Lenin and Trade Union consciousness

[RedZezz]

I know that Lenin in What is to be Done? stated that the working class was unable to develope beyond "trade union conciousness" on their own. However, I have heard in passing that he later changed his mind on this subject.

I was wondering if this was true, and if so, which work it is featured in.

[Gold Against The Soul]

Well, I've never heard that and would be interested to see the quotes too...

[Lucretia]

Alan Shandro has a good article on this subject called "'Consciousness From Without': Marxism, Leninism, and the Proletariat."

[blake 3:17]

That's the main thrust of his What is to be Done? written 110 years ago. His most "Left" major work is State and Revolution.


His argument was against Marxists/socialists who thought simple class struggle was sufficient for developing revolutionary socialism. Lenin recognized the need to fight on all levels against social injustice, not just in the workplace.

The way Lenin's discussion has been framed has been not all that great for the most part, but the recent burst of Lenin scholarship has allowed for the question to be re-examined.

[Gold Against The Soul]

That's the main thrust of his What is to be Done? written 110 years ago. His most "Left" major work is State and Revolution.


His argument was against Marxists/socialists who thought simple class struggle was sufficient for developing revolutionary socialism. Lenin recognized the need to fight on all levels against social injustice, not just in the workplace.

The way Lenin's discussion has been framed has been not all that great for the most part, but the recent burst of Lenin scholarship has allowed for the question to be re-examined.

Okay but this really doesn't answer the OP's question?

[Blake's Baby]

I know that Lenin in What is to be Done? stated that the working class was unable to develope beyond "trade union conciousness" on their own. However, I have heard in passing that he later changed his mind on this subject.

I was wondering if this was true, and if so, which work it is featured in.

In 1902 Lenin was a Kautskyist. He thought that the revolutionary intelligensia was a necessary part of the proletariat coming to consciousness. A symptom of the 'under-development' of Russia that some people are keen to promote? Possibly. An elitist conception of class consciousness? I'd say so.

In 1905 there was aa revolution in Russia. The working class proved that Lenin's (read, Kautsky's and Plekhanov's) ideas on class consciousness were wrong. Consciousness is a learning process not a grant of divine grace. The workers went way beyond the exhortations of the revolutionary intelligensia.

Comparing 'What Is To Be Done?' with 'State and Revolution' is comparing works from different eras; one is a patrician, elitist and paternalistic view of class consciousness and the other is a dynamic and involved view of class consciousness. Lenin learned from the class struggle. He adjusted his views about class consciousness as a result.

There's an interesting book called 'Leninism Under Lenin' by Marcel Liebman that deals with some of this stuff, and I'm sure plenty of other people have done so to (but I've recently read Liebman so it's fairly fresh in my mind).

[daft punk]

In 1902 Lenin was a Kautskyist. He thought that the revolutionary intelligensia was a necessary part of the proletariat coming to consciousness. A symptom of the 'under-development' of Russia that some people are keen to promote? Possibly. An elitist conception of class consciousness? I'd say so.

In 1905 there was aa revolution in Russia. The working class proved that Lenin's (read, Kautsky's and Plekhanov's) ideas on class consciousness were wrong. Consciousness is a learning process not a grant of divine grace. The workers went way beyond the exhortations of the revolutionary intelligensia.

Comparing 'What Is To Be Done?' with 'State and Revolution' is comparing works from different eras; one is a patrician, elitist and paternalistic view of class consciousness and the other is a dynamic and involved view of class consciousness. Lenin learned from the class struggle. He adjusted his views about class consciousness as a result.

There's an interesting book called 'Leninism Under Lenin' by Marcel Liebman that deals with some of this stuff, and I'm sure plenty of other people have done so to (but I've recently read Liebman so it's fairly fresh in my mind).

Lenin changed his mind on a lot of stuff, adopting an identical position to Trotsky and vice versa, which shows the greatness of these two men. In 1917 their views converged and thus the revolution happened. Marx and Engels evolved too.

Unfortunately a lot of the left seem incapable of even facing facts let alone analysing them, learning and moving on.

Of course the worst example is those Stalinists who still parrot absurd claims.

[GoddessCleoLover]

And the Stalinists have paid the ultimate revolutionary price, they have lost their working class base. They have gone from the heights of ruling China and the Soviet Union to barely holding on in the DPRK (Raul is well on his way to getting rid of M-L in Cuba). Once they were the leaders of major parties in Italy, France and elsewhere, now their leading parties in Greece and Portugal are a fraction of their former strength. They have no future with the working class. OTOH the various tendencies that uphold workers' democracy might have a bright future if our praxis becomes more rooted in the actual working class.

[-NW2-]

And the Stalinists have paid the ultimate revolutionary price, they have lost their working class base. They have gone from the heights of ruling China and the Soviet Union to barely holding on in the DPRK (Raul is well on his way to getting rid of M-L in Cuba). Once they were the leaders of major parties in Italy, France and elsewhere, now their leading parties in Greece and Portugal are a fraction of their former strength. They have no future with the working class. OTOH the various tendencies that uphold workers' democracy might have a bright future if our praxis becomes more rooted in the actual working class.

I agree with your point about being rooted in the working class. As bad as the unions can be, they are still the place many people first become aware of class issues and start learning about Socialism. That was certainly the case for me. Marxists of all descriptions should be active in Trade Unions trying to win over workers and guide the Unions themselves in a socialist direction. There isnt much point in sitting in tiny fragmented, sectarian 'Reveloutionary' parties because the working class dont even know most of these parties exist.