IN the aftermath of the humiliating defeat by Tsarist Russia in the hands of Japanese Imperialism during the ‘Russo-Japanese War’ in 1905, revolution swept Russia and as a matter of “concession,” Tsar Nicholas had to agree to the establishment of the ‘Duma’ (Parliament), allow the multi-party system and reforms in the Russian Constitution where, for the first time the Tsar of All Russia agreed to “share power” with Parliament.
These concessions were all of course, the result of the handiwork of those controlling the myriads of the many mass organizations that sprung up during those heady days in Russian history, particularly the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks and the Anarchists (the Narodniks).
Some 14 years after this “arrangement” was made, the Russian monarchy was toppled from power in 1918 by the same group of “lawmakers” with whom the Tsar agree to share power with.
Taking advantage of the global crisis arising from World War 1, the Bolsheviks staged their coup and gave birth to what has come down to history as the ‘Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’ (USSR) or simply, the ‘Soviet Union.’
I “segued” into this topic, dear readers, in order to help enlighten most people as to “why” we now have the partylist system in our own Congress.
In 1905, while the Bolsheviks and other revolutionary groups are still discussing among themselves what is the “way forward” because of the changed political landscape after the revolution, Lenin, founder of the Soviet Union, released an article, ‘Two Tactics of Social Democracy in the Democratic Revolution.’
In it, he laid out the “tactics” the Bolshevik would adopt in order to maximize the “democratic space” that was brought about by the tumultuous events of the past months.
Back when yours truly was still an “activist” trying to prove myself as worthy of being called “ganap na kasapi ng Partido,” the particular material that was made “mandatory reading” for all aspiring “cadres of the party” is this work of Lenin, Two Tactics of Social Democracy.
And why not? There is near similarity in the “prevailing conditions” in 1905 Russia and the Philippines, post-Marcos.
Like Russia then revolting against the autocracy of Tsarism, the Philippines had just come out from a “dictatorship” under Marcos.
We also have a new Constitution, which like the Russian Constitution, was finished after nearly one year (1906) after the Revolution (ours in 1987 nearly a year after EDSA Uno); there was a new Congress (no longer the Interim Batasang Pambansa), there was democratic space and there was a new novelty, the multi-party system. And yes, as in Russia, EDSA Uno happened in the month of February.
What was the “plan” that Lenin laid out for the Bolsheviks?
For them to participate in the parliamentary elections and control it from within; to use the Duma as a base for their propaganda and agitation among the broad masses of the people while giving them legal protection and respectability.
I mean, a congressman speaking before a crowd is more credible than an ordinary labor or student organizer, right?
That is what Lenin’s 1905 article is all about— as a guide on how to use the institutions of the state, parliament, to weaken the very same state sufficiently thru “legal means” so that when an opportunity arises, it can be overthrown.
Well, what can one say except that the CPP is indeed a “Leninist Party” as they followed his “advice” to the letter and with great success!
Now, ever wonder why there are communists in our own Congress?