Rus Devrimi'nin Kısa Tarihi

by Geoffrey Swain, Mert Büyükkarabacak (Translator)

Çar yönetiminden mutsuz bir kitlenin benzersiz bir örgütlenmeyle harekete geçerek gerçekleştirdiği 1917 Rus Devrimi, tarihin ilk komünist devletinin kurulmasına neden oldu. Toplumsal ve ekonomik birçok değişikliği beraberinde getiren Sovyetler Birliği, dünya tarihine damga vurdu ve günümüzde hâlâ ilgi uyandırmaya devam ediyor. Peki bu devrimin öncülleri nelerdi? Örgütlenme nasıl gerçekleşti? Fikir önderleri kitleleri nasıl etkiledi ve yol gösterdi? Rusya toplumunun düşünce yapısı devrimde ne kadar etkili oldu ve bu toplumun hangi kesimleri, nasıl roller üstlendi?

Geoffrey Swain bu kitabında yeni bir bakış açısıyla devrimi tekrar ele alırken bu soruların cevaplarını arıyor.

“Elinizdeki kısa tarih […] Rus işçi sınıfının 1905’ten itibaren istikrarlı bir biçimde reformistten ziyade devrimci olduğunu ve Şubat 1917’de ortaya çıkan sapmanın yeni kurulan Sovyet’in başına, önde gelen reformistleri rastlantısal olaylar sonucu getirdiğini, Haziran sona ermeden, belki de daha öncesinde Bolşeviklerin işçi sınıfının geleneksel devrimci reaksiyonunu yeniden ortaya çıkarmak için büyük çaba harcamış olduğunu iddia ediyor.”

Genres: History, Russia, Nonfiction

288 pages, Paperback

First published January 30, 2017

About the author

Geoffrey Swain is the Alec Nove Chair in Russian and East European Studies at the University of Glasgow.

Reviews

[Always Pouting · Rating 3 out of 5]

A nonfiction book looking at Russia's progression from a monarchy with a parliament to a communist state, one that deteriorated to a dictatorship rather than holding true to the socialist ideals. It explores the Russian citizen's desire for reformation versus revolution and goes into why the state ends up not being able to adhere to the more democratic ideals of communism. I think the book was okay but it tended to be a little dry and hard to keep up with. There were tons of names mentioned at once not just people but parties and government entities that made it hard for me to keep track of what was happening. Also the book dives right in so having some familiarity with this subject or Russian politics especially before this period may be helpful before reading this one.

[Mik · Rating 3 out of 5]

dit is de facto meer een verkapte wikipedia pagina dan een goed boek…

[Jacob Richter · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the first of the ‘centenary’ publications that I have read. I picked Swain’s because I anticipated that Swain would follow in the footsteps of his former teacher, Leonard Schapiro, and be a devotee of the ‘continuity thesis’ of Russian revolutionary history belonging to the ‘Totalitarian’, Cold War liberal school – that there was a relatively uncomplicated and natural transition from the politics of Bolshevism before and after 1917 to the politics of Stalinism in the 1930’s – and would, therefore, be one with which I would disagree.
On the whole, though, I was pleasantly surprised. It’s not too bad at all. Many of the classic tropes of the ‘continuity thesis’ have been abandoned and Swain is much more influenced by the ‘social’ historians that emerged in the 1980’s. Gone are the notions that the Tsar was not overthrown by workers and soldiers, that there was a genuine popular revolution, that the Russian working class was, by tradition, revolutionary not reformist, and so naturally Bolshevik. Accepted is that Kerensky was trying to establish an authoritarian regime, that Kerensky did conspire with Kornilov, that the October Revolution was, in its essence, an action of defence by the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet.
There are some ambiguities as Swain still tries to maintain some aspects of the ‘continuity thesis’ – he seems to want to believe that there were elements of a coup in October and yet all his evidence points in the opposite direction. The section on the Constituent Assembly is stronger than many accounts as Swain weaves in the arguments within the splitting Socialist Revolutionary party and seems to see these as key to events here – almost certainly correctly.
Swain’s main weakness, though, is his explanation of where it all started to go wrong - the slide towards civil war and autocratic government, normal mainstream historiography resurfaces here and, that’s right – it was all Lenin’s fault. In this, Swain reverts back to the classic foundation of the ‘continuity thesis’ which he, like those before him, locates in Lenin’s concept of party discipline as outlined in ‘What Is To Be Done?’ and Lenin’s supposed distrust of the ability of the working class to develop socialist consciousness and here Swain ignores the fact that this approach, which was always weak, has been rendered completely untenable by the work of Lars Lih. Swain relates quite well the debates of the Bolshevik leadership, their deep divisions, the fact that party organisations operated autonomously from the party’s centre and comes close to saying that many leading Bolsheviks didn’t actually know what Bolshevism was – when your description of how a party and its members and organisations performed is so at odds with your assumptions as to what the party’s ideology was, then the time to reassess those assumptions is overdue

[Classic Bhaer · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wanted to start off by saying that I received an ebook copy of this book via netgalley in exchange for my honest review.

A Short History of the Russian Revolution discusses the Russian Revolution that ended the Tsarist monarchy and ushers in the communist regime in Russia during 1917. Now I will 30897399say that someone can easily write a 1000 page book on this topic so when I requested this I knew that some things would be missing. When I did finally get to reading it I laughed a bit when the author himself said, "much has to be left out" because this is such a complex period of history.
I will say that Geoffrey Swain did a good job summing up such a complex event(s). For someone who does not know a lot about the Russian Revolution they will benefit a lot from reading this. Swain knows his topic well, he discusses a wide range of related events and organizations which I find important. A historical event did not happen in a vacuum, society prior to the event let to the Russian Revolution and it impacted a lot of events, policies, and individuals following it as well. I will say that this book is very academic, since this is a short history it is jammed packed with facts. So if you are looking for a non-fiction account that reads like a novel this is not for you. This is more of something you would read if you are interested in learning about the event or need a good resources for research. I wish I had read something like this years ago when I took a class dealing with this topic. On another note I really enjoyed was the short timeline in the beginning of the book. It really showed a quick summary before getting into details.

Overall, I think that this is a good book. I ended up giving it a 3.5/5 stars. This is a great book for those who are studying the Russian Revolution, have a serious interest, an introduction to the topic, and a good resource for research, but it is not something I feel many individuals will pick up a read "for the fun of it". But, to restate what I have said, this really is a well written "short" history of the Russian Revolution.

Book Information

Publisher: I. B. Tauris & Company

Publication Date: March 30th 2017

List Price: Varies - $10.60 on Kindle $29.00 on Nook

ISBN: 9781780767925

Pages: 256 pages

[Önder Kurt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Yazarın kanıtlamaya çalıştığı ana tez, Batılı Sovyet tarihçileri arasındaki yaygın Rusya’da 1917 Ekim Devrimine varan sürecin tabandan yükselen kitlesel tabanı olmayan, yukarından, darbeci bir hareket olduğu fikrine karşılık, bu süreçte ciddi bir sınıfsal mücadelenin verildiği, ve tabandan yükselen devrimci bir radikalizmin olgunlaşmış olduğu ve yazar tezini inandırıcı bir şekilde desteklemede iyi bir iş çıkarıyor.

Ancak bu tezi gösterdikten sonra, yine darbeci, keyfi bir yönetimin Lenin’in manipülatif operasyonları (seçim hileleri, keyfi tutuklamalar vs) ile yine de devrimin son aşamasında iktidara geldiğini iddia ediyor.

Sol SR’ler ile koalisyon devam edebilseydi de Bolşevikler tek başına iktidarı sahiplenmeseydiler, Stalin’e varan sonraki süreç önlenebilir miydi sorusunu zihinlerde ortaya çıkarmayı başarıyor.

[Mandy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Exactly what it says it is – a short history of the Russian Revolution. In my opinion Swain has done a good job in summarising some very complex events in relatively few pages, and although it’s a fairly dry account, if an introduction is what you need then this is a comprehensive and accessible book that will fit the bill.

[Cara Hall]

I had to read ‘chapter 5: six months of social revolution’ for my degree, so I haven’t read the whole book. Basically this book provides information about Russia from 1905-1918, but it assumes you already have some prior knowledge, so it’s not the easiest to understand for a beginner.

[Busrauyarimsi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bu kitap üzerine kaleme aldığım yazı 14.042019 tarihinde, gazeteduvar.com.tr’de yayınlanmıştır:
https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/kitap/...

Rus Devriminin Kısa Tarihi

Her saniye yeniden şekillenmekte olan bugünü anlamanın en meşakkatli ve etkili yolu, geçmişi anlamaktan geçiyor. Geçmiş ile bugün arasında kurulan ilişki bireylerin, toplumların, hatta kıtaların kişiliklerini ve eylemlerini analiz edebilmemizi sağlar. Bu analiz yeteneği, yapısı gereği basit gözükür, ama tıpkı bir anahtar gibi bize dünyanın kapısını açar.

Geçmişi anlamak gibi bir dert edindiğimiz andan itibaren karşımıza ülke devrimleri çıkıyor. İçinde fazlaca neden-sonuç ilişkisi barındıran ve uzun bir sürece yayılan bu devrimler; dinamik ve öfkeli kitleleriyle bizi her daim etkilese ve bizim için ilham kaynağı olsalar da, bu ilham verici devrimler tarihinin ne yazık ki kısa ya da uzun vadede ürkütücü diktatörlükler halini aldığını görürüz. Ülkemizdeki ve dünyadaki örgütlenme pratiklerini incelediğimizde, rol model haline getirilen devrimlerin diktatörlük halinin odak noktası haline getirilmediğini fark ederiz, oysa mutlak gerçeği görmezden gelmek tüm optimistliğe rağmen altında kalınan bir yüktür.

Rus Devrimi de ürkütücü bir dönüşüm sonucunda diktatörlük halini almış, ancak bu durum onun elinden, belki de en çok imrenilen rol model olma ünvanını alamamıştır. Liderleri, uzun devrim sürecinde daima öfkeli ve dinamik olan halkı ile Rus Devrimi bu ünvanı fazlasıyla da hak eder. Yine de, dünya üzerindeki birçok şey gibi o da olumlu yönünün yanı sıra eleştirilecek, kimi zaman yanlış kabul edilebilecek eylemlerin oluşturduğu olumsuz kimi yönler de taşır.

Bu anlamda İletişim Yayınları’ndan çıkan Rus Devrimi’nin Kısa Tarihi, Rus Devrimi’ne objektif olarak bakmamızı sağlayan önemli bir çalışma. Geoffrey Swain’in titiz çalışması, Rus Devrimi’ni salt “sempati unsuru” olmaktan öteye taşıyıp, onu kendi gerçekliği içerisinde, adım adım var etmemizi ve değerlendirmemizi sağlıyor. Örneğin tüm dünyada adeta siyasi bir ekol haline gelmiş Bolşeviklerin devrim sürecinde nasıl bir profil çizdiğini çoğu zaman düşünmeyiz. Daha doğrusu onların cesur ve inatçı kimlikleri bizim için yeterlidir. Oysa Bolşeviklerin son derece karışık ve yoğun bir bürokratik kimlikleri de vardır. Bu çalışma boyunca son derece ayrıntılı ve nitelikli biçimde ele alınan Bolşevikler, anlaşılır ve bir o kadar da tartışmaya açık adımlarıyla, sosyolojik ve tarihi bir bulgu olarak okurların karşısına çıkıyor. Swain’in çalışması bu noktada, Bolşeviklerin çoklu kimliğini anlamak açısından son derece önemli bir kaynak olarak kabul edilebilir.

Etkili bir panoramik çalışma olan Rus Devrimi’nin Kısa Tarihi, sekiz bölümde devrimi “ilmek ilmek” örüyor. Her daim hayret ve hayranlık uyandıran Rus halkının, “kurtuluş” planları içinde debelenen hükümetle oluşturduğu tezat, okura önemli bir zemin hazırlıyor. Zira çalışmanın anlaşılır ve yardımcı iç yapısı sayesinde, “halk” diye adlandırıp geçtiğimiz kitlenin aslında devrim boyunca sürekli olarak yeniden şekillendiğini öğreniyoruz. Bu şekillenme ve inat, hükümetin aşırıya kaçtığını düşündüğümüz, “geçiştiren” tavrının sebebini açıklar hale geliyor. Kitabın başında bulunan “Rus Devrimi Zaman Tüneli” ise adeta, devrim sürecinin ne kadar yoğun ve durulmaz olduğunun kronolojik bir kanıtı olarak okura sunuluyor.

‘RUS DEVRİMİ’Nİ TAHLİL EDİYOR’

İletişim Yayınları’ndan çıkan Rus Devrimi’nin Kısa Tarihi, dünyaya olan bakış açısını genişletmek isteyen okurların mutlaka elinde bulundurması gereken bir kitap. Çalışmasıyla Rus Devrimi konusunda ileri okumaların kapısını ardına kadar açan Swain, Rus Devrimi’nin Kısa Tarihi’ni yine en iyi kendisi tahlil ediyor: “Elinizdeki kısa tarih, Çar’ın Şubat 1917’de alaşağı edilmesi ile başlayan sürecin ne zaman ve nasıl raydan çıktığını ve parti disiplinine dair Bolşevik teorilerle köylülüğün sosyalizme yönlendirilmesi gerektiğine dair bir ideolojik kanaatin nasıl olup da bir tek parti diktatörlüğü ile sonuçlandığını araştırıyor.” (syf. 26)

[Barry Smirnoff · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very useful book, that has assembled a 200 page introduction to the Russian Revolution that incorporates the latest scholarship and the historiography of the period. The notes provide references to the controversies and viewpoints. The author references both his own work but also dozens of others. He provides a balanced perspective that allows for alternate explanations. The book was originally written for the centenary but the 2nd edition incorporates all the scholarship from then. I highly recommend it to both historians and the general reader.

[John Plowright · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this volume in the I.B. Tauris Short Histories series the reader gets, in the space of 232 pages, or just over 200 if you exclude footnotes, bibliography and index, not only a punchy summary of Swain’s long research in the field but a distillation of scholarly debate on the Russian Revolution.

The argument is lucid and up front, with Swain stating his twin theses in his introduction, namely, that “as Soviet scholars once argued … the October Revolution represented the culmination of those revolutionary ambitions first articulated by Russia’s masses during the failed 1905 Revolution” and that, “unlike any Soviet scholarship”, the Bolsheviks directed the masses “along an unnecessary path which led to dictatorship and terror”. The latter claim is uncontentious but the first is very contentious indeed.

In seeking to make his case Swain rejects the orthodox western Cold War view, associated with Leonard Schapiro and Richard Pipes, that October 1917 was a Bolshevik coup, and in Trotskyite declamatory mode asserts that his book “will not consign … to the dustbin of history” the contrary views of social historians such as Steve Smith and William Rosenberg on the proletariat, Rex Wade on Red Guards, Alan Wildman on soldiers, Graeme Gill on the peasantry and Moira Donald and Sarah Badcock on women. To this end Swain charts “rising impatience with Kerensky’s Government” on the part of the populace “as October … approached.”

Stated in these terms there is little with which to disagree but there is, however, a world of difference between “impatience” and revolutionary intent. It is clear that by October 1917 the Provisional Government had very few friends and even fewer willing to risk their lives in its defence. It is also possible to argue convincingly that the masses gave their tacit support to the Bolshevik takeover, not least attracted by a false prospectus centred on ‘Peace, Bread, Land’ and ‘All Power to the Soviets’. That does not, however, alter the fact that the seizure of power in October was actually accomplished not by the masses but by an elitist party. After all, the basic rationale of the Bolshevik party was that it had to act in the interests of and on behalf of the proletariat because the latter was prey to a false consciousness which militated against its achieving its historic mission of realizing proletarian revolution.

Swain’s book faces stiff opposition from volumes such as Sheila Fitzpatrick’s ‘The Russian Revolution’ (now in its third edition) and S. A. Smith’s ‘The Russian Revolution: A Very Short Introduction’. In terms of scholarship, brevity and clarity it faces that challenge well but it is in terms of passion that some will feel it falls down, while others feel it has an edge. This reader disagrees with some of Swain’s conclusions but nevertheless admires the vigour with which they’re argued. At the very least the book lives up to the admirable aspiration of the series to which it belongs, never to be bland.

[Karen Lee-Johnston · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a random read for me- having no particular interest in the topic! It's very readable and I found it very informative! In fact this book has made want to read more about it! A really interesting and informative read!