1 (2nd ed., 31 vols.; Moscow, 1930-35), XXI, 174.

2 Ibid., XXIII, 251.

3 Ibid., XXII, 3.

4 Ibid., XXII, 5.

5 ibid., XXII, 6, 11.

6 Ibid., XXI, 261.

7 Ibid., XX, 473. s Ibid., XXII, 25-26.

9 For the Bolshevik resolutions on workers’ control adopted earlier in 1917, see (Petrograd, 1917), pp. 16, 36; (3 vols.; Moscow, 1927- 29), I, 217-19, II, 186-88.

10 The decree is in (Moscow, 1918), pp. 171-72; (Moscow, 1954), pp. 74-76; Nov. 16, 1917; and , Nov. 17, 1917. On the role of the Central Council in formulating the decree, see No. 10, 1948, pp. 5-7. In 1924, M. N. Zhivotov wrote that at the end of October he and P. N. Amosov had also discussed with Lenin the creation of a Supreme Economic Council. See Jan. 25, 1924, p. 3.

11 The All-Russian Council of Workers’ Control held only two sessions, on November 25 and December 5. At these meetings, it discussed organizational matters and drew up an Instruction on workers’ control. According to D. B. Riazanov, the Council met either once or not at all (see Carr, E. H., The Bolshevik Revolution, 1917-1923 [3 vols.; New York, 1951-53], II, 69n.Google Scholar), buj in this he was mistaken. It was absorbed by the Supreme Economic Council (VSNKh) on December 5, when the latter was created by the Soviet government. The Council of Workers’ Control for the Central Industrial Region (Moscow) survived until May, 1918. See CCCP, pp. 74-75n., and BepxoBeHB, op. cit., p. 11.

12 (Leningrad, 1947), p. 261.

13 Quoted in Carr, op. cit., II, 68, from (Moscow, 1918).

14 No. 6, Nov. 29, 1917, pp. 18-22.

15 Nov. 21, 1917. See also , No. 3-4, Dec. 1, 1917, pp. 25-26.

16 Quoted in (Kharkov, 1958), p. 108.

17 , Dec. 7, 1917. Cf. the similar provisions of the new ustav of the factory committees drawn up in January, 1918, by the Central Council of Petrograd Factory Committees: (Moscow and Leningrad, 1926), pp. 342-51.

18 CCCP, p. 78.

19 See No. 1, Feb. 23, 1918, pp. 11-12; and (img), No. I, 1918, pp. 128-32. Cf. the moderate Instruction of the Economic Section of the Moscow Soviet, also drafted at the end of November: , pp. 326-28.

20 Interesting repercussions of the debate on workers’ control were heard as recently as 1956. After Khrushchev denounced Stalin at the 20th Party Congress, several unorthodox articles on the events of 1917 appeared in . One of these, No. 5, 1956, pp. 90-99, interpreted workers’ control as “a form of state capitalism” (p. 96), thus agreeing with the viewpoint of rightist Bolsheviks like Lozovsky. Nasyrin added that technical experts were needed to perform the complex tasks of production; that Mensheviks and SR's served alongside the Bolsheviks in the factory committees; and that nationalization was spontaneous at first and not a planned Bolshevik policy. As a result of this and other articles (notably No. 4, 1956, pp. 38-56), some of the editors of Bonpocu ucmopuu were dismissed for allowing “Menshevism” to creep into their journal. The “correct” line on workers’ control is presented in No. 2, 1959, pp. 21-44; (Moscow, 1956), p. 45; and , op. cit., P. 116. The Instruction on workers’ control of the Central Council of Petrograd Factory Committees is upheld, while the Instruction of the All-Russian Council of Workers’ Control is condemned as Menshevik-inspired. For a somewhat more judicious critique of Nasyrin, see the excellent study by , 1917-1920 (Leningrad, 1957), pp. 80-81n.

21 , No. 1-2 (5-6), Jan. 14, 1918, pp. 3-5.

22 (Petrograd, 1918), pp. 23-24.

23 Quoted in Carr, op. cit., II, 68.

24 , op. cit., p. 26. Cf. S. O. Zagorsky, La République des Soviets (Paris, 1921), p. 16: The role of the owner and his technical assistants was “reduced to zero.“

25 , op. cit., pp. 37-38. At the end of January, 1918, Lozovsky told the All- Russian Congress of Textile Unions and Factory Committees that the seizure of management by the factory committees meant “creating not one but a thousand owners.” See (Moscow, 1918), p. 11 (hereafter cited as ).

26 , I, 230.

27 See (Moscow, 1958), p. 194; (Petrograd, 1917), p. 18; 1917-1918 ιι. (Leningrad, 1927), p. 16; , II, 149-52; (Ivanovo, 1953), p. 28; , No. 18, 1958, p. 214; (Sverdlovsk, 1927), p. 126; , No. 2, 1959, p. 30; and (Moscow and Leningrad, 1927), p p. 89-90, 92.

28 J. Maynard, Russia in Flux (New York, 1951), p. 223, estimates that within a few months alter the Revolution only about one-fifth of the enterprises continued to operate under the old ownership and management. The rest, says Maynard, were about evenly divided between nationalization and workers’ control, which in practice were not very different. In Moscow in February, 1918, workers’ control over raw materials was exercised in about 32 per cent of the factories, and control over fuel in about 27 per cent. See B. A. cmu CCCP, 1917-1918 (Moscow, 1955), p. 42. By mid-January, workers’ control was widespread in the Urals. See …, p. 251.

29 See CCCP, pp. 271, 275; , No. 59, 1957, p. 44; , op. cit., p. 40; and ( (Moscow, 1957), p p. 197-98.

30 , op. cit., p. 92.

31 (Dissertation, Moscow State University, 1948), p. 141.

32 , op. cit., p. 51. On November 23 t h e All-Russian Commercial-Industrial Organization resolved to close enterprises in which the workers demanded control. See , op. cit., p. 7.

33 , p. 327.

34 See, for example, 1917 ι., pp. 335-36; and , No. 4-5 (8-9), Feb.; 25, 1918, p. 15.

35 International Labour Office, Labour Conditions in Soviet Russia (London, 1920), p. 239.

36 Russia: The Official Report of the British Trades Union Delegation to Russia and Caucasia, Nov. and Dec, 1924 (London, 1925), p. 138.

37 Ibid.

38 See (Moscow, 1923), p. 238; , No. 3, 1920, p. 91; Zagorsky, op. cit., p. 19; , No. 8, Dec. 20, 1917, p. 5; (3rd ed.; Petrograd, 1920), pp. 156-67; and BHKT, NO. 2-3, 1918, p. 125.

39 , Mar. 27, 1918.

40 See Zagorsky, op. cit., p. 19; , op. cit., p. 157; and , No. 3, 1920, p. 91.

41 W. H. Chamberlin, The Russian Revolution, 1917-1921 (2 vols.; New York, 1957), I, 416.

42 See , No. 2-3, 1918, p. 125.

43 At the All-Russian Congress of Textile Unions and Factory Committees, Lozovsky told of the refusal of the workers’ committee of the Treugolnik Rubber Factory to share its fuel reserves with other enterprises. Finally, after long debate, the committee agreed to sell fuel at 8 rubles a pood, though the normal price was 2 rubles. Lozovsky called this “a maximal distortion of the idea of socialism, an extremely dangerous understanding of the idea of workers’ control.” , p. 31.

44 , op. cit., p. 17.

45 See (Moscow and Leningrad, 1933), pp. 36-37; and , p. 238, says that owners sometimes used the factory committees as their “agents.” Collusion between the owners and the committees rendered workers’ control “fictitious,” according to (img), op. cit., p. 52; Zagorsky, op. cit., p. 19; and Larin, quoted in Labour Conditions in Soviet Russia, p. 242.

46 Price, M. P., My Reminiscences of the Russian Revolution (London, 1921), p. 212.Google Scholar

47 , Op. cit., pp. 77-79.

48 , No. 6, Nov. 29, 1917, p. 19; Lozovsky in , p. 30; Arsky in BHKT, No. 2-3, 1918, p. 125; and Gastev, cited above (n. 14).

49 , No. 6, Nov. 30, 1917, p. 3.

50 Ibid.

51 , II, 169.

52 Quoted in Carr, op. cit., II, 69.

53 See , XXI, 261, 399. Lenin's views on the role of the workers in management changed considerably from the turn of the century to the NEP. This subject will be discussed on another occasion.

54 Ibid., XXII, 50.

55 Ibid., XXII, 125.

56 CCCP, p. 499.

57 , XXII, 215.

58 See , op. cit., pp. 96 ff.; , op. cit., p. 59; Price, op. cit., p. 213; BepxoBeHb, op. cit., pp. 19-20; and . No. 59, 1957, p. 39. The local and all-Russian councils of workers’ control were likewise composed of factory-committee and trade-union members. See (img), p. 250, and , 1917-1918 ιι. (Kostroma, 1960), p. 69.

59 See , No. 7, Dec. 16, 1917, p. 2; (Moscow, 1957), p. 112; and (Dissertation, Kiev State University, 1952), p. 199.

60 See the speeches of Linkov and Riazanov, II, 190-92.

61 Ibid., II, 193.

62 Ibid., II, 191.

63 See 1917 ι., p. 340.

64 , No. 3-4, Dec. 1, 1917, p. 26.

65 See CCCP (7 vols.; Moscow, 1955-59), III: (1956), pp. 78, 82, 97; (Dissertation, Saratov State Pedagogical Institute, 1953), p. 161; and pp. 64-67.

66 (Moscow, 1918), p. 338.

67 Ibid., pp. 2-3.

68 Ibid., p. 5.

69 ibid., p. 29.

70 ibid., p. 69.

71 Ibid., p. 82.

72 Ibid., p. 200.

73 Ibid., pp. 26-27. Lenin had accused the Anarcho-Syndicalists of desiring to abolish the state “overnight” (s segodnia na zavtra). See Con., XXI, 410.

74 Early in 1918 Riazanov resigned from the party and Lozovsky was expelled. The latter rejoined the party, becoming the head of the Profintern in 1921. Riazanov was also readmitted, only to be purged at the “Menshevik Trial” in 1931. Lozovsky was purged during the “Crimean Affair” and executed in 1952.

75 , pp. 192, 234.

76 Ibid., p. 229..

77 Ibid., p. 192..

78 Ibid., p. 235.

79 Ibid., pp. 213-14.

80 Ibid., p. 82

81 Ibid., p. 55

82 Ibid., p. 86

83 Ibid., pp. 101-2. Later in the month, at the First Congress of Textile Unions and Factory Committees, Veselovsky (evidently an Anarcho-Syndicalist) spoke of “the dead trade unions” and held that “it is impossible to have central organizations every time. p. 38. In , pp. 35-36, Lozovsky wrote that the Anarcho-Syndicalists had “created a whole theory that the trade unions have died.“

84 , p. 237.

85 Ibid., p. 240.

86 Renev had warned the Fourth Conference of Petrograd Factory Committees that “the intellectuals in no case can represent the interests of the workers. They know how to twist us around their fingers, and they will betray us” (Okm. pe6. u.bab, II, 128). Renev's statement was not an original insight. The same idea had been expressed earlier by Bakunin and by Waclaw Machajski. In later years it was to be reiterated eloquently by Max Nomad in three books: Rebels and Renegades (New York, 1932); Apostles of Revolution (Boston, 1939); and Aspects of Revolt (New York, 1959).

87 , p. 50.

88 Ibid., p. 374.

89 As the future trade-union head, M. P. Tomsky, put it, every effort would be made “to create trade unions on the lines of the factory committees.” International Labour Office, The Trade Union Movement in Russia (Geneva, 1927), p. 54 Google Scholar. This would not be too difficult a task, for by 1918 most of the large unions already were organized along industrial lines. See 1917 i. (Moscow, 1926), p p. 416-24.

90 , p. 364.

91 Ibid., p. 369.

92 Ibid.

93 Ibid., p. 370.

94 Ibid., pp. 369-70.

95 Ibid., p. 234.

96 , No. 3 (7), Jan. 21, 1918, pp. 1-2.

97 Ibid., No. 4-5 (8-9), Feb. 25, 1918, pp. 23-24. The Instruction of the All-Russian Council of Workers’ Control was also approved by the First Congress of Textile Trade Unions and Factory Committees. See (Moscow, 1922), pp. 46-47; and (Moscow, 1918).

98 No. 11, 1918, p. 8.

99 , the organ of the Council of Workers’ Control of the Central Industrial Region, appeared from February to May, 1918. In reality, it supplemented as an organ of the VSNKh.

100 Quoted in Wolfe, B. D., Three Who Made a Revolution (Boston, 1955), p. 287.Google Scholar

101 See Schapiro, L., The Origin of the Communist Autocracy (Cambridge, Mass., 1956), pp. 135–36Google Scholar. Bukharin, incidentally, expressed the same distrust of the new ruling class as the Anarcho-Syndicalists had: “Comrade Lenin has written that in Russia every scullion will be taught to govern the country. It is a good thing to teach a scullion to govern a country. But what will be the result if you put a commissar over the scullion?” (ibid., p. 138).

102 On May 23, 1917, a meeting of industrialists of south Russia declared: “The working class, captivated by the tempting prospects depicted by its leaders, anticipates the coming of a golden age, and terrible shall be its disappointment, which one cannot but foresee“ ( 1917 i, ., p. 126).

103 Maximoff, G. P. (Maksimov, ), The Guillotine at Work: Twenty Years of Terror in Russia (Chicago, 1940), p. 346.Google Scholar