“Second coming” with unexpected ending

Apparently, the 96th anniversary of the October takeover in Petrograd (or October Revolution, the title preferred by adherents of the old tradition) has not evoked any special excitement either in the world mass media, or in Ukrainian political elite (except for the Communists, of course). The New York Times, Frankfurter Rundschau, Le Figaro, Financial Times have not published any lengthy analytical articles about the former “holiday of all workers of the world.”

On the other hand, the success of communist parties in a number of European countries (in particular, the Czech Republic, where Communists earned almost 15 percent of votes in the parliamentary election in late October; Greece, which is courageously resisting not imagined, but quite real Fascist attack of Golden Dawn; Portugal, which plays an active role in protests against the regime of “economic austerity”) is beneficial above all for oligarchs and suggests that discussion of prospects of the Left movement and danger of “second coming” – not of October Revolution, but its “matrix” – is necessary and well-timed.

It should be understood that the October “earthquake” of 1917 had very rigid and objective prerequisites. It took place in an imperialistic country with despotic regime (and Nicholas II’s personal qualities do not matter), with suppression of inorodtsy (an official term to define national minorities), besides involved in the World War I, which was in a sense an irreparable crime, taking into account colossal political and social problems. “Russia they lost” (dreams of Solzhenitsyn and Govorukhin) was not “crimson,” it was a deeply diseased country, where equal rights for Ukrainians were, by the way, out of question!

What did Bolsheviks do after taking the power? They promised everything to everyone: land to peasants (reality: komnezams – nearly six years of free labor – collectivization – the Holodomor); factories to workers (everything was nationalized and estranged in favor of the power clan); peace to soldiers (reality was a series of cruel wars, civil and occupational); right for self-identification to non-Russian nations (it seems to me, there is nothing to comment here).

So, this is the “Bolshevik matrix”: they promised everything to everyone, but applied bloody force to everyone who dared to ask them to fulfill the promises. Except for those mentioned above, two more fundamental promises of this party remained unfulfilled: the victory of the world revolution and building of Communism. This cornerstone fact is not changed by the very important nuance that Bolsheviks were heterogeneous; there were two generations of their leaders: conditionally speaking, Lenin’s generation, which exterminated millions of people, but for seemingly great idea of the world revolution, and Stalin’s generation, which did not have any ideas whatsoever but the power mania and pathological cruelty. Are these details? There is ground for discussion.

As for modern European leftists, it should be reminded: the Czech Communist Party is the party which launched the Prague Spring in 1968 (they are a different kind of Communists!). However, the Communist Party of Ukraine even of Brezhnev time was for the most part terrifying due to its hardhattism, not just conservatism (Petro Shelest is a separate complicated conversation).

In summary, it can be said that if the “second coming” of Bolshevik matrix takes place, which is possible both as a result of pathological greed of the powers that be, and of malignant envy of lumpen and populists, it will be catastrophic.