Lenin CW-Vol. 23.pdf - From Marx to Mao

PRINCIPLES INVOLVED IN WAR ISSUE153war. It implies rejection of all the foundations of modernbourgeois society, the undermining of the very roots ofthe modern social system, and not only in theory, not only“in general”, but in practice, directly and immediately.Is it not clear that this can be accomplished only if we gobeyond the firm theoretical conviction that capitalism hasfully matured for its transformation into socialism andaccept the practical, direct and immediate carrying outof such transformation, i.e., the socialist revolution?Yet that is nearly always lost sight of in discussingrefusal to defend the fatherland. At best there is “theoretical”acceptance of the fact that capitalism is ripe for transformationinto socialism. But immediate, radical change of allaspects of party activity in the spirit of the directly imminentsocialist revolution—that is shunned!The people, it is alleged, are not prepared for that!But that is ridiculously inconsistent. Either, or. Eitherwe do not proclaim immediate rejection of defence ofthe fatherland—or we immediately develop, or begin todevelop, systematic propaganda for immediate socialistrevolution. In a certain sense the “people”, of course, are“not prepared” either to reject fatherland defence or acceptsocialist revolution. But that does not justify two years—two years!—of procrastination and delay in starting tosystematically prepare them!Second. What is being opposed to the policy of defenceof the fatherland and civil peace? Revolutionary struggleagainst the war, “revolutionary mass actions”, as recognisedby the 1915 Aarau Party Congress resolution. No doubt avery good decision, but ... but the party’s record since thatcongress, the party’s actual policy, show that it has remaineda paper decision.What is the aim of revolutionary mass struggle? Theparty has made no official statement, nor is the questionbeing discussed in general. It is either taken for granted,or frankly admitted, that the aim is “socialism”. Socialismis being opposed to capitalism (or imperialism).That, however, is absolutely illogical (theoretically)and void of all practical meaning. Illogical because it istoo general, too nebulous. “Socialism” in general, as an aim,as the opposite of capitalism (or imperialism), is accepted