# Where Did the Revolution Lead the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks?
Source: PSS, Volume 32

They led it to submission to the imperialists.

The offensive marks a resumption of the imperialist war. Nothing of substance has changed in the relationship between the two colossal alliances of capitalists locked in conflict with one another. Even after the revolution of February 27, Russia remained firmly under the absolute control of capitalists bound by old, pre‑revolutionary, tsarist secret treaties with Anglo‑French imperialist capital. The economic and political contours of the ongoing war remain the same as before: the same imperialist banking capital continues to dominate economic life; the same secret treaties endure, and the same foreign policy persists—aligning one group of imperialists against another.

The rhetoric of the Mensheviks and Socialist‑Revolutionaries has always been nothing more than empty phrases, which in practice merely sweeten the resumption of the imperialist war—a development that naturally elicits the rapturous cheers of approval from all counter‑revolutionaries, from the entire bourgeoisie, and from Plekhanov, who, as the Menshevik “Workers’ Gazette” puts it, is “a rooster straining to keep pace with the bourgeois press,” himself a mere rooster trailing behind the entire pack of social‑chauvinists.

We must not forget, however, the distinctive features of this particular, present-day resumption of the imperialist war. The offensive began after three months of hesitation, during which working‑class and peasant masses had repeatedly voiced their condemnation of the war of conquest (while, at the same time, continuing in practice to support the government of the predatory, plundering bourgeoisie in Russia). The masses wavered, as if on the verge of heeding the very advice they had been given in the appeal to the peoples of the world, issued on March 14 and addressed to foreign nations: “Refuse to serve as instruments of conquest and violence in the hands of the bankers.” Yet here at home, in “revolutionary‑democratic” Russia, the masses were in fact left as instruments of conquest and violence “in the hands of the bankers.”

The peculiarity of this situation lies in the fact that it was brought about under conditions of relatively great freedom for mass organization—freedom secured by the Socialist‑Revolutionary and Menshevik parties. It was these very parties that had, at that moment, won a majority: the All‑Russian Congress of Soviets and the All‑Russian Peasants’ Council had unequivocally demonstrated this.

It is precisely these parties that now bear responsibility for Russia’s policies.

It is precisely these parties that are responsible for the resumption of the imperialist war, for the hundreds of thousands of new victims—victims, in effect, sacrificed in the name of “vanquishing” some capitalists through the efforts of other capitalists—and for the renewed intensification of devastation, an outcome inevitably arising from the onset of hostilities.

Before us lay, in its purest form, the self‑deception of the petty‑bourgeois masses, deceived by the bourgeoisie through the agency of the Socialist‑Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks. In word, both parties claimed to represent “revolutionary democracy.” In deed, it was they—precisely they—who handed the fate of the people over to the counter‑revolutionary bourgeoisie, to the Cadets; it was they who turned away from the revolution toward the continuation of the imperialist war, from democracy toward “concessions” to the Cadets—in matters of power (take, for example, the “confirmation” from above of local authorities elected by the populace), in matters of land (the refusal, by both Mensheviks and Socialist‑Revolutionaries, to adhere to their own program—to support revolutionary peasant uprisings all the way to the confiscation of landed estates)—and in matters of national policy (the defense of the Cadets’ anti‑democratic stance toward Ukraine and Finland).

The petty‑bourgeois masses cannot help but vacillate between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. This has been true in every country, especially during the years 1789–1871. And so it remains in Russia. The Mensheviks and Socialist‑Revolutionaries led the masses into subordination to the politics of the counter‑revolutionary bourgeoisie.

This is the essence of the situation. This is the significance of the offensive. Herein lies the peculiarity: it was not violence, but rather a misplaced trust in the Socialist‑Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks that led the people astray.

For how long?

Not for long. The masses will learn through their own experience. The bitter lessons of this new (now begun) phase of the war—lessons drawn from the intensified devastation wrought by the offensive—will inevitably lead to the political collapse of the Socialist‑Revolutionary and Menshevik parties. The task of the proletarian party, first and foremost, is to help the masses recognize this experience and to appraise it correctly, to prepare themselves properly for this great collapse—which will reveal to the masses their true leader: the organized urban proletariat.

“Pravda,” No. 88, July 5 (June 22), 1917

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