight for the interests of the capitalists, they do not want to "be patient" when they are treated only to beautiful words about peace, while for months there has been a delay (as Kerensky is delaying it) in the peace proposal, the proposal for a just peace without annexations, to be offered to all the nations.

Comrades! Know that Kerensky is again negotiating with the Kornilov's generals and officers to lead troops against the Councils of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, to prevent the Councils from obtaining power! Kerensky "will under no circumstances submit" to the Councils, the paper Dyelo Naroda openly admits. Go, then, to the barracks, go to the Cossack units, go to the working people and explain the truth to them.

If power is in the hands of the Councils, then not later than October 25 (if the Congress of Councils opens on October 20) a just peace will be offered to all the fighting nations. There will be a workers’ and peasants’ government in Russia; it will immediately, without losing a single day, offer a just peace to all the fighting nations. Then the people will learn who wants the unjust war. In the Constituent Assembly the people will decide. If power is in the hands of the Councils, the landowners' estates will immediately be declared the inalienable property of the whole people.

This is what Kerensky and his government fights against, relying on the village exploiters, capitalists and landowners! This is for whom and for whose interests you are asked to "be patient". Are you willing to "be patient" in order that Kerensky may use armed force to suppress the peasants who have risen for land? Are you willing to "be patient" in order that the war may be dragged out longer, in order that the offer of peace and the annulling of the former tsar’s secret treaties with the Russian and Anglo-French capitalists may be postponed?

Comrades, remember that Kerensky deceived the people once when he promised to convene the Constituent Assembly! On July 8 he solemnly promised to convene it not later than September 17, and he has deceived the people. Comrades! Whoever believes in the Kerensky government is a traitor to his brothers, the peasants and soldiers! No, not for one more day are the people willing to suffer postponement. Not for a single day longer can we suffer the peasants to be suppressed by armed force, thousands upon thousands to perish in the war, when a just peace can and must be offered at once. Down with the government of Kerensky, who is conniving with the Kornilov's landowning generals to suppress the peasants, to shoot them, to drag out the war! All power to the councils of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies! (October 12, 1917. See the Lenin archive on the Internet)

Leaflets like this won Lenin the support of most peasants, soldiers, and workers. The soldiers wanted Peace, the peasants wanted land, the city dwellers wanted bread, and workers wanted an 8-hour working day. Lenin's Party supported all these demands long before the war. Therefore when Lenin ordered his men to arrest Kerensky's Cabinet in the Tsar's Winter Palace they met hardly any resistance.

Ten Years later, when film Director Sergei Eisenstein filmed his version of the revolutionaries attacking the Tsar’s Winter Palace, he asked the Palace caretaker if the film version resembled the real event. The Caretaker replied: "Last time fewer things were broken". Kerensky's refusal to end the war alienated most soldiers. They were unwilling to defend Kerensky's Cabinet so there was no fight and little was broken.
Lenin kept his promise to end the war. Immediately after setting up his government he declared that Russia ends its war, and sent Trotsky (who joined Lenin's Party) to negotiate Peace with Germany. Even within his Party many opposed Peace with Germany. Trotsky used the negotiations (broadcast by radio to Germany) to incite German soldiers to start their revolution. Lenin gave Germany a quarter of Russia's territory for Peace. Lenin's Peace made an enormous impression all over the world. WW1 continued but most British, French, and German soldiers hated it.

They envied Russia. Mutinies started in the French and British armies.

When the USA joined the war against Germany in April 1917 Germany's defeat was inevitable. In 1918 Trotsky's prediction was confirmed - German sailors disobeyed orders to sail into battle. This forced the German Kaiser to abdicate. The German Army surrendered and the war ended. People everywhere yearned for peace. Lenin was the first to achieve it. Moreover, he declared he will abolish economic inequality, create a state-owned economy, a state run by citizens' councils, not by Kings, Presidents, or Politicians. This made a tremendous impression everywhere. Autocratic rule in Russia was over. It seemed that "the meek shall inherit the Earth".
Lenin's government took over ownership of all lands and factories and promised guaranteed employment, state-paid housing, education, and health-service to all. This was without precedent and impressed people all over the world. Rulers everywhere began to worry. So did BB. They hoped Lenin's regime would collapse soon, failing to overcome the immense difficulties facing it. When this did not happen the British, French, and US governments sent troops to topple Lenin's regime (1918). US troops invaded Murmansk, British and French troops invaded the Caucasus, and the Japanese invaded the East. All failed to defeat Lenin's regime. In many countries people created Lenin-type parties to promote a Lenin-type revolution in their own country.
The most vehement enemy of Lenin's revolution was Winston Churchill who lost his job as Lord of the Admiralty due to his disastrous invasion of Gallipoli in Turkey in 1916. At a luncheon in the Aldwych Club in London on January 11, 1919 he said: "Of all tyrannies in history the Bolshevist tyranny is the worst. The most destructive, the most degrading. It is sheer humbug to pretend that it is not far worse than German militarism. The miseries of the Russian people under the Bolshevists far surpass anything they suffered even under the Tsar. The atrocities of Lenin and Trotsky are incomparably more hideous, on a larger scale and more numerous, than any for which the Kaiser is responsible. The Germans at any rate have stuck to their allies. They misled them, they exploited them, but they did not desert or betray them. It may be honour among thieves, but that is better than dishonour among murderers."

("Winston Churchill in war and peace" Emrys Hughes, Unity, London 1950. p. 88)

The last accusation refers to Lenin's peace with Germany which Churchill saw as a betrayal of Russia's pact with Britain signed by the Tsar. Was Lenin supposed to honour the Tsar's agreements? Churchill predicted Lenin's regime will collapse soon.

A few years later Churchill supported Mussolini's dictatorship in Italy, which reveals his denunciation of Lenin's dictatorship as hypocrisy. Coming from a landowner's family Churchill was outraged by Lenin's nationalisation of all lands, not by his dictatorship. After the failure of the foreign invasions, Britain and France sent money and weapons to former Generals of the Tsar to organize a Russian counter-revolutionary "White" army. A British Government White Paper estimated the total financial support given by Britain to the Russian counter-revolutionary forces at 100 Million British Pounds. According to Churchill this could arm 250,000 men.

Sir Bruce Lockhart, a special agent sent by the British government to Russia to study the situation, wrote: " The revolution took place because the patience of the Russian people broke down under a system of unparalleled inefficiency and corruption. No other nation would have stood the privations which Russia stood for anything like the same length of time. As instances of the inefficiency, I give the disgraceful mishandling of food-supplies, the complete break-down of transport, and the senseless mobilisation of millions of unwanted and unemployable troops. As an example of the corruption, I quote the shameless profiteering of nearly every one engaged in the giving and taking of war contracts. Obviously, the Emperor himself, as a supreme autocrat, must bear the responsibility for a system which failed mainly because of the men (Stürmer, Protopopoff, and Rasputin) whom he appointed to control it. If he had acted differently, if he had been a different man . . . What it is important to realize is that from the first the revolution was a revolution of the people. From the first moment neither the Duma nor the intelligentsia had any control of the situation. Secondly, the revolution was a revolution for land, bread and peace - -but, above all, for peace. There was only one way to save Russia from going Bolshevik. That was to allow her to make peace. It was because he would not make peace that Kerensky went under. It was solely because he promised to stop the war that Lenin came to the top. It will be objected that Kerensky ought to have shot both Lenin and Trotsky . . . even if Kerensky had shot Lenin and Trotsky, some other anti-war leader would have taken their place and would have won through on his anti-war programme. "

("Memoirs of a British agent" by Sir Bruce Lockhart. Book 3 Ch..4, see the Internet)

Supporters of the Tsar, called "Whites", started a civil war against the "Red" Army led by Trotsky. It lasted from 1919 to 1921 ending in defeat of the "Whites". Next Britain France and the US tried to destroy Lenin's BG by imposing an economic boycott on it. They refused to recognize it, and forbade all trade with it. This created great difficulties and a great challenge - to build a new economy without outside help.
Lenin's first aim was to industrialize Russia, to build electricity generating plants and heavy industry (to provide tools for light industry) in this vast agricultural country. This required money which foreign Bankers refused to lend. Where could the new regime raise money to industrialize an agricultural economy ruined by three years of WW1 and four years of revolution and civil war?
During the civil war Lenin introduced laws forcing peasants to sell their produce to the State at fixed prices. The State then sold it in the cities for fixed prices. This provided all with basic food for reasonable prices. The peasants supported Lenin fearing that if the "Whites" win the civil war the nobility would repossess their farms. In 1921, when the civil war ended, Lenin introduced a "New Economic Policy" (NEP) proposed by his disciple Bukharin. It allowed peasants to sell part of their produce in the cities at their own prices, and to employ hired labour. Bukharin told the peasants: "Get rich". The idea was to raise money for industrialization by taxing the enriched peasants. NEP worked. Peasants began to prosper, industrialization progressed, and in 1924 most people in the USSR were very enthusiastic about the new regime.
Lenin's revolution made great impression everywhere. It achieved Peace, and created a State using the economy to provide guaranteed employment, state-paid housing, healthcare, education, and pensions, to all citizens. This impressed people everywhere. Why should the economy benefit a few and not all? Lenin's success inspired people everywhere to set up local Communist Parties to emulate Russia's example. This was not Lenin's initiative; he was too busy rebuilding Russia. He rejected any idea of exporting revolution. He firmly believed every society must make its own revolution. He saw the Russian revolution as the first step in a process replacing BB economies all over the world by State-owned economies. He had no intention - or means - to conquer countries by military force. He was sure every BB economy was heading for an economic crisis predicted by Marx and ending in war and revolution. He believed people everywhere, especially those suffering unemployment and poverty, would see the advantages of a State-owned, planned economy and strive to replace their BB economy by a state-owned economy caring for all. This change could not be introduced by elections as BB would resist by force, hence revolution was unavoidable. Lenin hoped that after WW1 there will be revolutions also in Germany, Britain, and France. He sent Kamenev to check this out.

Kamenev returned early in 1918 and told Lenin "We are alone".

After Lenin's revolution people created revolutionary parties in many countries. To coordinate their activities Lenin founded in 1919 an organization called "The Communist International" ("Com-intern"). He wrote 21 conditions for membership and invited those who qualified to meet regularly for coordinating policies. The Comintern was the most powerful revolutionary organization in history. It aimed openly to set up socialized economies everywhere by local revolutions.
For states with BB economies Lenin's state, and the Comintern, were a major threat. They knew Russia would not attack them, but its state-owned economy, using the economy to provide guaranteed employment and state-paid housing, healthcare, and education to all citizens, attracted people everywhere. Many decided to create a socialized economy in their own country. The idea that the economy should be used to benefit all citizens rather than enrich a few was attractive to many people.

BB opposes a socialized economy caring for all citizens because its viability shows that sharing the benefits of the economy equally among all citizens is possible. So BB of Germany, Italy, Britain, France, and the USA was determined to destroy Lenin's state. BB presented this as a struggle against Dictatorship, but BB tolerated - and supported - dictators like Hitler and Mussolini until 1939, and Salazar in Portugal and Franco in Spain until 1976. In 1961 CIA agents, on orders of US President Eisenhower, assassinated Congo's elected PM Lumumba replacing him by the corrupt dictator Joseph Mobutu, who ruled Congo for 32 years. In 1973 the CIA overthrew elected President Allende in Chile replacing him the dictator Pinochet. CIA did the same to Mossadeq in Iran (1953), and to Arbenz in Guatemala (1954). This reveals the claim that the US anti-USSR campaign was a struggle of "Democracy against Dictatorship" as hypocrisy. US rulers prefer dictators protecting BB to democratic governments nationalizing part of the economy. BB matters to US rulers far more than democracy. International politics of the 20^th Century were mostly efforts of states with Big Business economies to destroy states with nationalized economies.

The latter did not try to destroy the former. Being Marxists they believed every BB economy must produce economic crises that will cause its own downfall.

When Lenin died in January 1924 millions in Russia and abroad mourned his death. His BG regime was at the peak of its popularity, but cracks had already appeared in it in 1921. Actually it was flawed from the start. Its flaws grew over the years, eventually causing the regime's collapse in 1991. What were these flaws?

The first - and most serious - flaw was Lenin's insistence that his Party alone should arrest Kerensky's cabinet and take over power. Before the revolution Lenin supported the policy of: "All power to the Councils" (of delegates elected by soldiers, workers, and peasant). He proposed that the country should be run by local and general councils rather than by Parliament and Political Parties. The most important council was the one in St. Petersburg. Its members were elected by the soldiers in the city, by its workers and citizens. All revolutionary parties, Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, Social-Revolutionaries, and the Anarchists, were represented in this council, which had more authority than Kerensky's government as most soldiers obeyed its orders. On October 24 (by new Calendar - November 6, by the old) Lenin exhorted the leaders of his Party to arrest Kerensky's government immediately, before October 25. He wrote to the leadership of his party:

"Comrades, I am writing these lines on the evening of the 24th. The situation is critical in the extreme. In fact it is now absolutely clear that to delay the uprising would be fatal. With all my might I urge comrades to realize that everything now hangs by a thread; that we are confronted by problems which are not to be solved by conferences or congresses (even congresses of councils), but exclusively by peoples, by the masses, by the struggle of the armed people.

…We must not wait. We must at all costs, this very evening, this very night, arrest the government, having first disarmed the officer cadets (defeating them, if they resist), and so on. We must not wait! We may lose everything!

The value of the immediate seizure of power will be the Defence of the people (not of the Congress, but of the people, the army and the peasants in the first place) from the Kornilovite government, which has driven out Verkhovsky and has hatched a second Kornilov plot.

Who must take power? That is not important at present let the Revolutionary Military Committee (of the Bolsheviks. A.O.) do it, or "some other institution" (of the Bolsheviks. A.O.) which will declare that it will relinquish power only to the true representatives of the interests of the people (i.e. Lenin's party. A.O.) the interests of the army (the immediate proposal of peace), the interests of the peasants (the land to be taken immediately and private property abolished), the interests of the starving.

All districts, all regiments, all forces must be mobilized at once and must immediately send their delegations to the Revolutionary Military Committee and to the Central Committee of the Bolsheviks with insistent demand that under no circumstances should power be left in the hands of Kerensky and Co. until the 25th; not under any circumstances; the matter must be decided this very evening, or this very night.

History will not forgive revolutionaries for procrastinating when they could be victorious today (and they certainly will be victorious today), while they risk losing much tomorrow, in fact, they risk losing everything. If we seize power today, we seize it not in opposition to the Councils but on their behalf.

The seizure of power is the business of the uprising; its political purpose will become clear after the seizure.

It would be a disaster, or a sheer formality, to await the wavering vote of October 25. The people have the right and are in duty bound to decide such questions not by a vote, but by force; in critical moments of revolution, the people have the right and are in duty bound to give directions to their representatives, even their best representatives, and not to wait for them.

This is proved by the history of all revolutions; and it would be an infinite crime on the part of the revolutionaries were they to let the chance slip, knowing that the salvation of the revolution, the offer of peace, the salvation of Petrograd, salvation from famine, the transfer of the land to the peasants depend upon them. The government is tottering. It must be given the death blow at all costs. To delay action is fatal. (see the Lenin Archive on the Internet)

Why did Lenin insist on arresting Kerensky's government before October 25?

He knew that the Congress of Councils from all Russia was meeting on October 25. This Congress was the supreme political authority in the country. It numbered 670 delegates, of which 390 (a majority) were Bolsheviks and 179 were Left Social-Revolutionaries who in the main supported the Bolsheviks.

Lenin knew this Congress would approve a Bolshevik proposal to arrest Kerensky's government; he also knew that an arrest made by order of the Congress would mean that this Congress - not Lenin's Party - is the supreme political authority in Russia.

He wanted to avoid this by arresting Kerensky's government before the Congress did it. By presenting the Congress with the accomplished fact of Kerensky's arrest he reduced the Congress status from a decision-maker to that of a decision-approver. The status of a decision-approver is inferior to that of a decision-maker. What motivated Lenin was the prime issue of politics - WHO DECIDES? Not the content of the political decision but the authority to make it. He knew this Congress would order Kerensky's arrest. But this would establish the Congress as the supreme political authority in the country. He was determined to prevent this. He was not motivated by a quest for personal power. For Lenin power was a means to carry out the Marxist revolution. His goal was the revolution, not power. As long as the Bolsheviks had a majority in the Councils the revolution was safe, but what if they lose their majority?

Lenin's 1917 coup-d'état was against the authority of the workers and soldiers Councils, not against Kerensky who was a dead duck anyway. Lenin set a pattern for future relations between his party and the Councils, namely, the Party - not the councils - decides policy, the councils then approve it.

Lenin's insurrection was planned by Trotsky to precede the opening of the second All-Russia Congress of Councils. It was carried out during the night of October 24 to 25 by the Bolshevik Military Revolutionary Committee under the direction of Trotsky. Armed workers, soldiers, and sailors entered the Winter Palace, seat of Kerensky's Cabinet. Although seizure of power often costs many lives this one was bloodless as most people supported the arrest of the government that refused to end the war. Ironically in 1991 most citizens supported the demise of Lenin's one-party state, and it was carried out with less casualties than his revolution in October 1917.

On the afternoon of October 25, 1917, Trotsky announced the arrest of Kerensky's Cabinet to the All-Russia Congress of workers and soldiers councils. Some ministers were arrested later that day, but Kerensky managed to escape to exile.

On October 25 the 2nd Congress of Councils convened. The opening session, its speeches punctuated by rifle fire in the streets, was a stormy debate on the legality of Lenin's insurrection which challenged the authority of the Congress. Many Menshevik and Social-Revolutionary delegates accused Lenin of presenting them with a ‘fait accompli’, and - to Lenin's relief - walked out of the Congress. Left Social Revolutionaries stayed and formed a short-lived coalition government with Lenin.

On October 26 Lenin addressed the Congress, declaring: "We shall now proceed to construct the socialist order". The Congress then voted on three resolutions proposed by Lenin: 1) on peace, 2) on land, and 3) on setting up a new government. The Congress unanimously approved Lenin's resolution calling for an end to WW1 by calling on "all warring nations and their governments to open immediate negotiations for a just, democratic peace" and proposing an immediate ceasefire for three months.

Decisions on the land question were made in the form of a decree: "The right to private property in the land is annulled forever …The landlord's property in the land is annulled immediately and without any indemnity whatever … " All landed estates and the holdings of monasteries and churches were made national property and were placed under the protection of local land councils and councils of peasants. The holdings of poor peasants and of the rank and file of the Cossacks were exempted from confiscation. Hired labour on the land was prohibited, and the right of all citizens to cultivate land by their own labour was affirmed.

The Congress set up a governmental structure in which supreme authority was vested in the Congress itself. Implementing the decisions of the Congress was entrusted to a Committee of People's “Commissars”. Lenin was elected head of this committee. Other Bolsheviks elected to this committee were Trotsky and Stalin. With the establishment of the new government, the Congress of Councils adjourned.

The decisions of the All-Russia Congress of Councils on peace and land evoked widespread support for the new government, and were decisive in assuring victory to the Bolsheviks in other cities and in the provinces. In November the Committee of People's Commissars also proclaimed the right of self-determination, including voluntary separation from Russia of the nationalities forcibly included in the Tsarist empire, but made it clear that it hoped that the "toiling masses" of the various nationalities would decide to remain with Russia. It also nationalized all banks and proclaimed the workers' control of production. Industry was nationalized gradually.

These policies were supported by most people in Russia, and by millions everywhere.

What they did not know - and would not support if they’d known - was that Lenin changed his former policy of "All Power to the Councils" to a new policy of "All Power to my Party" without admitting it openly. This was a fateful change which eventually caused the downfall of Lenin's state and a huge setback to the idea of the state-owned, planned, economy. Why did Lenin change his policy? He was not motivated by lust for power but by mistrust of anyone who disagreed with him. He was a Marxist intellectual, and like all Marxists in the 19^th Century he believed that Marx's "Laws of History" were the "Objective Truth" about history and society, and he possessed it. Lenin was sure that those who disagreed with him were wrong and therefore a threat to the revolution even if they did not intend to harm it. Marxists everywhere shared this belief. They were not exceptional. Most 19^th Century scientists thought that scientific theories are “Objective Truth”. Catholics have the same conviction and therefore accept the infallibility of the Pope. Marx's "Laws of History" became a new, secular, God. The Communist Party was a secular Church. Its leader was the secular Pope. Marxism was the secular religion. Most secular thinkers in the !9^th century inherited from religion the belief in Objective Truth. They rejected a God whose existence could not be tested by experiments or predictions, but believed that a theory like Marxism, whose predictions of economic crisis, of war and of revolution, were confirmed, is “Objective Truth". This caused more deaths than belief in God did.

An early Italian Communist, Ignazio Silone (1900-1978), met Lenin and wrote

"Between 1921 and 1927, I had repeated occasion to go to Moscow, and take part, as member of Italian Communist delegations, in a number of Congresses and meetings of the Executive (The leadership of the Comintern.A.O.) What struck me most about the Russian Communists, even in such exceptional personalities as Lenin and Trotsky, was their utter incapacity to be fair in discussing opinions that conflicted with their own. Their adversary, simply for daring to contradict, at once became a traitor, an opportunist, a hireling. An adversary in good faith is inconceivable to the Russian Communists. . . . Just as I was leaving Moscow in 1922 Alexandra Kollontai (a veteran member of Lenin's Party. A.O.) said to me: "If you read in the papers that Lenin has had me arrested for stealing the silver spoons in the Kremlin this simply means that I'm not entirely in agreement with him about some minor problem of agricultural or industrial policy." Kollontai had acquired her sense of humour in the West and so only used it with people from the West. But even then, in those feverish years of building the new regime, when the new orthodoxy had not yet taken complete possession of cultural life, how difficult it was to reach an understanding with a Russian Communist on the simplest, and for us most obvious, questions. How difficult, I don't say to agree, but at least to understand each other, when talking what liberty means to a man of the West, even for a worker."

("The God that failed" Columbia University Press, 2001, p. 101)

The reason for this attitude was not Lenin's psychology but his philosophy.

He believed in Objective Truth and was sure he possesses it so all views different from his are wrong. He believed that those who hold them harm - objectively - the revolution, even if subjectively they believe they are revolutionaries. Marxists and Catholics shared the belief in Objective Truth. It is for this reason that Lenin changed his policy from "Power to the Councils" to "Power to my Party" even when the Bolsheviks had a majority in the councils. The Councils included members of other revolutionary parties. Lenin believed all other parties held wrong views that harm the revolution, so they had to be excluded. Actually, he didn't trust even his own Party but only its leaders, and not all of them, as Kollontai's joke clarifies.
Lenin's mistrusted not only other revolutionaries but also the revolutionary class - the factory workers. Marx saw that work in factories - unlike manual work on land - depends on cooperation of workers and creates attitudes of solidarity rather than selfishness. Such new attitudes make factory workers into a class capable of changing the social mentality from Egocentrism and Ethnocentrism to Anthropocentrism. Marx advocated "Proletarian Revolution" not because factory workers ("the Industrial Proletariat") were exploited (the Peasants were more exploited but Marx never considered them a revolutionary class) but because factory workers could create a society motivated by human solidarity rather than by private or ethnic selfishness. This could change peoples’ selfish attitudes created by the rule of city merchants. No peasant uprising could do this. But Lenin saw that most workers cared more about their daily needs (wages and working conditions), than about their historical role - to change societies created by city merchants and motivated by selfishness into societies motivated by human solidarity.
Every ruling class shapes its society in its own image. Feudal landlords shaped a society (and mentality) motivated by obedience where "everybody knows his place" - and accepts it - believing it is imposed by God. City merchants shaped a society (and a mentality) motivated by selfishness and rivalry of the "self-made man" who outwits others for profit and power. They believed it was imposed by Nature. Industrial workers could shape a society motivated by human solidarity and cooperation, caring for humanity. Marx believed this was bound to happen, due to "Laws of History".
Lenin's mistrust of the industrial working class shaped his policy on Trade-Unions. It was a sensitive issue. In BB economies workers need Unions to defend their daily interests against private employers. But do they need Unions to defend them when the employer is a "Workers' State" promoting their historical interests?

Are workers' Unions needed in a "Workers' State"? if so, what is their role?

In 1920 Alexandra Kollontai and Alexander Shliapnikov formed a faction in Lenin's Party calling it "The workers opposition". It was opposition to Lenin. Seven million workers (!) supported the "Workers Opposition".

The Workers Opposition began to form in 1919, as a result of the policies of (Civil) War Communism, which created domination of the Central Committee (CC) of the Communist Party over local party branches and trade unions. At the end of the Civil War the Workers Opposition began agitating against the CC control of the workers, seeking to restore more power to local party branches and trade unions.

A sharp controversy over this issue began in the Ninth All-Russia Conference of the Communist Party in September, 1920. All sides recognized the danger of the growing bureaucracy and offered ways to defeat this bureaucracy.

Trotsky and Bukharin, suggested transforming trade unions into government organs, in this way giving unions some control over industrial management. Lenin and the right wing of the party, including Zinoviev, Kamenev, Rykov, and Stalin, opposed this, arguing that unions should not be a part of industrial management, but it was the role of the party to teach unionized workers how to manage the whole national economy. They explained that with workers’ control, the needs of the entire society would be ignored, that factories were the property of the entire society, and not only of those who worked in them. Lenin explained: " What is the point of having a Party, if industrial management is to be appointed by the trade unions, 90% of whose members are not party members?" (Lenin, Collected Works, V. 32, Page 50)

Lenin's slip about 90% of the workers not being members of his party reveals a lot about the nature of his party, its membership, and its State.

The Workers' Opposition represented the left wing of the party, composed almost exclusively of unionized workers and veteran revolutionaries. It was led by A.G. Shliapnikov, S.P. Medvedev, and Alexandra Kollontai. The group demanded that industrial management be made the responsibility of unions, which would not only mean that workers of a particular factory would have control over that factory, but also that unions would control the national economy as a whole. Kollontai explained that only workers could decide what was best for workers - that it was not for party officials to decide what was needed for the whole society, but it was for workers themselves, the producers of the wealth of society. The Workers Opposition had substantial support among Communist Party rank and file; but Lenin opposed its views. Kollontai said:"The basis of the controversy is this: shall we implement communism through workers or over their heads by the orders of Soviet officials.... The solution of this problem as it is proposed by the industrial unions, consists in giving complete freedom to the workers as regards experimenting, class training, adjusting and feeling out the new forms of production, as well as expression and development of their creative abilities, by that class which alone can be the creator of communism. There can be no self-activity without freedom of thought and opinion, for self-activity manifests itself not only in initiative, action, and work, but in independent thought as well. We are afraid of mass-activity. We are afraid to give freedom to class activity, we are afraid of criticism, we have ceased to rely on the masses, and hence, we have bureaucracy with us. That is why the Workers' Opposition considers that bureaucracy is our enemy, our scourge, and the greatest danger for the future existence of the Communist Party itself. In order to do away with the bureaucracy that is finding its shelter in the Soviet institutions, we must first of all get rid of all bureaucracy in the party itself.... Wide publicity, freedom of opinion and discussion, right to criticize within the party and among the members of the trade unions -- such is the decisive step that can put an end to the prevailing system of bureaucracy. Freedom of criticism, right of different factions to freely present their views at party meetings, freedom of discussion - are no longer the demands of the Workers' Opposition alone". ("The Workers Opposition", Shliapnikov", and "Kollontai" on the Internet)

Kollontai wrote: "We believe that the question of reconstruction and development of the productive forces of our country can be solved only if the entire system of control over the people's economy is changed" (see Shliapnikov report, December 30). Take notice comrades: ' only if the entire system of control if changed.' What does this mean? The basis of the controversy [between the "Workers Opposition" and Lenin. A.O.] revolves around the question: by what means during this period of transformation can our Communist Party carry out its economic policy - shall it be by means of the workers organised into their class union, or - over the workers' heads - by bureaucratic means, through appointed officials of the State.' The basis of the controversy is, therefore, this: shall we achieve Communism through the workers or over their heads, by the hands of Soviet officials? And let us, comrades, ponder whether it is possible to attain and build a Communist economy by the hands and creative abilities of the scions of the other class, who are imbued with their routine of the past. If we begin to think as Marxists, as men of science, we shall answer categorically and explicitly: 'No !'

The root of the controversy and the cause of the crisis lies in the supposition that 'practical men', technicians, specialists, and managers of capitalist production can suddenly free themselves from the bonds of their traditional conceptions of ways and means of handling labour (which have been deeply ingrained into their very flesh through the years of their service to Capital) and acquire the ability to create new forms of production, of labour organization, and of incentives to work. To suppose that this is possible is to forget the incontestable truth that a system of production cannot be changed by a few individual geniuses, but through requirements of a class. (see "Kollontai Archive" on the Internet, article written in 1921)

In her speech at the 10^th Congress Kollontai warned the party: "When you go to a factory of 900 workers, and during a meeting on a party resolution 22 workers vote, 4 abstain, and the rest simply do nothing, it shows inertia, a split, the dark side of party life we do not fight against". To awaken workers’ support for the party the "Workers Opposition" proposed that Unions participate in managing the factories but Lenin's BG was running the economy by dictate and excluded Unions from all decision-making. The "Workers' Opposition" proposed that unionized workers (blue and white collar) should elect councils that would manage the economy at all levels. Delegates elected by workers, responsible only to those who had elected them - not to the Party or to management - should participate in deciding industrial policy. The "Workers' Opposition" proposed that Lenin's BG managers at all levels cease to interfere in the activities of trade unions. It was not opposed to Lenin's employment of "Bourgeois specialists" in the economy, but it opposed giving them administrative powers, unchecked from below.
Lenin opposed this, and the 10th Party Congress in 1921 rejected all these proposals and banned the "Workers' Opposition". He then introduced new party rules banning all factions in the party. His party rules hold to this day (2007) in every communist party. In the 11th Party Congress Lenin spoke against Kollontai for 45 minutes, and asked the Congress to expel her from the Party, but he lost the vote. It was one of the rare occasions where the majority of the delegates opposed him. But they accepted his policy on Trade-Unions. They rejected the idea that workers in a "Workers State" need Unions to defend their daily interests against BG officials managing industry. They also forbade all strikes. This greatly contributed to the downfall of Lenin's BG state. All BG economies banned free Workers' Unions therefore many workers became indifferent - or hostile - to BG States. Unions are safety valves for States. If a State bans them employees’ anger is directed against the State, not against management. For a good description of workers’ life in a BG state (Hungary) in the 1950s see "Worker in a Workers' State" Miklos Haraszti, Pelican, London 1977)
In 1953 workers in East Germany’s BG economy demonstrated against their government and in 1956 Hungary's workers rose against their Party-appointed managers and set up workers’ councils to manage industry. USSR tanks invaded Hungary and put down the workers. The rulers of the USSR feared that success of the Hungarian workers would inspire workers in all BG economies to do the same. Polish workers demonstrated on this issue in 1970 and in 1980 they formed the Polish Trade-Union Federation in the Gdansk shipyards. Workers revolting against Lenin's type of "Workers State" damaged the socialist image of Lenin's state. The invasion of Hungary and use of tanks against workers there, and again, in 1968, in Czechoslovakia, shocked many communists, and turned many against the BG state.
Lenin's change of policy from "All Power to the councils" to "All Power to my Party" did not pass without resistance. The most famous was the uprising in March 1921 of the sailors in the naval fortress of Kronstadt (see the Internet), outside St. Petersburg harbour. It is described in many books and pamphlets. One good account is by the socialist-anarchist Emma Goldman in her autobiography "Living my Life". She emigrated from Russia to the USA in 1886 but was deported back to Russia in 1919 for opposing US's participation in WW1. She supported the Russian revolution and was in St. Petersburg during the Kronstadt uprising. She tried to mediate between Lenin's government and the sailors, but failed. Another good account is by Ida Mett.
The uprising was started by a strike of St. Petersburg workers complaining about low food rations. Lenin's State saw itself as guardian of the historical interests of the working class and prohibited strikes by workers. Strikes did not endanger Lenin's state. They endangered its image as a “Workers State”. In the USSR all strikes were forbidden. Strikes were put down immediately by the army, if need be - by force.

Lenin's Party chief in St. Petersburg, Zinoviev, sent troops against the strikers. The accumulated frustration of the strikers was caused by Lenin's one-party rule denying democratic rights to all other revolutionary parties. The event that triggered off the strike was a dispute over food rations. The sending of troops against striking workers shocked many - including the troops themselves, who desisted from shooting strikers. Lenin's loyalists running St.Petersburg declared martial law in the city.

The sailors in Kronstadt fort who fought for the revolution in 1917 (Lenin and Trotsky called them "The flower of the Revolution") sent a delegation to St. Petersburg to investigate events there. The delegation's report convinced the sailors to support the strikers. They published a declaration supporting the revolution and calling for return to the policy of "All Power to the workers and soldiers councils". Lenin rejected this demand. He rejected all mediation attempts by Goldman and others. Lenin, Trotsky, and supporters of the one-Party State rejected any compromise with those demanding "All Power to the workers and soldiers councils". They wanted a total victory over them. Victor Serge, a supporter of Lenin and Trotsky, wrote in his autobiography: "An ultimatum was published signed by Lenin and Trotsky and worded in disgusting terms: 'Surrender, or you will be shot down like rabbits'" ("Memoirs of a Revolutionary" by Victor Serge, p 129) Trotsky ordered a military attack on Kronstadt. It was led by Tukhachevsky. The attackers killed 500 sailors and those imprisoned were later shot lest they tell others what happened. Many sailors were shot while shouting "Long live the world revolution". In a speech three days later Lenin admitted: "The Kronstadt men did not really want the counter-revolutionists. But neither did they want us." Actually, they were against One-Party rule. They wanted rule by workers’ councils in which all revolutionary Parties participate. Later Trotsky and Tukhachevsky too were killed by the One-Party rule.
Until the 10^th Party Congress - which took place during the Kronstadt uprising – in 1921 - members of Lenin's Party could form groups to promote a particular policy. Such groups were known as "factions". In 1921 Lenin decided to stop this tradition. He proposed to the 10^th Congress of his Party the following resolutions:

"6. The Congress, therefore, hereby declares dissolved and orders the immediate dissolution of all groups without exception formed on the basis of one platform or another (such as the Workers’ Opposition group, the Democratic Centralism group, etc.). Non-observance of this decision of the Congress shall entail unconditional and instant expulsion from the Party.

7. In order to ensure strict discipline within the Party and in all Soviet work and to secure the maximum unanimity in eliminating all factionalism, the Congress authorizes the Central Committee, in cases of breach of discipline or of a revival or toleration of factionalism, to apply all Party penalties, including expulsion, and in regard to members of the Central Committee, demoting to the status of candidate members and, as an extreme measure, expulsion from the Party. A necessary condition for the application of such an extreme measure to members of the Central Committee, candidate members of the Central Committee and members of the Control Committee is the convocation of a full Meeting of the Central Committee, to which all candidate members of the Central Committee and all members of the Control Committee shall be invited. If such a general assembly of the most responsible leaders of the Party deems it necessary by a two-thirds majority to reduce a member of the Central Committee to the status of candidate member, or to expel him from the Party, this measure shall be put into effect immediately." ("Lenin Archive" on the Internet)

The 10^th Party Congress (1921) approved Lenin's proposals as standard practice in the Party. Approval of the principle of "maximum unanimity" in the Party abolished all opposition to every local leadership throughout the country. During the civil war (1919-1921) Party members were still allowed to criticize the Party's policy before it was approved by the majority, but once it was approved no criticism was allowed. After the civil war even this was forbidden. Critics of Party policy were labelled as "misguided" and although they were not punished they were denied influential jobs. Later they became labelled as "damaging the revolution" and were sent into exile. After Kirov's assassination in 1934 all criticism was forbidden and those who voiced it were labelled "enemies of revolution" (or "enemies of the people") and sentenced to death. This happened to leaders like Trotsky, Bukharin, Zinoviev, Kamenev, etc. This policy spread from the Party to all government departments, municipalities, Unions, and the Army. Acceptance of the principle of "maximum unanimity" abolished all opposition to every leadership throughout the country. Absence of opposition enabled harmful policies to persist long after their harm was recognized. It left no way to change leaders and policies other than by conspiracy. No opposition could express its views openly before it became a majority. Opponents of a policy had to meet secretly to collect adherents until they had a majority, and then stage a coup. After Lenin's death every change of leadership in his party was done by conspiracy. This became standard practice also in the Cabinet, in management of industry, and in the Army.

Everyone in the Party, State, Army, or Industry, had to pretend that he agrees with his superiors while secretly conspiring to depose them. Conspiracy and Deceit became a way of life throughout society.

Rosa Luxemburg, founder of the Polish and German Communist Parties, lifelong ally of Lenin, criticized him in 1918 for abolishing the Russian Parliament. Shortly before she was murdered in Berlin (1919) by nationalist Army officers, she evaluated Lenin's revolution, in an article entitled "The Russian Revolution”, where she warned: "...Without general elections, without unrestricted freedom of press and assembly, Without free struggle of opinion, life dies out in every public institution and becomes a mere semblance of life, in which only the officials remain as the active element. Public life gradually falls asleep. A few dozen Party leaders of inexhaustible energy, and boundless experience, direct and rule. Among them, in reality, only a dozen outstanding heads do the leading and elite of the working class is invited from time to time to meetings where they are to applaud the speeches of the leaders. And to approve proposed resolutions unanimously. At bottom then - a clique affair - a dictatorship to be sure, not the dictatorship of the proletariat however, but only the dictatorship of a handful of politicians, that is a dictatorship in the bourgeois sense. In the sense of the rule of the Jacobins, (the postponement of the Councils’ Congress from 3-months periods to 6-months periods!) Yes, we can go even further; such conditions must inevitably cause shooting of hostages, etc. a brutalization of public life, attempted assassinations, etc." (see Rosa Luxemburg on the Internet)

In 1950 Hanna Arendt - who admired Luxemburg - wrote “Origins of Totalitarianism” describing as “Totalitarianism” the system created by Lenin’s ban on opposition, factions, and criticism. The ban forced critics to conspire. In return leaders sacked - regularly - quotas of potential critics (many were imprisoned or shot). This created mutual mistrust, fear, and deceit. Open political cooperation became impossible. Political and Social cohesion evaporated. This was no ordinary dictatorship but a new political system - “Totalitarianism”. It pulverized social cohesion. People were pressurized indefinitely - like dust - offering no resistance. This confirmed Engels’s (Marx’s partner) observation that “History is the domain of intentional action and unintentional outcome”. Lenin intended to create a society based on economic equality but by using political inequality he created - unintentionally - Totalitarianism. In 1925, Mussolini emulated Lenin’s anti-opposition rules and in 1933 Hitler emulated Mussolini’s.

Lenin held General Elections in Russia on November 12, 1917. The results were:

Party	Ideology	Votes
Russian Social Revolutionaries	Socialist	16,500,000
Bolsheviks	Communist	9,023,963
Ukrainian, Moslem, and other non-Russian Social Revolutionaries	Socialist	4,400,000
Constitutional Democrats	Liberal	1,856,639
Mensheviks	Social Democratic	668,064
Moslems	Religious	576,000
Jewish Bund	Socialist	550,000
Ukrainian socialists	Social Democratic	507,000
Popular Socialists	Social Democratic	312,000
Other Rightist groups	Rightist	292,000
Association of Rural Proprietors and Landowners	Rightist	215,000
Bashkirs	Ethnic	195,000
Poles	Ethnic	155,000
Germans	Ethnic	130,000
Ukrainian Social Democrats	Social Democratic	95,000
Cossacks	Ethnic	79,000
Old Believers	Religious	73,000
Letts	Ethnic	67,000
Co-operators	Social Democratic	51,000
German socialists	Social Democratic	44,000
Yedinstvo	Social Democratic	25,000
Finnish socialists	Social Democratic	14,000
Belarusian	Ethnic	12,000
Total:		35,333,666