The peasants ought to be called to a.s.semble on the day of the political strike and to pa.s.s resolutions demanding the calling of a Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly. The suburban peasants ought to be called into the cities to partic.i.p.ate in the street movements of the ma.s.ses gathered under the banner of a Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly. All societies and organizations, professional and learned bodies, organs of self-government and organs of the opposition press ought to be notified in advance by the workingmen that they are preparing for an all-Russian political strike, fixed for a certain date, to bring about the calling of a Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly. The workingmen ought to demand from all societies and corporations that, on the day appointed for the ma.s.s-manifestation, they should join in the demand of a National Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly. The workingmen ought to demand from the opposition press that it should popularize their slogan and that on the eve of the demonstration it should print an appeal to the population to join the proletarian manifestation under the banner of a National Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly.
We ought to carry on the most intensive propaganda in the army in order that on the day of the strike each soldier, sent to curb the "rebels,"
should know that he is facing the people who are demanding a National Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly.
EXPLANATORY NOTES
"_The hiss of the knout_" which ended the era of "cordial relations" was a statement issued by the government on December 12, 1904, declaring that "all disturbances of peace and order and all gatherings of an anti-governmental character must and will be stopped by all legal means in command of the authorities." The Zemstvo and munic.i.p.al bodies were advised to keep from political utterings. As to the Socialist parties, and to labor movement in general, they were prosecuted under Svyatopolk-Mirski as severely as under Von Plehve.
"_The vast apparatus of the liberal press_" was the only way to reach millions. The revolutionary "underground" press, which a.s.sumed towards 1905 unusual proportions, could, after all, reach only a limited number of readers. In times of political unrest, the public became used to read between the lines of the legal press all it needed to feed its hatred of oppression.
By "_legal_" _press_, "_legal_" _liberals_ are meant the open public press and those liberals who were trying to comply with the legal requirements of absolutism even in their work of condemning the absolutist order. The term "legal" is opposed by the term "revolutionary" which is applied to political actions in defiance of law.
_Dragomirov_ was for many years Commander of the Kiev Military region and known by his epigrammatic style.
THE EVENTS IN PETERSBURG
This is an essay of triumph. Written on January 20, 1905, eleven days after the "b.l.o.o.d.y Sunday," it gave vent to the enthusiastic feelings of every true revolutionist aroused by unmistakable signs of an approaching storm. The march of tens of thousands of workingmen to the Winter Palace to submit to the "Little Father" a pet.i.tion asking for "bread and freedom," was on the surface a peaceful and loyal undertaking. Yet it breathed indignation and revolt. The slaughter of peaceful marchers (of whom over 5,000 were killed or wounded) and the following wave of hatred and revolutionary determination among the ma.s.ses, marked the beginning of broad revolutionary uprisings.
For Trotzky, the awakening of the ma.s.ses to political activity was not only a good revolutionary omen, but also a defeat of liberal ideology and liberal tactics. Those tactics had been planned under the a.s.sumption that the Russian people were not ripe for a revolution. Trotzky, a thorough revolutionist, _saw_ in the liberal movement a manifestation of political superst.i.tions. To him, the _only_ way to overthrow absolutism was the way of a violent revolution. Yet, when the liberals proudly a.s.serted that the revolutionary ma.s.ses of Russia were only a creation of the overheated phantasy of the revolutionists, while the movement of the well-to-do intelligent elements was a flagrant fact, the Social-Democrats had no material proofs to the contrary, except sporadic outbursts of unrest among the workingmen and, of course, the conviction of those revolutionists who were in touch with the ma.s.ses. It is, therefore, easy to understand the triumph of a Trotzky or any other Socialist after January 9th. In Trotzky"s opinion, the 9th of January had put liberalism into the archives.
"We are done with it for the entire period of the revolution," he exclaims. The most remarkable part of this essay, as far as political vision is concerned, is Trotzky"s prediction that the left wing of the "Osvoboshdenie" liberals (later organized as the Const.i.tutional Democratic Party) would attempt to become leaders of the revolutionary ma.s.ses and to "tame" them. The Liberals did not fail to make the attempt in 1905 and 1906, but with no success whatever. Neither did Social-Democracy, however, completely succeed in leading the ma.s.ses all through the revolution, in the manner outlined by Trotzky in this essay. True, the Social-Democrats were the party that gained the greatest influence over the workingmen in the stormy year of 1905; their slogans were universally accepted by the ma.s.ses; their members were everywhere among the first ranks of revolutionary forces; yet events developed too rapidly and spontaneously to make the leadership of a political organization possible.
How invincibly eloquent are facts! How utterly powerless are words!
The ma.s.ses have made themselves heard! They have kindled revolutionary flames on Caucasian hill-tops; they have clashed, breast against breast, with the guards" regiments and the cossacks on that unforgettable day of January Ninth; they have filled the streets and squares of industrial cities with the noise and clatter of their fights....
The revolutionary ma.s.ses are no more a theory, they are a fact. For the Social-Democratic Party there is nothing new in this fact. We had predicted it long ago. We had seen its coming at a time when the noisy liberal banquets seemed to form a striking contrast with the political silence of the people. _The revolutionary ma.s.ses are a fact_, was our a.s.sertion. The clever liberals shrugged their shoulders in contempt.
Those gentlemen think themselves sober realists solely because they are unable to grasp the consequences of great causes, because they make it their business to be humble servants of each ephemeral political fact.
They think themselves sober statesmen in spite of the fact that history mocks at their wisdom, tearing to pieces their school books, making to naught their designs, and magnificently laughing at their pompous predictions.
"_There are no revolutionary people in Russia as yet._" "_The Russian workingman is backward in culture, in self-respect, and (we refer primarily to the workingmen of Petersburg and Moscow) he is not yet prepared for organized social and political struggle._"
Thus Mr. Struve wrote in his _Osvoboshdenie_. He wrote it on January 7th, 1905. Two days later the proletariat of Petersburg arose.
"_There are no revolutionary people in Russia as yet._" These words ought to have been engraved on the forehead of Mr. Struve were it not that Mr. Struve"s forehead already resembles a tombstone under which so many plans, slogans, and ideas have been buried,--Socialist, liberal, "patriotic," revolutionary, monarchic, democratic and other ideas, all of them calculated not to run too far ahead and all of them hopelessly dragging behind.
"_There are no revolutionary people in Russia as yet_," so it was declared through the mouth of _Osvoboshdenie_ by Russian liberalism which in the course of three months had succeeded in convincing itself that liberalism was the main figure on the political stage and that its program and tactics would determine the future of Russia. Before this declaration had reached its readers, the wires carried into the remotest corners of the world the great message of the beginning of a National Revolution in Russia.
Yes, the Revolution has begun. We had hoped for it, we had had no doubt about it. For long years, however, it had been to us a mere deduction from our "doctrine," which all nonent.i.ties of all political denominations had mocked at. They never believed in the revolutionary role of the proletariat, yet they believed in the power of Zemstvo pet.i.tions, in Witte, in "blocs" combining naughts with naughts, in Svyatopolk-Mirski, in a stick of dynamite.... There was no political superst.i.tion they did not believe in. Only the belief in the proletariat to them was a superst.i.tion.
History, however, does not question political oracles, and the revolutionary people do not need a pa.s.sport from political eunuchs.
The Revolution has come. One move of hers has lifted the people over scores of steps, up which in times of peace we would have had to drag ourselves with hardships and fatigue. The Revolution has come and destroyed the plans of so many politicians who had dared to make their little political calculations with no regard for the master, the revolutionary people. The Revolution has come and destroyed scores of superst.i.tions, and has manifested the power of the program which is founded on the revolutionary logic of the development of the ma.s.ses.
The Revolution has come, and the period of our political infancy has pa.s.sed. Down to the archives went our traditional liberalism whose only resource was the belief in a lucky change of administrative figures. Its period of bloom was the stupid reign of Svyatopolk-Mirski. Its ripest fruit was the Ukase of December 12th. But now, January Ninth has come and effaced the "Spring," and has put military dictatorship in its place, and has promoted to the rank of Governor-General of Petersburg the same Trepov, who just before had been pulled down from the post of Moscow Chief of Police by the same liberal opposition.
That liberalism which did not care to know about the revolution, which hatched plots behind the scenes, which ignored the ma.s.ses, which counted only on its diplomatic genius, has been swept away. _We are done with it for the entire period of the revolution._
The liberals of the left wing will now follow the people. They will soon attempt to take the people into their own hands. The people are a power.
One must _master_ them. But they are, too, a _revolutionary_ power. One, therefore, must _tame_ them. This is, evidently, the future tactics of the _Osvoboshdenie_ group. Our fight for a revolution, our preparatory work for the revolution must also be our merciless fight against liberalism for influence over the ma.s.ses, for a leading role in the revolution. In this fight we shall be supported by a great power, the very logic of the revolution!
The Revolution has come.
The _forms_ taken by the uprising of January 9th could not have been foreseen. A revolutionary priest, in perplexing manner placed by history at the head of the working ma.s.ses for several days, lent the events the stamp of his personality, his conceptions, his rank. This form may mislead many an observer as to the real substance of the events. The actual meaning of the events, however, is just that which Social-Democracy foresaw. The central figure is the Proletariat. The workingmen start a strike, they unite, they formulate political demands, they walk out into the streets, they win the enthusiastic sympathy of the entire population, they engage in battles with the army.... The hero, Gapon, has not created the revolutionary energy of the Petersburg workingmen, he only unloosed it. He found thousands of thinking workingmen and tens of thousands of others in a state of political agitation. He formed a plan which united all those ma.s.ses--for the period of one day. The ma.s.ses went to speak to the Tzar. They were faced by Ulans, cossacks, guards. Gapon"s plan had not prepared the workingmen for that. What was the result? They seized arms wherever they could, they built barricades.... They fought, though, apparently, they went to beg for mercy. This shows that they went _not to beg, but to demand_.
The proletariat of Petersburg manifested a degree of political alertness and revolutionary energy far exceeding the limits of the plan laid out by a casual leader. Gapon"s plan contained many elements of revolutionary romanticism. On January 9th, the plan collapsed. Yet the revolutionary proletariat of Petersburg is no romanticism, it is a living reality. So is the proletariat of other cities. An enormous wave is rolling over Russia. It has not yet quieted down. One shock, and the proletarian crater will begin to erupt torrents of revolutionary lava.
The proletariat has arisen. It has chosen an incidental pretext and a casual leader--a self-sacrificing priest. That seemed enough to start with. It was not enough to _win_.
_Victory_ demands not a romantic method based on an illusory plan, but revolutionary tactics. _A simultaneous action of the proletariat of all Russia must be prepared._ This is the first condition. No local demonstration has a serious political significance any longer. After the Petersburg uprising, only an all-Russian uprising should take place.
Scattered outbursts would only consume the precious revolutionary energy with no results. Wherever spontaneous outbursts occur, as a late echo of the Petersburg uprising, _they must be made use of to revolutionize and to solidify the ma.s.ses, to popularize among them the idea of an all-Russian uprising_ as a task of the approaching months, perhaps only weeks.
This is not the place to discuss the technique of a popular uprising.
The questions of revolutionary technique can be solved only in a practical way, under the live pressure of struggle and under constant communication with the active members of the Party. There is no doubt, however, that the technical problems of organizing a popular uprising a.s.sume at present tremendous importance. Those problems demand the collective attention of the Party.
[Trotzky then proceeds to discuss the question of armament, a.r.s.enals, clashes with army units, barricades, etc. Then he continues:]
As stated before, these questions ought to be solved by local organizations. Of course, this is only a minor task as compared with the political leadership of the ma.s.ses. Yet, this task is most essential for the political leadership itself. The organization of the revolution becomes at present the axis of the political leadership of revolting ma.s.ses.
What are the requirements for this leadership? A few very simple things: freedom from routine in matters of organization; freedom from miserable traditions of underground conspiracy; a broad view; courageous initiative; ability to gauge situations; courageous initiative once more.
The events of January 9th have given us a revolutionary beginning. We must never fall below this. We must make this our starting point in moving the revolution forward. We must imbue our work of propaganda and organization with the political ideas and revolutionary aspirations of the uprising of the Petersburg workers.
The Russian revolution has approached its climax--a national uprising.
The organization of this uprising, which would determine the fate of the entire revolution, becomes the day"s task for our Party.
No one can accomplish it, but we. Priest Gapon could appear only once.
He cherished extraordinary illusions, that is why he could do what he has done. Yet he could remain at the head of the ma.s.ses for a brief period only. The memory of George Gapon will always be dear to the revolutionary proletariat. Yet his memory will be that of a hero who opened the sluices of the revolutionary torrent. Should a new figure step to the front now, equal to Gapon in energy, revolutionary enthusiasm and power of political illusions, his arrival would be too late. What was great in George Gapon may now look ridiculous. There is no room for a second George Gapon, as the thing now needed is not an illusion, but clear revolutionary thinking, a decisive plan of action, a flexible revolutionary organization which would be able to give the ma.s.ses a slogan, to lead them into the field of battle, to launch an attack all along the line and bring the revolution to a victorious conclusion.
Such an organization can be the work of Social-Democracy only. No other party is able to create it. No other party can give the ma.s.ses a revolutionary slogan, as no one outside our Party has freed himself from all considerations not pertaining to the interests of the revolution. No other party, but Social-Democracy, is able to organize the action of the ma.s.ses, as no one but our Party is closely connected with the ma.s.ses.
Our Party has committed many errors, blunders, almost crimes. It wavered, evaded, hesitated, it showed inertia and lack of pluck. At times it hampered the revolutionary movement.
_However, there is no revolutionary party but the Social-Democratic Party!_
Our organizations are imperfect. Our connections with the ma.s.ses are insufficient. Our technique is primitive.
_Yet, there is no party connected with the ma.s.ses but the Social-Democratic Party!_
At the head of the Revolution is the Proletariat. At the head of the Proletariat is Social-Democracy!
Let us exert all our power, comrades! Let us put all our energy and all our pa.s.sion into this. Let us not forget for a moment the great responsibility vested in our Party: a responsibility before the Russian Revolution and in the sight of International Socialism.
The proletariat of the entire world looks to us with expectation. Broad vistas are being opened for humanity by a victorious Russian revolution.