Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 13 - From Marx to Mao

336V. I. LENINAt the present time the Cossack lands represent realmunicipalisation. Large regions belong to separate Cossacktroops—the Orenburg, Don, and others. The Cossackspossess an average of 52 dessiatins per household, the peasantsan average of 11 dessiatins. In addition, the Orenburg Cossacksown 1,000,000 dessiatins of “army lands”; the DonCossacks, 1,900,000 dessiatins, etc. This “municipalisation”is the breeding-ground of purely feudal relations. Thisactually existing municipalisation involves the caste andregional isolation of the peasants, who are split up bydifferences in the size of holdings, amount of taxes paid,and terms of medieval land tenure as a reward for service,and so forth. “Municipalisation” does not assist the generaldemocratic movement, it serves to disintegrate it, to splitup into regions and thus weaken what can be victoriousonly as a centralised force; it serves to alienate one regionfrom another.And in the Second Duma we find the Right Cossack Karaulovspeaking in support of Stolypin (asserting that Stolypinin his declaration also agreed to the compulsory shiftingof land boundaries), denouncing nationalisation no lessstrongly than Plekhanov, and openly declaring in favourof municipalisation by regions (18th session, March 29, 1907,Stenographic Record, p. 1366).The Right-wing Cossack Karaulov grasped the crux ofthe matter a thousand times more correctly than Maslovand Plekhanov. The division into regions is a guaranteeagainst revolution. If the Russian peasantry (with the aidof a centralised, not “regional”, proletarian movement)fails to break the bounds of its regional isolation andorganise an all-Russian movement, the revolutionwill always be beaten by the representatives of thevarious privileged regions which the centralised authorityof the old regime will use in the struggle as necessityrequires.Municipalisation is a reactionary slogan, which idealisesthe medieval isolation of the regions, and dulls thepeasantry’s consciousness of the need for a centralisedagrarian revolution.