User:Saula Wenger/notes

General notes and references for articles.

Theory

Dictatorship of the proletariat

Vladimir Lenin

"The revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat is rule won and maintained by the use of violence by the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, rule that is unrestricted by any laws."

— The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky

"The Soviets are the direct organisation of the working and exploited people themselves, which helps them to organise and administer their own state in every possible way. And in this it is the vanguard of the working and exploited people, the urban proletariat, that enjoys the advantage of being best united by the large enterprises; it is easier for it than for all others to elect and exercise control over those elected. The Soviet form of organisation automatically helps to unite all the working and exploited people around their vanguard, the proletariat. The old bourgeois apparatus—the bureaucracy, the privileges of wealth, of bourgeois education, of social connections, etc. (these real privileges are the more varied the more highly bourgeois democracy is developed)—all this disappears under the Soviet form of organisation. Freedom of the press ceases to be hypocrisy, because the printing-plants and stocks of paper are taken away from the bourgeoisie. The same thing applies to the best buildings, the palaces, the mansions and manorhouses. Soviet power took thousands upon thousands of these best buildings from the exploiters at one stroke, and in this way made the right of assembly—without which democracy is a fraud—a million times more democratic for the people. Indirect elections to non-local Soviets make it easier to hold congresses of Soviets, they make the entire apparatus less costly, more flexible, more accessible to the workers and peasants at a time when life is seething and it is necessary to be able very quickly to recall one’s local deputy or to delegate him to a general congress of Soviets."

"Proletarian democracy is a million times more democratic than any bourgeois democracy; Soviet power is a million times more democratic than the most democratic bourgeois republic."

— Ibid.

Joseph Stalin

" Hence the three main aspects of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

1) The utilisation of the rule of the proletariat for the suppression of the exploiters, for the defence of the country, for the consolidation of the ties with the proletarians of other lands, and for the development and victory of the revolution in all countries.

2) The utilisation of the rule of the proletariat in order to detach the labouring and exploited masses once and for all from the bourgeoisie, to consolidate the alliance of the proletariat with these masses, to draw these masses into the work of socialist construction, and to ensure the state leadership of these masses by the proletariat.

3) The utilisation of the rule of the proletariat for the organisation of socialism, for the abolition of classes, for the transition to a society without classes, to a socialist society.

The proletarian dictatorship is a combination of all these three aspects. No single one of these aspects can be advanced as the sole characteristic feature of the dictatorship of the proletariat. On the other hand, in the circumstances of capitalist encirclement, the absence of even one of these features is sufficient for the dictatorship of the proletariat to cease being a dictatorship. Therefore, not one of these three aspects can be omitted without running the risk of distorting the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Only all these three aspects taken together give us the complete and finished concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The dictatorship of the proletariat has its periods, its special forms, diverse methods of work. During the period of civil war, it is the forcible aspect of the dictatorship that is most conspicuous. But it by no means follows from this that no constructive work is carried on during the period of civil war. Without constructive work it is impossible to wage civil war. During the period of socialist construction, on the other hand, it is the peaceful, organisational and cultural work of the dictatorship, revolutionary law, etc., that are most conspicuous. But, again, it by no means follows from this that the forcible aspect of the dictatorship has ceased to exist or can cease to exist in the period of construction. The organs of suppression, the army and other organisations, are as necessary now, at the time of construction, as they were during the period of civil war. Without these organs, constructive work by the dictatorship with any degree of security would be impossible. It should not be forgotten that for the time being the revolution has been victorious in only one country. It should not be forgotten that as long as capitalist encirclement exists the danger of intervention, with all the consequences resulting from this danger, will also exist."

— Concerning Questions of Leninism

New Democracy

Stalin defended it!

Com. Stalin asks whether there is a national trader bourgeoisie in Albania.

Hoxha answers that there is trading bourgeoisie in Albania but they have neither factories nor shops or warehouses. All this has been taken away from them.5

Com. Stalin says that this is not good. The national bourgeoisie could have helped in producing this or that item or carry out some trade till the state gets strengthened, especially if among this trading national bourgeoisie there are elements that treasure the freedom and independence of Albania. Such patriotic elements among the bourgeoisie should be used and not pushed out. Com. Stalin says that he can cite one example from the practice of northern China. Amidst the Chinese national bourgeoisie, among small and average factory owners and middle class of the traders, there are such people who support the communists. We advised the Chinese comrades not to push out these elements. This nationalist patriotic section of the bourgeoisie considers that only the communists can sustain the independence and freedom of China and that all the other parties have become bankrupt. This is why they have established contact with the communists. This section of the nationalist bourgeoisie left Chiang Kai Shek because it saw that his party was incapable of establishing a united and independent China as it was convinced that the struggle for such a China is being conducted only by the communists. The bourgeoisie in reality helps the communists. As is well known, China is divided into two parts – northern and southern. Some of the trading companies bring in for the Chinese communists items from the south including some American products. On questioning as to why do they do so and why they spend their money on it, they answer that they do not see anyone except the communists who could sustain the freedom of China against the Japanese and the Americans. Lenin always thought that if the revolution has an anti-imperialist character, the character of protecting the freedom of the country that is under threat, then the communists can get some cooperation from the national bourgeoisie. This cooperation is permissible at a well known stage in the first period. This comment of Lenin must be understood by the Albanian comrades.

In the countries of peoples’ democracy the national bourgeoisie compromised with the German and Italian occupation. This is why when the Russian armies entered these countries then the bourgeoisie left with the Germans. On the territory of Albania there were neither Yugoslav nor Russian armies. This is why, if the Albanian comrades did not kill every one, one or the other of the national bourgeoisie remained. To push away such a bourgeoisie that stands for national independence and may give help, is just not done. It is the same for some of the elements out of intelligentsia who do not have sympathy for the communists but see that only the communists can defend independence of the country. This is why such persons from the intelligentsia, even when they do not sympathise with the communists, they however can help us. To push them away should also not be done. The Russian Bolsheviks did not practice such politics. If one does not take into account the war against Germany then at the moment of the revolution Russia was not occupied by anyone, and none threatened it. This is why Russian revolution had no anti-imperialist character. Its sharp end was directed within the country. This is why there is a difference between what happened in Russia and what is happening in China, in Korea or in other countries. As there was no direct threat to Russia from outside, the Russian bourgeoisie turned out to be an uncompromising enemy of the revolution. The struggle against it stretched over a few years. The Russian bourgeoisie was not patriotic. It called the French and the British for help and called for intervention. Albanian comrades in their political work must not copy what happened in Russia or in other countries. They must take note of local specifics.

If small capitalists could be found in Albania who would open small enterprises, shops or workshops then they should be given patents, provided with loans and given the possibility to engage in commercial and industrial activities till the economy of Albania does not become strong. When this happens, then another situation is created and it will be possible to freshly put forward this question regarding the bourgeoisie.

—Stalin, source

Stalinism

Relevant quotations

Georgi Dimitrov

"The social-democrat lackeys often call us “Stalinists” and they think that in this way they insult the communists. But we are proud of this honorary appellation as we are proud of the appellation “Leninists”. There is no greater honor for a revolutionary than being a true Leninist, a true Stalinist, a devoted disciple of Lenin and Stalin until the end. And there is no greater happiness for the communists than fighting under the guidance of Stalin for the triumph of the international proletariat's just cause. Not everybody can be a Stalinist. The honorary appellation “Leninist–Stalinist” has to be won through Bolshevik struggle, persistence and unlimited devotion to the cause of the working class.”

— Georgi Dimitrov, Stalin and the international proletariat, 1939

William Z. Foster

"Stalin has further developed Marxism-Leninism through many invaluable theoretical accomplishments. His principal contributions to Marxian theory lie in indicating the path of the actual building of socialism in the U.S.S.R. Thus, his powerful polemics against Trotsky, Zinoviev, Bukharin and their counterrevolutionary affiliates comprised the greatest ideological struggle of our times. They clarified every aspect of the vast and unique problem of building socialism in one country, and surveyed the whole position of international capitalism. They resulted in a decisive victory for the leadership of the Communist Party and, thereby, of socialism.

Stalin has raised the whole Marxist-Leninist structure still another stage higher by revealing the path to the actual building of socialism and the development toward communism.

Leninism-Stalinism also was the theoretical basis of the international policy of the people’s front, the historically imperative tactic to unite the masses of workers, farmers, professionals and small business people in the capitalist and colonial countries in effective struggle against fascism and for democracy.”

— William Z. Foster, Lenin and Stalin as Mass Leaders The Communist, Vol. XVIII, No. 12, December 1939

Bolshevism

"On the one hand, Bolshevism arose in 1903 on a very firm foundation of Marxist theory. The correctness of this revolutionary theory, and of it alone, has been proved, not only by world experience throughout the nineteenth century, but especially by the experience of the seekings and vacillations, the errors and disappointments of revolutionary thought in Russia. For about half a century—approximately from the forties to the nineties of the last century—progressive thought in Russia, oppressed by a most brutal and reactionary tsarism, sought eagerly for a correct revolutionary theory, and followed with the utmost diligence and thoroughness each and every “last word” in this sphere in Europe and America. Russia achieved Marxism—the only correct revolutionary theory—through the agony she experienced in the course of half a century of unparalleled torment and sacrifice, of unparalleled revolutionary heroism, incredible energy, devoted searching, study, practical trial, disappointment. verification, and comparison with European experience. Thanks to the political emigration caused by tsarism, revolutionary Russia, in the second half of the nineteenth century, acquired a wealth of international links and excellent information on the forms and theories of the world revolutionary movement, such as no other country possessed."

— Vladimir Lenin, "Left-Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder

Bolshevism vs. Leninism

The relationship between Bolshevism and Leninism can be summed up as:

text"Bolshevism and Leninism are one. They are two names for one and the same thing. Therefore, the theory of dissecting Leninism into two parts is a theory of destroying Leninism, a theory substituting Trotskyism for Leninism."

— Joseph Stalin, Trotskyism or Leninism?

Imperialism

Russian imperialism

According to statistics provided by the World Inequality Database, out of 60 billion euros, the government of the Russian Federation spent 8 billion on workers in enterprises in foreign countries. These enterprises are largely owned by Russian bourgeoisie and less developed economies, constituting an exportation of capital.

The state

Vladimir Lenin

"[...] this period [the transition from capitalism to communism] inevitably is a period of an unprecedently violent class struggle in unprecedentedly acute forms, and, consequently, during this period the state must inevitably be a state that is democratic in a new way (for the proletariat and the propertyless in general) and dictatorial in a new way (against the bourgeoisie)."

— Vladimir Lenin, The State and Revolution, 1917

Refuting revisionism

"Dengism"

Vladimir Lenin

"The old parties are products of an epoch whose task was to develop capitalism as speedily as possible. The struggle between the parties was over the question how best to expedite and facilitate this development. The new party is a product of the present epoch, which raises the issue of the very existence of capitalism. In the U.S.A., the freest and most advanced country, this issue is coming to the fore more clearly and broadly than anywhere else. The entire programme and entire agitation of Roosevelt and the Progressives turn on how to save capitalism by means of bourgeois reforms. The bourgeois reformism which in old Europe manifests itself in the chatter of liberal professors has all at once come forward in the free American republic as a party four million strong. This is American style. We shall save capitalism by reforms, says that party. We shall grant the most progressive factory legislation. We shall establish state control over all the trusts (in the U.S.A. that means over all industries!). We shall establish state control over them to eliminate poverty and enable everybody to earn a “decent” wage. We shall establish “social and industrial justice”. We revere all reforms—the only “reform” we don’t want is expropriation of the capitalists! The national wealth of the U.S.A. is now reckoned to be 120 billion (thousand million) dollars, i.e., about 240 billion rubles. Approximately one-third of it, or about 80 billion rubles, belongs to two trusts, those of Rockefeller and Morgan, or is subordinated to these trusts! Not more than. 40,000 families making up these two trusts are the masters of 80 million wage slaves. Obviously, so long as these modern slave-owners are there, all “reforms” will be nothing but a deception. Roosevelt has been deliberately hired by the astute multimillionaires to preach this deception. The “state control” they promise will become—if the capitalists keep their capital—a means of combating and crushing strikes. But the American proletarian has already awakened and has taken up his post. He greets Roosevelt’s success with cheerful irony, as if to say: You lured four million people with your promises of reform, dear impostor Roosevelt. Very well! Tomorrow those four million will see that your promises were a fraud, and don’t forget that they are following you only because they feel that it is impossible to go on living in the old way." —Vladimir Lenin, The Results and Significance of the U.S. Presidential Elections

An excellent quote in refuting arguments in favor of supposed Chinese "socialism." In what way? Revisionist defenders of the People's Republic of China and other instances of "market socialism" entirely omit (or fabricate) the class character of that country while instead redirecting attention to dispersed, alleged increases in living conditions and economic growth as "proof" of "socialism." However, Lenin astutely indicates that limited degrees of "state control" and poverty elimination do not constitute socialism nor even a progressive arrangement. These "reforms" are of a particular class character, in this instance a bourgeois one, and are only made to preserve the capitalist system.

Having supposedly raised "800,000,000" individuals out of "extreme poverty" matters little on the question of socialism. What matters is that the ultimate act of the expropriation of the exploiters will never happen. "Dengists" and other revisionists, therefore, only seek a society where the national flag is red and where the ruling party calls itself "communist." However, they do not want by any means a true abolition of the capitalist system.

Socialism is not mere poverty reduction, it is not symbolism without substance, it is not economic growth. Socialism is the revolutionary transformation of society from one mode of production to another. Do not be fooled by these revisionists who seek to regress us back to social democratic notions on what constitutes socialism.

Joseph Stalin

"You speak of Sinified socialism. There is nothing of the sort in nature. There is no Russian, English, French, German, Italian socialism, as much as there is no Chinese socialism. There is only one Marxist-Leninist socialism. It is another thing, that in the building of socialism it is necessary to take into consideration the specific features of a particular country. Socialism is a science, necessarily having, like all science, certain general laws, and one just needs to ignore them and the building of socialism is destined to failure.

These, in short, are the main laws of socialism as a science, requiring that we relate to them as such. If you understand this everything with the building of socialism in China will be fine. If you won’t you will do great harm to the international communist movement. As far as I know in the CPC there is a thin layer of the proletariat and the nationalist sentiments are very strong and if you will not conduct genuinely Marxist-Leninist class policies and not conduct struggle against bourgeois nationalism, the nationalists will strangle you. Then not only will socialist construction be terminated, China may become a dangerous toy in the hands of American imperialists. In the building of socialism in China I strongly recommend you to fully utilise Lenin’s splendid work ‘The Immediate Tasks of Soviet Power’. This would assure success."

—Joseph Stalin, From the Conversation with the Delegation of the CC CP of China in Moscow

Juche

National and racial chauvinism

"Our nation is a homogeneous nation descended from Tangun that has inherited only one bloodline for 5,000 years. Such a phenomenon is rare in the world. Homogeneity of bloodline is the most important characteristic of a nation. If we regard a common economic life as the main mark of a nation as held by previous theories, our fellow countrymen who live under the different economic systems of north and south Korea should be divided into a “bourgeois nation” and a “socialist nation”, and several million Korean expatriates could not be regarded as part of our nation."

— Kim Jong II, Guiding Light

Idealism verses materialism

Quotes

Karl Marx

"Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence."

— Karl Marx, German Ideology

Tasks of the party

As detailed in comrade Stalin's work The Party Before and After Taking Power:

Firstly,

"The principal task of communism in Russia in that period [1900–1905, S.W.] was to recruit into the Party the best elements of the working class, those who were most active and most devoted to the cause of the proletariat; to form the ranks of the proletarian party and to put it firmly on its feet. Comrade Lenin formulates this task as follows: 'to win the vanguard of the proletariat to the side of communism'" [Emphasis added]

Secondly,

"The second period was the period of winning the broad masses of the workers and peasants to the side of the Party, to the side of the vanguard of the proletariat. It embraces the interval of time approximately from October 1905 to October 1917." [Emphasis added]

And thirdly,

"The third period is the period of taking and holding power with the object, on the one hand, of drawing all the working people of Russia into the work of building socialist economy and the Red Army, and, on the other hand, of applying all forces and resources for rendering assistance to the international proletariat in its struggle to overthrow capital. This period embraces the interval of time from October 1917 to the present day." [Emphasis added]

Resources

On socialist Albania

• The History of the Socialist Construction of Albania

On philosophy

• A Textbook of Marxist Philosophy

On socialism

• Socialist Mode of Production

On economics

• Political Economy