The Historical Meaning of the Inner Party Struggle in Russia (1911)

  • Author: Lenin
  • Date: 1911
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: http://www.marx2mao.com/Lenin/HMPS10.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

The subject indicated by the above title is dealt with in articles by Trotsky and Martov in Nos. 50 and 51 of Neue Zeit. Martov expounds Menshevik views. Trotsky follows in the wake of the Mensheviks, taking cover behind particularly sonorous phrases. Martov sums up the "Russian experience" by saying: "Blanquist and anarchist lack of culture triumphed over Marxist culture" (read: Bolshevism over Menshevism). "Russian Social-Democracy spoke too zealously in Russian ", in contrast to the "general European " methods of tactics. Trotsky's "philosophy of history" is the same. The cause of the struggle is the "adaptation of the Marxist intelligentsia to the class movement of the proletariat". "Sectarianism, intellectualist individualism, ideological fetishism" are placed in the forefront. "The struggle for influence over the politically immature proletariat " — that is the essence of the matter….

Continue reading

A Reply to Social-Democrat (1905)

  • Author: Stalin
  • Date: August 1905
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/RSD05.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

Modern social life is built on capitalist lines. There exist two large classes, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and between them a life-and-death struggle is going on. The conditions of life of the bourgeoisie compel it to strengthen the capitalist system. But the conditions of life of the proletariat compel it to undermine the capitalist system, to destroy it. Corresponding to these two classes, two kinds of consciousness are worked out:

Continue reading

Briefly About the Disagreements in the Party (1905)

  • Author: Stalin
  • Date: May 1905
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/ADP05.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

Our "Mensheviks" are really too tiresome! I am referring to the Tiflis "Mensheviks." They heard that there are disagreements in the Party and so they began harping: whether you like it or not we shall talk about disagreements, always and everywhere; whether you like it or not we shall abuse the "Bolsheviks" right and left! And so they are hurling abuse for all they are worth, as if they are possessed. At all the crossroads, among them selves and among strangers, in short, wherever they happen to be, they howl one thing: beware of the "majority," they are strangers, infidels! Not content with the "habitual" field, they have carried the "case" into the legally published literature, thereby proving to the world once again . . . how tiresome they are.

    What has the "majority" done? Why is our "minority" so "wrathful"?

    Let us turn to history….

Continue reading

What Is To Be Done (1902)

  • Author: Lenin
  • Date: 1902
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: http://www.marx2mao.com/Lenin/WD02.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

Burning Questions of Our Movement

" . . . Party   struggles   lend   a   party  strength and vitality; the greatest proof of the weakness of a party  is  diffuseness   and the blurring of clearly   defined   boundries;   a  party   becomes strong by purging itself. . . ."

Continue reading

Where to Begin (1901)

  • Author: Lenin
  • Date: May 1901
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: http://www.marx2mao.com/Lenin/WTB01.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

In recent years the question of "what is to be done" has confronted Russian Social-Democrats with particular insistence. It is not a question of what path we must choose (as was the case in the late eighties and early nineties), but of what practical steps we must take upon the known path and how they shall be taken. It is a question of a system and plan of practical work. And it must be admitted that we have not yet solved this question of the character and the methods of struggle, fundamental for a party of practical activity, that it still gives rise to serious differences of opinion which reveal a deplorable ideological instability and vacillation. On the one hand, the "Economist" trend, far from being dead, is endeavouring to clip and narrow the work of political organisation and agitation. On the other, unprincipled eclecticism is again rearing its head, aping every new "trend", and is incapable of distinguishing immediate demands from the main tasks and permanent needs of the movement as a whole. This trend…

Continue reading

The Discussion on Self Determination Summed Up (1916)

  • Author: Lenin
  • Date: October 1916
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: www.marx2mao.com/Lenin/SD16.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

We have affirmed that it would be a betrayal of socialism to refuse to implement the self-determination of nations under socialism. We are told in reply that "the right of self-determination is not applicable to a socialist society". The difference is a radical one. Where does it stem from?

Continue reading

The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self Determination (1916)

  • Author: Lenin
  • Date: April 1916
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: http://www.marx2mao.com/Lenin/SRSD16.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

Imperialism is the highest stage in the development of capitalism. In the foremost countries capital has outgrown the bounds of national states, has replaced competition by monopoly and has created all the objective conditions for the achievement of socialism. In Western Europe and in the United States, therefore, the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat for the overthrow of capitalist governments and the expropriation of the bourgeoisie is on the order of the day. Imperialism forces the masses into this struggle by sharpening class contradictions on a tremendous scale, by worsening the conditions of the masses both economically — trusts, high cost of living — and politically — the growth of militarism, more frequent wars, more powerful reaction, the intensification and expansion of national oppression and colonial plunder….

Continue reading

The Right of Nations to Self-Determination (1914)

  • Author: Lenin
  • Date: 1914
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: www.marx2mao.com/Lenin/RNSD14.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

A precise formulation of this question, which no Marxist can avoid, would at once destroy nine-tenths of Rosa Luxemburg's arguments. This is not the first time that national movements have arisen in Russia, nor are they peculiar to that country alone. Throughout the world, the period of the final victory of capitalism over feudalism has been linked up with national movements. For the complete victory of commodity production, the bourgeoisie must capture the home market, and there must be politically united territories whose population speak a single language, with all obstacles to the development of that language and to its consolidation in literature eliminated. Therein is…

Continue reading

Marxism and the National Question (1913)

  • Author: Stalin
  • Date: 1913
  • Location: Vienna
  • Link: www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/MNQ12.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

The period of counter-revolution in Russia brought not only "thunder and lightning" in its train, but also disillusionment in the movement and lack of faith in common forces. As long as people believed in "a bright future," they fought side by side irrespective of nationality — common questions first and foremost! But when doubt crept into people's hearts, they began to depart, each to his own national tent — let every man count only upon himself! The "national question" first and foremost! …

Continue reading

Economics and Politics in the Era of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (1919)

  • Author: Lenin
  • Date: 1919
  • Location: Russia
  • Link: www.marx2mao.com/Lenin/EPDP19.html
  • PDF: see attachment at the bottom of this page.

Theoretically, there can be no doubt that between capitalism and communism there lies a definite transitional period which must combine the features and properties of both these forms of social economy. This transition period has to be a period of struggle between dying capitalism and nascent communism — or, in other words, between capitalism which has been defeated but not destroyed and communism which has been born but is still very feeble.

Continue reading