Stalin Quotes on strategy and tactics

About strategy and tactics

 The strategy changes at moments of historical turns, turning points, it embraces the period from one turn (turning point) to another, therefore it directs movement towards a certain common goal that embraces the interests of the proletariat for this entire period; it strives to win the war between classes that fills the entire this period, which is why it remains unchanged during this period.

Tactics, on the contrary, are determined by the ebb and flow of the tides based on a given turn, a given strategic period, the relationship of the contending forces, the forms of struggle (movement), the pace of movement, the arena of struggle at each given moment, in each given area, and since these factors change depending on the conditions of place and time from one turn to another, then tactics , embracing not the entire war, but only its individual battles leading to the winning or losing of the war, changes (can change) several times during the strategic period. The strategic period is longer than the tactical period. Tactics are subordinated to the interests of strategy. Tactical successes, generally speaking, prepare the way for strategic successes. The task of tactics is to lead the masses into battle in such a way, to give such slogans, to lead the masses to new positions, so that the struggle results in the total winning of the war, that is, strategic success. But there are cases when tactical success undermines or delays strategic success, which is why tactical successes should be neglected in such cases.

("On Political Strategy and Tactics" vol. 5 p. 64.)

The art of a strategist and tactician is to skillfully and timely translate the slogan of agitation into a slogan of action, and also timely and skillfully cast the slogan of action into certain specific directives .

("On Political Strategy and Tactics" vol. 5 p. 67.)

A strategic plan is a plan for organizing a decisive strike in the direction in which the strike is most likely to produce maximum results.

("On the question of strategy and tactics" vol. 5 p. 163.)

The most important task of tactics is to determine those ways and means, those forms and methods of struggle that most closely correspond to the specific situation at a given moment and most likely prepare strategic success. Therefore, the actions of tactics and their results should be assessed not in themselves, not from the point of view of the immediate effect, but from the point of view of the tasks and capabilities of the strategy.

("On the question of strategy and tactics" vol. 5 p. 166.)

...one of the features of the Bolshevik tactics is that it does not confuse the leadership of the party with the leadership of the masses, that it clearly sees the difference between the leadership of the first kind and the leadership of the second, that it is, therefore, a science not only of the leadership of the party, but also about the leadership of millions of working people.

(“The October Revolution and the tactics of Russian communists”) vol. 6 p. 390.)

 People who talk about retreat miss at least two things.

a) They do not know the laws of attack. They do not understand that an offensive without consolidating the conquered positions is an offensive doomed to failure.

When can an offensive be successful, say, in the field of military affairs? When people do not limit themselves to indiscriminate advances forward, but at the same time try to consolidate captured positions, regroup their forces in accordance with the changed situation, tighten up their rear, and bring in reserves. What is all this for? In order to guarantee oneself against surprises, eliminate individual breakthroughs from which no offensive is guaranteed, and thus prepare for the complete elimination of the enemy.

...

The same must be said about the laws of attack on the front of the class struggle. It is impossible to conduct a successful offensive to eliminate class enemies without consolidating the conquered positions, without regrouping your forces, without providing the front with reserves , without tightening up the rear , etc.

The whole point is that bunglers do not understand the laws of attack. The whole point is that the party understands them and puts them into practice.

b) They do not understand the class nature of the offensive. They are shouting about the attack. But an attack on which class, in alliance with which class? We are conducting an attack on the capitalist elements of the countryside in alliance with the middle peasants, for only such an attack can give us victory. But what should we do if, in the heat of enthusiasm of individual detachments of the party, the offensive begins to slip from the right path and turns its tip against our ally, against the middle peasant? Do we really need every attack, and not an attack on a certain class in alliance with a certain class? Don Quixote also imagined that he was advancing on his enemies, going to attack the mill. However, it is known that he cut his forehead during this, so to speak, offensive.

Apparently, Don Quixote’s laurels do not allow our “left” benders to sleep.

("Answer to Comrade Collective Farmers" vol. 12 pp. 215-216.)