The transitional stage between capitalism and socialism.

[Revolution Hero]

I guess I promised Marxman to post this information. And I keep my words.

Lenin wrote that socialism can't be introduced right away after the socialist revolution. The nationalization needs a whole system of transitional measuers depending on the concrete historical conditions.
Workers' control over the economical activity of the capitalist enterprises is one of such transitional measures. While controlling the activity of the enterprises, workers and employees learn how to run the production, finance, products' distribution, how to adjust stock-taking.
State control over the distribution of the raw materials , equipment, the control over the trade , prices and credit is also the measure of the transition to nationalisation.
State capitalism can serve as the economical measure of the transition to socialism. State capitalism is the capitalism which is controlled by the socialist state, which defines the conditions and the limits of it's existence.

Lenin wrote:

" State capitalism, in the conditions of the soviet power, is such capitalism , which is delibaretely permitted and limitted by the working class. Our state capitalism significantly differs from the one , which bourgeoisie governments have, our state is not presented by the bourgeoisie class, but by the proletariat, which was able to conquer the complete trust of the peasantry." ( vol. 45, p. 296-297)

[Marxman]

Very good R.H. but let us see Lenin's quote a few months later when he was furious with NEP. NEP created petty-burgeois tendencies all over and Lenin warned about them. He also said that NEP must be limited but I guess Stalin had other plans when he prolonged it.

By the way, NEP was created because of the crisis of the CIVIL WAR and the fact that Russia was totally backward. Peasants were so unpleased that Lenin definitely needed to introduce some form of capitalism and that is free-market with NEP, so that peasants can trade, etc. Peasants would definitely uprise and make a coup if conditions wouldn't be as they were.

NEP, I have to correct you, is not a transitional period from capitalism to socialism, rather the reverse. Even Lenin said so but you didn't quote that. And I didn't notice that Lenin mentioned in your quote that state-capitalism is a transitional period from capitalism to socialism and that it's necessary.

Lenin almost cried for executing NEP but he had no choice.

[Revolution Hero]

Lenin didn't set the time limits of the NEP existence. The goal of the NEP was to develop the economical situation in the country, to raise economy on such level when it would be ready to transform into the socialist economy.

NEP IS THE TRANSITIONAL STAGE BETWEEN CAPITALISM AND SOCIALISM. Lenin was the author of the New Economical policy, and he knew what to do. The USSR wasn't able to move to socialism staright away after the revolution. The NEP was neeeded to develop state's economy in order to reach socialism.

Lenin didn't cried for executing NEP , but he supported it.

You have very superficial view of NEP.

[Marxman]

Lenin didn't have a plan to execute NEP. He certainly didn't expect such chaos for reaching NEP.

Are you trying to tell me that Lenin knew NEP (or some other state-capitalist) policy will have to be executed?
If you do, read more (non-stalinist versions).

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 3:22 pm on Oct. 4, 2002
By the way, NEP was created because of the crisis of the CIVIL WAR and the fact that Russia was totally backward. Peasants were so unpleased that Lenin definitely needed to introduce some form of capitalism and that is free-market with NEP, so that peasants can trade, etc. Peasants would definitely uprise and make a coup if conditions wouldn't be as they were.

NEP, I have to correct you, is not a transitional period from capitalism to socialism, rather the reverse. Even Lenin said so but you didn't quote that. And I didn't notice that Lenin mentioned in your quote that state-capitalism is a transitional period from capitalism to socialism and that it's necessary.

Lenin almost cried for executing NEP but he had no choice.


Lenin wrote in 1918:
" State capitalism would be the step forward comparing to the present situation of our Soviet republic. If we establish state capitalism , approximately after a half year period, then this would be a great success and a true guarantee of the victory of socialism." ( vol. 45, p.279)

Lenin wrote in the december of 1921:

" The new economical policy, meaning the new period (and the new turning point) in the development of the Soviet Power activity, implementing the transition from capitalism to socialism (!!!), needs a new consideration of the role and the tasks of the trade unions and taking into account a number of new circumstances" ( vol. 44, p. 494)

Lenin wrote in november of 1922:

" Unfortunately, the introduction of the state capitalism doesn't go as fast , as we wish. We don't have any serious concession till this time and the fast restoration of our economy is inconceivable without the participation of the foreign capital." ( vol. 45, p. 297)

[peaccenicked]

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...rum=26&topic=15 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=26&topic=15)

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 6:14 am on Oct. 5, 2002
Lenin didn't have a plan to execute NEP. He certainly didn't expect such chaos for reaching NEP.

Are you trying to tell me that Lenin knew NEP (or some other state-capitalist) policy will have to be executed?
If you do, read more (non-stalinist versions).


What I told you is that Lenin had been sure that state capitalism ( NEP)was the stage of the state's economical development, which would prepare the state's economy for the socialist building.

[Marxman]

Hahaha, very funny. YOu just gave me a great example of a stalinist version of LCW. Do you see those three exclamation marks (!!!)? Well, you're reading delibiretaly a stalinist version that is being included in some marxist book. I know it.

[Revolution Hero]

These marks (!!!) were put by me in order to get your attention to these words, fool.
And, I repeat one more time that I have full edition of Lenin's works.
Your words shows your ignorance and stupidity. You basically slander Lenin.

[Marxman]

Oh, really. YOu put them there. Then how come I found the exact quote in a marxist book that showed the methods of stalinist editing.

[Revolution Hero]

You are free not to believe me. But the fact that you don't trust Lenin's words only because they go against your rotten ideology( trotskysm) proves your anti-leninist position.

[Marxman]

Trotskyism is not rotten, only stalinists made it that way.

Lenin is my guidancd to socialism and one of my role-models, so don't insult me.

[Revolution Hero]

Then , why don't you agree with his words?

[Marxman]

I am the one who believes his words, you believe what Stalinists dictate.

Again, a classical contradiction that you stated.

[Revolution Hero]

Well, actually you don't agree with Lenin.
Lenin said that NEP was the transitional stage between capitalism and socialism. You negate this, hence you are anti- leninist, who claim to be leninist. You use the simple method of opportunists.

[Marxman]

You still don't know what opportunism is.

And I am definitely not the one who turns Lenin's words upside down. Otherwise I'd say silly arguments like "NEP was a transitional stage from capitalism to socialism."

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 2:59 am on Oct. 13, 2002
You still don't know what opportunism is.

And I am definitely not the one who turns Lenin's words upside down. Otherwise I'd say silly arguements like "NEP was a transitional stage from capitalism to socialism."

I don't turn Lenin's words upside down. The quotes, which I have mentioned, were originally said by Lenin.
Hence, you have just called Lenin's words to be silly arguements. You are anti-leninist. I am 100% sure about you.

[Dan Majerle]

guys, sorry to burst your bubble, and interrupt the "who loves and understands lenin more" session, but lenin was an evil dictator. If you wanna quote his works, quote the letter that was released after the fall of the USSR that shows him dictating to the party the fact that during a devastating harvest, that instead of feeding the people he should use that time to wipe out the church, etc. He was also an opportunist. Lenin instigated the terror, created the CHEKA and employed the Red Army against his people and set up the tools such as one party state, no elections, dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, no freedom of speech, expression, assembly and worship, that characterise the dictatorship of Stalin. He paved the way for Stalin to be a dictator. Lenin is no angel, he must take blame. RH, and Marxman, Lenin's works might say others but his actions speak louder then his words and through his actions we can see his brutal and violent nature that is something we cannot possibly look up to.
Thank you.

[redstar2000]

"evil dictator"???

That's a bit much and hardly justified by the historical evidence.

Wrong? Yeah, not infrequently. Among other things, I suggest the insertion of "transitional phases" into what ought to be a fairly straightforward process is not very useful.

Did anyone note that reference in one of the Lenin quotes above to "the need for foreign capital"? It's fortunate that no foreign capitalists were interested; otherwise, the end of the USSR might have come a great dealer faster than it did.

Did Lenin "persecute churches"? Probably, but NOT NEARLY ENOUGH!

[Marxman]

Dan Majerle, I think it's time you decide if you want to step to the other side.

Such nonsense, where do you guys get things like this?

[Dan Majerle]

Sorry Marxman but why don't you tell me which of the points i brought up were wrong.

[Marxman]

You're wrong, starting from "Evil dictator" word and so forth.

[Dan Majerle]

lol
obviously you don't know your history that well. Let's go through it shall we? His letter about persucuting churches in the midst of a devastating harvest in which people were starving is fact, it was released by the soviet archives and even revealed in Robert Service's biography of Lenin. Lenin did dissolve the Constituent Assembly when the Bolsheviks only received 1/4 of the vote, he did set up the CHEKA and helped form the Red Army, he did unleash a reign of terror on the population, quelled freedom of speech, expression and worship. That is all fact. Denying that is like saying collectivisation by Stalin was initiated by the people's request and did not aversely affect anyone. Marxman, i have thoroughly studied the Russian Revolution and not just at school. That my friend is fact.

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Dan Majerle on 1:19 am on Oct. 16, 2002
guys, sorry to burst your bubble, and interrupt the "who loves and understands lenin more" session, but lenin was an evil dictator. If you wanna quote his works, quote the letter that was released after the fall of the USSR that shows him dictating to the party the fact that during a devastating harvest, that instead of feeding the people he should use that time to wipe out the church, etc. He was also an opportunist. Lenin instigated the terror, created the CHEKA and employed the Red Army against his people and set up the tools such as one party state, no elections, dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, no freedom of speech, expression, assembly and worship, that characterise the dictatorship of Stalin. He paved the way for Stalin to be a dictator. Lenin is no angel, he must take blame. RH, and Marxman, Lenin's works might say others but his actions speak louder then his words and through his actions we can see his brutal and violent nature that is something we cannot possibly look up to.
Thank you.


Dan Majerle, you are fucking anti-communist!

[Dan Majerle]

RH, lay off the bold statements and show me, along with Marxman, what of which i brought up is incorrect. I am not a fan of Lenin, his crimes against humanity are evident. His ideas might seem alright but in practice he was ruthless.

[Marxman]

I suggest you learn history from another perspective, comrade Dan Majerle. Otherwise you shall find yourself in the maze of dead-ends, just like the Stalinists.

I warmely recommend learning history from a Marxist perspective.

[Dan Majerle]

Marxman, i'm not going to deny that Lenin did some good things. However neither am i going to overlook his obvious faults. Nobody in this forum can deny he persecuted, terrorised and murdered thousands during his rule. These are crimes you can't simply throw under the carpet despite what he has written in his anti-capitalist pamphlets and books. I do not agree with the fact that Lenin persecuted the church, unleashed a wave of terror, set up a secret police in the form of the CHEKA, oppressive and ruthless Red Army who like the White Army was responsible for bloody crimes and denied people freedom of speech, expression and worhship. He also established many of the characteristics of the dictatorship that Stalin would later rule by and over.

[Marxman]

I see. Maybe you haven't noticed but you intermix Stalinism and Leninism/Marxism as one.

You're not the only who does that, it's quite common. Please, at least tell me where have you heard erroneous facts like these. I want to analyse them, if you don't mind.

[Dan Majerle]

no problem,
first which of the following don't you agree with or deny? Do you deny that the CHEKA was formed during Lenin's era, by Lenin and spied and persecuted innocent people? Do you deny that Lenin dissolved the Constituent Assembly when the Bolsheviks received 1/4 of the votes? Do you deny formation of the Red Army and its harsh conscription and brutal rules that those who betrayed the army by deserting or other crimes would have their family shot from the orders of Trotsky? Do you deny the persecution of relgion? Do you deny the limitations of freedom of speech, expression and workship? Or do you deny the famine that ravaged Russia during the civil war?

[Marxman]

Like I said, you intermix them as one.

First of all, CHEKA under Lenin was as clean as clear-ble sky. But CHEKA under Stalin, that later evolved into KGB.

Second of all, Stalin made sure people believe Lenin was his "TEACHER."

[Dan Majerle]

Marxman do you think it is right to have a secret police that spies on your activities and can arrest and persecute you for not agreeing with everything the government says. You cannot dissent that way and freedom of speech is severely curtailed, surely you can see that.
Also i don't understand what the second point has to do with anything i said.

[Marxman]

I wonder if you listen to me!?

I said CHEKA was DIFFERENT under Lenin and it wasn't no spy organisation.

[Dan Majerle]

Marxman here is the CHEKA's role under Lenin. Notice how i provide primary quotes and evidence.
Full title of the CHEKA was "the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Fighting Counter-REvolution, Sabtoage and Speculation".
All the following information is from historian Michael Lynch,

"Felix Dzerzhinksy, head of CHEKA, never allowed finer feelings or compassion to deter him from this taks. His remorselss attitude was showin the various directieves that issued from the Cheka headquerters in MOscow:"

"Our Revolution is in danger. DO not conern yousrleves with the formos of revolutionary justice. WE have no need for justice now. Now we have a need of a battle to the death! I propose, I demand the use of the revolutionary sweord which will put an ed to all counterrevolutionaries. "

"In acordandce with Dzerzhinksky's instructions, all pretence of legality was abandonedl the basic rules relating to evidenc eand proof of guilt ceased to exist. Persecution was directed not simply against indiduals, but against whole classes. THis was clas war of the most direct kind:"

"Do not demand increimnating evidence to prove that the prisoner has opposed the Soviet government by forece or words. Your fist duty is to ask him to which class he belongs, what are his origins, his education, his occupation. These questiosn should decide the fate of the prisoner."

"The savagery of the CHek'as methods led to protest from within the Bolshevik party concerning the abdonnment of socialist legality. But there were no attempt ot restict the power of the Cheka. SO hazrardous was the situation between 1918 and 1921 that the majority of members accepted that severe represssion was necessary."

Dzerzhinksky - "The revolutionary sword will sometimes fall on the innocent".

All this prior to Stalin's reign and during Lenins. CHEKA was savage and brutal.

[bolshevik1917]

Mr Majerle, I wonder if you have ever encountered the phrase 'dictatorship of the proliterian'. If so you will realise that this is not a stage which involves democracy (as such) but is aimed at purging society of its enemies. The church is an enemy of society like it or not, religion is a misleading illusion which tricks people into living a life of idiocy. Everyone who was killed under Lenin had hundreds of oppertunities to join the revolutionary working class but chose not to, hence they were AGAINST revolution, therfore they were enemies of the working class.

[Cassius Clay]

Dan Merjerle, you really have 'Burst the bubble' I have never seen RH and Marxman stop arguing, for that atleist you deserve credit.

Let me tell you something about the Cheka in those days, are you aware of the SR uprising of July 1918 well for two days the SR held the Bolsheviks at their mercy but through a series of accidents and coincidences the Bolsheviks managed to gain the upper hand and in the end had around 600 prominent SR's in their custody.

Now ask yourself what most governments would do with these prisoners who had just attempted a coup. My understanding is a few were executed (and I only say that lest you provide a source that proves some were killed), a few put in prison but the vast majority just aloud to go after a few days.

Another story is that well into the Red Terror a former Tsarist officer was in the Cheka's custody, the officer demanded to speak to the man Dzerinsky himself and in doing so promised that he would not fight for the enemy. 'Take a Officers word on my life' he said.

Some months later the officer was taken prisoner again and promptly executed.

About those quotes from Dzerinsky, yes the man was fanatical I will give you that. But not one of those quotes in anyway is evidence of Lenin being a 'Evil Dictator' all it shows that the Bolsheviks probably killed innocent people (for example a former Landlord may not of been guilty) in a time of revolution and Civil War.

Western historians usually use the figure of 50,000, for a figure of those that died as a result of Cheka policy's during civil war. This if one looks at the circumstances, morals and background of the day is not the horrible cold figure that it would be if you just took the number and didn't do any research.

BTW atleist a 100,000 died in Finland alone as a result of White terror.

And I resent this phrase 'Secret Police' if that were true then they were the worst kept Secret in history. The Cheka and later NKVD (pacificly the NKVD) involved everything from international spies to your local detective or traffic cop. Hell even your source admits that the rank and file spoke out against the Cheka, much like a UK politician would speak out against the use of torture employed in Northern Ireland.

About the famine in the countryside. I will be the first to admit that the Bolsheviks caused suffering and even sometimes committed atrocities and these were usually committed by Trotsky's goons (what with his 'Military discipline' and use of Tsarist officers anyway he was sacked in 1920 and replaced by Marshall Frunze) and more often than not the workers who for alot of complex reasons didn't really get on with the peasants.

Anyway the policy of War Communism would of never had to of been introduced if 18 foiegn nations of Imperialism had not decided to invade Soviet Russia. You see if you were Lenin's shoes you would of done precisly the same thing, for the survival of the revolution itself. And if you wish to look at it from a moral point of view then please do, you can either feed the peasants (not all of them starved btw) or feed the workers and the Red Army.

It would be a difficult choice but in the end a obvious one.

[Mazdak]

On comments made against Dzerzhinsky- you make it sound as if his zealotry was a bad thing. To do his job, one needed to be extremely strong emotionally. He said this himself. The amount of counterrevolutionaries and whites that had infiltrated the goverment was outrageous. It needed to be cleaned up. Without Dzerzhinsky's work, "dirty cops" would be left unchecked, and as would sabateuors.

The famines during the 20s were caused when, as Cassuis Clay said, over 10 imperial armies invaded the Soviet Union on the side of the whites.

[Marxman]

Dan Majerle, if only you would know what conditions existed then!

Civil War was the most terrible thing in Russia and WWII was not as horrible as the Civil War. Capitalist forces invaded everywhere, from every corner. War Communism was necessary and was at first not horrible. Trotsky was very successfull in repelling the capitalist forces as he trained workers and peasants into the RED ARMY - workers' army and defenders of the revolution. Trotsky was for enemies considered as NAPOLEON.

By the way, Cheka was something very different under Lenin than it was under Stalin.

The conditions were the worst of all and beyond any expectations. The question was only to survive and if the people survived, the Revolution survived and it later did but unfortunately Germany acted too late and Rosa Luxemburg was murdered. It was really a cursed time then and Stalin had to SCREW it up in a matter of years! Damn him. If only Trotsky would be leader, WWII could've been avoided.

[RGacky3]

If socialism was initiated through a revolution it would take a long time, if it was democratic, it could happen with in a short period of time. I don't believe in evolutionary socialism, socialism happens there are no stages.

[Jaha]

im with gacky.

i think that socialism should come ithout stages. take out the existing government and use socialism to fill the void.

[Cassius Clay]

''Dan Majerle, if only you would know what conditions existed then!

Civil War was the most terrible thing in Russia and WWII was not as horrible as the Civil War. Capitalist forces invaded everywhere, from every corner. War Communism was necessary and was at first not horrible. Trotsky was very successfull in repelling the capitalist forces as he trained workers and peasants into the RED ARMY - workers' army and defenders of the revolution. Trotsky was for enemies considered as NAPOLEON.

By the way, Cheka was something very different under Lenin than it was under Stalin.

The conditions were the worst of all and beyond any expectations. The question was only to survive and if the people survived, the Revolution survived and it later did but unfortunately Germany acted too late and Rosa Luxemburg was murdered. It was really a cursed time then and Stalin had to SCREW it up in a matter of years! Damn him. If only Trotsky would be leader, WWII could've been avoided.''

Sigh, Marxman the originall point Dan Merjerle was making is that he/she feels that Lenin is not the God we make him out to be. When Dan points out that the Cheka came about in 1918 and not just with Stalin it is no good you just saying 'Cheka was nice and peaceful until evil Stalin' and 'Trotsky rules'.

A point to you Marxman is that if Stalinism is such the evil that you portray then surely there were parts of Leninism that led to it. Because judging from Dan's other posts this is where she/he lies in their opinion (and it appears buying all this crap about Stalin).

Oh I know that you will deny the above resorting to your usual rants. But history is more complicated than you seem to portray, you have the same logic of George W Bush.

Dan Merjerle the Cheka during the civil war did kill innocent people, I will not deny that but name me one civil war or revolution that didn't involve innocent people getting killed. And as your source admits people did protest against some of the actions of the Cheka and nothing happened to them.

BTW Marxman Trotsky got the sack because he continued to fuck up in the civil war, although you are right about him being sharing some similar characteristics to Napolean. Such as being a Imperialist thug.

[Marxman]

I know that history is more complicated. I know that very well. From a capitalist point of view (which we can see in schools), everything in nice and clean but if you study history from a Marxist point of view, then everything becomes clear to you.

I still deny the urders of the innocent issued by Lenin. The only issued murder I can think of is the killing of an entire Romanov family, which was heroic and needed.

About Lenin and Trotsky making crimes of all sorts, I deny all of it! And I have damn proofs. You have none, only some capitalist biased links that provide no profound explanation of anything. The typical example would be in a book that I was reading when it was said that the Bolsheviks made a coup d'etat in Georgia. And then I read a Marxist book, which described this incident in 20 pages and the truth was actually that Stalin issued this coup and led the corrupted Bolsheviks in Georgia when Lenin was on his death-bed.

I guess the symptom of capitalist blatant intermixing Stalinism with Marxism has become a plague that a few can cure out of.

[Revolution Hero]

The killing of entire Romanov's family wasn't heroic, BUT needed.

Anyway, Marxman, if you support both Lenin and Trotsky, then you have to learn about the differences between the theories of the both in order to decide whom you really want to support.
Saying that their theories didn't have any contradictions is the same as labeling oneself as LEFT OPPORTUNIST.

By the way, you have successfully escaped from my question. Congratulations!
But I am asking you again
Why do you go against Lenin's theory? You say, that you do support Lenin. OK, hypocrit. Then, why do you negate Lenin's words, particularly those, which states that NEP ( state capitalism ) is the transitional stage between capitalism and socialism. Is it because of the fact that Trotsky was against NEP, and declared the significance of the milltary communism? One more contradiction, which shows the ignorance of Trotsky.

[Marxman]

I don't deviate from any questions.

I don't go against Lenin's theories and Trotsky's (which I have proved many times by reading Marxist books). I read a lot about NEP and after I read about it, the last thing would come to my mind about the transition! Transition to what? The only transition Lenin was afraid of and Trotsky was the transition to capitalism. NEP was state-capitalism which was needed in order for Russia to survive the onslaught of capitalist forces and the backwardness that followed, including the horrors of the civil war. The peasants got a real break with NEP as they could sell grain and thus free-market was dominating there. Lenin saw this as something very dangerous for Socialism, so he said it should be very limited.

[Jaha]

this thread is a testament to the first amendment, but an abomination on humanity.

a revolution in russia or elsewhere, with counter revolutionaries or not, with white armies or green!, with religion or atheism, killing is not promoted!!

to kill during a revolution is because a rebels life is in direct threat, generally in the heat of demonstation.

assasinations, exicutions, these cannot be justified. i can pardon lenin for taking a dictatoral position for a transitional period, but i cannot pardon much else.

any man or woman here who can pardon downright murder, i would like to hear your arguements!! and "acceptable losses" or "necessary" wont cut it!!

i should have said this sooner.....

[redstar2000]

"Assassinations and executions cannot be justified." No?

As it happens, there were no less than eight attempts to assassinate...Adolph Hitler. Unfortunately, all of them were unsuccessful. I leave it to you to guess how many might have lived if Hitler had been killed.

Is that one too easy? Then how about Julius Streicher, tried, convicted and executed by the Nuremburg Tribunal? Streicher's crime was 20 years of the vilest and most hateful anti-semitic propaganda in the history of western "civilization". (I've actually seen samples and I warn you that you'd better have a strong stomach to even look at that shit!) To kill somebody just for what they wrote??? Sometimes, yeah. Sometimes, damn right!

The question of revolutionary violence is, like all real questions, very complicated. Slogans are, as usual, worthless!

[Marxman]

The Romanov family was given a chance! The Bolsheviks offered them to be arrested and not murdered but the Tzar was so stubborn he waited until the last moment in his White Palace.

[RGacky3]

Thats true the Romanov family was given various chances. Any way Think of the trouble the part would have to go through if tey were kept alive. People worshiped the monarchy.

[komsomol]

"Assassinations and executions cannot be justified."

Justice varies from ones perspective, in my opinion it was justified because it was for the greater good.

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 8:25 am on Oct. 23, 2002
I don't deviate from any questions.

I don't go against Lenin's theories and Trotsky's (which I have proved many times by reading Marxist books). I read a lot about NEP and after I read about it, the last thing would come to my mind about the transition! Transition to what? The only transition Lenin was afraid of and Trotsky was the transition to capitalism. NEP was state-capitalism which was needed in order for Russia to survive the onslaught of capitalist forces and the backwardness that followed, including the horrors of the civil war. The peasants got a real break with NEP as they could sell grain and thus free-market was dominating there. Lenin saw this as something very dangerous for Socialism, so he said it should be very limited.


Your conclusions are wrong. Moreover they contain anti-leninist essence.
Look at the one of my posts at the beginning of the thread and you would find the quote from Lenin. Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov clearly called NEP a transitional stage from capitalism into socialism.
You don't agree with Lenin, just like Trotsky did not . ( you should know that Trotsky supported the idea of the military communism). Therefore you are not Marxist- Leninist, means you are not communist.