"The Greatest Failure in All History": A Critical Examination of the Actual Workings of Bolshevism in RussiaSpargo, John
History
"The Greatest Failure in All History": A Critical Examination of the Actual Workings of Bolshevism in Russia
Spargo, John
Communism -- Russia
Moreover, it is quite clear that he was still thinking, in 1875, of
dictatorship by this _immense majority_ as a temporary measure. Of
course, the word “dictatorship” is a misnomer when it is so used, but
not more so than when used to describe rule by any class. Strictly
speaking, dictatorship refers to a rule by a single individual who is
bound by no laws, the absolute supremacy of an individual dictator.
Friedrich Engels, who collaborated with Marx in writing the _Communist
Manifesto_ and in much of his subsequent work, and who became his
literary executor and finished _Das Kapital_, certainly knew the mind
of Marx as no other human being did or could. Engels has, fortunately,
made quite clear the sense in which Marx used the term “dictatorship
of the proletariat.” In his _Civil War in France_, Marx described the
Paris Commune as “essentially a government of the working-class, the
result of the struggle of the producing class against the appropriating
class, the political form under which the freedom of labor could
be attained being at length revealed.” He described with glowing
enthusiasm the Commune with its town councilors chosen by universal
suffrage, and not by the votes of a single class. As Kautsky remarks,
“the dictatorship of the proletariat was for him a condition which
necessarily arose in a real democracy, because of the overwhelming
numbers of the proletariat.”[66] That this is a correct interpretation
of Marx’s thought is attested by the fact that in his introduction
to the _Civil War in France_ Engels describes the Commune, based on
the general suffrage of the whole people, as “the Dictatorship of the
Proletariat.”
[66] Kautsky, _The Dictatorship of the Proletariat_, p. 45.
Of course, the evolution of modern industrial nations has proceeded
upon very different lines from those forecasted by Marx. The middle
class has not been exterminated and shows no signs of being submerged
in the wage-earning class; the workers are no longer disfranchised and
outside the pale of citizenship; on the contrary, they have acquired
full political rights and are becoming increasingly powerful in the
parliaments. In other words, the wage-earning class is, for the most
part, no longer “proletarian” in the narrow sense in which Marx
used the term. Quite apart from these considerations, however, it
is very obvious that the theory of Lenin and his followers that the
whole political power of Russia should be centered in the so-called
industrial proletariat, which even the Bolsheviki themselves have not
estimated at more than 3 per cent. of the entire population, bears
no sort of relation to the process Marx always had in mind when he
referred to “proletarian dictatorship.” Not only is there no sanction
for the Leninist view in Marxian theory, but the two are irreconcilably
opposed.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account