RichardAWilson
25th June 2011, 07:35
What Is to be Done?
I’m not a Leninist: As I believe Lenin’s Democratic Centralism and his Dictatorship of the Workingman contributed to and culminated into the Tyranny of Stalin. With that said: Lenin was a theoretical and tactical genius. In “What is to be done?,” a number of rational conclusions should be drawn:
1. Socialists have to be on guard against revisionism and opportunism.
Bernstein, for instance, was a knowledgeable man. However, by placing short-term demands (Reform) ahead of longer-term demands (abandoning Socialism): His Reformism led to (contributed to) Modern Day Social-Democracy (I.e. Tony Blair’s Labor Party, the so-called German Social-Democrats).
This has now become an issue in Canada’s New Democratic Party: Which has abandoned Socialism and is pursuing Reformism as an end within itself.
Within an Organization: Freedom of Speech should be protected (something that Lenin was opposed to). Nonetheless, Revolutionaries must be on guard against anti-worker ideas.
2. There’s no guarantee that Social-Democratic Politics will follow Class Struggle. Indeed, historical evidence suggests that workingmen and women are more likely to pursue trade-union ideologies that have been hijacked by the bourgeoisie.
The AFL-CIO, until now, was a perfect example of Lenin’s Perspective on the Matter.
Instead of supporting an Alternative (I.e. Labor Party), the Union continued backing the Centrist Democrats: Meaning workingmen and women) supported the destruction of their own jobs (NAFTA, Free Trade, China, the IMF, WTO)
The same could be said of Britain: With a history that’s notorious for trade-unionism and Fabian Reformism. Tony Blair’s “New Labor Party” was the logical conclusion of Fabian Reformism.
3. Intellectuals form the backbone of Theoretical Socialism: They provide the ideas, the writings, the inspiration, the analysis.
These men often come from privileged and semi-privileged backgrounds (I.e. Better schooling and education, more time to use for the Cause).
Where Lenin is wrong: Just because they are the idea men does not mean that they should monopolize the Cause. Socialism is nothing without working class men and women.
I will continue to add thoughts to this. However, it’s late and I’m heading to bed.:cool:
I’m not a Leninist: As I believe Lenin’s Democratic Centralism and his Dictatorship of the Workingman contributed to and culminated into the Tyranny of Stalin. With that said: Lenin was a theoretical and tactical genius. In “What is to be done?,” a number of rational conclusions should be drawn:
1. Socialists have to be on guard against revisionism and opportunism.
Bernstein, for instance, was a knowledgeable man. However, by placing short-term demands (Reform) ahead of longer-term demands (abandoning Socialism): His Reformism led to (contributed to) Modern Day Social-Democracy (I.e. Tony Blair’s Labor Party, the so-called German Social-Democrats).
This has now become an issue in Canada’s New Democratic Party: Which has abandoned Socialism and is pursuing Reformism as an end within itself.
Within an Organization: Freedom of Speech should be protected (something that Lenin was opposed to). Nonetheless, Revolutionaries must be on guard against anti-worker ideas.
2. There’s no guarantee that Social-Democratic Politics will follow Class Struggle. Indeed, historical evidence suggests that workingmen and women are more likely to pursue trade-union ideologies that have been hijacked by the bourgeoisie.
The AFL-CIO, until now, was a perfect example of Lenin’s Perspective on the Matter.
Instead of supporting an Alternative (I.e. Labor Party), the Union continued backing the Centrist Democrats: Meaning workingmen and women) supported the destruction of their own jobs (NAFTA, Free Trade, China, the IMF, WTO)
The same could be said of Britain: With a history that’s notorious for trade-unionism and Fabian Reformism. Tony Blair’s “New Labor Party” was the logical conclusion of Fabian Reformism.
3. Intellectuals form the backbone of Theoretical Socialism: They provide the ideas, the writings, the inspiration, the analysis.
These men often come from privileged and semi-privileged backgrounds (I.e. Better schooling and education, more time to use for the Cause).
Where Lenin is wrong: Just because they are the idea men does not mean that they should monopolize the Cause. Socialism is nothing without working class men and women.
I will continue to add thoughts to this. However, it’s late and I’m heading to bed.:cool: