11.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

THE LIQUIDATORS EXPOSED21viks Plekhanov compares the Bolshevik <strong>Marx</strong>ists, Social-Democrats, <strong>to</strong> Gogol’s Osip, 11 who picked up all sorts <strong>of</strong>rubbish, every little bit <strong>of</strong> string (including empirio-criticism12 and god-building). Now the Bolshevik Osip, saysPlekhanov jokingly, has begun “<strong>to</strong> clear the space aroundhim”, <strong>to</strong> expel the anti-<strong>Marx</strong>ists, <strong>to</strong> throw away the “string”and other rubbish.Plekhanov’s joke <strong>to</strong>uches not on a frivolous question bu<strong>to</strong>n a fundamental and very serious one for Russian Social-Democracy, namely, which trend within it has been most<strong>to</strong> the benefit <strong>of</strong> rubbish, “string”, i.e., <strong>to</strong> the benefit <strong>of</strong>bourgeois-democratic influences in the proletarian environment.All the “subtleties” <strong>of</strong> factional disputes, all the longvicissitudes <strong>of</strong> the struggle over various resolutions, slogans,etc.—all this “factionalism” (which is now so frequentlybeing condemned by empty cries against “factionalism”that encourage unprincipledness most <strong>of</strong> all) turns on thisfundamental and very serious question for Russian Social-Democracy: which trend within it has been the most subservient<strong>to</strong> bourgeois-democratic influences (which are inevitable<strong>to</strong> some extent at some time during the bourgeoisrevolution in Russia, just as they are inevitable in everycapitalist country). Every trend in Social-Democracy inevitablyreceives the adherence <strong>of</strong> a greater or lesser number <strong>of</strong>not purely proletarian but semi-proletarian and semi-pettybourgeoiselements; the question is which trend is less subordinate<strong>to</strong> them, more rapidly rids itself <strong>of</strong> them, moresuccessfully combats them. This is the question <strong>of</strong> thesocialist, proletarian, <strong>Marx</strong>ist Osip in relation <strong>to</strong> theliberal or anarchist, petty-bourgeois, anti-<strong>Marx</strong>ist “bit <strong>of</strong>string”.Bolshevik <strong>Marx</strong>ism, says Plekhanov, is a “more or lessnarrow and crudely conceived <strong>Marx</strong>ism”. The Menshevik variety,apparently, is “more or less broad and subtle”. Letus look at the results <strong>of</strong> the revolution, at the results <strong>of</strong> sixyears <strong>of</strong> the his<strong>to</strong>ry <strong>of</strong> the Social-Democratic movement(1903-09), and what six years they were! The BolshevikOsips have already drawn a “general boundary” and “shownthe door” <strong>to</strong> the Bolshevik petty-bourgeois “bit <strong>of</strong> string”,which is now whining that it has been “ousted” and “removed”.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!