I made this account in part because of this TL. I love what is being done and can't wait to see how things turn, they're looking a little grim after all.
Rosa's Reich - Red Germany
- Thread starter GlobalHumanism
- Start date
War is not the time for internal squabbles!
And Eva Brodo should be sent to the tribunal for treason!
The Bolsheviks just in reality won and that they placed the interests of the revolution above the interests of party groupings (unlike some ...).
An attempt to convince a commander to arrange a coup in the face of an enemy offensive is a direct betrayal of the Revolution and deserves the highest penalty.
No. At least not OTL. The Russian civil war was as much a purge of the left as a civil war. It's true they waited for the whites to be dead to turn on some of their other allies, but not all of them. But you could say that it was just an extension of the civil war. By the time it was finished, there was really no pluralism left anywhere to be found. This is the only time any change is possible, because the Bolsheviks are autocratic in nature and will concentrate power further away from the people as time passes if nothing is done.
But you missed my point completely. Hearing "Do not revolt during war" in defense of the Bolsheviks is hilarious because they just did it to Russia.
The myth of the anarchists and the "new left" is actively replicated by the liberals. Before the Civil War, the Bolshevik Party showed one of the highest levels of internal democracy and freedom of discussion.
And somehow everyone forgets that firstly anarchists and Socialist-Revolutionaries themselves raised revolts. And secondly, that the anarchist and other leftist organizations operated in the RSFSR and other republics until 1923-1927 (the same majority of the Socialist-Revolutionaries eventually joined the RCP (b))
Between these wars the difference is gigantic. The Bolsheviks fought against the imperialist war, against the bourgeois state (with feudal survivals).
And here is literally a war of survival - neither Denikin, nor Clemenceau, nor Lloyd George, nor Kolchak are interested in preserving the Russian Republic of Soviets. On the southern front, the situation is critical - if Makhno (who is not the head of the Black Army that never existed, but the brigade commander of the 3rd Brigade of the First Ukrainian Soviet Division) decides to overthrow the command, he will not only weaken the front, but also provoke another civil war. In such conditions it is suicide, which means the defeat of the proletarian revolution in Russia.
That concentration of power wasn't immediate. But it's very clear it happened, or those groups wouldn't have disappeared completely. And internal democracy is a myth. Democratic centralism is dictatorship. You cannot have freedom of expression if you are only allowed to express it withing a single group because that group has all the tools in hand to shut you up anytime you disagree with it too much.
You're making my point for me. There is no "do not revolt during war" absolute, just things you should revolt against no matter what and things you shouldn't. I'm not sure which side of this we're in this time, because the Bolsheviks seem to be somewhat different and easier to work with long term, rather than just until it is no longer convenient for them. It's still the same people though, so you never know.
If the guy in charge is pushing everything off a cliff it makes sense to replace them with someone who is more competent. So far Lenin's strategy isn't working out and it's worth pointing out OTL when a similar drive was underway the Bolsheviks made the same overtures to Makhno's very real Black Army which played a decisive role in thwarting the drive on Moscow. The difference here is once Denikin is defeated (which seems likely since OTL the Makhnovists utterly trounced the Whites forcing them into retreat before finishing them off in Crimea) I could see a change in political fortunes happening in Russia which would, at the minimum, force Lenin to open up the governing coalition more and weaken the power of the Bolshevik Party. I don't think this is going to backfire the way people are saying it will seeing as OTL similar overtures ended with the Whites being driven off and ultimately routed.
That said I'm surprised there isn't more disruption going on in France and Britain regarding the increased interventions. OTL as-is French and British dockworkers staged wildcat strikes to disrupt the movement of supplies to Russia and French troops in Russia mutinied rather than fight. I wouldn't be surprised if Denikin's offensive runs out of steam simply because such a spanner flies into the works due to French overconfidence and pushing already mutinous, unhappy troops one step too far. Even the risk of proletarian revolution spreading isn't going to make the tensions that caused the French Army Mutiny to go away especially if supplies are getting disrupted by sympathy strikes in the rear.
That said I'm surprised there isn't more disruption going on in France and Britain regarding the increased interventions. OTL as-is French and British dockworkers staged wildcat strikes to disrupt the movement of supplies to Russia and French troops in Russia mutinied rather than fight. I wouldn't be surprised if Denikin's offensive runs out of steam simply because such a spanner flies into the works due to French overconfidence and pushing already mutinous, unhappy troops one step too far. Even the risk of proletarian revolution spreading isn't going to make the tensions that caused the French Army Mutiny to go away especially if supplies are getting disrupted by sympathy strikes in the rear.
If they're brought into the governing coalition and Makhno plays a larger role in the revolution that's going to be much less likely.
Firstly, the Bolsheviks suggested that all socialist parties join the Socialist Government, only the Left SRs agreed because "the Bolsheviks are illegitimate." Secondly, in the first days of the months of Soviet power, the Communists really relied on the political and cultural creativity of the masses. Thirdly, you do not know the dialectical method. Democratic centralism presupposes a free will, but taking into account responsibility to the collective and leadership.
That's before going into the knock-on effects of a German revolution that, by any outside observer's perspective, looks a lot like what the syndicalist movement was pushing for. Said movement was particularly strong in France but also had influence in Britain and with unrest now also spreading in Italy at the minimum there's going to be an uptick in strike actions, labor unrest and possibly some fresh attempts at revolt.
Doubly so if it looks like their governments are prolonging needless conflict in the name of crushing revolution. Such a policy would be comparable to tossing a match on a can of gasoline.
Responsibility to the leadership? What a load of feudal bullshit. The leadership is the one with a responsibility. And "the collective" is just a keyword for "the party". It is disagreement, not lack of knowledge. You can profess whatever you want, what matters is what you do, not what you put on the advert. Dogmatically repeating theory isn't going to make the practical results any different.
And as for joining the Bolsheviks, what they were offering was clearly a junior position, as shown by the way the basically absorbed the left SR. In the end, the Bolsheviks betrayed, absorbed or subordinated all the factions who chose to follow them. I have a lot less sympathy for the ones who left the soviets partway through, though I believe they only did so after the provisional assembly debacle and the Bolsheviks giving up on a peaceful transition of power.
On the other hand, the goverment and its allies are probably ramping up nationalist propaganda, using the "success" of WW1 to prop itself up. It will be a contest between the unions' influence and the states'. Fear mongering about the communists will probably win over most of the middle and upper class, so the workers will be the main battleground.
The communists may have more umph than expected especially since it was largely the working class that just died in droves in the name of national pride and a few meters of bloody, cratered mud. I'd also imagine, while the upper classes will rally quickly to stamp out anything with a whiff of Red Rebellion, some elements of the middle classes who had suffered as a result of the war may not respond as well to such propaganda. After all if the point of the war was to stop the German Hun and the Germans themselves seem to be doing a fine job of tearing down the Kaiser all on their own why would they want to continue with the fight? As long as the Revolution stays Over There I could see many of the middle classes putting more emphasis on concluding the struggle and moving on to the peace up until things get hot at home.
The US is another matter completely since there wasn't much in the way of a commitment to the war, no desire for troop deployments but also governments who were facing weaker union movements and were far more willing to deal with them with blood and lead. The US will be a steep hill to climb in this situation for the Socialists but I could definitely see serious upsets in Britain and France, at the minimum, derailing interventions in Russia and possibly hampering any attempts to intervene in Germany if nothing else because those governments will be calling troops home to put down strikes instead of putting down foreign Socialists.
That said if the Revolution sticks in Germany or even Italy that's going to have long-term butterfly effects. No German reparations means Britain and France are spending more to pay off their war debts to Wall Street and less at home. That, in turn, means less spending going on in the US, less means for Wall Street to extend the credit that made the 20s bubble possible, less prosperity and more people wondering openly if the Socialists totally had it right. On top of this is the problem of a Germany that's likely being shut out of Western markets so any money that was spent in US markets directly or indirectly won't be flowing there meaning less going to US businesses. You might not have the Great Depression as we know it but you also might not have the Roaring 20s and with no return of prosperity to pacify an increasingly unruly working class Socialist agitation will have a more fertile field to grow in. From there all it would take is a serious market upset (quite possible with all the loans running around) to put everything back to bread lines and barricades. This will be even more true if the successful revolutionaries in Germany and Russia don't do the unbelievably stupid move of demanding all Left parties outside of the revolutionary states toe the line as part of the Comintern allowing them more freedom to act, improvise and operate as best fits local conditions.
More focus at home means they have less means to impose Sykes-Picot, possibly even ensuring some of the Arab revolts succeed instead of being put down bloodily. Even if those revolts don't completely succeed having to crush them at greater cost means the whole enterprise is more costly, likely inspires similar revolts elsewhere and keeps Britain and France divided in their attentions. That's before going into what happens in Ireland which at this point OTL was a losing prospect for the British and a major drain on military capacity. Already there's too many fires with not enough trucks to put them all out and that's before taking into account the likely economic consequences of the postwar period.
Seriously, if Radek or someone tried to do this to Rosa he’d get the firing squad or the noose and deservedly so.
Precisely!
I will also note that the Mensheviks thereby discredit themselves.