Date: 1917
Source: ru:PSS/v31

1. Protocol Record

The materials submitted by our comrades regarding the activities of the Soviets, though incomplete, are nonetheless remarkably insightful. Perhaps this is the most significant body of information to emerge from the conference—a trove that enables us to test our slogans against the actual course of historical development. The picture that emerges leads us to draw optimistic conclusions. The movement began in the centers; for a time, the proletariat’s entire energy was devoted to struggle. A vast reservoir of energy was expended in the fight against autocracy. Through this struggle in Petrograd, the central state authority was overthrown. A colossal achievement was accomplished. Yet if this outcome resulted in the bourgeoisie seizing power, we must not draw pessimistic conclusions—nor should we fault the workers for failing to take power into their own hands. To suppose that, after just a few days of struggle, the masses could have seized power themselves would have been utopian. Such a feat was impossible so long as the bourgeoisie remained firmly in place, having been superbly prepared to assume control.

From the centers, the revolution now spreads to the localities. This is precisely what occurred in France—the revolution became municipal in character. In the provinces, the movement reveals that there, the majority stands with the peasantry and the working class; the influence of the bourgeoisie is minimal there, and the masses do not lose their way. The more data we gather, the clearer it becomes: the higher the proportion of proletarian elements within the population, and the fewer the intermediate strata, the better the revolution progresses at the local level. The comrades in Kazan approach the tasks of the socialist revolution with remarkable clarity. We see that where proletarian organizations are weak, the practical needs of the proletariat have nonetheless led to a perfectly accurate understanding of the revolutionary tasks at hand. Without such tools as statistics and the like, the proletarian revolution cannot be realized. For the proletarian revolution to succeed, engineers, technicians, and others must come under the practical oversight of the revolutionary proletariat. The revolution at the local level proceeded with remarkable ease. The danger of anarchism is ever present in times of revolution. But here, we have seen that…[56]

The bourgeois revolution cares little for production; here, however, the workers are deeply concerned with the means of production. The workers are invested in ensuring that output does not decline. The revolution at the local level advanced with giant strides. Reports from the field demonstrate that the sharper the class antagonisms, the more effectively the revolution moves forward—and the more surely the dictatorship of the proletariat is realized. The dictatorship of the proletariat is best exercised in small localities; the centers, in contrast, prove to be the least suited to driving the revolution forward.

There is absolutely no justification for pessimism. It is true that in the centers, collaboration with the bourgeoisie has begun. The bourgeoisie seeks, through its organizational prowess, to turn the proletariat into mere lackeys—reducing the workers to temporary participants in the projects the bourgeoisie is building. It is absurd to imagine that the Russian people derive their guiding principles from pamphlets alone. No, it is from direct, lived experience that the masses draw their vital lessons…[57] The people can forge these lessons through mass mobilization. The collective experience of the masses has begun to accumulate on its own…[58] In Penza Governorate, power was consolidated under the dictatorship of the peasantry. The representative from Penza presented resolutions passed by the peasants, who had taken control of the instruments of production and the land. Marx’s words are confirmed…[59] The program of the revolution is being carried out at the local level—to ensure that there is bread…[60] to enable the people themselves to establish their own connections. From this revolution, men and women of practice emerge. And only under the practical oversight of the localities can the revolution advance. Throughout Russia, where the peasantry constitutes an overwhelming majority, the course of the revolution fills us with profound hope.

After the centers lacked the strength to seize control of production, the provinces stepped in—where it proved far easier to accomplish this task. In the provinces, the revolution took on a municipal character, and it in turn spurred the centers onward; the latter, in turn, drew upon the experiences of the former.

The comrade coal miner once said that their first task, when…[61] they set out in search of bread… To think that this experience might be lost would be a mistake. Without this experience, the centers would have no impetus to launch a new revolution. A new revolution is gathering momentum. The unfolding of events, the devastation of daily life, the looming specter of famine—these are the forces that drive the revolution forward. From this arises the need to confront those elements that support the bourgeoisie. The situation is heading toward a collapse that the bourgeoisie will find itself utterly unable to withstand. We are preparing a new, multi-million-strong army—one that may make its mark in the Soviets, in the Constituent Assembly—but we do not yet know how. In the centers, we still lack the necessary strength. In the provinces, the balance of power tilts decisively in our favor. It is the very course of revolutionary development at the local level that propels us forward, that carries us along.

The people are not guided by any communist plans. The revolutionary class throughout Russia is gathering its strength—and our task is to collect this experience and, as our forces grow, to take the next step. We must not allow ourselves to be intimidated by the fact that the populists and Mensheviks enjoy such an overwhelming majority.

Based on our accumulated experience, we can now enshrine in our resolutions…[62] At the local level, we must take production into our own hands; otherwise, collapse is inevitable. The peasants will not provide bread. To secure bread, we must adopt revolutionary measures—measures that only the revolutionary class can implement, a class that must rely on the millions-strong masses.

I asked our comrades in the provinces how things were going with production at the local level.

In Nizhny Novgorod Governorate, the eight-hour workday was introduced, and production increased. This is the key. Without it, there is no way to emerge from ruin. To achieve this, we must labor with unprecedented intensity. We distinguish ourselves from the petty-bourgeois line. Life itself is at stake. The crisis cannot be resolved through the methods of petty-bourgeois democracy, for these methods falter before the adoption of revolutionary measures. (Shingarev, Milyukov.) The overall trajectory of the revolution shows that progress is being made.

Our difference from the petty bourgeoisie lies not in their advocacy of “caution” while we call for “speed”—rather, we advocate “even greater caution.” We must wage a relentless struggle against the game of statecraft…[63] Better late than early—and then the center will prevail. (Applause.)

First published in 1934 in the book “The Seventh (April) All‑Russian and Petrograd Citywide Conference of the RSDLP(b). April 1917.”

Printed from a typewritten copy of the protocol record.

2. Newspaper Report

Comrade Lenin pointed out that the French Revolution had passed through a phase of municipal revolution, consolidating itself in local self‑governance bodies that became its bedrock. In the Russian Revolution, we observe a certain degree of bureaucratic inertia in the centers, while the full potential of the power held by the Soviets is more fully realized at the local level in the provinces. The capital’s Soviets remain politically more dependent on the bourgeois central authorities than their provincial counterparts. In the centers, it is not so easy to assume direct control over production; in the provinces, this has already been partially achieved. From this, we draw the conclusion that the local Soviets of workers’, soldiers’, and peasants’ deputies must be strengthened. Progress in this regard is possible, above all, from the provinces.

“Pravda,” No. 42, May 10 (April 27), 1917.

Printed according to the text of the newspaper “Pravda.”