31

p Like Marx, Lenin devoted a great deal of attention to questions of the materialist understanding of history. In his major works—The Development of Capitalism in Russia, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, The State and Revolution, to name some of them—he raised the Marxist theory of social development to a higher stage.

p Lenin lived and worked in a new epoch, which differed significantly from the historical conditions in which Marxism and its philosophy appeared. In extending materialism to the sphere of social phenomena, Lenin provided a profound analysis of that epoch, and revealed its inherent features and the objective pattern of its development.

p Already in his very earliest works, Lenin made a profound study of Russian capitalism and the classes of Russian society, i.e., the objective conditions that comprise the foundation of the materialist understanding of history. In his celebrated book The Development of Capitalism in Prussia, Lenin revealed that many facts of Russia’s economic and social life were a manifestation of the general historical process. In the Preface to the first edition of this work, he wrote: "It is interesting to note how far the main features of this general process in Western Europe and in Russia are identical, notwithstanding the tremendous peculiarities of the latter, in both the economic and non-economic 32 spheres."  [32•1  This conclusion was of tremendous theoretical and practical significance.

p Lenin rejected the old Naroclnik concepts of the original development of Russian society. In his writings, he gave a profound analysis, from the positions of the Marxist understanding of history, of the socio-economic conditions of Russia, and showed the inevitability of that country’s capitalist development. At the same time, in his consideration of the problem of the general and the particular in historical development, Lenin emphasised that "an independent elaboration of Marx’s theory is especially essential for Russian socialists; for this theory provides only general guiding principles, which, in particular, are applied in England differently than in France, in France differently than in Germany, and in Germany differently than in Russia".  [32•2  Together with the general laws of capitalism, he carefully studied certain specific features of Russian capitalism. He wrote that "in no single capitalist country has there been such an abundant survival of old institutions that are incompatible with capitalism, retard its development, and immeasurably worsen the condition of the producers, who ‘suffer not only from the development of capitalist production, but also from the incompleteness of that develop- ment’.”  [32•3 

p In his all-round analysis of the social and economic structure of Russia, the alignment of classes, and the objective content of the class struggle in the country, Lenin pointed to the decisive role of the Russian working class and all working people in the coming revolution. Lenin’s main idea was that only a knowledge of the basic features of the new epoch as a whole could be the foundation for an assessment of the more detailed features of the historical process in one country or another.

p His profound knowledge of the laws of capitalist development in the epoch of imperialism and of certain specific features of Russian capitalism, and his knowledge of the dialectics of their development enabled Lenin to uncover the pattern and the motive forces of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in the epoch of imperialism, and the law-governed development of the bourgeois revolution into the socialist revolution, to show the guiding role of the proletariat and its Party in the 33 revolution, and to determine the Party’s strategy and tactics. The conclusions he arrived at have all become part of the arsenal of Marxist theory and to this day have retained all their significance. Without them, present-day Marxism does not, and cannot, exist.

p Lenin investigated the development of world capitalism with the same thoroughness. His masterly work Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism revealed the basic features inherent in the new, imperialist stage in the development of capitalism. Lenin’s doctrine of imperialism as the final stage of capitalism has been fully borne out in practice and is the international ideological weapon of the Communist and Workers’ Parties and of the world revolutionary movement.

p On the basis of his Marxist analysis of imperialism, Lenin showed that the law of uneven development acquires a decisive significance and is the key to an understanding of the specific nature of the new epoch. The uneven economic and political development of capitalist countries under imperialism conditions the time—difference in the revolutions in various countries. Hence follows Lenin’s bold conclusion of the impossibility of socialism being triumphant simultaneously in all capitalist countries, as well as his conclusion as to the possibility of socialism being triumphant first in a few countries, or even in a single one. Only a precise appraisal of history’s distinctive features, the ability to apply theoretical propositions to a historical situation, and a knowledge of the way general laws reveal themselves in concrete conditions made possible so great a discovery, which posed in an entirely new way the question of the prospects of the world socialist revolution.

p Lenin approached the analysis of the premises of the proletarian revolution as a great representative of creative Marxism. In the epoch of imperialism, he said, an analysis of the premises of the proletarian revolution in a country cannot be approached only from the angle of that country’s economic development. On the basis of an all-round study of the world economy and of the objective development of contradictions of the world system of imperialism, Lenin evolved the doctrine of the weak link in the chain of imperialism. Prior to Lenin, the question of where a revolution can begin and where the front of capital can be first pierced, usually evoked from the leaders of the Second International the reply that this would take place where industrial development was most advanced, where the proletariat formed the majority of the population, where culture and democracy were most developed, and so on.

34

p Despite the reformists’ assertions, the Leninist theory of revolution showed—and this has been confirmed by life—that the front of eapital is broken where the chain of imperialism is weaker; consequently, it may happen that a country which has begun the revolution and broken the front of capital may be less developed economically than other and more developed countries, which, nevertheless, still remain within the framework of capitalism. This spelled the inevitability of an entire period of history, in which individual countries will break away from the system of imperialism and take the road of socialism. Lenin foresaw, in its general features, the course of the further historical development during the world-wide transition from capitalism to socialism. The materialist understanding of history was given fresh development in Lenin’s theory of the socialist revolution. It deepened and gave practical implementation to Marxist ideas on the dictatorship of the proletariat and the guiding role of a Marxist party, and mapped out the fundamental problems of the construction of a socialist society.

p Lenin resolutely rejected the outworn dogmas of the reformists of the Second International and of the Russian Mensheviks regarding the prospects of the Russian revolution. In a profoundly dialectical spirit he revealed the objective and subjective factors in the Russian revolution. On the one hand, he pointed out, Russia was then economically backward, but on the other, she stood far ahead in the degree of her political maturity, since she had the world’s most revolutionary proletariat, which was guided by a Marxist party.

p This contradiction was considered irresolvable by the Menshevik doctrinaires. Replying to them, Lenin wrote: “. . . it would be a fatal mistake to declare that since there is a discrepancy between our economic ’forces’ and our political strength, it ’follows’ that we should not have seized power. Such an argument can be advanced only by a ’man in a muffler’, who forgets that there will always be such a ’discrepancy’, that it always exists in the development of nature as well as in the development of society, that only by a series of attempts—each of which, taken by itself, will be one-sided and will suffer from certain inconsistencies—will complete socialism be created by the revolutionary co-operation of the proletarians of all countries.”  [34•1 

35

p Lenin stressed that contradictions arc the foundation of the appearance and development of revolutions. There was nothing surprising or improbable in the proletarian dictatorship revealing in the first place the “contradiction” between Russia’s backwardness and her “leap” over bourgeois democracy. On the contrary, there can be no victory for the socialist revolution otherwise than through contradictions and by means of contradictions. "It would have been surprising had history granted us the establishment of a ?iew form of democracy without a number of contradictions."  [35•1 

p These ideas were later given more concrete shape in many of Lenin’s writings and speeches after the October Revolution. "History,” he wrote, "is moving in xigzags and by roundabout ways."  [35•2  He carefully traced the zigzag course of history in the example both of the Russian and of the world revolutionary movement. He gave a negative reply to the question of the probability of the smooth or harmoniously proportional transition of various capitalist countries to the dictatorship of the proletariat, to socialism. There has never been and there cannot be smoothness, harmoniousness or proportionality in bourgeois society. World history is advancing unswervingly towards the dictatorship of the proletariat, Lenin wrote, but that advance is along roads that are far from direct, smooth or simple. There may be setbacks, errors and forced retreats but no growing pains or temporary victories of the old world can check the general advance of history, despite all zigzags.

p Lenin flayed the opportunist pedants who are incapable of understanding this dialectic of development. "A revolutionary would not ’agree’ to a proletarian revolution only ’on the condition’ that it proceeds easily and smoothly, that there is, from the outset, combined action on the part of the proletarians of different countries, that there are guarantees against defeats, that the road of the revolution is broad, free and straight, that it will not be necessary during the march to victory to sustain the heaviest casualties, to ’bide one’s time in a besieged fortress’, or to make one’s way along extremely narrow, impassable, winding and dangerous mountain tracks. Such a person is no revolutionary, he has not freed himself from the pedantry of the bourgeois intellectuals; such a person will be found 36 constantly slipping into the camp of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie. . . ."  [36•1 

p In Lenin’s works, a special place is held by an analysis of problems of the Marxist understanding of the subjective factor in the development of society, i.e., of the role of human consciousness and organisation, will power and energy. Here, too, the new epoch confronted Marxist theory with new problems which called for clear answers. It is common knowledge that the period that Marx and Engels lived in was, in the main, one of the maturing of the objective preconditions for the revolution. In the epoch of imperialism, the objective necessity of the revolution has become manifest, so that the degree of the maturity of the subjective factor has acquired particular significance for the destiny of the revolution.

p In his works Lenin scathingly criticised both subjective- idealist conceptions and vulgar “economic” materialism, and the theory of “spontaneity” in all its varieties. The policy of a revolutionary party, Lenin showed, can be successful only when it is based on a correct understanding of the relation between the objective conditions and the subjective factor and if that policy recognises the determining significance of the objective conditions while at the same time taking stock of the vast role of the subjective factor which, given the objective conditions, can play a decisive part in the realisation of historically mature transformations.

p Lenin attached great importance to such elements of the subjective factor as the consciousness, purposefulncss, enthusiasm, and the creative initiative and organisation of the masses in the process of historical action. The proletariat becomes a powerful historical force, not only because of its class- consciousness but also as a result of its organisation, because it is guided by a Marxist party, which is the leading element of the subjective factor, the most important instrument and form of the historical process.

p Beginning with his book What the "Uriends of the People" Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats, and ending with one of his last articles "On Our Revolution”, Lenin made a thorough study of this problem. He emphasised those features and aspects of the subjective factor which had acquired primary significance in connection with the task of the proletariat in the new epoch—that of the struggle for the triumph of the socialist 37 revolution. I,cum gave a proloundlv scientific substantiation of the role of the masses, classes, parties and leaders in social development and the class struggle.

p In doing so, Lenin paid particular attention to an analysis of the influence exerted by the development of capitalism, in the epoch of imperialism, on the working-class movement and its organisations. 1 fe revealed the direct link between imperialism and opportunism. In his work Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism he wrote the following:

p "The receipt of high monopoly profits by the capitalists . . . makes it economically possible for them to bribe certain sections of the workers, and for a time a fairly considerable minority of them, and win them to the side of the bourgeoisie of a given industry or given nation against all the others."  [37•1 

p Lenin gave a profound analysis of the reasons for the lengthy domination of opportunists in a number of countries, revealed the essence of their treachery, and defined the tasks of the Marxist parties in the struggle against opportunism. As far back as the end of the last century, he scathingly criticised the first attempts of the revisionists—Bernstein and his Russian fellow- thinkers—to emasculate the revolutionary content of the Marxist theory and distract the working class from the revolutionary road to that of reconciliation with the bourgeoisie. In his struggle against the subjective sociology of Narodism, against the neo- Kantian philosophy that had become the theoretical foundation of "legal Marxism" and against the philosophical revisionism of the Second International, Lenin provided answers to the fundamental problems of the materialist understanding of history, which was of primary importance to the revolutionary working- class movement.

p To the doctrinaire schemes of the opportunist leaders of the Second International Lenin contraposcd the living and concrete reality of the world revolutionary process. He emphasised time and again that there is no abstract truth and that the essence of Marxism lies in a concrete scientific analysis of a definite situation. Lie severely strictured those whose conclusions were built only on abstract possibilities and were divorced from revolutionary practice. "Marxism,” he wrote, "takes its stand on facts, and not on possibilities. . . .” "One must distinguish the possible from the actual."  [37•2  The viewpoint 38 of life, of practice, should he the primary viewpoint if we wish to cognise actual processes and adopt correct decisions.

p Lenin gave a rich content to the concept of concreteness. Concretcness means an appraisal of the process of development, thoroughness of investigation, flexibility of concepts and so on. A study of all aspects, all links and mediations in an object is one of the most important demands presented by the method of Leninism. In his article, "Certain Features of the Historical Development of Marxism”, Lenin laid special stress on the links between the historical development of Marxism and the conditions of the time, the social set-up, and the definite tasks of the epoch.

p "...The aims of immediate and direct action changed very sharply during this period,” he wrote, "just as the actual social and political situation changed, and consequently, since Marxism is a living doctrine, various aspects of it were bound to become prominent".  [38•1 

p Lenin gained the upper hand in the struggle against reformism because he contraposccl genuine Marxism, i.e., creative Marxism, to the dogmatism and pedantry of the pseudo-Marxists. His works vividly illustrate a creative approach to theory and practice. They do not contain the least trace of the stereotype or the doctrinaire.

p "To seek out, investigate, predict, and grasp that which is nationally specific and nationally distinctive, in the concrete, manner in which each country should tackle a single international task: victory over opportunism and Left doctrinairism within the working-class movement; the overthrow of the bourgeoisie; the establishment of a Soviet republic and a proletarian dictatorship —such is the basic task in the historical period that all the advanced countries (and not they alone) arc going through,"  [38•2  he wrote in 1920.

p In emphasising the need for a flexible and dialectical approach to tactics, Lenin pointed out that the history of revolution is always richer in content, more varied, more living and more complex than is imagined by the finest parties and the most conscious vanguards of the most advanced classes. That is why the task of Party organisations and Party leaders consists—this in the course of lengthy, industrious, and varied work—in developing the necessary knowledge and gaining the necessary 39 experience and the political instinct for a solution of complex political questions.

p He taught Communists to learn to use all forms of struggle and be prepared for the most rapid and unexpected shifts in those forms. If this condition is ignored, he emphasised, the Communist Parties may suffer serious reverses, should the new historical conditions call for a rapid transition to new tactics.

p Docs not contemporary history provide instances of some, even big and experienced working-class parties, which for many years have overestimated peaceful and parliamentarian forms of struggle against capitalism, proving unprepared for serious clashes with the ruling classes at times of deep crises of bourgeois society?

p Lenin compared the activities of a workers’ party with those of a well-organised army. That organisation is good, he said, because it is flexible, while at the same time instilling a single will in millions of people.

p All of Lenin’s works dealing with problems of the materialist understanding of history arc marked by their having been built on the firm foundation of Marxism. In these writings Lenin developed and gave concrete shape to all the components of Marxism—philosophy, political economy and scientific communism. Lenin’s analysis of the new epoch, the conditions and the motive forces of the revolution, was grounded in a totality of knowledge and revolutionary practice, this making it possible for him to investigate the most complex and contradictory phenomena in the economic and social life of the epoch of imperialism and proletarian revolution. The Marxists, Lenin pointed out, were the first socialists to raise the question of the need to analyse all aspects of the life of society, not only the economic. By pursuing a science—grounded policy based on a knowledge of the dialectics of the objective historical process, a Marxist party is able to exert a tremendous influence on the historical process.

p In his writings after the October Revolution, Lenin made a vast contribution to the materialist conception of history. Despite the heavy pressure of state and Party affairs, Lenin continued his profound and all-round elaboration of the materialist understanding of history. He developed the theory of the socialist revolution and the Marxist doctrine of the construction of socialism and communism, the role of the masses, classes and the class struggle during the transition from capitalism to socialism, and further elaborated the Communist Party’s policies 40 on the national question. For the first time in Marxist literature, he defined the essence of the cultural revolution and revealed the pattern of its development, the ways in which the scientific world outlook and the morals of the builders of socialism are shaped. He showed the growing role of consciousness of people in the creation and development of the new social system, the way in which the retardedncss of social consciousness from social being can be eliminated, and the methods of struggle for the victory of socialist ideology over bourgeois ideology.

p On the basis of a profound dialectical materialist analysis of the general crisis of the capitalist system, Lenin revealed the essence and prospects of the world revolutionary process in the new era and developed the philosophical foundations of the strategy and tactics of the world communist movement. He showed that the world vsocialist revolution takes shape from processes differing in nature and time—from purely proletarian revolutions, revolutions of the bourgeois-democratic type which grow into socialist revolutions, and from those of the national liberation type. He foresaw that "the morrow of world history will be a day when the awakening peoples oppressed by imperialism arc finally aroused and the decisive long and hard struggle for their liberation begins".  [40•1 

p In his post-revolutionary appraisal of this great and many- faceted revolutionary process and its prospects, Lenin provided a theoretical substantiation of the roads and the laws of the development of national liberation movements. He considered them, not as isolated phenomena, but as part of a single world revolutionary process, emphasising that the national liberation movement can achieve success only if it acts in a united front of all revolutionary forces fighting against imperialism.

From Lenin’s works we see that every big step in historical development was accompanied by his elaboration of the major problems of the materialist conception of history. Lenin proceeded from society’s economic and social structure being characterised by changes without an understanding of which not a single step can be made in any field of social activity. The dialectics of historical development can be understood only on the basis of Marxist dialectics, the theory and the doctrine of development.