Documentary History of Communism in Russia by Daniels Robert V.; Daniels Robert V. ed ; original trans.

Author:Daniels, Robert V.; Daniels, Robert V. ed ; original trans.,
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: University of Vermont Press

NOTES

FROM: Stalin, “The Tasks of Business Executives” (Speech at the First All-Union Conference of Managers of Socialist Industry, February, 1931; Problems of Leninism, pp. 454–58).

*From N.A. Nekrasov’s “Who Is Happy in Russia?” (1876)—Ed.

FROM: Stalin “New Conditions—New Tasks in Economic Construction” (Speech at a conference of business executives, June, 1931; Problems of Leninism, pp. 463–64, 466–67, 471–73).

Stalin on the Sanctity of Leninism

In 1931, reacting to an article which cast doubt on Lenin’s infallibility, Stalin made it clear that the pursuit of truth—”rotten liberalism”—would henceforth be subordinated to considerations of the glory and discipline of the party.

Dear Comrades!

I emphatically protest against the publication in Proletarskaya Revolyutsia (No. 6, 1930) of Slutsky’s anti-party and semi-Trotskyite article, “The Bolsheviks on German Social-Democracy in the Period of its Prewar Crisis,” as a discussion article.

Slutsky asserts that Lenin (the Bolsheviks) underestimated the danger of centrism in German Social-Democracy and in pre-war Social-Democracy in general; that is, he underestimated the danger of camouflaged opportunism, the danger of conciliation with opportunism. In other words, according to Slutsky, Lenin (the Bolsheviks) did not wage a relentless struggle against opportunism, for, in essence, underestimation of centrism is tantamount to the renunciation of a forceful struggle against opportunism. Thus, it is suggested that in the period before the war Lenin was not yet a real Bolshevik; that it was only in the period of the imperialist war, or even at the close of that war, that Lenin became a real Bolshevik.

This is the tale Slutsky tells in his article. And you, instead of branding this newfound “historian” as a slanderer and falsifier, enter into discussion with him, provide him with a forum. I cannot refrain from protesting against the publication of Slutsky’s article in your journal as a discussion article, for the question of Lenin’s Bolshevism, the question as to whether Lenin did or did not wage a relentless principled struggle against centrism as a certain form of opportunism, the question as to whether Lenin was or was not a real Bolshevik, cannot be made the subject of discussion. . . .

Everyone knows that Leninism was born, grew up and became strong in its ruthless struggle against opportunism of every brand, including centrism in the West (Kautsky) and centrism in our country (Trotsky, etc.). This cannot be denied even by the outspoken enemies of Bolshevism. It is an axiom. But you are trying to drag us back by turning an axiom into a problem requiring “further analysis.” Why? On what grounds? Perhaps through ignorance of the history of Bolshevism? Perhaps for the sake of a rotten liberalism, so that the Slutskys and other disciples of Trotsky may not be able to say that they are being gagged? A rather strange sort of liberalism, this, exercised at the expense of the vital interests of Bolshevism. . . .

. . . The more reliable method of testing the Bolseviks by their deeds would have upset Slutsky’s whole position in a flash.

Because a test of the Bolsheviks by their deeds would have shown that

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.