From Marx to Mao Tse-tung - BANNEDTHOUGHT.NET

x\rsE-TUN

F'ROM MARX TOMAO TSE-TUNGStud2 in Reaolutionary DialecticsbyGEORGE THOMSONThey Lrave completely failed to understand what isdecisive in Marxism, namely, its revolutionary dialectics.-LeninCHINA POLICY STUDY GROUPLONDON

PrefaceTo the memory ofDOUGLAS GARMAN( r9o3-r 969)Copyright @ rgTr by George ThomsonPublished by the China Policy Study Group, LondonSBN 95oeor5 o eAll rights reserved, including permission to translate orreproduce this book or portions thereof, except with thepermission of the publishers, or by way of review.MADB AND PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BYTHE GARDEN CITY PRESS LIMMEDLETCHWORTH, HERTFORDS HIREsc6 l;sIII!I\l,This is a Marxist study of the Russian Revolution ofrgrT and the Chinese Revolution of 1949, designed todemonstrate their unity and continuity as two successivestages in the world socialist revolution. Theircommon theoretical foundation is expounded by meansof extensive quotations from the Marxist classics,especially the writings of Lenin and Mao Tse-tung.These enable the reader to follow the two revolutionsthrough the minds of those who led them, and at thesame time they provide him with an introduction to thebasic principles of dialectical and historical materialism;for that theory can only be understood in the light of therevolutionary struggles out of which it has grown andin which it finds its fullest and clearest expression.The book is dedicated to the memory of DouglasGarman, from whom I received my training inMarxism. As national education organiser of the BritishCommunist Party (C.P.G.B.), he created a network ofParty schools, attended by industrial workers from allparts of the country and tutored by himself and otherswhom he had trained in his superb method of teachingthrough controlled discussion. He gave up this work inrg5o owing to disagreements with the Party leadershipover the revisionist line of the British Road toSocialism, which he opposed from the beginning. Inthat struggle he was defeated, but among those whopassed through his Party schools there were many who,like myself, have never forgotten his lessons in revolutionarydialectics, and this has helped them to seervhere the revolutionary path lies today.Birminghant., r97 IGEORGE THOMSON

HELCWMEMEGMEPMERMFEMQMSWPRSCWSLSMTSPAbbreuiations(For full particulars of the works cited see pp. r7o-r8z)More on the historical experience of proletarianciictatorship.Lenin, Collected works.Marx and Engels, Selected works.Marx and Engels, The German ideology.Engels, The peasant war in Germany.Marx and Engels, On religion.Mao Tse-tung, Four essays on philosophy.Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung.Selected works of Mao Tse-tung.Mao Tse-tung and others quoted in PekingReuiew.Stalin, Works.Stalin, Leninism.The Moscow Trial and two speeches by Stalin.Stalin, Economic problems of socialism.vtPrefaceAbbreviationsContentsT. The Dictatorship of the ProletariatI Working-class Power z Continuationof the Class Struggle 3 The IdeologicalStruggle 4 'Left' and Right OpportunismlI. From the Bourgeois to the ProletarianReuolutionr The Relation of Classes in ModernSociety z The Russian Revolution sT[re Chinese RevolutionIII. The Proletariat and the Peasantryr The Leading Role of theProletariat z The Worker-Peasant AIliance3 The Diflerentiation of thePeasantry 4 The Lumpen-proletariat5 T,he Proletariat in the WestlY. The National Questionr The Nation in Modern Society 2National Self-determination 3 Wars ofNational Liberation 4 National versusRegional Autonomy 5 National andInternational Culturevllvvir93653II

iY. Socialism in One Countryr Marx's Theory of Permanent Revolutionz The Victory of the OctoberRevolution 3 lJneven Development 4Revolution in the EastYI. The Partyr Lessons of the Paris Commune z TlheParty of a New Type 3 The VanguardPa*y 4 Democratic Centralism 5From the Masses, to the Masses7t86t,/)IiIriihCHAPTER IThe Dictatorship of theProletariatYIL The First Socialist Stater The Proletarian Revolution z SocialistConstruction 3 'Left' and RightDeviations 4 The New Bourgeoisie 5The Need for a Cultural Revolution 6The Class Struggle in Socialist Society7 The New RevisionismYILL The Proletarian Cultural Reoolutionr National Liberation c The Handlingof Contradictions 3 The CapitalistRoad 4 Mass Participation in Government5 Revolution and Production 6Communist LabourRef erencesvlllr06r+2r70I iIl'i'iril1II,tIv(l\)"Iiiil1,i:I)'ir,,1,The first step in the revolution by the workingclass is to raise the proletariat to the position ofruling class, to win the battle for democracy.-Communist Manifestor. Working-class PowerLenin wrote :Those who recognise only the class struggle are notyet Marxists. . .. Only he is a Marxist who extendsrecognition of lhe class struggle to recognition of thedictatorship of the ttroletariat. This is what constitutesthe most profound d,istinction between theMarxist and the ordinary petty (as well as big)bourgeois. This is the touchstone on which the real,understanding and recognition of Marxism should betested. (LCW 25.4r r.)Thus, the concept of proletarian dictatorship entersinto Lenin's very definition of a Marxist. Accordingly,if rve accept this definition, we too must use it as atouchstone to distinguish between the conflicting interpretationsof Marxism that are current at the presentduy.CIass society rests on exploitation. The exploitersform the ruling class, the exploited the subject class orI{l;

classes. The ruling class enforces its rule by means ofthe state, which is an organ for the forcible repressionof one class by another. Its chief instruments are thearmy and the police :The distinctive feature of the state is the existenceof a separate class of people in whose hands pozuer isconcentrated. (LCW I.4Ig)According to Marx, the state is an organ of classrule, an organ for the oppression of one class byanother; it is the creation of 'order', which legalisesand perpetuates this oppression by moderating theconflict between the classes. (LCW 2SAB7.)A standing army and police are the chief instrumentsof state power. (LCW 25.389.)Thus, every form of class society-slave-owning,feudal, capitalist-is a dictatorship of the ruling class.The form of state varies. In capitalist-that is,bourgeois-society it may be more or less democratic; itmay allow for parliamentary elections based on universalsuffrage; but it is still a dictatorship-'a dictatorshipof the bourgeoisie masked by parliamentary forms'(LCW 3o.roo):Bourgeois democracy, which is invaluable for educatingthe proletariat and training it for struggle, isalways narrow, hypocritical, spurious and false; italways remains democracy for the rich and a swindlefor the poor. (LCW zB.roB.)Accordingly, while urging the workers to make fulluse of bourgeois democratic rights 'in the spirit of thernost consisten,t and resolutely revolutionary democracy'(LCW zr.4og), Lenin warned them that it was anillusion to suppose that they could win power by parliamentarymeans. This was the main issue betweenhim and the revisionists of his day :it l,i,I,l,iIi{iIIIiI{IThe most dangerous thing about the BerneInternational is its verrbal recognition of the dictatorshipof the proletariat.. .. Attempts are being madeto recognise the diotatorship of the proletariat inwords in order to smuggle in along with it the 'willof the majority', 'universal suffrage' (this is exactlywhat Kautsky does), ibourgeois parliamentarism,rejection of the idea that the entire hourgeois maohineryof the state must be destroyed, smashed, blownup. These new evasions, new loopholes of reformism,are most of all to be feared.The dictatorship of the proletariat would be impossibleif the majority of the population did notconsist of proletarians and semi-proletarians. Kautskyand Co. try to falsify this truth by arguing that 'thevote of the majority' is required for the dictatorshipof the proletariat to be recognised as 'valid'. Comicalpedants ! They fail to understand that voting withinthe bounds, institutions and customs of bourgeoisparliamentarism is a part of the bourgeois statemachinery that Lras to ibe broken and smashed fromtop to bottom in order to pass from bourgeois democracyto proletarian democracy. (LCW zg.5lo.)It follows that all attempts to use the apparatus of thebourgeois state, which seryes to protect bourgeoisrigh,ts, for the purpose of abolishing those rights, aredoomed to failure :It is the greatest delusion, the greatest selfdeception,and a deception of the people, to attemPtby means of this state aPparatus to carry outsuch reforms as the abolition of landed estateswithout compensation, of the grain monopoly, etc.This apparatus . . . is absolutely incapable of carryingout reforms which would even seriously curtail orlimit the rights of 'sacred private property', much lessabolish those rights. That is why it always happens,

under all sorts of 'coalition' cabinets, which include'socialists', that these socialists, even when individualsamong them are perfectly honest, in reality turn outto be either a useless ornament or a screen for thebourgeois government, a sort of lightning conductor,to divert the people's indignation from the government,a tool for the government to deceive thepeople. .. . So it has been and so it always will be solong as the old bourgeois, bureaucratic state apparatusremains intact. (LCW 25.369.)Consequently, the bourgeois state can only be overthrownby force. The dictatorship of the bourgeoisiemust be replaced by the dictatorship of the proletariat :The essence of Marx's theory of the state has beenmastered only by those who realise that the dictatorshipof a single class is necessary not only for everyclass society in general, not only for the proletariatwhich has overthrown the bourgeoisie, but also forthe entire historical period which separates capitalismfrom 'classless society', from communism. Bourgeoisstates are most varied in form, but their essence is'the same: all these states, whatever their form, inthe final analysis are inevitably the dictatorship ofthe bourgeoisie. The transition from capitalism tocommunism is certainly bound to yield a trernendousaibundance and variety of political forms, but theessence will inevitably be the same; the dictatorshipof the proletariat. (LCW 25.+ry.)The form in which this dictatorship emerged in Russiawas one in which the proletariat, supported by the poorpeasantry, seized state power from- the feudal lindownersand the big bourgeoisie or capitalist class(LCW es.r rs).In this way, having seized power, the proletariatabolishes bourgeois democracy and replaces it withprotretarian democracy :t/t,lt)it1,ir/liThe proletariat takes Power, becomes the ru'lingclass, smashes bourgeois parliarnentarism and bourgeoisdemocracy, suPPresses the -bourgeoisie, supp.etsesall attempts of all othet classes to return toLapitalitm, gives real freedom and democracy to -theworking people (which is practicahle only whenprivate ownership of the means of production hasbeen abolished) and gives them, not just the right to,but the real ttse of, what has heen taken |tom thebourgeoisie. (LCW z9'5r r.)Thus, the dictatorship of the proletariat means democracyfor the peoplJ and dictatorship over the capitalists:Bolshevism has popularised throughout the worldthe idea of the 'dictatorship of the proletariatr' hastranslated these words from the Latin, firs't intoRussian, and then into all the languages of theworld, and has shown by the example of Sooietgoaernnlent that the workers and poor Peasants,iam of a backward country, even with the leastexperience, education and habits of organisation,have been able for a whole year amidst giganticdifficulties and amidst a struggle against the exploiters(who were supported by the bourgeoisie oft]n. white wor'ld) to maintain the power of theworking people, to create a democracy which isi-measrribly frigher and broader than all previousdemocracies-in the world, and to start the creativework of tens of millions of workers and peasants forthe practical cbnstruction of socialism' (LCWzB.z93.)Siiultaneously with an immense expansion ofd.emocracy, which for the first time becomes demo'cracy for the poor, democracy for the.people,-andnot democracy lor the moneybags, the dictatorship ofthe proletariai irnposes a series of restrictions on the

freedom of the oppressors, the exploiters, the capitalists.We must suppress them in order to freehumanity frorn wageilr.rery; their resistance rnust becrushed by force. (LCW z5.j1r.1In 1949, led by the Communist party and Mao Tse_tung, the workers and peasants of China seiz.a po*., tyforce of arms and .itublirh"d u p"opi"t democraticdictatorship, that is, a form of the diJtatorship of theproletariat c_orresponding to the special conditions ofChina. It differs from the Soviet form in certainfeatures, which will be discussed in the nexi chapter, butin essence it is the same :are the pgople?At the present stage in China,they are the working class, the peasantry", the urbanpetty bourgeoisie and the national rboureeoisie, Theseclasses, led by the working class and rh? CommunistParty, unite to form theii own state and elect theiro-wn government; they enforce their dictatorship overthe_ running-dogs of imperialism_the landlord chssand the bureaucrat-bourgeoisie, as well as therepresentatives of these classes, the Kuomintang reac_tionaries and ,their accomplices_suppress them] allowthem only to behave themselves an&'not to be unrulyin word or deed. If they speak or act in an unrulyway, they will be promptly stopped and punishei.Democracy is practised - within^ the .arrk, of tfrepeople, who enjoy the rights of freedom of speech,assembly, association, and so on. The right to votebelongs only to the people, not to the reactionaries.The combination of these.two aspects, democracy forthe people and dictatorship oveithe reactionu.ilr,l"the people's democratic diciatorship. (MSW 4.4r7.)z. Continuation of the Class StruggleThe class struggle does not cease after the overthrow ofIthe bourgeoisie. On the contrary, it persists for a longtime and in many respects becomes fiercer :The abolition of classes requires a long, difficultand stntrboro class struggle, which, after the overthrowof capitalist rule, after the destruction of the,bourgeois state, alter the establishment of the dictatorshipof the proletariat, does not disappear (as thevulgar representatives of the old socialism and theold Social Democracy imagire), trut merely changesits forms and in many respects becomes fiercer.(LCW 29.389, cf. SCW ryA57,)During this period the dictatorship of the proletariathas to be maintained in order to suppress the continuedresistance of the bourgeoisie, to transform the economicbasis by replacing capitalist with socialist production,and to carry the revolution into the ideological sphere :The bourgeoisie in our country has been conquered,but it has not yet been uprooted, not yetdestroyed, not even utterly lbroken. flhat is why weare faced with a new and higher form of struggleagainst the Lrourgeoisie-the transition from the verysimple task of further expropriating the capitalists tothe much more complicated and difficult task ofcreating conditions in which it will be impossible forthe bourgeoisie to exist or for a new bourgeoisie toarise. (LCW 27.244.)This dictatorship presupposes the ruthlessly severe,swift and resolute use of force to crush the resistanceof the exploiters, the capitalists, the landowners andtheir underlings. Whoever does not understand, this isnot a revolutionary, and must be removed from thepost of leader or adviser of the proletariat.But the essence of proletarian dictatorship is not inforce alone, or even mainly in force. Its chief featureis the organisation and discipline of the advancedl'iI

contingent of the working people, of their vanguard,their sole leader, the proletariat, whose object is tobuild social,ism, abolish the division of society intoclasses, make all members of society into workingpeople, and remove the basis for all exploitation ofman by man. This object cannot be achieved at onestroke. It requires a f.airly iong period of transitionfrom capitalism to socialism, because the reorganisationof production is a difficult matter, because radicalchanges in all spheres of life need time, and becausethe enormous force of habit of running things in apetty-Lrourgeois and bourgeois way carr only be over-99me by a long and stubborn struggle. That is whyMarx spoke of an entire period of the dictatorship ofthe proletariat as the period of transition from capitalismto socialism. (LCW 29.SBB.)The class of exploiters, the landowners and capitalists,has not disappeared, and cannot disappear, allat once under the dictatorship of the proletariat.The exploiters have been smashed, but not destroyed.They still have an international base in the form ofinternational capital, of which they are a rbranch.They still retain in part certain means of production.They still have money, they still have vast socialconnections. Just because they have been defeated,the energy of their resistance has increased ahundred and a thousand fold. The (art' of state,military and economic administration gives them asuperiority, a very great superiority, so that theirimportance is incomparably greater than theirnumerical proportion of the population. (LCW3o.r r5.)More recently Lenin's view has been reaffirmed byMao Tse-tung:The current great proletarian cultural revolution isabsolutely necessary and most timely for consolidatingl,the d,ictatorship of t'he proletariat, preventing capitalistrestoration, and building socialism. (PR 6gr8.r5.)g. The Ideological StruggleBoth before and after the proletarian revolution theproletariat has to wage a continuous struggle againstbourgeois, and particularly petty-bourgeois, ideology.The formulation of rbourgeois ideas is mainly tthe workof bourgeois intellectuals, who play an important partin the ideological struggle, especially in revolutionaryperiods. At such times some of them, like Marx himself,'go over to the proletariat', having 'raised themselvesrto the level of comprehending theoretically thehistorical movement as a whole' (ME r.43, cf. LCW5.37s).The special features of petty-bourgeois ideologyarise f,rom the status of the petty bourgeois as a smallproprietor. As such, he has a vested interest in bourgeoissociety; but at the same time, being exploi'ted bythe big proprietors, he is in constant danger of beingruined and thrown d,own into the proletariat. Occupyingas he does an unstable position between the twomain contending classes, he tends to vacillate :It is a truth long known to every Marxist that inevery capitalist society the only decisiae forces arethe proletariat and the bourgeoisie, while all socialelements occupying a posi,tion ibetween these classesand falling within the economic category of thepetty Lrourgeoisie ineoitably vacillate between thesedecisive forces. (LCW zB.t86.)The petty bourgeoisie inevitably and unavoidablyvacillated between the dicrtatorship of the bourgeoisie(Kerensky, Kornilov, Savinkov) and the dictatorshipof the proletariat; for, owing to the basicI)

features of its economic position, the petty bourgeoisieis incapaible of doing anything independently.(LCW z8.3oo.)In between the proletariat and the bourgeoisiethere is another clasi of people, who incline first thisway and then the other. This has always been thein all revolutions, and in capitalist society, inwhich "urL the proletariat and the 'bourgeoisie form twohostile it is impossible for intermediate sectionsnot "r*pt, to exist 'between 'them. The existence ofthese waverers is historically inevitable, and unfortunatelythese elements, who d-o not know themsel,reson whose side they will fight tomorrow, willexist for quite some time. (LCW zB.47t')In its struggle for the allegiance of the petty bourgeoisiethe pioletariat has to carry on -thesame strugglei,itfrin itsef ; for it has itself evolved historically out ofthe pettv bourgeoisie, urban and rural, and moreover is.or,rtrrrily incriasing its numbers from the same source'The struggle againsi the big bourgeoisie takes the formof a., op"e"r, coifrontation between capital and labour,but the struggle against petty-bourgeois ideology islargely a stru{gle wiihin the ranks of the working class :One of the most profound causes that give riseperiodically to diflerences over tactics is the verylrowt r of ihe labour movement. If this movement isiot measured'by the criterion of some fantastic ideal,but is regarded as a practical movement of ordinaryoeople. ii wilt be clear that the enlistment of everiurg". .rmbers of new 'tecruits', the attraction of new,""iiorrt of working people, must inevitably be accompaniedby waveri-ngs in the sphere of theory andiactics, by repetitions of old mistakes, by a temporaryreversi,on' t; antiquated views and antiquatedmettrods, and so forth. (LCW t6.S+l')IONowhere in the world has the proletarian movementcome into being, nor could it have come intobeing, 'all at once', in a pure class form, ready-made,like Minerva from the head of Jove. Only throughlong struggle and hard work on the part of the mostadvanced workers, of all class-conscious workers, wasit possible to build up and strengthen the

asis-all this is bound to be experienced by theworking class on an incomparably larger scale, whenthe prJletarian revolution will sharpen all disputediss.re^s, focrs all differences on points of immediateimpo.tance in determining thg conduct o'f the*ur..r, and make it necessary in the heat of tLrebattle to distinguish enemies from friends and castout bad allies in order to deal decisive blows at theenemy. (LCW I5.39)After the revolution the proletariat must maintain itsideological struggle throughout the period of socialistconstriction foi- as long as srn-all-scale production,which is the basis of petty-bourgeois ideology, continuesto exist :IJnfortunately, small-scale production is still widespreadin the world, and small-scale.production en-["nders capitalism and the bourgeoisie continuouslyiaily,krouily, sPontaneously, on. a mass scale' Allthe# reasoni *it "the dictatorship of the proletariatnecessary, and victory over the bourgeoisie is impossiblewithout a long, stubbom and desperate life-anddeathstruggle, which calls for tenacity, discipline,and a single, inflexible will. (LCW 3r.24.)The abolition of, classes means, not merely oustingthe landowners and capitalists-that is something weaccomplished with comparative ease; it rneans abolishing-thesmall cotnmodity producers, and they cannot5e ousted or crustred; we must learn to liae wilhthem. They can, and rnust, be transformed andre-educated only by prolonged, slow, cautious organisationalwork. Trhey surround the proletariat onevery side with a petty-bourgeois atmosphere, whichpermeates and corrupts the proletariat, and constantlyoauses among the proletariat -relapsesintopetty-'borr.g.ois spinelessness, disunity, individualism,t2and alternating moods of exaltation and dejection.. . . The dictatorship of the proletariat means a persistentstruggle-bloody and bloodless, violent andpeace{ul, military and economic, educational andadministrative-against the forces and traditions ofthe old society. (LCW 3r.44, cf.. MSW 3.2r5.)4. 'Left' and Right OpportunismThe principal petty-bourgeois trends in the workingclassmovement are, in the order of their development,anarchism, syndicalism, reformism, and revisionism.Anarchism originated in Russia. One of its leaders,Bakunin, was an opponent of Marx in the FirstInternational. According to Marx, the state, as theinstrument of class rule, will necessarily persist so longas society is divided into classes; and the task of theproletariat is, not to abolish the state, but to replace thebourgeois state with the proletarian state. Only in thisway can the conditions be created for the ultimatedisappearance of classes. According to Bakunin, theabolition of the state is the immediate task, which theworkers are to carry out, not by forming a workers'party, not by political struggle at all, but by directaction. The anarchists failed to understand that theabolition of the state belon.qs to a future historicalstage, which can only be reached through the dictatorshipof the proletariat :Anarchism is bourgeois individualism in reverse.Individualism as the basis of the entire anarchistworld outtrook. . . . Failure to understand the developmentof society-the role of large-scale productionthedevelopment of capitalism into socialism. Anarchismis a product of despair. The psychology of theunsettled intellectual or the vagabond, not of thepnoletarian. (LCW 5327, cf . 25.+84.)r3

l,Syndicalism is closely related to anarchism. The syndicalist,too, repudiates the dictatorship of the proletariat.He maintains that through the trade unions theworkers can call a general strike, seize control of production,and so overthrow capitalism.Reformism originated in Britain. The Fabians were agroup of intellectuals and working-class leaders whoprorrid"d a theoretical basis for the Labour Party. Theiridea of the 'inevitability of gradualisrn' embodies theessence of reformism-the idea that oapitalism can betransformed into socialism by a series of gradualchanges, without any qualitative change, that is, withouta revolution,From Britain reformism spread to the continent,especially to Germany, where it took the form ofrevisionism. The founder of revisionisrn was Bernstein,who had at one time been a Marxist' He borowedmany of his ideas from the Fabians (LCW 37.z9r, cf.n.g7o). Revisionism differs from reformism simply inthat the reformist ideas are presented as amendments toMarxism. In Germany Marxism was too deeply rootedamong the workers to be ignored, and therefore it wasreinterpreted in such a way as to be emptied of itsrevolution,ary content :t+l,The Bernsteinians accepted, and accept, Marxismminus its direct revolutionary content. They do notregard ttrre parliamentary struggle as merely one ofthe weapons particularly suitable for definite &ristoricalperiods, but as the main and almost the soleform of struggle, making 'force', 'seizure', 'dictatorship'unnecessary.(LCW to.24g, cf. l9.3oo.). But, after Marxism had ousted all the more or lessintegral doctrines hostile to it, the tendencies expressedin those doctrines began to seek other channels.The forms and causes of the struggle changed,but the struggle continued. And the second halfcenturyin the existence of Marxism began-in thenineties-with the struggle of a trend hostile toMarxism within Marxism itself. Bernstein, a one-timeorthodox Marxist, gave his name to this trend bycoming forward with the greatest noise and the mostpurposeful expression of amendments to Marx,revision of Mar-x, revisionism. (LCW I5.32)'The movement is everything, the ultimate aim isnothing'. This catch-phrase of Bernstein's expressesthe substance of revisionism better than many longdisquisitions. To determine its conduct frorn case tocase, to adapt itself to the events of the day and tothe chopping and changing of petty politics, to forgetthe primary interests of the proletariat and the basicfeatures of the whole capitalist system, o{ all capitalistevolution, to sacrifice these primary interests forthe sake of real or assumed advantages of themoment-such is the policy of revisionism. (LCWr 5.37)When the Russian Social-Democratic Party wasreconstituted in r9o3, there existed within it from thebeginning two contrary trends-the revolutionary trend,represented by the Bolsheviks, and the opportunisttrend, represented by the Mensheviks :In the turbulent years rgo5-o7 Menshevism was anopportunist trend backed by the bourgeois liberals,which brought liberal-bourgeois tendencies intothe working-class movement. ,Its essence lay in anadaptation of the working-class struggle to suit liberalism.Bolshevism, on the other hand, set before theSocial-Democratic workers the task of rousing thedemocratic peasantry for the revolutionary struggle,despite the vacillation and treachery of the liberals.(LCW zr.g3z.)I5

In speakins of 'opportunism' here, Lenin is thinking of."io.*it* "o. ,.,ritionism-of the Menshevik tendencyto 'tall' behind the bourgeoisie. In the same period theBolsheviks had to combit 'adventurist' or 'anarcrhistic'tendencies-what Lenin called'revolutionary adventurir*tiCW 6.186) or 'petty-bourgeois revolutionism'iiaw 3r.3z,3g.zr'). In fact, ihese two opposite tendenil.r,trtJ o[p.ii""iit and the anarchist, are complementaryto one another, Iike the two sides of the samecoin:T[re anarchists rail at the Social-Democratic membersof parliament and refuse to have anything-to dowith them, refuse to do anything to develop aproletarian party, a proletarian.po]icy, and proletariu.,*.*b"it of- p"rtiument. And in practice theanarchists' phrase-mongering converts them into thetruest accomplices of opportunism, into the reverseside of opportunism. (LCW I5.39I)Anarchism was not infrequently a kind of penaltyfor the opportunist sins of the working-class movement.T,he two monstrosities complemented eachother. (LCW 3I.32.)Thus, we may say that anarchism and reformism (oropportunism) aie two petty-bor.rrgeois tendencies in the*'o'.king-clasi *orre*"t t, which, altn'ough opposed toone an6ther ) are at the same time united in being bothopposed to ilIarxism. In order to give expression to thisuniertying unity, Mao Tse-tung employs-the term 'opportunism;to cover both tendencies and distinguishesih.* ut 'Left' opportunism (anarchism and syndicalism)and Right bpportunisrn (reformism and revisionism)respectively :History tells us that correct political and militarylines do not emerge and develop spontaneously andtranquilly, but only in the course of struggle' Theser6iijililltllliltIlines must combat 'Left' opportunism on the onehand and Right opportunism on trhe other. Withoutcombating and overcoming these harmful tendencies,which damage the revolution and the revolutionarywar, it would be impossible to establish a correct lineand win victory in this war. (MSW I.I94.)Within the Party opportunist tendencies manifestthemselves commonly in two forms: timidity, or'tailism', due to over-estirnation of the enemy, andimpetuosity, or 'adventurism', due to under-estimationof the enemy. The Right opportunist tends to lagbehind, the 'Left' opportunist to rush ahead :It often happens that thinking lags behind reality;this is because man's cognition is limited bynumerous social conditions. We ate opposed todiehards in the revolutionary ranks, whose thinkingfails to advance with changing objective circumstancesand has manifested itself historically as Rightopportunism. These people fail to see that the struggleof opposites has already pushed the objective processforward, while their knowledge Lras stopped at theold stage. This is characteristic of the thinking of alldiehards. . . .We are opposed to 'Left' phrase-mongering. TLrethinking of 'Leftists' outstrips a given stage ofdevelopment of the objective process; some regardtheir fantasies as truth, while others strain to realisein the present an ideal trhat can only be realised intlie future. They alienate themselves from the currentpractice of the majority of tire people and fromthe realities of the day, and show themselves adventuristin their actions. (MSW r.3o6, cf. 4.r9z.)To sum up, w'e may say that there is only one roadto socialisrn-the road that leads to and through thedictatorship of the proletariat. The opportunist roadr7

that is presented as an alternative, whether Right or'Left', is in reality identical with the capitalist road,that is, the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie :The main thing that socialists fail to understandand that constitutes trheir short-sightedness in mattersof theory and their political betrayal of the proletariatis that in capitalist society, whenever there is anyserious aggravation of the class struggle intrinsic tothat society, there can be no alternative but thedictatorship of the bourgeoisie or the dictatorship ofthe proletariat. Dreams of some third way are reactionary,petty-bourgeois lamentations. That is borneout by more than a oentury of development of bourgeoisdemocracy and the working-class movement inall the advanced countries, and notably by the experienceof the past five years. It is also borne out bythe whole science of political economy, by the entirecontent of Marxism, which reveals the economicinevitatrility, wherever commodity economy prevails,of tlre dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, which can onlybe replaced by the class which the very growth ofcapitalism develops, multiplies, welds together andstrengthens, that is, the proletariat. (LCW 28.463.)rBFrom the Bourgeois to theProletarian ReuolutionThe development of modern industry cuts fromunder its feet the very foundation on which thebourgeoisie produces and appropriates products.What the bourgeoisie produces above all, therefore,is its own grave-d,iggers. Its fall and thevictory of the proletariat are equally inevitable.*Communist Manif estor, The Relation of Classes in Modern SocietyThe Russian Revolution of ryr7 and the ChineseRevolution of rg49 are two successive events in asingle historical process, which had its roots in thebeginnings of capitalist society. ,In order to understandthe relation between them we must see themboth in relation to the process as a whole.In his treatise On Contradiction Mao Tse-tungwrites :The fundamental contradiction in the process ofdevelopment of a thing and the essence of theprocess determined by this fitndamental contradictionwill not disappear until the process is completed;but in a lengthy process the conditionsusually differ at each stage. The reason is that,although the nature of the fundamental contradictionin the process of development of a thing andrg

the essence of the process remain unchanged, thefundamental contradiction becomes more and moreintensified as it passes from one stage to anotherin the lengthy process. In addition, among thenumerous major and minor contradictions whichare determined or influenced by the fundamentalcontradiction, some become intensified, some aretemporarily or partially resolved or mitigated, andsome new ones emerge; hence the process ismarked by stages. If people do not pay attentionto the stages in the process of development of athing, they cannot deal with its contradictionsproperly. (MSW I.325)In human history antagonism between classesexists as a particular manifestation of the struggleof opposites. Consider the contradiction betweenthe eiploiting and the exploited classes. Such contradictoryclasses coexist for a long time in the samesociety, be it slave society, feudal society, or capitalistsociety; but it is not until the contradiction betweenthe two classes develops to a certain stage that itassumes the form of open antagonism anddevelops into revolution. (MSW I.343)Capitalist society rests on the growth of commodiiyproduction. It marks the stage. at whichlabori-power itself has become a commodity. This isthe essence of the process. Its evolution is determinediby the developrnent of the fundamental contradictioninherent in it, namely, the contradictionbetween the social character of production and theprivate character of ownership' This contradictionmanifests itself in the class struggle tretween theproletariat and the bourgeoisie.Feudal society evolves on the basis of a simpleagrarian economy. The best part of the land isoivned by the feudal lords and cultivated for themby peasants or serfs, who own 'their own implementsbut are obliged to hand over to their lords apoltion of rrv{rat they produce. The antagonismbetween these two classes is the principal contradictionof feudal society. As commodity productiondevelops, there emerge, within the feudal system,two new classes-the bourgeoisie, or capitalists, engagedin trade and manufacture, and the proletariat,drawn mostly from 'the impoverished peasantry, whoown nothing but their labour-power, which they sellto the capitalists in return for wages. Thus, thebourgeoisie finds itself in opposition both to thefeudal lords, who obstruct the growth of commodityproduction, and to the proletariat, whose labour itexploits. This dual stra1ss161-levolu'tionary inrelation to the feudalists, counter-revolutionary inrelation ,to the proletariat-is inherent in the natureof the bourgeoisie. In the final stage of feudalsociety the bourgeoisie places itself at the head ofthe peasantry and the proletariat and with theirsupport overthrows the feudai lord,s and estatrlishesitself as the ruling class. This is the bourgeois revolution.In capitalist society commodity production is freedfrom all feudal restrictions. The feudal lords mergewith the bourgeoisie, while the peasantry becomesdifferen,tiated into a rural ourgeoisie (farmers) and arural proletariat (farm labourers). The principal contradictionis now the growing antagonism betweenthe bourgeoisie and the proletariat.Capitalist society develops through two mainstages-industrial capitalism and monopoly capitalismor imperialism. Both stages are marked by furthergrowth of commodity production and intensificationof the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and theproletariat. In the first stage, based on free competitionand colonial expansion, there emerge new2t

contradictions-[s1'il/sgn the big bourgeoisie and thepetty bourgeoisie, urban and rural, and between capitalismand-the colonial peoples. These conditions leadto the second stage, marked by the transformation offree competition into monopoly, the export of capital,and the exploitation of the colonies as sources ofcheap laboui and raw materials. This stage is markedby intensification of all the major contradictionsibetweenthe proletariat and, the bourgeoisie, betweenimperialism and the colonial peoples, and betweenrivil imperialist powers; and these contrad-ictions leadto impeiialist wars, until in one country after anotherthe proletariat seizes power with the suPport of the*r.ri, of the peasantry and establishes itself as theruling class. This is the proletarian revolution.Th; principal bourgeois revolutions of modernEurope ire thi English (16+g), Che French (1789), 'theGerman (IB4B), and the Russian (,9o5, I9r7)' In1649 and 1769 the bourgeoisie seized power from thefeudalists, ibut subsequently came to terms with them'In lB4B and r9o5 it did not seize power but receivedcertain concessions. In February rgrT it did seizepower but was overthrown nine months later by theproletariat.The hesitancy of the bourgeoisie in carryingthrough these revolutions arises from its dual character.II we examine them in turn, we find that eachof them, as compared with the preceding, is markedby deeper contridiotions, which lead gradually to-atransformation in the character of the revolution' In1649 the proletariat played onfV a- very- small part'In'i789 ii was active but still dependent on thepetft blureeoisie. In rB4B it was so active that theilorigeoisie" took fright and capitulated to the feudalisis,leaving the revolution uncompleted' The samething happeried in r9o5, -only by this time theprolEtariai was so strong that a few years later itsucceeded in forcing the bourgeois revolution throughto its completion by carrying it forward into theproletarian revolution.At the ,beginning of r9o5, arguing against thosepetty-bourgeois socialists who disdained the idea ofparticipating in a bourgeois revolution, Lenin wrote :To the proletarian the struggle for political libertyand a democratic republic in a bourgeoissociety is only one of the necessary stages in thestruggle for the social revolution that will overthrowthe bourgeois system. Strictly differentiatingbetween stages that are essentially different,soberly examining the conditions under which theymanifest ,themselves, does not at all mean indefinitelypostponing one's ultimate aim or slowingdown one's progress in advance. On the contrary,it is for the purpose of accelerating the advanceand achieving the ultimate aim as quickly andsecurely as possible that it is necessary to understandthe relation of classes in modern society. (LCW 8.24,cf. 9.5o.)z. T he Russian ReuolutionBy the end of the nineteenth century the bourgeoisrevolutions of Western Europe had for the most partbeen completed. Feudalism had ibeen abolished andcapitalism was entering on the stage of imperialism.Russia, however, was still semi-feudal.The growth of industrial capitalism in Russia maybe dated from the Peasant Reform of 186r. This wasa concession won by the new manufacturing bourgeoisiefrom the Tsarist autocracy, the regime of thefeudal landowners. Its effect was to abolish serfdomin such a way that the land,owners retained many oftheir feudal privileges, rvhich they used to intensify23

their exploitation of the peasantry (LCW 17.rzt)'Based on small holdings and primitive instruments,agriculture remained backward and unproductive'Fimine was endemic' Many ruined peasants lefttheir villages to work on the railways or to providecheap labour for the new industries in the towns(LCW 2.99-roo). Civil and political liberties did notexist (LCW q tzt).The Peasant Reform was followed by a period ofextremely rapid industrial growth :After l86r capitalism developed in Russia sorapidly that in a few decades it brought about atrinsformation which had taken centuries in someof the old countries of Europe. (LCW 17.tzz')Ilence, while the peasantry was crushed 'by innumerablesurvivals of medievalism as well as bycapitalism' (LCW IB.r43), the bourgeoisie founditself confronted, on the one hand, Lry an oppressiveand corrupt autocracy, still dbstructing the developmentof capitalism, and, on the other, by avigorous induitrial proletariat equipped. with a knowleJgeof Marxist theory, which embodied the lessonsleaint from rTBg and lB4B and also from the ParisCommune o,f rBTr (LCW I9.539-4o).These contradictions issued in the revoiution ofrgo5. If the bourgeoisie had then placed itself atthe " head of the proletariat and the peasantr)', itwould have been strong enough to overthrow theTsar and establish a bourgeois-democratic republic'But it shrank from doing so, because it was afraidof the proletariat :The antagonism between the proletariat and thebourgeoisie is much deeper with us than it was in1789, rB4B, or l87l; hence the bourgeoisie will bemore afraid of the proletarian revolution and will2+throw itself more readily into the arms of reaction.(LCW B.z5B.)Hence the bourgeoisie strives to put an end tothe rbourgeois revolution half-way frorn its destination,u,hen freedom has been only half won, bya deal with the old authorities and the landlords.This striving is grounded in the class interests ofthe bourgeoisie. In the German bourgeois revolutionof rB4B it was manifested so clearly thatthe Communist Marx spearheaded proletarianpolicy against the 'compromising' (Marx's expression)liberal bourgeoisie. Our Russian bourgeoisie isstill rnore cowardly, and our proletariat far moreclass-conscious and better organised than was theGerman proletariat in rB4B. In our country thefull victory of the bourgeois-dernocratic movementis possible only in spite of the 'compromising'liberal bourgeoisie, only in the event of the massof the democratic peasantry following the proletariatin the struggli for full freedom and ali theIand. (LCW r2.335)Accordingly, the bourgeoisie renounced its revolutionaryaims and came to terms with the autocracy. Thecontradiction hetween feudal privilege and capitalistenterprise remained unresolved (LCW 13.442, r9t43,2o17d. Meanwhile, the monopoly capitalists of theWest, who had already begun to invest in Russianindustry, were supporting the Tsar, because they toowere afraid of the proletariat :The world bourgeoisie is giving ,billions in loansto an obviously rbankrupt Tsar, not only because itis lured, like all moneylenders, by the prospect ofbig profits, lbut because it realises its own vestedinterest in the vic,tory of the old regime over the2_MTMTT ' '25

evolution in Russia, since it is the proletariat thatis at the head of this revolution. (LCW ry.$4.)From the experience of r9o5 Lenin concluded thatthe bourgeois revoiution could not succeed in Russiaso long as it was under the leadership of the bourgeoisie:In the view of the Bolsheviks the proletariat haslaid upon it the task of pursuing the bourgeoisdemocraticrevolution to its consummation and ofbeing its leader. This is only possible if theproletariat is able to carry with it the rnasses ofthe democratic petty bourgeoisie, especially of thepeasantry, in the struggle against the autocracyand ,the treacherous liberal bourgeoisie. (LCWrz.49o.)The victory of the bourgeois revolution in ourcountry is impossible as the uictory of the bourgeoisie.This sounds paradoxical, trut it is a fact.The preponderance of the peasant population, itsterrible oppression by 'the semi-feudal big landowningsystem, the strength and class-consciousness ofthe proletariat, already organised in a socialistparty-all these circurnstances impart to ozr bourgeoisrevolution a specific character. This peculiaritydoes not eliminate the bourgeois character ofthe revolution. . ..It only determines ,the counterrevolutionarycharacter of our bourgeoisie and thenecessity of a dictatorship of the proletariat andthe peasantry for victory in such a revolution.(LCw r5.56.)Accordingly, Lenin put ,forward the perspective of arevolution to be effected in two stages: first, a revolutionary-democraticdictatorship of the proletariat andthe peasantry, and, second, a dictatorship of theproletariat supported by the poor peasantry. In thefirst stage, the bourgeois-democratic revolution wouldbe completed by abolishing the remnants of feudalism;in the second, the struggle for socialismwould begin. By distinguishing the two stages in thisway, the proletariat would gain the support of thewhole peasantry for the first stage and ensurethe continued support of the poor peasantry for thesecond,. At the same time, while insisting on theneed to distinguish ;between them, Lenin recognisedthat in 'the actual struggle the two stages mightbecome interwoven, and in that case the proletariatshould be prepared to pass without a pause fromthe first stage to the second :The major distinguishing feature of this revolutionis the acuteness of the agrarian question. Itis rnuch more acute in Russia than in any othercountry in similar conditions. The so-calledPeasant Reform of 186l was carried out so inconsistentlyand so undemocratically that the principalfoundations of feudal landlord d,ominationremained unshaken. For this reason, the agrarianquestion, that is, the struggle of the peasantsagainst the landowners for 'the land, proved oneof the touchstones of the present revolution. . . .Such an alignment of forces leads inevitably tothe conclusion that the ibourgeoisie can be neitherthe motive {orce nor the leader in the revolution.Only the proletariat is capable of consummatingthe revolution, that is, of achieving complete victory.But this victory can be achieved only if theproletariat succeeds in getting a large section ofthe peasantry to follow its lead. The victory of thepresent revolution in Russia is possible only as therevolutionary-democratic dictatorship of theproletariat and the peasantry. (LCW rz.45B.)26 27

With atl the peasants right through to the endof the bourgeois-d,emocratic revolutionl and withthe poor, the proletarian and semi-proletarian, sectionof ih" p"rtut tt forward to the socialist revolution! Tfrat has been the policy of theBolsheviks, and it is the only Marxist policy'(LCW zB.3ro.)Like everything else in the world, therevolutionary-democratic dictatorship od theproletariat and the peasantry has -a past and aiuture. Its past is autocracy, serfdom, monarchy,and privilege. In the struggle against thispast . . . a 'siigle will' of the proletariat and thepeasantry is fossible, for here there is a unity ofinterests.Its future is the struggle against privateproperty, the struggle of the ;\Mage-earner againstit the iiruggle for socialism' Here singleness"'"*pioy.r, of *ifi it irnpossiUle. Here the path beforeus lies not from artocracy to a repu'blic ut froma petty-bourgeois democratic republic to socialism'-Of 'courselin actua historical circumstances, theelements of ihe past become interwoven with thoseof the futurel the two paths cross' ' ' ' We allcounterpose bourgeois revolution and socialist revo-Iution; we all iisist on the absolute necessity ofstrictlv distinguishing between them' However, cani, U"' denied that ln the course oI history individ,ual,particular elements of the two revolutionsbecome interwoven? (LCW S'B+-S)From the democratic revolution we shall atonce, and precisely in accordance with the meas-'.f our strength, the strength of the classconscious,organised proletariat, begin to Pass to"."tt t*iuiitt ftrrolutiot. We stand for uninterrupted"revolution. We shall not stop half-way. (LCW9.46-7.)In February tgr7, after two and a half. years ofimperialist war, the workers, peasants and soldiers ofRussia were in revolt, demanding peace, land andbread. Isolated and utterly d,iscredited, the Tsaristautocracy had opened secret negotiations withGermany for a separate peace. Then, under pressurefrom the British and French, who were determinedto keep Russia in the war, the bourgeois leaderscornpelled the Tsar to abdicate and proclaimed ademocratic reputrlic. In this, however, they wereacting from weakness, not from strength. It becameclear that they had no intention of meeting thepeople's demands. Lenin perceived that, if what hadbeen gained was not to be lost, it was necessary topass at once to the second stage of the revolution :eB 29The specific feature of the present situation inRussia is that the country is passing from the firststage of the revolution-which, owing to the insufficientclass-consciousness and organisation of theproletariat, placed power in the hands of thebourgeoisie-to its second stage, which must placepower in the hands of the proletariat and the poorestsection of the peasants. (LCW z4.zz.)The question is one of advance or retreat. No onecan stand still in a revolution. . . . Power transferred tothe revolutionary proletariat, supported by the poorpeasants, trneans'transition to a revolutionary strugglefor peace in the surest and least painful f,orms everknown to mankind. . . . (LCW z5.z8.)A year later, looking back on the October Revolution,Lenin wrote :The course taken by the revolution has confirmedthe correctness of our reasoning. First, with the

'whole' of the peasants against the monarchy, thelandowners, med,ievalism (and to that extent the revolutionremains bourgeois, bourgeois-d emocratic) ; t h en,with the poor peasants, the semi-proletarians, all theexploited, against capitalism, including the rural rich,the kulaks, the profiteers, and to that extent therevolution trecomes a socialist one. To attempt to raisean artificial Chinese Wall between the first and thesecond, to separate them by anything else thanthe degree of preparedness of the proletariat, and thedegree of its unity with the poor peasants, means todistort Marxism dreadfully, to vulgarise it, to replaceit with liberalism. (LCW z8.3oo.)Speaking on the fourth anniversary of the revolution,Lenin said :The direct and immed,iate dbject of the revolutionin Russia was a bourgeois-democratic one, namely, todestroy ,the survivals of medievalism and sweep themaway completely, to purge Russia of this barbarism,this shame, and to remove this obstacle to all cultureand progress in our country. And we can justifiablypride ourselves on having carried out that purge wifhgreater determination and much more rapidly, boldlyand successfully, and, from the standpoint of itseffect on the masses, much more widely and deeply,than the great French Revolution over one hundredand twenty-five years ago. . . . We have consurnmatedthe bourgeois-democratic revolution as nobody haddone before. We are aduancing'towards the socialistrevolution consciously, firmly and unswervingly,knowing that it is not separated from the bourgeoisdemocraticrevolution try a Chinese Wall, and knowingtoo that in the last analySis struggle alone willdetermine how far we shall advance, what part ofthis immense and lofty task we shall accomplish, andto what exten-t we shall succeed in consolidating our3ovictories. Time will show. But we see even now thata tremendous amount-tremendous for this ruined,exhausted, backward country-has already been donefor the socialist transformation of society. (LCW33.5r )g. The Chinese ReuolutionIn l94o Mao Tse-tung wrote :The first imperialist world war and the first victorioussocialist revolution, the October Revolution,have changed the whole course of world history andushered in a new era. It is an era in which the worldcapitalist front has collapsed in one part of the globe(one-sixth of the world) and has fully revealed itsdecadence everl'where else; in which the remainingcapitalist parts cannot survive without relying morethan ever on the colonies and semi-coloniesl in whicha socialist state has been estakrlished and has proclaimedits readiness to give active support to theliberation movements of all colonies and semicolonies.. . . In this era, any revolu,tion in a colony orsemi-colony that is d,irected against imperialism, i.e.against the international bourgeoisie or internationalcapitalism, no longer comes wittrin the old categoryof the bourgeois-democratic world revolution, butwithin the new category. It is no longer part of theold bourgeois, or capitalist, world revolution, but ispart of the new world revolution, the proletariansocialistworld revolution. (MSW 2;.43-4, cf. SCWto.244-55.)At the beginning of the present century China was asemi-feudal, semi-colonial country, in which .the massesof the peasantry were exploited by the feudal landownersand by a number of colonial powers, which hadoccupied the ports, seized control of the anks, and3r

established a commercial network for plundering thecountry. In this they were supported by the rich merchants,moneylenders and financiers who constitutedthe big bourgeoisie-the comprador orbureaucrat capitalists.These two classes, ,the feudal landowners and thecomprador bourgeoisie, formed the social base for imperialistoppression in China.Between these two exploiting classes and the masses ofthe people stood the middle, or national, bourgeoisie.These were industrial capitalists whose efforts to buildnative industries were frustrated by feudaJism and imperialism.From that point of view they were inclined toside with the people, hut at the same ,time they werethemselves exploiters, afraid of the proletariat, and sothey tended to vacillate.The only consistently an,ti-feudal, anti-imperialistclasses were the peasantry and the proletariat. The vastmajority of the peasantry were ,poor peasants, that is,rural proletarians and semi-proletarians. The industrialproletariat was small, ibut after the first world war, andmore especially after the October Revolution, it grewrapidly in strength and influence :,The modern industrial proletariat numhers abouttwo million. It is not large because China is economica\backward. These two million ind;ustrialworkers are mainly employed in five industriesrailways,mining, maritime transport, textiles andshiptruilding-and a great numher are enslaved inenterprises owned by foreign capitalists. Though notvery numerous, the industrial proletariat representsChina's new productive forces, is the most progressiveclass in modern China, and has become the leadingforce in the revolutionary movement. (MSW r.rB.)Thus, the peasantry constituted the main body, and theproletariat the leading force, of the revolutionary movement:IjlIItIlr1i,IIIIOnly under the leadership of the proletariat can thepoor and middle peasants achieve their liberation, andonly by forming a firm alliance with the poor andmiddle peasants can the proletariat lead tlhe revolutionto victory. (MSW 2$24.)In the period tgrr-27 there were several revolutionaryuprisings, all directed against feudalism and imperialism,but none of them were successful :Strictly speaking, China's bourgeois-democraticrevolution against imperialism and feudalism wasbegun'by Dr Sun Yat-sen and has been going on formore than fi,f,ty years. . . . Was not the revolutionstarted, Lry Dr Sun Yat-sen a success ? Didn't it sendthe Emperor packing? Yet it was a failure in the sensethat, while it sent the Emperor packing, it left Chinaunder irnperialist and feudal oppression, so that theanti-imperialist and anti.feudal revolutionary taskremained unaccomplished. (MSW 2.242.)The bourgeois-democratic revolution which startedin Kwangtung had gone only half-way when thecomprador and landlord classes usurped the leadershipand immediately shifted it on to the road ofcounter-revolution. (MSW r.63.)These failures proved that the aims of the bourgeoisdemocraticrevolution were unattainable under bourgeoisleadership :What is the nature of the Chinese revolution ?What kind of revolution are we making today?Today we are making a bourgeois-democratic revolution,and nothing we do goes beyond its scope. Byand large, we should not destroy the bourgeoissystem of private property for the present; what wewant to destroy is imperialism and feudalism. This iswhat we mean by the bourgeois-democratic rev-32 JJ

olution. But its accomplishment is already beyondthe capacity of the bourgeoisie and must depend onthe efforts of the proletariat and the broad massesof the people. (MSW z.z4z.)Accordingly, it was argued by Mao Tse-tung thatthe bourgeois-democratic revolution should be carriedthrough by the proletariat with the support of allthe other classes opposed to imperialism and feudalism,including the national bourgeoisie. This rvasa new type of bourgeois-democratic revolution, whichhe named 'new-democratic' in order to distinguish itfrom the old type. In 1939 he wrote :What indeed is the character of the Chineserevolution at the present stage? Is it a bourgeoisdemocraticor a proletarian-socialist revolution ?Obviously, it is not the latter but the former. .However, in present-day China the bourgeoisdemocraticrevolution is no longer one of the oldgeneral type, which is now obsolete, trut one ofthe new special type. We call this tlpe the newdemocraticrevolution, and it is developing in allother colonial and semi-colonial countries as wellas in China. The ne'"v-democratic revolution ispart of the world, proletarian-socialist revolution,for it resolutely opposes imperialism, i.e. in'ternationalcapitalism....A new-democratrc revolutionis an anti-imperialist and anti-feudal revolution ofthe broad masses of the people under the leadershipof the proletariat. Chinese society canadvance to socialism only through such a revolution.There is no other way. (MSW z4z6-7.)Such was the evolution of the people's democraticdictatorship which was established in China in t949,marking the completion of the bourgeois-democraticrevolution and the inception of the proletariansocialistrevolution. The Chinese people's democraticdictatorship is the dictatorship of the proletariat in anew form corresponding to the conditions prevailingin a semi-colonial country in the new era introdncedby the Octdber Revolution. It resembles the Sovietform in that it, too, is based on the worker-peasantalliance, that is, on the alliance of the proletariatand the peasantry under the leadership of theproletariat; but it differs from the Soviet form inthat the basis of the alliance is broader, including asit does the entire peasantry and the national bourgeoisie.In China the contradiction between theproletariat and the bourgeoisie ,was handled in sucha way that the national bourgeoisie acceptedproletarian leadership in the new-democratic revolutionof 1949. This was only possible because theproletariat was guided, hy Lenin's theory of uninterruptedrevolution as applied to the concrete conditionsof China by Mao Tse-tung.34 35

CHAPTER IIIThe Proletariat and the PeasantryAll previous historical movements were movementsof minorities, or in the interest ofminorities. The proletarian movement is theself-conscious, independent movement of the immensemajority. The proletariat, the loweststratum of our present society, cannot stir,cannot raise itself up, without the whole superincumbentstrata of official society being sprunginto the air.-Communist Manifestor. The Leading Role o.f the ProletariatThere is only one really revolutionary class in modernsociety :Beginning with the Communist lvlanifesto, allmodern socialism rests on the indisputable trutrh thatthe proletariat alone is a really revolutionary classin capitalist society. The other classes may and dobecome revolutionary only in part and under certainconditions. (LCW 6.r97, cf. r6.356.)It is important to understand how the proletariat hascome to occupy this position.The antagonism between the proletariat and thebourgeoisie expresses, as we have seen, the fundamentalcontradiction of capitalist society, namely, the contradictionbetween the social character of production36I,)i,and the private character of ownership. As capitalismdevelops, with small-soale production giving Place tolarge-siale production, so the contradiction betweenproduction -and ownership is intensified, until theiystem of private ownership is shattered and replacedby a system of public ownership, that is, socialism.The unit of capitalist production is the factory, inwhich large numLrers of workers are brought together.These workers own nothing excePt their labour-Power,which they sell to the capitalists in order to live. Ofalt the workers they are exploited the most intensively;but, working as they do together, they are in aposition to organise themselves in self-defence. Theytake a united stand against the common enemy,become class-conscious, establish trade unions, createan independent working-class party, and equip themselveswith Marxist theory, which is itself a product oftheir struggle :The very conditions of their lives make theworkers capable of struggle and impel them tostruggle. Capital collects the workers in great massesin big cities, uniting them, teaohing t'hem to act inunison. At every step the workers come face to facewith their main enemy-the capitalist class. In combatwith this enemy the worker becomes a socialist,comes to realise the necessity of a complete reconstructionof the whole of society, the complete abolitionof all poverty and oppression. (LCW 16.3or,cf.7.4r5.)I,n its knowledge of capitalist society, the proletariatwas only in the perceptual stage of cognition inthe first period of its practice, the period ofmachine-smashing and s,pontaneous struggle; it knewonly sorne of the aspects and the external relationsof the phenomena of capitalism. The proletariat wastrhen still a 'class-in-itself'. But, when it reached theil

second period of its practice, the period of consciousand organised economic and political struggles, theproletariat was able to comprehend the essence of'oapitalist society, the relations of exploitationbetween social classes and its own historical task;and it was able to do so because of its own practiceand ibecause of its experience of proionged struggle,which Marx and Engels scientifically summed up inall its variety to create the theory of Marxism forthe education of the proletariat. It was then thatthe proletariat became a 'class-for-itself'. (MSWr.3or, cf.3rz.)Thus, we may say that the proletariat assumes itsleading role in virtue of its conscious identificationwith the principal aspect of the principal contradictionin oapitalist society. It represents the long-term interestsof humanity. Just as the bourgeoisie overthrew thefeudal system, which obstructed the full development"of the forces of capitalist production, so the proletariatoverthrows the capitalist system in order to free theproductive forces for the further development whichwill put an end to the division of society into classesand the exploitation of man by man.z. The Worker-Peasant Alliancefn contrast to the proletariat, the peasantry is associatedwith small-scale production and private ownership:The worker owns no means of production andsells [rimself, his hands, his labour-power. The peasantdoes own means of production-implemelts,livestock, his own or rented land-and sells trheproducts of his farming, being a small proprietor, asmall entrepreneur, a petty bourgeois. (LCW 18.37,cf. zz.g5.)II'l'jI,)The peasants are a class of small proprietors. Thisclass is far less favoura'bly situated in regard to thestruggle for liberty and the struggle for socialismthan the workers. The peasants are not united byworking in big enterprisesl on the contrary, they aredisunited by their small, individual farming. Unliketrhe ',vorkers, they do not see before them an open,obvious, single enemy in the person of the capitalist.T,hey are themselves to a certain extent masters andproprietors. (LCW tr.39e, cf. 29.365.)Nevertheless, there are certain conditions, due to theuneven development of capitalism, in which theproletariat can win the masses of the peasantry to itsside.In Russia tapitalism developed later than inWestern Europe, and it developed all the more rapidlyfor that reason, being partly supported by Westerncapital. The result was that the antagonisrn betweenthe proletariat and the bourgeoisie-the principal contradictionof capitalist society-entered the revolutionarystage before the antagonism between the peasantryand the feudalists-the principal contradiction offeudal society-had been resolved. The two contradictionsbecame in;terwoven. In these conditions, facedwith an alliance between the big bourgeoisie and thefeudalists, the proletariat formed an anti-feudal aIliancer.tith tlre peasantry, thereby rallying the massesof the people to its side. This allianoe between workersand peasants was trhe tbasis of the revolutionary movement:The proletariat by itself is not strong enough towin. The urban poor do not represent any independentinterests, they are not an independent forcecompared with the proletariat and the peasantry.Tlhe rural population has the decisive role, not inthe sense of leading the struggle-that is out of the3B 39

question-but in the sense of being able to ensurevictory. (LCW tr.g43.)Only the proletariat can bring the democraticrevolution to its consummation, the condition beingthat the proletariat, as the only thoroughly revolutionaryclass in modern society, leads the mass ofthe peasantry and imparts political consciousness toits struggle against landed proprietorship and thefeudal state. (LCW rz.i39.)In China capitalism developed even later than inRussia. It evolved from the internal contradictions offeudal society under the impact of imperialist opPression:Just as a section of the merchants, landlords andbureaucrats were precursors of the Chinese bourgeoisie,so a section of the peasants and handicraftworkers were precursors of the Chinese proletariat.As distinct social classes, the Chinese bourgeoisieand proletariat are new-born, and never existedbefore in Chinese history. They have evolved intonew social classes frorn tihe womb of feudal society.They are twins born of C,hina's old (feudal)society, at once linked to each other and antagonisticto each other. However, the Chinese proletariatemerged and grew simultaneously not only withthe Chinese national bourgoisie but also with theentenprises directly operated by the imperialists inChin,a. Hence, a very large section of the Chineseproletariat is older and more experienced than tlheC,hinese bourgoisie, and is therefore a greater andmore broadly based social force. (MSW z.3ro.)'In these conditions, faced with an alliance betweenthe comprador bourgeoisie, the feudalists and theimperialists, the proletariat' formed an anti-feudal,anti-imperialist alliance with the peasantry, thereby4orallying to its side the masses of the people, includingeven the national bourgeoisie :The Chinese proletariat should understand tLhat,altLrough it is t'ire class with the highest politicalconsciousness and sense of organisation, it cannotwin victory by its own strength alone. In order towin, it must unite, according to varying circumstances,with all classes and strata that can takepart in the revolution, and must organrise a revoluiionu.yunited front. Among all classes in Chinesesociety, the peasantry is a firm ally of the workingclass, the urban petty bourgeoisie is a reliable ally,and the national bourgeoisie is an ally in certainperiods and to a certain extent. This is one of theiundamental laws established by China's modernrevolutionary history. (MSW 2 825.)The influence of the proletariat over tLre Peasantrywas enhanced by tihe fact that in China the peasantryhad no political party of its own :As China has no political party exclusivelyrepresenting the peasants, and the political partiesof tLre national bourgeoisie have no thoroughgoingland programme, the Chinese Communist Party hasbecome the leader of the peasants and all the otherrevolutionary democrats, being the only party tnLathas formulated and carried out a thoroughgoingland programme, fought earnestly for the peasants'interests, and therefore won the overwhelmingmajority of the peasants as its great ally. (MSW3.298.)flence, in China ast in Russia, the worker-peasantalliance was the basis of the revolutionary movement :To sum up our experience and concentrate it inone point, it is: the people's democratic dictatorshipunder the leadership of the working class (through4r

the Communist Party) and based on the alliance ofworkers and peasants. (MSW 4.+22.)In both countries the proletariat was only a minorityof the movement which it led; but, as Irenindbserved, the strength of the proletariat is not to bemeasured by its numbers :The strength of the proletariat in any capitalistcountry is far greater than the proportion it representsof the total population. This is because theproletariat dominates the nerve centre of the entireeconomic system of capitalism, and also it expresseseconomically and politically the real interests of theoverwhelming majority of the working people undercapitalism. (LCW 3c,27 4, cf. 3.3r.)Moreover, in both Russia and China, the proletariat,though small in numbers, was rel.atively free from theinfluence of reformism. Of the Russian workers Leninsaid :In Russia we see a series of shades of opportunismand reformism among the intelligentsia, thepetty bourgeoisie, etc., but it Lras affected only aninsignificant minority among the politically activesections of the workers. The privileged stratum offactory workers and clerical staff is very thin in ourcountry. The fetishisrn of legality could not appearhere. (LCW 2t.Ztg, cf. r9.r6o.)Mao Tse-Tung says the same of the Chinese workers :Since there is no economic basis for reformism incolonial and semi-colonial China, as there is inEurope, the whole proletariat, with the exception ofa few scabs, is most revolutionary. (MSW 282+.)Thus, the decisive factor in trhe role of the proletariatis not its numerical strength bu! its political strength.III1Ill.3,The Differentiation of the PeasantryBefore the Peasant Reform of tB6I, the relations ofproduction in the Russian countryside had been predominantlyfeudal. The unit of production was thevillage, or sroup of villages, which was economicallyself-sufficient. What the peasants produced was consumedeither by themselves or by tihe landowners, towhom they were in 'bondage. If there was a surplus, itwas disposed of in the local market. Many of thepeasants were impoverished as a result of crop failuresand debts.With the rapid growth of commodity productionafter I 86 t , these relations were to a large extenttransformed into capitalist relations, but at the sametime the big landowners retained many of their feudalprivileges, which thus became an obstacle to the furtherdevelopment of capitalism. At the beginning ofthe present century some r 5 per cent of the ruralpopulation were rich peasants, that is, capitalist farmersemploying wageJabour; some 65 per cent werepoor peasants, that is, rural proletarians or semiproletarians,who had little or no land and lived byselling their labour-power; and the remainder weremiddle peasants, that is, smallholders, who were beingsteadily driven down into the proletariat (LCW 6.389,28.56).All sections of the peasantry had a commoninterest in the complete abolition of feudal relations;but, along with this contradiction between the peasantryand the feudal landowners, there was adeepening cleavage within the peasantry itself, which,especially after r9o5, was ,being rapidly divided intoa rural bourgeoisie (the kulaks) and a rural proletariat(LCW t5.42). Accordingly, the Social-Democrats, theparty of the proletariat, set itself the task ofmobilising the entire peasantry in support of the+2 43

ourgeois-dernocratic revolution and at the same timeoi J"rrri.,.ing the poor and middle peasants thattheir long-terir interests lay in joining forces witLr theindustrial"proletariat in the struggle for socialism :The Social-Democrats have pointed outrepeatedly that the Peasant movement sets beforethem a twofold task. IJnquestionably we rnust supportthis movement and spur it on, inasmuch as it isa revolutionary-democratic rnovement' At tnLe sametime we must unsweryingly maintain our proletarianclass point of view; we must organise the ruralproletariat, like the urban proletariat, and togetherwittr it, into an independent class party; we mustexplain to it that itJ interests are antagonistic tothose of trhe bourgeois peasantry; we must call on itto fight for the socialist revolution, and poin't out toit th"at liberation from oppression and poverty lies,not in turning several sections of the peasantry intopetty bourge6is, but only in .replacingthe entireLorig"oit s=ystem by the socialist system' (LCWB.e3r, cf. 4.422,9.297, ro.43B.)Every advance in science and technologyinevitably and relentlessly undermines the foundationsof small-scale production in capitalistsociety : and it is the task of socialist political econo-yio investigate this process in all its forms, oftencomplicated and intricate, and to demonstrate tothe small producer the impossibility of his holdinghis own under capitalism, trhe hopelessness of peasantfarming undei capitalism, an'd the need for thepeasant to adopt the standpoin't of the proletarian'(LCw Is.35)The proletarian says to the small peasant: Youare semi-proletarian, so follow the lead of theworkers; it is your on'ly salvation. The bourgeois441tIIsays to the small peasant: You are a small proprietor,a 'labouring farmer'. Labour economy'grows' under capitalism as well. You should bewith the proprietors, not with the proletariat.The small proprietor has two souls: one is aproletarian and the other a 'proprietory' soul. (LCWzo.zr6.)Turning to China, we find that, although individualcultivation had been established there much longerthan in Russia, the relations of production remainedpredominantly feudal right down to rg4g :Among the peasant rnasses a system of individualeconomy has prevailed for thousands of years, witheach family or household forrning a productive unit.This scattered, individual form of production is theeconomic foundation of feudal ruile and keeps thepeasants in perpetual poverty. (MSW 3.r56, cf.r.r6.)The following assessment of the ,peasantry was madein 1939 :The peasantry constitutes approximately Bo percent of China's total population and is the mainforce in her national economy today.A sharp process of polarisation is taking placeamong the peasantry.First, the rich peasants. They form about 5 percent of the rural population (or about Io per centtogether with the landlords) and constitute the ruralbourgeoisie. Most of the rich peasants in China aresemi-feudal in character, since they let a part oftheir iland, practise usury and ruthlessly exploit the,farm labourers. But they generally engage in labourthemselves and in rhis sense are part of the peasantry.The rich.peasant form of production will45

emain useful for a definite period. Generally speaking,they rnight rnake sorne use,ful contribution tothe anti-imperialist struggle of the peasant massesand stay neutral in the agrarian revolutionarystruggle against the landtlords. . . .Second, the middle peasants. They form a'bout zoper cent of China's rural population. They areeconomically self-supporting. . . and generally theydo not exploit others but are exploited by imperialism,the landlord class, and the bourgeoisie. Theyhave no political rights. . . . Not only can the middlepeasants join the anti-imperialist revolution but theycan also accept socialism. Therefore the wholemidd,le peasantry can be a reliable ally of theproletariat and is an important motive force of therevolution. , . .Third, the poor peasants. The poor peasants inChina, together with the farm lalbourers, form about70 per cent of the rural population. They are thebroad peasant masses, with no land or insufficientland, the semi-proletariat of the countryside, thebiggest motive force of the Chinese revolution, thenatural and most reliable ally of the proletariat andthe rnain contingent of China's revolutionary forces.(MSw 2Aq.)When we compare this analysis of the Chinesepeasantry with Lenin's of the Russian peasantry, wesee that in China the worker-peasant alliance had abroader basis, and that this diflerence was due to theemergence of a new contradiction-the contradictionbetween the Chinese people and imperialism. By placingitself at the head, of the struggle against imperialism,the Chinese proletariat was able to effect ashift in the balance of class forces and so to isolate themain enemy in the countryside-the feudal landlords.It was aJble to do this because it was guided, ,throughtllIt1;Illit,l]t,1Illrthe Communist Party, by Lenin's theory of theworker-peasant alliance as applied to China by MaoTse-tung.4.'f he Lumpen-proletariatThus, the worker-peasant alliance consisted basicallyof an alliance between the industrial workers andthe poor peasants, that is, between the urban andthe rural proletariat and semi-proletariat. It remainsto consider the lumpen-proletariat.This section is composed of declassed, and demoralisedelements, not regularly engaged in production,unorganised and largely incapable of organisation. Inthe early days of the working-class movernent, whenthe proletariat was still struggling to become consciousof itself as a separate class and to developthe solidarity and discipline necessary for thecreation of trade unions, the lumpen-proletariat wasmore of a danger to the movement than a potentialasset :The 'dangerous class', the social scum, that passivelyrotting mass thrown off by the lowest layersof old society, may, here and there, tre swept intothe movement by a proletarian revolution; its conditionsof [ife, however, prepare it far more forthe part of a bribed 'tool of reactionary intrigue.(ME r.44, cf. r55.)A similar warning was given by Lenin in IgIB,when the Russian workers were struggling to reorganiseproduction in the chaotic conditions createdby the war :Undoubtedln the war is corrupting people bothin the rear and at the front; people working onwar supplies are paid far above the rates, and thisattracts all those who hid themselves to keep out46 47

of the war, the vagabond and semi-vagabond elements,who are irnhued with one desire, to 'grab'something and clear out. But these dlements arethe worst that has rernained of the old capitalistsystem and are the vehicles of all the old evils;these we must kick out, remove, and we must putin the factories all the best proletarian elementsand form them into nuclei of future socialistRussia. (LCWz6.46B.)With this may be compared the following appraisalby Mao Tse-tung :Apart from all these, there is the {airly largelumpen-proletariat, made up of peasants who havelost their land and handicraftsmen who cannot getwork. These lead the most precarious existence of all.. . . One of China's difficult problems is how tohandle these people. Brave fighters but apt to bedestructive, they can become a revolutionary force ifgiven proper guidance. (MSW r.rg.)China's status as a colony and semi-colony hasgiven rise to a multitude of rural and urban unemployed.Denied proper means of making a 'living,many of them are forced to resort to illegitimateones, hence the robbers, gangsters, beggars and prostitutes,and ,the numerous people who live on superstitiouspractices. This social stratum is unstable;dhile some are apt to be bought over by the reactionaryforces, others may join the revolution. Thesepeople lack constructive qualities and are given todestruction rather than constructionl after joiningthe revolution they become a source of roving-rebeland anarchist ideology in the revolutionary ranks.Therefore we should know how to remould them andguard against their destructiveness. (MSW 2825.)This more positive appraisal reflects the advance ofIIiIlI'the world revolution. As imperialist exploitationbecomes more intense, so the numbers of the permanentlyunemployed increase; but at the same time, asthe revolutionary struggle grows, so too the internationalproletariat extends its influence arnong all thosewhom imperialism has made outcasts.5. The Proletariat in the WestSince the growth of the proletariat is determined bythe development of capitalism, and since capitalism ismost highly developed in the advanced countries ofthe West, it is pertinent to ask, why is it that inthose countries no proletarian revolution has yettaken place? In their early years Marx and Engelsexpected that the first proletarian revolution wouldbreak out in Germany, but this expectation was notfulfilled. The French workers did seize power in Parisin r87r, but they were unable to hold it. At the timeof the October Revolution Russia was the most backwardstate in Europe. At the end of the secondworld war there were revolutions in several countriesin Central Europe, but not in the West. China inI949 was more back'ward than Russia in r9r7.This question needs to be considered in connectionwith the converse question, why did the Russian andChinese revolutions take place as early as they did ?The answer lies, as we have seen, in the unevendevelopment of capitalism. In Russia and China thebourgeoisie was still struggling to shake off theshackles of feudalism at a time when the bourgeoisieof the West had entered the stage of imperialisrn. Itwas weakened still further in Russia ,by its dependenceon Western capital (LCW 20.399) and inChina by imperiatist oppression. The proletariat, onthe other hand, was strengthened in Russia by drawingon the revolutionary experience of the West, and48 49

in China by the example of the October Revolutionand the support of the Soviet Union. These extemalfactors combined to intensify the internal contradictionsand so to shift the balance of class forces infavour of the proletariat.In the West, where the development of capitalismhad ,begun much earlier, feudalism had been almostcompletely eliminated, and from the beginning thebourgeoisie had ibeen enriching themselves from theplunder of America and Asia. In this way ,theystrengthened their position at home. Drawing on theimmense profits of colonial exploitation, they madesubstantial concessions to ,the industrial workers andbought over many of their leaders. Ilence, in additionto the gulf dividing the proletariat of themetropolitan countries from the workers and peasantsof the colonies, the metropolitan proletariat was itselfdivided and infected to a considerable extent Withbourgeois ideology. The effect of imperialism in thesecountries was to mitigate the internal contradictionsand so to shift the ba,lance of class forces in favourof the bourgeoisie.That this was Lenin's opinion is clear from manypassages in his writings :Only the proletarian class, which maintains thewhole of society, can bring about the social revolution.Ilowever, as a result of the colonial policy,the European proletarian finds himself partly in aposition in which it is not his own labour, but thelabour of the practically enslaved natives in thecolonies, that maintains the whole of society.. . .Incertain countries 'this provides the material and economicbasis for infecting tLre proletariat with colonialchauvinism. (LCW ry.77, c'f . zr.z43.),Is the actual condition of the workers in theoppressor and the oppressed nations the same, from5othe standpoint of the national question? No, it is notthe same.(r) Economically the difference is that sections ofthe working class ,in the oppressor nations receivecrurnlbs from the super-profits which the bourgeoisieof those nations obtains tby extra exploitation of theworkers of the oppressed nations. Besides, economicstatistics show that here a larger percentage of theworkers become 'straw bosses' than in the oppressednations, a larget percentage rise to the labour aristocracy.T*tat is a fact. To a certoin degree the workersof the oppressor nations are partners oI their ownbourgeoisie in plundering the workers-and lhe massof the population-of the oppressed nations.(z) Politically, the difference is that, compared withthe workers of the oppressed nations, they occupy aprioileged psition in many spheres of political life.(3) Ideologicallly, or spiritually, the difference isthat they are taught, at school and in life, disdainand, contempt for the workers of the oppressednations. (LCW 23.55)It would perhaps be expedient to emphasise morestrongly and to express more vividly in our programmethe prominence of the handful of the richestimperialist countries, which prosper parasitically byrobbing colonies and weaker nations. This is anextremely important feature of imperialism. To acertain extent it facilitates the rise of powerful revolutionarymovements in countries su;bjected'to imperialistplunder and in danger of lbeing crushed andpartitioned by the imperialist giants (such as Russia),and on the other hand it tends to a certain extent toprevent the rise of profound revolutionary rnovementsin the countries that plunder by imperialistmethods many colonies and foreign lands, and thusmake a cornparatively large portion of their popu-5r

lation participants in the division of the imperialistloot. (LCW e6.r68, cf. zg.tz3,3r.r9r, zgo.)However, in regard to Britain it must not beforgotten that. . . . the percentage of workers andoffice employees who enjoy a petty-bourgeois standardof living is exceptionally high, owing to theactual enslavement of millions of people in Britain'scolonial possessions. (LCW 22.456.)So we see that in the imperialist countries even theproletariat, that most revolutionary of classes, maycease to be revolutionary.At the present dan with dhe oppressed peoples inrevolt all over the world and imperialism heading fortotal collapse, ,the situation in the West is beginning tochange. If the relatively high standard of living enjoyediby the workers of these countries was won on thebasis of colonial exploitation, then, with the collapse ofthat basis, they will be compelled to shed their reformistillusions, and so v/ill recover their revolutionaryconsciousness.F,inally, it may be noted that in these advancedcapitalist countries the industrial workers forrn a higherpercentage of ,the total population than in any others.Again we see that the strength of the proletaiiat is notto be measured by its numbers.CIIAPTER IVTlte Jt[ational QtestionIn proportion as the exploitation of one individualtry another is put an end tq the exploitation ofone nation by another will 'also be put an end to.In proportion as the antagonisnr between classeswithin the nation vanishes, ,the hostility of onenation to another will come to an end.r. The Nation in Modern Society-CommunistManif estoThe nation is a social formation which first took shapewith the growth of commodity production during thetransition from feudalism to capitalism. One of theaims of the bourgeois-d,emocratic revolution is nationalindependence. In the evolution of capitalist society, astruggle for national independence-a national movement,as it is called-arises when the 'trourgeoisie of asubject people rallies the rest of the people in anattempt to shake off ,the rule of a foreign power andestatrlish its own state. The word 'people' in this contextmeans a community of persons occupying a commonterritory and speaking a common language. Suchcommunities have, of course, existed from the earliesttimes, but it is only in modern society that 'they havebecome nations.The economic basis of national movements was explainedby Lenin as follorus :For the cornplete victory of commodity produc-52 s3

tion, the bourgeoisie must capture ,the home rnarket,and there must be politically united territories whosepopulation speaks a single language, with allobstacles to the development of the language and itsconsolidation in iliterature eliminated. Therein liesthe economic foundation of national movements.Language is the most important means of humanintercourse. Unity and unimpeded development ofIanguage are the most important conditions for genuinelyfree and extensive commerce on a scale commensuratewith modern ,capitalism, for a free andbroad grouping of the population in all its variousclasses, and lastly for establishing a close connectionbetween the rnarket and every proprietor, big andsmall, and between buyer and seller. (LCW 20.396.)The earliest national movements arose in WesternEurope. Out of the unstable, heteroeeneous kingdoms ofthe feudal era there emerged,, mainly in the seventeenthand eighteenth centuries, a dozen independent states.Most of these developed as single-nation states: that isto say, each country was occupied by a single peoplespeaking a common language. Only in the British Isleswas there a national minority large enough to give riseto a struggle for independence. The English ,failed toconsolidate their conquest of Ireland, and during theeighteenth centurythere arose an Irish national movement.It must be remembered, however, in speaking of ,thesecountries as single-nation states, that most of them wereengaged from the beginning in carving out colonialernpires overseas. In this way nations formerly oppressedbecame themselves oppressors of other peoples. Theresult was both to p.o*tt" the growth of national movementsamong the colonial peoples and also, as explainedin Chapter III, to retard the proletariat of the oppressornation in its struggle against the bourgeoisie :lIIIiiilIi'No nation can be free if it oppresses other nations'(Marx and Engels). A proletariat that tolerates theslightest coercion of other nations by its 'own' nationcannot be a socialist proletariat. (LCW zr.gr7.)Turning to Eastern Europe as it was on the eve of thefirst world war, we find that, outside the Balkans, wherethere were six small states (several of them with sutrstantialnational minorities), there were no single-nationstates at all. The whole area was covered by two multinationalstates, feudal in origin and torn by nationalconflicts. At the end of the war the Austro-HungarianEmpire ibroke up into a number of independent bourgeoisnation-states, and meanwhile the Russian Empirewas transformed into a union of socialist repu,blics withsmaller autonomous areas inhabited hy national rninorities.Their line on the national question was an importantfactor contributing to the victory of the Bolsheviksin those areas (SCW 6.r52).To complete the picture, we must add, two majornation-states from outside Europe.The United States of America was formed from agroup of colonies founded by West European settlers,who in 1776 declared their independence of Britishrule. Augmented continuously by mass immigrationfrom all parts of Europe, the population has nevertheless(apart from the Negroes and the Indians) beenunifi.ed on the basis of bourgeois equality and the useof a common language:We know that the specially favourable conditionsin America for the developrnent of capitalism, andthe rapidity of this development, have produced asituation in which vast national differences arespeedily and ,fundamentally smoothed out, asnowhere else in the world, to form a single'American' nation. (LCW 4.276.)In Japan the development of capitalism was as late54 55

as in Russia and so rapid that the bourgeoisie mergedwith the feudal nobility without a breach. Japan wasthe only nation-state of non-European origin to becomea major imperialist power :In Asia itself the conditions for the most completedevelopment of commodity production and thefreest, widest, speediest growth of capitalism havebeen created only in Japan, that is, oniy in anindependent nation-state. Japan is a bourgeois state,and for that reason has itself lbegun to oppress ottrernations and to enslave colonies. We cannot saywhether Asia will have had time to develop into asystem of independent nation-states, like Europe,before the collapse of capitalism; but it remains anundisputed fact that capitalism, having aa,,akenedAsia, has called forth national rnovements everywherein that cou-tinent too. (LCW 2o.3gg)Summing up the situation as he saw it in 1916,Lenin distinguished three types of national movement :First type: the ad,vanced countries of WesternEurope (and America), where the national movementis a ,thing of. the past. Second type: Eastern Europe,where it is a thing of the present. Third type: thesemi-colonies and colonies, where it is largely a thingof. the future. (LCW 23.38.)Finally, we must note that, in addition to thecreation of separate nation-states, capitalism reveals, inits later stages, a contrary tendency leading to theremoval of national barriers :56Developing capitalism knows two historical tendenciesin the national question. The first is the awakeningof national life and national movements, thestruggle against all national oppression, and thecreation of nation-states. The second is the developmentand growing frequency of international intercoursein every form, the breakdown of nationalbarriers, the creation of the inte.rnational unity ofcapital, of economic life in general, of politics,science, etc. Both tendencies are a universal law ofcapitalism. Tire former predominates in the beginningof its development, the latter characterises amature capitalism moving towards its transformationinto socialist society. (LCW 2c..27.)The international unity of capital calls forth the internationalunity of labour. After the contradiction betweencapital and labour has been resolved in socialism,national divisions will finally disappear :To the old world, the world of national oppression,national bickering, and national isolation, the workerscounterpose a new world, a wortrd of unity betweenthe working people of all nations, a worid in whichthere is no place for any privileges or for the slightestdegree of oppression of man by man. (LCW r9.ge.)z. ?,lational Self -determinationThe attitude of the proletariat to the national questionfollows from its attitude to the bourgeois revolution. Theproletariat supports the bourgeoisie in its struggleagainst feudalism and irnperialism, and is ready to takeover ,the leadership of that struggle, if the bourgeoisieshould capitulate. Accordingly, it supports the bourgeoisdemocraticprinciple of equal rights for all citizens,regardless of nationality, and recognises that nationsemerging within a multinational state have the right tosecede :For different nations to live together in peace andfreedom, or to separate and form different states (ifthat is more convenient for them), a full democracy,3-]\,ITI\{TT ' '57

upheld by the working class, is essential. No privilegesfor any one nation or any one languagel not theslightest degree of oppression or the slightest injusticein respect of a national minority-such are the principlesof working-class democracy. (LCW tg.gr, cf.2$.)In so far as national peace is possible at all in acapitalist society based on exploitation, profit-makingand strife, it is attainable only under a consistentlyand thoroughly democratic republican system ofgovernment which g'uarantees full equality for allnations and languages, recognises no compulsoryofficial language, provides the people with schoolswhere instruction is given in all the native languages,and has a constitution containing a fundamental lawwhich prohibits any privileges to any one nation andany encroachment on the rights of a national minority.(LCW t9.427.)At the same time, while supporting the bourgeoisdemocraticprinciple of equal rights for all nationalities,the proletariat insists, in opposition to the bourgeoisie,that the national struggle is surbordinate to the classstruggle :The bourgeoisie always places its nationaldemands in the forefront, and does so in categoricalfashion. With the proletariat, lhowever, thesedemands are subordinated, to the interests of theclass struggle. (LCW zo.4ro.)Successful struggle against exploitation requiresthat the proletariat should be free of nationa ism,and be absolutely neutral, so to speak, in the fightfor supremacy that is going on among 'the bourgeoisieof the various nations. If the proletariat ofany one nation gives the slightest sup;port to theprivileges of its own' national bourgeoisie, thatwill inevitably arouse distrust among the proletariatof another nationl it will weaken the internationalclass solidarity of the workers and dividethem, to the delight of the bourgeoisie. (LCWzo.4z4.)The proletariat cannot support any consecrationof nationalism; on the contrary, it supports everyttringthat helps to obliterate national distinctionsand remove national barriers; it supports everythingthat makes the ties between nationalitiescloser, or tends to merge nations. (LCW 20.35.)If the proletariat favours the merging of nations, why,it may be asked, does it recognise their right toindependence ? Recause it is only through the fulfilmentof national aspirations that national divisions can beovercome:We want lree unification; that is why we mustrecognise the right to secede. Without freedom tosecede, unification cannot be called free. (LCW26t76.)3. Wars ol National LiberationAt the Third Congress of the Communist International(r9zr)Lenin said:It is perfectly clear that in the impending decisivebattles of the world revolution the movement of themajority of the world's population, directed initiallytowards national liberation, will turn against capitalismand imperialism, and will perhaps play amuch more revolutionary part than we expect. ...Inspite of the fact that the masses of toilers-thepeasants in the colonial countries-are still rbackward,they will play a very important revolutionary part in5B 59

the coming phases of the world revolution. (LCW32.482.)Since then, throughout the colonial and semi-colonialworld the class struggle has assumed the form ofnational struggle, giving rise to wars of national liberationand revolutions of the 'new-democratic' typediscussed in Chapter II. In China during the war ofresistance against Japan Mao Tse-tung said :In a struggle which is national in character theclass struggle takes the form of national struggle,which demonstrates the identity between the two. Onthe one hand, for a given historical period the politicaland economic demands of the various classesmust not ,be such as to disrupt co-operationl on theother hand, the dernands of the national struggle(the need to resist Japan) should ,be the point ofdeparture for all class struggle. Thus there is identityin the united front etween unity and independenceand between the national struggle and the classstruggle. (MSW z.zr5.)It has recently been demonstrated in one country afteranother, and above all in Vietnam, that even a smalland materially backward nation, organised under theCommunist Party and guided by Mao Tse-tung'sstrategy of people's war, can defeat the most powerfulof all imperialist states, armed with a vast militarymachine on which monopoly capitalism has squanderedall its wealth.The war of liberation in Vietnam has won worldwidesupport. In this way the national struggle of asingle people has become an international struggle,which in its turn has aroused new national struggles inother countries, including the United States. Thestruggle of the American Negroes for freedom and6oequal rights is itself a national movement, as Leninrecognised :In the United States, the Negroes . . . should beclassed as an oppressed nation; for the equality wonin the Civil War of 186l-65, and guaranteed by theConstitution of the Republic, was in many respectsincreasingly curtailed in the chief Negro areas (theSouth) in connection with the transition from theprogressive, pre-monopoly capitalism of 186o-7o tothe reactionary, monopoly capitalism (imperialism) ofthe new era. . , . (LCW n.275.)Similarly, in declaring his support for the movement,Mao Tse-tung has pointed out that it is both a nationalstruggle and a class struggle :The speedy developrnent of the struggle of theAmerican Negroes is a manifestation of sharpeningclass struggle and sharpening national struggle withinthe United States. . . .'In the final analysis, national struggle is a matterof class struggle. . . . The evil system of colonialismand imperialism arose and throve with the enslavementof Negroes and tihe trade in Negroes, and itwill surely come to its end rvitrh the complete emancipationof the black people. (PR 63-33.)As the struggles for national liberation expand, so thearea remaining under imperialist rule contracts; as thatarea contracts, so its exploitation is in ensified, thusprovoking new struggles for national liberation. This isthe vicious circle from which imperialism has noescape :U.S. imperialism, which looks like a huge monster,is in essence a paper tiger, now in the throes of itsdeath-bed struggle. In the world of today, whoactually fears whom? It is not the Vietnamese6r

qeople, the Laotian people, the Palestinian people,the Arab people, or the people of other countries,who fear U.S. imperialism; it is U.S. imperialismwhich fears the people of the world. It becomespanic-stricken at the mere rustle of leaves in the wind.In.numerable facts prove that a just cause enjoysabundant support, while an unjust cause finds littiesupport. A weak nation can defeat a strong, a smallnation can defeat a big. The people of a smallcountry can certainly defeat oppression by a bigcountry, if only they dare to rise in struggle, dare totake up arnm, and grasp in their orvn hands thedestiny of their country. This is a law of history. (pR7o-22.)4. National uersus Regional AutonomyIn affirming the right of every nation to secede andform an independent state, Lenin did not mean thatthe party of the proletariat was committed in all casesto advocating the exercise of that right. On tlie contrary,he recognised that in some cases secession mightbe inexpedient :The right of nations to self-determination (that is,the constitutional guarantee of an absolutely freeand democratic method of deciding the question ofsecession) must under no circumstances be confusedwith the expediency of secession for a given nation.The Social-Democratic Party must decide thequestion, exclusively on its merits in each case inconformity with the interests of social developmentas a whole and with the interests of the prolelarianclass struggle for socialism. (LCW rg.42g.)Il T"I -alsohappen, of course, that secession is precludedby the objective situation. Some nationalitiesare too small or too scattered to form independent6zstates. IIow, then, is the national question to be solvedin cases where secession is judged to be inexpedient orimpracticable ?There are, as Lenin points out, two oppositesolutions of this problem-the bourgeois solution ofcultural-national autonomy and the proletariansolution of regional and local autonomy.According to the principle of cutrtural-national autonomy,the mernbers of each nationality form a 'nationalassociation', whioh controls their social and culturallife, including education. Thus, the schools aresegregated according to nationality. Lenin asks:Is suoh a division, be it asked, permissible fromthe standpoint of dernocracy in general and fromthe standpoint of the interests of the proletarianclass struggle in particular?A clear grasp of the essence of the 'culturalnational'autonomy programme is sufficient toenable one to reply without Lresitation : it isabsolutely impermissible. . . .If the various nations living in a single state arebound by economic ties, then any attempt to dividethem permanently in 'cultural' and particularlyeducational matters would be absurd and reactionary.On the contrary, efforts should be made tounite the nations in educational matters, so that theschools should be a preparation for what is actuallydone in real life. At the present time we see thatthe diflerent nations are unequal in the rights theypossess and in their level of development. (Jnderthese circumstances, to segregate the schools accordingto nationality would actually and inevitablyu)orsen the conditions of the more backwardnations. . . ,Segregating the schools according to nationality isnot only a harmful scheme but a downright swindle63

on the part of the capitalists. Trhe workers can besplit up, divided and weakened by the advocacy ofsuch an idea, and still more by segregation of theordinary people's schools according to nationality;while the capitalists, whose children are wellprovided with ricrh private schools and speciallyengaged tutors, cannot i.n any way be threatened byany division or weakening through 'cultural-nationalautonomy'. (LCW rg.5o3-S.)Thus, the effect of cultural-national autonomy is todivide the workers and so place them more fi.rmlyunder bourgeois control.Against this Lenin put forward the principle ofregional and local autonomy. True national equalitnhe argued, calls for:wide regional autonorny and fully democratic selfgovernment,with the boundaries of the selfgoverningand autonomous regions determined bythe local inhabitants on the basis of economic andsocial conditions, national make-up of the population,etc. (LCW ry.427.)In order to eliminate national oppression, it is veryimportant to create autonomous areas, howeversmall, with entirely homogeneous populations, towardswhioh members of the respective nationalitiesscattered all over the country, or even all over theworld, could gravitate, and with which they couldenter into relations and free associations of everykind. (LCW 2o.5o.)The principle of local autonomy also includes :the right of the population to receive instruction intheir native tongue in schools to be established forthe purpose at the expense of the state and the localorgans of self-government; the right of every citizen64to use his native language at meetings; the nativelanguage to be used in all local, public and stateinstitutions; the obligatory official language to beabolished. (LCW 2+.472.)On the last point Lenin has also this to say :The requirements of economic exchange will themselvesdecide which language of the given country itis to the aduantage of the majority to know in theinterests of commercial relation,s. (LCW I9.355.)Is not an 'official language' a stick LTtat driuespeople away f.rom the Russian language? Why willyou not understand the psychology which is so impoxtantin the national question, and which, if theslightest coercion is applied, besmirches, soils, nullifiesthe undoubtedly proeressive importance of centralisation,large states, and a uniform language ? (LCWr 9.499.)'fhere still remains the problem of the large industrialcentres, whose population is necessarily heterogeneous,being drawn from all parts of the country andfrom countries overseas, and is at the same time soclosely mixed that even the principle of local autonomyis insufficient to ensure full national equality. This wasalready a world-wide problem in Lenin's time :There can be no doubt that dire poverty alonecompels people to abandon their native land, andthat the capitalists exploit the immigrant workers inthe most shameless manner. But only reactionariescan shut their eyes to the progressiue sienificance ofthis modern migration of nations. (LCW ry.454.)Referring to the school census of r9I r, Lenin remarks :The extremely mixed national composition of thepopulation of the large city of St. Petersburg is at65

once evident. This is no accident but results from alaw of. capitalism, which operates in all continentsand in all parts of the world. Large cities, factorycentres, railway centres, commercial and industrialcentres generally, are certain, more than any others,to have very mixed populations, and it is preciselythese centres that grow faster than others and attractever larger numbers of the inhabitants of the backwardrural areas. (LCW I9.532)He observes that, if the principle of cultural-nationalautonomy had been applied in St. Petersburg, therewould have been no less than twenty-three 'nationalassociations', eacth with its own sohools. I{e continues :The interests of democracy in general and of theworking class in particular demand the very opposite.We must strive to secure the mixing of the childrenof. all nationalities in unifornt schools in each locality.... It is not our business to segregate the nations inmatters of education in any way; on the contrary, wemust strive to create the fundamental democraticconditions for ttre peaceful coexistence of nations onthe basis of equal rights. (LCW r9.532)Here, toq the solution lies in the fullest extension ofdemocracy. Lenin shows this by taking an extreme case.After noting that the school population of St. Petersburgincluded one Georgian child, he remarks :We may be asked whether it is possible tosafeguard the interests of the one Georgian childamong the 48,o76 schoolchildren of St. Petersburg onthe basis of equal rights. And we should reply that itis impossible to establish a special Georgian school inSt. Petersburg on the basis of Georgian 'nationalculture'. . . . But we shall not be defending anythingharmful, or striving after anything impossible, if wedemand for this child free government premises for66Ilectures on the Georgian language, Georgian history,etc., the provision of Georgian books from theCentral Library for this child, a state contributiontowards the fees of the Georgian teacher, and soforth. Under real democracy. " . the people canachieve this quite easily. But this real democracy canbe achieved only when the workers of all nationalitiesare united. (LCW r9.533.)5. National and International CultureThe bourgeoisie has always Lrad a dual character, revolutionaryin relation to the past, counter-revolutionarvin relation to the future, and in the final stage ofcapitalisrn the negative aspect predominates. The classwhich once led the fight for national independence nowimposes its rule on other nations. The culture whichwas once full of life and vigour now becomes a deadweight crushing the aspirations of subject peoples. Insome cases the people itself is physically exterminated,like the American Indians and the Australian aborigines.In other cases the people is enslaved and itsculture stamped out, like the South African Bantus.Elsewhere more subtle methods are employed :The imperialists ihave never slackened their effortsto poison the minds of the Chinese people. This istheir policy of cultural aggression. And it is carriedout through missionary work, through establishinghospitals and schools, publishing newspapers, andinducing Chinese students to study abroad. Theiraim is to train intellectuals who will serve their,interests and to dupe the people. (MSW 2.5t2.)Ttre same dualism is revealed in the bourgeoisie oftLre oppressed nation, whioh wavers between its desirefor national independence and its fear of socialism, and67iII

so is always ready, as in Greece and Ireland, to sell itscultural heritage :'We', the proletariat, have seen dozens of timeshow the bourgeoisie betrays the interests of freedom,motherland, language and nation, when it is confrontedby the revolutionary proletariat. (LCW6.46e, cf.23.6r.)From this it follows that the future of world culture,which is the sum total of national cultures, is in thehands of the international proletariat. What will thatfuture be ? This question has been answered in generalterms both by Lenin and by Mao Tse-tung :The elemenfs of democratic and socialist cultureare present, if only in rudimentary form, in eaerynational culture, since in every nation there arelabouring and exploited masses, whose conditions oflife inevitably give rise to the ideology of democracyand socialism. B:ut eoery nation also possesses a bourgeoisculture (and most nations a reactionary andclerical culture as well) in the form, not merely of'elements', but of the dominanf culture. Thereforethe general national culture is the culture of the landlords,clergy and bourgeoisie. . . .In advancing the slogan,of 'the international cultureof dernocracy and the world unorking-classmovement', we take from each national culla:re onlyits democratic and socialist elements; we take themonly and absolutely in opposition to the bourgeoisculture and bourgeois nationalism of each nation.(LCW 20.24.)We have said that China's new culture at the presentstage is an anti-imperialist, anti-feudal culture ofthe masses of 'the people under the leadership of theproletariat. Today, anything that is truly of t[remasses must necessarily be led by the proletariat.6BWhatever is under the leadership of the bourgeoisiecannot possibly be of the masses. Naturally, the sameapplies to the new literature and art which are partof the new culture. We should take over the richlegacy and the good traditions in literature and artthat have been handed down from past ages inChina and foreign countries, but the aim must stillbe to serve trhe masses of the people. Nor do werefuse to utilise the literary and artistic forms of thepast, but in our hands tihese old forms, remouldedand infused with new content, also become somethingrevolutionary in the service of the people.(MSw 3.76.)The proletarian culture of the future will be internationalin content, national in form. It will be international,and therefore homogeneous, in content,because it will express the socialist outlook common tothe masses of the people of all nations. It will benational, and therefore varied, in form, because thatoutlook will be embodied concretely in forms determinedby the language, customs and traditions of eaohnation. As Stalin explained :Proletarian in content, national in form-such isthe universal culture towards wlhich socialism isproceeding. Proletarian culture does not abolishnational culture, it gives it content. On the otherhand, national culture does not abolish proletarianculture, it gives it form. The slogan of nationalculture was a bourgeois slogan so long as the bourgeoisiewas in power and the consolidation ofnations proceeded under the aegis of the bourgeoisorder. The slogan of national culture became aproletarian slogan when the proletariat came topower, and when the consolidation of nations beganto proceed under the aegis of Soviet power. (SCW?.r4c..)69

Similarln Mao Tse-tung has said :For the Crhinese Communists, who are part of thegreat Chinese nation, flesh of its flesh and blood ofits blood, any talk about Marxism in isolation fromChina's characteristics is merely Marxism in theabstract, Marxism in a vacuum. Ifence to applyMarxism concretely in China, so that its everymanifestation has an indubitably Chinese character,that is, to apply Marxism in the light of China'sspecific characteristics, becomes a problem which itis urgent for the whole Party to understand andsolve. Foreign stereotypes must be abolished, therernust be less singing of emptn abstract tunes, anddogmatism must be laid to rest; they must bereplaced by the fresh, liveiy Chinese style and spiritwhich the common people of China love. To separateinternationalist content from national form isthe practice of those who do not understand thefirst thing about internationalism. (MSW z.zo9, cf.gBr )Mao Tse-tung is speaking here of Party propaganda,but what he says appiies equally to culture; and notonly to Crhinese culture, but to the culture of allnations, great and small, old and new, including thosewhich, after being crushed by imperialism and broughtto the verge of extinction, will be saved by socialism.Thus, proletarian culture will be richer than bourgeoisculture and infinitely more varied.7oCIIAPTER VSocialism in One CountryThe proletariat have nothing to lose but theirchains. They have the world to win. Working-menof all countries, unite !-Communistt. Marx's Theory of Permanent ReuolutionManif estoLenin's contribution to Marxist theory was defined byStalin as follows :Leninism is Marxism of the era of imperialism andof the proletarian revolution. To be more exact,Leninism is the theory and practice of the proletarianrevolution in general, the theory and tactics ofthe dictatorship of the proletariat in particular. Marxand Engels pursued their activities in the prerevolutionaryperiod (we have the proletarian revolutionin mind), when developed imperialism did notyet exist, in the period of the proletariat's preparationfor revolution, in the period when the proletarianrevolution was not yet an immediate practicalinevitability. Lenin, however, the disciple of Marxand Engels, pursued his activities in the period ofdeveloped imperialism, in the period of the unfoldingproletarian revolution, when the proletarian revolutionhad already triurnphed in one country, hadsmashed bourgeois democracy and had ushered inthe era df proletarian democracy, the era of theSoviets. (SCW 6.73.)7r

The era of imperialism, or monopoly capitalism,opened in the last years of the nineteenth century andculminated in the October Revolution of rgr7. It coincided,therefore, with the period of Lenin's activities,which began in the nineties and ended a few yearsafter the revolution which he led. The theoreticalanalysis o{ imperialism was his, and so too was theleadership of the October Revolution. In this chapter itwill be shown how, starting from the perspective ofworld revolution which had been outlined by Marx andEngels on the basis of their activities in the era ofindr.rstrial capitalism, Lenin worked out a new perspectivecorresponding to the conditions of the imperialistera, which Marx and Engels did not live to see :Marx, in the era of laissez-faire capitalism, couldnot conoretely know certain laws peculiar to the eraof imperialism beforehand, because imperialism, thelast stage of capitalism, had not yet emerged and therelevant practice was lacking; only Lenin and Stalincould undertake this task. (MSW I.299)ln 1847, in a draft which served as a basis for theCommunist |rtanif esto, Engels raised the questionwhether it was possible that the proletarian revolutionmight take place in one country alone :Can this revolution take place in one countryalone? No. Large-scale industry has, by the very factthat it has created a world market, bound all thenations of the earth, and notably the civilisednations, so closely together, that each depends onwhat is happening in the others. Further, in all thecivilised countries it has evened up social developmentto such an extent that in all of them thebourgeoisie and the proletariat have ibecome the twodecisive classes of society, and the struggle betweenthem the major struggle of our times. Therefore, thecommunist revolution will not be simply a nationalrevolution, but will take place simultaneously in allthe civilised countries, that is, at ieast in England,America, France and, Germany. (Quoted in SCW8.z6o, cf. 7.n7.)In the final draft of the Manifesto the idea of 'simultaneousrevolution' was not mentioned. The authorsconfined their attention to the situation in Germany,where the bourgeois revolufion had not yet takenplace :The Communists turn their attention chiefly toGermany, because that country is on the eve of abourgeois revolution that is bound to be carried outunder more advanced conditions of European civilisation,and with a much more developed proletariat,than that of England in the seventeenth and ofFrance in the eighteenth century, and because thebourgeois revolution in Germany will be but theprelude to an immediately following proletarianrevolution. (ME t.65.)A full analysis of the situation in Germany, togetherwith a forecast of the further perspective, was given byMarx in r85o :While the democratic petty bourgeoisie wish tobring the revolution to a conclusion as quickly asposs.ible and with the achievement at most of theabove demands, it is or.lr interest and our task tomake the revolution pemanent, until all the more orless possessing classes have been displaced fromdomination, until the proletariat has conquered statepower, and the association of proletarians, not onlyin one country but in all the dominant countries ofthe world, has advanced so far that competitionamong the proletarians of these countries has ceasedl-1

and that at least the decisive forces are concentratedin the hands of the proletarians. (ME r.r ro.)In this forecast the impending revolution is described as'permanent'. It is to begin with a bourgeois revolutionin Germany, which will be followed without interruptionby a proletarian revolution in that country, andthat in turn will ibe carried into lhe other advancedcountries of the West, until the proletariat has estab-Iished its supremacy all over the world; and meanwhilethe transition from the lower stage of communism (thatis, socialism) to the higher stage will have begun. Thisidea of 'permanent 1sy9|u1len'-that is, revolution continuingby stages-marks the central point at which theMarxist theory differs both ifrom reformism (whicheliminates the revolution) and from anarchism (whicheliminates the stages).Further, as Marx explained, the success of the revolutionin Germany would depend on the skill withwhich the proletariat handled its relations with thepeasantry. In the first stage, directed against the feudalistsand their allies among the big bourgeoisie, theproletariat was to 'march together' with the democraticpetty bourgeoisie (inc,luding the peasantry) ; in thesecond stage, it was to advance 'beyond the pettybourgeoisdemands and initiate the proletarian revolution.Analysing the reasons for the defeat of theGerman revolution, Engels pointed to the failure of theproletariat to establish close ties with the peasantry :The mass of the nation, small bourgeois artisansand peasants, were left in the lurch by their nearestand natural allies, the bourgeoisie, because they weretoo revolutionary, and partly also by the proletariat,because they were not sufficien-tly advanced.(MEP r5z.)After the Peasant Reform of 186r Marx and Engelslooked to Russia as 'the vanguard of revolutionaryaction in Europe' and envisaged, the possibiiity that abourgeois revolution in that country might become 'thesignal for a proletarian revolution in the West' (MEr.2+, cf. z.6o). In other words, Russia might play thepart which they had previously assigned to Germany.They still believed that, when the proletarian revolutiondid come, it would be simultaneous.Lastiy, the proletarian revolution was to issue in thedictatorship of the proletariat. This concept is alreadyimplicit in the Manif esto (in the sentence quoted at thehead of Chapter I) but was first expressly formulatedby Marx in rB5z :And now, as to myself, no credit is due to me fordiscovering the existence of classes in mod.ern societyor the struggle between them. Long before me bourgeoishistorians had described the historical developmentof this class struggle and bourgeois economiststhe economic ana.tomy of classes. What I did thatwas new was to prove : (l) that tlrc existence olclasses is only bound up with particular historicalphases in the deuclopment of production,' (z) that theclass struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship ofthe ltroletariat; (q) that this dictatorship itself onlyconstitutes the transition to the abolition of all classesand to a classless society. (ME 2.452.)One essential element in the concept was still lackingtheneed for the proletariat to destroy the bourgeoisstate machine. This was one of the lessons of the ParisCommune, as Engels explained, :The Commune was compelled to recognise frornthe outset that the working class, once come topower, could not carry on ibusiness with the old statemachine; that in order not to lose again its newlywonsupremacy, it must, on the one hand, do away74 75

with all the old repressive machinery previously used,against it, and, on the other, safeguard itself againstits own deputies and officials by declaring them allwithout exception sulbject to recall at a\y moment.(ME r.483.)In these jdeas of Marx and Engels we recognise thethree main features of Lenin's revolutionary strategy asdescrlbed above in Chapters I,III ' the dictatorship ofthe proletariat, the uninterrupted transition from thebourgeois to the proletarian revolution, and the workerpeasantalliance. There is, however, one point at whichLenin's perspective, in the form which it eventuallyassumed on the eve of the October Revolution, differedsharply from theirs.z. The Victory of the October ReaolutionAs rve have seen, Marx and Engels believed that theproletarian revolution would break out simuitaneouslyin the advanced countries of the West, sparked offperhaps by a bourgeois revolution in Russia. Frorn thisit followed ,by implication that, if it should tre attempted(as in the Paris Commune) in a single countrywithout the support of similar revolutions elsewhere, itwould, be unable to survive.For many years Lenin accepted these assumptions :We will make the Russian political revolution theprelude to the socialist revolution in Europe. (LCW8.3o3, cf 54r, g.57, 412, 432.)The Russian revolution can achieve victory by itsown efforts, ibut it cannot possibly hold and conso-,lidate its gains by its own strength alone. It cannotdo this unless there is a socialist revolution in theWest. (LCW to.z8o, cf..92,334,3g4, r3.32j.)76Lenin never ceased to believe that 'the objective conditionsin Western Europe were ripe for a socialistrevolutiorr' (LCW zr.4rg); but, after ihe collapse of theSecond International in r9r4, when the woiking_classleaders of the West repudiated their pledges to opposethe imperialist war, he recognised tfrit tie subjectiveconditions had become unfavourable :.Inthe early period of the revolution many entertainedthe hope ,that the socialist revolution wouldbegin in Western Europe immediately the imperialistwar ended. At the time when the masses were armedthere could have been a suocessful revolution in someof the Western countries as well. ,It could have takenplace burt for the fact that the split within theproletariat of Western Europe *as deeper, and thetreachery of the former socialist leaders greater, thanhad been imagined. (LCW 3o.4r7, ct. 3z.a:Ar.1Meanwhile, in the,course of his work on imperialism hehad reached the conclusion that, in the new worldsituation, the old theory of ,simultaneous, revolution,*hj.h, implied that a proletarian revolution attempted ina single country could not be successful, was out oi dute :IJneven economic and political d.evelopment is anatbsolute law of capitalism. Hence, the victory ofsocialism is possible first in several or even in'onecapitalist country taken separately. The victoriousproletariat of that country, having expropriated thecapitalists and organised socialist production, wouldstand up against the rest of the world, the capitalistworld, attracting to its cause the oppressed claises ofother countries, raising revolts in those countriesagainst the capitalists, and in the event of necessitycoming out even with armed force against the exploitingclasses and their stares. (LCW zi.34z.)In 1916 he went further, asserting that the socialistrevolution could not be simultaneous :77

The development of capitalism proceeds extremely,.re,r"rrly in different counlties' It cannot be otherwise,rra", Jo**odity production' From this it followsi.r"trrtuUty that socialism cannot achiewe victory;;;i;;"sly in att countries' It will achieve victory"d;J-i;;"" o, serre.al, while the others,wjll remain for;;; ;;; bourgeois or pte-bo"geois' (LCW 4; g')And, after the new socialist republic had emerged,ri"to.iow frorn the war of intervention and the civilrvar, he declared :t has turned out that, while our forecasts did notmaterialise simply, rapidly and directly' they wereiulfilled in so far'u, *" uthi"''ed the main thing' Therrossibilitvhas been maintained of the existence of;;;i;;L" .,rt" u"a the Soviet Republic even in theI;;;;;ffi" *Lrld socialist revolution being delaved'(LCW 3r.4rr.)But is the existence of a socialist republic in acaoitalist environment at all conceivaL'le? From the,ra militarv asPects it seemed inconceivable'"Hii-lJ Tfr^i i, ;, possible, both'politica-lly-and militarily' has,,o* U."., prorred. It is a fact' (LCW 33' I 5 I ')In reaching this conclusion, Len-in did not mean toimply that ihe survival of the Soviet republic. wasthenceforth guaranteed. On the contrary' he continuedio-*ri"t*"ihat the victory of socialism could not be;g;;;-;t final until it had been won on a worldscale :The final victory of socialism in a single country isof course impossible' (LCW z6'47o')Everyone knows the difficulties of a revolution' It-u, U"ei., with brilliant success in one country andii,"i, g"-rrl."ugh agonising periods, since final victoryscale, and only by the;;iyporrluL oi u -ita78joint efforts of the workers of all countries. (LCW27.372.)We have always known, and shall never forget,that ours is an international cause, and that, untilthe revolution takes place in all lands, including therichest and most highly civilised, our victory will beonly a half-victory, perhaps even less. (LCW 3I.399)We have always said that we are only a single linkin the chain of world revolution. (LCW 3r.43r, cf .32.36 t.)g. Uneuen DeaelopmentIn rejecting the theory of simultaneous revolutionLenin appealed to the law of the uneven developmentof capitalist society.IJneven development, arising as it does from thenature of commodity production, is found in all stagesof capitalist society, and indeed also in pre-capitalistsociety, in so far as it too reveais rudimentary forms ofcommoclity production I but, just as capitalism marksthe highest stage in the growth of commodity production,the stage at which labour-power ibecomes a commodity,so it is in the era of imperialism, the higheststage of capitalism, that the law of uneven developmentbecomes a major factor in world revolution. All thiswas shown by Lenin in his study of imperialism' Hisargument may be presented in the form in which it waslater summarised by Stalin in dealing with the questionat issue :What is the law of the uneven deveiopment ofcapitalism, whose operation under the conditions ofimperialism leads to the victory of socialism in onecountry?Speaking of this ,law, Lenin held that the old,pre-monopoly capitalism had already passed into im-79

perialism; that the world economy is developing inthe conditions of a frenzied struggle between theleading imperialist groups for territory, markets, rawmaterials, etc.; that the division of the world intospheres of influence between the imperialist groups isalready complete; that the development of capitalistcountries does not proceed evenly, not in such a waythat one country follows after another or advancesparallel with it, but spasmodically, through somec.ountries which had previously outstripped the othersbeing pushed back and new countries advancing tothe forefront; that this manner of development inthe capitalist countries inevitably engenders conflictsand wars between the capitalist powers for a freshredivision of an already divided world; that theseconflicts and wars lead to the weakening of imperialism;that owing to this the world imperialist frontbecomes easily liable to be breached in individualcountries; and that because of this the victory ofsocialism in individual countries becomes possible.We know that quite recently Britain was ahead ofall the other imperialist states. We also know thatGermany then began to overtake Britain anddemanded a 'place in the sun' at the expense ofother countries and in the first place of Britain. Weknow that it was precisely as a result of this circumstancethat the imperialist war of r9I4-IB arose.Now, after the imperialist war, America has spurtedfar ahead and out-distanced both Britain and theother European powers. It can scarcely be doubtedthat this contains the seeds of great new conflicts andwars.The fact that in consequence of the imperialistwar the imperialist front was breached in Russia isevidence that in the present-day conditions of capitalistdevelopment the chain of the imperialist frontBoItlIIl{IIlrIiIIIIIiI/I'lwill not necessarily break in the country whereindustry is most developed, but where the chain isweakest, where the proletariat has an importantally-such as the peasantry, for instance-in thefight against imperialist rule, as was the case inRussia. (SCW 8.265.)In Russia, the law of uneven development operated insuch a way as to turn the ibalance of class forces infavour of the proletariat :Owing to a numtrer of historical causes-thegreater backwardness of Russia, the unusual hardshipsinflicted on her by the war, the utter rottennessof Tsarism, and the extreme tenacity of the traditionsof r9o5-the revolution broke out earlier inRussia than in other countries. (LCW 25364, cf.29.307)In the West, however, where the bourgeoisie was firmlyestablished and the proletariat divided, the first step inthe revolution-the seizure of state power-was boundto be more d,ifficult :It would be a very great illusion, a very greatmistake, to forget that it was easy for the Russianrevolution to begin but difficult for it to take furthersteps. This was inevitable, because we had to ,beginwith the most backward and rotten political system.The European revolution will have to begin againstthe bourgeoisie, a much more serious enemy, andunder immeasurably more difficult conditions. (LCW27.r76, cf. 98.)Thus, the effect of imperialism was to speed up therevolution in the backward country and slow it downin the more advanced. Such are the dialectics ofuneven development.Br

4, Reuolution in the EastAfter the October Revolution it became clear rhat thenext advance of the world revolution would not necessarilybe confined to Europe. The imperialists hadsucceeded for the time being in containing the revolutionin the West, ibut they could not prevent thevictory of the October Revolution from reverberatinglike thunder all round the world :I think that what the Red At.ry hasaccomplished-its struggle and the history of itsvictory-will ,be of colossal, epoch-making significancefor all the peoples of the Bast. It will slhowthem that, weak as lhey may rbe, invincible as mayseem the power of their European oppressors, who inthe struggle employ all the marvels of technologyand military art-even so, a revolutionary warwaged 'by oppressed peoples, if it really succeeds inarousing the workers and the exploited in their millions,harbours such potentialities, such miracles, thatthe emancipation of the peoples of the East is nowquite practicable, from the standpoint not only of theprospects of the international revolution, but also ofthe direct military experience acquired in Asia, inSiberia-the experience of the Soviet republic, whichhas suffered armed invasion from all the powerfulimperialist countries. (LCW 30.r53)Hence, there was now being forged in the East, rvhereconditions were even more backward than they hadbeen in Russia, a new link in the chain of worldrevolution :Mean*hile, India and China are seething. Theyrepresent over 7oo million people, and together withthe neighbouring Asian countries, which are in allways similar to them, over half the world's inhabitants.Inexorably and with mounting momentumBz(IiIIithey are approaching their r9o5, with the essentialand important difference that in I9o5 the revolutionin Russia could still (at any rate in the beginning)proceed in isolation, that is, without other countriesbeing immediately drawn in; whereas the revolutionsnow maturing in India and China are being-havealready been-drawn into the revolutionary struggle,the revolutionary movement, the world revolution.(LCw 33.3so)The impact of the October Revolution in China hasbeen described by Mao Tse-tung :It was through the Russians that the Chinesefound Marxism. Before the October Revolution, theChinese were not only ignorant of Lenin and Stalin,they did not even know of Marx and Engels. Thesalvoes of the October Revolution brought usMarxism-Leninism. The October Revolution helpedprogressives in China, as throughout the world,to adopt the proletarian world outlook as the instmmentfor studying a nation's destiny and consideringanew their old problems. Follow the path of theRussians-that was their conclusion. (MSW +.+ry.)Ten years later, when the first wave of the Chineserevolution had expended itself, ending in defeat forthe revolutionary forces, many comrades, misled bythe outward appearance of things, despaired ofChina's future. In this situation Mao Tse-tung wrote :Althou$h the sutrjective forces of the revolution inChina are now weak, so also are ali organisations(organs of political power, armed forces, politicalparties, etc.) of the reactionary ruling classes, restingas they do on the lbackward and fragile social andeconomic structure of China. This helps to explainwhy revolution cannot hreak out at once in thecountries of Western Europe, where, although theB3

subjective forces of revolution are now perhapssomewhat stronger than in China, the {orces of thereactionary ruling classes are many times stronger,and it also holps to explain why the revolution willundoubtedly move towards a high tide more rapidlyin China, for although the subjective forces of therevolution in China at present are weak, the forcesof the counter-revolution are relatively weak too.(MSW r.r r9.)By 'the subjective forces of the ,revolution' are rneantthe organised forces of the revolution. These forces, itis argued here, were really, despite appearances, strongerin China than in the West, because the forcesranged against them were weaker. Further, thesituation in China was such that the revolutionaryforces were bound to grow :In other words, our forces, though small at present,will grow very rapidly. In the conditionsprevailing in China, their growth is not only possiblebut indeed inevitable, as the May 3oth movementand the Great Revolution which followed, have fullyproved. When we look at a thing, we must examineits essence and treat its appearance merely as anusher at the threshold, and once we cross thethreshold, we must grasp the essence of the thing;this is the only reliable and scientific method ofanalysis. (MSW I.IIg.)Turning to India, we find there a trroadly similar setof conditions, rbut the balance of forces was different.On the one hand, in British India capitalist relationswere more highly developed, and the big bourgeoisiewas more united, being tied to a single imperialistpower, not torn between rival powers, as in China(MSW 2.4$).At the same time, feudal relations stillsurvived, especially in the native states. On the otherB4hand, the proletariat failed to establish an alliance withthe peasantry. Thus, the counter-revolutionary forceswere stronger and the revolutionary {orces weaker thanin China. The result was that the bourgeoisie retainedthe leadership of the national rnovement and came toterms with feudalism and imperialism.{n the surnmer of 1945, when the war in the Westwas at an end and the surrender of Japan alreadyassured, the American imperialists used their latesttechnologicai marvel to wipe out two Japanese cities.The purpose of this action, which must be counted asone of the greatest crimes in the whole history ofwarf.are, was to intimidate all those, especially in Russiaand China, who rnight dare to challenge the world'snew masters. At the same time they were pouringmoney and war materials into the .rotten regime ofChiang Kai-shek in the hope that he would destroycommunism in China, which they would then use as abase for a renewed war against the ,Soviet lJnion. Fouryears later Chiang Kai-shek was routed by workers andpeasants trained, in Mao Tse-tung's strategy of people'swar (which was derived partly from the experience ofthe Red Army in the Russian civil war) ; and a people'sdemocratic dictatorship was established in Peking.Imperialism had suffered a second Shattering blow.85

CHAPTER VIThe Part2The Communists fight for the attainment of theimmediate aims, fbr the enforcement of themomentary interests, of the working class; but inthe movement of the present they also representand take care of the future of that movement'-Communist Manilestor. Lessons of the Paris CommuneOn March rB, rB7I, when the French bourgeoisie hadcapitulated to the Prussian invaders rather than fight on*iin working-class support, the workers of Parisrevolted and seized, po*e.. In place of the bourgeoisparliament they set up the Commune, which hadexecutive as rvell as legislative functions' Its memberswere elected by universal suffrage and subject to instantrecall. The standing army was abolished and replacedby the armed p"opi"; the police were 'broughtdirectly,r.rd.. p"prlar-'control; the magistrates and all otherpublic tffi"iolt were elected by the workers and paid aiorkman's wages' This was the first time in history thatthe proletariat had succeeded in overthrowing the hourg"oi.i"and setting up its own state; and, although theCommrrna.ds were not Marxists, the new state assumedin their hands the form of a proletarian dictatorship asconceived by Marx and Engels. Engels wrote later :Well and good, gentlemen; do you want to knowB6what this dictatorship looks like? Look at the ParisCommune. That was the dictatorship of the proletariat.(ME r.+BSJThe Commune lasted only a few weeks. There was noworking-class party, the trade-union movement was stillin its infancy, and through lack of experience the leadersmade some serious mistakes. They were too lenient tothe enemy, and they did not succeed in estao-lishing aworker-peasant alliance. Above ail, being preoccupiedwith armed sruggle against the troops encircling thecity, they had little time for socialist construction (LCWr7:4r). At the end of May the Commune was overthrown,and the workers of Paris-men, women,children-were massacred in thousands by the riflemenof that same bourgeoisie which only eighty years beforehad overthrown lhe feuclal monarchy in the name ofliberty, equality and fraternity.And yet, regarded historically, it was not a failure.Referring to Marx's judgement of it, Lenin wrote :In September rBTo Marx had called the insurrectionan act of desperate folly; but in Aprilt87r, when he saw the mass movement of thepeople, he rvatched it with the keen attention of aparticipant in great events marking a step forwardin the historic revolutionary movement. (LCWr z.Io9.)Not only was it the first proletarian dictatorship, butits organisational unit, the commune, was theprototype of the Soviets of Workers' Deputies, whichsprang up in Russia in r9o5 and again in r9r7 :Only the Soviet organisation of the state canreally effect the immediate break-up and totaldestruction of the old-that is, bourgeoisbureaucraticand judicial machinery, which has,been-and inevitably had to be-retained even inB7

the most democratic republics, and which is, inactual fact, the greatest obstacle to the practicalimplementation of democracy for the workers andworking-people generally. The Paris Commune tookthe first epoch-making step along this path. TheSoviet system has taken the second. (LCW 28.466.)The lessons to be learnt from the experience of rBTrwere embodied by Lenin in the work of the revolutionaryparty which he founded and led; and ofthose lessons one of the most important was preciselythe need for such a party-a party equipped with arevolutionary theory, united within itself by a combinationof democracy and discipline, and bound byclose ties to the masses.z. The Party of a N ew TypeThe theoretical principles underlying the organisationof a proletarian party were worked out by Lenin inthe period which began with the preparations for therevolution of rgo5 and ended with the OctoberRevolution. During the greater part of this period theParty rwas banned, with only brief intcrvals oflegality, and it was sutrject throughout to persecutionfrom the Tsarist police. In these circumstanccs it wasnecessary that the leadership should consist of a solidcore of professional revolutionaries :I assert : (I) that no revolutionary movement canendure without a stable organisation of leaders maintainingcontinuity; (z) that the broader the popularmass drawn spontaneously into the struggle, formingthe basis of the movement and participating in it, thegreater the need for such an organisation and themore solid it must te...; (3) that the organisationmust consist chiefly of people professionally engagedin revolutionary activity; (+) that in an8Blilautocratic state, the more we confine membershipof such an organisation to professional revolutionariestrained in the art of combating the politicalpolice, the more difficult it will be to unearth theorganisation and (5) the greater the number ofpeople from the working class and other socialclasses who will be able to join the movement andwork actively in it. (LCW 5.464.)The need for a highly centralised leadership wasd,riven home by the following experience :The rapid alternation of legal and illegal work,which made it necessary to keep the general stafftheleaders-under cover and cloak them in thegreatest secrecy, sometimes gave rise to extremelydangerous consequences. The worst of these wasthat in rgrz the agent proaocateur Malinovsky gotinto the Bolshevik Central Committee. He betrayedscores and scores of the .best and most loyal comrades,caused them to be sent to penal servitude,and hastened the death of many of them. (LCW3r.+5-)At the same time, if the members of the Party wereto work together effectively, it was necessary thatthey should act on the basis of collective decisionsreached after full and free discussion. This principleof unity in action com,bined with freedom of criticismis the basis of democratic centralism.When the Party emerged above ground in lgl7, itcontained a core of trained revolutionaries, but atthat time there was a large influx of new members,who did not recognise the need for Party discipline.Among these was Trotsky, who joined in July rgr7.Lenin's principles were upheld iby Stalin, whosucceeded in the face of itter opposition in establishinga collective leadership, but despite repeated4_MTMTT ' 'B9

efforts, extended over rnany years (SCW 6.238, 7.2o,31, 16r, ro.3e8, t1.75, rZ7, rzSzz), he was unable tocheck the growth of bureaucracy and came to relyhimself increasingly on adrninistrative methods, withthe result that the relationship between the Party andthe masses was impaired.Meanwhile Lenin's principles were being applied inChina by Mao Tse-tung. There, too, the Party hadsuffered savage persecution (MSW 2876); but, thanksto the vast extent of the country, offering ampleroom for manoeuvre in a peasant war, theCommunists were able to establish liberated areas,some of which they administered for many yearsbefore I94g. In this way they accumulated, a {und ofpractical experience, which, combined with a closestudy of the history of the Bolshevik Party, enabledthem to carry the theory and practice of democraticcentralism forward to a higher stage.Lenin's theory of the 'party of a new type', asdeveloped by Mao Tse-tung, may be consideredunder three heads: the vanguard Party; dernocraticcentralism; and the mass line.3.The Vanguard PartyThe proletariat, as it becomes conscious of its role inhistory, organises itself as the vanguard of the otherexploited, classes, principally the petty bourgeoisie,giving them leadership, winning their suPport, and atthe same time opposing the vacillations anddeviations which they bring with them into themovement. This it can only do if it is itself organisedunder the leadership of an independent proletarianparty:In its struggle for power the proletariat has noother weapon but organisation. Disunited by the9orule of anarchical competition in the bourgeoisworld, ground down by forced labour for capital,constantly thrust back into the 'lower depths' ofutter destitution, savagery and degeneration, theproletariat can [sg6mg-4nd will inevitatrly,fsg6ms-2n invincible force only when its ideologicalunification in accordance with the principlesof Marxism is consolidated'by the material unity o{organisation, which welds millions of toilers into anarmy of the working class. (LCW 7.+r5.)A Social-Democrat must never for a momentforget that the proletariat will inevitably have tolvage a class struggle for socialism even against themost democratic and republican bourgeoisie andpetty bourgeoisie. That is beyond doubt. Hence theabsolute necessity of a separate, independent,strictly class Party of Social-Democracy. (LCWg.Bs)The Party is the politically conscious, advancedsection of the class. It is its vanguard. The strengthof that vanguard, is a hundred times, more than ahundred times, greater than its nurnbers. (LCWr9.4o6.)One of the greatest and most dangerous mistakesmade by Communists (as genera,lly by revolutionarieswho have successfully accomplished the beginningof a great revolution) is the idea that arevolution can be made by revolutionaries alone.On the contrary, if it is to he successful, all seriousrevolutionary work requires that we should understandand translate into action the idea that revolutionariescan only play the part of vanguard ofthe truly virile and advanced class. A vanguardperforms its task as vanguard only when it is ableto avoid isolation from the people it leads and is9r

eally able to lead the whole mass forward. (LCW33.227-)In order to carry out its task as vanguard, theFarty must learn to handle correctly the relationsbetween the proletariat and the several sections ofthe petty trourgeoisie and the relations between differentsections of the proletariat itself :Capitalism would not be capitalism if theproletariat pur sang were not surrounded, by somevery motley types, intermediate between theproletarian and the semi-proletarian (who earns hislivelihood in part by selling his labour-power),between the semi-proletarian and the small peasant(and petty artisan, handicraft-worker, and smallmaster in general), rbetween the small peasant andthe middle peasant, and so oflr and if theproletariat itself were not divided into more orless developed, strata, if it were not divided accordingto territorial origin, trade, sometimes accordingto religion, and so on. From all thisfollows the necessity, the absolute necessity, for theCommunist Party, the vanguard of the proletariat,its class-conscious section, to resort to changes oftack, to conciliation and compromises with thevarious groups of proletarians, with the v-ariousparties of the workers and small masters. It isentirely a matter of knowing how to apply thesetactics in such a way as to raise, not lower, thegeneral level of proletarian class-consciousness, ofrevolutionary spirit, of the ability to fight andwin. (LCW 9r.74.)The Chinese Party was faced with similar problemsin establishing its alliance with the petty bourgeoisie:Among the petty-bourgeois masses outside the92Party, in addition to the peasants who form themain force in the Chinese bourgeois-democraticrevolution, the urLran petty bourgeoisie is also oneof the motive forces of the revolution in thepresent stage, because the great majority of itsmemt,ers are subject to all kinds of oppression, arebeing constantly and rapidly driven to poverty,bankruptcy and unemployment, and very urgentlydemand economic and political democracy. But, asa class in transition, the petty bourgeoisie has adual character, As for its good and revolutionaryside, the great majority of this olass are receptiveto the political and organisational influence of theproletariat, and even to its ideological influence, atpresent they demand a democratic revolution andare capable of uniting and fighting for it, and inthe future they can take the path of socialismtogether with the proletariat; but as for its badand backward side, not only has this class variousweaknesses which distinguish it from the proletariat,but when deprived of proletarian leadership, itoften veers and falis under the influence of theliberal bourgeoisie, and becomes their prisoner. Inthe present stage, therefore, the proletariat and itsvanguard, the Communist Party of China, shouldbase themselves on a firm and broad alliance withthe masses of the petty bourgeoisie outside theParty, and should, on the one hand, be lenient indealing with them and tolerate their liberal ideasand style of work, in so far as these do notimpede the struggle against the enemy or disruptthe social life we share in common, and, on theother, give them appropriate education so as tostrengthen our alliance with them. (MSW 3.2r4.)93

4. D enxocratic C entralismParty discipline rests on democracy under centralisedleadership. In this way freedom of discussion andcriticism is combined rvith unity in action. The loiverbodies elect the higher and are subject to their control.Majority decisions are binding. These principiescorrespond to every class-conscious worker's experienceof trade-union struggle :We have already more than once enunciated ourtheoretical views on the importance of disciplineand how this concept is to be understood in theparty of the working class. We defined it as unityof action, freedom of discussion and criticisnt Onlysuch discipline is worthy of the democratic party ofthe advanced class. The strength of the workingclass lies in organisation. lJnless the masses areorganised, the proletariat is nothing. Organised-itis everything. Organisation means unity of action,unity in practical operations. . . . Therefore theproletariat does not recognise unity of action lvithoutfreedom to discuss and criticise. (LCW r r.3ro.)Is it really so difficult to understand that, beforea decision has been taken by the centre on astrike, it is permissible to agitate for and against it,lbut that alter a decision in favour of a strike (withthe additional decision to conceal this from theenemy) to carry on agitation against the strike isstrike-breaking? Any worker will understand that.(LCW z6.zz4.)When the Party is working illeg-ally, the scope fordiscussion and criticism is necessarily restricted, but atthe same time there can be no discipline withoutconfidence in the leadership. The terms of admissionto the Third (Communist) International, founded inr9zo, included the following :Parties belonging to the Communist Internationalmust be organised on the principle of democraticcen.tralism. In this period of acute civil war, theCommunist Parties can perform their duty only ifthey are organised in a most centralised manner,are marked by an iron discipline bordering onmilitary discipline, and have strong, authoritativeparty centres invested with wide powers and enjoyingthe unanimous confidence of the membership.(LCW 3r.zro.)In the course of a long struggle to build theBolshevik Party on this basis, Lenin had to combatthe anarchistic attitude to discipline prevalent amongthe Menshevik intellectuals. To one of these, whocomplained that he looked on the Party as though itr.ere 'a huge factory', Lenin replied :This dreadful word of his at once betrays thementality of the bourgeois intellectual unfamiliarwith either the practice or the theory of proletarian,organisation. For the factory, which to someseems only a bogey, represents that highest form ofcapitalist co-operation which has united and disciplinedthe proletariat, taught it to organise, andplaced it at the head of all the other sections ofthe toiling and exploited population. And Marxism,which is the ideology of the proletariat trained bycapitalism, has been, and is, training unstable intellectualsto distinguish Lretween the factory as ameans of exploitation (discipline based on fear ofstarvation) and the factory as a means of organisation(discipline based on collective labour unitedby the conditions of a technically advancecl formof production). The discipline and organisationwhich come so hard to the bourgeois intellectualare easily acquired by the proletariat just becauseof this factory 'schooling'. (LCW 7.39I.)94 95

This is where the proletarian who has beenthrough the sohool of the ofactory' can and shouldteach a lesson to an,archistic individualism. Theclass-conscious wolker has long since emerged fromthe state of infancy when he used to fight shy ofthe intellectual as such. The class-conscious workerappreciates the richer store of knowledge and thewider political outlook which he finds amonqSocial-Democratic intellectuals. But, as we proceedwith the building of a real Party, the classconsciousworker must learn to distinguish thementality of the soldier of the proletarian armvfrom the mentality of the bourgeois intellectualwho parades anarchistic phrases I he must learn toinsist that the duties of the Party member befulfilled not only by the rank and file but by the'people at tlre top' as well. (LCW 7 Sg4.)The circumstances in whioh the Chinese Party wasbuilt were different, and in some respects less difficult,since the Bolsheviks had blazed the trail; butthe principles at issue were the same:If we are to make the Party strong, we mustpractise dernocratic centralism to stimulate the initiativeof the whole membership. There was morecentralism during the period of reaction and civilwar. In the new period, centralism must be closelylinked with democracy. Let us apply democracy,and so give scope to initiative throughout theParty. Let us give scope to the initiative of thewhole Party membership, and so train new cadresin great numbers, eliminate the remnants of sectarian,ism,and unite the whole Party as solidly assteel. (MSW r.zgz.)For these reasons, education in democracy mustbe carried on within the Party so that memberscan understand the meaning of democratic life, themeaning of the relationship between democracyand centralism, and the way in whioh democraticcentralism should be put into practice. Only in thisu,'ay can we really extend democracy within theParty and at the same time avoid ultra-democracyand the laissez-f aire which destroys discipline.(MSW z.zo5.)The Chinese Party attracted recruits in large numbers,not only from the peasantry, but from the urbanpetty bourgeoisie and particularly the intellectuais; butthese, too, became good Party members only after submittingto a process of ideological remoulding inaccordance with the principles formulated by Lenin :But the case is entirely different with those ofpetty-bourgeois origin who have voluntarily abandonedtheir original class stand and joined theparty of the proletariat. The Party should adopt apolicy towards them that difiers in principle fromthat towards the petty-bourgeois masses outside theParty. Since such people were close to the proletariatto begin with and joined its Party voluntarily,they can gradually become proletarian in theirideology tihrough Marxist-Leninist education in theParty and steeling in mass revolutionary struggles,and they can be of great service to the proletiiianforces. . . , It has to be emphasised, however, thatthe revolutionary character of the petty bourgeoiswho has not yet been proletarianised is essentiallydifferent from the revolutionary character of theproletarian, and that this difference can oftendevelop into a state of antagonism. . . . If theadvanced elements of the proletariat do not draw afirm and sharp line between Marxist-Leninistideology and the original ideology of those Partymembers who came from the petty bourgeoisie, and96 97

do not educate them and struggle with threm in aserious but appropriate and patient way, it will beimpossible t" o.r"r.o*" their petty-bourgeoisideology, and, wntat is more, these members willi""vit"'biy strive to remould the vanguard of theproletariat in their own image and usurp Partyieadership, thus damaging the cause o{ the Fartyand the people. (MSW 3.2r+.)trn the Chinese democratic revolutionary movement,it was the intellectuals who were first toawaken. . . . But the intellectuals will accomplishnothing if they fail to integrate themselves with theworkeri and peasants. In tire final analysis' th:dividing line bitween revolutionary intellectuals andnon-rev'olutionary or counter-revolutionary .intellectualsis whether or not they are willing to integratethemselves with the workers and peasants andactually do so. (MSW z.z3B.)Lastly, democratic centralism is the organising -principle,not only of the proletari?n party, but of thenew proletarian state, bised in Russia on the sovietsand in China on the people's conEgesses :Now, if the proletariat and poor peasants takestate power into their own hands, organise themselvesquite freely in cornmunes, and unite theaction of uU tt "communes in striking at capital,in crushing the resisiance of the capitalists, andtransferring the privately-owned railways, factories,land and io on to the entire nation, to the wholeof society, won't that be centralism? Won't thatbe the rnost consistent democratic centralism andmoreover proletarian centralism ? (LCW 25'429')The organisational principle of the newdemocraticstate should be democratic centralism,with the people's consresses determining the major9BIIiIiIIj/IIIpolicies and electing the governments at thevarious levels. It is at once democratic andcentralised, that is, centralised on the basis ofdemocracy and democratic under centralisedguidance. T[ris is the only system that can givefull expression to democracy with full powersvested in the people's congresses at all levels and,at the same time, guarantee centralised administrationwith the governments at each level exercisi.gcentralised management of all the affairsentrusted to them by the people's congresses atthe corresponding level and safeguarding whateveris essential to the democratic life of the people.(MSW 3,280, cf. 2.57,352, MFE 86.)5. From the Masses,to the MassesOne of the fundamental principles of Party work, asdeveloped in China, is what is known as 'the massline', that is, the systematic cultivation of the closestpossible interaction between the Party and the masses.This was one of the lessons which the Chinese Partylearnt from the Russian Revolution :The more acute the class struggle becomes, themore necessary it is for the proletariat to rely,most resolutely and completely, on the broadmasses of the people and to bring into full playtheir revoiutionary enthusiasm to defeat thecounter-revolutionary forces. The experience of thestirring and seething mass struggles in the Soviet{Jnioi-r during the October Revolution and theensuing civil war proved this truth to the full. It isfrom Soviet experience in that period that the'mass line' our Party so often talks about wasderived. (HE zo.)If the party is to lead the masses, it must serve99

trheir interests. It must serve in order to lead. Itmust, therefore, be in close contact with them. Onlyin this way can it guide their activities and correctits own mistakes :To serve the rnasses and express their interests,having correctly conceived those interests, theadvanced contingent, the organisation, must carrvon all its activities among the masses, drawingfrom them all the best elements without exception,at every step verifying carefully and objectivelywhether contact with the masses is being maintainedand whether it is a Iive contact. In thisway, and only in this way, does the advancedcontingent train and enlighten, the masses, expressingtheir interests, teaching them organisation anddirecting all their activities along the path of consciousclass politics. (LCW I9.4og)A political party's attitude to its own mistakes isone of the most important and surest ways ofjudging how earnest the party is and how it fulfilsin practice its obligations to its class and the workingpeople. Frankly acknowledging a mistake,analysing the conditions that have led up to it,and thrashing out the means of rectifying it-thatis the hallmark of a serious partv; that is how itshould perform its duties; that is ho,r,v it shouldeducate and train its class and then lhe masses.(LCw 2r.57.)This principle of 'the mass line' is regarded as thestarting-point of all work in the Chinese Party :All work done for the masses must start fromtheir needs an.d not from the desire of any individual,however well-intentioned. It often happensthat objectively the masses need a certain change,but subjectively they are not as yet conscious of theIOOneed, not yet willing or determined to make thechange. In such cases we should wait patiently. Weshould not make the change until, through ourwork, most of the masses have become conscious ofthe need and are willing and determined to carry itout. Otherwise we shall isolate ourselves from then)asses. (MSW 3.%6,)Our point of departure is ;to serve ,the peoplewhole-heartedly and never for a moment divorceourselves from the masses, to proceed in all casesfrom the interests of the people an.d not from theinterests of individuals or groups, and to understandthe identity of our responsibility to the people andour responsibility to the leading organs of the Party.Communists must be ready at all times to stand upfor the truth, because truth is in the interests of thepeople; Communists must be ready at all times tocorrect their mistakes, because mistakes are againstthe interests of the people. Twenty-four years ofexperience tell us that the right task, policy andstyle of work invariably conform to the demands ofthe masses at a given time and place and invariablystrengthen our ties with the masses, and trhe wrongtask, policy and style of work invariably disagreewith the demands of the masses at a given time andplace and invariably alienate us from the masses.(MSw 3.3I5.)We Commun,ists are like seeds and the people arelike the soil. Wherever we go, we must unite withthe people, take root and blossom among them.Wherever our comrades go, they must build goodrelations with the masses, be concerned for themand [relp them to overcome ttheir difficulties. Wemust unite with the masses; 0he more of the masseswe unite with, the better. We must go all out tomobilise the masses, expand the people's forces, and,IOI

under the leadership of our Party, defeat the aggressorand build a new China. (MSW a.58.)We must criticise and struggle with certain cadresand Party members, who have committed seriousmistakes, and certain bad elements among themasses of workers and peasants. In suoh criticisrnand struggle we should persuade the masses toadopt correct methods and forns and to refrainfrom rough actions. This is one side of the matter.The other side is that these cadres, Party membersand bad elements should be made to pledge thatthey will not retaliate against the masses. It shouldbe announced that the masses not only have theright to criticise them freely but also have the rightto dismiss them from their posts when necessary, ot'to propose their dismissal, or to propose their expulsionfrorn the Party and even to hand the worstelements over to the people's courts for trial andpunishment. (MSW 4.r86.)The relation between the Party and the masses, likethe relation between the Party leadership and therank-and-fi1e, is a unity of opposites, in which eachacts and reacts upon the other :As Comrade Mao Tse-tung says, the correct politicalline should be 'from the masses, to themasses'. To ensure that the line really comes frornthe masses, and in particular that it really goesback to the masses, there must be close ties notonly between the Party and the masses outside theParty (between the class and the people) but aboveall between the Party's leading bodies and themasses within the Party (between the cadres andthe rank-and-file) ; in other words, there must be acorrect organisational line. (MSW 3.2o8.)Further, this cyclical interaction between Party andt02people corresponds to the dialectical relation betweentheory and practice ,in the Marxist theory of knowledge:In. all the practical work of our Part% all correctleadership is necessarily 'from the masses, to themasses'. This means: take the ideas of the masses(scattered and unsystematic ideas) and concentratethem (through study turn them into concentratedand systematic ideas), then go back to the massesand propagate and explain these ideas, until themasses embrace them as their own, hold fast tothem and translate them into action, and test thecorrectness of these ideas in such action. Then onceagain concentrate ideas from the masses and onceagain go to trhe massers, so that the ideas arepersevered in and carried through. And so on overand over again in an endless spiral, with the ideasbecorning more correct, more vital and richer eachtime. Such is the Marxist theory of knowledge.(MSW 3.r r9)From liv.ing perception to abstract thought, andfrom this to practice-suoh is the dialectical pathof the cognition of truth, of the cognition of objectivereality. (LCW 38. t 7 r .)Hence, in the building of socialism the developmentof society becomes a conscious process conductedby the masses of the people under theleadership of the proletariat and its party :In the present epoch of the development ofsociety, the responsibility of correctly knowing andchanging the world Lras been placed by historyupon the shoulders of the proletariat and its party.This process, the practice of dhanging the world,which is determined in accordance with scientificknowledge, has already reached a historic momentr03

in the world an'd in China, a great moment unprecedentedin human history, that is, the momentfor completely banishing darkness from the worldand for changing the worid into a world of lightsuch as never previously existed. The struggle ofthe proletariat and the revolutionary people tochange the world comprises the fulfilment of thefollowing tasks: to change the objective world andat the same time their orvn subjective world-toohange their cognitive ability and ohange thereiations between ttre subjective and the objectiveworld... . And the objective world which is to bechanged also includes all the opponen;ts of change,who, in order to be ohanged, must go through astage of compulsion before they can enter the stageof voluntary, conscious change. The epoch of rvorldcommunism will be reached when all mankindvoluntarily and consciously changes itself and theworld. (MSW r.3oB.)Thus, the Party leadership and the rank-and-fi1e, theParty and the proletariat, the proletariat and the rest ofthe people, the people and the reactionaries-lhssg 21sfour major contradictions underlying the movementof socialist society, each of them being included in thewider contradiction as its principal aspect. The firstthree are non-antagonistic by nature, though they maybecome antagonistic, if handled incorrectly; the fourthis antagonistic by nature, but, if ihandled correctly, rvilleventually tbecome non-antagonistic; and then, whenthe transition to communism has been completed, allforms of state power, including democracy, dictatorshipand the Party itself, will disappear :When classes disappear, all instmments of classstruggle-parties and the state machinery-will losetheir function, cease to be necessary, thereforegradually wither away and end their historical misto+IIIlilIi'Ision; and human society will move to a higher stage . . .Communists the world over are wis-er than thebourgeoisie, they understand the laws governing thec.xrstence and development of things, they underitanddialectics and they can see further. The bourgeoisiedoes not welcome this truth because it does not wantto be overthrown. . . . But for the working class, thelabouring people and the Communist party. tthequestion is not one of being overthrown, but ofworking hard to create the conditions in whichclasses, state power and political parties will die outvery naturally and mankind will enter the realm ofGreat Harmony. (MSW 4.4rt.)r05

CHAPI'ER I/IITlre First Socialist StateThe history of all past society has consisted inthe development of class antagonisms, antagonismsthat assumed different forms at differentepochs. But, whatsoever form they have taken,one fact is common to all past ages, namely,the exploitation of one part of society by theother.-Communist Manifestor. T he P r olet arian Re u olutionSummarising Lenin'sbetween the bourgeoisStalin wrote :analysis of the differencesand the proletarian revolution,The distinction between the proletarian revolutionand, the bourgeois revolution may bereduced to five main points.r. The bourgeois revolution usually begins whenthere exist more or less finished forms of thecapitalist order, forms which have grown andripened within the womb of feudal society priorto the open revolution; whereas the proletarianrevolution begins when finished forms of thesocialist order are either absent or almost completelyabsent.z. The main task of the bourgeois revolutionconsists in seizing power and making it conformro6to the already existing ,bourgeois economy, whereasthe main task of the proletarian revolution consistsin .seizing power in order to build up a newsocialist economy.3. The ,bourgeois revolution is usually consurnmatedwith the seizure of power, whereas in theproletarian revolution the seizure of power is onlythe beginning, and power is used ai a lever foitransforming the old economy and, organising thenew one.4. The bourgeois revolution limits itself to substitutingone group of exploiters for another inthe seat of power, and therefore it need not breakup the old state machinel whereas the proletarianrevolution removes all the exploiting groups frompower and places in power the leader of all thetoilers and exploited, the olass of proletarians, inview of which it cannot abstain from breaking upthe old state machine and replacing it with a-newone.5. The bourgeois revolution cannot rally themillions of the toiling and exploited masses forany length of time, for the very reason that theyare toilers and exploited; whereas the proletarianrevolution cun a.rd must join them, as toilers andexploited, in a durable alliance with the proletariat,if it wishes to carry out its main task ofconsolidating the power of the proletariat andbuilding the new socialist economy. (SCW B.zz, cf.LCW 27.89.)Thus, having overthrown the bourgeoisie, theproletariat is confronted with the task of constructinga new social order, which will differ not onlyfrom capitalism but from all previous forms of classsociety in that it brings exploitation to an end. Itfollows that the proletarian revolution involves moret07

profound changes, and there{ore greater difficulties,than any previous revolution.Further, these difficulties, inherent in the nature ofproletarian revolutions, were necessarily at theirgreatest in the October Revolution, because it wasthe first. After seizing power and defeating theirenemies, internal and external, with a Red Armycreated in the thick of the fighting, the Russianworkers and, peasants turned to the task of buildingsocialism with no experience to draw on, with nohelp from any friendly state, harassed by sabotageorganised from abroad, and faced with the threat ofrenewed intervention.The actual seizure of power had not been so difficult.This was due to the political situation created bythe war. Internally, the backward economy of theTsarist era had collapsed under the impact of militarydefeat. Externally, the imperialist powers, lockedtogether as they were in mortal combat, were unableto intervene (LCW 27.92, SCW 6.r62); and later,when they did intervene, they were hampered by theopposition of their own workers-revolutionary uprisingsin Hungary and Germany, actions in support ofthe Bolsheviks in France and Britain (LCW 3o.386,33.145, SCW 6.39r). Thanks to these political factors,the revolution survived. But then, as it passed fromthe struggle for power to socialist construction, thebackwardness of Tsarism became a major obstacle :The more backward the country which, owing tothe zigzags of history, has proved to be the one tostart the socialist revolution, the more difficult it isfor her to pass from the old capitalist relations tosocialist relations. (LCW 27.89.)In the West the reverse situation obtained. There,the socio-economic conditions of monopolycapitalism-large-scale production, universal literacy,roBand a high level of labour skill and trade-unionorganisation-were favourable to socialist construction;but, so long as the workers were held back by reformistillusions, the political conditions were lacking.Lenin pointed the contrast by comparing Russia withGermany:Socialism is inconceivable without large-scale capitalistengineering based on the latest discoveries ofmodern science. . . . At the same time socialism isinconceivable unless the proletariat is the ruler ofthe state. . . . In 19IB, Germany and Russia hadbecome the most striking emibodiment of the rnaterialrealisation of the economic, productive andsocio-economic conditions for socialism, on the onehand, and the political conditions, on the other.(LCw 3e.%+.)Accordingly, Lenin argued that in the West the revolutionwould be slower in coming than it was inRussia but less difficult when it did come; and at thesame time he warned the Bolsheviks not to bedeceived by the ease with which they had won power,because their greatest difficulties lay ahead :Anyone who has given careful thought to theeconomic requisites of the socialist revolution inEurope must be clear on the point that in Europe itwill be immeasurably more difficult to start, whereasfor us it was immeasurably easier to start; but itwill be rnore difficult for us to continue the revolutionthan it will be over there. This objectivesituation has caused us to experience an extraordinarilysharp and difficult turn in history. (LCW27.%.)Looking at the Russiar.r revolution as a rvhole, therefore,he concluded, :r09

We began our revolution in unusually difficultconditions, suih as no other workers' revolution inthe world will ever have to face. (LCW 28.ry7.)z. S o cialist C onstructionAt the end of the civil war the economic life of thecountry was almost at a standstili, and the workerpeasantalliance was under a severe strain. Thesituation was only saved by Lenin's New EconomicPolicy, through ,which production was revived on thebasis of private trade in small industry and agriculture.After this period of economic restoration thestruggle for socialist construction began.Industrialisation requires capital, and the onlyavailable source of capital was the labour of theproletariat and peasantry. Stalin said :In the capitalist countries industrialisation rvasusually effected, in the main, by robbing othercountries, by robbing colonies or defeated countries,or with dhe help of substantial and more orless enslaving loans from abroad.You know that for hundreds of years Britaincollected capital from all her colonies and fromall parts of the world, and was able in this wayto make additional investments in her industry.This incidentally explains why Britain became atone time the 'workshop of the worid'.You know aiso that Germany developed herindustry with the help, among other things, of ther),ooo million francs r.r'hich she levied as anindemnity on France after the Franco-Frussian!var.One respect in r.t'hich our country differs fromthe capitalist countries is that we cannot and mustnot engage in colonial robbery, or in the plunderingof other countries in general. That wan therefore,is closed to us.Neither, however does our country have, orwant to have, enslaving loans from abroad. Consequenty, that way too ,is closed to us.What then remains? Only one thing, and thatis to develop industry, to industrialise the country,with the help of internal accumuiations. . . .But what are the chief sources of these accumulations?As I have said, there are two suchsources : first, the working class, which createsvalues and advances our industry; secondly, thepeasantry.The way matters stand with the peasantry inthis respect is as follows. It not only pays thestate the usual taxes, direct and indirect; it alsoouer-pays in the relatively high prices for manufacturedgoods-that is in the first place-and itis more or less u.nder-paid in the prices for agriculturalproduce-that is in the second place.This is an additional tax levied on the peasantryfor the sake of promoting industry, whichcaters for the whole country, the peasantry included.(SCW tr.r65.)In order to implement this poiicy it was necessaryto maintain the dictatorship of the proletariat and theworker-peasant alliance, in which the masses of thepeasantry joined with the proletariat in the struggleagainst the kulaks:The alliance of the proletariat with the peasantrvis an alliance of the working class with the labouringmasses of the peasantry. Such an alliance cannotbe effective without a struggle against capitalistelements in the peasantry, against the kulaks. Suchan alliance cannot be a stable one unless the poorpeasants are organised as the bulwark of the work-

ing class in the countryside. That is why the alliancebetween the workers and peasants under thepresent conditions of the dictatorship of theproletariat can be effected only in accordance withLenin's well-known slogan : rely on the poor peasants,Lruild a stable alliance with the middle peasants,and never cease fighting against the kulaks.For only iby applying this slogan can the main massof the peasantry be drawn into the channel ofsocialist construction. (SCW r l.ror.)tJnder Stalin's leadership these tasks were accomplished.In a backward country, ruined by war andcivil war, surounded by enernies, a socialist state wascreated, the first in the world, with a modern industry,modern agriculture, and a modern army strong enoughto withstand and destroy the armed might of fascistGermany, which had been built up by the imperialistsfor the express purpose of destroying socialism. Forthese reasons Stalin is assured of a place in history bvthe side of Lenin.g.'Left' and Right DeuiationsBesides the difficulties inherent in the objectivesituation, there were others arising from the lack ofunity in the subjective forces of the revolution. Formany years the leadership was openly divided. TheLeninists, led by Lenin and later by Staljn, were opposed'by several groups, led by Trotsky, Bukharin andothers, who were often divided among themselves butat one in their opposition to Lenin and Stalin. Twomain lines of opposition emerged, one led by Trotskv,who maintained that, unless there was a revolution inthe West, the Soviet republic r,r'as bound to collapse,and the other by Bukharin, who maintained that thekulaks should not be coerced but allor.r,ed to 'grow.tt2peacefully into socialism'. These two lines exemplify the'Left' and Right forms of opportunism, which havebeen discussed in Chapter I.In r9o5, when Lenin formulated his theory of ouninterruptedrevolution', Trotsky put forward in oppositionto it his own theory of 'permanent revolution',borrowing the name from Marx. According to thistheory, the proletariat, having overthrown the Tsar,will find itself in conflict with the masses of the peasantryand will be unable to maintain itself in powerwithout state support from the proletariat of the West,that is, without a proletarian revolution in the West. Inkeeping with this theory, Trotsky refused to concludethe peace negotiations at Brest-Litovsk, on the groundthat to make peace with the German imperialists wouldbe to betray the coming revolution in Germany. Thiswas described by Lenin as a 'strange and monstrous'decision (LCW zl.68); and, if he had not succeeded inreversing it, the Soviet reputrlic would undoubtedlyhave collapsed,.Of course, Lenin recognised that the revolution inRussia might fail; but he maintained that, even if itdid fail, it would still mark an advance in the worldrevolution, and that it was only through a series ofsuch attempts, none of them completely suocessful, thatthe r"rltimate victory of world socialism wouid besecured :We are not in a position to call forth at will asocialist revolution in the West, which is the onlyatrsolute guarantee against restoration in Russia. Buta relative and conditional 'guarantee', that is onethat would raise the greatest possible obstacles torestoration, lies in carrying out the revolution inRussia in the most far-reaching, consistent and determinedmanner possible. The more far-reaching therevolution is, the more difficult it will be to restoreI I3

the old order and the more gains will remain even ifrestoration does take place. (LCW ry827.)It would be a fatal mistake to declare that, sincethere is a discrepalrcy between our economic 'forces'and our political strength, it 'follorvs' that we shouldnot have seized power. Such an argument can beadvanced only by a 'man in a muffler', who forgetsthat there will ahvays be such a 'discrepancy', that italways exists in the development of nature andsociety alike, and that only by a series of attemptseachof which, taken by itself, will be one-sided andsuffer from certain inconsistencies-will completesocialism be created by the revolutionary cooperatiorrof the proletarians oI all countries. (LCW32.33e.)It will be seen that, apart from the name, Trotsky'stheory of 'permanent revolution' has nothing in commonwith IVIarx's theory except the idea of 'simultaneity',which proved in the event to be mistaken.Trotsky failed to distinguish the two stages of therevolution and denied a revolutionary role to the peasantry.This was the Menshevik position. Like theMensheviks, he failed to see that the differentiation ofthe peasantry after Igo5 was making them more, notless, revolutionary; for the peasant masses were beingdrau,n closer to the urban proletariat, and at the sametime the struggle against Tsarism,. u'hich involved theentire pcasantry, was becoming more aclrte :rr+Tlris task is being 'rvrongly tacLled in Nashe Slouoby Trotsky, who is repeating his 'original' rQo5 theoryand refuses to give some thought to the reason why, inthe course of ten years, life has been by-passing thissplendid theory of his.From the Bolsheviks Trotsky's original theory hasborrowed their call for a decisive proletarian revoiutionarystruggle, while from the Mensheviks it hasborrowed 'repudiation' of the role of the peasantry. . . .A whole decade-the great decade of rgo5-15-hasshown the existence of two, and only two, class linesin the Russian revolution. The differentiation of thepeasantry has enhanced the class struggle withinthem; it has aroused many hitherto politically dormantelements. It has dralvn the rural proletariatcloser to the urtran proletariat. . . . However, the antap;onismbetween the peasantry, on the one hand, andthe Markovs, Romanovs and Khvostovs, on the other,has becorne stronger and more acute. This is such anobvious truth that not even the 'thousands of phrasesin ihe scores of Trotsky's Paris articles will 'refute' it.Trotsky is in fact helping the liberal-lirbour politiciansin Russia, who hy 'repudiation' of the role of thepeasantry understand a refusal to rouse the peasantsfor tlre revolution. (LCW zt.4rg-zo.)Lenin's opinion of Trotsky's theoretical and politicalline may be seen in the follorving comments :Trotsky distorts Bolshevism, because he has neverbeen able to form any definite views on the role ofthe proletariat in the Russian bourgeois revolution.(LCW r6.38o.)And that fact proves we u/ere right in callingTrotsky a representative of the 'worst remnants offactionalism'" . . .LTnder cover of 'non-factionalism' Trotsky ischampioning tl.re interests of a group abroad rvliichparticularly lacks definite principles and has no basisin the working-class movement in Russia.All that glitters is not eold. There is much glitterand sound in Trotsl

important question of Marxism. He always contrivesto worm hii way into the cracks of any differenceof opinion, and desert one side for the other. (LCW20.447.)In a letter dated February tg, rgr7, he wrote :Trotsky arrived, and this scoundrel at onceganged up with the right wing of Nouy Mir againstthe Left Zimmerwaldists ! ! That's it ! ! That'sTrotsky for vou ! ! always true to himself-twists,swindles, poses as a left, helps the right, so long ashe can.. . (LCW 35.zBB, cf. zB5.)At the end of rgzo Trotsky produced a pamphlet inwhich he attacked the Party line on developing tradeunion democracy. Lenin criticised it as follows :My principal material is Comrade Trotsky'spamphlet, The Role and Tasks of the TradeUnions. When I compare it with the theses hesubmitted to the Central Committee, and go over itvery carefully, I am amazed at the number oftheoretical mistakes and glaring blunders it contains.. . .IIe has, I am quite sure, made a number ofmistakes bearing on the very essence of the dictatorshipof the proletariat. (LCW 32.rg-2e, cf. 36.595.)In t93o, fighting for the Leninist line against both'Left' and Right deviations, Stalin made the followinganalysis of Trotskyism :What is the essence of Trotskyism?The essence of Trotskyism is, first of all, denial ofthe possibility of completely building socialism inthe U.S.S.R. by the efforts of the working class andpeasantry of our country. What does this mean? Itmeans that, if a victorious world revolution does notcome to our aid in the near future, we shall have torr6surren er to the bourgeoisie and clear the way for abourgeois-democratic republic. Consequently, wehave here the bourgeois denial of the possibility ofcompletely building socialism in our country, disguisedby 'revolutionary' phrases about the victoryof the world revolution. . . .The essence of Trotskyism is, secondly, denial ofthe possibility of drawing the main mass of thepeasantry into the work of socialist construction inthe countryside. What does this mean? It meansthat the working class is incapable of leading thepeasantry in the work of transferring the individualpeasant farms to collectivist lines, that, if the victorybf tne world revolution does not come to the aid ofthe working class in the near future, the peasantrywill restore the old bourgeois order. . . .The essence of Trotskyism is, lastln denial of thenecessity for iron discipline in the Party, recognitionof freedom for factional groupings in the Party,recognition of the need to form a Trotskyist party.According to Trotskyism, the C'P.S.U.(B.) must notbe a singie, united militant party, but a collection ofgroups and factions, each with its own centre, itsown discipline, its own press, and so forth. Whatdoes this mean? It means proclaiming freedom forpolitical factions in the Party. It means thatireedom for political groupings in the Party must befollowed by freedom for political parties in thecountry, that is, bourgeois democracy. . . .Capitulation in practice as the content, 'Left'phrases and revolutionary adventurist postures as theiorrn, disguising and advertising the defeatistcontent-such is the essence of Trotskyism'This duality of Trotskyism reflects the duality inthe position of the urban petty bourgeoisie, Which isbeing ruined, cannot tolerate the 'regime' of thedictatorship of the proletariat and is striving eithertt7

to jump into socialism 'at one go' in order to avoidbeing ruined (hence aduenturism and hysteri.cs inpolicy), or, if this is impossible, to make everyconceivable concession to capitalism (hence capitulationinpolicy). (SCW t2.364.)At the same congress Stalin analysed the Rightdeviation, led by Bukharin, Rykov and Tomsky :It cannot be said that the Right deviators donot admit the possibility of completely buildingsocialism in the U.S.S.R. No, they do admit it, andthat distinguishes them from the Trotskyists. Butthe misfortune of the Right deviators is that, wtrileformally admitting that it is possible to buildsocialism in one country) they refuse to recognisethe ways and means of struggle without which it isimpossible to build socialism. . . . They think thatsocialism can be built on the quiet, automatically,without class struggle, without an offensive againstthe capitalist elements. They think that the capitalistelements will either die out imperceptibly orelse grow into socialism. Since, however, suchmiracles do not happen in history, ,it follows thatthe Right deviators are in fact slipping into theviewpoint of denying the possibil'ity of completelybuilding socialism in our country.Nor can it be said that the Right deviators denythat it is possible to drar,v the main mass of thepeasantry into the work of building socialism inthe countryside. No, they admit that it ispossible, and that distinsuishes them from theTrotskyists. But, while admitting it formally, theywill not accept the ways and means without whichit is impossible to draw the peasantry into thework of building socialism. . . . They think that thechief thing now is not a high rate of industrialdevelopment, and not collective farms and stater t8farms, but to 'release' the elemental forces of themarket, to 'emancipate' the market and to 'removethe shackles' from the individual farms, up to andincluding those of the capitalist elements in thecountryside. Since, however, the kulaks cannotgrow in,to socialism, and 'emancipating' the marketmeans arming the kulaks and disarming the workingclass, it follows that the Right deviators are infact slipping into the viewpoint of denying that itis possible to draw the main mass of the peasantryinto the work of building socialism. . . .The Right deviators do not take tihe stand offorming another party, and that is another thingthat distinguishes them from the Trotskyists. Theleaders of the Right deviators have openlyadmitted their mistakes and have surendered tothe Party. But it would be foolish to think on thesegrounds that the Right deviation is already buried.The strength of Right opportunism is not measuredby this circumstance. The strength of Right opportunismlies in the strength of the petty-bourgeoiselemental forces, in the strength of the pressure onthe Party exercised by the capitalist elements ingeneral and by the kulaks in particular. . . .That is how matters stand as regards the 'Left'and Right deviations in the Party.The task is to continue the uncompromisingstruggle oz two t'ronts, against the 'Lefts', whorepresent petty-bourgeois radicalism, and againstthe Riglrts, who represent petty-bourgeois liberalzsrz.(SCW nq64-72.)It only remains to add that in professing to admittheir mistakes the Rightists were guilty of deception.It was subsequently shown at the Moscow trials thatboth groups were working for the counter-revolution.II9

4.The New BourgeoisieThe proletarian revolution puts an end to exploitation,but not to class struggle. Even after the collectivisationof agriculture, there remains a contradiction in theeconornic base between the collective farms, which areowned by the collective, and the state farms, whichare state-owned. Within the collective, each family hasits own holding, with the right to sell its produce onthe open market. Thus, the peasantry is still tied tosmall commodity production. So, toq are thehandicraft-workers. The proletariat enjoys a higherstandard of living than the peasantry, correspondingto the division between, town and country, which hasbeen inherited from oapitalist society. In industry itselfthere is a contradiction between the collective characterof labour and the individual character of wages.The capitalists, landowners and kulaks have been expropriated,but they are still active, many of thembeing employed in the government and public services.Lenin warned repeatedly that, apart from the dangerof foreign intervention, there still existed wit'hinthe Soviet system conditions giving rise to the possibilityof a capitalist restoration :The transition from capitalism to communismtakes an entire historical epocitr. Until this epoch isover, the exploiters inevitably cherish the hope ofrestoration, and this hope tutns into attempts atrestoration. (LCW z9,z54.)The bourgeoisie are emerging, not only fromamong our Soviet governmen;t employees-only avery few can emerge from their ranks-but fromthe ranks of the peasants and handicraftsmen. .. .Itshows that even in Russia capitalist commodity productionis alive, operating, developing and givingI20rise to a bourgeoisie, just as it does in every capitalistsociety. (LCW z9.r89)As long as we live in a srnall-peasant country,there is a surer economic basis for capitalism inRussia than for communism. This must be borne inmind. Anyone who has carefully observed life in thecountryside, as compared with life in the towns,knows that we have not torn out the roots ofcapitalism and have not undermined the foundation,the basis, of the internal enemy. The latterdepends on small-scale production, and there is onlyone way of undermining it, namely, to place theeconomy of the country, including agriculture, on anew technical basis, the technical basis of modernlarge-scale production. (LCW 3 L5 r 6.)Lenin's warning was repeated by Stalin :Have we in our Soviet country any of the conditionsthat would make the restoration of capitalismpossible? Yes, we have. That, comrades, mayappear strange, but it is a fact. We have overthrowncapitalism, we have established the dictatorshipof the proletariat, we are developing oursocialist industry at a rapid pace and arc linkingpeasant economy with it. But we have not yet tornout the roots of capitalism. Where are these rootsimbedded ? They are imbedded in commodity production,in small production in the towns andespecially the countryside. (SCW r r.235.)This new bourgeoisie could not work openlyexceptabroad, where the 6migr6s were very activeand well-organised-but it had its own ideology,known as Smena-Vekhism, which Stalin described asfollows:Smena-Vekhism is the ideology of the new bourgeoisie,which is growing and little by little linking5-hITMTT 3 't2l

up with the kulaks and ttre intelligentsia in thegovernment service. The new bourgeoisie has putforward its own ideology, the Smena-Vekh ideology,which consists in the view that the Communist Partyis bound to degenerate and the new bourgeoisie toconsolidate itself, while it appears that, without ourselvesnoticing it, we Bolsheviks are bound to reac,hthe threshold of the democratic republic, then tocross that threshold, and, with th,e assistance ofsome 'Caesar', who wi]l come forward, perhaps fromthe ranks of the military or perhaps from thegovernment ser-vice officials, to find ourselves in theposition of an ordinary bourgeois republic. (SCW7 $50.)The progress of our industry, the progness of ourtrading and co-operative Lrodies, the improvement ofour state apparatus, is progress and improvement ofbenefit to the rvorking class, of benefit to the mainrnass of the peasantry, but of disadvantage to thenew bourgeoisie, of disadvantase to the middlestrata generally and to the urban middle strata inparticular. Is it to be wondered at that discontentwith the Soviet regirne is growing among thesestrata? Hence the counter-revolutionary moods inthese circles. Henoe the Smena-Vekhist ideology as afashionable commodity on the political market ofthe new bourgeoisie. (SCW ro.3e5.)One of the most effective weapons in the hands ofthe new bourgeoisie was bureaucracy. This was oneof the evils inherited from the old regime :Under capitalism, democracy is restricted,cramped, curtailed, mutilated by all the conditionsof wage-slavery and the poverty and misery of thepeople. This, and this alone, is the reason why thefunctionaries of our political organisations andItrade unions are corrupted-or rather tend to becorrupted-by the conditions of capitalism andbetray a tendency to become bureaucrats, that is,privileged persons divorced from the people andstanding aboue the people. That is the essence ofbureaucracy, and until the capitalists have beenexpropriated and the bourgeoisie overthrown, evenproletarian functionaries will inevitably be 'bureaucratised'to a certain extent. (LCW 25.486.)The tra.ining of new proletarian administrators wasnecessarily a slow process, and mean,while many ofthe old officials ,had to be retained. Many of thesewere secretly hostile to the new regime, and all ofthem clung to the old methods and values :We now have a vast army of government employees,but lack sufficiently educated forces toexercise real control over them. In practice it oftenhappens that here at the top, where we exercisepolitical power, the machine functions somehow. ...Down below, however, there are hundreds ofthousands of old officials, whom we took over fromtihe Tsar and from bourgeois society, and who, inpart deliberately and in part unwittingly, workagainst us. (LCW BZ.42B, cf . zg.gz.)When we are told. . . that the state farms everywhereare hiding-places for old landowners slightlydisguised or not disguised at all, and that similarthings are often to be orbserved in chief administration.and central boards, I never doubt that it istrue. (LCW 30.245.)Stalin drerv attention to the same evil in even sharperterms :f am referring to the bureaucratic elements to befound in our party, government, trade-union, co-122 r23

operative and all other organisations. I am referringto the bureaucratic elements who batten onour weaknesses and errors, who fear like the plagueall criticism by the masses, all control by themasses, and hinder us in developing self-criticismand ridding ourselves of our weaknesses and errors.Bureaucracy in our organisations must not beregarded merely as routine and red tape. Bureaucracyis a manifestation of bourgeois influence onour organisations. (SCW tr.r37, cf. LCW 3z.r9r.)The danger was all the greater because, owing to theshortage of cadres, bureaucratic practices were penetratinginto the Party itself :It was only to be expected that red tape in theSoviet apparatus would penetrate into the Partyapparatus, because the two are intimately interwoven.(LCW 3r.435, cf. 42t, SCW 6.ro.)The key feature is that we have not got theright men in the right places; that responsibleCommunists, wlho acquitted themselves magnificentlyduring the revolution, Lrave been givencommercial and industrial functions about whichthey know nothing; and they prevent us fromseeing the trutih, for rogues and rascals hide themselvesmagnificently behind their backs. (LCW33.304)All shrewd whiteguards are definitely bankingon the fact that the alleged proletarian characterof our Party does not in the least safeguard itagainst the small-proprietor elements gainingpredominance in it, and very rapidly too. (LCW33.254,cf. r87, 3I.r r5.)AII the work of all our economic bodies suffersmost of all from bureaucracy. Communists haver2+IIilrIIlbecome bureaucrats. If anything will destroy us, itis this. (LCW 35.549, cf .32.24,56.)Even when it did not serve as a screen forcounter-revolutionaries, bureaucracy was dangerous,because, by placing administration above politics, italienated the masses from the Party, and so underminedthe basis of the dictatorship of the proletariat:The task is to learn to organise the workproperly, not to lag behind, to remove friction intime, not to separate administration from politics;for our administration and our politics rcst on theability of the entire vanguard to maintain contactwith the entire mass of the proletariat and theentire mass of the peasantry. If anyone forgets thesecogs and becomes wholly absorbed in administration,the result will be disastrous. (LCW 33.egg)In the sea of the people we are after all but adrop in the ocean, and we can administer onlywhen we express correctly what the people areconscious of. Unless we can do this, the CommunistParty will not lead the proletariat, the proletariatwill not lead the masses, and the whole machinewill collapse. (LCW 33.3o4JIn considering the problem of bureaucracy, Leninhad little patience with those who, like Trotsky,treated it as though it could be solved by speechmaking:It will take 'decades to overcome the evils ofbureaucracy. It is a very difficult struggle, andanyone who says we oan rid ourselves of bureaucraticpractices overnight by adopting antibureaucraticplatforms is nothing but a quack witha bent for fine words. (LCW 32.56, cf. 68, 89,33.428, 48r.)125

5. The Need f or a Cultural ReuolutionWhat made the struggle against bureaucracy so difficultwas that it had to be conducted simultaneously inthe economic basis and in the ideological superstructure.On the one hand, being rooted in. small cornmodityproduction, it could not be completely eradicateduntil the whole economy had been reconstructedon the basis of large-scale socialist production;on the other, it was itself one of the main obstacles toremoved, might reverse the whole process.Lenin understood that the key to tihe problem laywith trhe masses. If the masses could be aroused totake the initiative in developing production, workingnot for private gain tb'r.rt for the common good, theywould both overcome in themselves the ideologicalobstacles inherited from the old society and recognisethe need to take the work of administration into theirown hands,In regard to production, the masses had alreadydemonstrated their initiative in the subbotniks. Duringthe civil war, when Kolchak's armies were threateningto overwhelm the young Soviet republic, the railwayworkers of Moscow organised teams for voluntary overtimelabour in the railway yards; and within a fewweeks the movement spread like wildfire to all theprincipal railway centres and to other industries. Greetingthese workers, Lenin said :Evidently this is only a beginning, but it is abeginning of exceptionally great importance. It is thebegin,ning of a revolution which is more difficult,more tangible, more radical, more decisive than theoverthrow of the bourgeoisie; for it is a victory overour own conservatism, indiscipline, petty-bourgeoisegoism, a victory over rtrabits left as a heritage to theworkers and peasants by accursed capitalism. Onlyrz6when liis victory has been consolidated will the newsocial discipline, socialist discipline, be createdl then,and only then, will a reversion to capitalism becomeimpossible and communism become really invincible.(LCW zg.4tr.)In regard to administration, it was of course necessaryfor the workers to raise their educational andcultural level, but that in itself was not enough. If theywere to put an end to bureaucracy, it was necessarythat they should themselves participate in the work ofgovernment. Only then would the Soviet systembecome government by, and not merely f or, the people.Speaking at the Eighth Party Congress (r9rg), Leninsaid:We can fight rbureaucracy to the bitter end, tocomplete victory, only when the whole populationparticipates in the work of government. In the bourgeoisrepublics not only is this impossible, but the lawitself preuen r ir. The rbest of the bourgeois republics,no matter how democratic they may be, have thousandsof legal hindrances which prevent people fromparticipating in the work of government. What wehave done is to remove these hind,rances, but so farwe have not reached the stage at which the workingpeople could participate in government. Apart fromthe law, there is still the level of culture, which youcannot subject to any law. The result of tnLis lowcultural level is that the Soviets, which in virtue oftheir prograrnme are organs of government by theworking people, are in fact organs of government for,the working people hy the advanced section of theproletariat, not by the working people as a whole. . . .Bureaucracy has been defeated. The exploitershave been eliminated. But the cultural level has notbeen raised, and therefore the trureaucrats are stilloccupying their old positions. They can be forced tot27

etreat only if the proletariat and peasantry areorganised far more extensively than they have beenhitherto, and only if real measures are taken to enlistthe workers in government. (LCW zg.r83.)Lenin returned to his theme at the Eleventh Congress(rgzz)-the last that he attended,; and early in 19t3, inone of his last articles, he issued a call for a 'culturalrevolution' :Our opponents have told us repeatedly ,that wewere rash in undertaking to implant socialism in aninsufficiently cultured country. They were misled bythe fact o,f our having started from the opposite endto the one prescribed hy theory-the theory ofpedants of all kinds. In our country the political andsocial revolution preceded the cultural revolution,that same cultural revolution which nevertheless confrontsus now. (LCW n.+7+.)Lenin's call was repeated by Stalin :The surest remedy for bureaucracy is raising thecultural level of the workers and peasants. One cancurse and denounce , ureaucracy in the state apparatus,one can stigmatise and pillory bureaucracy inour practical worrk; but, unless the masses of theworkers reach a certain level of cutrture, which willcreate the possibility, the desire, the ability, to controlthe state apparatus, bureaucracy will continue to existin spite of everything. Therefore, the cultural developmentof the working class and of the masses of theworking peasantry, not only the development ofliteracy-although literacy is the trasis of all culturebutprimarily the cultivation of the ability to take partin the administration of the country, is the chief leverfor improving the state and every other apparatus.This is the sense and significance of Lenin's sloganabout the cultural revolution. (SCW lo.33o, cf. r r.4o.)rzBLastly, our economic organisations. . . .IIow are weto put an end to bureaucracy in all these organisations?There is only one sole way of doing this, andthat is to organise control from below, to organisecriticism of the 'bureaucracy in our institutions, oftheir shortcomings and mistakes, by the vast rnasses ofthe working class. (SCW I r.77.)Granted the need for a cultural revolution, whatform was it to take? This problem was not solved. TheSoviet workers and, peasants had succeeded, in theface of almost insuperable difficulties, in buildingtheir own statel but, for the reasons given, they didnot succeed in bringing it completely under theircontrol.6. The Class Struggle in Socialist SocietyIn February r93r Stalin uttered this prophetic warnlng:We are fifty ol a hundred years behind theadvanced countries. We must make good this distancein ten years. Either we do it, or we gounder. (SCW r3.4r.)Two years later the Nazis seized power in Germany.Rather than face the possibility of a Communistmajority in parliament, the German monopoly capitalists,supported tby other monopoly capitalists of theWest, discarded the bourgeois parliamentary system,which had .served them hitherto as a screen, andinstalled an open dictatorship in preparation for whatwas to be the final confrontation with the SovietUnion. It is hgainst this background of intensive warpreparations that Stalin's handling of internal classconuadictions must be judged.In 1933 the first. five-year plan was completed; inr29

Ig37 the second five-year plan was completed' Thedifficulties were immense-inexperience, incompetence'and, above all sabotage; yet they were all overcome,thanks to what I-enin had called 'mass heroism inplain, everyday work' (LCW 29.+4).^ In January 1933, reviewing the results of the firstfive-year plan, Stalin said :We must rbear in mind that the growth of thepower of the Soviet state will intensify the resistanceLi ttr" last remnants of the dying classes. It isprecisely because they are dying and their days arenumibered that they will go on from one form ofattack to another, sharper form, appealing to thetrackward sections of the population and mobilisingthem against the Soviet regime. (SCW r3.zI6.)A year later, reviewing the Progress of the secondfive-year pian, he said :But can we say that we have already overcome allthe survivals of capitalism in economic life? No, wecannot say that. Still less can we say that we haveovercome the survivals of capitalism in people'sminds. We cannot say that, not only because thedevelopment of people's minds trails behind theireconomic position, but because we are still surroundedby capitalist countries, which are trying torevive and sustain the survivals of capitalism ineconomic li,fe and in the minds of the people of theU.S.S.R., and against which we Bolsheviks mustatrways keep our powder'dry.It stands to reason that these survivals cannot butcreate a favourable soil for the revival of theideology of the defeated anti'Leninist groups in theminds of individual memrbers df our Party. . . .That is why we cannot say that the fight is endedr30II)iiIII.lIIand that there is no longer any need for the policy ofthe socialist offensive. (SCW t3.356.)Thus, according to these two statements, the remnantsof the exploiting classes, supported by the capitalistpowers, were still endeavouring to mdbilise backwardsections of the Soviet people against the regime. Theclass struggle was not only continuing but growingsharper.In l936 a new constitution was adopted, whichguaranteed equal rights for all, 'irrespective of race,nationality, religion, standard of education, domicile,social origin, property status, or past activities'. It was,as Stalin claimed, the most democratic constitution inthe world. ,Introducing it in November of that year, hesaid :The landlord class, as you know, had already beeneliminated as a result of the victorious conclusion ofthe civil war. As for the other exploiting classes, theyhave shared the fate of the landlord class. The capitalistclass in the sphere of industry has ceased toexist. The kulak class in the sphere of agriculture hasceased ,to exist. And the merchants and profiteers inthe sphere of trade have ceased to exist. Thus, all theexploiting classes have now heen eliminated. (SLs6s)The draft of the new Constitution of the U.S.S.R.proceeds from the fact that there are no longer anyantagonistic classes in society. . . . (SL 57 r.)Here the exploiting classes have been eliminated; theclass struggle, it would seem, is at an end.In March 1937, calling for greater vigilance withinthe Party in defending it fnom infiltration by counterrevolutionaryagents, Stalin said :It is necessary to shatter and discard the rottentheory to the effect that with every step of progressI3I

that we make the class struggle here is bound to diemore and more, that in proportion to the growth ofour successes the class enemy becornes more andmoretamed....On the contrary, the greater our progress, thegreater our successes, the rnore embittered the remnantsof the smashed, exploiting classes will become,the more quickly they will resort to sharper forms ofstruggle, the more they will do damage to the Sovietstate, the more they will clutch at the most desperatemeans of struggle as the last resort of the doomed.We must ,bear in mind that the remnants of therouted classes in the U.S.S.R. are not alone. Theyhave direct support from our enemies beyond theborders of the U.S.S.R. It would be a mistake tosuppose that the sphere of the class struggle isbounded iby the frontiers of the U.S.S.R. While oneend of the class struggle operates wiurain theU.S.S.R., its other end extends into the bourgeoisstates around us. (SMT z6z.)Here 'the class struggle is again envisaged as continuingand growing more acute.Finally, in his report to the Eighteenth PartyCongress in March 1939, Stalin said :While capitalist society is torn by irreconcilablecontradictions between workers and capitalists andbetween peasants and landlords-resulting in itsinternal instability-Soviet society, liberated fromthe yoke of exploitation; knows no such contradictions,is free of class conflicts, and presents a pictureof friendly collaboration between workers, peasantsand intellectuals. (SL 645.)Here Soviet society is again presented as being free ofclass antagonisms.How are these discrepancies to be explained? Beforer32attempting to answer this question, we must considerthe measures taken d,uring these years to defeat thecounter-revolutionary forces.On the one hand, a nurnber of political leaders,including Bukharin, Rykov and Zinoviev, also severalarmy generals and a chief of police, were tried andconvicted of treason and executed. Common to allthese was the conviction that in the coming war aGerman victory was inevitable. In addition, a largenumber of spies and other enemy agents were eliminated.There can be little doubt that, if thesemeasures had not been taken, the Soviet Union wouldhave been destroyed. On the other hand, in the courseof their counter-espionage activities, the securitypolice, who were subject to no effective control, arrestedon false charges many tens of thousands ofinnocent persons, and large numbers of these wereexecuted without trial. These repressive rneasures weredirected not so much against the workers and peasants,who were relatively unaffected, as against theintelligentsia and above all the Party itself. Not onlydid a large proportion of the victims consist of Partymembers, but many of these were among Stalin's mostloyal supporters. The only intelligible explanation ofthese events is the one that was current at the timeand suibsequently endorsed at the Twentieth PartyCongress (tgS6). Enemy agents had penetrated intothe higher ranks of the security police. Stalin acceptedresponsibility for the purges, and, admitted that theyhad been accompanied by 'grave mistakes' (SL 6a9).They show how narrow was the margin by which thecounter-revolution f ailed.These criminal violations of civic rights stand inflagrant contradiction to the new constitution, inwhich those rights were guaranteed; and this contradictionis clearly related to the contradiction alreadynoted in Stalin's analysis of the state of classes inI33

Soviet society. Returning to his aualysis, we ask, whatwas the actual situation ? Was the class struggle grow_ing more acute, or was it dying away?During these years a new socialist economy had, been constructed. Capitalist ownership had beenreplaced by socialist ownership, small_scale productionby large-scale production. B"i the socialisi transfor_mation of. the political and ideological superstructurestill remained to be carried thro"ugh. A new stateapparatus had been .created, contrJled tlrrough thefarty.by the proletariat, but the masses were not yetfully involved in it. On the contrary, it had becometo some extent alienated from the masses through thebureaucratic practices of bourgeois officials *io o"_cupied privileged positions in ii. Bureaucratic tenden_cies. were also growing in the party itself. The oldexpioiting classes had been expropriated, but by nomeans eliminated. Many formei lurdo*.r".s and tapi_talists had found employment in the public serrric'es,and former kulaks had joined the collective farms.These. people had lost their property, but not theirtraditions and habits and outlook- on 'life. The massesof the peasants in the collective farms still retained thementality of the small proprietor. The proletariat itselfhad met the needs of -industrial development byrecruiting la_rge nurnbers from the peasantryr- and thesetoo. ibrought with-them thiir petiy_bourgeoisprejudices. Thanks to the rapid expansion of the -edu_cational system, the ^had masses raised their culturallevel,. and .illiteracyhad rbeen almost entirely atbolished,but this still fell short of the cultural revolution whichI-.enin had regarded as necessary in order to involvethe masses in the work of government. For thesereasons, the final issue of the class struggle had still tobe fought out, and, if the proletariat ltould relax itsleadership, the expropriated classes would redoubletheir efforts to recover what they had lost.A study of Stalin's speeches to Party cadres duringthis period shows that he was keenly aware of thedanger that the Party might allow its ties with themasses to be corroded by 'bureaucratic rust' (SMTz7B). He saw the danger and warned them repeatedlyagainst it, but, perhaps because he was himself inclinedto rely too much on 'pure ad,ministration' (l,CW36.6o6), he was unable to prevent it; and it was throughthis weakness in the socialist defen,ces that the enemyfound his way in. If 'the ,masses had heen roused to takethe class struggle into ,their own hands and carrv itthrough to the end, taking care to distinguish betweenfriends and enemies, they would have been able toisolate the counter-revolutionaries in their midst and atthe same.time to provide a check on the activities of thesecurity po ice.The answer to our question, therefore, is that, farfrom dying away, the resistan.ce of the expropriatedclasses was continuing and assuming new forms, whichwere more insidious than the old and therefore evenmore dangerous. In these circumstances, it was vitallynecessary to maintain and strengthen the dictatorship ofthe proletariat, as Lenin had foreseen.From all this it may,be concluded that Stalin follo'rvedthe Leninist line down to r935, but that suLrsequently, asthe pressure of capitalist encirclement increased, hedeparted from it in two ways. On the one hand, the newconstitution rested on the assumption that, so far asinternal relations were concerned, the dictatorship of theproletariat could be relaxed; and {or this reason it waswelcomed by the new trourgeoisie, who accepted it as aconfirmation of their privileges. This was a Rightdeviation. On the other hand, since the dictatorship ofthe proletariat could not in fact tre relaxed, it wasmaintained by administrative methods as a function ofthe security police (SCW 13.16o). This was a 'Left'deviation-the error of what Lenin had called 'overr34r35

ad,ministration'*which had already manifested itself inthe leftist excesses that had marred the struggle againstthe kulaks (SCW 12.368). The rwo deviations complementedand supported one another. Enemies weretreated as friends and friends as enemies.In this connection, it is noteworthy that in hisDialectical and Historical Matcrialism Qg3B), Stalin didnot distinguish between antagonistic and nonantagonisticcontradictions, nor did rhe point out that,according as they are handled, antagonistic contradictionsmay becorne non-antagonistic and non-antagonisticcontradictions may become an,tagonistic. This is one ofthe points at which Mao Tse-tung's treatment of dialecticsmarks an important advance.7.The New ReoisionismAs the Soviet Union grew strong.gr, the contradictionsamong the imperialist powers became more acute. Theywere united in, their hostility to the first socialist state,divided in the face of its increasing might. This divisionwas reflected in each country within,the ruling class. InBritain, the section represented by Chamberlain, then inthe majority, was encouraging Hitler to attack theSoviet Union in the hope that he would both destroysocialism and weaken himself in the process, so thatBritain would emerge as the strongest power in Europe.Stalin offered Britain and France a mutual securitypact, whioh, had it been accepted, would [rave preventedthe war. When it became clear that it was notgoing to be accepted, he signed a non-aggression pactwith Hitler, who then attacked in the West, and lateroverran the Balkans, thus threatening British interests inthe Middle East. Meanwhile Chamberlain had beenreplaced by Churohill, who represented that section ofthe ruling class which regarded Hitler as the moreimmediate enemy. Having strengthened his position inr36the West, Hitler was now ready to attack in the East,and made a bid for British support; but Churchillreplied by ranging Britain, with the support of theBritish people, on the side of the Soviet IJnion. This didnot mean that the British ruling class had abandoned itsobjective. Only its tactics had changed. C,hurchill's aimwas to give the Soviet Union such support as would enableher to defeat Germany, thereby exhausting herselfand leaving Britain as the real victor. 'Once more theymiscalculated. The Soviet people suffered incalculablelosses-fifteen million dead, twenty-five millionhomeless, material damage exceeding the output oftwo five-year plans; but they won. The first socialiststate had saved the world from fascism and opened the *way for the last stage of imperialism-the stage of itsfinal collapse.Meanwhile, hower.er, the internal contradictionsremained. They might have been resolved, if ttherehad been a call to the masses to complete the victoryover the external enemy by defending the dictatorshipof the proletariat against those who were underminingit from within; but that call was not given. Faced witha renewal of imperialist pressure, bringing the threatof a new war, Stalin resorted to the same measures asbefore-further concessions to the new bourgeoisiecombined with further repression. It may be that,after twenty-five years, his powers of leadership werefailing. No other statesman in history had carried soheavy a burden for so long.The bureaucracy was now entrenching itself as aprivileged class, cut off from the workers and peasantsby a large and growing income gap. Some flagrantcases of bourgeois corruption were exposed at theNineteenth Party Congress (rg5z). After Stalin's deathin rq53 there was a struggle for power, resulting inthe arrest and execution of Beria, who had been incharge of the security police since rg3B; and theI37

leadership then passed into the hands of the newbourgeoisie, represented by Khrushchev.Khrushchev's aim was to establish the new bourgeoisieas trhe ruling class in a system of trureaucraticstate capitalism. He did not, of course, formulate hispolicy in these terms but, following the examptre ofBernstein and Kautsky, presented it in the for:n of aseries of 'amendments' to Marxism.According to Marxism-Leninism, ttre form of statewhich must necessarily prevail during the transitionfrom capitalisrn to 6666sn156-that is, throughoutthe period of socialism-is the dictatorship of theproletariat. According to Khrushchev and the newrevisionists, tthe dictatorship of the proletariat rtradceased to exist in the Soviet Union and had beenreplaced by a 'dictatorship of the whole people'. Thisconcept is alien to Marxism. According to Marxism,the only alternative to the dictatorship of the proletar'iat in modern society is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie,and that is what Khrushchev's 'state of thewhole people' really is.According to Marxism-Leninism, the dictatorship ofthe proletariat is the highest form of dernocracy, sinceit is a dictatorship of the majority over the minority.According to Khrushchev and the new revisionists, the'state of the whole people' is more democratic thanthe dictatorship of the proletariat, because it extendsdemocracy to the whole people. This ooncept of aclassless democracy has no place in Marxism. It is abourgeois concept, which Krhrushchev adopted inonder to conceal the fact that his 'state of the wholepeople'was really a dictatorship of tihe trourgeoisie.According to Marxism-Leninism, the dictatorship ofthe proletariat is established and maintained under theleadership of the Communist Party, which, equippedwith the revolutionary theory of Marxism-Leninism,acts as a vanguard of the working class. IJnder theI3Blri')IIIleadership of Khrushchev and the new revisionists, theCommunist Party o{ the Soviet Union 'has ceased to bea vanguard party of the working class, leading thestruggle to consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat,and become a 'party of the whole people', that is,a party whose function is to maintain the dictatorshipof the bourgeoisie.According to Marxism-Leninism, the dictatorship ofthe proletariat must be maintained and consolidated,not only to cornplete the work of socialist construction,but to re-educate the workers in a spirit of socialistdiscipline, eliminating all forms of bourgeois individualismin preparation for the transition to communism.This was tlhe spirit of the subbotnik movernentand of socialist emulation, in which, under the leadershipof Lenin and Stalin, the workers had performedmiracles of collective labour. Under the leadership ofKhrushchev and the new revisionists, this spirit hasbeen abandoned in favour of 'material incentives'; andat the same time it is claimed that Soviet society isadvancing to comm"rnism. According to Marxism, theadvance from socialism to communism requires thateacth worker's share of the social product should beproportionate, not to rhis work, but to ,his needs (LCW25.472), in accordance with the principle 'all f,or eachand each for all' (LCW 4.124). The advance cannotbe rnade on the basis of material iincentives, r,Vhichrepresent the competitive element in wage-labourderived from bourgeois society (ME z.z3).According to Marxism-Leninism, the ruling classrules by force, and therefore cannot be overthrownexcept by force. In the colonies the imperialists havealways ruled by open force; in the metropolitan countriesthey ihave usually concealed the use of forcebeneath parliamentary forms; but, faced with a realthreat to their privileges, they have always been readyr39

to declare a 'state of emergency' and resort to openforce. This is what every ruling class has always done :Major questions in the life of nations are settledonly by force. The reactionary classes themselves areusually the first to resort to violence, to civil war;they are the first to 'place the bayonet on theagenda' . . . (LCW 9.I32.)According to Khrudhohev and the new revisionists, thepossibilities are growing of the transition from capitalismto socialism being effected peacefully by parliamentarymeans. There is not a single socialistcountry in which the transition has been effected in thisway; but there are several capitalist countries in which,disarmed by the illusion of 'peaceful transition', theworkers' movement has been crushed.At all these points Khrushcrtrev and the new revisionistsrhave abandoned the Marxist-Leninist theory of thedictatorship of the proletariat.One of the obstacles in Khrushchev's pat[r was theveneration in which Stalin's name was held among thecommon people, not only in the Soviet Union but allover the wo,rld. Accordingly, amidst rapturous applausefrom the imperialists, Khrushchev denounced Stalin.Instead of undertaking an objective analysis of pastachievements and failures, with a view to drawing thecorrect lessons for the future, he exploited the people'snatural revulsion at his disclosures of crimes committedunder Stalin's leadership in order to conceal, under thepretext of combating the 'personality cult', his owncalculated betrayal of Marxism-Leninism. He chose toforget that, as a member of the Party leadership himselffor many years, he too was answerable for its mistakes,and that, during Stalin's lifetime, no one had been morevociferous in praising him than he had. It is true thatthe praise of Stalin had been carried to extremes,having been inflated by bourgeois-bureaucratic officials,r-ioII:Iwho were adept at 'waving the red flag in order todestroy ttre red flag'; but essentially it was a spontaneousexpression of popular feeling. The workers andpeasants of the Soviet Union were devoted to Stalin,just as they rvere de',,oted to Lenin, because thev knewthat to them they owed everyttring.This chapter may be concluded with the words ofMao Tse-tung :The Soviet Union was the first socialist state, andthe Communist Party of the Soviet lJnion wasfounded by Lenin. Although the leadership of theSoviet Party has been usurped by revisionists, trwould urge comrades to remain firm in the convictionthat the masses of the Soviet people and ofparty members and cadres are good, that they desirerevolution, and that revisionist rule will not last long.(PR 69-rB.zz.)r4r

il:ICHAPTER VIIIThe Proletarian CulturalReuolutionThe cornmunist revolution is the most radical rupturewi,th traditional proPerty relationsl no wonderthat its development involves the most radicalrupture with traditio'^t to"1"ommunist Manif estot. National Liberationr+2The proclamation of the Chinese People's Republic inOotober lq49 marked, the victorious conclusion of a longand compie*- revolutionary war, including both civil warand anti-Japanese war, which hegan with-the fiormationof the Ctii""te Red Army (now the People's LiberationArmv) ,in rgzT and extended gradually over the whole ofChina. tt tiat essentially a peasant war (MSW z'366)-an armed struggle for the land. Peasant insurrectionshad ibeen a featuie of Chinese history for more than twothousand years. They were all 'defeated, because thepeasantry us a class is incapable of leading.a revolution''But this was a new kind of peasan't war, in which'thepeasants were led by the p.ol"tatiut and' its vanguard'ih. Co*.rr.rist Party. Its fighting force was an army ofa ndw type, close to the misses, organised on the prin-.iol", of'd.*ocratic centralism, active in production andadministration as well as in fighting, providing everywhereit went a practical exarnple of proletarian moralityand self-sacrifice in the service of the people. Theresult was that, when liberation came in rg4g, the newpeople's government had at its disposal a reserve ofexperienced cadres ready to give leadership in all thetasks of socialist construction. In addi,tion, it received forseveral years valua.ble assistance from the Soviet IJnion,and it had the Soviet experience of socialist construction,both positive and negative, to learn from.,In the summer of Ig4g, reviewing the period of armedstruggle which was .then drawing to an end, Mao Tsetungsaid :A rvell-disciplined Party armed with the theory ofMarxism-Leninism, using the method of self-criticismand linked with the masses of the people; an armyundelthe leadership of such a Party; a united front ofall revolutionary classes and all revolutionary groupsunder the leadership of such a Party-these are thethree main ,weapons with which we have defeated theenemy. . . . Relying on them, we have won basic victory.We have travelled a tortuous road. We havestruggled against opportunist deviations in our Party,;both Right and 'Left'. Whenever we rnade seriousmistakes on these three matters, the revolutionsuffered setbacks. Taught by mistakes and sebbacks,we have become wiser and handle our affairs hetter.It is hard for any political party or person to avoidmistakes, but we should make as few as possible. Oncea mistake is made, we should correct it, and the morequickly and thoroughly the better. (MSW +.422.)In order to fulfil the tasks that lay ahead, it rvasnecessary that the Party should adapt itself to the newsituation, in which the centre of the struggle had shiftedfrom the battlefield to the farms and factories andgovernment departments. In this situation the Partywould find itself faced with a new enemy, or rather withan old enemy in a new disguise :r43

Very soon we shall be victorious throughout thecountry. This victory will breach the eastern front ofimperialisrn and will have great international significance.To win this victory will not require much moretime and effort, but to consolidate it will. The bourgeoisiedoubts our ability to constmct. The imperi"alistsreckon that eventually we will beg alms fromthem in ord,er to live. With victory, certain moodsmay grow within the'Party-arrog.ance, the airs of aself-stlyled hero, inertia, and unwillingness to makepoogr"tt, love of pleasure and distaste for continuediruri tiring. With-victory, the people will be gratefulto us, andlhe hourgeoisie will come forward to flatterus. It has been proved tnlat the enemy cannot conquerus by force of a.-t' 'Ilowever, the flattery -ofthebourgeoisie may conquer the weak-willed in ourranki. There may be some Communists, who were notconquered by enemies with guns and were worthy ofthe name of 'heroes for standing up to those enemies,but who cannot withstand sugar-coated bullets; theywill be defeated by sugar-coated' bullets' We mustguard against such a situation. (MSW 48n')Chairman Mao looked to the future with cautious confidence:The Chinese revoh.rtion is great, but the road afterthe revolution will be longer, the work greater andmore arduous. This must be made clear now in theParty. The comrades must be taught to remainmodlst, prudent and free from arrogance andrashness in their style of work. The comrades mustbe taugh,t to preserve the style of plain living andhard siruggle. We have the Marxist-Leninist weaponof criticis"ri and self-criticism. We can get rid of abad style and keep the good. We can -learnwhat wedid not know' Wi are not only good at destroyingthe old world, we are also good at truilding the new'r4+iI/itIIIiIIII i'iilNot only can the Chinese people live without beggingalms from the imperialists, they will live abetter life than that in the imperialist countries.(MSw 4874.)The proclamation of the People's Republic was theoutward expression of three radical changes in Chinesesocietv.Firk, the completion of the struggle for nationalliberation. Not only had the whole country (with theexcepfion of Taiwan) been freed from imperialist oppressibn,but, for the first time in history, the nationalminorities, which accounted for about six per cent ofthe population, acquired equal rights with the Hanpeople.Second, the completion of the bourgeois-democraticrevolution. All feudal relations were abolished. In thecountryside, the land was divided among the peasantryon the principle of 'the land to the tillers'. In thetowns, the capital belonging to the comprador bourgeoisiewas confiscated, while the national bourgeoisieretained their ownership of the factories, subject tostate control of raw materials, markets and labourcond,itions. At the same tirne a system of representativegovernment was esta:blished, based on universal suffrageand supported by a coalition of those political partieswhich had taken part in the struggle for nationalliberation.Third, the inception of the socialist revolution. Inthe countryside, the peasants were encouraged to formmutual-aid groups. These were to develop later intoagricultural co-operatives and later still into communes;and, thanks to the proletarian leadership giventhrough the peasant associations, ithese successive stageswere carried through without serious opposition fromthe rich peasants. In the towns, the national bourgeoisiewere encouraged to enter into agreements forr45

joint state and private ownership. This arrangementhad the advantage of securing the co-operation rofformer factory-owners, with their business training andadministrative experience, in the socialist developrnentof industry. And lastly, the Party initiated a series ofrn"r, ,rro.r"*ents, 'beginning with the San Fan rytovementof I952, which was directed against graft,corruption and bureaucracy, and culminating in theproleiarian cultural revolution (1966-8). These rnovehentsgrew in breadth and depth, as one followedanother, ibut their underlying purPose was the sametocarry the class struggle through to the end bycalling on the masses to take 'the initiative : 'Dare tothink ! d.are to speak ! dare to act !'z.The Handling of ContradictionsAre there contradictions in socialist society? If so, whatis their nature and how are they to be resolved?The answer is, in the first place, that there must becontradictions in socialist society, because there arecontradictions everywhere :Marxist philosophy holds that the law of the unityof opposites is a fundamental law of the universe.This law operates universally, whether in the natural,world, in human society, or in man's thinking.Between the opposites in a contradiction there is atonce unity and struggle, and it is this that impelsthings to move and change. Contradictions existeverlnvhere, but they differ in accordance with thedifferent nature of different thin'gs. In any given,phenomenon or thing, the unity of opposites is condiiional,temporary and transitory, and hence relative,whereas the struggle of opposites is absolute' Leningave a very clear exposi'tion- of this. law- In ourcountry, a gron'ing nr.rrnber of people have come tor46understand it. For many people, holvever, acceptanceof this law is one thing, and its application inexamining and dealing with problems is quiteanother. Many dare not openly admit that contradictionsstill exist among the people of our country,although it is these very contradictions that are pushingour society forward. Many do not admit thatcontrad,ictions continue to exist in a socialist society,with the result that they are handicapped and passivewhen confronted with social con.tradiotions; theydo not understand that socialist society will growmore united and consolidated through the ceaseless,process of the correct handling and resolving ofcontradictions. Folthis reasonr we need to explainthings to our people, and to our cadres in the firstplace, in order to help them understand the contradictionsin a socialist society and learn to use correctmethods for handling these contradictions. (MFE 9r,cf. LCW 38.36o.)Granted the existence of contradictions in socialistsociety, what is their nature ? They are of two kinds :contradictions among the people, which are nonantagonisticby nature, and conrtradictions betweenthe people and the enemy, which are antagonistic bynature. Contradictions between the classes that supportthe revolution-for example, between theproletariat and, the peasantry--bsleng to the firstkindl contradictions between the classes that supportthe revolution, on the one hand, and the remnants ofthe old exploiting classes*for example, the formerlandlords-on the other, belong to the second kind.The distinction between these two kinds of contradictionin socialist society corresponds to the two aspectsof the people's democratic dictatorship-democracyfor the people and d,ictatorship over the reactionaries.Thus, both non-antagonistic and antagonistic conr47

tradictions exist in socialist society. Moreover, ifhandled incorrectly, the non-antagonistic contradictionsmay become antagonistic, and conversely, ifhandled corectly, antagonistic contradictions maybecome non-antagonistic. Thus, the contradictionbetween the proletariat and the peasantry is nonantagonistic.Agriculture is required to produce asurplus in order to provide capital for industrialdevelopment, while it is itself dependent on industryfor the machines 'whichincrease its productivity; yet,owing to the division Lre0ween torun and countryinherited from the old society (MEG 64), agriculturallabour is less productive than industrial labour' Ifthis contradiction is not handled correctly, it will beimpossitrle to maintain a proper balance betweenagricultural and industrial development, and then thecontradiction between ttre two classes may becomeantagonistic. Conversely, the contradiction betweenthe national bourgeoisie and the proletariat in the oldChina was antagonistic, being a contradictionbetween exploi'ters and exploited; rbut in the specialconditions of the Chinese revolution, explained inChapter II, this contradiction was handled in such away as to become non-antagonistic. It had not, however,disappeared. IJnder the systern of joint sta'teand private ownership, the former factory ownerscontinued for many years to receive a fixed interest ontheir capital. This was still a form of exploitation,though only a mitigated form. The contradiction betweenthe proletariat and the bourgeoisie has still notbeen finally resolved.For these reasons, it is vitally necessary to understandthat class contradictions and class struggle continueto exist in socialist society and with them thepossibility of a reversion to capitalism :In China, although in the main socialist transfor-I48IriII1mation has been completed with respect to thesystem of ownership, and although the large-scaleand tuibulent class struggles of the masses characteristicof ,the previous revolutionary periods have inthe main come to an end, there are still remnantsof the overthrown landlord and comprador classes,there is still a Lbourgeoisie, and the remoulding ofthe petty bourgeoisie has only just started. The classstruggle is by no means over. The class strugglebetween the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, theclass struggle between ,the different political forces,and the class struggle in the ideological fieldbetween the proletariat and the bourgeoisie willcontinue to be lon.q and tortuous and at times willeven become very acute. The proletariat seeks totransform the world according to its own worldoutlook, and so does the bourgeoisie. In this respect,the question of which will win out, socialism orcapitalism, is still not really settled. (MFE r r5.)Class struggle, the struggle for production, andscientific experiment are the three great revolutionarymovements for building a mighty socialist country.These movements are a sure guarantee thatCommunists will be free from bureaucracy and immuneagainst revisionism and dogmatism, and will foreverremain invincible. They are a reliable guaranteethat the proletariat will be able to unite with thebroad working masses and realise a democratic dictatorship.If, in the absence of these movements, thelandlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, badelements and ogres of all kinds were allowed to crawlout, while our cadres were to shut their eyes to allthis, and in many cases fail even to diflerentiatebetween the enemy and ourselves but were to collaboratewith the enemy and become corrupted and demorali-ssd,if our cadres were thus dragged into the enemyr49

camp or the enemy were able to sneak into our ranks,and if many of our workers, peasants and intellectualswere left defenceless against both the soft and thehard tactics of the enemy-then it would not takelong, perhaps only several years or a decade, orseveral decades at most, before a counter-revolutionaryrestoration on a national scale inevitably occurred,the Marxist-Leninist Party would undoubtedly becomea revisionist party or a fascist party, and thewhole of China would change its colour. (MQ +o.)Socialist society covers afairly long historical period.In the historical period of socialism there are stillclasses, class contradictions and class struggle, there isthe struggle between the socialist road and the capitalistroad, and there is the danger of capitalist restoration.We must recognise the protracted and complexnature of this struggle. We must heighten our vigilance.We must conduct socialist education. We mustcorrectly understand and handle class contradictionsand class struggle, distinguish the contradictions betweenourselves and the enemy from those among thepeople, and handle them correctly. Otherwise asocialist country like ours will turn into its oppositeand degenerate, and a capitalist restoration will takeplace. (PR 69-rB.r5.)3.The Capitalist RoadIn r9z7 Mao Tse-tung wrote :So long as classes exist, contradictions betweencorrect and incorrect ideas in the Communist Partyare reflections within the Partv of class contradictions.At first, with regard to certain issues, suchcontradictions may not manifest themselves as antagonistic.But with the development of the classstruegle, they may grow and become antagonistic.r50IIThe history of the Communist Party of the SovietUnion Shows that the contradictions between thecorrect thinking of Lenin and Stalin and the fallaciousthinking of Trotsky, Bukharin and others didnot at first manifest themselves in an antagonisticform, but that later they did develop into antagonism.'fhere are similar cases in the history of th-eChinese Communist Party. . . . At present, the contradictionbetween correct and incorrect thinking in ourparty does not manifest itself in an antagonistic form,and if comrades who have cornmitted mistakes cancorrect them, it will not develop into antagonism.Therefore, the Party must on the one hand wage aserious struggle against erroneous thinking, and onthe other give the comrades who have committederrors ample opportunity to wake up. This being thecase, excessive struggle is obviously inappropriate.But, if tlhe people who have committed errors persistin them and aggravate them, there is the possibilitythat this contradiction will develop into antagonism.(MSw 11'4+.)In the cultural revolution the masses were encouragedto hold meetings in order 'to expose every kind ofghost and monster and also to crjticise the shortcomingsand errors in the work of the persons in charge'(PR 66-::.2). In the course of these meetings itbecame known that for many years there had existedwitihin ttre Party leadership a faction working in oppositionto Mao Tse-tung under the direction of LiuShao-chi. This faction represented the in'terests of onesection of the n.ational bourgeoisie.It was pointed out in Chapter II that in the specialconditions of China the national bourgeoisie was wonover to the worker-peasant alliance in the struggleagainst feudalism and imperialism :In our country the contradiction between theI5I

working class and the national bourgeoisie belongsto the oategory of contradictions among the people.By and large, the class struggle between the two is aclass struggle within the ranks of the people,because the Chinese national bourgeoisie has a dualcharacter. In the period of the bourgeois-democraticrevolution, it had a revolutionary as well as aconciliationist side to its character. In trhe period ofthe socialist revolution, exploitation of the workingclass for profit constitutes one side of the characterof the national bourgeoisie, while its support of theConstitution and its willingness to accept socialisttransformation constitutes the other. The nationalbourgeoisie differs frorn the imperialists, the landlords,and the bureaucratic capitalists. The contradictionbetween the national bourgeoisie and theworking class is one between the exploiter and theexploited, and is trherefore antagonistic in nature.But in the concrete conditions of China this antagonisticclass contradiction can, if properly handled,be transformed into a non-antagonistic one and beresolved by peaceful methods. However, it canchange into a contradiction between ourselves andthe enemy, if we do not handle it properly and donot follow the policy of uniting with, criticising andeducating the national bourgeoisie, or if the nationalbourgeoisie does not accept this policy of ours.(MFE Bz.)r52Thanks to the correct handling of this contradictionmost members of the national bourgeoisie gave theirsupport to the people's democratic dictatorship; butsome of them, who wanted a capitalist China, resistedthe further advance of the revolution and so alignedthemselves with the counter-revolutionary forces. ft wasthis section of the national bourgeoisie whose interestswere served, within the Party leadership, by Liu Shaochi.His opposition to Mao Tse-tung expressed thecontradiction between the pro-capitalist elements andthe proletariat, which had been present from the beginningbut became intensified after 1945, when the waragainst Japan ended, and still more after 1949, whenthe bourgeois-dernocratic revolution passed into thesocialist revolution.The line pursued by Liu Shao-chi was consistentlyopportunist in content, though presented sometimes ina rightist and sometimes in a leftist form. The differencein form was dictated by tactical considerations,being designed to exploit the vacillation characteristicof bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideology. When theParty was debating w'hether to advance or retreat, LiuShao-chi was in favour of retreat; when t[re Party haddecided to advance, Liu Shao-chi was in favour ofadvancing so rapidly as to risk defeat. The developmentof this initially non-antagonistic contradictionmay be seen from the stand which he took on successiveissues in the post-war period.At the end of the second world war, the CommunistParties of the liberated countries found themselves in astronger position tnlan ever before. Through theirleadership of the resistance they had won the supportof the masses, wheneas the bourgeoisie was divided anddiscredited. They were faced, therefore, with achoice-either to lead the people forward to thesocialist revolution or to hand in their arms and helpthe bourgeoisie to re-establish the old order, which hadbeen shaken to its foundations by the war. It was, ineffect, a choice between the socialist road and thecapitalist road. The Parties of Western Europe chosethe latter. In China, too, this road was recommendedby some of the Party leaders, including Liu Shao-chi. Itwould have meant entering a coalition with theKuomintang on terrns which would have placed therevolutionary armies under their control. Tlhanks to the6-MTMTT I +I53

leadership of Mao T'se-tung, the Chinese Communistsdecided to fight on.The landJeform was planned by the Party with theaim of abolishing feudal relations in bhe countryside'After making a careful assessment of the propertiesbelonging to the landlords and rich peasants, the peasantas*soc-iations were to take over their surplus trand andredistribute it among the poor peasants. Th*is line wasfor some time distorted by Liu Shao-chi, who encouragedthe poor peasants to believe that the Purposeof the redistribution was to give middle-peasant status tothem all. At the eisting level of agricultural productionthis was impossible, and the land reform movementrvould have ended in failure, if the line had not beencorrected by Mao Tse-tung (MSW 4197).After the abolition of feudal relations, the questionarose, what was to be the next stage ? Was agriculture todevelo,p on a socialist or a capitalist basis ? The Partyline was, still relying on the poor peasants, to advancethrou$h mutual-aid groups to the formation of cooperativesand so to collectivisation. The agricuituralsurplus was to provide a basis for building up heavyindustry, but part of it was to be invested in lightindustry, which would both create a demand for industrialcrops and supply a sufficient quantity of consumergoods to ensure that an undue strain was not placed on'the pe,asantry. This line was opposed by Liu Shao-ohi,who argued as follows. Collectivisation was impossiblewithout machines and must therefore wait on industrialdevelopment. In the meantime agriculture was to bedeveloped on capitalist lines by permitting the buyingand seiling of land and the employment of wage-trabour.'It will be time enougrh to talk about collectivisation', hesaid, 'when seventy per cent of the peasants havebecome rich peasants.' It will be seen that this lineresembles the line put forward in the Soviet Union byThere are a number of these represen;tatives of thebourgeoisie in the Central Committee and in theParty, government and other departments at the cent54Bukharin, who argued that, given a free market inagriculture, the kulaks would 'grow into socialism'.When the co-operative movement was gatheringspeed in the mid-fifties, Liu Shao-chi began by attemptingto slow it down. Later, after it had gone afiead inspite of him, Lre advocated an extreme form of equalitarianism,just as he had done in the land reform. I-aterstill, when the movement was in difficulties after a runof 'bad harvests, he was again advooating a free m,arketand freedom of private enterprise. When the Party wascalling on the workers to 'fight self and criticiserevisionism'-that is, to oppose, in themselves andothers, all forms of bourgeois individualism and selfinterest-LiuShao-chi was advocating'self-cultivation'and the use of material incentives.It is clear, therefore, that from the beginning therehad been a conflict within the Party leadership betweenthese two lines-the proletarian line, represented byMao Tse-tung, and the bourgeois line, represented byLiu Shao-chi. The bourgeois line deviated now to theright and now to the 'left', but always in opposition tothe proletarian line.Encouraged by the example of Kihrushchev and thenew revisionists in the Soviet Union, Liu Shao-chi andhis faction made plans for a similar take-over in China.Their number was not large, but they held some keypositions in the Party leadership, through which theywere able to exert widespread influence, misleading andconfusing the rank-and-fi1e. The issue came to a head inthe spring of 1966. On May 16 a circular, drafted byMao Tse-tung, was sent out by the Central Committeeto all Party members. In tlis document it was stated :r55Il1

tral as well as the provincial, municipal, andautonomous-region level.T[re whole Party must hold high the great bannerof the proletarian cultural revolution, thoroughly exposethe reactionary bourgeois stand of those so-called'academic authorities' who oppose the Party andsocialism, thoroqghly criticise and repudiate the reac'tionary bourgeois ideas in the sphere of academicwork, education, journalism, literature and art publishing,and seize the leadership in these culturalspheres. To achieve this, it is necessary at the sametime to criticise and repudiate those representatives ofthe bourgeoisie who have sneaked into the Party, thegovernment, the army and all spheres of culture, toclear them out or transfer some of them to otherpositions.Those representatives of the bourgeoisie who havesneaked into the Party, the government, the army, andvarious cultural circles are a bunch of counter-revolutionaryrevisionists. Once conditions are ripe, they willseize political power and turn the dictatorship of theproletariat into a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.Some of them we have already seen through, otherswe have not. Some are still trusted by us and arebeing trained as our successors, Persons likeKhrushchev, for example, who are still nestling besideus. Party comrnittees at all levels must pay full attentionto this matter. (PR 67-zr.lo.)In this way the Party was alerted to the danger, and itresponded by calling on the masses to criticise 'its workwithout constraint in order to identify and isolate theenemy:As Chairman Mao pointed out in his talk inFebruary 1967 : 'In the past we have wagedstruggles in rural areas, in factories, in the culturalfield, and we carried out lhe socialist educationr56iIIImovement. But all this failed to solve the problem,because we did not find a form, a method, to arousethe broad masses to expose our dark aspect openly,in an all-round way, and from below'.Now we Lrave found this form-it is the greatproletarian cultural revolution. It is only by arousingthe masses in their hundreds of millions to air trheirviews freely, write big-character posters, and holdgreat debates, that the renegades, enemy agents, andcapitalist-roaders in power, who have wormed theirway into the Party, can be exposed and their plots torestore capitalism smashed. (PR 69-lB.16.)4. Mass Partici.pation in GooernmentWhen Lenin called for a 'cultural revolution', herealised that for tihe complete victory of socialism it wasnecessary that the masses of the workers and peasantsshould take the work of government into their ownhands, and that to achieve this they must raise theircultural level to the point at which they could imposetheir own proletarian ideology in place of the oldbourgeois ideology and so clear away tilre bureaucraticof,rstacles behind which the bourgeoisie had entrenchedthemselves.These, too, were the aims of the Chinese culturalrevolution. It was designed, not merely to eliminate theelements hostile to socialism, but to enaible the workingclass to 'exercise leadership in everything', to 'placepolitics in command of administration', and to ensurethat everyone serving as an official should 'remain oneof the common people'.In order to achieve these aims it was necessary tolaunch an all-out offensive against lbourgeois ideologyin such a .way ,that the masses would be activelyinvolved:Although the bourgeoisie has been overthrown, itr57

is still trying to use the old ideas, culture, customsand habits of the exploiting classes to coruupt themasses, capture their minds, and, endeavour to stagea come-back. The proletariat must do just the opposite.It must meet head-on every challenge of thebourgeoisie in the ideological field and use the newideas, culture, customs and habits of the proletariatto change the mental outlook of the whole of society.(PR 66-33.6.)In the great proletarian cultural revolution, theonly method is for the masses to liberate themselves,and any method of doing things on their behalf mustnot be used.Trust the masses, rely on thern, and respect theiriniriative. Cast out fear. Don't be afraid of disorder.. . . Let the masses educate themselves in thisgreat revolutionary movement and learn to distinguishbetween right and wrong and between correctand incorrect ways of doing th.ings. (PR 66-33.7.)Such was the 'socialist offensive' against the 'survivalsof capitalisrn in people's minds', for which Stalin hadcalled in the Soviet Union; but there, 'being less closeto the masses, the Party was not strong enough to drawthem into the struggle.During the cutrtural revolution there sprang up a neworganisational unit-the revolutionary committee. It isbased on the 'three-in-one' combination : that is, itsmernbers, who are elected, subject to recall, and directlyresponsible to the people, are drawn from theParty, the People's Liberation Army, and the massorganisations. These committees are a creation of themasses. They have sprung up at all levels, from thefactory or commune to the organs of provincial andregional government, and their function is to providethe link through which the masses can participatedirectly in the running of the country :I58This three-in-one organ of power enables ourproletarian political power to strike deep rootsamong the masses. Chairman Mao points out: 'Themost fundamental principle in the reform of stateorgans is that they must keep in contact with themasses'. The representatives of the revolutionarymasses, particularly the representatives of the workingpeople-the workers and peasants-who havecome forward. en masse in the course of the greatproletarian cultural revolution, are revolutionaryfighters with practical experience. Representing theinterests of the revolutionary masses) they participatein the leading groups at various levels. This providesrevolutionary committees at these levels with abroad mass foundation. Direct participation by therevolutionary masses in the running of the countryand the enforcement of revolutionary supervisionfrom 'below over the organs of political power atvarious levels play a very importan,t role in ensuringthat our leading groups at all levels always adhere tothe mass line, maintain the closest relations with themasses, re,present their interests at all times, andserve the people heart and soul. (PR 68-t4.6.)The formation of these revolutionary committeesmarks an important advance in the socialist revolution.The masses have begun to take over directly the runningof the country. When this process is complete, the,transition to communism will have begun; but it is alengthy process, and its success'ful completion can onlybe ensured by continuing the class struggle to the end.As Chairman Mao has said :We have won a great victory. But the defeatedclass will still struggle. These people are still around,and this class still exists. Therefore we cannot speakof final victory. Not even for decades. We must notlose our vigilance. According to the Leninist view-I59

{Ipoint, the final victory of a socialist country requiresnot only the efforts of the prcletariat and the broadmasses of the people at home, hut also involves thevictory of the world revolution and the abolition ofthe system of exploitation of man try man on thewhole globe, upon which all mankind will be emancipated.Therefore, it is wrong to speak lightly of thefinal victory of the revolution in our country: it runscounter to Leninism and does not conform to facts.(PR 69-rB.z3.)5. Reuolution and ProductionSumur-ing up the economic results of the cultural revolution,Lin Piao said:Our ,country has seen good harvests in agriculturalproduction for years running, and there is also athriving situation in industrial production and inscience and teohnology. The enthusiasm of the broadmasses of the woriking people in both revolution andproduction has soared to unprecedented heights.Many factories, mines and other enterprises havetime and again topped their production records,creating all-time highs in production. The technicalrevolution is making constant Progress' The market isflourishing and prices are stdble. By the end of 1968we had redeemed all the national bonds. Ourcountry is now a socialist country with neither internalnor external debts. (PR 69-rB.zz.)He went on to explain the principle of 'grasp revolution,promote production', lvhich had become one ofthe key slogans of the revolution :'Grasp revolution, promote production'-tnlis principleis absolutely correct. It correctly explains therelationship belween revolution and production,This concept of the relation between revolution andproduction as a unity of opposites is an expression ofwhat Lenin called 'revolutionary dialectics' (LCW23.476, c{. z5.4zz). It is deeply rooted in the thoughtof Mao Tse-tung, going back to the rectification movementsof the pre-liheration period (MSW 3.328), andit rests on one of the fundamental principles of dialecticaland historical materialism. Marx wrote :In the social production of their life, men enterinto definite relations that are indispensable andindependent of their will, relations of productionwhioh correspond to a definite stage of developmentof their material productive forces. The sum total ofthese relations of production constitutes the econr6o1iIbetween consciousness an'd matter, between thesuperstructu.e urd the economic basis, and betweenthe relations of production and the productive forces.Chairman Mao always teaches us: 'Political work isthe life-blood of all economic work.' Lenindenounced the opportunists w,Lro were opposed toapproaching problems politically. 'Politics cannot buthave precedence over economics. To argue differentlymeans'forgetting the ABC of Marxism' (LCW 32.83).... Politics is the concentrated expression of economics.If we fail to make revolution in the superstructure,fail to arouse the broad masses of theworkers and peasants, fail to criticise the revisionistline, fail to expose the handful of renegades, enemyagents, capitalist-roaders in power and counterrevolutionaries,and fail to consolidate the leadershipof the proletariat, how can we further consolidatethe socialist economic hase and further develop thesocialist productive forces? This is not to replaceproduction by revolution, but to use revolution tocommand production, promote it and lead it forward.(PR 69-rB.ze.)t6r

Iomic structure of society, the real foundation, onwhich rises a ,legal and political superstructure andto which correspond definite forms of social consciousness.It is not the consciousness of men thatdetermines their being, but, on the contrary, it istheir social ibeing that determines their consciousness.(ME t.362.)At the same time, while determined by the economicbasis, the superstructure reacts upon it :Political, juridical, philosophical, religious, literary,artistic etc. development is based on economicdevelopment. But all these react upon one anotherand also upon the economi,c basis. It is not that theeconomic condition is the cause and alone actiue,while everything else is only a passive effect. Thereis, rather, interaction on the rbasis of economic necessity,which ultimately always asserts itsel,f. (ME2.504.)It follows that in centain conditions, and especially inrevolutionary situations, the consciousness of men, havirr.gcomprehended the laws governing their socialbeing, may becorne the decisive factor. Mao Tse-tungwrites :True, the productive forces, practice, and theeconomic base generally play the principal anddecisive role : whoever denies this is not a materialist.But it must also rbe admitted that in certain conditionssuch aspects as the relations of production,theory, and the superstructure in turn manifest themselvesin the principal and decisive role. When it isimpossible for the productive forces to develop withouta change in the relations of production, then thechange in the relations of production plays the principaland decisive role. The creation and advocacy ofrevolutionary theory plays the principal and decisiver6eIliIII!iI:lrole in those times of which Lenin said, 'Withoutrevolutionary theory there can ,be no revolutionarymovement' (LCW 5.369). When a task, no matterw,trat, has to ,tre performed, but there is as yet noguiding line, method, plan or policy, the principaland decisive thing is to decide on a guiding .line,method, plan or policy. When the superstructure(politics, culture, etc.) obstructs the development ofthe econo,mic base, political and cultural changesbecome principal and decisive. Are we going againstmaterialism when we say this? No. The reason isthat, while we recognise that in the general developmentof history the material determines the rnentaland social being determines social consciousness, wealso-and indeed must-recognise the reaction ofrnental on material things, of social consciousness onsocial being, and of the superstructure on the economicbase. This does not go against materialism; onthe contrary, it avoids mechanical materialism andfirmly upholds dialectical materialism. (MSW r.336.)If, while determined ultimately by the economicbasis, the political and ideological superstructure reactsupon it, and at times decisively, it follows that in itswork of socialist construction the proletariat mustmaintain and extend its dictatorship simultaneously inboth basis and superstructure. In the Soviet lJnion,owing to 0he pressure of capitalist encirclement, whichforced the pace of internal development, this problemwas not solved; but the solution has been found inChina, thanks to the lead given by Mao Tse-tung :The new social system has only just been estab-,lished and requires time for its consolidation. It mustnot be assumed that the new systern can be completelyconsolidated the moment it is established, forthat is impossible. It has to ,be consolidated step bystep. To achieve its ultimate consolidation, it isr63

necessary not only to ,bring about the socialist industrialisationof the country and persevere in thesocialist revolution on the economic front, but tocarry on constant and arduous socialist revolutionarystruggles and socialist ed,ucation on the political andideological fronts. Moreover, various contributoryinternational factors are required. (MQ zZ)6. Communist LabourLet us return to the subbotniks. The first of these, heldin the spring of rgr9, were, as Lenin said, only abeginning^ On May t, tg2o, an All-Russia subbotnikwas held, in which 45o,ooo workers were involved inthe city of Moscow alone. A leaflet was circulated witha message from Lenin, in which he said:Let us build a new society !We were not daunted by defeats during the greatrevolutionary war against Tsarism, against the bourgeoisie,against the omnipotent imperialist worldpowers.We shall not be daunted by the gigantic diffi,cultiesand the errors that are inevitable at the outset of amost difficult ,task: the transformation of all labourhabits and customs requires decades. . . . We shallwork to do away with the accursed maxim, 'Everyman for himself and the devil take the hindmost', thehabit of Iooking on work merely as a duty and ofconsidering rightful only that work which is paid forat certain rates. We shall work to inculcate into thepeople's minds, to form into a habit, and bring intothe everyday life of the masses, the rule 'Al1 for eachand each for all', the rule 'From each according tohis ability, to each according to his needs'; we shallwork for the gradual but steady introduction ofcornmunist discipline and communist labour.t6+J1IiiIIll)rIItIII:iWe have shifted a huge mountain, a huge mass ofconservatism, ignorance, stubborn adherence to thehabits of 'free trade' and the 'free' buying and, seilingof human labour-power like any other commodity.We have begun to undermine and destroy thefirmest, age-long and ingrained habits. In a singleyear our subbotniks have made an immense strideforward. They are still infinitely weak, but that willnot daunt us. We have seen our 'infinitely weak'Soviet state, before our own eyes, gaining strengthand becoming a mighty world force as a result of ourown eftorts. We shall work for years and decadespractising subbotniks, developing them, spreadingthern, improving them, converting them into a habit.We shall achieve the victory of communist labour'(LCW 3r.r2+.)It is the same message that r,las been conveyed to theChinese people by Mao Tse-tung. Led by theCommunist Party, the masses of workers and peasantsthrow off the burden of imperialism and feudalism, andthere is released within thern, freed at last from exploitation,an inexhaustible store of creative energ'y, whichenables them to transform the world. In June 1945,addressing the Seventh Party Congress, Lte recalled thefollowing folk-tale:There is an ancient Chinese fable called 'TheFoolish Old Man who Removed the Mountains'. Ittells of an old man who lived in northern Chinalong, long ago and was known as the Foolish OldMan of North Mountain. His ,house faced south andbeyond his doorway stood the two great peaks,Taihang and Wangwr:, obstructing the way. Hecalled his sons, and hoe in hand they began to digup these mountains with great determination.Another greybeard, known as the Wise Old Man,saw them and said derisively, 'How silly of you to dor65

this ! It is quite impossible for you few to dig .rpthese huge mountains.' The Foolish Old Manreplied, 'When I die, my sons will carry on; whenthey die, there will be my grandsons, and so on toinfinity. High as they are, the rnountains cannotgrow any higrher, and with every bit we dig they willbe that much lower. Why can't we clear themaway?' Having refuted the Wise Old Man's wrongview, he went on digging every day, unshaken in hisconviction. God was moved by this, and sent downtwo angels, who carried the mountains away on theirbacks.Today, two big mountains lie like a dead weighton the Chinese people. One is imperialism, the otheris feudalism. The Chinese Communist Party has longrnade up its min.d to dig them up. We must persevereand work unceasingly, and we too will touch God'sheart. Our God is none other than the masses of theChinese people. If they stand up and dig togetherwith us, why can't these two mountains be clearedaway? (MSW 3.32I)Four years later, on the eve of the proclamation of thePeople's Republic, he said :Of all things in the world, people are the mostprecious. IJnder the leadership of the CommunistParty, so long as there are people, every kind ofmiracle can be performed. ... We believe that revolutioncan change everything, and that before longthere will arise a new China with a big populationand a great wealth of products, where life will beabundant and culture will flourish. All pessimisticviews are utterly groundless. (MSW +.454.)Revolution can ohange everything. The proletarian culturalrevolution is a mass movement, without precedentin history, for remoulding both man and nature. In thisr66movemen , following the road of the OctoberRevolution, the Chinese workers and peasants fravegiven an example to the world, showing the workersind peasants o] a[ countries that through revolutionporr"ity can be transformed into plenty. And the keyio the success of the movement lies in the relation betweenthe Party and the masses. Having boundless confidencein the masses, the Party calls on them toexercise their initiative more and more boldly, and themasses respond.In 1955, during the socialist upsurge in the countryside,wrhich led to the creation of the people's communes,Mao Tse-tung wrote :T,he masses have boundless creative power' Theycan organise themselves and concentrate on placesand branclhes of work where they can give full play totheir energy; they can concentrate on production inbreadth and depth and create more and more undertakingsfor their own well-being. (MQ I IB')Since then considerable Progress Ihas been made in themechanisation of agriculture, and it will not be longbefore the Chinese workers and peasants are equippedwith all the advanced techniques of modern society. Inthe meantime, however, rather than wait for machines,lhey are prepared to work with the same implementsthat their ancestors used for thousands of years, but towork in a new way. On Decerrlber 9, Ig7o-only a fewweeks after the flood disaster in East Bengal, in whichover a qurarter of a million Peasants lost their lives-+French newspaper correspondent sent the followingdespatch from Peking :A mere twelve miles from Peking Ioo,ooo Chineseare working steadily round the clock, in spite of thebitter cold, to change the course of a river. Their onlyr67

tools are wheelbarrows, shovels, pickaxes, and thetihoughts of Mao Tse-tung.Diplomats in Peking who take the highway to theairport south-east of the capital invariably slow theircars when they cross the hridge over the Wen YuRiver to gaze with astonishment at the human antheapthat forms a dark patch, dotted witrh innumerablered flags, stretching to the horizon.The picture is even more striking in the light ofdawn, and one might be tempted to classify it as oneof those stereotypes of the Chinese reality intended forforeigners.Acoording to officials, the Wen Yu developmentscheme is only part of a scheme for the whole of theHai River in north-east China. The Hai has a historyof floods and droughts.According to the Chinese press, hundreds of thousandsof peasants answered Chairman Mao's call in1963 to 'tame' the Hai. Since then enough earth hasbeen shifted to build a dyke 3 feet high and 3 feetwide stretching 37 times round the globe.Drainage works and the building of goo miles ofdikes for rq main tributaries of the Hai River havemeant that at tfre river's principal outflow point,Tsientsin, the discharge has risen from r,ooo cubicyards a second to r3,ooo cubic yards. This has sparedB,z5o,ooo acres of arable land from the danger offloods.At the end of October the authorities mobilisedHopei-province peasants, soldiers, militia, and Pekingcitizens to work on 34 miles of the Wen Yu, atributary of the Hai. The job should have taken fourmonths, but the authorities say it is already four-fifthscompleted.Recently I visited two of the work sites. There wasno noise of machinery, just the hear.ry breathing ofmen swinging pick-axes, the neighing of ponies, theshouts of cart drivers, the slogans chanted by ther68workers, and the revolutionary music played over theloud-speakers.To dig into the river bed it is necessary to broak ice.Yet I saw one man, aged about sixty, stripped to thewaist so that he could swing his pick-axe better.Day and night, in eight-hour shifts, and sometimesin sub-zero temperatures, relay teams deepen the riverbed, construct dikes, and eliminate various tributariesto give the river a new bed.For the workers all methods are valid for respondingto Chairman Mao's appeal. They may uproot atree-trunk by the sheer weight of their bodies.They live in huts or enormous tents surrounded bysmall walls of eartkr and straw to keep out the icywind. Food is brought to the site in great steamingpots. (The Times 7o-rz-ro.)As Marx said, 'When theory grips the masses, itbecomes a material force' (MER 5o).Let me conclude with one more quotation fromChairman Mao:Tfrre masses are the real heroes, while we ourselvesare often childish and ignorant, and without thisunderstanding it is impossible to acquire even themost rudimentary knowledge. (MSW 3.r2.)r69

1',IIMarx and EngelsReferencesME. Marx and Engels, Selected works in two volumes'Moscow, r955.tttU ,.zr-65. th. Corn*rnist Manifesto' February rB4B'-ME I.ro6-"17. Address of the Central Committee to theCommunist League. March r85o.ME r.r39-242. Mi.", the class siruggles in France rB4B-rB5o'r85o.fttE.i3Or-05. Marx, A contribution to the critique of politicaleconomy. January r859.ME r.473-85. Muo, The civil war in France: introductionby Engels. March 189t.ME z.16-48. Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme. MaYr 875.ME z.a9-6r. Engels, On social relations in Russia' April 1875'ME z.[52. Marx, Letter to Joseph Weydemeyer' March 5,r B5z.ME 2.5o4-o6. Engels, Letter to H. Starkenburg' January e5,r 894.MEG. Marx and Engels, The German ideology' (London,1965) 1846.MEP. Engels, The peasant war in Germany. (London, r9z7)r B5o.MER. Marx and Engels, On religion' Moscow, 1957.MER 4r-58. Marx, A contribution to the critique of Hegel'sphilosophy of right. r844.r70ii,IIIIIIiILeninLCW. V. I. Lenin, Collected works, 45 vols. Moscow,r96o-7o.LCW r.335-5o7. The economic content of Narodism and ,thecriticism of it in Mr. Struve's book. r895.LCW 2.93-rer, Draft and explanation of a programme forthe Social-Democratic Party. r89516.LCW 3.z9-6o7. The development of capitalism in Russia.I 899.LCW 4.42o-z8. The workers' party and the peasantry. Aprilr90r.LCW 5.327-28. Notes on anarchism and socialism. IgoI.LCW 5347*529. What is to be done? February rgo2.LCW 6.r86-eo7. Revolutionary adventurism. October rgo2.LCW 6.36r-432. To the rural poor. March rgo3.LCW 6.+S+-63. The national question in our programme.July r9o3.LCW 7.2o3-425. One step forward, two steps rback. May r9o4.LCW B.r7-zB. The autocracy and the proletariat. Januaryrgo5.I,CW 8.e3r-36, The proletariat and the peasantry. Marchrg05.LCW 8.257-59. A revolution of the r7B9 or the rB4B type?April r9o5.LCW 8.293-3o3. The revolutionary-democratic dictatorship ofthe proletariat and .the peasantry. March rgo5.LCW 8.537-43. The struggle of the proletariat, senility of thebourgeoisie. June Igo5.LCW 9.r3-r4o. Two tactics of social-democracy in the democraticrevolution. July r9o5.LCW 9.23o-39. Social-democracy's attitude towards the peasantmovement. September r9o5,ICW 9.4tr-rz. The aggravation of the situation in Russia.October rgo5.LCW 9.427-94. The first victory of the revolution. Novemberrgo5.LCW ro.9r-ge. The stages, the trend, and,the proqpects of therevolution. 19o5-o6.LCW ro.r99-279. The victory of the Cadets and the task ofthe workers' party. March 19o6.r7r

LCW ro.z77-3o9. The UnitYApril 19o6.LCW ro.317-82. RePort onR.S.D.L.P. May r9o6.Congress of the R.S.D.L.P.the Unity Congress of theLCW ro.39e-g5. The Congress summed up. May 19o6'LCW Io.43G39. The land question and the fight for freedom'June r9o6.LiW 116zo-29. P^rty discipline and the fight against thepro-Cadet social-democrats. November 19o6.tCW r 134r-64. The crisis of Menshevism. December 19o6'LCW rr.38g-g5. The politicat situation and the tasks of theworking class. December r9o6.LCW rz.ro4-I2. Preface to 'the Russian translation of KarlMarx's letters to Dr Kugelmann. February t9o7.LCW rz.I33-44. Draft resolutions for the Fifth Congress ofthe R.S.D.L.P. March t9o7.LCW r2.333*36. The agrarian question and the forces of therevolution. April r9o7.LCW r2.359-7o. Preface to the Russian translation of Lettersto Friedrich Sorge and others. April t9o7.LCW r2.437-BB. Fifth Congress of the R.S.D.L.P. May I9o7.LCW re.49o-5o9. The attitude to bourgeois parties. I9o7.LCW r3.75-8r. The intemational socialistic congress in Stuttgart.September rgo7.LCW q.2r7-42g. The agrarian programme of socialdemocracyin the first Russian revolution' December t9o7.LCW 12.4q218. The debate on the extension of the Duma'sbudgetary powers. February r9o8.LC'W 13.44o-46. Political notes' February r9o8.LCW 15.29-39. Marxism and revisionism. April I9o8.LCW 15.5o-62. The assessment of the Russian revolution.April r9oB.LCW r5.383-g4. A caricature of Bolshevism. April r9og.LCW 16.z96-3o4. The lessons of the revolution. Novemberr9 ro.LCW r6.347-5e. Differences in the European labour movement.December rgto.LCW r6.355-58. The beginning of demonstrations. Decemberr9 ro.r72LCW t6.359-6o. What is happening in the countryside?December 19ro.LCW 16. 974-92.Inner-party struggle in Russia. rgro-rr.LCW l7.rr9-t8. The 'peasant reform' and the proletarianpeasantrevolution, March r9rr.LCW r7.r39-43. In memory of the Commune. April r9rr.LCW 18.36-43. The Trudoviks and the worker democrats.May rgrz.LCW r8.r43-49. A comparison of the Stolypin and the Narodnikagrarian programmes. July l9rz.LCW 19.9r-92. The working class and the national question.May r9r3.LCW 19.147-69. Controversial issues: an open party and theMarxists. June r9r3.LCW 19.r8o96. The question of the (general) agrarian policyof the present Govemmeu-t. June rgl3.LCW rg.z43-5r. Theses on,the national question. June rgr3.LCW r9.295-3or. August Bebel. August r9r3.LCW 19.354-57. Li,berals and democrats on the languagequestion. september rgr3.LCW I9.394-4r6. How Vera Zasulich demolishes liquidationism.September rgr3.LCW r9.4r7-3r. Resolutions of the Summer (r9r3) JointConference of the C.C. of the R.S.D.L.P. and Party officials.September rg13.LCW ry.+54-57. Capitalism and workers' immigration.October rgrg,LCW 19.499-5o2. Letter to S.G. Shahumyan. December 6,rg r3.LCW rg.5o3-o7.'Cultural-national' autonomy. November19r3.LCW r9.53r13. The nationality of pupils in Russian schools.December r9r3.LCW rg.53g-45. The national programme of the R.S.D.L.PDecember rgr3.LCW zo.I7-5r, Critical remarks on the national question.December r913.LCW eo. ztz-r6. The Lef,t Narodniks whitewash the bourgeoise.April r9r4.LCW zo.z45-53. From the history of the workers' press inRussia. April r9r4.r73

LCW zo.165-73. Concluding remarks to the symposium'Marxism and liquidationism'. April I9r4.LCW zo.3z5-47. Disruption of unity under cover of outcriesfor unity. May r9t4.LCW 2o.375-77. The agrarian question in Russia. June 19I4.LCW 2o.393-454. The right of nations to self-determination,May r9r4.LCW zr.eo5-59. The collapse of the Second InternationalJune rgr5.LCW er.ug5-338. Socialism and war. August IgI5.LCW 2r.339-43. On the slogan for a United States of Europe.August I9I5.LCW er.4o7-r4. The revolutionary proletariat and the rightof nations to self-determination. October 19t5.LCW ar.4r5-zo. On the two lines in the revolution' November19r5.LCW ze.r3-roz. New data on the laws goveming the developmentof capitalism in agriculture. rg I5.LCW zz.r87-3o4. Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism.April I9r7.LCW zz.3zo-6o. The discussion on self-determina'tionsurnmed up. July 1916.LCW 23.e8-76. A caricature of Marxism and imperialisteconomism. October rg16.LCW 13.77-87. The military programme of the proletarianrevolution. September r9I6.LCW 4.e7r77. Statistics and sociology. January r9t7.LCW z4.zo-26. The tasks of the proletariat in the presentrevolution. April t9r7.LCW e4.38-4r. The dual power. April r9I7.LCW z4.r4o-47. Report to the Petrograd City Conference ofthe R.S.D.L.P. (Bolsheviks). April t9t7.LCW 24.456-79. Materials relating to the revision of theParty programme. May 19I7.LCW 25.t5-42. First All-Russian Congress of Soviets. JuneI9I7.LCW 25.319-65. The impending catastrophe and how tocombat it. October Igr7.LCW zS.:66-79. One of the fundamental questions of therevolution. September rgr7.LCW a5.3BI-492. The state and revolution. r9r8.r7+LCW 26.87-136. Can the Bolsheviks retain state power?October r9r7,l,CW e6.r4g-78. Revision of the Party programme. Octoberr9t7'LCW z6.ze3-27. Letter to the Central Committee of theR.S.D.L.P.(8.). November r, r9r7.LCW 26.453-8e. Third All-Russia Congress of Soviets. JanuaryrgrB.LCW 27.68-75. Strange and monstrous. March r9r8.LCW r7.85-r58. Exraordinary Seventh Congress of theR.C.P.(B.). March r9rB.LCW 27.r69*zor. Extraordinary Fourth All-Russia Congressof Soviets. March r9r8.LCW 27.235-77. The immediate tasks of the Soviet Govemment.April rgr8.ICW 27.365-8r. Report on foreign policy. May r9r8.LCW 28.54-58. Comrade workers, forward ,to .the last, decisivefight ! August rq r B.LCW uB.ro5-r3. The proletarian revolution and the renegadeKautsky. October 19rB.LCW z8.135-64. Irxtraordinary Sixth Congress of Soviets.November r9rB.ICW zB.r85-94. The valuable admissions of Pitirim Sorokin.November r9r8.I.CW z9.zz7-3a5. The proletarian rcvolution and the renegradeKautsky. r9r8.LCW zB.39r*4o4. Speech at a joint session of the All-RussianCentral Executive Committee, the Moscow Soviet, andAll Russian Trade Union Congress. January r9r9.LCW 28.453-77. First Congress of the Communist Intemational.March r9rg.LCW 29.1917. Session of the Petrograd Soviet. March r9r9.LCW 29.97-14o. Draft programme of the R.C.P.(8.). MarchI9 I9.LCW zg.r4r-225. Eighth Congress of the R.C.P.(8.). MarchI9 I9:LCW r9.3o5-r3. The Third International and its place inhistory. April I9r9.LCW 29.333-76. The First All-Russian Congress on AdultEducation. May 19r9.r75

LCW zg.387-gr. Greetings to the Hungarian workers' MayI9I9.LCW 29.4o9-34. A great beginning. July r9I9.I-CW ng.iga-iir. The tasks of the Third Intemational. JulvI9 I9.LCW 3o.93-ro4. The dictatorship of the proletariat' OctoberI9 I9'LCW 3o.ro7-26. Economics and politics' Norember t9r9'LCW 3o.r5i-66. Address to the Second All-Russia Congressof Comirurrist Organisations of the Peoples of the East'November I9t9.LCW 3o.zo5-52. Seventh All-Russia Congress of Soviets'December t9rg.LCW 3o.253-75. The Constituent Assembly elections and thedictatorship of the proletariat. December I9I9.LCW go.38o-4o2. Spiech delivered at the First AII-RussiaCongress of Working Cossacks. March t9zo.LCW 3o.4r7-25. Speech at a meeting of the Moscow Soviet'March r9zo.LCW 3r.r7-rIB.'Left-wing' communism-an infantile disorder.May rgeo.LCW 3r.rz3-25. From'the first subbotnik to the All-RussiaMay Day subbotnik. MaY lgeo.LCW 3I.rB4-2oI. Theses on the fundamental tasks of theCommunist Intemational. July tgeo.LCW 3I.zo&-rr. The terms of admission to the CommunistIntemational. July tgzo.LCW 3r.z13-63. Second Congress of the Communist International.July lgzo.LCW 3r.397-4o2. Speech at a joint meeting of the MoscowSoviet. November I92o.LCW 3r.4o8-26. Our foreign and domestic position and thetasks of the Party. November rgeo.LCW 3r.43o-33. Speech delivered at a me€ting of cell secretaries....November r9zo.LCW 3r.434-36. Speech delivered at a general meeting ofCommunists of Zamoskvorechye District, Moscow. Novembertgro.LCW 3i.46r-533. The Eigh'th AII-Russia Congress of Soviets'December rgeo'r76)rt'IiLCW 3e.r9-42. The trade unions, the present situation, andTrotsky's mistakes. December rgzo.LCW 32.54-68. The Second All-Russia Congress of Miners.January t9zr,LCW 32.7o-Io7. Once again on the trade unions, the presentsituation, and the mistakes of Trotsky and Bukharin. Januaryr92r.LCW 3e.rr2-Ig. Speech delivered at ,the Fourth AII-RussiaCongress of Garment-workers, Februaty rg2t.LCW 32.165-27r. Tenth Congress of the R.C.P.(8.). Marchr92 r.LCW 32.329-65. The tax in kind. May rgzr.LCW 3e.45r-96. Third Congress of the Communist fntemational.June r9zr.LCW 33.2r-29. New times and old mistakes in a new guise.August 1921.LCW 33.5r-59. The fourth anniversary oI the OctoberRevolution, October t9et.LCW 33.r4r-Br. Ninth All-Russia Congress of Soviets.December tg2t-t2.LCW 33.r8416. The role and functions of trade unions underthe New Economic Policy. January 1922.LCW 33.227-36. On the significance of militant materialism.March rgez.LCW 33.254-55. The conditions for admitting new membersto the Party. March rgz:.LCW 33.259-326. Eleventh Congress of the R.C.P.(B.). April1922.LCW 33.349-52. On the tenth anniversery oI Prauda. Mayr922.LCW 33,4r5-gz. Fourth Congress of the Communist Intemational.Decernber t922.LCW 33.467-75. On co-operation. January Igz3.LCW 33.47G-79. Our revolution. January r9e3.LCW 33.48r-86. How we should reorganise the workers' andpeasants' inspection. January rgz3.LCW 35.e85-87. Letter to Alexandra Kollontai. February r7,I9I7.LCW 35.zBB-Bg, Letter to Inessa Armand. February 19, tgr7.LCW 35.549-5o. Letter to G. Y. Sokolnikov. February rt,1922.t7l

LCW 36.59117. Letter to the Congress' December 1922.LCW 36.6o5-rI. The question of nationalities or'autonomisation'.December I9zz.LCW 37.28r-82. Letter to his mother. January 9, 1899.LCW 38.85-243. Conspectus of Hegel's book, The science oflogic. December 19r4.LCW 38.355-64. On the question of dialectics. t9t4.StalinSCW. J. V. Stalin, Works. t3 vols. (uncompleted). Moscow,r952-55.SCW 6.3-46. Thirteenth Congress of the R.C.P.(B.). Januaryr924.SCW 6.7r*196. The foundations of Leninism. May rgz4.SCW 6.r97-e45,. Thirteenth Congress of the R.C.P.(B.). May1924.SCW 6.375-437. The October Revolution and the tactics of,the Russian Communists. December r9e4.SCW 7.r9-24. Dymovka. January rgz5.SCW 7.25-33. Conceming the question of the proletariat andthe peasantry. January rgz5.SCW 7.r35-r54. T'he political tasks of the University of thePeoples of the East. May Igz5.SCW 7.157-2r4. Questions and ansuers. June t925.SCW 7.237-39. Letter to Comrade Yermakovsky. Septemberr5, r925.SCW 7.265-4o3. The Fourteenth Congress of theC.P.S.U.(B.). December tgz5.SCW 8.13-96. Concerning questions of Leninism. Januaryrge6.SCW 8.145-3ro. The social-democratic deviation iu ourParty. November r9e6.SCW 9.r-r55. The Seventh Enlarged Plenum of the E.C.C.I.December r9e6.SCW ro.z44-55. The intemational character of the OctoberRevolution. November rgz7.SCW ro.e75-38e. The Fifteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.).December r9e7.SCW rr.3o-68. The work of the April Joint Plenum of theI78Central Committee and the Central Control Commission.April 1928.SCW I t.7o-Bz. Speech delivered at the Eighth Congress ofthe All-Union Leninist Young Communist League. Mayr9e8.SCW rr.B5-ror. On the grain front. February r9z8.SCW rr.133-44. Against vulgarising the slogan of selfcriticism.June rgz8.SCW rr.r45-2o5. Plenum of the C.C., C.P.S.U.(8.). JulyrgzB.SCW rLz3r-48. The Right danger in the C.P.S.U.(8.).October r9z8.SCW rz.z4z-385. Political report of the Central Committeeto the Sixteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.). June I93o.SCW r3.3r-44. The tasks of business executives. FebmaryI93 I.SCW r3.I6o. The fifteenth anniversary of the O.G.P.U.December r93e.SCW 13.163-219. The results of the first five-year plan.January 1933.SCW r3.z8B-388. Report to the Seventcenth Party Congress.January r934.SL. Joseph Stalin, Leninism. London, r94oSL. 56r-9o. On the draft constitution of the U.S.S.R. November1936.SL. 59r-6r8. Dialectical and historical materialism. Septemberrg38.SL. 6r9-67. Report to the Eighteenth Congress of theC.P.S.U.(8.). March r939.SMT. The Moscow trial (January 1937) and two spceches byJ. Stalin. Compiled by W. P. and, Z. K. Coates. London,1937.SMT 249-Br. Speech at the Plenum of the Central Committeeof the C.P.S.U.(B.). March 3, 1937.SP. J. Stalin, Economic problems of socialism in the U.S.S.R.Moscow, r95e.r79

Mao Tse-tungMSW. Selected works ofr96r-65.MSW r.rg-zr. Analysis ofMarch 1926.Mao Tse-tung. 4 vols. Peking,the classes in Chinese society.MSW r.63-72. Why is it that red political power can exist inChina? October r9z8.MSW r.rr7-zB. A single spark can start a prairie fire. Januaryr93().MSW r.r47-52. Be concemed with ,the well-being of themasses, pay attention to methods of work. January 1934.MSW r. qg-254Problems of strategy in China's revolutionarywar. December t936.MSW I.28514. Win the masses in their millions for theanti-Japanese united national front. May 1937.MSW r.e95-3o9. On practice. July r937.MSW r.3 r r-47. On contradiction. August r937.MSW :.47-59. fnterview with the British journalist JamcsBertram. October 1937.MSW 2.195-er r. The role of the Chinese Communist Party inthe national war. October t938.MSW z.zr3-I7. The question of independence and initiativewithin the united front. Novernber 1938.MSW a.237-39. The May 4th movement. May r939.MSW z.e4r-49. The orientation of the youth movemert. Mayr939.MSW 2.3o5-34. The Chinese revolution and the ChineseCommunist Party. December 1939.MSW z.3gg-84. On new democracy. January I94o.MSW 2.44I-49. On policy. December rg4o.MSW 3, rr-r3. Preface to 'Rural suweys'. March rg4r.MSW 3.69-98. Tallm at the Yenan forum on literature ;rudart. May rg4z.MSW 3,r r7-az. Some questions conceming methods ofleadership. June t943.MSW 3.153-6r. Get organised ! November r943.MSW 3.177-225. Resolution on certain questions in thehistory of our Party. April 1945.MSW g.zgS-s7. The united front in cultural work. October1944.IBoMSW 3.255-32o. On coalition governmenr. April 1945.MSW 3.32r-24. The Foolish OId Man who remolrid themountains. June rg45.MSW 3.325-29. On production by the army and rectification.April 1945.YlI +.SS-Og. On the Chungking negotiations. October 1945.MSW 4.r8r-89. On some important problems of the paity;spresent policy. January rg48.MSW 4.197-99. Correct the 'Left' errors in land reformpropaganda. February 1948.MSW 4.36r-75. Report ro the secondSeventh Central Committee of ,theChina. March 1949.MSW 4.4r rz4 On theplenary session of theCommunist Party ofpeople's democratic dictatorship.June 1949.MSW 4.451-59. The bankruptcy of the idealist conception ofhistory. September r949._MFE. Mao Tse-tung, Four essays on philosophy. peking, r966.MFE 7g-r33. On the correct handling of contradictionsamong the people. February 1957.MFE 13416. Where do correct ideas come from? May 1963.MQ. Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung. Peking, 1967.MQ e7-zB. Speech at the Chinese Communist Party'snational conference on propaganda work. March rg57.MQ 4o-4r. Note on 'The seven well-written documents ofChekiang province concerning cadres' participation in physicallabour'. May 1963.MQ rr8. Note tn 'Surplus labour has found a way out'. 1955.Mao Tse-tung and othersHE. More on the historical experience of proletarian dictatorship.December lgt6.PR. Peking Review (cited by year and number of issue).PR 6313. Mao Tse-tung, Statement in support of the AmericanNegroes in their just struggle against racial discrimina-'tion by U.S. imperialism. August 8, 1963.PR 6613. Decision of the Central Committee of the ChineseIBT

Communist Party conceming the great proletarian culturalrevolution. August 12, 1966.PR 6618. Take firm hold of the revolution and stimulateproduction. Renmin ribao editorial. September 16, 1966.PR 67-er. 6-9. Circular of the Central Committee of theChinese Communist Party, May 16, 1966.PR 67-eI. ro-rz. A great historic document. Hongqi and.Renmin ribao editoial. May r9. r967.PR 68-14. Revolutionary committees are fine. Renmin ribao,Hongqi, and liefangjun bao editorial. April 5, 1968.PR 69-18. Lin Piao, Report to the Ninth National Congressof the Communist Party of China. April n8, 1969.PR 7o-za. Mao Tse-tung, Peoples of the world, unite anddefeat the U,S. aggressors and all their running-dogs. May20, t97O.tBz