September 25, 2025 • 28 mins
Amidst the turmoil of the failed 1905 revolution in Russia, Lenin provides a critical analysis of the Bolshevik political program and tactics, contrasting them with the erratic and subservient factions within the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party. Join us as we explore this insightful examination of revolutionary strategy and political clarity. (Summary by Christian Pecaut) This edition was edited by George Hanna.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Chapter twelve of Two Tactics of Social Democracy by Lenin
read for Librevox dot Org by Christian Picaut at Communist
Revolution dot Org. Chapter twelve. Will the sweep of the
(00:25):
democratic revolution be diminished if the bourgeoisie recoils from it?
The foregoing lines were already written when we received a
copy of the resolutions adopted by the Caucasian Conference of
the New Escriists published by the ESCRA. Better material than this,
(00:46):
poor La bonne bousche for dessert could not even have
been invented. The editors of the ESCRAS quite justly remark
quote on the fundamental question of tactics. The Caucasian Conference
also arrived at a decision analogous in truth to the
(01:07):
one adopted by the All Russian Conference i e. Of
the New Escriists. The question of the attitude of social
democracy towards a provisional revolutionary government has been settled by
the Caucasian comrades in the spirit of most outspoken opposition
to the new method advocated by the Period Group and
(01:29):
by the delegates of the so called Congress who called it.
It must be admitted that the formulation of the tactics
of the proletarian party in a bourgeois revolution, as given
by the Conference is very apt. What is true is true.
No one could have given a more apt formulation of
(01:51):
the fundamental error of the new Eschrists. We shall quote
this formulation in full, indicating in parentheses first the blossoms
and then the fruit presented at the end. Here is
the resolution of the Caucasian Conference of the new Est
Christs on a provisional revolutionary government. Whereas we consider it
(02:17):
to be our task to take advantage of the revolutionary
situation to render more profound. Of course, they should have
added a La Martinov the social democratic consciousness of the proletariat,
only to render the consciousness more profound, and not to
win a republic. What a profound conception of revolution, And
(02:39):
in order to secure for the party the fullest freedom
to criticize the nascent bourgeois state system. Is it not
our business to secure a republic. Our business is only
to secure freedom of criticism. Anarchist ideas give rise to
anarchist language bourgeois state system. The Conference declares against the
(03:03):
formulation of a social democratic provisional government and joining such
a government. Recall the resolution passed by the Bacunonists ten
months before the Spanish Revolution and referred to by Engels
see the Proletary number three, and considers it to be
the most expedient course to exercise pressure from without, from
(03:27):
below and not from above, upon the bourgeois provisional government
in order to secure a feasible measure of democrat of
democratization of the state system. The conference believes that the
formation of a provisional government by social Democrats or their
joining such a government, would lead, on the one hand,
(03:50):
to the masses of the proletariat becoming disappointed in the
Social Democratic Party and abandoning it, because the social Democrats,
in spite of the fact that they had seized power,
would not be able to satisfy the pressing needs of
the working class, including the establishment of socialism. A republic
(04:10):
is not a pressing need. The authors, in their innocence,
do not notice that they are speaking a purely anarchist language,
as if they were repudiating participation in bourgeois revolutions, and
on the other hand, will cause the bourgeois classes to
recoil from the revolution and thus diminish its sweep. That
(04:35):
is where the trouble lies. That is, where anarchist ideas
become interwoven, as is constantly the case among West European Bernstinians.
Also with the purest opportunism, just think of it not
to join a provisional government, because this will cause the
(04:56):
bourgeoisie to recoil from the revolution, and thus a demis
fish the sweep of the revolution. Here, indeed, we have
the new Escras philosophy in its complete, pure and consistent form.
The revolution is a bourgeois revolution. Therefore we must bow
down to bourgeois philistinism and make way for it. If
(05:20):
we are guided even in part, even for a moment,
by the consideration that our participation may cause the bourgeoisie
to recoil. We thereby simply yield leadership in the revolution
entirely to the bourgeois classes. We thereby place the proletariat
entirely under the tutelage of the bourgeoisie, while retaining complete
(05:44):
freedom of criticism, compelling the proletariat to be meek and mild,
so as not to cause the bourgeoisie to recoil. We
emasculate the most vital needs of the proletariat, namely its
political needs, which the economists and their epigonies have never
properly understood. So as not to cause the bourgeoisie to recoil,
(06:10):
we completely abandon the field of revolutionary struggle for the
achievement of democracy to the extent required by the proletariat,
for the field of bargaining with the bourgeoisie, betraying our principles,
betraying the revolution, to purchase the bourgeoisie's voluntary consent that
it might not recoil. In two brief lines, the Caucasian
(06:37):
new Escrists managed to express the quintessence of the tactics
of betrayal of the revolution and of converting the proletariat
into a wretched appendage of the bourgeois classes. The tendency
which we traced above to the mistakes of the new
Escrists now stands out before us as a clear and
(06:58):
definite principle vis a vis to drag at the tail
of the monarchist bourgeoisie. Since the establishment of a republic
would cause and is already causing mister struve, for example,
the bourgeoisie to recoil. Therefore, down with the fight for
a republic. Since every resolute and consistent democratic demand of
(07:24):
the proletariat always and everywhere in the world causes the
bourgeoisie to recoil. Therefore, hide in your layers, comrades and
fellow workers, act only from without. Do not dream of
using the instruments and weapons of the bourgeois state system
in the interests of the revolution, and reserve for yourselves
(07:48):
freedom to criticize. Here the fundamental fallacy of their very
conception of the term bourgeois revolution has come to the surface.
The Martinov or new Escra conception of this term leads
straight to a betrayal of the cause of the proletariat
to the bourgeoisie. Those who have forgotten the old economism,
(08:13):
those who do not study it or remember it, will
find it difficult to understand the present echo of economism.
Recall the Bernstinian Credo. From purely proletarian views and programs,
people arrived at the conclusion we, the social democrats, must
(08:34):
concern ourselves with economics, with the real cause of labor,
with freedom to criticize all political chicanery, with rendering social
democratic work really more profound. Politics are for the liberals.
God save us from dropping into revolutionism. This will cause
(08:57):
the bourgeoisie to recoil. Those who read the whole Credo
over again or the supplement to number nine of the
Robochaya Mussul September eighteen ninety nine, will be able to
follow this entire line of reasoning. Today we have the
same thing, only on a larger scale, applied to an
(09:20):
appraisal of the whole of the Great Russian Revolution, alas
already vulgarized and reduced to a travesty in advance by
the theoreticians of orthodox Philistinism. We the social democrats, must
concern ourselves with freedom of criticism without rendering class consciousness
(09:41):
more profound. With action from without, they the bourgeois classes,
must have freedom to act, a free field for revolutionary
read liberal leadership, freedom to put through reforms from above.
These vulgarisers of Marxism have never pondered over what Marx
(10:06):
said about the need of substituting the criticism of weapons
for the weapon of criticism. Taking the name of Marx
in vain, they in actual fact draw up resolutions on
tactics wholly in the spirit of the Frankfurt bourgeois wind bags,
who freely criticized absolutism and rendered democratic consciousness more profound,
(10:31):
but failed to understand that the time of revolution is
the time of action, of action both from above and
from below. Having converted Marxism into pedantry, they have made
the ideology of the advanced, most determined, and energetic revolutionary
class the ideology of its most underdeveloped strata, which shrink
(10:55):
from the difficult revolutionary democratic tasks and leave it to
messieurs the stroves to take care of these democratic tasks.
If the bourgeois classes recoil from the revolution because the
social democrats join the revolutionary government, they will thereby quote
(11:16):
diminish the sweep of the revolution. Listen to this, Russian workers.
The sweep of the revolution will be mightier if it
is carried out by messieurs the strouves, who are not
frightened away by the social democrats, and who want not
victory over Czarism, but to come to terms with it.
(11:38):
The sweep of the revolution will be mightier if of
the two possible outcomes which we have outlined above, the
first eventuates, i e. If the monarchist bourgeoisie comes to
terms with the autocracy concerning a constitution. A lah ship
of social democrats who write such disgraceful things in resolutions
(12:02):
intended for the guidance of the whole party, or who
approve of such apt resolutions are so blinded by their pedantry,
which has utterly eroded the living spirit out of Marxism,
that they do not see how these resolutions convert all
their other fine words into mere phrase mongering. Take any
(12:24):
of their articles in the est gra or take even
the notorious pamphlet written by our celebrated Martinov. You will
read there about a popular insurrection, about carrying the revolution
to completion, about striving to rely upon the common people
in the fight against the inconsistent bourgeoisie. But then all
(12:46):
these excellent things become miserable phrase mongering immediately after you
accept or approve of the idea that the sweep of
the revolution will be diminished as a consequence of the
alienation of the bourgeoisie. One of two things a gentleman,
either we, together with the people, must strive to carry
(13:09):
out the revolution and win a complete victory over Czarism
in spite of the inconsistent, self seeking and cowardly bourgeoisie,
or we do not accept this, in spite of we
fear lest the bourgeoisie recoil from the revolution, in which
case we betray the proletariat and the people to the bourgeoisie,
(13:33):
to the inconsistent, self seeking and cowardly bourgeoisie. Don't try
to misinterpret what I have said. Don't start howling that
you are being accused of deliberate treachery. No, you have
always been crawling, and have at last crawled into the mire,
as unconsciously as the economists of old, drawn inexorably and
(13:58):
irrevocably down the encl declined plane of making Marxism more
profound to anti revolutionary, soulless and lifeless philosophizing. Have you
ever considered, gentlemen, what real social forces determine the sweep
of the revolution. Let us leave aside the forces of
(14:21):
foreign politics, of international combinations, which have turned out very
favorably for us at the present time, but which we
all leave out of our discussion, and rightly so, inasmuch
as we are concerned with the question of the internal
forces of Russia. Look at these internal forces aligned against
(14:43):
the revolution are the autocracy, the imperial court, the police,
the bureaucracy, the army, and the handful of high nobility.
The deeper the indignation of the people grows, the less
reliable become the troops, and the more the bureaucracy waivers. Moreover,
(15:08):
the bourgeoisie on the whole, is now in favor of
the revolution, is zealously making speeches about liberty, holding forth
more and more frequently in the name of the people,
and even in the name of the revolution. Note of
interest in this connection is mister Struve's open letter to Jarret,
(15:29):
recently published by the latter in Lumannite and by mister
Struve in the Asvobgenia number seventy two. Note. But we
Marxists all know from theory and from daily and hourly
observation of our liberals, Zemzvoists and Osvobjensi, that the bourgeoisie
(15:51):
is inconsistent, self seeking, and cowardly in its support of
the revolution. The bourgeoisie in the man will inevitably turn
towards counter revolution, towards the autocracy, against the revolution and
against the people immediately its narrow, selfish interests are met.
(16:14):
Immediately it recoils from consistent democracy, and it is already
recoiling from it. There remains the people, that is the
proletariat and the peasantry. The proletariat alone can be relied
on to march to the end, for it is going
(16:34):
far beyond the democratic revolution. That is why the proletariat
fights in the front ranks for a republic and contemptuously
rejects silly and unworthy advice to take care not to
frighten away the bourgeoisie. The peasantry includes a great number
of semi proletarian as well as petty bourgeois elements. This
(16:59):
causes it also to be unstable and compels the proletariat
to unite in a strictly class party. But the instability
of the peasantry differs radically from the instability of the bourgeoisie.
For at the present time, the peasantry is interested not
so much in the absolute preservation of private property as
(17:23):
in the confiscation of the landed estates, one of the
principal forms of private property. While this does not make
the peasantry become socialist or cease to be petty bourgeois,
it is capable of becoming a wholehearted and most radical
adherent of the democratic Revolution. The peasantry will inevitably become
(17:46):
such if only the progress of revolutionary events, which is enlightening,
it is not checked too soon by the treachery of
the bourgeoisie and the defeat of the proletariat. Subject to
this condition, the peasantry will inevitably become a bulwark of
the revolution and the republic. For only a completely victorious
(18:09):
revolution can give the peasantry everything in the sphere of
agrarian reforms, everything that the peasants desire, of which they dream,
and of which they truly stand in need. Not for
the abolition of capitalism, as the socialist revolutionaries imagine, but
(18:30):
in order to emerge from the mire of semi serfdom,
from the gloom of oppression and servitude, in order to
improve their living conditions as much as it is possible
to improve them under the system of commodity production. Moreover,
the peasantry is attached to the revolution not only by
(18:52):
the prospect of radical agrarian reform, but by its general
and permanent interests. Even in fighting the proletariat, the peasantry
stands in need of democracy, for only a democratic system
is capable of giving exact expression to its interests and
of ensuring its predominance as the mass, as the majority,
(19:17):
the more enlightened the peasantry becomes, and since the war
with Japan, it is becoming enlightened much more rapidly than
those who are accustomed to measure enlightenment by the school's standard. Suspect,
the more consistently and determinedly will it favor a thorough
going democratic revolution, For unlike the bourgeoisie, it has nothing
(19:43):
to fear from the supremacy of the people, but on
the contrary, stands to gain by it. A democratic republic
will become the ideal of the peasantry as soon as
it begins to free itself from its naive monarchism, because
the enlightened monarchism of the bourgeois stock jobbers, with an
(20:05):
upper chamber, etc. Implies for the peasantry the same disenfranchisement
and the same downtroddedness and ignorance as it suffers from today,
only slightly glossed over with the varnish of European constitutionalism.
That is why the bourgeoisie as a class naturally and
(20:27):
inevitably strives to come under the wing of the liberal
monarchist party, while the peasantry in the mass strives to
come under the leadership of the Revolutionary and Republican Party.
That is why the bourgeoisie is incapable of carrying the
democratic revolution to its consummation, while the peasantry is capable
(20:49):
of doing so, and we must exert all our efforts
to help it to do so. It may be objected,
but this requires no proof. This is all abc. All
social democrats understand this perfectly well. But this is not so.
(21:09):
It is not understood by those who can talk about
the sweep of the revolution being diminished because the bourgeoisie
will fall away from it. Such people repeat the words
of our agrarian program that they have learned by Rote
without understanding their meaning, For otherwise they would not be
(21:30):
frightened by the concept of the revolutionary democratic dictatorship of
the proletariat and the peasantry, which inevitably follows from the
entire Marxian world outlook and from our program. Otherwise they
would not restrict the sweep of the Great Russian Revolution
to the limits to which the bourgeoisie is prepared to go.
(21:53):
Such people defeat their abstract Marxian revolutionary phrases by their
concrete anti Marquis and anti revolutionary resolutions. Those who really
understand the role of the peasantry in a victorious Russian revolution.
Will not dream of saying that the sweep of the
(22:13):
revolution will be diminished if the bourgeoisie recoiled from it,
For as a matter of fact, the Russian revolution will
begin to assume its real sweep, will really assume the
widest revolutionary sweep possible in the epic of bourgeois democratic revolution,
only when the bourgeoisie recoils from it, and when the
(22:36):
masses of the peasantry come out as active revolutionaries side
by side with the proletariat. In order that it may
be consistently carried to its conclusion, our democratic revolution must
rely on such forces as are capable of paralyzing the
inevitable inconsistency of the bourgeoisie. I e. Came capable precisely
(23:01):
of causing it to recoil from the revolution, which the
Caucasian adherents of ESCRAS fears so much because of their
lack of judgment. The proletariat must carry to completion the
democratic revolution by allying to itself the mass of the
peasantry in order to crush by force the resistance of
(23:24):
the autocracy and to paralyze the instability of the bourgeoisie.
The proletariat must accomplish the socialist revolution by allying to
itself the mass of the semi proletarian elements of the population,
in order to crush by force the resistance of the bourgeoisie,
and to paralyze the instability of the peasantry and the
(23:47):
petty bourgeoisie. Such are the tasks of the proletariat which
the new Escrists present so narrowly in all their arguments
and resolutions about the sweep of the revolution. One circumstance, however,
must not be forgotten. Although it is frequently lost sight
(24:08):
of in discussions about the sweep of the revolution, it
must not be forgotten that the point at issue is
not the difficulties this problem presents, but the road along
which we must seek and attain its solution. The point
is not whether it is easy or difficult to make
the sweep of the revolution mighty and invincible, but how
(24:32):
we must act in order to make this sweep more powerful.
It is precisely on the fundamental nature of our activity
on the direction it should take, that our views differ.
We emphasize this because careless and unscrupulous people too frequently
(24:52):
confuse two different questions, namely the question of the direction
in which the road leads i e. The selection of
one or two different roads, and the question of how
easily the goal can be reached, or of how near
the goal is on the given road. We have not
(25:14):
dealt with this last question at all in the foregoing
because it has not evoked any disagreement or divergency in
the party. But it goes without saying that the question
itself is extremely important and deserves the most serious attention
of all social democrats. It would be a piece of
unpardonable optimism to forget the difficulties which accompany the task
(25:39):
of drawing into the movement the masses not only of
the working class, but also of the peasantry. These difficulties
have more than once been the rock against which the
efforts to carry out a democratic revolution to completion have
been wrecked. And it was the inconsistent and self seeking
pourgeoisie which triumphed most of all, because it made capital
(26:06):
in the shape of monarchist protection against the people, and
at the same time preserved the virginity of liberalism or
of the Asvobjenia trend. But difficult does not mean impossible.
The important thing is to be convinced that the path
chosen is the correct one, and this conviction will multiply
(26:29):
a hundredfold the revolutionary energy and revolutionary enthusiasm, which can
perform miracles. How deep is the disagreement among present day
social democrats on the question of the path to be
chosen can be seen at once by comparing the Caucasian
resolution of the New Eschriists with the resolution of the
(26:52):
Third Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. The
Congress resolution says, the bourgeoisie is inconsistent. It will certainly
try to deprive us of the gains of the revolution. Therefore,
make more energetic preparations for the fight. Comrades and fellow workers,
(27:14):
arm yourselves, win the peasantry to your side. We shall
not surrender our revolutionary gains to the self seeking bourgeoisie
without a fight. The resolution of the Caucasian new Escrists
says the bourgeoisie is inconsistent, it may recoil from the revolution. Therefore,
(27:36):
comrades and fellow workers, please do not think of joining
a provisional government, for if you do, the bourgeoisie will
certainly recoil, and the sweep of the revolution will thereby
be diminished. One side says, push the revolution forward to
its consummation in spite of the resistance or the passivity
(27:58):
of the inconsistent bourgeois. The other side says, do not
think of carrying the revolution to completion independently, for if
you do, the inconsistent bourgeoisie will recoil from it. Are
these not two diametrically opposite paths. Is it not obvious
(28:19):
that one set of tactics absolutely excludes the other, that
the first tactics are the only correct tactics of revolutionary
social democracy, while the second are in fact purely Asvobjenia
tactics end of chapter twelve. This recording is in the
(28:41):
public domain.
Chapter twelve of Two Tactics of Social Democracy by Lenin
read for Librevox dot Org by Christian Picaut at Communist
Revolution dot Org. Chapter twelve. Will the sweep of the
(00:25):
democratic revolution be diminished if the bourgeoisie recoils from it?
The foregoing lines were already written when we received a
copy of the resolutions adopted by the Caucasian Conference of
the New Escriists published by the ESCRA. Better material than this,
(00:46):
poor La bonne bousche for dessert could not even have
been invented. The editors of the ESCRAS quite justly remark
quote on the fundamental question of tactics. The Caucasian Conference
also arrived at a decision analogous in truth to the
(01:07):
one adopted by the All Russian Conference i e. Of
the New Escriists. The question of the attitude of social
democracy towards a provisional revolutionary government has been settled by
the Caucasian comrades in the spirit of most outspoken opposition
to the new method advocated by the Period Group and
(01:29):
by the delegates of the so called Congress who called it.
It must be admitted that the formulation of the tactics
of the proletarian party in a bourgeois revolution, as given
by the Conference is very apt. What is true is true.
No one could have given a more apt formulation of
(01:51):
the fundamental error of the new Eschrists. We shall quote
this formulation in full, indicating in parentheses first the blossoms
and then the fruit presented at the end. Here is
the resolution of the Caucasian Conference of the new Est
Christs on a provisional revolutionary government. Whereas we consider it
(02:17):
to be our task to take advantage of the revolutionary
situation to render more profound. Of course, they should have
added a La Martinov the social democratic consciousness of the proletariat,
only to render the consciousness more profound, and not to
win a republic. What a profound conception of revolution, And
(02:39):
in order to secure for the party the fullest freedom
to criticize the nascent bourgeois state system. Is it not
our business to secure a republic. Our business is only
to secure freedom of criticism. Anarchist ideas give rise to
anarchist language bourgeois state system. The Conference declares against the
(03:03):
formulation of a social democratic provisional government and joining such
a government. Recall the resolution passed by the Bacunonists ten
months before the Spanish Revolution and referred to by Engels
see the Proletary number three, and considers it to be
the most expedient course to exercise pressure from without, from
(03:27):
below and not from above, upon the bourgeois provisional government
in order to secure a feasible measure of democrat of
democratization of the state system. The conference believes that the
formation of a provisional government by social Democrats or their
joining such a government, would lead, on the one hand,
(03:50):
to the masses of the proletariat becoming disappointed in the
Social Democratic Party and abandoning it, because the social Democrats,
in spite of the fact that they had seized power,
would not be able to satisfy the pressing needs of
the working class, including the establishment of socialism. A republic
(04:10):
is not a pressing need. The authors, in their innocence,
do not notice that they are speaking a purely anarchist language,
as if they were repudiating participation in bourgeois revolutions, and
on the other hand, will cause the bourgeois classes to
recoil from the revolution and thus diminish its sweep. That
(04:35):
is where the trouble lies. That is, where anarchist ideas
become interwoven, as is constantly the case among West European Bernstinians.
Also with the purest opportunism, just think of it not
to join a provisional government, because this will cause the
(04:56):
bourgeoisie to recoil from the revolution, and thus a demis
fish the sweep of the revolution. Here, indeed, we have
the new Escras philosophy in its complete, pure and consistent form.
The revolution is a bourgeois revolution. Therefore we must bow
down to bourgeois philistinism and make way for it. If
(05:20):
we are guided even in part, even for a moment,
by the consideration that our participation may cause the bourgeoisie
to recoil. We thereby simply yield leadership in the revolution
entirely to the bourgeois classes. We thereby place the proletariat
entirely under the tutelage of the bourgeoisie, while retaining complete
(05:44):
freedom of criticism, compelling the proletariat to be meek and mild,
so as not to cause the bourgeoisie to recoil. We
emasculate the most vital needs of the proletariat, namely its
political needs, which the economists and their epigonies have never
properly understood. So as not to cause the bourgeoisie to recoil,
(06:10):
we completely abandon the field of revolutionary struggle for the
achievement of democracy to the extent required by the proletariat,
for the field of bargaining with the bourgeoisie, betraying our principles,
betraying the revolution, to purchase the bourgeoisie's voluntary consent that
it might not recoil. In two brief lines, the Caucasian
(06:37):
new Escrists managed to express the quintessence of the tactics
of betrayal of the revolution and of converting the proletariat
into a wretched appendage of the bourgeois classes. The tendency
which we traced above to the mistakes of the new
Escrists now stands out before us as a clear and
(06:58):
definite principle vis a vis to drag at the tail
of the monarchist bourgeoisie. Since the establishment of a republic
would cause and is already causing mister struve, for example,
the bourgeoisie to recoil. Therefore, down with the fight for
a republic. Since every resolute and consistent democratic demand of
(07:24):
the proletariat always and everywhere in the world causes the
bourgeoisie to recoil. Therefore, hide in your layers, comrades and
fellow workers, act only from without. Do not dream of
using the instruments and weapons of the bourgeois state system
in the interests of the revolution, and reserve for yourselves
(07:48):
freedom to criticize. Here the fundamental fallacy of their very
conception of the term bourgeois revolution has come to the surface.
The Martinov or new Escra conception of this term leads
straight to a betrayal of the cause of the proletariat
to the bourgeoisie. Those who have forgotten the old economism,
(08:13):
those who do not study it or remember it, will
find it difficult to understand the present echo of economism.
Recall the Bernstinian Credo. From purely proletarian views and programs,
people arrived at the conclusion we, the social democrats, must
(08:34):
concern ourselves with economics, with the real cause of labor,
with freedom to criticize all political chicanery, with rendering social
democratic work really more profound. Politics are for the liberals.
God save us from dropping into revolutionism. This will cause
(08:57):
the bourgeoisie to recoil. Those who read the whole Credo
over again or the supplement to number nine of the
Robochaya Mussul September eighteen ninety nine, will be able to
follow this entire line of reasoning. Today we have the
same thing, only on a larger scale, applied to an
(09:20):
appraisal of the whole of the Great Russian Revolution, alas
already vulgarized and reduced to a travesty in advance by
the theoreticians of orthodox Philistinism. We the social democrats, must
concern ourselves with freedom of criticism without rendering class consciousness
(09:41):
more profound. With action from without, they the bourgeois classes,
must have freedom to act, a free field for revolutionary
read liberal leadership, freedom to put through reforms from above.
These vulgarisers of Marxism have never pondered over what Marx
(10:06):
said about the need of substituting the criticism of weapons
for the weapon of criticism. Taking the name of Marx
in vain, they in actual fact draw up resolutions on
tactics wholly in the spirit of the Frankfurt bourgeois wind bags,
who freely criticized absolutism and rendered democratic consciousness more profound,
(10:31):
but failed to understand that the time of revolution is
the time of action, of action both from above and
from below. Having converted Marxism into pedantry, they have made
the ideology of the advanced, most determined, and energetic revolutionary
class the ideology of its most underdeveloped strata, which shrink
(10:55):
from the difficult revolutionary democratic tasks and leave it to
messieurs the stroves to take care of these democratic tasks.
If the bourgeois classes recoil from the revolution because the
social democrats join the revolutionary government, they will thereby quote
(11:16):
diminish the sweep of the revolution. Listen to this, Russian workers.
The sweep of the revolution will be mightier if it
is carried out by messieurs the strouves, who are not
frightened away by the social democrats, and who want not
victory over Czarism, but to come to terms with it.
(11:38):
The sweep of the revolution will be mightier if of
the two possible outcomes which we have outlined above, the
first eventuates, i e. If the monarchist bourgeoisie comes to
terms with the autocracy concerning a constitution. A lah ship
of social democrats who write such disgraceful things in resolutions
(12:02):
intended for the guidance of the whole party, or who
approve of such apt resolutions are so blinded by their pedantry,
which has utterly eroded the living spirit out of Marxism,
that they do not see how these resolutions convert all
their other fine words into mere phrase mongering. Take any
(12:24):
of their articles in the est gra or take even
the notorious pamphlet written by our celebrated Martinov. You will
read there about a popular insurrection, about carrying the revolution
to completion, about striving to rely upon the common people
in the fight against the inconsistent bourgeoisie. But then all
(12:46):
these excellent things become miserable phrase mongering immediately after you
accept or approve of the idea that the sweep of
the revolution will be diminished as a consequence of the
alienation of the bourgeoisie. One of two things a gentleman,
either we, together with the people, must strive to carry
(13:09):
out the revolution and win a complete victory over Czarism
in spite of the inconsistent, self seeking and cowardly bourgeoisie,
or we do not accept this, in spite of we
fear lest the bourgeoisie recoil from the revolution, in which
case we betray the proletariat and the people to the bourgeoisie,
(13:33):
to the inconsistent, self seeking and cowardly bourgeoisie. Don't try
to misinterpret what I have said. Don't start howling that
you are being accused of deliberate treachery. No, you have
always been crawling, and have at last crawled into the mire,
as unconsciously as the economists of old, drawn inexorably and
(13:58):
irrevocably down the encl declined plane of making Marxism more
profound to anti revolutionary, soulless and lifeless philosophizing. Have you
ever considered, gentlemen, what real social forces determine the sweep
of the revolution. Let us leave aside the forces of
(14:21):
foreign politics, of international combinations, which have turned out very
favorably for us at the present time, but which we
all leave out of our discussion, and rightly so, inasmuch
as we are concerned with the question of the internal
forces of Russia. Look at these internal forces aligned against
(14:43):
the revolution are the autocracy, the imperial court, the police,
the bureaucracy, the army, and the handful of high nobility.
The deeper the indignation of the people grows, the less
reliable become the troops, and the more the bureaucracy waivers. Moreover,
(15:08):
the bourgeoisie on the whole, is now in favor of
the revolution, is zealously making speeches about liberty, holding forth
more and more frequently in the name of the people,
and even in the name of the revolution. Note of
interest in this connection is mister Struve's open letter to Jarret,
(15:29):
recently published by the latter in Lumannite and by mister
Struve in the Asvobgenia number seventy two. Note. But we
Marxists all know from theory and from daily and hourly
observation of our liberals, Zemzvoists and Osvobjensi, that the bourgeoisie
(15:51):
is inconsistent, self seeking, and cowardly in its support of
the revolution. The bourgeoisie in the man will inevitably turn
towards counter revolution, towards the autocracy, against the revolution and
against the people immediately its narrow, selfish interests are met.
(16:14):
Immediately it recoils from consistent democracy, and it is already
recoiling from it. There remains the people, that is the
proletariat and the peasantry. The proletariat alone can be relied
on to march to the end, for it is going
(16:34):
far beyond the democratic revolution. That is why the proletariat
fights in the front ranks for a republic and contemptuously
rejects silly and unworthy advice to take care not to
frighten away the bourgeoisie. The peasantry includes a great number
of semi proletarian as well as petty bourgeois elements. This
(16:59):
causes it also to be unstable and compels the proletariat
to unite in a strictly class party. But the instability
of the peasantry differs radically from the instability of the bourgeoisie.
For at the present time, the peasantry is interested not
so much in the absolute preservation of private property as
(17:23):
in the confiscation of the landed estates, one of the
principal forms of private property. While this does not make
the peasantry become socialist or cease to be petty bourgeois,
it is capable of becoming a wholehearted and most radical
adherent of the democratic Revolution. The peasantry will inevitably become
(17:46):
such if only the progress of revolutionary events, which is enlightening,
it is not checked too soon by the treachery of
the bourgeoisie and the defeat of the proletariat. Subject to
this condition, the peasantry will inevitably become a bulwark of
the revolution and the republic. For only a completely victorious
(18:09):
revolution can give the peasantry everything in the sphere of
agrarian reforms, everything that the peasants desire, of which they dream,
and of which they truly stand in need. Not for
the abolition of capitalism, as the socialist revolutionaries imagine, but
(18:30):
in order to emerge from the mire of semi serfdom,
from the gloom of oppression and servitude, in order to
improve their living conditions as much as it is possible
to improve them under the system of commodity production. Moreover,
the peasantry is attached to the revolution not only by
(18:52):
the prospect of radical agrarian reform, but by its general
and permanent interests. Even in fighting the proletariat, the peasantry
stands in need of democracy, for only a democratic system
is capable of giving exact expression to its interests and
of ensuring its predominance as the mass, as the majority,
(19:17):
the more enlightened the peasantry becomes, and since the war
with Japan, it is becoming enlightened much more rapidly than
those who are accustomed to measure enlightenment by the school's standard. Suspect,
the more consistently and determinedly will it favor a thorough
going democratic revolution, For unlike the bourgeoisie, it has nothing
(19:43):
to fear from the supremacy of the people, but on
the contrary, stands to gain by it. A democratic republic
will become the ideal of the peasantry as soon as
it begins to free itself from its naive monarchism, because
the enlightened monarchism of the bourgeois stock jobbers, with an
(20:05):
upper chamber, etc. Implies for the peasantry the same disenfranchisement
and the same downtroddedness and ignorance as it suffers from today,
only slightly glossed over with the varnish of European constitutionalism.
That is why the bourgeoisie as a class naturally and
(20:27):
inevitably strives to come under the wing of the liberal
monarchist party, while the peasantry in the mass strives to
come under the leadership of the Revolutionary and Republican Party.
That is why the bourgeoisie is incapable of carrying the
democratic revolution to its consummation, while the peasantry is capable
(20:49):
of doing so, and we must exert all our efforts
to help it to do so. It may be objected,
but this requires no proof. This is all abc. All
social democrats understand this perfectly well. But this is not so.
(21:09):
It is not understood by those who can talk about
the sweep of the revolution being diminished because the bourgeoisie
will fall away from it. Such people repeat the words
of our agrarian program that they have learned by Rote
without understanding their meaning, For otherwise they would not be
(21:30):
frightened by the concept of the revolutionary democratic dictatorship of
the proletariat and the peasantry, which inevitably follows from the
entire Marxian world outlook and from our program. Otherwise they
would not restrict the sweep of the Great Russian Revolution
to the limits to which the bourgeoisie is prepared to go.
(21:53):
Such people defeat their abstract Marxian revolutionary phrases by their
concrete anti Marquis and anti revolutionary resolutions. Those who really
understand the role of the peasantry in a victorious Russian revolution.
Will not dream of saying that the sweep of the
(22:13):
revolution will be diminished if the bourgeoisie recoiled from it,
For as a matter of fact, the Russian revolution will
begin to assume its real sweep, will really assume the
widest revolutionary sweep possible in the epic of bourgeois democratic revolution,
only when the bourgeoisie recoils from it, and when the
(22:36):
masses of the peasantry come out as active revolutionaries side
by side with the proletariat. In order that it may
be consistently carried to its conclusion, our democratic revolution must
rely on such forces as are capable of paralyzing the
inevitable inconsistency of the bourgeoisie. I e. Came capable precisely
(23:01):
of causing it to recoil from the revolution, which the
Caucasian adherents of ESCRAS fears so much because of their
lack of judgment. The proletariat must carry to completion the
democratic revolution by allying to itself the mass of the
peasantry in order to crush by force the resistance of
(23:24):
the autocracy and to paralyze the instability of the bourgeoisie.
The proletariat must accomplish the socialist revolution by allying to
itself the mass of the semi proletarian elements of the population,
in order to crush by force the resistance of the bourgeoisie,
and to paralyze the instability of the peasantry and the
(23:47):
petty bourgeoisie. Such are the tasks of the proletariat which
the new Escrists present so narrowly in all their arguments
and resolutions about the sweep of the revolution. One circumstance, however,
must not be forgotten. Although it is frequently lost sight
(24:08):
of in discussions about the sweep of the revolution, it
must not be forgotten that the point at issue is
not the difficulties this problem presents, but the road along
which we must seek and attain its solution. The point
is not whether it is easy or difficult to make
the sweep of the revolution mighty and invincible, but how
(24:32):
we must act in order to make this sweep more powerful.
It is precisely on the fundamental nature of our activity
on the direction it should take, that our views differ.
We emphasize this because careless and unscrupulous people too frequently
(24:52):
confuse two different questions, namely the question of the direction
in which the road leads i e. The selection of
one or two different roads, and the question of how
easily the goal can be reached, or of how near
the goal is on the given road. We have not
(25:14):
dealt with this last question at all in the foregoing
because it has not evoked any disagreement or divergency in
the party. But it goes without saying that the question
itself is extremely important and deserves the most serious attention
of all social democrats. It would be a piece of
unpardonable optimism to forget the difficulties which accompany the task
(25:39):
of drawing into the movement the masses not only of
the working class, but also of the peasantry. These difficulties
have more than once been the rock against which the
efforts to carry out a democratic revolution to completion have
been wrecked. And it was the inconsistent and self seeking
pourgeoisie which triumphed most of all, because it made capital
(26:06):
in the shape of monarchist protection against the people, and
at the same time preserved the virginity of liberalism or
of the Asvobjenia trend. But difficult does not mean impossible.
The important thing is to be convinced that the path
chosen is the correct one, and this conviction will multiply
(26:29):
a hundredfold the revolutionary energy and revolutionary enthusiasm, which can
perform miracles. How deep is the disagreement among present day
social democrats on the question of the path to be
chosen can be seen at once by comparing the Caucasian
resolution of the New Eschriists with the resolution of the
(26:52):
Third Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. The
Congress resolution says, the bourgeoisie is inconsistent. It will certainly
try to deprive us of the gains of the revolution. Therefore,
make more energetic preparations for the fight. Comrades and fellow workers,
(27:14):
arm yourselves, win the peasantry to your side. We shall
not surrender our revolutionary gains to the self seeking bourgeoisie
without a fight. The resolution of the Caucasian new Escrists
says the bourgeoisie is inconsistent, it may recoil from the revolution. Therefore,
(27:36):
comrades and fellow workers, please do not think of joining
a provisional government, for if you do, the bourgeoisie will
certainly recoil, and the sweep of the revolution will thereby
be diminished. One side says, push the revolution forward to
its consummation in spite of the resistance or the passivity
(27:58):
of the inconsistent bourgeois. The other side says, do not
think of carrying the revolution to completion independently, for if
you do, the inconsistent bourgeoisie will recoil from it. Are
these not two diametrically opposite paths. Is it not obvious
(28:19):
that one set of tactics absolutely excludes the other, that
the first tactics are the only correct tactics of revolutionary
social democracy, while the second are in fact purely Asvobjenia
tactics end of chapter twelve. This recording is in the
(28:41):
public domain.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.