Page:The Proletarian Revolution in Russia - Lenin, Trotsky and Chicherin - ed. Louis C. Fraina (1918).djvu/294



The liberal and S.-R.-Menshevik scribes and politicians are much concerned over the question of the sociological significance of the Russian Revolution. Is it a bourgeois revolution or some other kind of a revolution? At first glance, this academic theorizing may appear somewhat enigmatical. The liberals have nothing to gain by revealing the class interests behind "their" revolution. And as for the petit bourgeois "Socialists," they do not as a general rule, make use of theoretical analysis in their political activity, but rather of "common sense," which is simply another name for mediocrity and lack of principle. The fact is that the Milyukov-Dan estimate, inspired by Plekhanov, as to the bourgeois character of the Russian Revolution, contains not a single grain of theory. Neither Yedinstvo, nor Retch, nor Den, nor Rabochaya Gazeta, its head seriously affected, take any pains to formulate what it understands by a bourgeois revolution. The intention of their manoeuvres is purely practical: to demonstrate the "right" of the bourgeois revolution to assume power. Even though the Soviets, may represent the majority of the politically trained population, even though in all the democratic elections, in city and in country, the capitalist parties were swept out with eclat,—"so long as our revolution is bourgeois in character," it is necessary to preserve the privileges of the bourgeoisie, and to assign to it in the government a role, to which it is by no means entitled by the alignment of political groups within the country. If we are to act in accordance with the principles of democratic parliamentarism, it is clear that power belongs to the Social-Revolutionists, either alone, or in conjunction with the Mensheviki, But as "our revolution is a bourgeois revolution," the principles of democracy are suspended, and the representatives of the overwhelming majority of the people receive five seats in the ministry, while the representatives of an insignficant minority get twice as many. To Hell with democracy! Long live Plekhanov's Sociology!