Preface

This volume aims to commemorate, criticize, scrutinize and assess the undoubted significance of the Russian Revolution both retrospectively and prospectively in three parts. Part I consists of a palimpsest of the different representations that the Russian Revolution underwent through its turbulent history, going back to its actors, agents, theorists and propagandists to consider whether it is at all possible to revisit the Russian Revolution as an event. With this problematic as a backbone, the chapters of this section scrutinize the ambivalences of revolution in four distinctive phenomena (sexual morality, religion, law and forms of life) that pertain to the revolution’s historicity. Part II concentrates on how the revolution was retold in the aftermath of its accomplishment not only by its sympathizers but also its opponents. These chapters not only bring to light the ways in which the revolution triggered critical theorists to pave new paths of radical thinking that were conceived as methods to overcome the revolution’s failures and impasses, but also how the Revolution was subverted in order to inspire reactionary politics and legitimize conservative theoretical undertakings. Even commemorating the Russian Revolution, then, still poses a threat to every well-established political order. In Part III, this volume interprets how the Russian Revolution can spur a rethinking of the idea of revolution. Acknowledging the suffocating burden that the notion of revolution as such entails, the final chapters of this book ultimately address the content and form of future revolution(s). It is therein, in such critical political thought and such radical form of action, where the Russian Revolution’s legacy ought to be sought and can still be found.

Contributions to Contemporary History

The Russian revolution of 1917 was one of the turning points in world history, even if its radical (communist) stage proved to be a historical blind street. There was just one revolution – not two, as it had been interpreted by the Soviet historiography. The uniqueness of the Russian revolution results from the fact that the radical seizure of power in November 1917 turned to be the beginning of a long process of totalitarian dictatorship, which lasted for mor than seventy years. Today, it is the heritage of the victory in the Second World War that constitutes the founding myth of modern Russian state.

Scando-Slavica, 2018

Studies in East European Thought

Last year marked the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution of 1917. That turbulent year featured two revolutions-in February and October-following one another in quick succession. The first, the February Revolution, overthrew Tsar Nicholas II and ended more than a 300 year reign of the Romanov dynasty, which led to a brief period of a growing optimism and hopes for a democratic future. The second, the (Great) October Revolution, put the Bolsheviks in power and launched the 70-year communist experiment. The event of a great historical significance, the centennial anniversary of the Russian Revolution of 1917, was widely received as an occasion to revisit the topic of revolution and stirred new debates concerning Russia's intellectual and political history and identity, as well as the country's future role in the world. "Revolution" has been one of the keywords in modern political vocabulary since the seventeenth century. However, the term itself has undergone a remarkable change. Thus, seventeenth-century British statesmen and political theorists called relatively minor events of 1688 a "Great" or "Glorious" Revolution, whereas Cromwell's Revolution was called, by its enemies "The Great Rebellion" (Williams 1976, 271-272). One of the most prominent twentieth-century Marxist critics, Raymond Williams associated the modern usage of the term "revolution" with the influence of the French Revolution. He wrote:

Science & Society, 2017

Irish Marxist Review, 2017

It is self-evident that the Russian Revolution was an enormously important historical event – probably the most important of the 20th century. But the French Revolution was also an important historical event, so was the fall of Constantinople in 1453. From the standpoint of this journal, however, the Russian Revolution was important in a different way: not just because it is more recent but because it embodied goals and aspirations that are our goals and aspirations – a socialist society of equality and freedom based on workers’ democratic control from below – and because it fought for those goals and aspirations with methods that have a bearing on the methods we use today.

The Historical Journal, 1981

Russian Studies in Philosophy, 2017

Sept 11, 2017 This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution of 1917. Without question, that upheaval was the most important event of the 20th century. It was and remains a milestone in humanity’s long struggle for national sovereignty and social justice in this epoch of capitalist imperialism. Soldiers join the revolution in Russia in February 1917 to overthrow the Tsarist monarchy Much will be written in the coming months about the October Revolution, as it was also named, for the pivotal date of October 25 in the old Russian calendar (November 7 in the modern calendar) when a new political power was born. Many detractors will continue to dismiss it as a flawed, totalitarian experiment. Amongst more serious observers, some of what will be written will be informative, but a lot will be less than informative if not downright misleading. Many political and academic careers and reputations have staked claims to the mantle of the Russian Revolution, so the competition to speak in its name can be expected to be strong on the 100th anniversary. This essay attempts an interpretation that is cleared of the ultraleftism which, in this writer’s view, has dominated many 20th century interpretations.

International Critical Thought, 2018

The Russian Revolution is being celebrated worldwide, at its 100th anniversary. There are, however, diverse interpretations of this historic event. Three of these are common among progressive scholars and activists: (1) "Dawn of a New Age," which sees the Revolution as the beginning of a line of unbroken progress toward communism; (2) "Shangri-La," the Revolution as an all-butimpossible dream of a working-class utopia, which may or may not ever reach fulfillment; and (3) "Inevitable Thermidor," which views 1917 as a brief moment of working-class triumph that was then overturned and replaced by dictatorship and tragedy. Against all of these views, a fourth interpretation is possible: "October 1917 as Defining Moment." The Revolution planted early socialist seeds, which bore fruit only much later. Despite the demise of the socialist states in 1989-1991, the early socialist system laid the foundations for the Chinese Revolution of 1949, the breakup of the old colonial systems worldwide, and for progressive gains yet to come. With due allowance for the failures and weaknesses of the Soviet experience, and for the retreats and complexities that occur along the path of social progress, the Russian Revolution still stands as a signal historic moment, with a direct link to the early socialist transformations of the twentieth century, and to the further steps toward human fulfillment that are yet to come.