Freedom of the Press in Ten Days

Despite John Reed's obvious enthusiasm for Bolshevism he is more than willing to explain Bolshevik acts which he would presumably be against. The best example of this is Lenin's suppression of the press. However, it is always difficult to know by what extent Reed is being taken in by Lenin's political sophistry. At the time of writing Reed seems to attribute infinite wisdom to Lenin and Trotsky, though later in life he was very dissatisfied with the results. Lenin's excuses for suppressing the freedom of the press are an interesting example of political rhetoric as Lenin seeks to justify suppressing newspapers after years of being strong defenders of freedom of the press while in a minority.

In the chapter notes following chapter seven Reed provides a document written by Lenin justifying suppressing newspapers. Lenin admits that there are cries that, "the new Socialist authority is in this vioalting the essential principles of its own programme by an attempt against the freedom of the press" (Reed 250). Lenin goes on to explain that the problem is that the wealthy segment of the population are able to "seize a lion's share of the whole press" and in doing so "poison" the minds of the population (Reed 250). Lenin claims that as soon as order is restored so will measures against the press, however he later goes on to argue that this cannot be allowed.

Lenin's arguments against a free press also provide an example of the idea that freedom of the press is meaningless without respect for private property. The Bolsheviks officially supported a policy of seizing all supplies related to printing as "property of the people." One Bolshevik says directly, "it is as private property that we must examine the question of the press" (Reed 354). The Bolshevik resolution argues that there needs to be a new printing regime, "under which the capitalist owners of printing-presses and of paper cannot be the all powerful and exclusive manufacturers of public opinion" (Reed 354). This is a criticism which falls flatly on its face, as communist groups were regularly able to print underground newspaper and pamphlets, a consistent feature in the text. Though they argue that political groups should be allowed representation through the use of state-controlled printing presses, this would obviously not be the case. They argue, "The reestablishment of the so-called 'freedom of the press,' the simple return of printing pressed and paper to the capitalists,--poisoners of the mind of the people--...would be a measure of unquestionably counter-revolutionary nature" (Reed 354). It is difficult to imagine that anyone would believe the Bolsheviks about re-opening newspapers; the idea of a party in power controlling printing presses and not abusing the situation is completely unrealistic.

A consistent feature of Ten Days that Shook the World is the inclusion of fantastic primary documents such as speeches and fliers. The reader is able to get a concept of the actual rhetoric that Bolsheviks were using to justify their actions. While these occasionally seem like something which would win over an uninformed and uncritical voter, other claims are simply outlandish. It is really quite difficult to imagine how Reed could have supported these men, but he was allegedly heartbroken about the horrors of Bolshevism in practice.