12.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

AGRARIAN PROGRAMME OF SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY371ties <strong>of</strong> the period <strong>of</strong> the Second Duma already, in essence,take the stand <strong>of</strong> recognising capitalism, <strong>of</strong> taking it forgranted), but because it stands for the Junker type <strong>of</strong> capitalistdevelopment in order <strong>to</strong> strengthen the power and<strong>to</strong> increase the incomes <strong>of</strong> the landlords, in order <strong>to</strong> placethe edifice <strong>of</strong> au<strong>to</strong>cracy upon a new and stronger foundation.There is no contradiction between what these gentlemensay and what they do; our reactionaries, <strong>to</strong>o, are“businessmen”, as Lassalle said <strong>of</strong> the German reactionariesin contrast <strong>to</strong> the liberals.What is the attitude <strong>of</strong> these people <strong>to</strong>wards the idea<strong>of</strong> nationalising the land? Towards, say, the partialnationalisation with compensation demanded by the Cadetsin the First Duma, leaving, like the Mensheviks, privateownership <strong>of</strong> small holdings and creating a state landreserve out <strong>of</strong> the rest <strong>of</strong> the land? Did they not perceivein the nationalisation idea the possibility <strong>of</strong> strengtheningthe bureaucracy, <strong>of</strong> consolidating the central bourgeoisgovernment against the proletariat, <strong>of</strong> res<strong>to</strong>ring “statefeudalism” and the “Chinese experiment”?On the contrary, every hint at nationalisation <strong>of</strong> theland infuriates them, and they fight it in such a way tha<strong>to</strong>ne would think they had borrowed their arguments fromPlekhanov. Take the nobleman Vetchinin, a Right landlord.“I think,” he said at the 39th session on May 16, 1907,“that the question <strong>of</strong> compulsory alienation must be decidedin the negative sense from the point <strong>of</strong> view <strong>of</strong> thelaw. The advocates <strong>of</strong> that opinion forget that the violation<strong>of</strong> the rights <strong>of</strong> private owners is characteristic <strong>of</strong> statesthat are at a low stage <strong>of</strong> social and political development.It is sufficient <strong>to</strong> recall the Muscovy period, when the tsar<strong>of</strong>ten <strong>to</strong>ok land away from private owners and later grantedit <strong>to</strong> his favourites and <strong>to</strong> the monasteries. What did thatattitude <strong>of</strong> the government lead <strong>to</strong>? The consequences werefrightful” (619).Such was the use made <strong>of</strong> Plekhanov’s “res<strong>to</strong>ration <strong>of</strong>Muscovy Rus”! Nor is Vetchinin the only one <strong>to</strong> harp onthis string. In the First Duma, the landlord N. Lvov, whowas elected as a Cadet and then went over <strong>to</strong> the Right,and after the dissolution <strong>of</strong> the First Duma negotiatedwith S<strong>to</strong>lypin for a place in the Ministry—that personage

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!