CHAPTER: 3

SOCIAL REVOLUTION AND ITS LIMITATIONS

In the field of social revolution history making incident is proletarian
revolution of Russia in 1917 and later after Second World War, in subsequent
years, China got a neo-democratic revolution. These two revolutions took
place under the leadership of communist party. After these two revolutions
much debate and limitless deliberation of opposite thoughts resulting a great
debate has been continuing the entire world over the last 50 years. It has
steered the global opinion and there is no end to scholarly books on this
topic ----- be for or against of it. We will not get into detailed discussion on
this topic; but in brief this can be said that the new state system that grew
up as a result, is comparatively better and developed. Soviet Russia, a
backward country in Europe, in comparison with other capitalist states of
that continent and further backward state, a semi-colonial country like China
where revolution took place is not apparently supported by older Marxist
ideology. Peasant War In Germany, written by Engles may be upheld as a
comparison.In the introduction of this book, Engels explained Marx, referred
that socialist revolution will be possible much earlier in Germany. The time
when Marx said this Germany was not advanced hand other European
countries. This situation then was much probable in England and France. On
the other hand bourgeois evolution in Germany had a great backlog in many
respect. Still Marx predicted about a socialist change of that country. Their
reason for this , which Marx noticed , that labor of that country were more
educated and ideologically advanced in the field and that s why he thought
of it. For creating a situation of revolution being a conscious effort, German
was more developed and powerful in this context. Though , by number the
English proletarian class was much bigger by quantity and by experience of
class struggle , French working class had more enriched , at the same time,
the capitalism were more developed in both countries in comparison to
Germany.
In subsequent time, Lenin extended the view and showed the uneven
development of capitalism with development of monopoly capitalist
bourgeois state-system entered in the era of imperialism. In this historical
situation, progressive role of bourgeois class had lost. So many revolutions
for change of the state-system were not possible by the leadership of
bourgeois class. Thereafter, it was a responsibility of proletarian class and
their political organization to continue revolutionary struggle by giving their

class leadership. Lenin also showed that revolution, either bourgeois

democratic or socialist, can be possible in a backward state. Even in a
colonial or semi-colonial country also, this extended theory of Marxism was
applied in Soviet Russia which was a backward state-system in comparison
to West-European countries by the leadership of proletarian class and by
consolidating other toiling masses, specially the peasantry in favor of
revolutionary changes in the system.
Lenin put forward the concept of alliance of proletarian class and its natural
ally, the peasantry, along with other toiling masses , revolution might be
possible in the era of imperialism throughout the world , in developed, under
developed and also in colonial countries. So, world view of Marxism was
extended and developed in theory and practice in a change international
situation. For this reason, this concept of Lenin is defined as Leninism is
Marxism in the era of Imperialism. The detailed discussion in this context is
out of the scope of this book. We are mentioning some of the statement of
great leader Lenin about revolution in backward state-system. He said that
the organize either bourgeois democratic or socialist revolution in a
backward country like Soviet Russia is not a very difficult task, ( just pick up
a feather from a hen ) . But it is much more difficult to maintain and protects
the result of the revolution that means the socialist state-system. On the
other hand he mentioned that to organize revolution in an advanced
capitalist country is much more difficult, but it is easier to protect its result.
Why did he make this statement? Lenin answered this question in a very
simplified manner. The civil rights in an advanced capitalist country is
already well-established. Due to higher technology and much more skilled
proletarian class, the economic surplus is greater in an advanced capitalist
state. With this surplus, the state system can take various welfare programs
for the benefit of common people, at the same time; the working people may
get better wages and salary. For all, these beneficiaries, the working class
along with other toiling masses are better educated, more conscious about
their civil rights. So , any revolution to change capitalist state-system based
on private ownership and surplus value to a socialist state-system based on
social ownership is much more difficult, but the result of the revolution is
much more deeper and with sustained effect. This consciousness of civil
rights makes to maintain and to protect the result of revolution a far long
period, but in the backward country peoples consciousness for human rights
are relatively backward, at the same time due to poverty and economic
backwardness may give success to the revolution much more easier. But
compared to advanced countries, it is much more difficult to maintain and

retain its result. For this, a continuous debate and struggle should require
during the period of socialist reconstruction in various issues that may be in
economic, cultural and ideological ground. Lenins warning about the future
of socialism in a backward country has great importance. It is possibly
applicable to advanced countries also, through revolution has not yet been
possible in these countries.
The new state took its birth for Soviet revolution and the socialist economy
and socialist culture faced various problems. As a new first socialist state in
the world, it was very difficult to maintain and retain it or keep it in life, and
free from imperialist influence. Many scholarly discussion, debate and
resolution came in writing from the leaders of different states including
Soviet Russia. These enriched the communist ideas and philosophy. The
experience and the revolutionary struggle of Soviet Russia and its loop holes
give many important lessons for revolutionary struggle in other countries.
The neo-democratic revolution in a vast country like China had taken this
lesson and some correction with addition was done under the leadership of
communist party led by Mao-Ze-Dong. This neo-democratic revolution was
led by the Communist party; the political vanguard of proletariat was shifted
from urban areas to agricultural based areas of China and had a prolong
course of struggle. This prolong struggle in rural areas enriched Communist
party to be more pragmatic for unity of proletarian class with its natural
allies, the peasantries. So, it was shown in the program of Communist party
of China to adopt the policy of cultivization of land by forming agricultural
commune in spite of land to the dealers as a popular call of revolution of
Soviet Russia. Because we have seen in the history of Russia after
implementation of land to the dealers, it was very difficult for the Soviet
government led by Joseph Stalin to reform this policy and to increment for
establishing collective or state agricultural farming. As peasantry has
inherent training for land ownership. Basically land to the dealers is a petty
bourgeois call. So, Communist Party of China had taken better strategy to
unite peasantry in favor of revolution from the lesson of Soviet revolution
and afterward experience of socialist reconstruction. After revolution of great
China which was a neo-democratic revolution by the participation of the four
classes, that are, national bourgeois, petty bourgeois, peasantry led by
proletariat. So, by character, this was a democratic revolution, but it was
organized by Communist party of China, the vanguard of proletarian class.
After the seizure of power in post revolutionary phase, reconstruction of the
social order was continued mostly in non capitalist class. The policies and
programs were adopted mostly in favor of toiling masses including peasantry

and proletariat. But it is well known that the contradiction between the
different classes will remain in post revolutionary period. Though, Chinese
Communist Party had adopted pro people non-capitalist path, the strife
between the classes was continuing within the country in the government
policies remain within the Communist party also. All these experiences and
effects of the super structural raiments of older state-system on the
reconstruction phase of new social order need to take a new revolutionary
program of cultural revolution by great leader Mao-Ze-Dong. This Cultural
Revolution was an addition in Marxism and Leninism basically for correction
and change of super structural inequalities and contradictions. This Cultural
Revolution had been taken for prolong course and some time it was violent in
shape. Much elimination of Communist leaders like Liu-Sao-Chi and Lin-Biao
were expelled from the party .But the aim and objectives of Cultural
Revolution have not fulfilled. This was an unfinished battle. After the death of
great leader Mao-Ze-Dong, the reactionary and revisionist force of
Communist party led by Deng-Xiao-Ping had captured the state power by
establishing their leadership within the Communist party of China. These
reactionary and revisionist elements of CPC led China towards capitalist path
by adopting neo-liberal economy which was formulated by imperialist camp
with the leadership of US imperialism. The revisionist leader Deng-Xiao-Ping
philosophized and politicized their capitalist stand by giving a new
terminology in the subject of Marxist political economy as Market socialism.
This is a severe distortion and establishment of capitalist economy under the
veil of socialist terminology. So, we can say an undeclared counter-revolution
took place in China in the name of socialist reform, in reality, it was not a
social reform, but a counter revolution occurred by reforming the leadership
of Communist party of China to be the capitalist roader. Now, China is a
country without any socialist or international outlook has most problems of
social inequality and labor-dispute.
In spite of so many experiences, historical
evidence with numerous debate and polemics the fall of socialism could not
be prevented in most of the socialist countries. The China and Vietnam
socialist countries have taken capitalist path by undeclared counterrevolution, but in Europe, there were counter-revolution of different countries
including Soviet Russia. There are many disputes and the struggle occurred
in East European countries against the totalitarian nature of socialist state
system led by Communist Parties of those countries. The state-system and
Communist party became inseparable and due to lack of democracy, they
were slowly alienated from the people of those countries including proletariat

class. As there was no proper democracy and right for expression of views
through newspaper and other media , the debate , discourse , polemics
becomes obliterated making the Communist party and state ruler as an
absolute body. The infiltration of opportunist state bureaucracy in the
Communist party and amalgamation of these state bureaucrats with the
party bureaucrats made the Communist party an anti-people apparatus of
repression. With these inequalities, contradictions in socialist countries of
Europe, the cloud of peoples grievances against the state system were
accumulated to form the path of counter-revolution. In Poland, anti-state and
anti-communist movement was growing and getting vigorous day by day
under leadership of Letch Walesa at early 80s of 20th century. The result of
this vigorous movement of Poland caused fall of socialist government led by
the workers party which was totally alienated from the working class and
common people of Poland. This was first declared fall of socialism in East
Europe. Strife within the socialist countries was growing and getting more
intensity after this counter revolution. This was not simply due to totalitarian
outlook of Communist parties of those countries, but also failure to adopt
newer policies for better social condition, more welfare to the people and
good quality of life for the people. Observing this inevitable culmination,
Soviet Communist Party led by Gorbachov had taken the program of
glasnost and perestroika. This program was taken to keep freedom to the
people to encounter their grievances. All these measures the fall of socialist
government were not preventive in most of the East European countries
including Soviet Russia. So, declared counter-revolution took place within a
very short period of time early 80s to 90s. All these historical evidences
shows that the history of socialism of 20th century is the history of revolution
and counter revolution either declared or undeclared. So the big question
mark came out from these historical evidences that capitalism the end of
social development? Or we shall search for alternatives that should not
include the rejected theory of totalitarian socialist state-system or capitalist
state-system. Question arises within the progressive, Marxist and
revolutionary minded people, intellectuals and social workers that what will
be the future steps to go for newer society which will be devoid of classexploitation with class-inequality. This search is most important task not only
for revolutionaries and leftists, but also for socially conscious person and
intellectuals. We shall go for discussion in this direction in the later chapter of
this book. Before entering this discussion we have to say some words about
the experiences and evidences from the success and failure of socialist
countries:

1. The hegemony of proletarian was not established comparison to

bourgeois in pre-revolutionary period. Proletarian class established their
leadership among other toiling masses within brief period of time, but in
respect from fall of hegemony they are relatively backward from
bourgeois class in most of the super structural organization and social
activities. The evolution of the bourgeois was within the womb of
feudalism, even their existence was noticed as mercantile capitalist from
the ancient period as in the slave oriented society also like Roman
Empire. As they were economically solvent class and with the experience
through worldwide mercantile business, they were richer class by
economy and culture. By the development of capitalist market system
with accumulation of capital they were able to create industrial
revolution and became closer to feudal state-power. For their growing
strength they were competing with feudal class to infiltrate in the state
system for state governance. For centuries of time, an alternative
culture, literature, philosophy, economy was growing through the
concept of enlightenment and as a measure of European renaissance. In
brief, bourgeois class was able to establish their hegemony in all fields of
cultural, economic sector of society and became hegemonies to establish
new social order replacing the older one through bourgeois democratic
revolution. The difference between the proletarian class and bourgeois
class is that the later had more experience and equipped with their own
economic base and cultural aspect. In Soviet proletarian revolution the
leading class did not get this scope to establish a total alternative both in
economic and cultural field to set up their hegemony for conducting
state-system. So, proletarian class was quite backward and inexperience
in forming new socialist economy and governing the newer state-system
in pre-revolutionary period as compared to capitalist class. These
resulted a lot of confusion, debate, contradiction and conflict in postrevolutionary period. The limitation of proletariat both in pre and post
revolutionary period were culminating a totalitarian outlook among the
leadership of proletarian class, that is, in the communist party to
dominate in all fields of state and social activities by applying force. This
results formation of an undemocratic and totalitarian state-system which
was against the Marxist and socialist view. Due to lack of democracy in
post-revolutionary period of society and state system becomes absolute
which is again opposite to Marxist and Leninist view.
2. In the capitalist system, the class leader bourgeois are getting the
consent of the people continuously by introducing universal suffrage and
replaceable government by electoral process by participation people as

electorate. They established political diversity and plurality, freedom of

the press and media, right to express the peoples view, judiciary system
and various social organizations. Through these entire capitalist are able
to rule the society by the consent of the common mass. We may
translate it in Gramshian dialect that exploited are giving their consent to
exploit them by exploiters. The socialism is basically formed to abolish
exploitation by one class to other class or man by man. But the eternal
need of freedom of human civilization cannot fulfill by giving better
economic opportunity and the basic need of life. The exercise which was
practiced in capitalist democracy was not followed. In alternative
manner, for getting consent of the people for socialist ruler to maintain
the class hegemony of proletariat over all toiling masses.
3. Due to lack of democracy the dictatorship of proletariat slowly converted
to the dictatorship of Communist party. This occurred both inside and
outside of the party. So, political debate, discussion, polemics,
progressively reduced within an outside the Communist party, even in all
type of social organizations of the state-system. State-system was
governed by an undialectical transmission belt theory, decision and
policy will be taken by the highest authority of the state and Communist
party should follow the lower level, even grass-root level. By this way,
the dialectical relation between higher and lower level both within and
outside the party or state and people was reduced. So, there is no
counter discussion from lower level of the party and people. As a result of
this state and communist party was increasingly alienated from the
people.
4. Due to the inexperience of proletarian class the upliftment of this class
not only in state government, but also they were not capable enough to
manage the production units self-dependently. So, they have to borrow
the remnant of older society for management and state-governance.
These elites and from higher middle class and older remnants of society
like beaurocrats gave birth to a new opportunist classes in all socialist
countries. This new class slowly infiltrate in Communist party and statesystem by capturing authoritative position. They established their
hierarchy in the management of all sections of production units and
social organization. This hierarchy was also established within the
Communist party and converted the character of Communist party from
pro-people international outlook to nationalist and opportunist one. In the
later post world-war, the Communist Party of Soviet Russia was governed
by the personnel from the higher middle class and elites with bourgeois
outlook. The working class and common people slowly alienated from

Communist party and remained as wage workers only, but not as a policy
maker of the society and state.
5. Soviet Russia slowly detached from the concept of Marxism and Leninist
internationalism towards nationalistic attitude and became the
superpower of the world. They acted like big brother over the EastEuropean socialist countries and over other under developed countries in
international arena. We can notice more or less same characteristics of
deviation and deformity in other socialist countries led by Communist
Parties.
6. To prevent these all types of errors, deviation and deformities there was
need of a continuous struggle in economic, cultural and ideological
ground. But due to the historical limitations this task was not fulfilled,
though in China the great leader Mao-Ze-Dong had tried to remove these
errors and deviations by introducing the policy and programs of Cultural
Revolution. Even this wise decision of Mao-Ze-Dong did not succeed at its
end. Though it has contributed a new path of struggle in postrevolutionary society yet. It was an unfinished battle.
7. The ideology and concept of socialism did not set a permanent and living
life pattern in the mind of the common people and toiling masses in
socialist countries. It is also true either in developing and advance
country the red flag has lost its credibility and its honorable position.
Question arises :a) Communist Parties dictatorship = dictatorship of proletariat ------ is it
correct or not?
b) Without democracy is socialism possible?
c) What will be the form of democracy in socialist state?
d) How the hegemony of working class would be established in a
socialist system either in economic or cultural section?
e) Can a counter-revolution is possible after establishing socialist,
economic state-system by the effect of super structural contradiction
and inequalities lead to change of society and state?
f) What will be the new socialist state system and its constitution which
will reflect and proves that this new state-system will be more
developed, more democratic and more pro-people social system than
capitalist democratic system?
g) What would be the alternative economic system which will replace
international market economy for development of new social and
economic order to reach the goal of communism through socalism by
maintaining the ideology of international equality ? is it possible or not
?

h) Another complex question have been progressively evolving among

the Marxist and anti-imperialist intellectuals. The surplus value is the
basic economic pre-condition of any capitalist state-system. In the
experience of the previous socialist state system and its economy this
surplus value did not abolish. So, the basic pre-condition of capitalism,
that is, surplus value by surplus labor existed in socialist economy. By
mere nationalization or statization of private property this basic
capitalist economy was not changed. This shows the revolution
occurred by seizure of power , but capitalism remained flowing in the
society and state system at only in super structure, that is, all types of
state and social organization , but also in state economy by underground flow of surplus value which is the basis of the society. So, this
gave us lesson that by the abolishing of private property and
statization or nationalization of that cannot fulfill socialist economy,
culture and ideology. With the abolishment of private property to
convert it into a social property was not achieved in 20th century
socialist experience. The question we have to deal with how the
surplus value will be abolished in newer socialist state economy and
how to convert private property to social property and to clear out
class exploitation in future.