The History of the Russian Revolution - Leon Trotsky - HQ Full Book.

Part 2 (Vol. I Chapt. 7-9): The February Revolution of 1917.
 
Leon Trotsky's The History of the Russian Revolution is a seminal work of Marxist historiography, written by one of the revolution's key architects during his exile in the 1930s. Volume 1, titled "The Overthrow of Tsarism," delves into the February Revolution of 1917, which toppled the Romanov dynasty and paved the way for the Provisional Government. Part 2 of this volume focuses on the immediate dynamics of the uprising, blending meticulous narrative with theoretical analysis. Chapters 7 through 9 form a critical core, capturing the revolution's explosive onset, its leadership, and its ironic outcomes. These chapters highlight Trotsky's thesis that revolutions arise from deep social contradictions, often defying the plans of elites or even revolutionary organizations. Drawing on eyewitness accounts, documents, and his own insights, Trotsky portrays the February events as a spontaneous proletarian surge that unexpectedly reshaped Russia's political landscape. The narrative underscores the role of workers, soldiers, and peasants in driving history forward, while critiquing the bourgeoisie's opportunistic seizure of power.    

Chapter 7: FIVE DAYS (FEBRUARY 23-27, 1917)  
Short Description: This chapter provides a chronological account of the pivotal five days of the February Revolution, detailing how strikes initiated by women textile workers escalated into mass demonstrations, soldier mutinies, and the collapse of tsarist authority in Petrograd.  
In Chapter 7, Trotsky vividly reconstructs the ignition and rapid escalation of the February Revolution, framing it as an organic outburst from below rather than a premeditated plot. The narrative begins on February 23, International Women's Day, which unexpectedly becomes the revolution's spark. Contrary to expectations, no major strikes were called by revolutionary groups like the Bolsheviks, who deemed the moment unripe due to weak party strength and limited soldier contacts. Yet, women textile workers, driven by bread shortages and wartime hardships, initiate strikes in Petrograd's Vyborg district. About 90,000 workers join, with demonstrations spilling into the city center, chanting not just for bread but against autocracy and the war. Red banners flutter, and crowds confront police, though clashes remain limited as troops are deployed but avoid direct confrontation.  
By February 24, the movement doubles in scale, engulfing half of Petrograd's industrial workforce. Workers abandon factories for meetings and marches toward Nevsky Prospect, drawing in new layers of society. Slogans evolve from economic demands to political ones, reflecting pent-up rage against the tsarist regime. Trotsky notes the workers' growing boldness, clashing with Cossacks and police, yet the Cossacks show signs of sympathy, winking at protesters—a harbinger of fracturing loyalties. The chapter emphasizes the revolution's grassroots momentum, with breadlines and factory grievances fueling a broader anti-war sentiment. Arrests mount, but the strikes persist, paralyzing the city.  
February 25 sees intensified conflict as the tsar, from his headquarters, orders General Khabalov to suppress the unrest. Troops fire on crowds, killing dozens, but this only hardens resolve. Demonstrations swell to over 300,000, with workers arming themselves from factories. Trotsky highlights pivotal moments, like soldiers hesitating to shoot, revealing the regime's crumbling foundation. The liberal Duma, meanwhile, dithers, hoping for concessions rather than revolution.  
The turning point arrives on February 26, a Sunday, when troops openly mutiny. The Pavlovsky Regiment rebels after hearing of shootings, marching to support workers. Clashes intensify, with over 150 deaths, but the tide turns as more units fraternize with protesters. Trotsky describes the psychological shift: soldiers, mostly peasant conscripts weary of war, see workers as allies against oppression.  
Finally, February 27 marks victory. The Volynsky Regiment leads a cascade of mutinies, with 66,000 soldiers joining the revolution by day's end. Workers and soldiers seize arsenals, arrest ministers, and storm police stations. The tsarist government evaporates, with Nicholas II's abdication looming. Trotsky's account stresses the revolution's speed—five days from strikes to overthrow—driven by mass initiative, not elite direction. He weaves in details like the role of Vyborg workers and the failure of tsarist repression, illustrating how economic crisis intersected with political decay to unleash transformative energy.    

Chapter 8: WHO LED THE FEBRUARY INSURRECTION?  
Short Description: Trotsky analyzes the leadership of the February uprising, arguing it was a leaderless mass movement propelled by workers and soldiers, not bourgeois liberals, political parties, or military officers, debunking counter-narratives of it being a mere riot or coup.  
Chapter 8 shifts from narrative to analytical dissection, challenging bourgeois interpretations that downplay the revolution as a "petticoat rebellion" or soldiers' mutiny. Trotsky refutes claims by reactionaries and liberals that the events were chaotic riots or akin to the Young Turk coup, where officers directed obedient troops. Instead, he posits the insurrection as a proletarian-led phenomenon, with workers initiating and soldiers supporting as class allies.  
Drawing on testimonies like that of soldier Shishilin, Trotsky illustrates how the uprising began without organized leadership. Revolutionary parties, including Bolsheviks, were caught off-guard; their committees opposed strikes initially. The Duma's liberals, focused on parliamentary maneuvers, offered no guidance. Even as events unfolded, no central command emerged—yet the masses coordinated instinctively through factory committees, street meetings, and soldier soviets. 
Trotsky emphasizes the workers' vanguard role: textile women sparked it, metalworkers amplified it, drawing in 240,000 strikers by February 25. Soldiers, radicalized by war and influenced by worker agitation, mutinied en masse on the 27th, often against officers' orders. He cites examples like the Preobrazhensky Regiment killing their commander to join the revolution, underscoring bottom-up dynamics.  
Critiquing elitist views, Trotsky argues the bourgeoisie benefited but did not lead; they trembled in salons while workers stormed bastions. Liberals like Miliukov later claimed credit, but Trotsky exposes their passivity—the Duma only formed a Provisional Committee under duress. The chapter extends to Moscow, where echoes of Petrograd's spontaneity prevailed, with workers and soldiers aligning without directives.  
Trotsky theorizes this "leaderlessness" as a strength: revolutions mature through accumulated grievances, erupting when masses sense opportunity. He contrasts February with October, noting the former's bourgeois outcome despite proletarian origins, foreshadowing dual power. Through data on arrests, mutinies, and participant accounts, he substantiates the insurrection's democratic essence, led by the toiling classes' collective will rather than individuals or cabals. 

Chapter 9: THE PARADOX OF THE FEBRUARY REVOLUTION
Short Description: This chapter explores the irony that a revolution driven by radical workers and soldiers resulted in power transferring to the conservative liberal bourgeoisie, attributing it to the masses' illusions, the liberals' maneuvering, and the socialists' compromises. 
Chapter 9 grapples with the February Revolution's central paradox: why did a proletarian uprising deliver power to the bourgeoisie? Trotsky unpacks how the insurrection, snatching authority from the monarchy, inadvertently handed it to liberals who feared the masses they purported to represent. 
He traces the Duma's role: on February 26, as strikes peaked, liberals negotiated concessions with ministers, hoping to preserve monarchy. The dissolution decree forced their hand, but even then, Rodzianko's committee hesitated, proposing dictatorships or regencies rather than seizing power. Workers and soldiers, meanwhile, flooded the Tauride Palace, pressuring the Duma to act. 
The paradox stems from dual illusions: the masses trusted liberals as anti-tsarist, viewing the Duma as a revolutionary beacon despite its bourgeois composition. Liberals exploited this, forming the Provisional Government to contain the upheaval. Trotsky critiques Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries for reinforcing this by urging support for bourgeois rule as a "democratic" stage before socialism. 
He details key maneuvers: the Executive Committee of the Soviet, dominated by compromisers, ceded power to liberals on February 27, fearing proletarian rule would alienate allies. This "contact committee" formalized the handover, with socialists like Kerensky bridging gaps. Trotsky argues this reflected Russia's uneven development—advanced industry amid feudal remnants—creating a bourgeoisie too weak to lead but opportunistic in victory. 
Extending to provinces, the chapter shows similar patterns: local soviets formed but deferred to bourgeois committees. Trotsky warns this setup sowed seeds of counter-revolution, as liberals prioritized war and property over reforms. The paradox, he concludes, was temporary; the masses' growing consciousness would demand real power in October. Through dialogue with figures like Sukhanov and analysis of telegrams, Trotsky illuminates how revolutionary energy was diverted, setting the stage for Volume 1's broader themes of class struggle and historical inevitability.