Lenin and Stalin - ON REVOLUTIONARY SITUATION
Assessment of Objective and Subjective Conditions
Collected writings from Lenin and Stalin researched and compiled for various articles on the subject.
Download PDF (298 pages)
Collected writings from Lenin and Stalin researched and compiled for various articles on the subject.
Download PDF (298 pages)
Introduction
“It is the ABC of Marxism that
the tactics of the socialist proletariat cannot be the same both when
there is a revolutionary situation and when there is no revolutionary
situation.” Lenin, Page 227
As
in general, determining the path of revolution in particular constitutes
important and decisive factors in the formation of the political line of
the revolutionary party. Marxist-Leninist party or organization cannot play an
important role in the development of the proletariat and the revolutionary
struggle of the people without a clear strategic line, because the correct
tactics can be defined and applied to life on the basis of strategic line.
The strategic line essentially
identifies key contradictions in a concrete process. While drawing the strategic line
of the party, or organization, it decides its specific goals and strategic
tasks depending on the general, determines the main enemy and
driving forces of the revolution and the internal and external allies of the
working class in particular. Therefore, the strategy refers to the
path of the revolution, that is, the nature of the struggle to radically
transform the existing social conditions, to undertake the task of eliminating
capitalist exploitation and building socialism. As Stalin defines; “Strategy
deals with the main forces of the revolution and their reserves. It changes
with the passing of the revolution from one stage to another but remains basically unchanged throughout a given stage.” Stalin, Page 263
Tactics
consist of determining the tools to be used to advance towards strategic
goals, the forms of organization to be adopted and the struggle to overcome
problems in each given specific conditions. As Stalin defines; “Tactics deal
with the forms of struggle and the forms of organization of the proletariat,
with their changes and combinations. During a given stage of the revolution tactics
may change several times, depending on the flow or ebb, the rise or
decline, of the revolution.” Stalin,
Page 263
In
particular, the assessment of “revolutionary situation” is the mother of all
assessments. Every form and tactics related to the revolutionary struggle in a
given concrete situation is determined by the assessment of the “Revolutionary
Situation” - the existing objective and subjective conditions - at that
given time, not by abstract slogans learned by rote to serve the petty
bourgeois inclinations. “If we are to remain true to Marxism” says Lenin,
“we cannot and should not try, by resorting to generalities, to shirk
the task of analyzing the objective conditions; for, in the last analysis, the
appraisal of these conditions provides the final answer to the questions.”
Lenin, Page
47
It
is a common habit of vacillating petty bourgeois in general and variations of
Trotskyism in particular to call on people to revolution where there is no
revolutionary situation, and to reject uprising where there is revolutionary
situation. Turkey, where once was a castle of Stalinists with full of active
struggle and following where Trotskyism and its open and hidden variations
mushroomed after 1990s serves as a concrete example to this habit. Trots
and variations are calling for “socialist revolution” in order to topple the
religious autocracy based on the factual argument that the parliament is not
active and that alone constitutes the existence of “revolutionary situation”.
Contrary
to Trotskyites and its variations’ claim, Lenin states;
“We must not appraise the revolutionary
situation in the country from the standpoint of what goes on in the Duma.
On the contrary, we must appraise questions and incidents that arise in the
Duma from the standpoint of the revolutionary situation in the country.”
Lenin, [14]
One
does not have to be a scholar of Marxism Leninism in order to respond to
the question of “What could be the “Revolutionary Situation “ in a country
where over % 99 of the population have deep illusion of parliamentarism,
over % 50 of it is not only reactionary but actively counter revolutionary, %
25+- of the remaining is mainly interested in “bourgeois democratic rights”
related to themselves, most of the rest believe in “parliamentary road to
socialism”, and there is no strong ML Party embracing the large masses. These
are the objective and subjective conditions at this given concrete conditions
which constitutes the non-existence of revolutionary situation. As Lenin puts it;
“Marx’s method consists, first
of all, in taking due account of the objective content of a historical process
at a given moment, in definite and concrete conditions; this in order to
realise, in the first place, the movement of which class is the mainspring of
the progress possible in those concrete conditions.” Lenin, Page 152
It
is not the far-left agitations, one or more existing crisis, but it is the totality
of all the changes in objective and subjective conditions that constitutes a
revolutionary situation. As Lenin explains; “it is neither chance nor the
result of any demagogy or agitation, but the objective conditions of the crisis
brought about by the war and the sharpening of class contradictions that
now generate strikes, demonstrations and other similar manifestations of mass
revolutionary struggle.” Lenin, [2]
The
general crisis of capitalism, the trend of which will become steadily deeper
makes us draw the general conclusion that the revolutionary situation
and thus the socialist revolution is on the agenda. However, what is on
the agenda in general, may or may not be in the agenda in particular,
assessment for which is called “revolutionary situation”
What is “revolutionary
situation?”
“To
the Marxist” Lenin
says,” it is indisputable that a revolution is impossible without a
revolutionary situation; furthermore, it is not every revolutionary
situation that leads to revolution. What, generally speaking, are the
symptoms of a revolutionary situation? We shall certainly not be mistaken if
we indicate the following three major symptoms:
(1) when it is impossible for the ruling classes
to maintain their rule without any change; when there is a crisis, in one
form or another, among the “upper classes”, a crisis in the policy of the
ruling class, leading to a fissure through which the discontent and
indignation of the oppressed classes burst forth. For a revolution to take
place, it is usually insufficient for “the lower classes not to want” to
live in the old way; it is also
necessary that “the upper classes should be unable” to live in the old way;
(2)
when the suffering and want of the oppressed classes have grown more
acute than usual;
(3)
when, as a consequence of the above causes, there is a considerable increase
in the activity of the masses, who uncomplainingly allow themselves to be
robbed in “peace time”, but, in turbulent times, are drawn both by all the
circumstances of the crisis and by the “upper classes” themselves into
independent historical action.
"Without
these objective changes, which are independent of the will, not only of
individual groups and parties but even of individual classes, a revolution, as
a general rule, is impossible. The totality of all
these objective changes is called a revolutionary situation.”
Lenin, Collapse of 2nd International
And
“without these objective changes, which are independent of the will,
not only of individual groups and parties but even of individual classes, a
revolution, as a general rule, is impossible. The totality of all
these objective changes is called a revolutionary situation.” Lenin, Page 162
Lenin
stresses the fact that the “objective conditions” alone is not sufficient for
the arising of “revolutionary situation;
” it is not every revolutionary situation that gives rise to a revolution;
revolution arises only out of a situation in which the above-mentioned
objective changes are accompanied by a subjective change, namely, the
ability of the revolutionary class to take revolutionary mass action strong
enough to break (or dislocate) the old government, which never, not even in
a period of crisis, “falls”, if it is not toppled over.” Lenin, Page
162
Apart from the Trotskyites in
varying shades who hide behind far-left slogans and gamble on the future and
life of laboring masses from afar, Marxist Leninists do not take the issue of
Revolution and the analysis of objective and subjective conditions for the
revolutionary situation lightly. As Enver Hodja well puts it;
“While
adhering unwaveringly to the teachings of Marxism-Leninism on the violent
revolution as a universal law, the revolutionary party of the working class
is resolutely opposed to adventurism and never plays with armed insurrection.
In all conditions and circumstances, it carries out an unceasing revolutionary
struggle and activity in various forms, in order to prepare itself and the
masses for the decisive battles in the revolution, for the overthrow of the
rule of the bourgeoisie with revolutionary violence. But only when the
revolutionary situation has fully matured does it put armed insurrection
directly on the order of the day and take all the political, ideological,
organizational and military measures to carry it through to victory.” Enver Hodja, [1]
Lenin
points the essence of tactical approach in two different situation.
“Today there is no revolutionary
situation, the conditions that cause unrest among the masses or heighten their
activities do not exist; today you are given a ballot paper—take it, learn to
organise so as to use it as a weapon against your enemies, not as a means of getting cushy
legislative jobs for men who cling to their parliamentary seats for fear of
having to go to prison. Tomorrow your ballot paper is taken from you and you
are given a rifle or a splendid and most up-to-date quick-firing gun—take this
weapon of death and destruction, pay no heed to the mawkish snivelers who are
afraid of war; too much still remains in the world that must be destroyed
with fire and sword for the emancipation of the working class; if anger and
desperation grow among the masses, if
a revolutionary situation arises, prepare to create new organisations and
use these useful weapons of death and destruction against your own government
and your own bourgeoisie.” Lenin, Page 162
In
summarizing the assessment of revolutionary situation in totality – both
objective and subjective conditions, Lenin says that “We must examine:
firstly, the nature of the present revolutionary situation from the
standpoint of the general tendencies of social, economic and political
development; secondly, the political grouping of classes (and
parties) in Russia today; thirdly, the basic tasks of the Social-Democratic
Labour Party in this situation and with this political grouping of the
social forces.” Lenin, Page 73
Objective conditions
Lenin
in his response to P. Nezhdanov who charged Marx and Lenin with inconsistency,
states;
“the connection nevertheless
exists, even if it is indirect; consumption must, in the final analysis, follow
production, and. if the productive forces are driving towards an unlimited
growth of production, while consumption is restricted by the proletarian
condition of the masses of the people, there is undoubtedly a contradiction
present. This contradiction does not signify the impossibility of capitalism,
but it does signify that its transformation to a higher form is a necessity:
the stronger this contradiction becomes, the more developed become the
objective conditions for this transformation, as well as the subjective
conditions, i.e., the workers’ consciousness of this contradiction.” Lenin,
[15]
Stating
the general assessment that “the period of imperialism i.e., one in which, as
all Marxists hold, the objective conditions are ripe for the collapse of
capitalism, and there are masses of socialist proletarians”, he stresses in
particular that “not the desires of individuals or groups, but the objective
conditions of the epoch give rise to the struggle.”
(Page 127) That’s
why, “We must study the objective conditions .. on the basis of
this objective analysis, we must separate the erroneous ideology of the
different classes from the real content of the economic, changes, and
determine what, on the basis of those real economic changes, is
required for the development of the productive forces and for the proletarian
class struggle.” (Page 78) And “when there are objective
conditions for a direct revolutionary onslaught by the masses, the Party’s supreme political task is “to
serve the spontaneous movement”. To contrast such revolutionary work with
“politics” is to reduce politics to chicanery. It means exalting political
action in the Duma above the political action of the masses in October and
December; in other words, it means abandoning the proletarian revolutionary
standpoint for that of intellectualist opportunism.”( Page
190) Because,
“the employment of one or other means of struggle depends on the objective
conditions of the particular crisis, economic or political, precipitated by
the war, and not on any previous decision that revolutionaries may have made.”
[3]. And “every form of struggle requires a corresponding technique and
a corresponding apparatus. When objective conditions make the parliamentary
struggle the principal form of struggle, the features of the apparatus for
parliamentary struggle inevitably become more marked in the Party. When, on
the other hand, objective conditions give rise to a struggle of the masses in
the form of mass political strikes and uprisings, the party of the proletariat
must have an “apparatus” to “serve” these forms of struggle, and, of course,
this must be a special “apparatus”, not resembling the parliamentary one. An
organised party of the proletariat which admitted that the conditions
existed for popular uprisings and yet failed to set up the necessary apparatus
would be a party of intellectualist chatterboxes; the workers would
abandon it and go over to anarchism, bourgeois revolutionism, etc.” Lenin, Page 190
“Regardless of the will and the consciousness,
the dreams and the theories, of the various individuals” says Lenin, “Marx
strives in a sober, materialist manner to determine its real historical
content, the consequences that must inevitably follow from it because of
objective conditions.” Lenin, Marx on the American “General
Redistribution” Because, “The objective conditions of social life and
the class struggle are more powerful than pious intentions and
written programmes.” Lenin, Page 101
Through
concrete assessments of the existing conditions without leaving the real
ground, Lenin says, “we have also learned, at least to some extent, another
art that is essential in revolution, namely, flexibility, the ability to effect
swift and sudden changes of tactics if changes in objective conditions demand
them, and to choose another path for the achievement of our goal if the
former path proves to be inexpedient or impossible at the given moment.”
Lenin, Page 243
Weighing
the importance of each conditions with the example of conversion of imperialist
war into civil war, Lenin states, “One must be able to uphold the Marxist point
of view, which says that this conversion of imperialist war into a civil war
should be based on objective, and not subjective, conditions.” [4]
Subjective Conditions
The
creation of the subjective conditions of the struggle for the seizure of power
is related to the activities for the working class gaining revolutionary
consciousness, understanding the significance of economic, political and
ideological problems, and reaching certain level of revolutionary maturity and sound
vanguard organization. Even the objective conditions are ripe, without the
existence of subjective conditions a revolution or success of revolution is not
possible.
“Some
people think that it is enough to note the objective process
of extinction of the class in power in order to launch the attack. But that
is wrong” says Lenin. “In addition to this, the subjective conditions
necessary for a successful attack must have been prepared. It is precisely
the task of strategy and tactics skillfully and opportunely to make the
preparation of the subjective conditions for attacks fit in with the
objective processes of the extinction of the power of the ruling class.”
Lenin, Page
39
“In preparing the subjective factor, as
Lenin wrote in his early works, the revolutionary party of the working class, its
leadership, education and Mobilization of the revolutionary masses play a
decisive role. The party achieves this both by working out a correct
political line, which responds to the concrete conditions and the
revolutionary desires and demands of the masses, and through a colossal amount
of work, involving intensive and politically well-pondered revolutionary
actions, which make the proletariat and the working masses conscious of the
situation in which they are living, of the oppression and exploitation, of the
barbarous laws of the bourgeoisie, and the absolute necessity for the
revolution as a means to overthrow the enslaving order.” Enver Hodjha, [1]
When objective and
subjective conditions for revolutionary situation exist
“one
of the main tasks .. in every revolutionary situation must be to arm the
people and to strengthen the military organisations of the proletariat”
[16], because “whether we like it or
not, and in spite of all “directives”, the acute revolutionary situation is
bound to convert a demonstration into a strike, a protest into a fight, a
strike into an uprising.” [17] and “in order to be able to
exercise this pressure from below, the proletariat must be armed—for in a
revolutionary situation matters develop with exceptional rapidity to the stage
of open civil war—and must be led by the Social-Democratic Party.” Lenin,
Page 39
As
Stalin notes in his reply to Sverdlov Comrades; “No hard and fast line can be
drawn between a “revolutionary upsurge” and a “direct revolutionary
situation.” One cannot say: “Up to this paint we have a revolutionary
upsurge; beyond it, we have a leap to a direct revolutionary situation.” Only
scholastics can put the question in that way. The first usually passes
“imperceptibly” into the second. The task is to prepare the
proletariat at once for decisive revolutionary battles, without
waiting for the “onset” of what is called a direct revolutionary situation.” Stalin, Page 290
As
it is clear, in example of Turkey Trots’ call for a revolution by itself is
meaningless not only because it totally ignores the existing objective and
subjective conditions, but not calling for “arming the people” for the revolution
(that may be because while they are sitting in their comfortable homes, they
expect the standing Turkish “army will switch side “and carry out the
revolution(see “Lenin vs Trotsky on Standing Army” ).
If
the revolutionary situation existed to some degree, they would have been right
to boycott the elections and call for revolution. As Lenin explains;
“By the force of circumstances,
of the revolutionary situation, there will be no elections at the “election”
meetings; they will be transformed into meetings for party agitation
outside of and despite the elections; in other words, the result will be
what is called “active boycott”.
The realities of the
revolutionary and counter revolutionary situation prove, more convincingly than
any number of arguments, that dreams about participating in the Duma for the
purpose of fighting are futile, and that the tactics of active boycott are
correct. “[5]
As
far as them calling everyone else, including the opposition to the religious
autocracy as “fascist”, and thus suggest that “Marxist Leninists cannot
compromise”, it would have been correct to some degree if the revolutionary
conditions were there.As Lenin explains;
“The communist resolution says
that the revolutionary situation calls for greater homogeneity in the party.
That is undeniable. The resolution of those who advocate “unity” with the
reformists attempts to evade this undeniable truth, without daring to dispute
it.
The Communist resolution says
that it is a feature of the situation in Italy that the condition demanding
submission to party decisions by the reformists has not been observed. That
is the gist of the matter. That being so, it is not merely a mistake but
a crime to allow the reformists to remain in the party at a time when
the general revolutionary situation is becoming acute, and the country may even
be on the eve of decisive revolutionary battles.” [6]
Marxist
Leninists do not leave the real ground and do not set forth tactics without the
concrete assessment of concrete conditions.
When objective and
subjective conditions lack
Lenin,
in his article “A Basic Question” gives an enlightening example; “What
classes do the Russian working masses consist of? Everybody knows that they
consist of workers and peasants. Which of these classes is in the majority? The
peasants. Who are these peasants as far as their class position is concerned?
Petty proprietors. The question arises: if the petty proprietors constitute
the majority of the population and if the objective conditions for socialism
are lacking, then how can the majority of the population declare in favour
of socialism? Who can say anything or who says anything about establishing
socialism against the will of the majority?” [7]
Considering
the conditions in example of Turkey where neither objective nor subjective
conditions exists, Trots must be proposing a socialism against the will of %99
thru military putsch.
When
the conditions of revolutionary situation non-exists, Lenin explains the task
at the given time in Russia;
“The
present new conditions require new forms of struggle. The use of the
Duma tribune is an absolute necessity. A prolonged effort to educate and
organise the masses of the proletariat becomes particularly important. The
combination of illegal and legal organisation raises special problems before
the Party. The popularization and clarification of the experience of the
revolution, which the liberals and liquidationist intellectuals are seeking to
discredit, are necessary both for theoretical and practical purposes. But the
tactical line of the Party—which must be able to take the new conditions into
account in its methods and means of struggle—remains unchanged. The correctness
of revolutionary Social-Democratic tactics, states one of the resolutions of
the conference, is confirmed by the experience of the mass struggle in 1905-07.
The defeat of the revolution resulting from this first campaign revealed,
not that the tasks were wrong, not that the immediate aims were “utopian”,
not that the methods and means were mistaken, but that the forces were
insufficiently prepared, that the revolutionary crisis was insufficiently wide
and deep… Let the liberals and terrified intellectuals lose heart after the
first genuinely mass battle for freedom, let them repeat like cowards: don’t go
where you have been beaten before, don’t tread that fatal path again. The
class-conscious proletariat will answer them: the great wars in history, the
great problems of revolutions, were solved only by the advanced classes
returning to the attack again and again—and they achieved victory after
having learned the lessons of defeat. Defeated armies learn well. The revolutionary
classes of Russia have been defeated in their first campaign, but the
revolutionary situation remains. In new forms and by other ways,
sometimes much more slowly than we would wish, the revolutionary crisis is
approaching, coming to a head again. We must carry on with the lengthy work
of preparing larger masses for that crisis; this preparation must be more
serious, taking account of higher and more concrete tasks; and the more
successfully we do this work, the more certain will be our victory in the
new struggle.” [8]
Wars
can be a trigger for the intensification of objective and subjective conditions.
An imperialist war, “among the Great Powers.. is creating a revolutionary
situation, is engendering revolutionary sentiments and unrest in the masses”, Lenin,
The Draft Resolution of the Left Wing at Zimmerwald “the war itself has
begun to teach, and is teaching, the masses the lesson of revolution, by
creating a revolutionary situation and by expanding and deepening it.”
[10]
The
importance of waging struggle for the creation of subjective conditions is that
due to the nature of capitalism objective conditions could rise
unexpectedly, and without the existence of subjective conditions, bourgeoisie
will be able to stop the spontaneous uprisings either by force or by giving
some concessions. In the case of Russian
example, Lenin comments; “A revolutionary situation was maturing in the
country and the tsarist government, preferring to free the peasants “from
above” rather than wait till they took action “from below,” was
preparing for the abolition of serfdom (the so-called Peasant Reform).” [11].
Assessing
the revolutionary situation in any given time, “history” says Lenin,
“is not to be convinced by speeches, …we see that to play with words and
wave a cardboard sword is useless.” [12]
The
tactics in both conditions determined with the interests of the laboring masses
and their struggle in mind, that’s to say, revolutionary in context subordinated
to socialist tasks. That’s why, “It is far more difficult—and far more
precious—to be a revolutionary when the conditions for direct, open, really
mass and really revolutionary struggle do not yet exist, to be able to
champion the interests of the revolution (by propaganda, agitation and
organisation) in non-revolutionary bodies, and quite often in downright
reactionary bodies, in a non-revolutionary situation, among the masses who
are incapable of immediately appreciating the need for revolutionary methods of
action.” [13]
When there are no
objective or subjective conditions for revolution
It is no coincidence that Lenin’s assessments at
each phase of revolution for the tactics differ and seems contradictory to
those who lack the application of Marxist dialectics in connection with the
revolutionary situation. Let’s read Stalin in reference to the importance of
the creation of subjective conditions:
“The first period was the
period of formation, of the creation of our
Party. It embraces the interval of time approximately from the foundation
of Iskra to the Third Party Congress inclusively (end of 1900
to beginning of 1905).
In
this period the
Party, as a driving force, was weak. It was weak not only because it itself was
young, but also because the working-class movement as a whole was young and
because the revolutionary situation, the revolutionary movement, was
lacking, or little developed, particularly in the initial stages of this
period (the peasantry was silent or did not go beyond sullen murmuring; the
workers conducted only partial economic strikes or political strikes covering a
whole town; the forms of the movement were of an underground or semi-legal
character; the forms of working-class organisation were also mainly of an
underground character).
The
Party's strategy—since strategy presupposes the existence of reserves and
the possibility of maneuvering with them—was necessarily narrow and
restricted. The Party confined itself to mapping the movement's strategic plan,
i.e., the route that the movement should take; and the Party's reserves—the
contradictions within the camp of the enemies inside and outside of
Russia—remained unused, or almost unused, owing to the weakness of the Party.
The
Party ‘s tactics, since tactics presuppose the utilisation of all forms of the
movement, forms
of proletarian organisation, their combination and mutual supplementation,
etc., with the object of winning the masses and ensuring strategic success,
were also necessarily narrow and without scope.
In
this period the
Party focused its attention and care upon the Party itself, upon its own
existence and preservation. At this stage it regarded itself as a kind of
self-sufficing force. That was natural: tsarism's fierce attacks upon the
Party, and the Mensheviks' efforts to blow it up from within and to replace the
Party cadres with an amorphous, non-Party body... threatened the Party's very
existence and, as a consequence, the question of preserving the Party
acquired paramount importance in this period.
The
principal task
of communism in Russia in that period was to recruit into the Party the best
elements of the working class, those who were most active and most devoted
to the cause of the proletariat; to form the ranks of the proletarian party and
to put it firmly on its feet. Comrade Lenin formulates this task as follows:
"to win the vanguard of the proletariat to the side of communism"
(see "Left-Wing" Communism.). “Stalin, Page 279
And
Lenin; “Even in peacetime, when there is no revolutionary situation, the
mass struggle of the workers against the capitalists—for instance, the mass
strike—gives rise to great bitterness on both sides, to fierce passions
in the struggle, the bourgeoisie constantly insisting that they remain and mean
to remain “masters in their own house”, etc. “
“And
in time of revolution, when political life reaches boiling point, an
organisation like the Soviets, which embraces all the workers in all branches
of industry, all the soldiers, and all the working and poorest sections of the
rural population—such an organisation, of its own accord, with the
development of the struggle, by the simple “logic” of attack and defense, comes
inevitably to pose the question point-blank. The attempt to take up a
middle position and to “reconcile” the proletariat with the bourgeoisie is
sheer stupidity and doomed to miserable failure.” Lenin, Page 227
Conclusion
Determining
the path of revolution in particular constitutes decisive factors in
the formation of the political line of the revolutionary party and its strategic
line. The strategic line identifies key contradictions in a concrete
process which remains basically unchanged throughout a given stage. Tactics
to be used to advance towards these strategic goal changes in each
given specific conditions. In order to determine the correct tactics for
the strategy in the path of revolution, assessment of each concrete situation
is made - not the assessment of each specific issue by itself but with its
dialectic connections to other issues. As Lenin explains, assessment “like
every other political question, must be considered by Marxists concretely
and not abstractly, taking into account the entire revolutionary situation as a
whole,” Lenin, Page 83
Assessment
for a call to revolution -maximum program - requires the existence of both
objective and subjective conditions for it. When there is no revolutionary
condition struggle is for -minimal program- the creation of subjective conditions
and thus intensifying the objective conditions. As Lenin clearly explains; “by
making implementation of the minimum program provisional revolutionary
government’s task eliminates the absurd, semi-anarchist ideas about giving
immediate effect to the maximum program, and the conquest of power for a
socialist revolution. The degree of economic development
.. (an objective condition) and the degree of class consciousness and
organisation of the broad masses of the proletariat (a subjective condition
inseparably connected with the objective condition) make the immediate
complete emancipation of the working class impossible.” Lenin, Page 39
Confronting
the democratic tasks and tactics for it when there is no “revolutionary
situation” with calls for “revolution” is typical to Trotskyites to hide behind
far-left mask and do nothing. Same Trots deny the proletarian alliance with the
poor peasantry where peasantry still significant, and yet declare the peasantry
“vanguard” of revolution where proletariat is significant. Unfortunately,
despite the fact that their counter-revolutionary mask has been exposed, they
still influence the petty bourgeois and likewise far-left organizations’
approaches.
Marxist
Leninists believe in the concrete assessment of every concrete situation,
without leaving the factual ground in order to determine the tactics to be
employed at a given situation. The assessment of “revolutionary situation”
is the mother of all assessment to which every assessment has to be connected. Every
assessment proceeds from the concrete assessment of existing objective
and subjective conditions.
As
both Marx and Lenin summarizes, regardless of the will and the consciousness,
the dreams and the theories of the various individuals, the consequences follow
from the objective conditions, because, the objective conditions of
social life and the class struggle are more powerful than pious intentions
and written programmes. The degree of class consciousness and organisation
of the broad masses of the proletariat that makes up the subjective
condition is inseparably connected with the objective condition, and only
their totality becomes decisive in the success of a revolution.
August
2020
Summary
of various article on the subject written in Turkish during the last four years.
E.A
Contents
Introduction - Page 4
Lenin, The Third Congress, May
1905 - Page 22
Lenin, On the Provisional
Revolutionary Government, June 1905 – Page 30
Lenin, Two Tactics of
Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution, July 1905 – Page 39
Lenin, The Russian Revolution and
the Tasks of the Proletariat March 1906 – Page 47
Lenin, Report on the Unity
Congress of the R.S.D.L.P, A Letter to the St. Petersburg Workers, May 1906 – Page
59
Lenin, The Workers’ Group in the
State Duma, May 1906 – Page 68
Lenin, The Platform of Revolutionary
Social-Democracy, March 1907 – Page 73
Lenin, The Agrarian Programme of
Social-Democracy in the First Russian Revolution, 1905-1907, December 1907 – Page
78
Lenin,
Two Letters, November 1908 –
Page 83
Lenin, How the
Socialist-Revolutionaries Sum Up the Revolution and How the Revolution has
Summed Them Up January
1909 – Page 101
Lenin,
Two Worlds, November 1910 – Page 117
Lenin,
To the Russian Collegium of the C.C February 1911 -Page 127
Lenin, The Platform
of the Reformists and the Platform of the Revolutionary Social-Democrats, November
1912 – Page130
Lenin, May Day Action by the
Revolutionary Proletariat, June 1913- Page 141
Lenin, Under a False Flag,
February 1915 – Page 152
Lenin, May day and the war, April
1915 - Page 160
Lenin, The Collapse of the Second
International, June 1915 – Page 162
Lenin, Opportunism, and the
Collapse of the Second International, December 1915 – Page 174
Lenin, The Crisis of Menshevism,
December 1906 – Page 190
Lenin, Wilhelm Kolb 6 George
Plekhanov, February 29, 1916 – Page 216
Lenin, Marxism and Insurrection, A
Letter to the Central Committee of the R.S.D.L.P.(B.), September 1917 – Page
218
Lenin, Afterword to The Theses on
The Question Of The Immediate Conclusion Of A Separate And Annexationist Peace,
January 1918 – Page 225
Lenin, The Proletarian Revolution
and the Renegade Kautsky, November 1918 – Page 227
Lenin, Fourth Anniversary of the
October Revolution, October 1921 – Page 243
Lenin, Bourgeois Pacifism and
Socialist Pacifism, January 1, 1923 – Page 253
Lenin, Our Revolution, (Apropos
of N. Sukhanov's Notes), January 1923 – Page 258
Stalin, The Foundations of
Leninism, 1924 – Page 263
Stalin, The Party Before &After
Taking Power, August 1921 – Page 279
Stalin, Reply to the Sverdlov
Comrades, February 10, 1930 – Page 290
Quotes;
[1] Enver Hodja, Imperialism and
revolution
[2] Lenin, The Second International
Socialist Conference at Kienthal
[3] Lenin, The International
Socialist Congress in Stuttgart.
[4] Lenin, The Seventh (April)
All-Russia Conference of the R.S.D.L.P.(B.)
[5] Lenin, The State Duma and Social-Democratic
Tactics
[6] Lenin, On the Struggle of the
Italian Socialist Party
[7] Lenin, A Basic Question
[8] Lenin, On the Road
[9] Lenin, The Draft Resolution of
the Left Wing at Zimmerwald
[10] Lenin,
The Voice of an Honest French Socialist
[11] Lenin,
Remarks on Books: G. V. Plekhanov.
[12] Lenin,
Extraordinary Fourth All-Russia Congress of Soviets,
[13] Lenin,
“Left-Wing” Communism: an Infantile Disorder
[14] Lenin,
The Workers’ Group in the State Duma
[15] Lenin,
Reply to Mr. P. Nezhdanov
[16] Lenin,
A Tactical Platform for the Unity Congress of the R.S.D.L.P.
[17] Lenin,
The Dissolution of the Duma and the Tasks of the Proletariat