We can satisfy the small farmer in two ways. He must first of all be allowed a certain liberty in effecting exchange, and secondly, we must obtain goods and supplies. Should we be able to obtain a certain amount of goods which the State could use for purposes of exchange, we [i.e. the Communist Party] as a State would add economic power to our political power. Experience will show us how a certain freedom in local exchange is possible, not only without destroying, but in fact strengthening the political power of the proletariat.
We shall be able to obtain a certain part of the goods we require from abroad. If the goods are in the possession of the State then the power of the latter increases. Economically we must satisfy the middle peasant and agree to the freedom [!] of exchange in order to keep power more firmly in the hands of the proletariat.
It will be noted that Lenin reassured the Communists that no concession whatever was to be made in the direction of democracy or towards giving the peasant majority any voice whatever over their own affairs. Indeed in a speech which was made to the railway men at Moscow after the enactment of the new legislation, reported by the wireless on April 3, Lenin made this doubly clear:
As far as I personally am concerned, I know only too well how badly organized are the Russian peasants, how little class consciousness they have. In such circumstances they do not represent a serious menace to the dictatorship of the proletariat. Therefore, we must by all means strive to attain union with the peasantry and meet them half with regard to their justifiable demands.
Again we have fair phrases with no real change in the peasants' economic condition:
