Tuesday, October 24, 2017

The100thAnniversaryYearOfTheBolshevik-LedOctoberRevolution-Lessons-*From The Pen Of Vladimir Lenin- On The Need For Marxist Leadership

Click on the headline to link to a "Communist International Internet Archive" online copy of Lenin's 1920 report to the Second Congress Of the Communist International

Markin comment:

Leon Trotsky, co-leader of the Russian Revolution of 1917 along with Vladimir Lenin, was an early and vocal opponent of the norms of Bolshevik leadership prior to 1917. After he "saw the light" in 1917, in the heat of battle, there was no more important or impassioned proponent for that concept, nationally and internationally, until his murder in 1940 by a Stalinist agent. He argued, strenuously and repeatedly, that there was no substitute for a revolutionary party to lead the revolution. The international working class landscape of the 20th century is filled with examples of efforts that failed to take that piece of wisdom into account.

***********


Workers Vanguard No. 923
24 October 2008

On the Need for Marxist Leadership

(Quote of the Week)


Amid the carnage of the first interimperialist World War and as the treacherous leaders of the Second International supported their own bourgeoisies, Lenin and Trotsky’s Bolsheviks led the Russian proletariat to the seizure of state power in the 1917 October Revolution. Speaking at the 1920 Second Congress of the Communist International, which took place during revolutionary upheavals in capitalist Europe as well as a global economic crisis, Lenin stressed the indispensability of proletarian revolutionary leadership. The destruction of the Soviet Union in 1991-92 has led to a profound, though uneven, regression in political consciousness internationally, with most advanced workers no longer identifying their struggles with socialism. We fight to reimplant the ideas of Marxism as part of the struggle to forge revolutionary parties internationally.

Comrades, we have now come to the question of the revolutionary crisis as the basis of our revolutionary action. And here we must first of all note two widespread errors. On the one hand, bourgeois economists depict this crisis simply as “unrest,” to use the elegant expression of the British. On the other hand, revolutionaries sometimes try to prove that the crisis is absolutely insoluble.

This is a mistake. There is no such thing as an absolutely hopeless situation. The bourgeoisie are behaving like barefaced plunderers who have lost their heads; they are committing folly after folly, thus aggravating the situation and hastening their doom. All that is true. But nobody can “prove” that it is absolutely impossible for them to pacify a minority of the exploited with some petty concessions, and suppress some movement or uprising of some section of the oppressed and exploited. To try to “prove” in advance that there is “absolutely” no way out of the situation would be sheer pedantry, or playing with concepts and catchwords. Practice alone can serve as real “proof” in this and similar questions. All over the world, the bourgeois system is experiencing a tremendous revolutionary crisis. The revolutionary parties must now “prove” in practice that they have sufficient understanding and organisation, contact with the exploited masses, and determination and skill to utilise this crisis for a successful, a victorious revolution.

It is mainly to prepare this “proof” that we have gathered at this Congress of the Communist International.

—V.I. Lenin, “Report on the International Situation and the Fundamental Tasks of the Communist International” (July 1920)

No comments:

Post a Comment