ISKRA---The Spark that lit a Bolshevik Fire: a Study

Readings:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

How did Iskra come into being?
What role did it play?
How did they distinguish themselves in the revolutionary Left?
Who was the intended primary audience of Iskra?
How did they win people over?
What did they do with those they won over?

Coach wrote:Readings:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

How did Iskra come into being?
What role did it play?
How did they distinguish themselves in the revolutionary Left?
Who was the intended primary audience of Iskra?
How did they win people over?
What did they do with those they won over?

I haven't finished reading all of them yet, but I'll start anyway. I may indirectly answer some of your questions, maybe not at all, but at least I hope to start some discussion as well. I assume your questions are more guidelines, but anyway I'll begin now.

The role it played is quite fascinating. I think this quote summarizes it pretty accurately (its from the first one linked to).

We will exert our efforts to bring every Russian comrade to regard our publication as his own, to which all groups would communicate every kind of information concerning the movement, in which they would relate their experiences, express their views, indicate their needs for political literature, and voice their opinions concerning Social-Democratic editions: in a word, they would thereby share whatever contribution they make to the movement and whatever they draw from it. Only in this way will it be possible to establish a genuinely all-Russian Social-Democratic organ. Only such a publication will be capable of leading the movement on to the high road of political struggle.

One part I found that I actually had the exact same idea before was this quote:

Open polemics, conducted in full view of all Russian Social-Democrats and class-conscious workers, are necessary and desirable in order to clarify the depth of existing differences, in order to afford discussion of disputed questions from all angles, in order to combat the extremes into which representatives, not only of various views, but even of various localities, or various “specialities” of the revolutionary movement, inevitably fall. Indeed, as noted above, we regard one of the drawbacks of the present-day movement to be the absence of open polemics between avowedly differing views, the effort to conceal differences on fundamental questions.

I think this is exactly right. We can't build a revolutionary group agitating for a workers' state by simply uniting all the bickering socialist ideas. We have to draw a line somewhere. We have to do do this through struggle with others. I don't mean a struggle of contempt. But one where we can bring ideas together so we can learn from each other. I find that this is one of the main reasons the Iskra was created. This is also closely related to the other reason, which is to unite revolutionaries across the nation.

It seems they distinguished themselves in the revolutionary left because they did not try to keep from creating a true vanguard party to lead the people, but actively tried to create it. They did not push it into the background.

It seems the primary audience were the revolutionary socialists and the advanced workers.

This is all I have so far. I'll continue reading the rest of the articles (they're fascinating, really), and I may revise some of my answers later upon encountering new information.

It seems another major role it played was to unite the divided revolutionary socialist circles spread out around the country to form a vanguard party.

Not sure if this fits, but as Gf said in his post (excellent, by the way) it continues the debate.

When the advanced representatives of this class assimilate the ideas of scientific socialism and the historical idea of the Russian worker – when these ideas receive a broad dissemination – when durable organisations are created among the workers that transform the present uncoordinated economic war of the workers into a purposive class struggle, - then the Russian WORKER, elevated to the head of all democratic elements, will overthrow absolutism and lead the RUSSIAN PROLETARIAT (side by side with the proletariat of ALL COUNTRIES) by the direct road of open political struggle to THE VICTORIOUS COMMUNIST REVOLUTION. (Lenin, ‘Friends of the People’ 1894?)

In his book on Lenin, Lars T. Lih points to the final section of Lenin’s ‘Friends of the People’ as setting the three ‘acts’ for a communist revolution. He suggests that this final paragraph contains all the ingredients broken into easy to digest chunks.

Act One, The creation of Russian Social Democracy: “When the advanced representatives of this class assimilate the ideas of scientific socialism and the historical idea of the Russian worker – when these ideas receive a broad dissemination – when durable organisations are created among the workers that transform the present uncoordinated economic war of the workers into a purposive class struggle…”

Act Two, The democratic revolution: “the Russian WORKER, elevated to the head of all democratic elements, will overthrow absolutism…”

Act Three, The Social revolution: The Russian worker will “lead the RUSSIAN PROLETARIAT (side by side with the proletariat of ALL COUNTRIES) by the direct road of open political struggle to THE VICTORIOUS COMMUNIST REVOLUTION."

Although written several years before the birth of ‘Iskra’, there is little doubt of the role that Lenin saw for a journal directed at the ‘nucleus’ of the revolution, providing a manual for the dissemination of information to the ‘advanced worker’.

Isakenaz wrote:Not sure if this fits, but as Gf said in his post (excellent, by the way) it continues the debate.

When the advanced representatives of this class assimilate the ideas of scientific socialism and the historical idea of the Russian worker – when these ideas receive a broad dissemination – when durable organisations are created among the workers that transform the present uncoordinated economic war of the workers into a purposive class struggle, - then the Russian WORKER, elevated to the head of all democratic elements, will overthrow absolutism and lead the RUSSIAN PROLETARIAT (side by side with the proletariat of ALL COUNTRIES) by the direct road of open political struggle to THE VICTORIOUS COMMUNIST REVOLUTION. (Lenin, ‘Friends of the People’ 1894?)

In his book on Lenin, Lars T. Lih points to the final section of Lenin’s ‘Friends of the People’ as setting the three ‘acts’ for a communist revolution. He suggests that this final paragraph contains all the ingredients broken into easy to digest chunks.

Act One, The creation of Russian Social Democracy: “When the advanced representatives of this class assimilate the ideas of scientific socialism and the historical idea of the Russian worker – when these ideas receive a broad dissemination – when durable organisations are created among the workers that transform the present uncoordinated economic war of the workers into a purposive class struggle…”

Act Two, The democratic revolution: “the Russian WORKER, elevated to the head of all democratic elements, will overthrow absolutism…”

Act Three, The Social revolution: The Russian worker will “lead the RUSSIAN PROLETARIAT (side by side with the proletariat of ALL COUNTRIES) by the direct road of open political struggle to THE VICTORIOUS COMMUNIST REVOLUTION."

Although written several years before the birth of ‘Iskra’, there is little doubt of the role that Lenin saw for a journal directed at the ‘nucleus’ of the revolution, providing a manual for the dissemination of information to the ‘advanced worker’.

Do you think the same principles of democratic revolution would apply in a nation where a bourgeois republican government grants the illusion of democracy and people's rule?

Godfaesten wrote:Do you think the same principles of democratic revolution would apply in a nation where a bourgeois republican government grants the illusion of democracy and people's rule?

I don't want to change course from the Iskra study, but I actually disagree with Lenin's earlier "stagist" conception or revolution in the more backward semi-feudal less-industrialized countries, and instead think Trotsky's Permanent Revolution theories are more what is needed today. After all, if you look at almost every country on earth now, they are formally ruled by a 'constitutional republic' or 'constitutional monarchy' (but the monarch is really basically just a figurehead of the state). To liberate their nations from imperialism and to abolish capitalist (and any remaining pre-capitalist) relations, the proletariat has to conquer power itself and for itself (yes, in alliance with peasantry, but not submitting to the usually more numerous peasants' petty interests in opposing socialization and clinging to some old reactionary bullshit).