How was a socialist state established? Explain
Answers
Answered by
1
At the time of the revolution in Russia in 1917, the Bolsheviks did not believe that socialism was possible in Russia alone, without a revolution in the more developed areas of Europe, especially Germany. As orthodox Marxists, they believed that only the proletarian class could create socialism — and the working class was a minority in Russia.
So their aim was to create mass power of the pleibean classes. This was the point to pushing the power of the soviets — which represented the workers, soldiers and peasants, but excluded the capitalist and landlord elites from political power. The idea was that the mass power of the soviets could hold on, excluding the capitalist parties like the Constitutional Democrats, til the revolution in the west absorbed Russia in a larger socialist federation.
However, after October 1917 they simply used the soviets as a kind of trampoline to jump themselves into control of a top down state machine.
Due to their fixation on state power being in the hands of a Marxist party — that is, them — they were focused on creating things like centralized state planning and top down control over the economy (‘one man management”). And because there were other working class left forces that disagreed with them, and pushing for more direct worker power (syndicalists, maximalists, etc) they ended up creating a repressive political party police (Cheka) which repressed their left working class opponents. Although the libertarian socialist groups (syndicalists, maximalists, Ukrainian anarchists) were mainly based on the working class, they believed that a peasant-worker alliance could build socialism in Russia — so they disagreed with this aspect of Bolshevik analysis.
The upshot of this was that the Bolsheviks laid the basis for the emergence of a new bureaucratic ruling class — a managerial boss class — military brass, elite planners, industrial managers, party apparatchiks, etc. — to which workers were subordinate.
Since a dominating, exploiting class over the working class is inconsistent with socialism, they did not create socialism at all.
MARK BRAINLIEST..
So their aim was to create mass power of the pleibean classes. This was the point to pushing the power of the soviets — which represented the workers, soldiers and peasants, but excluded the capitalist and landlord elites from political power. The idea was that the mass power of the soviets could hold on, excluding the capitalist parties like the Constitutional Democrats, til the revolution in the west absorbed Russia in a larger socialist federation.
However, after October 1917 they simply used the soviets as a kind of trampoline to jump themselves into control of a top down state machine.
Due to their fixation on state power being in the hands of a Marxist party — that is, them — they were focused on creating things like centralized state planning and top down control over the economy (‘one man management”). And because there were other working class left forces that disagreed with them, and pushing for more direct worker power (syndicalists, maximalists, etc) they ended up creating a repressive political party police (Cheka) which repressed their left working class opponents. Although the libertarian socialist groups (syndicalists, maximalists, Ukrainian anarchists) were mainly based on the working class, they believed that a peasant-worker alliance could build socialism in Russia — so they disagreed with this aspect of Bolshevik analysis.
The upshot of this was that the Bolsheviks laid the basis for the emergence of a new bureaucratic ruling class — a managerial boss class — military brass, elite planners, industrial managers, party apparatchiks, etc. — to which workers were subordinate.
Since a dominating, exploiting class over the working class is inconsistent with socialism, they did not create socialism at all.
MARK BRAINLIEST..
Similar questions