Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 16 - From Marx to Mao

118V. I. LENINchange may set in which would abolish all hopes and prospectsfor an “American” path. But I assert that at the presenttime this change has certainly not yet come and that, therefore,it is absolutely inadmissible for a Marxist, absolutelywrong theoretically, to renounce the “classical” presentationof the question. That is where we differ.Theoretically these differences reduce themselves, if Iam not mistaken, to two chief points: 1) I must destroy your“ally”, V. Ilyin, 63 in order to justify my position. In otherwords, this position contradicts the results of the Marxistanalysis of the pre-revolutionary economics of Russia.2) The “classical” presentation may and must be comparedwith the agrarian opportunism of the revisionists (Davidand Co.), for there is no substantial, radical difference inprinciple between the presentation of the question of theworkers’ attitude towards the “muzhik” in Russia and inGermany.I consider both these propositions to be radically wrong.Ad* 1) (In order not to touch on “tactics” I shall set asideMartynov’s attack on Ilyin 64 and take up only your presentationof the theoretical question.)What did Ilyin argue and prove? In the first place, thatthe development of agrarian relations in Russia is proceedingon capitalist lines both in landlord and in peasant economy,both outside and within the “village commune”. In the secondplace, that this development has already irrevocablydetermined that there will be no other path than the capitalistpath, no other grouping of classes than the capitalistgrouping.This was the subject of the dispute with the Narodniks.This had to be proved. It was proved. It remains proved. Atthe present time another, further question is raised (and wasraised by the movement of 1905-07), which presupposesthe solution of the problem that was solved by Ilyin (and, ofcourse, not by him alone), but which presupposes not onlythis, but something bigger, more complex, something new.Apart from the problem that was finally and correctlysolved in 1883-85, in 1895-99, the history of Russia in thetwentieth century has confronted us with a further problem,* With regard to.—Ed.