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

120V. I. LENINthan a Trudovik, that the “dictatorship of the proletariatand the peasantry” (= the classical presentation) contradicts“the entire course of economic development” (p. 661 of theMenshevik Social Movement). “Contradicts the entire courseof economic development”—is this not reactionary?I maintain that the struggle against this monstrous distortionof Marxism was the basis of the “classical presentation”and a correct basis, although unfortunately, owing tothe natural conditions of the time, this struggle was veryzealously conducted as regards tactics, and not zealouslyenough as regards theory. By the way, “unfortunately” isnot the right word here and should be struck out!This agrarian question is now the national question ofbourgeois development in Russia, and in order not to fallinto the error of a mistaken (mechanical) application of theGerman model, which in many respects is correct and in allrespects very valuable, to our conditions, we must clearly understandthat the national question of the fully establishedbourgeois development of Germany was unification, etc.,and not the agrarian question; whereas the national questionof the final consolidation of bourgeois development in Russiais precisely the agrarian (and even narrower: the peasant)question.Such is the purely theoretical basis of the difference inapplication of Marxism in Germany in 1848-68 (approximately)and in Russia in 1905??How can I prove that in our country the agrarian question,and not some other, has assumed national significance forbourgeois development? I do not even know that it requiresproof. I think it is indisputable. But this is precisely thetheoretical basis and all the partial questions must turnon this. If this is disputed, I shall briefly point out (brieflyfor the time being) that it is precisely the course of events,the facts and the history of 1905-07 that have proved theimportance I have indicated of the agrarian (peasant, andof course petty-bourgeois peasant, but not village-communepeasant) question in Russia. The same thing is being provednow by the law of June 3, 1907, and by the composition andactivity of the Third Duma, and—a detail—by November20, 1909, 65 and (what is especially important) by the government’sagrarian policy.