|
|
The traditional
Soviet interpretation
was based on a strictly orthodox Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist
approach. According to it, the October Revolution was the
product of a clearly discernible, irresistible trend in Russian
history. The capture of power had been meticulously planned by
the Party, acting under the guidance of the omniscient,
infallible Lenin. |

The
Bolshevik triumph was the inevitable consequence of Russian domestic
conditions and at the same time an integral part of the
international struggle of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie,
with the Russian comrades acting as a vanguard of the world
proletarian forces. The Russian workers were victorious because,
under the masterly leadership of Lenin and his Bolshevik party, they
dealt a timely blow to the weakest link in the ‘chain of
capitalism’. The ‘Great October Socialist Revolution’ ushered in a
new era in the history of mankind, the era of Socialism, which would
in turn develop into full Communism.
In the
former Soviet Union this approach was obligatory in the
interpretation of Revolution. From the late 1920s until the late
1980s all professional historians, researchers, writers, teachers
and students of the Revolution inside the USSR were compelled to
operate within this ideological and methodological framework, which
condemned all other interpretations as ‘unscientific’. The official
view of the Revolution thereby played a legitimizing role in the
monopoly of political power enjoyed until the late 1980s by the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union. It consecrated October as a
once-and-forever transmission of democratic legitimacy from people
to Party which would rule for as long as it would take to reach
Socialism, with no need for any ‘bourgeois’ renewal of mandate. The
last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, for instance, until the very
end, always spoke of ‘the socialist choice made in October’.
|
|
|
Tsarist Russia |
|
Images &
Video |


 |
|