Includes bibliographical references (p, [263]-270) and index.

Preliminary Material / John Eric Marot -- Introduction / John Eric Marot -- Chapter One The Peasant-Question and the Origins of Stalinism: Rethinking the Destruction of the October Revolution / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Two Trotsky, the Left Opposition and the Rise of Stalinism: Theory and Practice / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Three Class-Conflict, Political Competition and Social Transformation: Critical Perspectives on the Social History of the Russian Revolution / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Four Political Leadership and Working-Class Agency in the Russian Revolution: Reply to William G. Rosenberg and S.A. Smith / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Five A ‘Postmodern’ Approach to the Russian Revolution? Comment on Ronald Suny / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Six Alexander Bogdanov, Vpered, and the Role of the Intellectual in the Workers’ Movement / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Seven The Bogdanov Issue: Reply to Andrzej Walicki, Aileen Kelly and Zenovia Sochor / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Eight Marxism, Science, Materialism: Toward a Deeper Appreciation of the 1908–9 Philosophical Debate in Russian Social Democracy / John Eric Marot -- Chapter Nine Politics and Philosophy in Russian Social Democracy: Alexander Bogdanov and the Socio-Theoretical Foundations of Vpered / John Eric Marot -- References / John Eric Marot -- Index / John Eric Marot.

Available to subscribing member institutions only.

In a series of probing analytical essays, John Marot tracks the development of Bolshevism through the prism of pre-1917 intra-Russian Social Democratic controversies in politics and philosophy. For 1917, the author presents a critique of social historical interpretation of the Russian Revolution. Turning to NEP Russia, the author applies Robert Brenner's analysis of pre-capitalist modes of production and concludes that neither Bukharin nor Trotsky's NEP-premised programs of economic transformation and advance toward socialism were feasible. At the same time, he rejects the view that Stalinism was pre-destined to supplant NEP. Instead, he hypothesises that the superior alternative to Stalinism was NEP without collectivization and the Five-Year Plans — a outcome that would have been possible had Bukharin and Trotsky joined forces to stop Stalin.