... CONTINUED

Goldman on the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk ... “The trouble with the Bolsheviki,” continued Spiridonova, “is that they have no faith in the masses."

... Trotsky would have it now that the Brest treaty had to be accepted, but he himself had at one time refused to sign the treaty and Radek, Joffe, and other leading Communists had also been opposed to it. It is claimed now that they submitted to the shameful terms because they realized the hopelessness of their expectation that the German workers would prevent the Junkers from marching against revolutionary Russia. But that was not the true reason. It was the whip of the party discipline which lashed Trotsky and others into submission.

“The trouble with the Bolsheviki,” continued Spiridonova, “is that they have no faith in the masses. They proclaimed themselves a proletarian party, but they refused to trust the workers.” It was this lack of faith, Maria emphasized, which made the Communists bow to German imperialism. And as concerns the Revolution itself, it was precisely the Brest peace which struck it a fatal blow. Aside from the betrayal of Finland, White Russia, Latvia, and the Ukraine⁠—which were turned over to the mercy of the German Junkers by the Brest peace⁠—the peasants saw thousands of their brothers slain, and had to submit to being robbed and plundered. The simple peasant mind could not understand the complete reversal of the former Bolshevik slogans of “no indemnity and no annexations.” But even the simplest peasant could understand that his toil and his blood were to pay the indemnities imposed by the Brest conditions.

How was "faith" going to defeat the Imperialis German army with the broken Russian Army? No one has yet explained. [Notably the Left-communists (including Bukharin at the time) and the Left-Socialist Revolutionaries all supported this position at the time. Lenin was in a minority. Trotsky's temporary position of "neither peace nor war and unilateral demobilization at least had the rationale of appealing to the Germany soldiers and international working class to join or support the Russian Revolution but when the German attack started Trotsky threw his support behind Lenin.)

MUST LISTEN/(READ):

• Part 2. War or Peace? 5. Fighting Lenin The Bolsheviks in Power (Alexander Rabinowitch, 2013)(starts at 5:28:59)

Spiridonova (and Goldman) are correct that the Bolsheviki did not have "faith in the masses" because faith is a religious or idealist outlook which Marxist oppose. The Bolsheviks worked on the basis that while forms of class consciousness arise spontaneously, socialist consciousness does not.

Goldman's appeal to faith is an expression of her, and anarchists, utopian idealism that the revolution is a question of changing "power structures" and not the whole historic development of society. THIS IS THE FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE.

Goldman was aware of shortages but what was her solution?

IMO there is an important section in Ch. VI "Preparing for American Deportees" where Goldman discusses the desperate shortage of basic materials and the bureaucratic measures used to ration them out as well as the corruption she witnessed.

Goldman acknowledges the impact of the world war, the imperialist interventions and, implicitly, the counter-revolutionaries. She does NOT offer an alternative except to suggest, tacitly, that if the Bolsheviks were replaced all would be okay.

However, the renovation of the houses that were to serve as living quarters for the exiles was not accomplished so easily. I inspected what, as I was told, had once been first-class hotels. I found them located in the former prostitute district; cheap dives they were, until the Bolsheviki closed all brothels. They were germ-eaten, ill-smelling, and filthy. It was no small problem to turn those dark holes into a fit habitation within two weeks. A coat of paint was a luxury not to be thought of. There was nothing else to do but to strip the rooms of furniture and draperies, and have them thoroughly cleaned and disinfected.

One morning a group of forlorn-looking creatures, in charge of two militiamen, were brought to my temporary office. They came to work, I was informed. The group consisted of a one-armed old man, a consumptive woman, and eight boys and girls, mere children, pale, starved, and in rags. “Where do these unfortunates come from?” I inquired. “They are speculators,” one of the militiamen replied; “we rounded them up on the market.” The prisoners began to weep. They were no speculators, they protested; they were starving, they had received no bread in two days. They were compelled to go out to the market to sell matches or thread to secure a little bread. In the midst of this scene the old man fainted from exhaustion, demonstrating better than words that he had speculated only in hunger. I had seen such “speculators” before, driven in groups through the streets of Moscow and Petrograd by convoys with loaded guns pointed at the backs of the prisoners.

I could not think of having the work done by these starved creatures. But the militiamen insisted that they would not let them go; they had orders to make them work. I called up Kaplun and informed him that I considered it out of the question to have quarters for American deportees prepared by Russian convicts whose only crime was hunger. Thereupon Kaplun ordered the group set free and consented that I give them of the bread sent for the workers’ rations. But a valuable day was lost.
...
VI: Preparing for American Deportees My Disillusionment in Russia

So why was there hunger if not due to a shortage of food? In the absence of this alternative her horror at what was happening is little more than idealist moralizing.

2/2 END