![The market-builder who restrained the market [Part 2]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/PHOTO-2026-08-25-17-16-32-360x180.jpg)
![The merchant preceding the Prophetic mission [Part 1]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/01-360x180.jpg)
The Russian Revolution demonstrates that when survival is threatened and political avenues are blocked, mass mobilisation becomes not only possible but likely.
By MPHUTLANE WA BOFELO
THIS year marks 108 years since the Russian Revolution, which took place on October 25, 1917 (according to the Julian calendar) or November 7, 1917 (according to the Gregorian calendar).
The Russian Revolution offers a compelling historical lens through which to understand how the interrelationship between the political economy of food and that of labour can drive systemic crisis and revolutionary change.
In the years preceding the revolution, Russia was gripped by catastrophic food shortages. Grain requisition by the state, soaring inflation and the collapse of transport infrastructure left urban populations starving. These conditions were not isolated from the labour system; they were deeply intertwined with it.
Workers who laboured in factories and agriculture found themselves unable to afford or access the very food their work helped produce. This paradox of being both producers and excluded consumers created a feedback loop of deprivation that intensified social unrest.
The political economy of food in Russia was marked by concentrated land ownership, exploitative agrarian structures and inequitable food distribution. Food insecurity was not merely a result of scarcity; it was a manifestation of economic exclusion.
Poor households spent a disproportionate share of their income on food, and the lack of access to nutritious sustenance reinforced cycles of poverty and ill-health. At the same time, the political economy of labour was collapsing.
Wages stagnated, working conditions deteriorated and the war effort drained human and economic resources. Labour was organised to serve elite interests, while workers were excluded from any meaningful participation in shaping their conditions. The absence of strong unions and protective legislation left them vulnerable to exploitation and dismissal.
You may also want to read
As poverty deepened, unemployment surged due to factory closures and war disruptions. Inequality became stark: aristocrats and industrialists retained wealth and privilege, while peasants and workers suffered. This convergence of economic despair and political exclusion created fertile ground for revolution.
The Bolsheviks capitalised on these grievances, mobilising the masses with slogans such as ‘Peace, Land and Bread’, which directly linked the struggles over food and labour to the need for systemic transformation.
South Africa today faces a structural crisis that echoes many of these dynamics, albeit in a different historical and political context. The political economy of food in South Africa is shaped by persistent land inequality, where a small elite controls vast agricultural resources.
Market concentration in food retail and agribusiness limits affordability and access. Pricing, subsidies and trade policies often favour corporate interests over community needs. In this unequal society, food insecurity is not simply about availability; it is about exclusion. Millions of South Africans, particularly in informal settlements and rural areas, spend most of their income on food, yet remain malnourished and vulnerable.
The political economy of labour in South Africa is similarly fraught. Historical legacies of racialised labour exploitation continue to shape employment patterns, wage gaps and job insecurity.
Labour is organised in ways that benefit capital, while large segments of the population – especially youth, women and rural communities – are excluded from stable employment. Many workers in food production and retail are employed informally or under precarious conditions, lacking protection and bargaining power. Wages are stagnant and working conditions often fail to meet basic standards of dignity and safety.
These intertwined systems of exclusion produce entrenched poverty, high unemployment and extreme inequality. Over half the population lives below the upper-bound poverty line, and unemployment exceeds 30 per cent. Inequality remains among the highest globally, with deep racial and spatial divides.
The South African experience, like that of pre-revolutionary Russia, reveals how the collapse of food and labour systems can destabilise society and erode trust in institutions.
Revolutionary theory suggests that when the working class and marginalised groups are systematically excluded from food, land and labour systems, revolutionary consciousness can emerge.
The Russian Revolution demonstrates that when survival is threatened and political avenues are blocked, mass mobilisation becomes not only possible but likely. In South Africa, revolutionary practice would involve organising around material needs – such as food sovereignty, living wages and land reform – while building alliances across workers, rural communities, youth and civil society. It would also require democratising institutions to ensure grassroots participation in economic planning and embracing strategic disruption through strikes, occupations and alternative economies.
Some may argue that South Africa’s democratic framework, constitutional protections and vibrant civil society offer non-violent pathways to transformation, and that these avenues, though under strain, provide opportunities to address structural poverty, unemployment and inequality without resorting to rupture.
The lesson from the Russian Revolution is clear: when food and labour systems collapse together and inequality becomes unbearable, revolution is not just possible – it becomes inevitable. As things stand, the stark reality of a socially unresponsive system causes people to lose hope in using democratic tools to build a more just and equitable society. The crisis threatens to culminate in a collapse.
Mphutlane wa Bofelo is a political theorist who focuses on the interface between politics, governance and development.
