The Proletarian Revolution in Russia/Part 2/Chapter 1

by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

I

PROLETARIAN POLICY

In the Revolution of 1848, in Paris, Louis Blanc, the French Socialist, sadly distinguished himself by passing over from the position of the class struggle to the position of petit bourgeois illusions. These illusions, employing a phraseology not unlike that of "Socialism," actually served to strengthen the influence of the bourgeoisie. Louis Blanc expected to receive aid from the bourgeoisie; his hopes aroused hopes in others, as if the bourgeoisie could aid the workers in the matter of an "organization of labor"—this unclear expression was supposed to express a "Socialistic" tendency.^[1]

In Russia, at present, the policy of Louis Blanc has met with complete success in the "Social Democracy" of the right wing, the Menshevik Party. Cheidse, Tseretelli and many others, who arc now leaders of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Delegates, have assumed precisely the position of Louis Blanc. In all the chief questions agitating the political life of our day, these leaders have accepted the petit bourgeois illusions of Louis Blanc. Take, for instance, the war question.

The proletarian standpoint in this matter consists of a definite class characterization of the war and irreconcilable hostility to an imperialistic war,—that is, to wars waged between groups of imperialistic countries, (no matter whether they are monarchic or republican,) for a division of the capitalist spoils.

The bourgeois standpoint consists of outright justification of the war, outright "defense of the fatherland," that is, a defense of the interests of the capitalists and their right to annexations. The petit bourgeois standpoint differs from this in that it renounces annexations, "condemns" Imperialism, and "demands" from the bourgeoisie that it shall cease to be imperialistic, although the petit bourgeois does not require the bourgeoisie to pass out of its world-imperialistic relations, or out of the capitalistic structure of society. Limiting himself to this innocent, innocuous, shallow declamation, the petit bourgeois as a matter of fact follows meekly after the bourgeoisie, "sympathizing" somewhat with the proletariat, in words, but remaining completely dependent on the bourgeoisie, being unable or perhaps unwilling to grasp the revolutionary means of removing the capitalist yoke, which is the only means that can save humanity from Imperialism.

"Demanding" from bourgeois governments that they make a "solemn declaration" renouncing annexations,—this seems to the petty bourgeois the height of audacity as well as an illustration of anti-imperialistic consistency of action. It is not difficult to see that this is the policy of Louis Blanc at its worst. Has the competent bourgeois politician ever had any difficulty in pronouncing the most "radical" and sonorous of phrases, saying little, to be sure, and binding the speaker to nothing, in discussing the matter of annexations "in general"? But when it comes to actions, it is always possible to walk the tight-rope, as the bourgeois Rech has been doing lately; in fact, this paper has recently had the effrontery to declare that Courland (recently annexed by the imperialistic robbers of the German bourgeoisie) is not a land annexed by Russia! This is the most shameless deception of the workers, the most intolerable misrepresentation, for any man who has even the most rudimentary political education must recognize that Courland has always been a territory annexed by Russia.

Admitting, if only for a moment, that the bourgeois ministers are models of righteousness and honesty, that they really believe implicitly in the possibility of a renunciation of annexations, while preserving Capitalism, and really want to renounce annexations,—making, for a moment, this truly Louis-Blanc admission, here is our question: Can any man of mature intellect be content with what people think of themselves, without verifying these thoughts by their acts? Is it possible for a Marxist not to distinguish between desires, assertions, objective realty? Answer: It is not.

Annexations are imposed by the bonds of capital: financial, banking, imperialistic capital,—that is the present economic foundation of annexations. From this angle, annexation means the political guarantee of profit on the millions of capital "invested" in thousands and thousands of enterprises in the annexed territories. It is impossible, even in one's wishes, to renounce annexations without taking decisive steps toward the overthrow of Capitalism.

Is it true, as the Social-Revolutionary Rabochaya Gazetta, Plekhanov's Yedinstvo, and the other Louis Blancs of our bourgeoisie are ready to infer, and actually do infer, that we must not take any decisive steps toward overthrowing capital? That we must be content, for the present, with reducing annexations to a minimum? No. We must energetically struggle for the overthrow of capital. The necessary measures must be introduced judiciously and gradually, and must be based on the support alone of the class consciousness and organized activity of the oppressed majority of the workers and of the poorest peasants. These steps must be taken. And the Soviets of Workers' Delegates in quite a number of Russian cities have already undertaken them.

There is now necessary in the order of the day a decisive, irrevocable formulation of the distinctions between us and the Louis Blancs, the Cheidses, Tseretellis, Stekloffs, the Mensheviki, the Social-Revolutionary Party, etc. We must point out to the masses that the policy of Louis Blanc will destroy and is destroying the onward success of the Revolution; that even the newly-won liberties will be lost, unless the masses understand the danger of petit bourgeois illusions and unite with the class conscious workers in their judicious, gradual, well-planned, yet firm and immediate, steps toward the realization of Socialism.

Outside of Socialism there is no deliverance of humanity from wars, from hunger, from the destruction of millions and millions of human beings.

1. Upon the overthrow of the monarchy by the uprising of the Parisian masses in 1848, a Provisional Government was formed, of which Louis Blanc and other representatives of the masses of his type were members. The workers had made the revolution, but the bourgeoisie took control of the new government, Blanc and his group aiding in this consummation by their petty bourgeois policy. Blanc's great scheme was the establishment of national workshops for the unemployed; the scheme was adopted by the new government, but sabotaged for the purpose of discrediting Blanc and demoralizing the masses. Roughly, the situation in Russia during the first and second stages of the Revolution was similar; and measures proposed by the "Socialist" representatives in the government were sabotaged by the bourgeois representatives.—L. C. F.