Lenin between the revolutions the writings that led to October

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument¶

The central thesis is that Lenin's writings between the February and October Revolutions of 1917 constitute a masterclass in the application of dialectical materialism to revolutionary strategy. The article argues that the October victory was not inevitable, but was made possible only by Lenin's ability to rearm the Bolshevik Party theoretically and tactically at each abrupt turn in the conjuncture. The claim is that Lenin's method — his refusal to treat Marxist theory as dogma, his capacity to recognise when a previously correct slogan had become obsolete, and his willingness to fight the Party's own conservative instincts — is the decisive lesson for communists today. The article insists that the revolution succeeded because Lenin understood that the task was not to repeat old formulas but to grasp the concrete movement of class forces and adapt accordingly.

Theoretical Grounding¶

The analysis draws on several interconnected Marxist concepts:

The dialectic of base and superstructure in revolutionary situations. The article shows how Lenin read the shifting relationship between the economic crisis (hunger, war exhaustion, land hunger) and the political forms through which class struggle expressed itself (dual power, the Soviets, the Provisional Government). This is not mechanical economism but a concrete analysis of how objective conditions opened and closed strategic possibilities.

The theory of permanent revolution in practice. Although not named explicitly, the article's account of Lenin's abandonment of the "democratic dictatorship of proletariat and peasantry" formula and his turn toward socialist revolution in a backward country is precisely the terrain of the permanent revolution debate. The article positions Lenin and Trotsky together on this question against the "old Bolshevik" resistance.

The Marxist theory of the state. The article highlights The State and Revolution as the theoretical accompaniment to the practical work of insurrection, though it notes this text is excluded from the selection for length. The question of smashing the bourgeois state apparatus and replacing it with Soviet power runs through every tactical decision described.

The critique of centrism and opportunism. Lenin's break with Zimmerwald and his insistence on founding a new International are presented as necessary consequences of the war's exposure of reformist betrayal. The article treats this as settled: centrism is not a bridge but a swamp.

The tradition invoked is that of revolutionary Marxism as opposed to both reformism and ultra-leftism. The article sits squarely in the Trotskyist tradition's reading of 1917, drawing heavily on Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution and presenting the Lenin-Trotsky collaboration as the theoretical and organisational high point of the period.

Conjunctural Relevance¶

The article is explicitly framed as relevant to the current epoch of "deepening crisis for world capitalism." The connection is made through analogy rather than detailed conjunctural analysis:

Economically: The article notes that the Provisional Government could not solve the basic problems of peace, bread, and land. The parallel is to contemporary capitalism's inability to meet working-class needs — though the article does not specify which crises it has in mind.

Politically: The key lesson is that reformist parties (Mensheviks and SRs in 1917) will betray when the crisis deepens. The article implies that today's social-democratic and labour parties are similarly incapable of breaking with capital. The call for a new revolutionary International is presented as the contemporary task.

Geopolitically: The article emphasises Lenin's internationalism — his insistence that the Russian revolution was only the "prologue" to world revolution and that socialism could not be built in one backward country alone. This is a direct intervention against Stalinist "socialism in one country" and its contemporary heirs.

Named forces: The article does not name specific contemporary parties or movements, but the implicit target is any current that treats the revolutionary perspective as abstract or postpones it indefinitely. The RCI's own project of building a revolutionary international is the organisational conclusion.

Where the Argument Continues¶

The article explicitly directs readers to several other texts and resources:

Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution — presented as the essential companion for understanding the objective and subjective forces of 1917.
The State and Revolution — excluded from this selection for length but published separately by Wellred Books.
The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat It — available on marxist.com.
Lenin Selected Writings: On Imperialist War — the companion volume dealing with Lenin's wartime writings.
The broader corpus of In Defence of Marxism (marxist.com) — the article is an introduction to a book, but the theoretical and political arguments it makes are developed across the site's articles and Against the Stream episodes.

What the article leaves open is the concrete application of Lenin's method to the present. It asserts the relevance but does not attempt the analysis itself. The reader is left to draw the parallels: which contemporary parties play the role of the Mensheviks? Where is dual power emerging today? What would a contemporary "April Theses" look like? These are questions the RCI's ongoing work presumably addresses.

Connections¶

Primary texts to read alongside: - Lenin, The State and Revolution - Lenin, The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat It - Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution - Trotsky, The Lessons of October - John Reed, Ten Days That Shook the World

Theoretical connections: - The article's treatment of the relationship between objective conditions and party leadership connects to the broader Marxist debate on the role of the subjective factor in revolution — a theme developed by Trotsky, Lukács, and Gramsci. - The critique of centrism connects to Lenin's Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder and the ongoing debate about how revolutionaries relate to reformist workers. - The question of when to advance the slogan of insurrection and when to restrain adventurism connects to the Marxist tradition's distinction between revolutionary situations and putschism — a theme taken up by Marx in The Class Struggles in France and by Trotsky in his writings on the German catastrophe of 1923.

Contemporary connections: - The RCI's own publications and Against the Stream episodes that apply these lessons to current struggles. - The broader tradition of "Lenin's method" as developed by figures like Lukács (Lenin: A Study on the Unity of His Thought) and more recently by Lars T. Lih and others in the academic literature — though the article's political stance is closer to the Trotskyist tradition than to Lih's "kombinator" interpretation.

Key Quotes¶

"The formula is obsolete. It is no good at all. It is dead. And it is no use trying to revive it." — Lenin on the old slogan of the democratic dictatorship of proletariat and peasantry, quoted to illustrate the necessity of abandoning correct formulas when the conjuncture changes.
"Ours is a bourgeois revolution, we Marxists say, therefore the workers must open the eyes of the people to the deception practised by the bourgeois politicians, teach them to put no faith in words, to depend entirely on their own strength, their own organisation, their own unity and their own weapons." — Lenin's inversion of the Menshevik conclusion from the same premise, showing dialectical reasoning in action.
"The slogan 'Down with the Provisional Government!' is an incorrect one at the present moment because, in the absence of a solid (i.e. a class-conscious and organised) majority of the people on the side of the revolutionary proletariat, such a slogan is either an empty phrase, or, objectively, amounts to attempts of an adventurist character." — Lenin's restraint of ultra-left impatience, demonstrating that revolutionary strategy is not maximalism but concrete assessment.
"All hopes for a peaceful development of the Russian revolution have vanished for good. This is the objective situation: either complete victory for the military dictatorship, or victory for the workers' armed uprising…" — Lenin's assessment after the July Days, showing how a shift in the correlation of forces demands a shift in perspective.
"It would be wrong to think that we have moved farther away from the task of the proletariat winning power. No, we have come very close to it, not directly, but from the side." — Lenin on the Kornilov crisis, illustrating the dialectical understanding that defeats and setbacks can create new paths to victory.
"Now, and only now, perhaps during only a few days or a week or two, such a government could be set up and consolidated in a perfectly peaceful way." — Lenin's September compromise offer, refuting the caricature of Lenin as a putschist and demonstrating his willingness to pursue peaceful development when objective conditions allowed.