Estrela Vermelha Sobre o Terceiro Mundo

by Vijay Prashad

Estrela Vermelha sobre o Terceiro Mundo procura recuperar, a partir de uma interpretação histórica, o impacto e as consequências da Revolução de Outubro de 1917 sobre os diversos países do chamado Terceiro Mundo, desde a Ásia até a América Latina, tanto no sentido de motivar lutas populares - demonstrando, antes de tudo, que a revolução é algo possível - quanto no de fomentar a organização de partidos ao redor do mundo - o que gerava muitas contradições, por vezes produtivas, entre uma diretriz política pensada a partir da URSS e as realidades e particularidades dos diferentes países - para a construção de uma sociedade capitalista.

Escrito e publicado por ocasião do centenário da Revolução RUssa, este livro não se propõe a ser uma estudo exaustivo e detalhado desse processo histórico, mas contém, segundo o autor, “uma grande esperança: que a nova geração venha a saber dessa importância da revolução para operários e camponeses naquela parte do mundo que sofreu com a opressão da dominação colonial”. O conhecimento dessa experiência, à época, mas também ainda hoje, serve como um alimento para a luta dos povos em todo o mundo, pois ali se inaugurou algo aparentemente impossível: a vitória da maioria trabalhadora sobre a minoria exploradora.

(texto retirado da contra capa do livro)

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Theory, World History, Africa, Asia

152 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2017

About the author

Vijay Prashad is the executive director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He is the author or editor of several books, including The Darker Nations: A Biography of the Short-Lived Third World and The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South. His most recent book is Red Star Over the Third World. He writes regularly for Frontline, The Hindu, Alternet and BirGun.

Reviews

[The Conspiracy is Capitalism · Rating 5 out of 5]

USSR and Global South Decolonization…

Preamble:
--I try to be stingy with giving 5-star ratings to avoid diluting its value.
--144-pages is usually insufficient. In this case, my rating includes the author’s lectures relating to this book (I still believe his lectures are his peak story-telling format).
--I first encountered Vijay Prashad when I was searching for videos to watch in documentary nights with friends to address our ignorance of the rest of the world (esp. Global South). After all, we are the “War on Terror” generation, and our Western education left us with only vague prejudices (“why is there so much violence in the Middle East”?) which Western media could exploit (“why the Middle East is so violent”).
--Prashad was the major breakthrough, opening many doors in history. I would later start to supplement with (geo)political economy…

Highlights:

--Western capitalism conveniently frames the “Cold War” as a binary (West vs. East) struggle between “democratic” capitalism and “totalitarian” socialism.
--Prashad’s key innovation is presenting a Global South view (majority of the world). Let’s re-trace the story:

1) While early Western Marxism (including the young Marx/Engels’ 1848 The Communist Manifesto and later the “First International”) anticipated working-class revolutions in Western Europe (i.e. where there was the most advanced capitalism, thus the most organized urban proletariat movements with their hands on the levers of capitalist production), such revolutions were crushed and socialist parties diluted into social democratic reformism (i.e. political “democracy” while economics remain capitalist).
2) Meanwhile, the rest of the world struggled with colonialism. 1911 saw revolutions in China/Iran/Mexico. In 1913, Lenin wrote the essay “Backwards Europe and Advanced Asia”, criticizing the backward European capitalists for digging their own graves by arming reactionary movements (sound familiar?) in Asia against Asian peoples seeking decolonization.

3) WWI (1914-1918) was another crisis which European socialism (“Second International”) could not overcome, as vulgar nationalism swept Europe. In 1915, Lenin wrote Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, with the Zimmerwald Conference identifying WWI’s roots in capitalism’s imperialist rivalries (similarly, W.E.B. Du Bois’ 1915 "The African Roots of War" identified WWI’s roots in the imperialist “Scramble for Africa”).
…WWI escalated capitalism/imperialism’s contradictions, as European nations needed colonial armies. It was a tough sell risking your life for “freedom”, only to return home to colonialism.
…Note: key to social change is analyzing bargaining power: who has it/who know they have it/how it is organized (raising confidence/expectations):
-A People's History of the World: From the Stone Age to the New Millennium
-Raising Expectations (and Raising Hell); My Decade Fighting for the Labor Movement
…For more (geo)political economy on capitalism and imperialism, see: Capital and Imperialism: Theory, History, and the Present
4) The 1917 Russian Revolution was sparked by women workers striking for anti-war/International Women’s Day.
…Note: another wartime contradiction is pushing women from unpaid housework into factory work; once again, think about bargaining power: The Invisible Heart: Economics and Family Values.

5) Prashad’s challenge for readers is to view the Russian Revolution not merely as a national project, but to consider its global influence, esp. on the colonized Global South.
...We can compare with the Haitian Revolution (1791-1804; see The Common Wind: Afro-American Currents in the Age of the Haitian Revolution), which itself was influenced by the French Revolution (1789). Capitalist imperialist nations immediately embargoed Haiti (ex. US under Thomas Jefferson 1806) to destroy a good example of decolonization/anti-slavery (embargos will be repeated against post-revolution USSR/China/Cuba etc.); France demanded debts for lost colonial properties which were only paid off in 1947 (!). However, the influence of the Haitian Revolution on global decolonization/anti-slavery could not be reversed.
“[T]he process of liberation is irresistible and irreversible” -Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (adopted by the UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV), 14 December 1960)

6) Thus, with the USSR came the COMINTERN (Communist International/“Third International”; 1919-1943) which centered the worker-peasant alliance:
i) Industrial workers: which prior socialist movements centered
ii) Anti-colonial peasants/workers: for example, in Lenin’s study of capitalist development in Russia, he identifies 81% of the peasantry to be landless and compares this with industrial proletariats (dependent on capitalists’ means of production). The colonies were identified as the weakest link in the imperialist chain.
7) Of course, such a large umbrella had many contradictions to unravel. Lenin tried to balance emancipatory principles with where the people were at. USSR had to contend with the Tsarist legacy of Great Russian imperialism, issuing decrees like the 1917 “Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia” on self-determination. Colonies had to contend with revolutionary nationalists who were still pro-capitalist.
…Prashad highlights:
-ex. India’s first prime minister Nehru (anti-colonial nationalist yet pro-capitalist) was impressed when visiting USSR by its social life/literacy, since Nehru could relate with the USSR’s difficult starting point.
-ex. India’s communist E.M.S. Namboodiripad synthesized India’s class struggle with its caste oppression.
-ex. Turkist communist/teacher Naciye Hanim challenged Eastern communists to not neglect women’s emancipation. This was connected with USSR’s Zhenotdel (women’s department) headed by Alexandra Kollontai. One challenge in Central Asia was with traditionalist mullahs:

The Soviets hesitated in the first decade, unwilling to directly confront Central Asian culture for fear of a widespread revolt in the region.

On March 8, 1927, on International Women’s Day, Zhenotdel activists came out on the streets in the major Uzbek cities. […] The Zhenotdel activists were now in direct confrontation with the clergy and with the landlords, who benefitted from the social quiet imposed by the old ways.

…We should not forget that “traditional” societies have their own class/social struggles contesting bargaining power. For a materialist anthropology lens on the origins of women’s oppression/bargaining power (yes, Engels wrote on this too), see: Mothers and Others: The Evolutionary Origins of Mutual Understanding and “What is Politics?” video series, in particular:
-"6. Political Anthropology: When Communism Works and Why"
-"7. The Origins of Male Dominance and Hierarchy; what David Graeber and Jordan Peterson get wrong"
-"7.1 Material Conditions: Why You Can't Eliminate Sexism or Patriarchy by Changing Culture"
-"8. Materialism vs. Idealism: How Social Change Happens"
-ex. South American Marxist José Carlos Mariátegui analyzed indigenous struggles vs. large land-owning latifundistas. Mariátegui adapted Marxist class analysis to move beyond the 1920s indigenismo cultural movement (which focused on Amerindians as culture producers more than history producers). Mariátegui looked to the past as a resource, rather than as a destination.
-ex. Aimé Césaire (Discourse on Colonialism) framing fascism as colonial practices returning home to Europe.

…see comments below for rest of the review…

[João Nunes · Rating 5 out of 5]

The only "bad" thing I can say about this book is that I wish its length were 1000 pages and this was just an introduction.
Brilliant.

[Zach Carter · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nifty little overview of some of the repercussions (good and bad) of the Bolshevik Revolution and the way it was viewed in the Third World. I would recommend this to someone who's (relatively) new to this material, as I found it a bit too simple and wanted more. But even so, it's valuable and an important contribution.

[Eren Buğlalılar · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short essay that outlines the impact of October Revolution on the Third World intellectuals, political leaders and movements. Prashad's prose is very accessible as usual and his examples are useful in painting a general picture on the contributions and shortcomings of the USSR policy in terms of its relations with the international popular movements.

Still, Prashad's use of some rhetorical tools were inconvenient to me. For example, Prashad low-key wants us to think that all those advances and breakthroughs that took place in the USSR were despite Stalin, who was a rigid, Moscow-centric reelpolitik expert. USSR is to be praised, Stalin is to be blamed. And I find it really curious when an author who is as enthusiastic about the popular movements as Prashad, remains silent about the Naxalite movement of India.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sweet and short. Discusses the impact of the October revolution on the third world, with specific attention to the woman question, the arts, democracy and development. Prashad's 'line', so to speak, is impeccably nuanced: no sloganistic paeans or tales of glorious heroes and perverse betrayals, but rather a narrative of endless learning and correcting in harsh circumstances. Seldom judgemental, always materialist.

Reminds me how strange the perspective of western historians on various socialist episodes is. No faculty devoted to its examination fails to produce new scar literature: the gulags, famine in Kazakhstan, racist Chinese bosses in Tanzania, endless discussions on the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. But all this is viewed through the lens of a lab researcher; no attempt is made to take in context, neither by taking together the difficulties with the undeniable progress made, nor by comparing it to the blatantly antidemocratic colonialist practices of the liberal democracies. The late Domenico Losurdo put it this way: freedom from the Brits for the American slave owners meant the genocide of the Indians and slavery of the Africans. There is seldom a real choice between full despotism and unfettered freedom; in reality, we find choices that are full of contradictions. But in the Third World, the choice between Western-backed compradors in tandem with IMF neocolonialism, or autonomous, developmental socialism, is easily made.

Shame it wasn't longer or more detailed - the breadth of CPs all over the world is stunning - but very suitable as an intro work for beginning socialists.

"The reason why parties such as the PKI held fast to 'Stalin' was not because they defended the purges or collectivization in the USSR. It was because 'Stalin' in the debate around militancy had come to stand in for revolutionary idealism and for the anti-fascist struggle. Aidit had agreed that the Soviets could have any interpretation of Stalin in terms of domestic policy ('criticize him, remove his remains from the mausoleum, rename Stalingrad'), but other Communist Parties had the right to assess his role on the international level. He was a 'lighthouse whose work was still useful to Eastern countries'." (120)

[Aine · Rating 4 out of 5]

“The Russian Revolution tore through the fabric of time. What should never have been became real – a workers’ state, a country whose dynamic was to be controlled by the working class and peasantry.”

In Red Star Over The Third World Vijay Prashad shows how the October Revolution resonated across the colonised world and both the imaginative and material importance of the USSR. He traces the history from the initial shock of the Revolution and its reverberation across the world (particularly helpful was the union of the working class and the peasants) to the balancing acts between the needs of the Commintern’s European members and those members from the countries colonised by Europe as well between supporting the anti-colonial movements that would eventually suppress the communists as soon as the national bourgeoisie came to power. Staying in the inter-war period he explains the difficulties the Commintern faced when confronted with areas of the world that hadn’t developed like Europe and the struggle both the have Moscow recognise the importance of the Eastern women’s issues and then to organise and campaign on those rights (in 1928 270 Uzbek women were murdered for unveiling themselves).

In Europe, Soviet intervention in Hungary and Khrushchev’s revelations about Stalin produced a process that led to Eurocommunism. Amongst the Third World communist parties, a different orientation became clear after 1956, acknowledging the importance of the USSR but seeking some distance from its political orientation. But, frustrated with the pace of change and the violence around them (e.g. the massacre of Indonesian communists), many communist parties took to the gun in the 1960s. This, of course, had its limitations, especially as “violence worked most effectively the other way”.

The importance of the USSR was shown as much in what has happened in world politics since its dissolution. However, Prashad advises “today, in many parts of the world, despite the collapse of the USSR, the red flag remains aloft in our movements. Who carries this red flag? Brave women and men who believe in a cause that is greater than their own self-interest, who believe that whatever the errors made over the course of the past century, the dream of socialism remains alive and well. These brave women and men loo up at the sky and see the red star over their world.”

Yes, it is a short book written in broad strokes. It does not get into the detail of particular countries or their own characteristics or context and sub-Saharan Africa does not feature much. But what it does do is make the reader want to find out more, to learn about these other people and other places that don’t appear in the usual narrative.

There’s also some great quotes throughout the book:
* “Gradually, word arrived that the Russian people – mostly peasants – had overthrown the most powerful autocracy in the world, the Tsarist Empire. There was disbelief that men and women with dirt under their fingernails and bodies beaten by machines would be able to come together and seize power. How was this even possible?”
* “The national bourgeoisie of the colonies would instinctively be against colonial rule, but they would not necessarily be against imperialism.”
* “Anti-colonial nationalism could not easily be denounced. Lenin recognised that it was a ‘difficult task’ to navigate the shoals of anti-colonial nationalism. Such a problem had to be dealt with carefully. There was ‘no communist booklet’ that had the answers for the radicals in the anti-colonial movements. They would have to throw themselves into the struggle and find their answers there.”
* “In other words, the past is a resource not a destination – it reminds us of what is possible, and its traces show us that elements of that old communitarianism can be harnessed in the fight against colonial private property relations in the present. When Marxism came to the Third World, it had to be supple and precise – learn from its context, understand the way capitalism morphs in a new venue and explore the ways for social transformation to drive history.”
* “The USSR lasted only seventy years. This is a very small period of time in the scope of world history. Its achievements have been pilloried – its demise being the greatest argument against its achievements. But merely because it disappeared does not mean that it was without merit. It provides us with the assurance that a workers’ and peasants’ state can exist, that it can create policies to benefit the vast masses of the people rather than merely the rich, that it can heal and educate rather than simply starve and kill. This is something to hold on to.”

I would definitely recommend it to a friend.

[Vivek KuRa · Rating 5 out of 5]

USSR started out as a beacon of socialist success but later only to become a bad example for deviating from its original agenda in a short span of 70 years for several reasons. This book talks about how USSR’s successful proletariat revolution acted as a sounding board for similar experiments around the third world countries.
The chapters in this book are neither in any chronological order nor assorted by countries. It is all over the place. So I tried to summarize the high level contents of the book below.
1. How the October revolution’s success reverberated in all directions with Moscow as the epicenter and how the world reacted to it.
2. As a result, how some of the then third world countries tried to emulate and experiment this newly validated Marx’s hypothesis for themselves (Both successfully and unsuccessfully).
3. Least talked about Women’s role in the October revolution
4. Formulation of Comintern and contribution/participation from the third world nations including India, China, Mexico, Iraq, Turkey, Peru to the Comintern in 1920s.
5. How Soviet Islamic republics were formed amidst the challenge of pan-Islamic sentiments and regional language barriers. How USSR’s regional language policy (Korenizatsiya) helped in increasing the literacy rate from 1/5 of population in 1917 to 86% in 1937.
6. How the constant pressure from colonialism, Fascism, Imperialism, and capitalism hinders the socialist growth all over the world
7. And finally how events such as Invasion of Hungary and policies such as Glasnost & Perestroika eventually steered USSR towards its irreversible but expected doom
In this book I learned so many unknown facts about the working class/peasant uprising effort from all over the world including China, India, Mexico, Indonesia and how some groups always considered USSR as a model but some formulated their own solutions.
I really wished the book was sectioned by countries and included the stories from Angola, Ethiopia, Mozambique , Yemen , Nicaragua to name a missed few.
If any of the above topic interests you then you will like this book. A very short comprehensive read.

[Tanroop]

Update: Gave this book a quick re-read over the past few days. An enjoyable read to be sure, but it's short and probably serves best as an intro to the impact of October on the Third World.

Hanim was not an idealist. She took life by the throat and demanded more of
it. ‘True, we may stumble in pathless darkness, we may stand on the brink of
yawning chasms,’ she closed her comments lyrically, ‘but we are not afraid,
because we know that in order to see the dawn one has to pass through the dark
night.’
______________________________________________________

A concise, well written, and interesting look at the enduring impact the October Revolution had on the Third World and anti-colonial movements.

This book admittedly made me reconsider some of my preconceptions of the Soviet Union, but I was also glad to see Prashad engage with the critiques and failings of the USSR as well. This book felt like an important contribution to the debate around the USSR's legacy.

"The USSR will be remembered for its breakthrough against monarchy, its emancipation of the peasantry and the working class, its war against fascism and its support for the anti-colonial movements; it cannot be reduced entirely to the purges or the failure to produce a wide range of commodities. But it should also be remembered for having failed to deepen our understanding of socialist democracy and of a socialist culture. These are the challenges before us. We have to develop new ideas to deepen the meaning of socialism, a living tradition not a dead past."

[Lucas Kzau · Rating 5 out of 5]

Chorei varias vezes. Ficou muito claro para mim o porque aprendemos a historia da burguesia na escola. Se aprendessemos a historia do povo nao teria anticomunismo que segurava.

[Rob M · Rating 3 out of 5]

Vijay Prashad is a leading thinker in this field and a deeply compelling writer of prose. This short book is accessible and enjoyable and contains a lot of exciting historical and political threads for the curious reader to follow up on.

However, the book is almost too short and too accessible. It would have benefitted from some extra detail and texture. One of the most exciting aspects of revolutionary third world politics is its pluralism, dynamism, and richness - and this brief text doesn't convey that as well as it could have.

I would recommend this to anyone looking for a very short and simple introduction to Bolshevism, Soviet Asia, and the roots of Third World Revolution. However, anyone with even a basic background in this area would be better served skipping this and going straight to some of Prashad's more in-depth writing.

[Jeff · Rating 4 out of 5]

I didn't really know what this book was about when I picked it up -- I was looking for a history of communist movements in the Third World, and the title seemed related. But although it touches on this, it's mostly about the *inspiration* that the Soviet Union provided for these movements, rather than the movements themselves. In other words, it talks more about Soviet ideology regarding the Third World than it does any particular Third World communist movement. That being said, it's SUPER good if that's what you're looking for.

[Your Friend Fieldy · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really appreciate having the connection between so many revolutions and revolutionary movements across the world laid out for me like this. Prashad removes the context of socialist victories and defeats from their individual vacuums, shows how socialist parties across the globe have supported and inspired each other. This was a really beautiful book, like an ode to revolution. There have been many times we were close to creating a better world, and there's a long thread for us to pick up. A better world is possible.

[lexluvsb00ks · Rating 3 out of 5]

just wish the flow was better. incredibly valuable nonetheless and def recommend reading !!!!

[Eli · Rating 5 out of 5]

beautifully told, great images included. inspiring.

[Happy Dwi Wardhana · Rating 2 out of 5]

Cara menulisnya melompat-lompat dan terlalu banyak name dropping.

[csillagkohó · Rating 4 out of 5]

At times this feels not so much like a cohesive text in its own right as it does a catalogue. I'm using that word in the best possible sense. Red Star over the Third World genuinely makes me intrigued to read Mariátegui or Aimé Césaire, to find out more about Soviet Asia, to understand the importance of literacy campaigns in socialist history, ... albeit that these topics are only briefly touched upon by Vijay himself. In that sense the book is an eclectic anthology of (maybe too many) names, ideas, events and arguments, illustrated with colourful examples from Peru to Iran.

In terms of content here's just three memorable points the book raises (not the only ones):

1) It shows how socialist parties/movements in the Third World never merely existed as an extension of the Comintern or as Soviet sattelites, but developed their own autonomous theory and practice. Especially interesting is the contrast between the stagnation/reformism this led to in Western Europe (Eurocommunism) and the more successfully evolved Third World communist parties of the same era in India, Cuba, ...

2) It demonstrates that imperialism and fascism are completely intertwined in their origins, methods, ideologies and purposes (Western support for fascist Spain being an important illustration) and that they both threaten the emancipation of humanity in similar ways. Liberalism has often presented itself as synonymous with emancipation while supporting and enacting the most reactionary politics in practice.

3) It underlines the importance of understanding that "the working class is not made up of unmarked bodies of workers" (p. 90) and thus that class is never the only social hierarchy to be directly fought by leftists. Which could be a valuable lesson to those on the left who are quick to stitch the label "identity politics" onto virtually any strategy that extends beyond the strictly economical delineation of class struggle.

[Victor Lopez · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lots of interesting tidbits about socialist activism and national liberation struggle in the light of the October Revolution. It's pretty good but I honestly liked Walter Rodney's exploration of this a little more (since this a short essay and that is lecture notes for a university course).

[Tobias Fausko-Johansen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Veldig interessant lesning om hvordan oktober revolusjonen påvirka de ulike bevegelsene verden rundt. Anbefales virkelig !

[Creighton Ward · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good, accessible introduction to studies of the October Revolution and its impact on global communist parties and movements, but skippable for most people interested in the field.

[Ben Spill · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The USSR will be remembered for its breakthrough against monarchy, its emancipation of the peasantry and the working class, its war against fascism and its support for the anti-colonial movement; it cannot be reduced entirely to the purges or the failure to produce a wide range of commodities. But it should also be remembered for having failed to deepen our understanding of socialist democracy and of a socialist culture. These are the challenges before us. We have to develop new ideas to deepen the meaning of socialism, a living tradition not a dead past."

[Oscar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Boka gikk i detaljer om kommunisme og sosialisme i den tredje verden og hvor viktig den sosialistiske utviklinga var for dem. Vijay forklarte godt men generelt om de diverse sosialistiske bevegelsene og hva slags farer de støtte på i sine kamper. Boka var lettlest og enkel å forstå. Anbefaler boka om du har lyst til å bli introdusert til sosialistisk historie i den tredje verden.

[Oleg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Очень коротенькая книжечка - своеобразная таблетка от склероза, вызванного капиталистической пропагандой. Индийский коммунист на ста страницах напоминает миру о той огромной роли, которую сыграли большевики и СССР в развитии человечества.

За годы чтения иностранных текстов о России (в основном англоязычных - у нас же pax americana) я уже привык к их пристрастности. Даже в самых объективных из них, старающихся опираться на факты, а не на эмоции, нет-нет да и проскочит искра западного высокомерия или просто недопонимания со стороны автора (дескать у нас в Европах тут сад и расчищенные дорожки, а у них в России сплошь тайга и бурелом). Удивительно после этого читать Red Star Over the Third World , где иностранный автор ни разу не скатывается к аргументу "ну это же русские, вы же понимаете", а глубоко и внимательно анализирует суть Октябрьской революции, широкими мазками рисуя ту важнейшую роль, которую она сыграла в развитии мировой истории. Уж точно нам надо выбираться из информационного пузыря, навязанного коллективным Западом, и больше читать авторов развивающихся стран.

Вдохновлённые Октябрём

Прашад показывает, как Октябрьская революция, словно брошенный в тихую воду булыжник, послала вибрации во все уголки мира.

Вот Хо Ши Мин, лидер вьетнамской революции: "В истории человечества не было революции, сравнимой с Октябрьской по масштабу и значению."

А вот Эмилиано Сапата, один из вождей Мексиканской революции 1919 года: "Я не знаю, что такое социализм, но я большевик, как и все мексиканские патриоты. Янки не любят большевиков; янки - наши враги; значит, большевики должны быть нашими друзьями, а мы должны быть их друзьями. Мы все большевики."

Китайский революционер Сунь Ятсен: "Если китайский народ желает быть свободным, его единственным союзником в борьбе за национальную свободу является рабоче-крестьянская Красная армия."

Прашад задаётся вопросом, было бы столько восстаний в 1919 году против европейских колонизаторов без влияния Октября? От восстания в Египте до движения первого марта в Корее и до движения четвёртого мая в Китае? Были бы переворот против британского управления в Ираке в 1920 и революция в Монголии в 1921? В отсутствие классовых требований Советов включила бы индийская партия Национальный Конгресс требования крестьянства в свою программу? Хотя под влиянием Ганди Индия пошла другим путём, влияние Ленина на индийские прогрессивные силы было неоспоримым, что признавал лидер Национального Конгресса Дж. Неру.

Борьба за просвещение масс

Что привлекало третий мир в Октябрьской революции, так это та роль, которую большевики отводили в ней крестьянам. Россия в начале XX века аграрная страна, и этот фактор сближал её с колониями.

В деле построения лучшего общества большевикам важно было добиться повышения грамотности населения, образовать тех самых крестьян.

"Безграмотный человек стоит вне политики, — писал Ленин, — его сначала надо научить азбуке. Без этого не может быть политики, без этого есть только слухи, сплетни, сказки, предрассудки, но не политика."

После революции была запущена программа ликбеза, в результате которой за 20 лет большевистской власти уровень образования в стране повысился с 30 до 86 процентов для мужчин, с 13 до 65 для женщин. При этом проводилась политика "коренизации" - продвижения региональных языков.

Успехи ликвидации неграмотности в СССР, причём даже в самых дальних и отсталых его уголках, не могли не впечатлить лучших представителей задавленного метрополиями третьего мира.

В деле просвещения молодое советское государство не ограничивалось внутренней работой. Важным было взаимодействие с прогрессивными силами за рубежом. Многие будущие национальные лидеры в Азии, родившиеся близко к 1900 году, прошли через Коминтерн, а также через учёбу в Коммунистическом университете трудящихся Востока. Для всех них СССР был важной отправной точкой для развития собственных идей, построения собственных революционных теорий и связей.

Советскую власть отличает в те годы умение работать на востоке с исламом. Полумесяц и советская красная звезда вполне уживались, по мнению многих восточных революционных деятелей, на одном знамени освобождения 250 млн мусульман Сахары, Аравии, Индустана и Индии. В конце концов "для миллионов мусульман-пролетариев империалистический панислаизм так же малопривлекателен, как и западный империализм".

Ташкент и Баку в то время (20е и 30е годы XX века) - "хабы" восточного марксизма, где регулярно проводились международные конгрессы, конференции и т.п. левого движения.

Ещё один выдающийся момент советских начинаний, потрясавший прогрессивных представителей третьего мира, это борьба за права женщин на Востоке. В тех же городах Средней Азии были созданы женотделы, последовательно отстаивавшие право женщины на то, чтобы считаться человеком, а не вьючным скотом в парандже. Да, было глухое сопротивление масс - простой работяга приветствовал передачу земли в общественную собственность и изгнание баев, но не был готов поднять женщину до своего уровня. Да, были ужасные проявления Средневековья:  к примеру, в 1928 году 270 узбекских женщин было убито из-за снятия ими паранджи. И тем не менее женотделы не отступали. И результаты пришли. Если до Октярьской революции уровень грамотности женщин в Средней Азии находился практически на нуле, то к 1970 он составлял почти 99%.

Для индийского коммуниста Прашада описанное выше - яркий пример прогрессивной политики Советов; пример тем более яркий, если учесть, что в его стране до сих пор, в 21 веке (!), в обществе сильны средневековые традиции не только разделения мужчин и женщин, но и деления на касты.


Борьба с империализмом

Когда президент США В. Вильсон в 1919 году, претендуя на оригинальность, пытался рассуждать на тему мира без аннексий и контрибуций, а также на тему права народов на самоопределение, индийский журналист замечал, что Ленин эти все эти идеи провозгласил ещё два года до этого.

Коминтерн в 1928 году отмечал, что Октябрьская революция привлекает народы, потому что именно в коммунистическом движении они видят главного врага империализма.  При этом антиколониальное движение не должно было останавливаться на обретении угнетённым третьим миром формальной независимости от колоний. Предстояло избавиться от компрадорской национальной элиты, действующей во имя своих интересов и тем самым на благо империализма. Большевики в своей стране это предательство элитами интересов народа увидели ещё на примере Временного правительства, упорно не желавшего заканчивать участие России в Первой мировой войне. Спайка компрадорской элиты с мировой буржуазией нашла своё подтверждение и в безусловной поддержке всеми империалистическими силами белого движения. Всё, что уводило страну в сторону от интересов метрополий, вызывало лютую ненависть последних. Немудрено, что такие хищники-капиталисты, как У. Черчилль люто ненавидили красных ("one might as well legalize sodomy as recognize the Bolsheviks").

Последовательная борьба СССР с фашизмом и родственным ему колониализмом

Только два государства официально поддержали Испанскую республику в борьбе с Франко: СССР и Мексика, оба - государства крестьян, в которых прошли революции. Без логистической поддержки СССР (Операция "X") испанские республиканцы, зажатые со всех сторон, не продержались бы так долго, до 1939 года.

Прашад прямо утверждает то, что в XXI веке на Западе писать либо просто не comme il faut, либо уже негласно запрещено:

It was the Soviet Union that saved the world from Nazism. It was Soviet armies that liberated most of the Nazi concentration camps, and it was the Soviet armies that entered Berlin and ended the war.

После окончания войны СССР последовательно выступал в поддержку антиколониального движения. Инициированная им Декларация ООН о предоставлении независимости колониальным странам и народам 1960 года получила 89 голосов "за", "против" было 0, а вот "воздержалось" аж 9 государств. И кто же среди воздержавшихся? Конечно, США, Бельгия, Франция, Португалия, Испания, Великобритания, Южная Африка. Тем не менее тенденцию выдавливания метрополий из колоний уже было не остановить.

СССР было не достаточно просто содействовать обретению формальной независимости третьими странами. Необходимо было помочь обрести им реальную экономическую независимость от бывших метрополий. Че Гевара в этом смысле прозорливо замечал:

"социалистические страны должны помочь в финансировании развития стран, продвигающихся к независимости. [Торговля между социалистическими странами должна основываться не на стоимостном законе капитализма, а базироваться на установлении братских цен. Задача] состоит в установлении таких цен, которые дозволят развитие страны. Великий сдвиг в идеях [человечества] не может произойти без изменения порядка международных отношений."

СССР старался следовать этим идеям и с той же Кубой задачу поддержания страны решал, в том числе покупая по справелливой цене у острова Свободы сахар, когда США наложили эмбарго на Кубу). Но экономическая сила СССР всё же была меньше, чем силы Запада, и когда Советский Союз ослаб, а затем и распался, многие формально независимые страны третьего мира вновь попали в неоколониальную зависимость к метрополиям (об этом подробнее у J. Hickel. The Divide).

О разнице в подходах к оценке СССР между еврокоммунистами и левыми третьего мира

1956 год, в СССР проводится 20й съезд КПСС, на котором Хрущев "разоблачил" преступления Сталина. Согласно Прашаду, эта атака на Сталина, а также вторжение СССР в Венгрию нанесли серьёзный ущерб высочайшему авторитету Советского Союза в третьем мире; авторитету, дл того подтверждённому фактом построения современного и справедливого государства в крестьянской стране, а также фактом величайшей доблести в деле победы над фашизмом и его собратом колониализмом. 

"Откровения" Хрущева усилили определённые тенденции в Европе, приведшие к вырождённому еврокоммунизму, испугавшемуся революции и более не считавшему её нужной. Еврокоммунисты, ставшие выступать за полицентризм и за эволюционное (постепенное, само собой) развитие общества , в итоге вернулись к социальной демократии, по сути предав идеалы коммунизма. При этом, согласившись играть по правилам западных капиталистических т.н. "демократий", еврокоммунисты  встали в позу оправдывающихся, вечно открещивающихся от ошибок тех государств,  в которых реализовывался социалистический проект.

Совсем по иному воспринимали ситуацию коммунисты третьего мира. Они хоть и выступали за определённую автономию своего политического курса, однако, в отличие от еврокоммунистов, не снимали СССР с заслуженного пьедестала почёта. Че Гевара говорил в 1965 году: "Социализм молод, он совершает ошибки." Но это лишь повод усилить продуктивную работу, а не посыпать голову пеплом и отступать от своего пути. Тут же можно вспомнить - хотя Прашад его и не приводит - и китайский подход, созвучный с кубинским: Мао на две трети был прав, а на треть ошибался, но мы не будем копаться в его ошибках.

Кстати, насчёт ошибок социализма и отказа от борьбы. В том же 1965 году, когда прозвучали цитируемые выше слова Че, Коммунистическая партия Индонезии пошла ненасильственным путём к власти, за короткий срок в разы увеличив и количество своих членов, и количество сочувствующих. В итоге это вызвало беспокойство местной компрадорской элиты, а также метрополий. Как итог, против индонезийских коммунистов военными при поддержке спецслужб США и Австралии был развернут настоящий политический террор с десятками, если не сотнями тысяч убитых.

Увы, в победившем pax americana  такие эпизоды истории упоминаются намного реже. Как метко пишет Прашад:

The image of communists being thrown from helicopters off the coast of Chile is far less known than any cliché about the USSR.

О распаде СССР и его наследии

Прашад отмечает, что на протяжении всех семидесяти лет существования СССР не было периода, когда страна не подвергалась бы серьёзной внешей угрозе. Как следствие, вся архитектура его социального планирования была ограничена императивными требованиями безопасности. При этом кадровый дефицит, вызванный войнами (ПМВ, гражданская война, ВМВ) и эмиграцией, потребовал перехода многих членов партии на государственные должности. Теория и пассионарность преобразователей потонули в текучке и бюрократии.

Требования безопасности, по мнению Прашада, ограничили и демократические надежды народа. Автор считает, что, ограничив проявления народовластия, СССР позволил Западу - демократичному лишь на бумаге - присвоить себе эксклюзив на "демократию". Советский Союз в итоге встал в положение оправдывающегося.

От себя. Да, СССР проиграл словесную войну, в итоге общаясь с Западом на его ньюспике со всеми этими терминами типа "демократия", "независимые выборы из двоих и более кандидатов" и так далее. Но это отнюдь не значит, что в СССР народовластие было более ограниченным, чем на Западе. Скорее наоборот. Просто эта демократия проявлялась совсем в другом. Например, в трудовых отношениях.

Другой причиной распада СССР, которую упоминает Прашад, и которая мне представляется более весомой, является уклон послевоенного советского общества в материальное. Вспоминается "Чего же ты хочешь?" Кочетова с его резкой критикой мелкобуржуазного мышления, постепенно становящегося главенствующим в советском обществе 60х годов. Удивительно созвучно тревогам Кочетова звучат следущие слова Фиделя Кастро, приводимые Прашадом:

The real values of socialism were being neglected, and the material questions received more attention as time went by. The ideological part of this kind of process was being neglected, while the materialistic part was being stressed. It suddenly appeared as if the objective of socialism, according to the statements, speeches, and documents, had focused only on improving the standard of living of the population every year: A little more cloth fabric, a little more cheese, a little more milk, a little more ham, more material stuff. To me, socialism is a total change in the life of the people and the establishment of new values and a new culture which should be based mainly on solidarity between people, not selfishness and individualism.

Как этому противостоять, как с этим бороться? СССР показал нам пример построения жизнеспособного социалистического общества и вместе с тем он же обнажил ряд сопутствующих этому построению проблем. Прашад верно призывает высоко ценить достижения СССР в деле освобождения крестьянского и рабочего классов, изучать советский опыт и брать от него самое лучшее, вместе с тем учитывать допущенные ошибки и просчёты, работать над устранением их в будущем.

[Keen Reader · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a fairly lightweight read, but then it doesn’t pretend to be otherwise, but in spite of that it still raises many interesting points. How so many millions continued fight on and die during WWI for nothing more than the petty squabbles of the monarchy and elite, well at least the Russians and communists actually saw through the illusion and the madness of it all, pulled out and revolted and destroyed their own monarchy.

Prashad raises some valid points of how communism managed to greatly increase the rates of literacy and culture within the peasantry. After all look how many millions lay illiterate and dirt poor in the likes of India in spite of centuries of British imperial rule?...

Ultimately this is a book that throws out a lot of interesting ideas or starting off points, but never allows itself to explore or expand on any of those, and as result I was left a little confused as to the overall point. It didn’t appear to be coherent or focused enough to present a clear or established aim and instead it read just like a series of collected and shapeless fragments

Prashad lists many grim examples of when the US and European democracies in spite of the high moralising rhetoric have sided with fascism, like in 1960 when the US voted against a resolution that called for Algerian independence. Or when General Franco marched into Madrid, the British ambassador went to greet him. “This imperialist and fascist alliance was against humanity." In spite of the million plus slaughtered in the CIA backed Indonesian military coup in the 60s, apparently the UN never spoke up at all.

I did learn a thing or two from here, there were a few names I hadn’t come across before. Strangely the final chapter seems to be the strongest and most compelling of all and made me wish that the rest of the book was as consistent and enjoyable. But still this was an interesting read.

[Daniel Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an explosive little book that admirably conveys the profound impact of the October Revolution and its continued influence for communist movements in the Third World – with a focus here on Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. What Prashad lacks in focus and depth of analysis (this is a very short introduction, with the pros and cons of a bird's-eye view), he makes up for in the strength of his associative vignettes of revolutionaries, artists, poets, peasants, workers, and religious figures who found their grounding in the events of 1917. (The book is worth it just for the bits of revolutionary poetry, pulled from a multitude of nationalities and languages, which appear throughout.) Nothing could be the same in the world after 1917, for "what should never have been became real" – a society where the oppressed masses had overthrown the oppressing class.

Prashad's narrative is a compelling alternative to both a unilaterally triumphalist or defamatory assessment of the Soviet legacy. Rather, we are given brief but well-defined glimpses of honest, hard-won expressions of "polycentric communism" beyond Russia, which took the Soviet experience as inspiration but which forged unique paths. True to Lenin's form, these are movements born out of "concrete analyses of concrete conditions," and they are worthy of study in their own right as part of the legacy of twentieth-century communism.

What is clear from this book is that pessimistic appraisals of the Left and its decline over the last 50 years are largely a Western phenomenon. For the places where the memory of the October Revolution remains present, the red flag is as vibrant as ever. I highly recommend this book as a short, accessible introduction to the immense contribution of communism and the lasting revolutionary influence of events that dared to remake the world.

[Kahfi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Revolusi Oktober mungkin beberapa generasi kemudian akan menjadi suatu epos dengan tingkatan suprarasional. Revolusi Oktober mewujudkan apa yang sebelumnya hanya angan-angan kemudian menjadi mungkin. Revolusi Oktober dengan kisahnya menjadikan pemerintahan komunis bukan sekadar olok-olok kaum borjuis.

Buku ini menjelaskan bagaimana Revolusi Oktober berdampak begitu hebat kepada situasi politik internasional khususnya negara Dunia Ketiga, selain itu Revolusi Oktober memberikan sinar-sinar pendukung kekuatan anti-kolonialisme untuk berbalik menggebuk lawan tradisional nya.

Buku ini mengambil sikap netral dengan menyajikkan peranan Revolusi Oktober dalam menginspirasi negara-negara baru yang ingin merdeka sekaligus mencemooh glorifikasi komunis garis keras yang selalu mengganggap suksesi kepemimpinan mereka jauh dari kata cacat.

[Joe G]

Engaging, short and sweet little intro on the impact of the October revolution on the oppressed world. Inspirational and valuable in its focus on the spirit of socialism, the culture, consciousness and truth of the communist project.

[Albert Zhou · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great short read about the importance of communism for national-liberation movements in the formerly colonised Third World nations. It also has an honest discussion about the internal contradictions of the Soviet Union, and mentions violations of international law by it, like the 1956 invasion of Hungary. The Third World, unlike the colonial West, never saw the Soviet Union as an all-good paragon or all-bad demon, but saw it for what it was: a flawed attempt to build a society run by workers and peasants. Western Leftists would do well to listen to voices in the Third World once in a while.

[João Vítor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ótimo, sucinto, com grande riqueza de materiais para refletir o papel da URSS nas relações internacionais do século XX, sobretudo na solidariedade entre os povos e a construção de movimentos insurgentes.

[Nathana Tila · Rating 4 out of 5]

"gerações construtivas pensam no passado como uma origem, nunca como um programa"

[Timóteo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Um livro incrível e inspirador que todo mundo que habita o sul global deveria ler.