Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: An Organ of Student Opinion At Victoria University College, Wellington, N. Z. Vol. 24, No. 4. 1961

A Visiting Lecturer From Glasgow University Speaks On Russian Revolution

page 7

A Visiting Lecturer From Glasgow University Speaks On Russian Revolution

"The picture painted by the Bolshevik victors gives Lenin's party an importance they probably did not have at the time of the Revolution" This was the opinion of Dr. Mosse. of the University of Glasgow, given at the second of two lectures he recently delivered at Victoria on "The Background and Form of the Russian Revolution.

In 1900, he said, the Tsarist regime was a solid one: Tsar Nicholas II was revered by millions of loyal peasants and had at his command one of Europe's largest armies. Though the fall of Tsardom was due to external circumstances (war in 1904 against Japan and the First World War 10 years later) the causes were internal and determined the "method" of the Revolution, and the regime it brought to power.

Among these internal causes were, firstly, the French ideas of (among others) Voltaire and Montesquieu, which were favoured by Catherine, and secondly the French Revolution itself. These two factors resulted in a clash of generations: the "ruling class elders" became conservative and rigid, while their sons sympathised with the French radicalism and (uncritically) favoured all Western ideas (culminating in Marx and Engels) because they were revolutionary.

Then came the "dedicated, single-minded, fanatical and unselfish men of the 'sixties," to quote Dr. Mosse, whose Nihilism started off as a non-political movement but took up the cause of the peasant masses. The peasants at this time even were hostile to officials, which coupled with the "strip system" of land distribution, allowed the idea of Socialism to catch on quickly.

The emancipation of 1861 proved unsatisfactory to the peasants, but not until 1895 when a working class of factory workers had emerged did the peasant make his grievances felt. The first successful strike was in 1895 when town and country struck together.

A second force was at work against the Tsar: those who wanted Central Government as a limitation on Tsarist autocracy. The concessions they obtained in 1861 proved as unsatisfactory as those given the peasants and things came to a head, when, after a slump (1901) and defeat in war (1904) and Bloody Sunday (Jan., 1905), a spontaneous strike paralysed the Empire.

In 1914 the outbreak of war rallied a short burst of patriotism but in 1917, when the food shortage was acute, the Cossacks and the army fraternised with the demonstrating crowds. This was a revolt Lenin failed to see, but in April, 1917, he returned from exile and campaigned against the government, which under Kerensky had a dictatorship.

In October came the final and almost bloodless revolution in which the Bolshevicks, having obtained the backing support of the military garrison, proclaimed their new government. Though the permanence of this government was doubted even by Lenin himself, it weathered the storm partly through the divisions amongst its opponents, partly through the organising genius of Trotsky and the enthusiasm of the young army, hut mostly through the apathy of the peasants, who, though they never became pro-Bolshevicks, never supported the opposition parties. Then came the Civil War (familiar to readers of Dr. Zhivago) and owing to peasant sympathies, the abolition of elections.

By way of conclusion Dr. Mosse suggested: "The Revolution changed the face of Russia and the world, and it is this change we must contend with."