Question: Who exposed flows in the Soviet view in October Revolution?
About the article "October Revolution", section "Western historiography".

Candidate passages:
Few events in historical research have been as conditioned by political influences as the October Revolution.
The historiography of the Revolution generally divides into three camps: the Soviet-Marxist view, the Western-Totalitarian view, and the Revisionist view. 
During the Cold War, Western historiography of the October Revolution developed in direct response to the assertions of the Soviet view.
The Soviet Marxist-Leninist version of the October Revolution conditioned historical interpretations in the United States and the West.
As a result, these Western historians exposed what they considered flaws in the Soviet view, thereby undermining the Bolshevik’s original legitimacy, as well as the precepts of Marxism.
Far from being inevitable according the historical laws of Marxism, these Western historians presented the revolution as the result of a chain of contingent accidents.
Examples of these accidental and contingent factors that precipitated the Revolution include World War I's timing, chance, and the poor leadership of Tsar Nicholas II as well as liberal and moderate socialists.
According to this historical interpretation, it was not popular support, but rather Bolshevik manipulation of the masses and the organization’s ruthlessness and superior structure which enabled it to survive.
For these historians, the Bolsheviks’ defeat in the Constituent Assembly elections of November–December 1917 demonstrated popular opposition to the Bolsheviks’ coup, as did the scale and breadth of the Civil War.
These historians saw the organization of the Bolshevik party as proto-totalitarian.
Their interpretation of the October Revolution as a violent coup organized by a proto-totalitarian party reinforced the idea that totalitarianism is an inherent part of Soviet history.
For them, Stalinist totalitarianism developed as a natural progression from Leninism and the Bolshevik party’s tactics and organization.
Soviet historiography of the October Revolution is intertwined with Soviet historical development.
Many of the initial Soviet interpreters of the Revolution were themselves Bolshevik revolutionaries.
(For example, the revolutionary Leon Trotsky wrote a major narrative of the October Revolution.)
After the initial wave of revolutionary narratives, Soviet historians worked within “narrow guidelines” defined by the Soviet government.
The rigidity of interpretive possibilities reached its height under Joseph Stalin.
Soviet historians of the October Revolution interpreted the Revolution so as to establish the legitimacy of Marxist ideology, and also the Bolshevik regime.
To establish the accuracy of Marxist ideology, Soviet historians generally described the Revolution as the product of class struggle.
They maintained that the Revolution was the supreme event in a world history governed by historical laws.
The Bolshevik Party is placed at the center of the Revolution, exposing the errors of both the moderate Provisional Government and the spurious “socialist” Mensheviks in the Petrograd Soviet.
Guided by Vladimir Lenin's leadership and his firm grasp of scientific Marxist theory, the Party led the “logically predetermined” events of the October Revolution from beginning to end.
The events were, according to these historians, logically predetermined because of the socio-economic development of Russia, where the monopoly industrial capitalism alienated the masses.
In this view, the Bolshevik party took the leading role in organizing these alienated industrial workers, and thereby established the construction of the first socialist state.
Although Soviet historiography of the October Revolution stayed relatively constant until 1991, it did undergo some changes.
Following Stalin’s death, historians such as E. N. Burdzhalov and P. V. Volobuev published historical research that deviated significantly from the party line in refining the doctrine that the Bolshevik victory “was predetermined by the state of Russia’s socio-economic development”.
These historians, who comprised the “New Directions Group”, posited that the complex nature of the October Revolution “could only be explained by a multi-causal analysis, not by recourse to the mono-causality of monopoly capitalism”.
For them, the central actor is still the Bolshevik party, but this party triumphed “because it alone could solve the preponderance of ‘general democratic’ tasks the country faced” (such as the struggle for peace, the exploitation of landlords, and so on.
)During the late Soviet period, the opening of select Soviet archives during glasnost sparked innovative research that broke away from some aspects of Marxism-Leninism, though the key features of the orthodox Soviet view remained intact. 
And Quiet Flows the Don or Quietly Flows the Don (Тихий Дон, literally "The Quiet Don") is an epic novel in four volumes by Russian writer Mikhail Aleksandrovich Sholokhov.
The first three volumes were written from 1925 to 1932 and published in the Soviet magazine "October" in 1928–1932, and the fourth volume was finished in 1940.
The English translation of the first three volumes appeared under this title in 1934.
The novel is considered one of the most significant works of Russian literature in the 20th century.
It depicts the lives and struggles of Don Cossacks during the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and Russian Civil War.
In 1965, Sholokhov was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature for this novel.
The authorship of the novel is contested by some literary critics and historians, who believe that it was written mostly not by Sholokhov. 
In 1973 Korczak began to work in Europe as an Access Agent for the Central Intelligence Agency.
He was stationed in Copenhagen, Denmark with an Electronics Import/Export business as his front.
Being multilingual, and fluent in Russian, made him a natural choice to infiltrate the KGB and became a double agent.
By 1979, he had attained the rank of Major within the KGB.
In 1979 Korczak was exposed as a double agent.
In November 1979, the October Revolution Celebration Reception was being held inside the Soviet Embassy in Copenhagen, Denmark.
During this reception, Korczak's intoxicated Chief of Station (who was officially an American Diplomat) admitted that Korczak was spying for the CIA after being provoked by the KGB officer.