Interpretation of Lenin's Principle of Democratic Centralism - ( from a Chinese Bourgeois disguised as Marxist)
Central Compilation and Translation Bureau
Forward; Erdogan A.
CCTB seems to be an anti-Communist, Trotskyite, revisionist dominated bureau. The writer with his/her sophistry try to distort and (probably consciously) make wrong deductions from Lenin's view to fit his/her own revisionist point of view. I should give some quotes from Lenin on the subject for the readers to compare with the writer's "deductive understanding" and "conclusions". I will not go through each subject, for that would be a waste of time since his genuine intention and distortions are so obvious.
Lenin criticizing such in kind said once; "The anti-Party group of Democratic Centralists came out against the Party line. Behind a cover of phrases about Democratic Centralism but in fact distorting that principle". It seems that the writer is an example of a similar group of what Lenin described in 1920. (1)
"Democratic centralism means only that representatives from the localities get together and elect a responsible body, which is to do the administering. Democratic centralism means that the congress supervises the work of the Central Committee, and can remove it and appoint another in its place." (2)
With his sophistry, and distortion and or making wrong deductions from the words of Lenin, he seems to be denying the Party’s leadership in socialist construction, with demagogy opposing democratic centralism and supporting "freedom of discussion" including on the subjects that are decided by the CC. Strict adherence to democratic centralism in the Party is the principle for a socialist party.
While the writer in some strange way separates the concept to "democracy" and "centralism" while Lenin clearly noting such philistines says ; "It would be inexcusable to forget that in advocating centralism we advocate exclusively democratic centralism. On this point all the philistines in general, and the nationalist philistines in particular have so confused the issue that we are obliged again and again to spend time clarifying it." (4)
Unlike the writers claims, insinuation and defense of a Minority and majority split, separation of Party and Party organizations Lenin defended the amalgamation of the groups and preventing any split through the application of democratic centralism principle; "Another important practical result was the amalgamation of the Minority and Majority groups. The split has been stopped. The Social-Democratic proletariat and its Party must be united. Disagreements on organisation have been almost entirely eliminated. There remains an important, serious and extremely responsible task: really to apply the principles of democratic centralism in Party organisation, to work tirelessly to make the local organisations the principal organisational units of the Party in fact, and not merely in name, and to see to it that all the higher-standing bodies are elected, accountable, and subject to recall. ." (5)
Writer seems to be totally against the authority of the Central Committee and defending a Party Organisation no different than the bourgeois parties of the West with different views and with minority and majority split. Lenin stresses the power and authority of the CC;
"On the question of organisation, we differed only as regards the rights of the editorial board of the Central Organ. We insisted on the right of the Central Committee to appoint and dismiss the editors of the Central Organ. We were all agreed on the principle of democratic centralism, on guarantees for the rights of all minorities and for all loyal opposition, on the autonomy of every Party organisation, on recognising that all Party functionaries must be elected, account able to the Party and subject to recall. We see the observance in practice of these principles of organisation, their sincere and consistent application, as a guarantee against splits, a guarantee that the ideological struggle in the Party can and must prove fully consistent with strict organisational unity, with the submission of all to the decisions of the Unity Congress." (6)
"The strict adherence to democratic centralism in the Party," says Stalin, "as the rules of our Party demand, the obligatory election of Party bodies, the right to nominate and to object to candidates, secret ballot, freedom of criticism and self-criticism - all these and similar measures must be carried out in order, among other things, to facilitate the testing and control of Party leaders by the Party membership." (7)
The writer starts his article with a quote from Lenin in order to insert "his own subjective deduction and advocation from it. " Lenin ends his comment with the words " We advocate democratic centralism" meaning we do not advocate "democracy". Lenin defended "democracy" as the best possible settings for the working class in a bourgeois society, not in a socialist society. Lenin defended "democratic process", not the "democracy" . A democratic process; "freedom of discussion, unity in action" in which all the point of views must be considered for the decision to implement. Lenin does not speak of democracy in its literal meaning except in bourgeois society in which he is more concerned about the "revolutionary democracy". As a communist, Lenin is well aware of the farce of "democracy" which is a dictatorship of one or other class at a given time. That's why, lets not confuse the "democracy" with the "democratic process". The writer, with his skilled sophistry and demagogy defends "democracy" while claiming that, he is not defending "democracy" of the first kind. He is literally defending a "bourgeois liberal democracy" not a "socialist democracy- which also means dictatorship of working class".
We can clearly see that fact in his comment ; "Stalin practiced personal autocracy and alienated democracy into monarchy." By saying that the writer exposes himself as an opponent of socialism which pre-requisites the "dictatorship of the proletariat with the Party at the head". As all other bourgeois writers, he does not come up with any supporting evidence to his claim. Interestingly enough, his lack of knowledge of the Soviet history, he is not even aware of the fact that Stalin, "the monarch", "the dictator" submitted his resignation four times. Is there any "dictator", "monarch" in the history who wanted to resign from his duty, not once, four times? (8)
This Chinese bourgeois writer disguised as Marxist continues; "The political system in Stalin's monarchical centralism is monarchy, and the centralization that serves it plays the role of "helping the tyrant to do evil". So, in his point of view , the Soviets were not socialist but a "monarchy". So it was the "monarchy of Stalin" who helped CCP and Chinese people against the Japanese and during the revolution. Writer must be getting his information from Wikipedia - a full of garbage history and gossips, propaganda in most cases.
It seems that the writer and quite a number of other academicians and "researchers" in China prefer and chose the Western anti-communist sources for their research, analyses and articles rather than the Soviet history, archives, classics (without distortion) and Marxist Leninist sources.
As long as these kind of writers remain to be influential in China, regardless of the socialist orientation of the system, the total restoration of capitalism together with the dissolution of party will be inevitable.
Notes
(1) Lenin, “Left-Wing” Communism: an Infantile Disorder
(2) Lenin, Ninth Congress of the R.C.P.(B.)
(3) Lenin, Freedom to Criticise and Unity of Action
(4) Lenin, Centralization and Autonomy
(5) Lenin, The Congress Summed Up
(6) Lenin, An Appeal to the Party by Delegates to the Unity Congress Who Belonged to the Former “Bolshevik” Group
(7) Stalin, Speech in Reply to Debate
(8) Stalin's resignation attempts - of being a dictator!!
**********
The democratic centralism that Lenin defined for the party is a combination of democracy and centralism. He said: "We must implement thorough centralism and resolutely expand democracy within the party organization." [1] "We have always defended democracy within the party in our press. But we have never opposed party centralism. We advocate democratic centralism." [2]
The essence of democratic centralism is management.
1. Democratic Centralism is a political organizational system that manages the Party through democracy and centralism.
When any large-scale organization is established, it must consider how to manage itself and determine its own management system. This is even more true for a country or a political party.
The political system of a country refers to who holds power and exercises it (decides all major issues). There are basically three forms, namely monarchy, aristocracy and democracy. Monarchy is one person holds power and exercises it. Aristocracy is a minority of people holding power and exercising it. Democracy is the people holding power, and as for how to exercise power (decide major issues), there are direct democracy and indirect democracy. When there are not many people, all members directly exercise power, which is direct democracy. When there are too many people to get together for a meeting, representatives are elected to form a representative body, that is, a power body, and the power body collectively exercises power, which is indirect democracy.
The structural form of a country refers to the relationship between its components and the whole. There are two types of national structures: centralized and decentralized. In modern times, the former is called unitary system, Lenin called it centralized system, and the latter is called federal system. When the centralized system is implemented, there is only one center, and the power of the local government is given by the center. The relationship between the components and the whole is that the components obey the whole, that is, the local government obeys the center. When the federal system is implemented, there are multiple centers, and the power of the federal center is distributed by the federal members. The federal center and the federal members each exercise their own power. The relationship between the components and the whole is the relationship between centers with different powers, and the components and the whole are independent. Switzerland's federal system is very distinctive. There are 26 criminal procedure rules in 26 states , and the states do not even have a unified history, language and cultural tradition.
Combining the two systems of state management means that a country's management system consists of the political system and organizational system, and the political-organizational system.
Take modern countries as an example. After mankind experienced the era of bourgeois revolution, democracy has become the trend of the times, and many countries have taken democracy as their political system orientation. However, what kind of structural form a country adopts cannot form the trend of the times, and can only be based on its own national conditions. Among the many countries that practice democracy, some countries, including China, have chosen centralization (unitary system) according to national conditions, while other countries, including the former Soviet Union and Russia, have chosen federalism according to national conditions. The two management systems in China are democracy and centralization. Combining them, the political organization system we use to manage the country is democratic centralism. The two management systems of the former Soviet Union and Russia are democracy and federalism. Combining them, the political organization system used by the two countries to manage the country is democratic federalism.
Let's take the countries in the feudal era of Western Europe as an example. Their political systems are all monarchies. As for the form of state structure, whether to choose a centralized or decentralized system, monarchies, like democratic countries, are based on national conditions. Generally speaking, in the early feudal era, for the sake of political stability, royal relatives were rewarded, and the form of state structure was a decentralized feudal system. In the late feudal era, the development of capitalism required a unified market. To adapt to this change in national conditions, the form of state structure adopted a centralized centralized system, that is, a centralized system. For the countries in the feudal era of Western Europe, the two early management systems were monarchy and feudal system, and the political organization system used to manage the country was the monarchy feudal system. The two late management systems were monarchy and centralized system, and the political organization system used to manage the country was the monarchy centralized system.
The situation of political parties is the same as that of the state. When a political party, such as the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, is established, it must also determine two management systems: one is the political system, that is, the political system, and the other is the structural form, that is, the organizational system. At the beginning of the establishment of the Russian Party, there was no disagreement in determining the former system, and the party unanimously agreed to implement a democratic system. However, differences arose when determining the latter system: Lenin advocated the adoption of a centralized structural form of centralization, while the Jewish Workers' Organization and the Mensheviks expressed opposition and advocated the adoption of a decentralized structural form. The Jewish Workers' Organization advocated the implementation of a federal system, advocating that the party organization and the party central committee each exercise their own power, that is, "each doing their own thing"; the Mensheviks advocated the implementation of an autonomous system. They only recognized the power of the party organization, not the power of the party central committee, and advocated that the party organization implement a thorough self-government. Lenin firmly advocated the implementation of a centralized system. He believed that in order to lead the proletariat to realize the great and arduous historical mission, the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party should not be a loosely structured party, a party that allows its own organizations to do their own thing, but should be a unified and centralized party, a party where the parts can obey the whole and the lower levels can obey the higher levels. After a long struggle, the party abandoned the federal system and the autonomous system, and the party accepted the central system. From the situation of the Russian party: the two management systems advocated by the Jewish workers' organization were democracy and federalism, and the political organization system used to manage the party was democratic federalism; the two management systems advocated by the Mensheviks were democracy and autonomy, and the political organization system used to manage the party was democratic autonomy; the two management systems advocated by Lenin and adopted by the party were democracy and centralism, and the political organization system used to manage the party was democratic centralism. Stalin practiced personal autocracy and alienated democracy into monarchy. During his reign, the two management systems of the party were monarchy and centralism. Combining them to manage the political organization system of the party was monarchical centralism.
To sum up, the democratic centralism stipulated by Lenin for the party is a political organizational system that manages the party through the two management systems of democracy and centralization.
As a political organizational system, the party's democratic centralism is a member of the world's political organizational system family.
2. Characteristics of the two management systems in democratic centralism
1. Characteristics of democracy.
The party is a large-scale organization with a large number of members. The democracy that Lenin prescribed for it is indirect democracy, that is, representative democracy. Lenin called it "democratic representation" and said it is a universal principle of international social democracy. [3]
This form of democracy has three characteristics: First, it implements an electoral system. The organs of power are elected, which is the way to start indirect democracy. Second, the organs of power collectively decide on major issues. The organs of power collectively exercise power and implement the principle of minority obeying the majority, which is the way power operates in a democratic system. Third, the exercise of power by the organs of power must reflect the will and interests of the majority, which is the fundamental attribute of democracy. Since the power holders and the power owners under the indirect democratic system are two subjects, the exercise of power may reflect or deviate from the will and interests of the majority of power owners. Since the exercise of power deviates from the right track, there are two manifestations: one is to use power for personal gain, and the other is to make decisions that are divorced from reality. For the above reasons, it is required that the exercise of power by the organs of power must reflect the will and interests of the majority, that is, it is required that they must not use power for personal gain and make decisions that are in line with reality.
These are the three basic requirements for implementing the indirect democracy system, and also the three basic characteristics of the indirect democracy system. They are linked to each other: the first step is to select people to form the power organ, the second step is to require the elected power organ to collectively decide major issues, and the third step is to require the elected power organ to reflect the will and interests of the majority when deciding major issues, not to abuse power for personal gain, and to make decisions in accordance with reality.
2. Characteristics of centralization.
The centralism that Lenin stipulated for the party is a centralized structural form. Its concept was formed in the process of fighting against the federal system, especially the autonomy, within the party. Lenin summarized it as: "The part is subordinate to the whole, the minority is subordinate to the majority, and the lower is subordinate to the higher." [4] Among them, "the part is subordinate to the whole" and "the minority is subordinate to the majority" are synonymous terms used by Lenin. The two sentences have the same meaning but different expressions. Lenin sometimes uses one sentence, sometimes uses the other, and sometimes uses both sentences. Both sentences talk about the principle included in the centralism, and "the lower is subordinate to the higher" is the concrete embodiment of this principle. Lenin explained the relationship between them by saying: In the past, the party was not an organized whole, but the sum of groups that acted independently. Now, the party has become an organized whole and a power structure system composed of superior-subordinate relations. The part should be subordinate to the whole, and the lower should be subordinate to the higher. [5] The party that practices centralism is regarded as a power structure system composed of superior-subordinate relations because no matter how many levels the party organization is divided into, it is ultimately two poles, namely superiors and subordinates.
Centralization is not the same as autocracy. The centralization that Lenin stipulated for the party is a democratic centralization. The three sentences of the centralization concept all require obedience, and the core of the concept is obedience, but the obedience required by the party's centralization is different from the obedience required by other centralizations, such as monarchical centralization. The obedience required by the centralization that serves the monarchy is unconditional obedience, while the obedience required by the party's centralization is conditional obedience, which is obedience in action but allows disobedience in thought. Lenin defined the party's centralized discipline as two sentences: "unity of action, freedom of discussion and criticism." After the decision is passed, the minority has the right to freely discuss and criticize the decision while maintaining consistency with the majority in action. Moreover, "without freedom of discussion and criticism, the proletariat does not recognize unity of action." According to Lenin's definition, protecting the rights that the minority should have is a natural part of the discipline of the proletarian party. In the two sentences defined by Lenin, “unity of action” can prevent the occurrence of anarchy, while “freedom of discussion and criticism” can create conditions for the minority that holds the truth to transform into the majority. The former enables the party organization to always maintain its combat effectiveness, and the latter enables the party body to always maintain its vitality. This is Lenin’s innovation in the centralized structure. [6]
The party's democratic centralism is actually indirect democracy plus democratic centralism.
In summary, Lenin's democratic centralism is a political organizational system for managing the party. Managing the party means managing the power organs at all levels that emerge from the indirect democratic system, that is, the superior and subordinate organs of the party. The management method is to constrain them with two management systems: first, requiring them to implement the three basic requirements of the indirect democratic system, namely "elected", "collective decision on major issues", "the exercise of power must reflect the will and interests of the majority, power must not be used for personal gain, and decisions must be in line with reality"; second, requiring them to implement the requirements of democratic centralism, namely "subordinates must obey superiors" and allow "freedom of discussion and criticism" while "acting in unison".
3. The master-slave relationship between the two management systems in democratic centralism, their combination and implementation
Lenin's democratic centralism is composed of political system and organizational system, and is a political organizational system. As a political organizational system, it embodies the commonality of various political organizational systems, that is, the organizational system serves the political system.
Lenin's democratic centralism is composed of specific political systems and specific organizational systems, and is a specific form of the political organizational system. As a specific form of the political organizational system, it embodies a personality that is different from other specific forms of the political organizational system, that is, it requires the higher and lower party organs to implement both democracy and centralism, and requires them to combine the two according to their own positions.
When Lenin's democratic centralism emerged as a political organizational system, what we saw were its external characteristics.
When Lenin's democratic centralism appears as a concrete form of political organizational system, what we see is its internal mechanism.
1. The external characteristics of democratic centralism.
Lenin's democratic centralism is a member of the world's political organization system family. In each small family in this big family, the political system is the "head of the family" and the organizational system serves it. The organizational system is a means and the political system is the goal. From the previous discussion, we can see that whether it is a country or a political party, it first determines the political system and then chooses a suitable organizational system to serve it according to the situation, rather than first determining the organizational system and then choosing a suitable political system to serve it according to the needs. It is precisely because the political system plays a leading role in the political organization system that if the political system is good, the organizational system will play a good role, and if the political system is not good, the organizational system will play a bad role. The political system in Lenin's democratic centralism is democracy, and the centralization that serves it plays the role of "helping people to do good". The political system in Stalin's monarchical centralism is monarchy, and the centralization that serves it plays the role of "helping the tyrant to do evil".
This is the master-slave relationship between the political system and the organizational system in every political organization system. For Lenin's democratic centralism, the master-slave relationship between the two management systems is: democracy is the "master" and centralism is the "slave". Centralism serves democracy. Centralism is a means and democracy is the goal.
2. The internal mechanism of democratic centralism.
Lenin's democratic centralism is a political organizational system specifically used to manage the party's superior and subordinate organs. The management method is to constrain them with two management systems, requiring them to implement both democracy and centralism. However, in terms of attitudes towards democracy and centralism, superior and subordinate organs have different tendencies due to their different positions. Generally speaking, superior organs prefer the centralized system that requires subordinates to obey them, and do not like democracy very much, thinking that democracy is "in the way", and they are unwilling to be restricted. The inclination of subordinate organs is the opposite. They prefer democracy that allows them to "take charge", and do not like the centralized system that requires subordinates to obey them, and they are unwilling to be restricted. In order to restrict the power of the organs of power and prevent the alienation of the organs of power, Lenin's democratic centralism stipulates different requirements for how the superior and subordinate organs should combine democracy and centralism according to their different status. The requirement for the superior organs is that the implementation of centralism must be based on the implementation of democracy to prevent them from only wanting centralism and not democracy. The requirement for the subordinate organs is the opposite: the implementation of democracy must be based on the implementation of centralism to prevent them from only wanting democracy and not centralism. This is the internal mechanism of Lenin's democratic centralism, and Lenin's democratic centralism operates according to this mechanism. We will see below that once this mechanism is destroyed, Lenin's democratic centralism will be alienated and deteriorated.
The so-called implementation of centralism must be based on the implementation of democracy , which means that if the superior authority requires the subordinate authority to obey it, it must first implement democracy. As mentioned above, the implementation of democracy by the power authority must embody the three basic characteristics of indirect democracy.
First, the organs of power must be elected. The electoral system is the starting point and necessary condition for representative democracy. Today, in all places in the world where representative democracy is practiced, the electoral system and representative democracy are mentioned together and are inseparable.
Second, the organs of power must collectively decide on major issues and implement the principle of minority obeying the majority, which is the way power operates in a democracy. In terms of the way power operates, if major issues are not decided collectively but by individuals or a small number of people, democracy will become monarchy or aristocracy, and democratic centralism will become monarchical centralism or aristocratic centralism.
Third, the exercise of power by power organs must reflect the will and interests of the majority, and must not abuse power for personal gain. The decision must be in line with reality. This is the fundamental attribute of democracy. In the direct democratic system, the exercise of power by power organs must reflect the will and interests of the majority, and there is no problem of abuse of power for personal gain, because in the direct democratic system, the power holder and the power holder are the same subject, and the pursuit of personal gain is for the power holder himself. There is no problem of being divorced from reality here, because people decide issues based on actual needs, will not fool themselves with political achievements and image projects, and will not be subjective or bureaucratic. However, in the indirect democratic system, since the power holder and the power holding are no longer the same subject, but two subjects, the exercise of power may reflect the will and interests of the majority, or it may deviate from the will and interests of the majority. When the latter situation occurs, it may manifest as abuse of power for personal gain, or it may manifest as decisions divorced from reality, and it may manifest as bureaucratic and subjectivism divorced from reality. When the power holders become a privileged class that only seeks their own interests, democratic centralism becomes the centralism of the privileged class. When the power holders become thorough bureaucrats or thorough subjectivists, democratic centralism becomes bureaucratic centralism or subjectivist centralism. All our efforts to regulate the exercise of power today are for one purpose: to control the operation of power and prevent it from going off the right track. The form of democracy can change, but the fundamental attributes of democracy cannot change. Whether it is direct democracy or indirect democracy, the exercise of power must reflect the will and interests of the majority, and power must not be used for personal gain. Decisions must be made in accordance with reality.
Given that the political system plays a leading role in the political organizational system, if the political system is good, the organizational system serving it will play a good role, and if the political system is bad, the organizational system serving it will play a bad role; given that the superior organs require the subordinate organs to obey themselves but do not first implement the three basic requirements of democracy, the superior organs themselves may be alienated and degenerate, and the centralization that serves them may become a tool and means of "aiding and abetting evil" - in view of this, Lenin's democratic centralism takes precautions and requires that the superior organs must base the implementation of centralization on the implementation of democracy to prevent them from only wanting centralization and not democracy. In today's words: centralization is centralization on the basis of democracy.
As for the implementation of democracy, it is necessary to implement centralism as a prerequisite . This means that when lower-level organs decide on issues, they must be guided by the decisions of higher-level organs. They must not contradict them, nor should they pretend to obey them and violate them, or have different policies at the bottom. When all Party organizations at all levels decide on issues, they must be guided by the decisions of the Central Committee and be consistent with the Central Committee in their actions. If we deny that lower-level organs must obey higher-level organs, deny that the part must obey the whole, and deny that the minority must obey the majority, democracy will become a system of individual rule and decentralism, and become anarchism. Lenin's democratic centralism requires that lower-level organs must be guided by the decisions of higher-level organs in implementing democracy, and that they must act in unison with higher-level organs to prevent them from preferring democracy over centralism. In today's terms, democracy is democracy under centralized guidance.
"Centralization on the basis of democracy" and "democracy under centralized guidance" are the activity trajectories of the operating mechanism of Lenin's democratic centralism. The party is a power structure system composed of superior-subordinate relations. In this power structure system, the central government is the highest level of superiors, a pure superior, and it implements the requirements of Lenin's democratic centralism for superiors, that is, centralization on the basis of democracy. Grassroots organizations are the lowest level of subordinates, pure subordinates, and they implement the requirements of Lenin's democratic centralism for subordinates, that is, democracy under centralized guidance. The intermediate levels are subordinates to the upper level and superiors to the lower level. They are both superiors and subordinates. They must be centralized on the basis of democracy and democratic under centralized guidance.
Lenin's democratic centralism puts forward different requirements on how the superior and subordinate organs of the party should combine democracy and centralism according to their different status, aiming to prevent the alienation and degeneration of the party's power organs. This is the inherent requirement of Lenin's democratic centralism. Whether the party's democratic centralism is well implemented depends on whether the superior organs have achieved centralization on the basis of democracy and whether they have first implemented democracy when requiring subordinate organs to obey them. For subordinate organs, it depends on whether they have achieved democracy under centralized guidance and whether they have been guided by the decisions of the superior organs when making democratic decisions and whether they have been consistent with the superior organs in their actions.
The two requirements that Lenin's democratic centralism sets for higher and lower organs are also the two functions that it sets for itself. The first function is to manage the higher organs of the Party well and prevent them from preferring centralism to democracy, which would lead to alienation and degeneration. The second function is to manage the lower organs well and prevent them from preferring democracy to centralism, which would lead to alienation and degeneration.
Stalin pursued personal dictatorship, which meant that he did not want democracy but only wanted centralization, and this was carried to the extreme, resulting in the alienation and degeneration of the power organs. He only wanted centralization but not democracy, and in the end, he destroyed the democracy that Lenin demanded, turning the power exercised by the collective into the power exercised by the individual, and also tampered with the centralization that Lenin demanded, turning the conditional centralization into unconditional centralization, turning it into a centralization that served personal dictatorship, and turning it into a tool and means of "helping the tyrant to commit atrocities." Ultimately, Lenin's democratic centralism was alienated into monarchical centralism.
The implementation of Lenin's centralization includes two aspects. In order to fulfill the historical mission of the proletariat, the proletarian party must implement centralization in terms of structure. This is one aspect. On the other hand, the implementation of centralization by the proletarian party is conditional. First, the implementation of centralization must be based on the implementation of democracy, requiring subordinates to obey superiors. First of all, superiors must implement democracy. This is the inherent requirement of Lenin's democratic centralism. Second, the implementation of centralization is not the implementation of general centralization, but the implementation of party centralization, that is, centralization that includes two elements, which requires both "unity of action" and "freedom of discussion and criticism". These are the two one-two and two-one prerequisites for the proletarian party to implement centralization. When implementing centralization, the proletarian party must emphasize both aspects at the same time. If it only emphasizes its necessity and importance when implementing centralization, but does not emphasize its prerequisites, it is equivalent to opening the door for other political systems other than democracy to enter the room and giving it a green light to tamper with the party's centralization for "my" use. The historical lesson of democratic centralism being alienated into monarchical centralism is worth remembering.
Of the two functions of Lenin's democratic centralism, the first is the most important, as it concerns the overall situation and the future of the party.
To sum up, the democratic centralism stipulated by Lenin for the Party is a political organizational system that manages the Party through the two management systems of democracy and centralization. It is a fundamental system for scientifically managing the Party’s higher and lower organs through the combination of democracy and centralization. It is the fundamental guarantee for the Party’s power to operate in a standardized manner.
IV. The Relationship between the Party’s Democratic Centralism and the Party’s Democracy
The party's democratic centralism and the party's democracy are two different categories. Implementing the party's democratic centralism does not mean implementing the party's democracy.
The party's democratic centralism is democracy plus centralism. From the literal meaning, it is the same concept as the party's democracy, except that there is an additional centralism. In fact, it is not. To say that the party's democratic centralism is democracy plus centralism is to say that it is the party's indirect democracy plus centralism. This is because centralism can only be combined with indirect democracy, not direct democracy. Centralism requires subordinates to obey superiors. Only indirect democracy has multiple levels of organization, so there are superiors and subordinates, while direct democracy is a one-level organization without superiors and subordinates. In the party's democratic centralism, centralism is based on the premise that democracy takes the form of indirect democracy. The two are closely related.
The reason why the party’s democratic centralism and the party’s democracy are two different categories is, first of all, because the party’s indirect democracy and the party’s democracy are two different categories.
On May 31 , 1906 , Lenin explained what party democracy was all about in his article “Let the Workers Decide”. He pointed out: “At present, the entire party organization is organized on the principle of democracy. That is, all party members elect the leaders, the members of the committee, etc., all party members discuss and decide the questions of the proletarian political movement, and all party members determine the strategy and policy of the party organization.” [7]
Lenin said here that the party’s democratic system takes all party members as the main body, and the concept of the party’s democratic system is that all party members hold all power in the party and all party members decide all major issues of the party.
The party's democracy includes two forms: direct democracy and indirect democracy. Under the direct democracy system, all party members not only hold power, but also exercise it directly. However, when there are many party members and the territory is vast, and the indirect democracy system has to be implemented, all party members only hold power, but do not exercise it directly, but indirectly, by electing representative organs to entrust representative organs to exercise power. This is the source of the power exercised by the party's representative organs at all levels, that is, the power organs. The power exercised by the party's power organs at all levels belongs to all party members, and they themselves are not the owners of the party's power. In the case of indirect democracy, that is, representative democracy, our country's democracy is expressed in the Constitution as follows:
"All power in the People's Republic of China belongs to the people. The organs through which the people exercise state power are the National People's Congress and the local people's congresses at all levels." The party democracy that Lenin talked about can also be expressed as follows when indirect democracy, that is, "democratic representation," is implemented: "All power in the party belongs to all party members. The organs through which all party members exercise the party's power are the National Party Congress and local congresses at all levels, as well as the committees produced by each congress."
In order to ensure that all party members can exercise power indirectly, as a matter of course, the first requirement is that when electing representative bodies, i.e. power bodies, the will of the voters as power holders must be fully reflected in who is elected and who is not elected, so as to avoid entrusting the wrong people. The second requirement is that the elected representative bodies must exercise power collectively and directly. It is not appropriate to implement indirect democracy in indirect democracy. The traditional practice, including that of our party, is to limit the power organs to congresses at all levels and their elected committees. The more indirect the democracy, the easier it is for power to be alienated. The third requirement is that the power organs must reflect the will and interests of the power holders when exercising power. In the case of minority obeying the majority, it means reflecting the will and interests of the majority of power holders. They must not use power for personal gain, and decisions must meet their actual needs. This is true for direct democracy, and it should also be true for indirect democracy. It is a prerequisite to implement indirect democracy instead of direct democracy.
Under the indirect democratic system, all party members not only stipulate the above three requirements for the representative organs, but also need to regularly understand the implementation of these requirements and supervise them. They have the right to know, participate, express and supervise the exercise of power. After entrusting power to another subject to exercise, the power owner must ensure that he will not lose control of the power, just like a business owner who entrusts the business to others to operate will not rely solely on the self-discipline of the operator and ignore the operating conditions.
This is the concept of party democracy.
The "democracy" in the party's democracy system and the "democracy" in the indirect democracy system are both democracy, but the connotations of the two democracies are completely different. The former is about how all party members exercise power in different ways under the direct democracy system and the indirect democracy system. The latter is about the three requirements for the power organs to implement the indirect democracy system, namely: the power organs are elected, the power organs collectively decide major issues, and the power organs decide issues to reflect the will and interests of the majority of power holders. The two democracies are two different concepts of democracy, one is a big concept of democracy, and the other is a small concept of democracy.
To implement the party's democracy is to implement democracy in a broad sense. To implement the party's democratic centralism is to implement indirect democracy plus centralism, and to combine democracy in a narrow sense with centralism. To implement the party's democracy is to give full play to the role of all party members as the party's power holders. To implement the party's democratic centralism involves how the party's power organs combine the three requirements of indirect democracy with centralism, how to manage the party's superior and subordinate organs well, and how to perform the two functions of Lenin's democratic centralism.
The party’s democratic centralism is a combination of indirect democracy and centralism, and falls within the category of indirect democracy.
The party's democracy includes two forms: direct democracy and indirect democracy, which also includes democratic centralism as a category of indirect democracy.
Party democracy is a broad concept, and party democratic centralism is a smaller concept within the broader concept.
5. In implementing Lenin’s democratic centralism, what requirements should be stipulated in the Party Constitution?
Lenin's democratic centralism is (indirect) democracy plus centralism. To implement Lenin's democratic centralism, four requirements should be stipulated: the requirements for implementing (indirect) democracy, the requirements for implementing centralism, the master-slave relationship between (indirect) democracy and centralism, and how to combine (indirect) democracy and centralism for implementation.
There are four requirements that should be stipulated for the implementation of (indirect) democracy:
1. All Party power belongs to all Party members.
The organs through which all Party members exercise Party power are the National Party Congress, local congresses at all levels, and the committees produced by the congresses at each level.
2. Elected by power organs at all levels.
3. Power organs at all levels shall collectively decide major issues and implement the principle of minority obeying the majority.
The collective decision-making on major issues is the basic characteristic that distinguishes democracy from monarchy and aristocracy. If the power is not decided by the collective but by individuals or a few people, democracy will become monarchy or aristocracy.
4. When exercising power and making decisions, power organs at all levels must reflect the will and interests of the majority of power holders. First, they must not abuse power for personal gain; second, decisions must be in line with reality.
This is the fundamental attribute of democracy. It is the characteristic of direct democracy. For the power holders, it is a prerequisite to practice indirect democracy instead of direct democracy. According to the first requirement, everything from general abuse of power for personal gain to all kinds of corruption and bribery are opposed. According to the second requirement, all kinds of political achievement projects, image projects, and all kinds of formalism, subjectivism and bureaucracy are opposed.
There are two requirements that should be stipulated when implementing a centralized system .
Lenin's centralism is a centralized structural form, which is in contrast to the decentralized structural form of autonomy. The concept of autonomy is "each party organization is independent", while the concept of centralism is the opposite, which is "the part is subordinate to the whole, the minority is subordinate to the majority, and the lower level is subordinate to the higher level". The first requirement that should be stipulated for the implementation of centralism is:
5. The part obeys the whole or the minority obeys the majority, the lower level obeys the higher level, and the whole party obeys the Central Committee.
In this provision: the two clauses in the first sentence are synonyms used by Lenin, which are the principle of centralism; the second sentence is the concretization of this principle; the third sentence is a further concretization of the second sentence and is also its highest expression.
Lenin's centralism is a democratic centralism. The obedience it requires is obedience in action, but disobedience in thought is permitted, and the former is premised on the latter. The second requirement that should be stipulated for the implementation of centralism is:
6. “Action unity, freedom of discussion and criticism.” After a decision is adopted, action unity must be maintained, but the minority has the right to freely discuss and criticize the decision adopted by the majority, and action unity must be based on the premise of allowing free discussion and criticism.
Lenin's democratic centralism is both a political organization system and a specific form of the political organization system. As a political organization system, it shows its external characteristics, and as a specific form of the political organization system, it shows its internal mechanism. The implementation of Lenin's democratic centralism should also highlight its external characteristics and operate its internal mechanism.
The external characteristics of democratic centralism are as follows: in the political organizational system, the political system occupies a primary position, and the organizational system occupies a subordinate position. The centralized organizational system serves the (indirect) democratic political system. The former is a means and the latter is an end.
According to the master-slave relationship between the two management systems in the political organizational system, when a country’s fundamental law (constitution) announces to the world its orientation on the two management systems, it always announces its orientation on the political system first, and then announces its orientation on the organizational system. Similarly, when a party’s fundamental law (party constitution) announces to the world its orientation on the two management systems, it also announces its orientation on the political system first, and then announces its orientation on the organizational system.
The internal mechanism of democratic centralism is the combination of "centralization based on democracy" and "democracy under centralized guidance", neither of which can be dispensed with. For higher-level organs, the implementation of centralization is based on the implementation of (indirect) democracy, and centralization is based on democracy; for lower-level organs, the implementation of (indirect) democracy is based on the implementation of centralization, and democracy is based on centralized guidance.
The above are the requirements that should be stipulated in the Party Constitution when implementing Lenin’s democratic centralism, as well as the theoretical basis for stipulating these requirements.
The purpose of stipulating Lenin's democratic centralism in the party constitution is, in the final analysis, to manage the higher and lower party organs through the combination of (indirect) democracy and centralism, to prevent them from undermining the internal mechanism of democratic centralism and to prevent the abuse of the power entrusted to them by all party members. Lenin himself practiced this. [8] His guiding ideology was: sovereignty belongs to the people (all party members).
Notes :
[1] The Complete Works of Lenin, 2nd edition , Vol. 11 , p. 325. [
2] Ibid., Vol . 27 , p . 89. [
3] Ibid., Vol . 10 , p. 300.
[ 4] “What did Lenin say about party centralism” (Study Times, January 7 and 14 , 2008 , No. 419 and 420 )
[5] The Complete Works of Lenin, 2nd edition , Vol . 8 , pp. 366-367 .
[6] “How Lenin talked about the discipline of the proletarian party” ( Study Times, October 13 and 20 , 2008, No. 457 and 458 ) . [ 7
] The Complete Works of Lenin, 2nd edition , Vol . 13 , pp . 191-192 . [8] “ The implementation of centralism must be based on the implementation of democracy” (Study Times, January 21 , No. 421 ) .
(Author's unit: Central Compilation and Translation Bureau)
.jpg)
No comments