The failure of the revolution in Europe led to the fact that socialism was different from that of Western Europe
My name is Tang Tang, and I am a person who loves history. I look forward to everyone [following] me, together with the past and the present, and talking about the general trend of the world. A gentleman's life is to learn and make friends.
At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, ** created a socialist path that was different from that of Western Europe.
In the early capitalist society, there was a huge revolutionary potential, but this did not mean that it was inevitable to move towards socialism, because it only aroused the spontaneous revolt of the working masses, but not the consciousness of socialism.
If isolated from the world, this potential will only lead to failed riots or uprisings, pushing the country towards Western-style capitalism in the midst of constant destructive upheaval.
However, the development of history did not follow this conventional course, but chose the path of transcendence. ** It is not necessary to gradually nurture the theory of socialism from its own economic development, but to be able to draw nourishment directly from the advanced ideological achievements of Western Europe.
* The development of Marxism has always been ahead of economic development, and this is a fact that was widely recognized before the Stalin period. Lenin pointed out that the emergence of the theoretical doctrine of Social Democracy did not depend on the spontaneous growth of the workers' movement, but was the result of the development of the ideas of the revolutionary socialist intelligentsia.
Bukharin also said that ** is a backward country, but it has sent a large number of good Marxists to the proletariat, and this is because the Germans have created many ideas, and we do not have to create them anymore.
This is the fact that Marxism was imported from the West. Looking at the history of modern social thought, the mainstream is the history of unremitting exploration by advanced intellectuals in order to seek a shortcut to their country on the road of freedom and happiness.
The huge contrast between the backwardness of the West and the advanced of Western Europe makes the intellectuals regard learning from the West as their own responsibility, but the backwardness of their own social life makes them often show off what they are ignorant and poor.
This characteristic was fully embodied in the Narodniks after the 60s of the 19th century, who inherited Herzen and Chernyshevsky and started the "Labor Liberation Society", which constituted an important part of the pre-history of Marxism.
Although there are many different factions of the Narodniks, and their specific differences are also disputed, we need only focus on certain common ideological traits of them. First of all, populists are fierce critics of the capitalist system.
Herzen and Chernyshevsky laid the groundwork for the Narodniks of the 70s. After the defeat of the revolution of 1848, Herzen was convinced that the historical mission of Western Europe was over, and it fell into the abyss of depravity.
Chernyshevsky also despised the political democracy of Western Europe, believing that the capitalist exploitation in Western Europe was more miserable than the backwardness. The populists of the 70s inherited and developed this tendency, attacking the "bourgeois civilization" of the West with all their might, seeing it as a "noose" and a "desperate situation".
In their view, backwardness is a blessing because it enables them to avoid the suffering of Western capitalism and take another path. They cherish the rural communes as a panacea against the "sores" of Western capitalism.
Therefore, they spare no effort to protect the village community.
The Narodniks were well aware of the threat of capitalism to the village community, and they were adamantly opposed to the destruction of the village community. They believe that the existence of public ownership of land in village communities has brought the backward people closer to socialism, and the peasants are more satisfied.
Therefore, they advocated the preservation of the village community in **, and the end of **rule in due course, and made efforts for ** to go another way. Although economic history shows that capitalism and the workers' movement at that time did not reach a level of full development, they were convinced that the defeat of the Narodnik movement could inspire people to seek a new revolutionary path.
Thus, they advocated a small trend of thought that reflected on previous movements, represented by Uspensky in literature and in political theory by Plekhanov and Aksherryrod, among others.
1.Plekhanov and others switched from populism to Marxism because they had unique advantages: they were ideologically astute and broad-minded, or they had a solid theoretical foundation and paid attention to the thoroughness of their ideas, or they were good at drawing lessons from practical experience.
These strengths allow them to quickly identify the shortcomings of populism. 2.In the 80s of the 19th century, the Marxist movement developed in the absence of a workers' movement, however, by the 90s this situation changed significantly.
Lenin pointed out that this was due to the combination of the social-democratic organisations of the advanced workers, which was formed by the combination of the spontaneous mass movement of the working class and the movement of social thought that accepted the theories of Marx and Engels.
The rise of the spontaneous mass movement of the working class is due to the development of the capitalist economy. After the staggering of the beginning of the "emancipation" of serfs and the relative stagnation of the 80s, ** capitalism ushered in a boom in the 90s.
The famous Soviet economic historian Liang Shichenko described in detail the upsurge of heavy industry and commerce, the widespread use of new technologies, the increase in the number of enterprises and workers, and so on.
The industrial boom of this period is the most important stage in the history of capitalist industry and the national economy. With the development of the capitalist economy, the working class grew up rapidly, and they began to put forward their own demands through the movement.
Beginning in the 90s, strikes became a common phenomenon. This can be said to be the beginning of the workers' movement.
In the early 90s of the 20th century, Marxist ideology was widely spread in China. Prior to this, only three members of the "Labor Liberation Society" were alone, and there were few supporters.
However, in the early 90s, Marxist groups blossomed all over China. The younger generation of Marxists, such as Lenin, Martov, Potresov and Struve, were deeply influenced by the theoreticians of the "Labor Liberation Society".
They quickly gathered under the banner of Marxism, recognized the mistakes of populism, and took up the task of opposing populist ideology. These young people, with their direct knowledge of the situation in the country and their close ties with the labour movement, have played a tremendous role in agitation.
After an initial propaganda campaign among the workers, they soon expanded their groups into associations and formed the Social Democratic Labour Party. This was the official birth of the socialist party and the background of the birth of Leninism.
In **, the highly mature "social ideological movement" led the naïve "spontaneous mass movement" in advance, and this situation completely broke with the conventions of history, so that the socialist revolutionary movement violently stormed its doors before capitalism was mature.
If, in the "general historical order", socialist theories were gradually accumulated, conceived and refined from the spontaneous experience of the workers' movement after 1895, history could be delayed by decades.
If, in the meantime, capitalism has passed the early stage of instability, then a more radical revolutionary trend may emerge, demanding that the favorable conditions of the tension between social class contradictions and the advanced development of socialist parties be used to promote the development of history by leaps and bounds.
Lenin, on the other hand, is the representative of this trend of thought. Lenin, when he began his revolutionary career in Marxism, was not as concerned with criticizing populism and demonstrating the inevitability and progress of capitalist development.
However, in this period, some germs can also be found that formed the characteristics of Lenin's later thought and practice, advocating a strong critical attitude towards bourgeois liberals, emphasizing the independence of the working class, while recognizing the progressive nature of capitalist development, and so on.
When Lenin first went abroad in 1895 to meet with the members of the "Society for the Emancipation of Labour", both Plekhanov and Aksherrod believed that it should be "oriented to the liberals", but Lenin advocated "turning his back on the liberals".
Thereafter, Lenin systematically thought about the future path of the socialist movement, drew up a complete organizational plan, and put it into practice immediately after the end of his exile.
His plan was to create an organ newspaper that would unite the scattered movements into a powerful group of revolutionaries through propaganda, liaison and organization. Lenin's plan was in fact based on the judgment that capitalism coexisted with the system, and that the working class was not well educated and organized, but spontaneously possessed the consciousness of opposing the existing order, and that the socialist ideological movement was highly developed.
Therefore, revolutionaries like Lenin were not willing to wait for the self-development of capitalism to create the material conditions for the socialist struggle, but demanded the establishment of the "subjective conditions" for the social revolution under the existing ** system, so as to turn the backwardness of the society into "objective conditions" favorable to the revolution and push the ** to embark on a simpler road of historical progress.
Leninism: From Idea to Practice, the Power of Organisation In the inaugural issue of Iskra, Lenin expounded his main ideas, which were refined in the ensuing struggle, forming a profoundly influential ideological system.
He recognized that in a country where the ** system prevailed and the secret police were rampant, it was impossible to carry on an effective struggle with the groups of the workers' daily struggles alone. Therefore, he advocated the establishment of a revolutionary party with a high degree of centralization, a meticulous division of labor, and a consistent pace, weaving a network of extensive organizations, organizing professional revolutionaries, subordinating the party's lower-level organs to the party's higher-level organs, concentrating all power in the first-class organs, and putting professional revolutionaries endowed with theoretical attainment, practical struggle experience, and organizational ability to take charge of the course of the movement.
He emphasized that as long as there is an organization of revolutionaries, it can turn the ** around. Lenin highly emphasized the conspiracy nature of the party, despised its "democratic form", and advocated strict secrecy, strict selection of members, and the training of professional revolutionaries.
This shows the peculiarities of Lenin's theory of party and his firm belief in the revolution.
How can we ensure the purity of the organisation, the close ties with the working masses, and the non-arbitrariness of the members in the exclusion of the "child's play" of "broad democracy"?
Lenin advocated that "strict secrecy and strict selection" is itself a kind of "comrade trust". This trust, combined with a deep understanding of the responsibilities of the members of the revolutionaries, and the pervasive supervision of the revolutionary ranks, is sufficient to provide more effective oversight than in a democracy.
This series of Lenin's views has attracted widespread attention and controversy. Among most Marxist theorists of the time, these views were at odds with their traditional beliefs.
In the party, many well-known figures, such as Plekhanov and Martov, were categorically opposed to Lenin's views. Internationally, even some recognized theoretical authorities, such as Kautsky and Rosa Luxemburg, criticized Lenin's claims.
However, Lenin's insistence on proceeding from the practical needs of the revolutionary seizure of power contrasted sharply with the views of his opponents. Historically, however, abstract principles have often had to give way to concrete tasks, no matter how rigorously logical and well-reasoned they may be.
What makes Lenin's ideas strong is that he always based them on reality and grasped the practical political tasks that resulted from them. This reality is the sharp class contradictions caused by the backwardness of capitalism, as well as the "conscious consciousness" of socialism that has developed ahead of time.
The task is to combine these two independent factors – the highly developed socialist consciousness and the backward but full of revolutionary potential – into a practical force for carrying out the socialist revolution ahead of schedule.
In the process of accomplishing this task, Lenin's propositions have already proven to be very successful. If you are interested in other topics or opinions in the field of history, you can [follow] me for private message communication, or you can leave a message in the comment area below, and I will reply to you as soon as possible.