former (before November 1952) name of theoretical. and political magazine of the CPSU Central Committee "Communist".

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

BOLSHEVIKS

the most radical faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. According to V.I. Lenin, Bolshevism as a current of political thought and as a political party arose in 1903 at the Second Congress of the RSDLP. Disputes over ideological, theoretical, tactical and organizational issues split the party. The majority of the congress delegates supported V.I. Lenin during the elections of the central bodies of the party. His supporters began to be called Bolsheviks, and his opponents - Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks insisted that the struggle for the implementation of the bourgeois-democratic revolution was the immediate task of the party (minimum program) and that the real transformation of Russia was possible only if the socialist revolution won (maximum program). The Mensheviks believed that Russia was not ready for a socialist revolution, that at least 100-200 years would have to pass until the forces capable of carrying out socialist transformations matured in the country. The most important condition for building socialism, the Bolsheviks considered the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat as, in their opinion, the most progressive class, capable of protecting the interests of the entire society and directing revolutionary forces to build socialism. Their opponents pointed out that the establishment of a dictatorship of one class was contrary to democratic principles, citing the experience of the “old” European social democratic parties, whose programs did not talk about the dictatorship of the working class. The Bolsheviks believed that the victory of the bourgeois-democratic revolution was possible only under the condition of an alliance between the proletariat and the peasantry. Therefore, they insisted on including the basic demands of the peasants in the party program. The Menshevik leaders, citing the experience of revolutionary populism, exaggerated the conservatism of the peasantry (see “going to the people”), and argued that the main ally interested in the victory of the bourgeois-democratic revolution would be the liberal bourgeoisie, capable of taking power and governing the country. Therefore, they were against including the demands of the peasantry in the program and were ready to cooperate with the liberal part of the bourgeoisie. The special position of the Bolsheviks was also evident in the discussion on organizational issues. The Mensheviks contrasted the Bolshevik concept of the party as an illegal, centralized organization of professional revolutionaries shackled with iron discipline with their vision of an organization in which there was a place for everyone who shared social democratic ideas and was ready to support the party in various ways. This also reflected a line of cooperation with liberal forces, but the Bolsheviks recognized as party members only those who were directly and personally involved in revolutionary work. The split in the party hindered the revolutionary movement. In the interests of its development, the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks often joined forces, acted in the same organizations, coordinating their actions. They were called to this by the IV Unification Congress of the RSDLP (1906). However, joint activities in the merged organizations did not last long. In the conditions of a new revolutionary upsurge (1910-1919), each of the factions wanted to use party financial and propaganda means (the press) as efficiently as possible and for their own purposes. The final split occurred at the VI All-Russian (Prague) Conference of the RSDLP (January 1912), after which the Bolsheviks designated their separation from the Mensheviks with the letter “b” in parentheses after the abbreviated name of the party - RSDLP(b).

At one time, the RSDLP (Russian Social Democratic Labor Party), formed in 1989 at the Minsk Congress, suffered extremely unpleasant and numerous losses. Production was dying, the crisis completely engulfed the organization, forcing society in 1903 at the Second Congress in Brussels to split into two opposing groups. Lenin and Martov did not agree with the views of the membership management, so they themselves became leaders of associations, which later served as the reason for the formation of the abbreviations in the form of a small letter "b" and "m".

The history of the Bolsheviks is still covered in some mysteries and secrets, but today we have the opportunity to at least partially find out what happened during the collapse of the RSDLP.

What caused the discord?

It is impossible to find out in history the exact cause of the events that occurred. The official version of the split of the RSDLP there was a disagreement between the two sides regarding the solution of important organizational issues that were raised during the fight against the monarchical system of government and foundations. Both Lenin and Martov agreed that internal changes in Russia required a network of worldwide proletarian revolutions, especially in well-developed countries. In this case, you can only count on a wave of uprisings both in your native state and in countries that are lower in social level.

Despite the fact that the two sides had the same goal, the disagreement lay in the method of obtaining what was desired. Yuliy Osipovich Martov advocated the ideas of European countries, based on legal methods of obtaining power and rule. While Vladimir Ilyich argued that only through active actions and terror can one gain influence on the Russian state.

Differences between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks:

closed organization with strict discipline;
opposed democratic conditions.

Menshevik differences:

were guided by the experience of Western rule and supported the democratic foundations of society;
agrarian reforms.

In the end, Martov won the discussion, calling everyone to an underground and quiet struggle, which served to split the organization. Lenin called his people Bolsheviks, and Yuliy Osipovich made concessions, agreeing to the name “Mensheviks.” Many believe that this was his mistake, since the word Bolsheviks caused people associations with something powerful and huge. While the Mensheviks were not taken seriously because of considerations of something small and hardly so impressive.

It is unlikely that terms like “commercial brand”, “marketing” and “advertising” existed in those years. But only the ingenious name of the group that was invented led to popularity in narrow circles and obtaining the status of a trusted organization. Vladimir Ilyich’s talent, of course, manifested itself in those very moments when, with unpretentious and simple slogans, he was able to offer ordinary people outdated ones since the time of the French Revolution ideas of equality and brotherhood.

People were impressed by the loud words promoted by the Bolsheviks, the symbols that inspired strength and radicalism - the five-pointed star, sickle and hammer with red in the background immediately fell in love with a large number of residents of the Russian state.

Where did the money for the activities of the Bolsheviks come from?

When the organization split into several groups, there was an urgent need to raise additional finances to support their revolution. And the methods of obtaining the necessary money also differed between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. The difference between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks in this regard was their more radical and illegal actions.

If the Mensheviks came to the idea of a membership fee for the organization, then the Bolsheviks were not limited only to the contribution of participants, they did not disdain bank robberies. For example, in 1907, one of these operations brought the Bolsheviks more than two hundred and fifty thousand rubles, which greatly outraged the Mensheviks. Unfortunately, Lenin carried out a large number of such crimes on a regular basis.

But the revolution was not the only waste for the Bolshevik party. Vladimir Ilyich was deeply convinced that only people who were completely passionate about their work could bring good results to the revolution. This meant that the Bolshevik squad had to receive a guaranteed salary so that workers could perform their duties all day. Compensation in the form of monetary incentives supporters of radical views really liked it, so in a short period of time the party’s size increased noticeably, and the wing’s activities noticeably improved in quality.

In addition, significant expenses came from printing brochures and leaflets, which party accomplices tried to spread throughout the state in various cities during strikes and rallies. This also reveals a characteristic difference between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, since their funding was spent on completely different needs.

The ideas of the two parties became so different from each other and even contradictory that Martov’s followers decided not to take part in the Third Party Congress of the RSDLP. It took place in 1905 in England. Despite the fact that some Mensheviks took part in the First Russian Revolution, Martov still did not support armed uprisings.

Bolshevik ideas and principles

It seemed that people with such radical and significantly different views from democratic and liberal views could not have principles. The first time one could notice ideological glimpses and human morality in Lenin was before the outbreak of the First World War. At that time, the party leader lived in Austria and at the next meeting in Bern, he expressed his opinion about the brewing conflict.

Vladimir Ilyich is happy spoke out strongly against the war and everyone who supports it, since in this way they betrayed the proletariat. Therefore, Lenin was very surprised when it turned out that the majority of socialists supported military activity. The party leader tried to prevent a split between people and was very afraid of the Civil War.

Lenin used all his perseverance and self-organization so as not to relax discipline in the party. Another difference can be considered that the Bolsheviks went to their goals by any means. Therefore, sometimes Lenin could renounce his political or moral views for the good of his party. Similar schemes were often used by him to attract new people, especially among the poor layer of citizens. Sweet words about how their lives would improve after the revolution forced people to join the party.

In modern society, naturally, there is a lot of misunderstanding about who the Bolsheviks are. Some people present them as deceivers who were ready to make any sacrifice to achieve their goals. Some saw them as heroes who worked hard for the prosperity of the Russian state and to create better living conditions for ordinary people. In any case, the first thing to remember is the organization that wanted remove all ruling officials and put new people in their places.

Under slogans, beautiful brochures and promises that offered ordinary people to completely change the conditions of their lives - their faith in their own strength was so great that they easily received support from citizens.

The Bolsheviks were an organization of communists. In addition, they received part of the funding from German sponsors who benefited from Russia's withdrawal from the war. This significant amount helped the party develop in terms of advertising and PR.

It is worth understanding that in political science it is customary to call some organizations right or left. The left stands for social equality, and the Bolsheviks belonged to them.

Dispute at the Stockholm Congress

In Stockholm in In 1906 there was a congress of the RSDLP, where it was decided by the leaders of the two groups to try to find compromises in their judgments and meet each other halfway. It was clear that the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks had many tempting offers for each side, and everyone benefited from this cooperation. At first it seemed that everything was going well, and soon they even planned to celebrate the mutual rapprochement of the two rival parties. However, one issue that was on the agenda created some differences between the leaders and a debate began. The issue that caused Lenin and Martov to argue concerned the possibility of people joining parties and their contribution to the work of the organization.

Vladimir Ilyich believed that only full-fledged work and a person’s dedication to work could produce noticeable and significant results, while the Mensheviks rejected this idea.
Martov was confident that ideas and consciousness alone were enough for a person to be part of the party.

On the surface this question seems simple. Even without reaching agreement, it is unlikely that it can do much harm. However, behind this formulation one could discern the hidden meaning of the opinion of each of the party leaders. Lenin wanted an organization with a clear structure and hierarchy. He insisted on strict discipline and abandonment, which turned the party into something like an army. Martov brought everything down to the simple intelligentsia. After the vote was held, it was decided that Lenin's proposal would be used. In history, this meant the victory of the Bolsheviks.

The Mensheviks gaining political power and initiative

The February Revolution made the state weak. While all organizations and political parties were moving away from the coup, the Mensheviks were able to quickly find their bearings and direct their energy in the right direction. Thus, after a short period of time, the Mensheviks became the most influential and visible in the state.

It is worth noting that the Bolshevik and Menshevik parties did not take part in this revolution, therefore the uprising was a surprise to them. Of course, both of them assumed such a result in their immediate plans, but when the situation occurred, the leaders showed some confusion and lack of understanding of what to do next. The Mensheviks were able to quickly cope with inaction, and 1917 became the time for them when they were able to register as a separate political force.

And although the Mensheviks were experiencing their best time, unfortunately, many of Martov’s followers decided to go over to Lenin’s side. The consignment lost its most prominent figures, finding themselves in the minority before the Bolsheviks.

In October 1917, the Bolsheviks carried out a coup. The Mensheviks extremely condemned such actions, trying in every possible way to achieve their former control over the state, but everything was already useless. The Mensheviks clearly lost. And besides this, some of their organizations and institutions were dissolved by orders of the new government.

When the political situation became more or less calm, the remaining Mensheviks had to join the new government. When the Bolsheviks gained a foothold in government and began to more actively lead the main political places, persecution and struggle against political migrants of the former anti-Leninist wing began. Since 1919 it has been accepted decision to liquidate all former Mensheviks by shooting.

It is not for nothing that modern people associate the word “Bolshevik” with the bright symbolism of the proletariat “Hammer and Sickle”, since at one time they bribed a large number of ordinary people. It is now very difficult to answer the question of who the Bolsheviks are - heroes or swindlers. Everyone has their own point of view, and any opinion, whether supporting the policies of Lenin and the Bolsheviks or opposing the militant policies of communism, can be correct. It is worth remembering that this is all the history of our native state. Whether their actions are wrong or reckless, they still need to be known.

party menshevik bolshevik democracy

Both the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks were supporters of democratic centralism with an emphasis on the second part of this concept. But if the Bolsheviks gravitated toward a strictly disciplined party with a single leader, built on the principle of unconditional subordination of each lower organization to a higher one and somewhat reminiscent of the spiritual knightly orders of the Middle Ages, then the ideal of the Mensheviks was the socialist parties of the Second International. In 1905, both factions of the RSDLP embarked on the path of democratization of their statutory norms, and the Mensheviks expanded the rights of local organizations much more than the Leninists. It is characteristic that after the unification in 1906, the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks began to be guided by the new party charter, the first paragraph of which, with a list of the duties of a party member, was now formulated in the Leninist spirit, i.e. demanded the personal participation of each party member in the work of one or another party organization (in the charter of 1903, at the suggestion of Martov, it was written that each party member must provide it with “regular personal assistance under the leadership of one of its organizations”).

Unlike the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks were much more tolerant of different shades of views within their ranks. They did not have a single leader, and within the faction there were always several movements and groupings that carried on quite heated debates among themselves. As one of the prominent Mensheviks, G.Ya. Aronson, later recalled, “the organizational framework of the RSDLP (in its Menshevik part) has always been extremely fragile. The element of coercion in Menshevism (the so-called party discipline, etc.) even during the period of legality and semi-legality had almost no real force. The concepts of hierarchy, subordination, especially authoritarianism and leaderism, were in no way characteristic of Menshevism.”

The founder of Menshevism, its ideologist and historian, the soul and conscience of this movement, which in the course of its evolution became one of the forms of “democratic socialism”, was Yu.O. Martov (1873-1923). Prominent Mensheviks were also P.B. Axelrod, F.I. Dan, I.G. Tsereteli, A.N. Potresov, A.S. Martynov, P.P. Maslov, N.S. Chkheidze, N.N. Zhordania. A special position was occupied by G.V. Plekhanov, whose views never completely coincided with Menshevism and who in 1917 headed the independent social democratic organization “Unity”. As for L.D. Trotsky, in 1903-1904. he was an ardent Menshevik, but then became a typical centrist, taking positions intermediate between Bolshevism and Menshevism and joining Lenin’s party in 1917.

The limited documentary base and the above-mentioned complexity of inter-factional relationships in the RSDLP, which often did not allow us to draw a clear boundary between the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks, make it extremely difficult to clearly define the quantitative and ethno-social parameters of Menshevism. It is known, for example, that in the spring of 1907 there were about 45 thousand Mensheviks in Russia, and the main centers of Menshevism were Tiflis, St. Petersburg, Kyiv, Moscow, and if we take large regions, then the South and West of European Russia and Transcaucasia. Among the Menshevik delegates to the V Congress of the RSDLP (1907), who were elected in the most democratic way in the pre-revolutionary period, there were 34% Russians, 29% Georgians and 23% Jews. Among the Menshevik delegates to the same congress there were 32% workers, and only 1% peasant farmers, while all the rest belonged to the intelligentsia or were professional revolutionaries. Of course, the ethnosocial composition of the Mensheviks as a whole might not coincide with the data given above, but these figures, in the absence of others, still give a certain idea of it.

For comparison, we point out that, according to the same mandate commission of the V Congress of the RSDLP, among the Bolshevik delegates there were 78% Russians and 11% Jews, 36% workers and not a single peasant farmer. At the same time, the Mensheviks were slightly ahead of the Bolsheviks in the number of delegates with higher and secondary education (61 and 52%, respectively), as well as in the length of underground work and average age.

In 1917, after Social Democracy emerged from underground, both the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks quickly became mass parties. The number of Mensheviks then reached 200 thousand people (the Bolsheviks had approximately 350 thousand members in October 1917). However, the share of workers in the ranks of the Mensheviks did not change significantly: at the August, purely Menshevik congress, worker delegates made up only 22%, i.e. even less than ten years earlier, at the V Congress of the RSDLP.

For a long time it was generally accepted that among the proletarians the Mensheviks relied mainly on the “labor aristocracy” prone to opportunism. However, the vagueness of this concept in relation to Russia and the party-political heterogeneity of this micro-social layer, which gave supporters to the RSDLP, the Cadets, and even the Black Hundreds, forced historians to abandon such a simplified scheme. It would be more correct to say that the Mensheviks were drawn to that part of the literate, socially active and politicized workers who wanted to implement the Marxist revolutionary doctrine, using a minimum of violence and a maximum of legal opportunities and relying primarily on the consciousness and initiative of the working masses themselves, and not on the actions of a narrow group of professional revolutionaries (it is no coincidence that they were supporters of the Menshevik slogans of revolutionary self-government, a workers' congress, etc.). Among the Menshevik workers, the so-called “worker intelligentsia” predominated, but there were also middle peasant workers among them, and even some low-skilled workers who were able to be carried away by one or another local Menshevik leader. Moreover, the absolute majority of them were not social reformists of the Western European persuasion, but moderate revolutionaries, especially since the extremely inflexible policy of the tsarist authorities and the bulk of Russian entrepreneurs on the labor issue did not at all contribute to the “taming” of the proletariat and the abandonment of the revolution.

Very indicative in this regard are the data on group workers’ donations to the Bolshevik, Menshevik and Socialist Revolutionary press in 1913. The Bolsheviks were in the lead in this competition, since they accounted for approximately 70% of the more than three thousand such collective collections, compared to 21% for Mensheviks and 9% among the Socialist Revolutionaries. At the same time, the Menshevik newspaper “Luche” was most popular among miners (51% of receipts), followed by metalworkers and printers (26% each) and workers of railway depots and workshops (24%), while among textile workers the Mensheviks received only 9% of receipts.

However, the bulk of the Mensheviks were radically minded intellectuals (doctors, journalists, teachers, lawyers, etc.), students, and office workers. This situation was the result of the Russian specificity of the process of combining Marxist ideology with the mass workers' movement. It took place under the undivided leadership of the Social Democratic intelligentsia, which, due to the low level of general and political culture of the workers, immediately seized leading positions in the RSDLP, and the Bolsheviks here were not much different from the Mensheviks. What we know today about the Menshevik intelligentsia leaves a dual impression: on the one hand, it was distinguished by high moral qualities, unselfishness, dedication, common sense, and good knowledge of Marxist theory; on the other hand, increased ambition, personal rivalry, rapid changes of mood, a certain gap between word and deed. These contradictory features largely determined the face of Menshevism as a whole, which in its practical political activities was noticeably inferior to Bolshevism, which was distinguished by immeasurably greater cohesion, ideological monolithicity, discipline, and the ability to take into account the sentiments of the working and peasant masses and kindle their rebellious instincts.

Let us now see what the program, strategy and tactics of Menshevism and Bolshevism were, what their political slogans looked like and how they saw the immediate and more distant future of Russia.

Mensheviks.

Menshevism, a current within Marxism and the Russian labor movement, occupied a prominent place on the left flank of the liberation movement in Russia. The final separation of the Mensheviks into the Social Democratic Party occurred in the spring of 1917. History of political parties in Russia: textbook. for university students; Ed. A. I. Zeveleva. P. 216. The leader of the Mensheviks was Yu. O. Martov. The main support of Menshevism in the proletarian movement was the labor aristocracy.

In their practical activities, the Mensheviks, like the Bolsheviks, adhered to the RSDLP program, consisting of two parts: a minimum program (the period of overthrow of the autocracy) and a maximum program (socialist revolution, dictatorship of the proletariat, destruction of classes).

To resolve the land issue, a “municipalization” program was developed, according to which confiscated lands would be transferred to the ownership of local governments elected on a democratic basis. There was a rational grain here, because Russia has long needed an end to brutal centralization and state intervention in all spheres of public life. But, despite this, the main question of interest to the peasants at that time was not addressed: when and under what conditions will they receive the landowner’s land? Therefore, the Menshevik plan was quite vulnerable.

Unlike the Bolsheviks, Martov’s supporters assigned only a relative role to the proletariat and declared that after the overthrow of the autocracy, workers should have no claims to power.

Thus, the Menshevik party had a noticeable, enormous success among the population, but still some nuances (uncertainty in resolving private issues, blurred time boundaries in relation to solving main, pressing problems, etc.) gave other parties with more opportunities a chance to compete with it. an attractive program, for example, of the RSDLP(b) party.

Bolsheviks.

The formation of the Bolshevik Party occurred as a result of the split of the Social Democrats at the Second Congress of the RSDLP. Right there. P. 260. The ideological leader of the Bolsheviks was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.

The political program of the Bolsheviks, like the Mensheviks, consisted of a minimum program and a maximum program. The goals of the first were the elimination of autocracy, the establishment of a democratic republic, the introduction of political freedoms, the second - the implementation of a socialist revolution, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the socialist reorganization of society on the basis of public ownership of the tools of labor and means of production. A distinctive feature of the Bolshevik policy was that the workers were assigned not just the role of a class capable of raising the people to revolution, but the role of the leading class, which should become at the helm of power after the revolution. This attracted the broad working class to join the ranks of the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks relied on revolutionary, violent methods of struggle, a rapid transition to socialism, and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The party program provided for the following reforms on the labor issue: the establishment of an 8-hour working day, the prohibition of overtime work, child labor, the creation of trade unions, and state insurance of workers.

And with regard to the peasants, the Bolsheviks pursued a very attractive policy, long awaited by the masses, of confiscating landowners' lands without redemption payments and providing a guarantee of the return of previously paid amounts.

The underground organizations of like-minded Bolsheviks were a huge help to the RSDLP(b) due to their organization and ability to lead the masses and push them in the right direction.

Thus, the RSDLP(b) supported any opposition and revolutionary movement directed against the existing social and political system in Russia.

Based on the foregoing, one can judge what alternative political forces have developed for the people so that they have the opportunity, summarizing their own views, to join a certain party. The fact that such alternatives are widespread (multi-party system) became noteworthy. Here the main parties were: Socialist Revolutionaries, Mensheviks, Cadets and Bolsheviks. Each expressed its vision of the further development of Russia, theoretically based its goals and objectives, and fought to gain power.

Having received general information about the history of the development of political parties, it is easier to approach the study of deeper issues relating to the existence and activities of parties in a certain period of time.

The situation in the country in the fall of 1917 contributed to the success of the armed uprising. Here we should take into account the political system and the balance of political forces that emerged after the February Revolution.

The paralysis of power became increasingly obvious. From March to October, the government experienced three crises. The first occurred due to Miliukov’s statement of his intention to wage the war to a victorious end together with the allies; it literally excited the people, who were expecting an end to the cruel, long, bloody, overwhelming war. And it became a kind of death sentence for the Cadet party; every day they lost their authority among the people. However, the goals for which the Cadets considered it necessary to continue the war were purely patriotic, aimed at bringing Russia closer to Western democratic countries with the help of the Entente allied powers, and at raising the country’s authority to the level of a Great Power.

The Mensheviks, who carried out anti-war propaganda at the beginning of their activities, after February began to admit the possibility of waging war. They explained this by the fact that Russia was waging a defensive war, and in Germany’s victory they saw a deterioration in Russia’s economic situation and the growth of a reactionary sector.

The war also contributed to the process of disintegration of the Socialist Revolutionary Party. Some called for withdrawal from the war, others supported defencist policies. The party leader was of the opinion that peace without annexations and indemnities could be achieved only through the united efforts of the working people. Therefore, they set the task of uniting the socialist forces scattered by the war. Defenders presented their arguments in support of the war. This is the fact that with the victory of Germany, Russia will become its colony, and this will lead to stagnation in the economy, and the fact that this victory will have the hardest impact on the working people, because they will have the role of paying indemnities. Such disagreements, naturally, did not cause approval among the people.

The Cadet government declares that only a military dictatorship can save Russia from anarchy. The masses were outraged by the participation of the Cadet leadership in the counter-revolutionary putsch, and not only the workers, but also members of this party were dissatisfied with this policy of the “tops”. Realizing the complexity and doom of their condition, the cadets prioritize the fight against the Bolsheviks and come to the conclusion that it is necessary to conduct propaganda not only among civilians, but also among soldiers in order to reduce the significance of Bolshevik active agitation. But this decision was made too late; the army was almost completely on the side of the Bolsheviks and was revolutionary.

Meanwhile, the Socialist Revolutionary Party continued to search for a unified direction in politics (attitude to war, the agrarian question, etc.) and disagreements led the party to a crisis, which occurred in the fall of 1917. In many ways, the decomposition and disorganization of the party was facilitated by weakness, lack of will and timidity to stand up the helm of power of the leader of the Socialist Revolutionaries - V. M. Chernov.

The blurriness and uncertainty of politics, the attempt to postpone the solution of the main problems tormenting society, played a tragic role for all these parties.

After the Kornilov rebellion, disagreements also increased in the ranks of the Mensheviks. They were frightened by the fact that democratic power in Russia was still fragile and shaky. It got to the point that even the Central Committee of the party spoke out against the Cadets, who they wanted to expel from the government, their recent allies.

The Third Coalition Government was created, which, in spite of everything, included even the Cadets. However, his policies were ineffective and unable to maintain the trust of the masses.

Thus, the main parties that formed the opposition to the Bolsheviks, pursuing a policy aimed at developing a compromise, not only did not receive the support of the population, they also, without wanting this, of course, turned the masses against themselves.

Crises of power showed that of the possible alternatives (strengthening democracy, carrying out liberal democratic reforms; establishing a military dictatorship with a further revival of the monarchy; establishing a dictatorship of extremely revolutionary parties to implement radical changes), by the fall the latter had become the most realistic.

Therefore, on the night of October 25-26, 1917, an armed uprising led by the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet and begun by decision of the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b) on October 10 was victorious in Petrograd. Maksimov Yu. I. Sample tickets and answers on history for preparing graduates of general education institutions. - M.: Bustard, 2005. P. 46. The revolution was a consequence of a crisis that worsened literally day by day. Political parties that were supposed to form a serious opposition to the Bolsheviks were in a state of crisis. They were not prepared for the fact that the Bolsheviks would turn out to be their main, strongest rivals in the struggle for power.

According to the “History of Social Movements and Political Parties”

TOPIC: “Historical split of the RSDLP. Bolsheviks and Mensheviks"

Prepared by: 1st year student,

Group No. 2

Checked:

Minsk 2004

MENSHEVISM.

A prominent place on the left flank of the liberation movement in Russia was occupied by Menshevism - a movement within Marxism and the Russian labor movement, a faction of the RSDLP, and then, from the spring of 1917, an independent Social Democratic Party.

As already noted, Menshevism was born as a result of a split that occurred first among the delegates of the second congress of the RSDLP (June-August 1903), and then in emigrant groups and social democratic organizations in Russia itself. Its harbingers were the appearance at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries of the so-called economists and disagreements on programmatic and tactical issues within the editorial office of the Marxist newspaper Iskra. Supporters of “economism,” in particular, believed that the primary task of Russian Marxists was to help the economic struggle of the proletariat and participate in the opposition activities of liberals. They proclaimed the slogan “workers for workers” and called for them to fight not for the sake of future generations, but “for themselves and their children.”

However, at the final stage of the 2nd Congress of the RSDLP in London, the delegates of the congress “stumbled” on organizational issues (conditions of party membership; elections of the new editorial staff of Iskra and the Central Committee of the RSDLP), dividing into supporters of Lenin - the Bolsheviks and supporters of Martov (Yulia Osipovich Tsiderbaum ) - Mensheviks. At the same time, at the beginning one got the impression that everything that happened was the result of some tragic misunderstandings and clashes of personal ambitions of the party leaders, that something similar had already happened more than once in the 11th International and that everything would “form” soon. However, as the conflict developed, it became obvious that it was based on deep and very serious reasons: different views on the proletarian party and its role in the labor movement, different approaches to the issue of the mechanism of social development and the prospects for the implementation of the socialist ideal in Russia, different attitudes towards the very Marxist teaching. To this we must add numerous tactical differences, which became especially clear during the revolution. and in the subsequent period.

The natural pluralism of approaches to solving all issues, multiplied by the differences in the individual, social and national psychology of participants in the revolutionary movement, as well as the extreme inconsistency and complexity of Russian reality, largely explains the incredible severity of the factional struggle within the RSDLP, which began in the summer of 1903.

The generators of internal party struggle were, as a rule, small emigrant colonies of Russian Marxists scattered throughout the cities of Western Europe, with their narrow group interests, petty squabbles and squabbles, which inevitably left their mark on the resolution of all fundamental issues. At the same time, first the factional divide passed through intellectual circles, and then through the working class environment, which was drawn into the conflict with great internal resistance and tried with all its might to maintain the unity of the party, so necessary for the fight against the autocracy and the bourgeoisie. Workers often did not understand the essence of the disagreements that arose or considered them completely secondary, placing responsibility for the split on the party intelligentsia.

Both factions (during the period of the split) published “accusatory” literature directed against their recent comrades in the struggle, and sent emissaries to Russia to win over the local committees of the RSDLP to their side. At the same time, the Mensheviks, with the help of Plekhanov, managed to gain a foothold in the editorial office of Iskra, gain two seats in the Party Council and achieve representation at the Amsterdam Congress of the 11th International (1904). Many major figures of the international socialist movement were on their side, including Kautsky and Rosa Luxemburg.

After the 11th Congress of the RSDLP, the issue of party building was brought to the fore. The Mensheviks believed that German Social Democracy could be taken as a model of a workers' party. The RSDLP, according to Axelrod, is still a proletarian party only in name and program, but not at all in the composition of its organizations, where intellectuals set the tone. If in the West, Axelrod wrote, the processes of self-development and self-education of the working class prevail, then in Russia the influence of the workers of the radical intelligentsia, united in an organization of professional revolutionaries, takes on a special role. At the same time, the entire Social Democratic Party turns into a pyramid built on a strictly hierarchical principle, at the top of which stand the party “chief leaders”, and at the bottom there are disenfranchised ordinary members, a kind of “cogs” and “wheels”, which are disposed of at the personal discretion of the omnipresent leading center.

An even more gloomy forecast of the uncontrolled management of the party of the Central Committee of the Leninist type was given by Plekhanov, who in November 1903 went over to the side of the Mensheviks. He predicted, in particular, that the Bolshevik Central Committee would plant its creatures everywhere and secure for itself at the new congress a completely obedient majority, which would unanimously shout “Hurray!” and will approve any of his plans and actions.

By the way, the Mensheviks themselves were also avid centralists at that time, they were not particularly tolerant of the opinions of the Bolsheviks and were clearly in no hurry to form party committees based on elections “from below” with the participation of workers. The Mensheviks moved very slowly towards the model of democratic socialism that was later associated with Menshevism. At the same time, the following situation arose: when the revolutionary movement was on the rise, the Mensheviks, trying to keep up with the sentiments of the workers, also began to speak and act “in the Bolshevik way,” and, conversely, during the decline of the revolution, the Bolsheviks, although belatedly, took on weapons of political realism and reasonable caution of their rivals.

In addition, the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks had different types of social behavior. The former were characterized, for example, by great prudence and caution in actions, rapid changes of mood, lack of volition, and moral scrupulousness. The latter were distinguished by a certain straightforwardness of views and actions, impatience and assertiveness, great self-confidence, a tendency to command methods of leadership, and indiscriminateness in the means of achieving the goal. Of course, these differences cannot be absolute, but the noted psychological traits can be quite clearly traced in the example of ordinary members of both factions of the RSDLP and especially their leaders.

Gradually, disagreements between the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks began to spread to the area of tactics. At the end of 1904, Iskra, on the initiative of the greatest tactician of Menshevism, Axelrod (later Plekhanov also identified with him), invited its supporters in Russia to support the zemstvo and city liberal-democratic opposition by organizing workers’ demonstrations and speeches by social-democratic speakers at banquets. In contrast to the Bolsheviks, who recognized only one way for revolutionaries to influence liberals - merciless, furious criticism, the Mensheviks sincerely sought to build bridges between participants in the liberation movement.

Thus, by 1905, Menshevism approached as a fully formed political movement with its own ideological and organizational center (the editorial office of Iskra), its own newspaper, special factional discipline and at least several thousand supporters. In 1905, Lenin was forced to admit that “the Mensheviks have more money, more literature, more transport, more agents, more names, more employees.”

It would seem that things were moving towards the final formation in Russia of two independent Marxist workers' parties. However, under the influence of the rise of the revolution and the sentiments of ordinary Social Democrats from the working class, this process seemed to go backwards: from the summer of 1905. A strong unification movement began among the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, and the joint congress scheduled for December was prevented only by a powerful wave of strikes and armed uprisings that swept through many regions of the country at that time. At the same time, the united Central Committee of the RSDLP was created. In April 1906, at the fourth congress of the RSDLP, the long-awaited, but, as it turned out, largely formal unification of the main part of Russian social democrats took place, including the Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, the Jewish Bund, the Social Democracy of Poland and Lithuania, as well as the Latvian Social Democracy. But even after this, the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks continued to exist as independent factions, or more precisely, semi-parties, within the framework of the apparently united RSDLP.

Data on numbers in underground conditions are purely indicative, since until the spring of 1917. the RSDLP did not even have party cards. However, taking as a basis the materials of the mandate commission of the fifth congress of the RSDLP, we can assume that in the spring of 1907 there were about 45 thousand Mensheviks in Russia, and the main centers of Menshevism were Tiflis (up to 5 thousand), St. Petersburg (2.8 thousand) , Kyiv (2 thousand), Moscow, Kutaisi, Yuzovka (approximately 1.5 thousand each), Baku, Ekaterinoslav, Poltava, Gorlovka (1 thousand each), Rostov-on-Don (0.7 thousand)

Data on the national and social composition of the Menshevik delegates to the fifth congress of the RSDLP are also indicative (37% Russians, 29% Georgians, 23% Jews, 6% Ukrainians, among the Bolsheviks - Russians - 78%, Jews - 11%). Workers among the Mensheviks of the same congress were 32%, and peasant landowners - 1% (among the Bolsheviks - none), writers - 19% (14% among the Bolsheviks), persons of intelligent "liberal" professions - 13%, students and trade -industrial employees – 5% each.

The Mensheviks were drawn to that part of the literate, socially active and politicized workers who wanted to implement the Marxist revolutionary doctrine, using a minimum of violence and a maximum of legal opportunities, relying on the consciousness and initiative of the working masses themselves, and not on the actions of a narrow group of professional revolutionaries. Among the Menshevik workers, the so-called “worker intelligentsia” predominated, but there were also middle peasant workers among them, and even some low-skilled workers who were able to be carried away by one or another local Menshevik leader.

The most favorable period for the growth of reformist sentiments among the workers was the period that came after the defeat of the revolution, especially the time of the pre-war industrial boom, when more and more features began to appear in the proletarian movement in Russia that brought it closer to the labor movement in the West. Of great interest from this point of view are data on workers’ fees for the publication and distribution of Bolshevik, Menshevik and Socialist Revolutionary party press in 1913, which marked the peak in the development of Russian capitalism. Of the 3.1 thousand collective contributions, the Mensheviks account for 21%, compared to 70% for the Bolsheviks and 9% for the Socialist Revolutionaries. The most popular was the mensch. The newspaper "Luch" was owned by the miners (51% of the proceeds), followed by metalworkers and printers (26% each) and workers of railway depots and workshops (24%), while the Mensheviks received only 9% from the textile workers.

Program, strategy and tactics of the Mensheviks.

According to the program adopted at the Second Congress of the RSDLP in 1903, both factions of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party set as their goal a revolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism, which would, in their opinion, ensure the well-being and comprehensive development of all members of society and eliminate its division into classes and eliminate the exploitation of man by man. The path to socialism was supposed to begin with the proletarian revolution and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat - the most organized class of society, associated with large-scale machine production and sharing the basic socialist principles, called upon, through its Marxist party, to govern the state during the entire transition period from capitalism to a new social system. Dictatorship was necessary to suppress the resistance of the exploiting classes leaving the historical arena. The proletarian revolution was conceived as a phenomenon on a global scale. Marx, Engels, and after them the theorists of the 2nd International believed that it would take place at short intervals in all developed European countries.

However, before solving the tasks that were part of the maximum program of the RSDLP, it was necessary to complete the minimum program: to achieve the establishment of a democratic republic in Russia and put an end to all remnants of serfdom. Transfer landowners' land to peasants, eliminate national oppression and give all peoples the right to decide their own future fate (the right to self-determination). The Social Democrats promised to improve the situation of workers: an 8-hour working day, state insurance for illness and old age, the elimination of the fine system, etc. All citizens of Russia were to gain freedom of speech, assembly and unions.

The program developed by the editors of the newspaper Iskra was adopted almost unanimously at the second congress of the RSDLP, even before the split. In 1906, at the 4th Congress - a revision (minor initiative) of the agrarian part of the program, it was about the transfer of landowners', state-owned, appanage and monastic lands to the disposal of democratically elected local governments without specifying the specific mechanism of peasant land use. In addition, in the last years before the World War, the Mensheviks showed a certain shift towards recognizing the demand for cultural-national extraterritorial autonomy for national minorities. However, this was not officially included in the RSDLP program.

The strategy and tactics of the Mensheviks were based on the following basic principles:

1. The Marxist workers' party sets itself only those practical tasks for the solution of which objective conditions are ripe, and therefore does not strive for a premature seizure of power or participation in it, preferring to remain in the role of the extreme left opposition at the democratic stage of the revolution (in May 1917. they moved away from this principle by joining the Provisional Government)

2. The socialist revolution in Russia is a matter of a very distant future and can only be accelerated by the victory of the proletariat in the West.

3. The national front of the struggle against autocracy must also include the liberal bourgeoisie, whose opposition potential is far from being exhausted

4. The peasantry, with its private property instincts and tsarist illusions, cannot be a reliable long-term ally of the proletariat in a democratic revolution, not to mention a socialist revolution, although it is capable of making a significant contribution to the weakening of the autocratic system.

5. the working class acts as the main force of the revolution, its initiator and example for other democratic strata of society.

6. The party’s tactics are based on the political situation in the country and provide for the possibility of using all forms of struggle, including violent ones, although preference is given to legal activities in the Duma, trade unions, cooperation, etc. The expropriation of funds for the needs of the revolution and political terrorism are morally - ethical considerations are considered unacceptable.

Rejecting any form of political extremism and adventurism, the Mensheviks tried to act through constructive dialogue with any possible ally from the revolutionary or liberal camp. However, in the Russian political arena, the Mensheviks until the spring of 1917. did not meet with understanding either from the liberals or from the neo-populists.

The revolutionary practice of Menshevism in

Revolution raised the activities of the Mensheviks to a qualitatively new level, allowing them to emerge from underground and take an active part in the leadership of the mass movement, as well as the councils of workers' deputies, in the activities of the State Duma, many trade unions and other legal organizations. They paid great attention to the leadership of the strike movement, including strikes on economic grounds. As for the villages, the successes of the Mensheviks were small: there was neither strength nor money for work among the peasantry, and the rural world itself remained alien and incomprehensible to the Mensheviks. With the exception of the Ukrainian “Spilka”, which successfully operated in the countryside and was closely connected with the Mensheviks.

Regarding armed uprisings, the Mensheviks believed that the Social Democrats would still not be able to arm everyone who wanted them, uprisings broke out spontaneously, and therefore it was necessary to prepare the masses for them psychologically and politically. Everything else is the work of a small group of people specially designated by the party who will be involved in the military-technical preparation of the uprising.

At the same time, they did not shy away from specific military-combat work. Iskra published in 1905. materials with practical advice on how to conduct street battles with government troops. In addition, during the days of the Moscow December uprising of 905. Among the 1.5 - 2 thousand vigilantes there were about 250 Mensheviks. Subsequently, the Mensheviks treated the prospect of an uprising rather coolly, although in July 1906 at some point they again succumbed to rebel sentiments, which very soon died out.

The main direction of the Mensheviks' activity was ideologically organized work among the proletarian masses. Awaken the consciousness of workers, increase the level of their political culture, stimulate initiative and creative activity.

The struggle of currents within Menshevism during the inter-revolutionary period

M. experienced the victory of the counter-revolution very hard. Their ranks were greatly thinned, their organizations disintegrated, and many of them were forced to emigrate again. A mood of apathy, despondency, and disappointment in revolutionary ideals reigned. Under these conditions, among the less ideologically stable part of the Mensheviks, a desire arose to break with underground work forever, to gain a foothold in legal organizations at any cost and wait there until better times. Supporters of this trend were called “liquidators” (Potresov, Axelrod, Levitsky, Cherevanin, Gavri, etc.)

The leaders of the Menshevik faction, Martov and Dan, and the official foreign organ of Menshevism, the newspaper “Voice of the Social Democrat,” did not share the extremes of “liquidationism,” they understood that they could not do without an underground organization, but they did not question organizational unity with the liquidators. At the same time, small groups of Mensheviks (under the leadership of Plekhanov), who were called Menshevik Party members, spoke out against the liquidators and demanded to preserve the illegal Social Democratic Party at any cost. As for Trotsky, he called for the elimination of factionalism and the unity of all currents of the RSDLP. This idea was the basis for the formation of a bloc consisting of several social democratic organizations - the August Bloc.

As a result, Menshevism approached the beginning of the First World War, having largely lost its previous positions in the labor movement, in particular in the trade unions. His direction was clearly visible, the desire to imitate the European labor movement and give priority to legal proletarian organizations.

The Mensheviks did not have time to take any active part in the stormy and fleeting events of February 1917. However, the revolution quickly brought them to the forefront of political life: they seized leading positions in the executive committee of the Petrograd Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, which largely determined the political situation in the country at that time, and in May 1917 became part of the coalition Provisional Government.

In May 1917, the All-Russian Conference of Menshevik and United Organizations of the RSDLP was held in Petrograd, and in August - a unification congress, at which the creation of the RSDLP (united) was proclaimed, although even after that several separate movements remained in the ranks of the Mensheviks: the right, led by Potresov, centrist - Tsereteli, and left - Martov.

The Mensheviks did not succumb to the temptation to irresponsibly promise millions of people a socialist paradise on earth, knowing that Russia was clearly not ready for such an experiment.

As a result, M., while maintaining their doctrinal purity, found themselves “out of the game” in the historical days of October 1917. War and devastation, the rampant anarchist mood, the disintegration of the army, the decline in the authority of the authorities suppressed and broke them.

BOLSHEVIKS

Bolshevism became a synthesis of the ideas of Marxism and the Russian revolutionary tradition. In his genealogy it is necessary to include not only Western utopian socialists, Marx, Engels, Kautsky, but also Russian revolutionaries Pestel, Chernyshevsky, Lavrov, Tkachev, Nechaev, members of the “Narodnaya Volya” group, the “Emancipation of Labor” group.

Its main ideologist played a huge role in the creation of Bolshevism. Back in the 90s of the 19th century, Lenin was already actually preparing the ideological platform for the future of Bolshevism and pondering its organizational principles.

Lenin paid special attention to the question of the Marxist party as the organizer and leader of the class struggle of the proletariat for a radical reorganization of society. His book “What to Do” (1902, Stuttgart) became widely known.

He put at the forefront the creation of an organization of professional revolutionaries who had mastered the basics of Marxist theory and skillfully carried out secret work. In a despotic regime, he wrote, the smaller and more disciplined the organization, the more difficult it is to track it down, the more difficult it is to arrest its members. “Give us an organization of revolutionaries, and we will turn Russia over!” - this is how, paraphrasing Archimedes, Lenin formulated his answer to the question of what to do.

The years turned out to be difficult for Lenin. Plekhanov left the Bolsheviks, with his help the Mensheviks took over the editorial office of Iskra, on the pages of which Plekhanov wrote biliously about Lenin’s Bonapartism. In addition, Martov published a pamphlet criticizing the direction of Bolshevism towards a “state of siege.” So, by 1904, Lenin remained in the minority both in the Central Committee and in the Party Council. In July 1904, the Bolshevik conciliators and Mensheviks carried out a kind of “coup” against Lenin, forbidding him to speak on behalf of the Central Committee. The conflict ended with a resolution of the Central Committee of February 7, 1905 on the expulsion of Lenin from the Central Committee and the Party Council.

At the end of 1904, a Bolshevik center emerged - the Bureau of Majority Committees with its newspaper “Forward”. Thus the formation of the Bolshevik faction of the RSDLP was completed.

The revolution began as a spontaneous explosion, for which the leadership of the RSDLP was unprepared. Against this background, the initiative of the Leninists, stubbornly fighting for the convocation of a new party congress, appealed to those who longed for decisive, energetic action.

In April 1905, delegates elected to the congress gathered in London, which Lenin's supporters called the 111th Congress of the RSDLP, and the Mensheviks considered illegal.

Lenin introduced into the charter his formulation of the conditions for membership in the RSDLP. The system of central bodies of the Bolshevik faction changed - a single authoritative body was created - the Central Committee (Lenin, Krasin, Bogdanov, Postolovsky, Rykov). A new Bolshevik newspaper, Proletary, was created.

The congress adopted all Lenin's theoretical principles. The revolution taking place in Russia is bourgeois in nature, but it is not the bourgeoisie, but the proletariat that is most interested in its complete success. The congress spoke in favor of the confiscation of landowners', state-owned, monastic, and appanage lands and for the immediate organization of revolutionary peasant committees. A course was charted towards carrying out mass political strikes and arming the workers.

The Bolshevik Congress in London and the Menshevik Conference in Geneva reflected not only the fact of the split of the RSDLP. The faction leaders felt the harmfulness of the confrontation and the rejection of factional politics on the ground. Therefore, it was decided to unite. Moreover, the Mensheviks quickly moved to the left, and in the spring of 1905 the Bolsheviks began a campaign for the democratization of internal party life.

At the same congress, the question of the eternal Russian disease, such as bureaucracy, was raised (due to the fact that there were not a single worker at the congress, only committee leaders). There was a tendency among party functionaries to become separated from the masses. They are used to commanding ordinary party members and looking down on the workers. Taking this into account, Lenin demanded to attract more workers from the machine to the leading party bodies at all levels, to rely on youth, to develop an elective principle in the party and to suppress bureaucratic tendencies. This was partially achieved, but the weakening of repression by the tsarist authorities was short-lived, and the underground situation soon brought to naught all efforts to establish a more democratic order.

During the revolution, the Bolsheviks were on the rise. The revolutionary euphoria that gripped the working masses, the advancement of maximum demands, and the awareness of their strength were very consonant with the sentiments of the Bolsheviks, who tried in every possible way to support and incite revolutionary impatience among the masses, the desire for an armed battle with the autocracy.

The Bolsheviks, unlike other organizations, approached the preparation of an armed uprising most seriously, deploying the largest number of combatants in Moscow during the December battles. In addition, they actively participated in leading the strike movement. They dominated the leadership of more than 40 councils of workers' deputies that emerged in 1905, including the Moscow one, and did a lot for the development of the young trade union movement in the country.

In 1905 Federative committees of the RSDLP began to emerge; at the end of December 1905, the Bolshevik Central Committee and the Menshevik Organizational Commission merged, and a common newspaper, Party News, began to be published.

However, after the defeat of the December armed uprisings, the situation in the RSDLP began to change in favor of the Mensheviks, and already at the 4th Congress of the RSDLP in Stockholm (1906) it was already clear that there would be no peace in the party. Of the 112 voting delegates, 62 were Mensheviks. An indicator of great changes in the RSDLP was the fact that a quarter of the congress delegates were represented by workers.

The 4th Congress of the RSDLP opened almost simultaneously with the start of the 1st State. The Duma, the elections to which the Bolsheviks actively boycotted. Only later did Lenin admit that this boycott was a mistake, since it did not take into account the possibility of the revolution retreating.

In the 11th Duma of 1907, abandoning boycott tactics, the Bolsheviks received 18 deputy mandates. They viewed the Duma not as a body for constructive legislative work, but only as a platform for promoting their views.

The 5th Congress of the RSDLP finished its meetings a few days before the June 3rd coup. The struggle for leadership, for subordination and other similar issues again came to the fore. 300 delegates discussed these issues for more than two weeks. A lot of time was spent checking mandates, working out the agenda, and mutual bickering on private issues. The congress did not support Lenin and condemned the expropriation. Lenin tried not to tie his hands, acting according to the rule: in the name of the victory of the revolution, you can use any means. In addition, the Bolsheviks still retained the slogan of an armed uprising, although the situation in the country already excluded such actions.

The largest centers of Bolshevism: Moscow (6.2), St. Petersburg (6), Ivanovo-Voznesensk (5), Kostroma (3), Kyiv and Yekaterinburg (1.5 each), Vladimir, Yaroslavl, Bryansk (1), Saratov (850 ).

The repressions that befell the RSDLP after the defeat of the revolution caused the party the heaviest damage. The shortage of professionals opened up additional opportunities for provocateurs to penetrate the party and quickly advance to the top.

In an atmosphere of ideological vacillation and organizational collapse, even Lanin’s team could not resist. Bogdanov openly challenged Lenin, accusing him of folding the revolutionary banner and switching to reformist positions. Lenin was accused of being overly enthusiastic about legalizing activities, losing interest in the squad and propaganda in the wax, as well as establishing personal control over the party treasury. Some Bolsheviks organized the “Forward” group, which opposed Lenin. The break with Lenin turned out to be complete and final. However, the group itself soon disbanded.

Later, in 1910, another group broke away from the Leninists - the Bolshevik party members (Lozovsky, Rykov, Nogin, Dubrovinsky)

In January 1910 - the last attempt to unite all organizations of the RSDLP. As a result, it was decided to stop publishing faction organs, create a single newspaper “Social Democrat”, and transfer money to the Central Committee. However, these decisions were not implemented because the participants did not trust each other.

In 1911, a course was taken to revive the collapsed organizations. A general party conference was convened. In Prague - 1912. Less than 20 delegates arrived. All national organizations, Plekhanov, and the majority of Menshevik party members refused to participate. Trotsky was not invited to Prague at all. Nevertheless, the meeting confidently declared itself the 6th all-party conference of the RSDLP. Lenin almost single-handedly led its meetings. The conference noted the commitment of revolutionary social democracy to the basic requirements of the minimum program. Lenin always attached particular importance to the election of leading party bodies. This time, for the first time in the history of congresses and conferences of the RSDLP, the Central Committee was elected unanimously. (Lenin, Zinoviev, Ordzhonikidze, Spandaryan, Malinovsky*, Goloshchekin, Shvartsman).

Despite the fact that the majority of Russian Social Democrats did not recognize the decisions of the Prague Conference, the resonance from it was great. Since the spring of 1912 The newspaper "Pravda" is published.

During the World War, discord faded into the background and deputies of the 4th Duma adopted a general declaration condemning the war. "War to war!"

Later, Lenin and the Bolsheviks in general were accused of anti-patriotism, treason, and betrayal of national interests (Lenin's calls for turning the imperialist war into a civil one). But there was no confirmation of this.

There was only one course - the construction of socialism in the USSR, faith in the possibility of the complete victory of socialism within one country - was greater than ever.

Their main work is done deep underground. It was difficult to contact Lenin, who was in exile. The Bolsheviks were not the leaders of the February revolution of 1917. Lenin learned about this after the fact.

The Bureau of Front-Rear Military Organizations was formed under the Bolshevik Central Committee. Bolshevik factions operated in the soviets. Particular attention to plants and factories.

The failed offensive at the front on June 18 undermined the authority of the Provisional Government. On July 2, the Cadets decided to secede from the government. A government crisis began. Some Bolsheviks, anarchists and some military units, who were threatened with being sent to the front, began to lean toward attempting an armed overthrow of the Provisional Government. As a result, the demonstration on July 3-4, 1917 was not without casualties. The persecution of Lenin by the authorities began.

The strength of the Bolsheviks lay in the fact that they brought to the fore slogans that were very close and understandable to the majority: peace to the peoples, land to the peasants, factories to the workers, power to the soviets...

Showing himself in October 1917 good tactics, the Bolsheviks soon faced great difficulties associated with their tragic miscalculations. Lenin’s well-known formula with reference to Napoleon: “First you need to get involved in a serious battle, and then you will see” was fraught with a huge risk, without which, however, nothing great in history can do. But something else was clear: after the October victory, the Bolsheviks faced severe trials.