Historical Lessons for Contemporary Revolutionary Movements
From the October Revolution in Russia to the Chinese Revolution, the Dissolution of the Soviet Union, and the Experience of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan
Introduction: The Victory of a Revolution Is Not the End of the Struggle
Revolutions emerge from deep social contradictions, political crises, and popular discontent. Yet the victory of a revolution does not necessarily guarantee its future. History has shown that overthrowing an old order is only the beginning of a more difficult stage: establishing new social relations, building accountable institutions, maintaining connections with the masses, and developing the capacity to confront internal crises and external pressures.
Why have some revolutions transformed the social and economic structures of their societies for decades, while others have ended in defeat, deviation, or collapse? The answer cannot be reduced to a single factor, the will of a handful of leaders, or foreign conspiracies. A scientific analysis requires examining the material conditions of society, class relations, the structure of the state, the quality of leadership, organisational methods, and the relationship between the party and the people.
The October Revolution: Seizing Power and the Challenges of Building a New Society
The Russian October Revolution of 1917 triumphed amid war, economic crisis, the disintegration of Tsarist authority, and widespread discontent among workers and peasants. Through political organisation, mobilising slogans, and support from sections of the population, the Bolsheviks succeeded in taking political power.
However, the civil war, foreign intervention, economic backwardness, and the difficulties of national reconstruction made the revolutionary process exceptionally complex. In subsequent years, the concentration of political power, the expansion of bureaucracy, and restrictions on independent political participation became important subjects in critical assessments of the Soviet experience.
The historical lesson is that capturing political power alone is insufficient to achieve a revolution’s social objectives. The way power is exercised, the participation of the people, the quality of institutions, and the ability to correct mistakes also play essential roles in determining the fate of a revolutionary order.
The Chinese Revolution: Understanding the Specific Conditions of Society
The Chinese Revolution triumphed in 1949, but its course differed fundamentally from that of Russia. China’s predominantly agrarian social structure, the question of land, the weakness of central government, and prolonged warfare played decisive roles in shaping the revolutionary strategy of the Communist Party of China.
This experience demonstrated that no revolutionary model can be mechanically reproduced without taking account of each country’s historical, economic, and social conditions. A strategy that produces results in one society may have very different consequences in another.
At the same time, the disastrous policies associated with the Great Leap Forward and the upheavals of the Cultural Revolution highlight the importance of scientifically evaluating leadership decisions and examining the consequences of state policies. A movement’s socialist identity does not exempt any policy from critical scrutiny.
The Dissolution of the Soviet Union: When a System Loses Its Capacity for Self-Correction
The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 was one of the most consequential events in modern history. It resulted from a combination of economic, political, national, and organisational factors that interacted over time.
Slowing economic dynamism, difficulties within the planned economy, social discontent, national tensions, weak accountability mechanisms, and divisions within the leadership all contributed to the process, alongside political decisions made during the final years of the Soviet state. Researchers continue to debate the relative importance of these factors.
From a Marxist perspective, analysing this experience requires distinguishing between state ownership, the genuine participation of workers in managing society, and bureaucratic control over decision-making. A change in the form of ownership, without examining actual power relations and the role of the people, cannot provide a complete picture of an economic and social system.
The fundamental lesson is that no political or economic system is exempt from the need for reform, accountability, and adaptation to society’s changing needs merely because of its past achievements or its claim to represent the working class.
The Experience of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan: Reforms, War, and Estrangement from Society
The experience of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) must also be examined through a historical, evidence-based, and critical approach. The government that emerged from the Saur Revolution of 1978 introduced a range of social and economic reforms, including land reform, the expansion of education, and efforts to transform traditional social relations. However, the implementation of some of these reforms, resistance from social forces, a crisis of legitimacy, political repression, civil war, and foreign intervention had profound consequences for the country’s development.
The Soviet military presence, the government’s growing dependence on external support, and the escalation of the war further complicated Afghanistan’s political and social environment. Following the withdrawal of Soviet forces, Dr Najibullah’s government remained in power until 1992. However, the termination of Soviet financial and military assistance, shifts in the allegiance of certain commanders, and intensifying political and military crises contributed to the government’s collapse.
This experience cannot be analysed either by denying its social achievements or by ignoring its mistakes and human costs. A serious assessment must distinguish between declared objectives, policies implemented in practice, wartime conditions, the role of domestic forces, and foreign intervention.
For Afghanistan’s progressive movements, this history becomes valuable when it provides a basis for understanding society, recognising its social diversity, evaluating approaches to reform and transformation, and examining the relationship between the party, the state, and the people.
Why Do Revolutionary Movements Fail?
A comparison of these experiences suggests that the defeat or collapse of revolutionary movements generally results from a combination of factors.
First, estrangement from the masses: When a political organisation fails to understand people’s actual needs, aspirations, and experiences, the gap between political slogans and everyday life widens.
Second, the concentration of power and weak accountability: When criticism, oversight, and meaningful participation are restricted, mistakes accumulate and become increasingly difficult to correct.
Third, dogmatism and the failure to understand specific conditions: Revolutionary theory becomes a useful guide when it serves as a tool for understanding reality rather than a substitute for scientific investigation.
Fourth, economic and social crises: Resource shortages, weak production, inequality, and failure to meet people’s basic needs can undermine a system’s legitimacy.
Fifth, war and foreign intervention: Military pressure, external support for opposing forces, and strategic dependence can alter the balance of power. Their impact, however, must be assessed separately in each historical case.
Sixth, organisational and leadership crises: Inadequate cadre development, unresolved internal disagreements, opaque decision-making, and an inability to correct mistakes can gradually weaken a movement’s capacity.
None of these factors alone explains every historical defeat. The significance of each depends on the specific circumstances and its interaction with other factors.
Conclusion: History Must Be Learned From, Not Repeated
The history of revolutions is neither a collection of sacred victories nor a catalogue of inevitable defeats. It is a record of human experience, social contradictions, political decisions, and sometimes unforeseen consequences.
A revolutionary movement that avoids critically examining its past increases the risk of repeating earlier mistakes. By contrast, a movement that recognises its achievements, analyses its defeats without prejudice, and connects theoretical principles with the actual conditions of society has greater opportunities to learn and develop.
For Afghanistan’s left-wing movement, the present need is not the mechanical reproduction of past models. It is the scientific understanding of Afghan society, stronger connections with workers and working people, respect for social diversity, the development of capable and politically conscious cadres, the strengthening of criticism and self-criticism, and the establishment of accountable organisations based on the participation of their members and the people.
A revolution must be judged not merely by its acquisition of power, but also by its ability to transform people’s lives, advance social justice, preserve popular participation, and correct its mistakes.
History does not instruct contemporary movements to repeat the past. It demands that they understand it, analyse reality scientifically, and accept responsibility for the consequences of their decisions.