816_Đilas, milovan, the new class - an analysis of the communist system, thames and hudson, 1957

8/20/2019 816_Đilas, Milovan, The New Class - An Analysis of the Communist System, Thames and Hudson, 1957

1/112

Т Н Е NEW CL SS

у

Milovan Djilas

n

nalysis of the

o ш ш u n i s t

System

n tlantic Press book u Ь i s l z e d

TH MES ND HUDSON

ondon


2/112

The

P u Ь l i s h e т s wish to e x p т e s s their

gratitude f о т editorial assistance to

Mr M o т t o n uner and Mr Konrad Kellen

First

p u Ь l i s h e d

in Great Britain,

1957

All rights reserved _,

Printed in tlle United States of America

reface

All

this could

told

in different way: as

the

history of

contemporary revoluti on, as the expr·ession of

set.

of opinions,

or

finally,

as

the confession of revolutionary. little of each

of these may

found

in

this document.

В н t ,

even

i

this is

an

inadequate

s y n t ћ e s i s of

history, o p i п i o n s and memoirs,

it

re-

flects

my

effort to give

as

complete а п d

as brief picture

as

p o s s i Ь l e of

c o п t e m p o r a т y

C o m m u п i s m Some special or tech-

п i c a l aspects may lost, but.

the l a т g e r

picture, I trust,

will

that much simpler а п d more complete.

I have tried to detach myself f г o m

my

p e r s o п a l

p r o Ь l e m s

not s u b m i t t i п g to t ћ e m М у c i r c u m s t a п c e s are,

at.

best, un-

c e r · t a i п а п d I am tl1erefore compelled to express my p e т s o n a l

o b s e т v a t i o п s а п d

e x p e 1 · i e п c e s

ћ a s t i l y ;

more detailed examina-

t i o п

of

my

p e r s o п a l

s i t u a t i o п

m i g ћ t

some day

s u p p l e m e п t

а п d

p e т h a p s even

c h a п g e

some of my

c o п c l u s i o п s .

I c a n п o t d e s c r i Ь e all

the d i m e п s i o n s

of the c o п f l i c t in

the

p a i п f u l с о u п е of

our

c o п t e m p o r a r y world.

or do

I p r e t e п d

to k п o \ v

any world

outside. the C o m m u п i s t \Vorld, in \Vhich I

had either

the

f o r t u п e or ш i s f o r t u п e to live. When I speak of

world out side my o \vn, I do so orlly to put my О \ V П world

in

perspective, to make its reality clearer.


3/112

vi

PREF CE

A l т o s t everytblng

in

this book has been expressed s o т e

vvhere else, and in different way. Perhaps

new

fiavor, color,

and n ю o d , and s о т е п е \ v t h o u g ћ t s т а у found here. That

is

s o т e t h i n g - - i п fact,

quite

enough. Each

т а п s

experiences

are unique 1vorthy of c o т т u п i c a t i o n to bls fello1v т е n .

The

reader

s l ю u l d not

seek

in

this book some

kind

of social

or other

pbllosophy,

not

even 1vhere I make generalized state

т e n t s . М у а i т has been to present p i c t u т e of the C o т т u n i s t

1vorld

but not

to philosophize

about it.

means of generaliza

tions-even though I ћ а v е sometimes found g e п e r a l i z a t i o n

н п a v o i d a Ь l e .

Т ћ е m e t ћ o d of d e t a c ћ e d o b s e r v a t i o п s e e т e d to т е t ћ е most

s u i t a Ь l e о п е for p т e s e n t i n g

т у

т a t e т i a l . М у

p r e т i s e s

could

ћ а v е been s t r e п g t h e n e d and т у c o n c l u s i o п s could ћ а v е Ь е е п

proved

q u o t a t i o п s

statistics,

and т e c i t a l s

of

e v e п t s .

order

to

as

simple

and

concise

as

p o s s i Ь l e I

ћ а v е

i п s t e a d expressed

o b s e r v a t i o п s

thr·ougl1

r e a s o п i п g

and

logical

deduction

keep

i п g q u o t a t i o п s and

statistics to

ш i n i т u т .

I t l п k ш у

ш e t h o d is

a p p т o p r i a t e for personal story а п d

for method of NOrking а п d thinking.

D ш i n g т у adult life I

ћ а v е

t т a v e l e d the entire road о р е п to

C o ш ш u n i s t :

ћ о ш

the

Iovvest

to the b l g ћ e s t

rung

of the bler

ю · c ћ i c a l l a d d e т f г о ш local а п d

national

to i n t e ш a t i o n a l forums,

а п d

ћ о ш the

f o r щ a t i o п

of t ћ е t т u e C o т т u n i s t Party

and

o r g a n i z a t i o п of the

revolution

to the e s t a Ь l i s h т e n t of the so

called socialist society. No one c o т p e l l e d to е т Ь r а с е or to

т е ј е с t

C o т ш u n i s ш .

I

т а d е

ш у

o1vn

d e c i s i o п

according to

т у

convictions, ћ е е l у in so

far·

as т а n can

ћ е е .

Even t ћ o u g ћ

I 1vas disillusioned, I do not belong to t ћ o s e whose disillusion

r п e n t

1vas

s ћ a r p and е х t г е т е .

I

cut т y s e l f

off gradually

and

c o п s c i o u s l y building up the

picture

and c o n c l н s i o n s I present

in this book.

As

I became i п c г e a s i п g l y estr·anged f r o т the re

ality of c o п t e т p o r - a r · y C o т r п н n i s m , I came closer to the idea

of

e r п o c г a t i c

s o c i a l i s т .

This

personal evolut ion is also refiected

PREF CE

vii

n this book,

although

the book s

primary

purpose is not to

trace this evolution.

I consider

it

superfluous to criticize

o m m u п i s m as an

idea.

The

ideas of equality and b r o t h e r ћ o o d among men,

w h i c ћ

ћ а v е exjsred

in

varying f o r т s s i п c e ћ н m а n society began-and

>vhich contemporary o т m н n i s m accepts in w o г d - a r e

p г i n

ciples

to

-vvhich

fighters for progress

and

ћ e e d o m

1vill

al1vays

aspire. It 1 v o н l d 1vrong

t.o

criticize t ћ e s e basic ideas, as \\rell

as v a i н and f o o l i s ћ . The struggle to achieve t ћ е т is part of

ћ н m а n society.

Nor

ћ а v е

I e н g a g e d

detailed

criticism of C o ш m н n i s t

theory,

although

such criticism is

needed

а п d useful. I have

c o n c e п t r a t e d d e s c r i p t i o п of c o п t e m p o r a r y C o m m н н i s m ,

touching

upon theor-y о н l у 1vhere n e c e s s a г y .

It

is

i m p o s s i Ь l e to express all my

o b s e r v a t i o п s

а п d exper

i e п c e s i н а 1vork as b г i e f

as

this о п е . I ћ а v е stated only the most

essential of

t ћ e m , u s i п g

g e n e r a l i z a t i o п s 1 v ћ е г е

t ћ е у

\Vere

un

a v o i d a Ь l e .

This

account may appear strange

t.o

t ћ o s e 1 v ћ о live in t ћ е

п o п - C o m r п u n i s t 1 v o г l d ; it. \vould п о t seem u п u s u a l to t ћ o s e

1 v ћ о

live i н t ћ е C o r п m u п i s t о п е : I claim no exclusive credit or dis

t i п c t i o n for p г e s e п t i n g t ћ е picture of tllat 1vorld, nor

f о г

t ћ е

ideas concerning it.

They

а г е simply the p i c t ш e а п d ideas of

t ћ е

\VOrld

i н \ v b l c ћ I live. I

am

p г o d u c t of

t ћ a t

1vor1d. I ћ а v е

c o n t r i Ь u t e d to it. No1v I

am

one of its cr-itics.

О п l у on

t ћ е

surface

is

tbls i n c o п s i s t e п t . I ћ а v е struggled

t ћ е

past,

and am

s t r н g g l i п g

IlO\V

for·

better

world.

Т ћ а t

s t т н g

gle may п о t produce the desired

r e s н l t s .

Nevertl1eless, t ћ е logic

of my action

is

c o n t a i п e d in t ћ е

l e н g t ћ а п d c o n t i п н i t y

of that

struggle.


4/112

CONTENTS

Origins

1

Character of the Revolution

5

The New Class

37

The Party State

7

Dogmatism in

the

Economy

103

Tyranny over

the

Mind

124

The Aim

and

The Means

147

The Essence

164

National Communism

173

The Present Day World

9


5/112

rigins

1

The roots of modern С о m п ш п i s п 1 reach back very far, al

though they >vere

dormant

before

tl1e

development of m o d e п 1

industry

. ; v e s t e r п

Europe

Communism s basic ideas

ar·e

the

Primacy of

Matter а п d t ћ е

Reality of Change, ideas borrmved

from tblnkers of t ћ е period just

befoie

the inception of Com

rnunism. As Communism endures and gains strength, these

basic ideas play less а п d less i m p o г t a п t role. This is u п d e r -

s t a n d a Ь l e

once pmvei,

C o m m u п i s m

t e п d s to Iemodel t ћ е

rest of the -.;vorld a c c o г d i n g to its o-.;vn ideas and t e п d s less and

less to change itseif.

Dialectics and m a t e r i a l i s m t ћ e c ћ a п g i n g of t ћ е -.;vorbl inde

pendently of hurnan -.;vill-formed the basis of the old, classical,

Marxist

C o m m u п i s m

Т ћ е s е

basic ideas

-.;vere

not originated

Communist theorists, s u c ћ as Marx or Engels. Т ћ е у bor

Io-.;ved

them

and

-.;vove

t ћ e m into -.;vhole

thus forming,

unintentionally, the basis for

r1e1v

conception of

t ћ е -.;vorld.

Т ћ е idea of the Prirnacy of Matter was borrmved from the

French materialists of t ћ е eighteenth century.

E ю · I i e r

t h i п k e r s

i п c l u d i n g D e п ю c r i t u s

in

а п с i е н t Greece, had expressed

it

in

differ·ent way. The

idea

of t ћ е reality of c h a н g e caused the

struggle of opposites, called Dialectics, was t a k e н over from

1


6/112

2

Т Н

N W CL SS

Hegel;

the

same idea had е е n expressed in different \vay

He1-aclitus

in

ancient Greece.

Without going into

t ћ е

details of t ћ е

d i f f e т e n c e s

bet.,veen

M a т x i s t ideas а н d p r e c e d i н g similar t ћ e o r i e s , it is necessary to

p o i п t

out t ћ a t Hegel, in

p т e s e п t i н g

the idea of t ћ е Reality of

С ћ а п g е , т e t a i н e d the с о н с е р t of а н u н с ћ а н g i н g supreme la\v,

or

Idea

of

t ћ е

Absolute. As

he

expressed it,

t ћ е

last

a н a l y -

sis t ћ е г е are u н с ћ а н g е а Ь l е la'\vs

\ v h i c ћ ,

i n d e p e н d e н t l y of l ш m а п

will, g o v e r п

nature

society, а н d

ћ u m а п b e i н g s .

A l t h o u g ћ

s t r e s s i п g t ћ е

idea of

t ћ е

Reality of С ћ а н g е , : М а т х ,

а н d especially Engels, stated t ћ a t t ћ е la\vs of t ћ е objective or

material world were

u н с ћ а п g е а Ь l е а н d i н d e p e н d e н t

of

ћ u m а п

b e i н g s . М а т х '\vas c e 1 · t a i н

t ћ a t

he \vould discover t ћ е basic Ia,vs

g o v e r п i п g

life

а н d

society, just as

D a n v i н ћ а d

discovered t ћ е

la'\\'S g o v e r п i п g l i v i н g creatures.

At

а н у rate, М а т х did clarify

some social la,vs, particular-Iy t ћ е way \ V ћ i с ћ t ћ e s e Iaws

o p e т a t e d

t ћ е

p e т i o d of early i п d u s t r i a l capitalism.

T ћ i s fact а l о н е , е v е н i accepted

as

accurate, c a n н o t

in

itself

justify

t ћ е с о н t е н t i о н

of m o d e r п Communists t ћ a t М а т х dis

c o v e г e d

all t ћ е la1vs of society. Still less с а н it justify their at

t ~ m p t

to

:nodel

society

after t ћ o s e

ideas

i н t ћ е

same

'\vay t ћ a t

l1vestock s Ь г е d

t ћ е

basis of t ћ е discoveries of Lamarck

а п d

D a r w i п .

H u m a н society

с а н н о t Ь е

compared to species of a н i -

mals or to i н a п i m a t e objects;

it

is composed of individuals а н d

g r o u ~ s \ v ћ i с ћ are c o п t i н u o u s l y а н d c o п s c i o u s l y active it,

r o ш н а п d с ћ а н g i п g .

. t ћ е p r e t ~ n s i o н s

of

contempOI ary

C o m m u н i s m

of b e i п g ,

1f. not t ћ е

u ш q u e

and

absolut.e,

but in

any case t ћ е ћ i g ћ e s t

sc1ence, based dialectical materialism, are

ћ i d d e н t ћ е

seeds

of its despotism. Т ћ е OI igin of t ћ e s e p r e t e п s i o н s can f o u п d

t ћ е

ideas of

М а т х ,

t ћ o u g l 1 М а т х blmself did

п о t

anticipate

t ћ e m .

f course, contempora1y Communism does r ю t deny t ћ е

eXIstence of an objective or u n c h a н g i n g body of laws. However,

w h e н

power, it acts in an entirely different

m a п n e r

to \vard

ORIGINS

human society and t ћ е individual, and uses methods to estab

lish its power different from those its theories would suggest.

Beginning

\ v i t ћ

the

p r e щ i s e t ћ a t t ћ е у

alone

know the

Iaws

which govern society, C o ш ш u n i s t s a п i v e at the o v e r s i ш p l i f i e d

and unscientific

c o n c l u s i o п

that this alleged knowledge gives

t ћ е ш t ћ е po,ver and the exclusive

r i g ћ t

to

c ћ a n g e

society and

to control its activities.

This is

the

ш а ј о r error

of t ћ e i r system.

Hegel c l a i ш e d t ћ a t

t ћ е

absolute

ш о п а r с ћ у in

Prussia was

t ћ е

i n c a r п a t i o n of bls idea of

t ћ е

Absolute. Т ћ е C o ш ш u n i s t s

on t ћ е o t ћ e r

ћ а п d ,

c l a i ш t ћ a t t ћ е у represent t ћ е i n c a r п a t i o n

of

t ћ е

objective aspirations of society.

Here

is

Ш О I е

t ћ a n just

one difference between t ћ е C o ш ш u n i s t s and Hegel;

t ћ e r e

is

also difference bet1veen tl1e C o ш m u n i s t s

and

absolute

ш о n -

а r с ћ у .

Т ћ е ш о n а r с ћ у did not tblnk quite as

b l g ћ l y

of itself as

t ћ е

C o ш m u n i s t s

do of t ћ e ш s e l v e s ,

п о r \Vas

it as absolute as

t ћ е у are.

2.

Hegel ћ i ш s e l f '\Vas p r o b a Ь l y

t r o u Ь l e d t ћ е

p o s s i Ь l e con-·

clusions to drawn f r o ш ћ i s own discoveries.

For

inst.ance,

if everytblng '\Vas constantly

being

t r a п s f o r ш e d , w ћ a t

'\Vould

ћ а р р е n

to ћ i s own ideas and to t ћ е society \ V ћ i с ћ \Vanted

to preserve? As professor royal a p p o i n t ш e п t ћ е could

not ћ а v е

dared, in any case, to

ш а k е p u Ь l i c

r e c o ш ш e n d a t i o n s

for

t ћ е i ш p r o v e ш e n t of

society on

t ћ е

basis of bls p ћ i l o s o p ћ y .

T ћ i s '\vas not t ћ е case w i t ћ М а т х . As young

ш а n

took

active part in

t ћ е

1848 revolution. \vent to e x t r e ш e s

in

dra,ving

c o n c l u s i o п s f r o ш

Hegel s ideas. Was not t ћ е

Ь l o o d y

class s t т u g g l e г a g i n g all over Europe straining to \vard s o ш e t h i n g

ne1v

and b l g ћ e r ? It. appeared not only t ћ a t Hegel '\Vas r i g ћ t -

t ћ a t is,

Hegel

as intet·preted

Marx-but

also t ћ a t pbllo

s o p ћ i c a l s y s t e ш s longer ћ а d ш e a n i n g and j u s t i f i c a t i o н , since

science '\Vas discovering objective la1vs so rapidly,

including

t ћ o s e

a p p l i c a Ь l e to society.


7/112

Т Н

NEW CL SS

In

science, Comte's

pos1t1v1sm

llad already

triumphed as

method of inquiry; tlle Englisll scllool of political economy

(Smitll, Ricardo, and otllers) 1vas at its lleight; е р о с ћ а l laws

1vere being discover·ed from day to day in

t ћ е

п a t u r a l sciences;

m о d е г п i п d u s t r y 1vas c a r v i п g out its р а t ћ on

t ћ е

basis of s c i e п

tific t e c h п o l o g y ;

and

t ћ е w o u п d s of y o u п g capitalism revealed

t ћ e m s e l v e s

i п t ћ е

s u f f e r i п g а п d

the

b e g i п п i п g

struggle of

the

proletariat. A p p ю · e n t l y this 1vas

t ћ е

onset of

t ћ е

d o ш i п a t i o п

of

c i e п c e ,

е v е п over society, and

t ћ е

e l i ш i n a t i o п of t he capital

istic

с о п с е р t

of ; v п e r s h i p

as t ћ е

final obstacle to ћ u ш а п happi

п e s s а п d

freedom.

Т ћ е

time

1yas

ripe for one great c o п c l u s i o п . Marx

had

Ь о t ћ

t ћ е d a r i п g а п d t ћ е d e p t ћ to express it, but t ћ e r e 1vere social

forces a v a i l a Ь l e 1vblch he could rely.

Marx >vas s c i e п t i s t

and

ideologist.

As

s c i e п t i s t , made

important

d i s c o v e г i e s ,

p a н i c u l a r l y sociology.

As

ideol

ogist, f u r n i s ћ e d t ћ е ideological basis for the g т e a t e s t

and

ш o s t i m p o г t a n t political m o v e ш e n t s of ш о d е т п blstory, 1vhich

took place first

in

Е ш о р е

and

are п m v taking place in Asia.

But, just because he >vas s c i e п t i s t , e c o п o ш i s t , а п d sociol

ogist, Marx never t h o u g ћ t of c o n s t ш c t i п g all-inclusive

philosopblcal

or

ideological s y s t e ш . о п с е said: One t ћ i п g

is

c e r t a i п ;

I

п о t

Marxist. His great

s c i e п t i f i c

talent gave

Ы ш t ћ е

g г e a t e s t

advantage

over·

all ls socialist.

p г e d e c e s s o r s ,

s u c ћ as О > v е п а п d Fourier. Т ћ е fact t.hat did r ю t i п s i s t

on

ideological all-inclusiveness

ls

о > v п

p b l l o s o p ћ i c a l s y s t e ш

gave

him

an even g т e a t e r advantage over

ls

disciples. Most of

the latter

>vere

ideologists

and

only to very

l i ш i t e d

degree-

as

t ћ е

e x a ш p l e s

of P l e k ћ a n o v , Labr·iola, Lenin, Kautsky,

and

Stalin

>vill

s l ю > v - s c i e n t i s t s .

Т ћ е i г

main desire 1vas to construct

s y s t e ш out

of Marx's ideas;

t ls 1vas

especially t.rue of

t ћ o s e

who kne1v littl e pbllosophy and even less talent for it.

As

t ћ е

t i ш e

passed, Marx's

s u c c e s s o г s г e v e a l e d а

tendency to present

his teachings as finite and all-inclusive concept of the >vorld,

and

to

r e g a г d


as т e s p o n s i Ь l e

for

t ћ е c o n t i п u a t i o n

ORIGINS

of all of Marx 's work, >vhich they considered

as

b e i п g virtuaHy·

c o ш p l e t e . Science gradually yielded to p r o p a g a п d a , and as

result, p r o p a g a п d a t e п d e d

ш о r е

а п d

ш о r е

to represent itself

as science.

B e i п g product of ls t i ш e , Marx d e п i e d the need for а н у

k i п d of p ћ i l o s o p ћ y . His closest friend, Engels, declar·ed

t ћ a t

p b l l o s o p ћ y

had

died

1 v i t ћ

t ћ е

d e v e l o p m e п t

of

s c i e п c e .

Marx's

t ћ e s i s >vas н о t at all o r i g i п a l . Т ћ е so-called s c i e п t i f i c p h i l o s o p ћ y ,

especially after

C o ш t e ' s

p o s i t i v i s ш а п d F e u e r b a c ћ ' s

ш a t e r

ialism, ћ а d

Ь е с о ш е

t ћ е g e н e r a l

f a s b l o п .

It

is

easy to u п d e r · s t a н d 1 v ћ у

Marx

d e п i e d Ь о t ћ the п е е d for

and

t ћ е p o s s i Ь i l i t y

of

e s t a Ь l i s b l н g

any

k i п d

of p ћ i l o s o p h y . It

is ћ a r d e r to u п d e r s t a п d > v ћ у ls s u c c e s s ш s

tried

to a r r a п g e his

ideas i п t o an a l l - i н c l u s i v e s y s t e ш , i н t o а п е 1 v , exclusive p ћ i l o s

o p ћ y . Е v е п t ћ o u g ћ they

d e п i e d t ћ е н е е d

for any k i п d of

p ћ i l o s o p ћ y , practice t ћ е у created dogma of t ћ e i r о w н 1 v ћ i с ћ

tl1ey

c o п s i d e r e d to

t ћ е ш o s t s c i e п t i f i c

or tlle

о п l у

s c i e п

tific

s y s t e ш .

p e г i o d of

g e н e r · a l


e п t ћ u s i a s ш and

of gr·eat c ћ a n g e s brougl1t about e v e г y d a y life and industry

science,

t ћ е у

could

п о t

ћ е l р

but ш a t e r i a l i s t s and

to

consider t ћ e ш s e l v e s

tl1e о п l у

r e p r · e s e п t a t i v e s of

t ћ е о п l у


vie>v

and

ш e t h o d ,

particular·ly since

t ћ е у

г e p r e s e n t e d

social s t r · a t u ш 1 v b l c ћ 1vas confiict 1 v i t ћ all tlle accepted

ideas of tlle t i ш e .

Marx's ideas

>vere

i n f i u e п c e d

t ћ е s c i e п t i f i c a t ш o s p ћ e r e of

ls

time,

ls o>vn l e a п i n g s

to>vard s c i e п c e ,

and

his г e v o l u ·

tionary a s p i r - a t i o п to give to t ћ е 1vorking-class ш o v ш n t

ш о r е

or

less scientific basis.

His

disciples 1vere

i п f i u e п c e d

а d i f f e г e n t

e n v i г o n ш e n t

а п d d i f f e r e п t ш o t i v e s 1 v ћ e n

t ћ е у

c o n v e н e d ls Yie>vs into dogrna.

f t ћ е political needs of t ћ е 1vor·king-class

ш o v ш n t

in

Europe had not d e ш a n d e d ne1v ideology c o ш p l e t e in itself,

t ћ е

p b l l o s o p ћ y t.hat calls itself Marxist, t ћ е dialectical

ш a t e r i a l

i s ш , \\rould have been

f o r g o t t e n - d i s ш i s s e d as s o ш e t ћ i n g

п о t

particularly profound

or

even o r i g i п a l , t ћ o u g ћ Marx's е с о -


8/112

6

Т Н

NEW CLASS

n o ш i c and

social studies are of the ћ i g h e s t scientific

and

literary

rank.

Т ћ е s t r e n g t ћ of Marxist pbllosophy

did not

Iie in its

s c i e п

tific e l e ш e п t s ,

but

its

с о п п е с t i о п

-.;vith ш a s s ш o v e ш e n t а п d

ш o s t

of all

in

its e ш p h a s i s

tl1e

objective of c h a п g i п g society.

It

stated a g a i п

and a g a i п

that. the e x i s t i п g -.;vorld

-.;vould c h a п g e

s i ш p l y

because

it

ћ а d

to

c ћ a n g e , t ћ a t

it bore

the seeds of its

о - . ; v п

o p p o s t o п а п d destruction; t Ъ a t the

- . ; v o г k i п g

class - . ; v a п t e d

this c h a п g e and

-.;vould

а Ь l е to effect it. I n e v i t a Ь l y , the influ

ence of this philosophy increased

а п d

created the

E u r · o p e a п

-.;vorkir1g-class

ш o v e m e n t the

i l l u s i o п

tl1at

it

.;vas omnipotent

at least.

as

method. countries - . ; v ћ e r e s i ш i l a r

c o n d i t i o п s

did

п о t

exist,

sucl1 as

Great B r i t a i п

and

the United States, t ћ е

i п f l u e п c e а п d

i ш p o r t a п c e

of this p ћ i l o s o p h y .;vas

i n s i g п i f i c a п t ,

despite the s t г e п g t l l of the - . ; v o г k i n g class and the - . ; v o r k i п g ~ c l a s s

ш о v е ш е п t

As

а s c i e п c e ,

Maixist

philosophy

.;vas

r ю t i ш p o r · t a п t ,

s i п c e

it

.;vas based mainly H e g e l i a п а п d materialistic ideas. As tlle

ideology of the

п е - . ; v

oppr·essed classes

а п d

especially of political

ш o v e m e n t s

it

marked an

epocl1, first in Eur·ope, and

later

in

Russia а п d Asia, p г o v i d i п g the basis for п е - . ; v political move

ш e п t а п d п е - . ; v social system.

Marx thought t ћ a t the

r e p l a c e m e п t

of capitalist society

1vould Ь е b r o u g ћ t а Ь о п t r e v o l п t i o п a г y s t г п g g l e b e t - . ; v e e п

its t .;vo basic classes, the b o п г g e o i s i e and t ћ е p г o l e t a r i a t . The

c l a s ћ

seemed all t ћ е

mor-e

likely to

him

Ь е с а п s е

in

the capital

istic system of t ћ a t time

Ь о t ћ

poverty а п d

-.;vealth

kept increas

ing п п с ћ е с k е d t ћ е opposite poles of society

t ћ a t

.;vas

s ћ а k е п periodic e c o п o m i c crises.

t ћ е last analysis, Marxist t e a c h i п g 1vas

t ћ е

p r o d п c t of t ћ е

ORIGINS

7

i n d п s t r i a l

revolution

or

of the struggle of the i n d п s t r i a l prole

tariat for better life. It .;vas no accident that tlle friglltful

poverty а п d b r u t a l i z a t i o п of t ћ е masses 1 v ћ i c h accompanied

d п s t r i a l cllange had p o - . ; v e r f п l i n f l п e n c e Marx.. His most

i m p o r t a п t -.;vork

Das Kapital

contains

number

of

important

and

stin·ing pages this topic. Т ћ е recurring crises, -.;vhich

\vere c ћ a r a c t e r i s t i c of tlle capitalism of

t ћ е

n i n e t e e n t ћ с е п t п r у ,

t o g e t ћ e r - . ; v i t ћ t ћ е pover-ty and the г a p i d

i n c г e a s e

of t ћ е popula

tiorl, logically

led Marx

to

t ћ е

belief tllat r e v o l п t i o п .;vas the

only

s o l п t i o n

. . М а r х did not c o п s i d e r r e v o l п t i o п to i п e v i t a

Ь l e in all c o п n t r i e s , p a г t i c п l a r l y

not

i п t l ю s e - . ; v ћ e r e democratic

i п s t i t п t i o п s

- . ; v е г е alr·eady tradition of social life.

Н е

cited as

examples of s п с Ь c o п n t r i e s , one of ћ i s talks, tlle N e t Ь e r l a n d s

Great B r i t a i п а п d tlle United States. Ho-.;vever о н е can con

c l п d e

from his ideas, t a k e п

as

- . ; v ћ o l e

t Ь a t

the i п e v i t a Ь i l i t y

of r e v o l п t i o n .;vas one of bls basic beliefs. believed revo

l п t i o п а п d

p r · e a c Ь e d

it.; .;vas

r e v o l п t i o п a r y .

l\Iarx s

r · e v o l п t i o п a т y

ideas,

- . ; v Ъ i с Ь

1vere

c o п d i t i o n a l

and п о t

u n i v e г s a l l y a p p l i c a Ь l e , were c l l a п g e d Ь у L е п i п i п t o a b s o l п t e а п d

lllliversal p г i п c i p l e s .

The lnfantile Disorder of Left-Wing

ommunism

p e r Ь a p s bls most dogmatic 1vork, L е п i п devel

oped t Ь e s e p г i п c i p l e s still more, d i f f e r i п g - . ; v i t Ь Marx s position

that r e v o l п t i o n .;vas a v o i d a Ь l e

in

c e r - t a i п

с о п п t т i е s .

said t ћ a t

Great

В r · i t a i п c o п l d no l o п g e r r e g a т d e d as c o п n t r y

1 v ћ i с ћ r · e v o l п t i o п 1vas a v o i d a Ь l e

Ь е с а п s е

d п r i п g t Ь е First

\Vorbl \Var

s Ь е Ь а d

become militar-istic

po-.;ver and

ther·efore

tlle B r - i t i s ћ \ V o r k i п g class Ь а d п о о t Ь е г с Ь о i с е Ь п t . т e v o l п t i o n .

L е п i п е п е d п о t

о п l у

in

ћ i s f a i l п r e

to

п n d e r s t a п d

that

" B т i t i s h

r n i l i t a т i s m " \vas о п l у

temporary, \vartime

р ћ а s е

of develop

ш e п t

Ь п t

Ь е с а п s е

failed to f o г e s e e

t Ь е f п r t ћ e r

development

of d e m o c т a c y а п d e c o п o m i c p т o g r e s s Gr-eat

В · i t a i п

or other

\ V e s t e ш

c o п п t r - i e s . also

did

п о t

u п d e r s t a n d

t Ь е

n a t п r e of

tlle E n g l i s Ь t r a d e - u п i o п r п o v e m e п t . placed too much em

pllasis or1 Ь i s О \ V П , or Marxian, d e t e n n i п i s t i c , s c i e п t i f i c ideas

а п d

paid too little

attention

to the objective social role а п d


9/112

8

Т Н N Т V CL SS

potentialities

of

the 1vorking class in more highly developed

countries.

Although

he

disclaimed it,

he

did

in

fact proclaim

his

theories

and the

R u s s i a п

т e v o l u t i o n a r y

experience

to

universally a p p l i c a Ь l e .

According to Marx s ћ y p o t h e s i s

and

his c o п c l u s i o n s the

subject,

the

r·evolution >vould о с с н r first of all in

the higbly

developed capitalist c o u n t т i e s . Marx believed

that

the results

of

the

r e v o l u t i o п - t h a t is,

the

ne1v socialist society->vould

lead

to ne1v

and

higher level of freedom t h a п t ћ a t

prevalent in

t ћ е existing society, in so-called l i Ь e r · a l capitalism. This is

u n d e г s t a n d a Ь l e . In the very act of r e j e c t i п g various types

of

capitalism, Marx 1vas

at

the same

time

pi Oduct of his epoch,

t ћ е l i Ь e r a l

capitalist epoch.

I п d e v e l o p i п g

the Marxist

s t a п d that. capitalism must re

placed

not

only ћ i g h e r economic and social f o т m - t h a t is,

socialism-but

higl1er

form

of human fr·eedom, the Social

Democrats

j u s t i f i a Ь l y

considered

themselves

to Marx s

suc

c e s s o г s .

They

ћ а d

less т i g h t to t ћ i s claim than the Com

munists, 1vho cited Marx as the source of their idea that

the

replacement of capitalism can

take place

only

revolutionary

means. Hmvever,

both

groups of Marx s follo>vers-the Social

D e m o п a t s

а п d t ћ е

C o m m н n i s t s - > v e г e

only partly

r i g Ь t i п cit.

ing him as t Ь е basis for t l e i г ideas. In citing Marx s ideas t ћ е у

1vere defending t ћ e i r ·

o>vn

practices, >vhich ћ а d

o г i g i n a t e d

in

d i f f e г e п t , and

already c Ь a n g e d

society. А п d

a l t h o н g Ь

both

cited and depended on M a т x i s t ideas, the Social D e ш o c т a t i c а п d

C o ш m u n i s t n ю v e ш e n t s developed in d i f f e г e n t d i т e c t i o n s .

In

c o t ш t r i e s

>vhere

political

and

e c o n o ш i c

p г o g г e s s 1vas

dif

ficult,

and v ћ е г е t ћ е

> v и k i п g class played 1veak role in society,

the

п е е d

а г о s е slo1vly to ш а k е s y s t e ш

and

dogma

out of

Marxist

teaching. M o т e o v e r , countr'ies > v ћ е т е

e c o n o ш i c

forces

and

social relations 1vere п о t yet ripe for

i п d u s t r i a l c ћ a n g e , as

Russia and later in C ћ i n a , tl1e adoption and dogmatization of

the r e v o l u t i o п a г y aspects

of Marxist t e a c ћ i n g s

was т о г е rapid

and

c o ш p l e t e . Т ћ е r е

>vas

e m p ћ a s i s on

revolution

the

work-

ORIGINS

9

ing-class ш o v e m e n t . In such countries, Marxism grew stronger

and

t r o п g e r

а п d

1vith the victory of t ћ е revolutionary party,

it

became the d о ш i п а п t ideology.

In c o u п t r i e s s u c ћ as G е r ш а п у 1 v ћ e r e t ћ е degree

of

political

and e c o п o r n i c progress made r e v o l u t i o п unnecessary, t ћ е derno

cratic

and reforrnist aspects of Marxist t e a c ћ i n g ,

r a t ћ e r t ћ а п

t ћ е revolutionary ones,

d o m i п a t e d . Т ћ е a п t i - d o g r n a t i c

ideologi

cal

а п d

political tendencies

g e п e r a t e d

а п e m p ћ a s i s reform

the v o r k i п g - c l a s s movernent.

the first case, t ћ е ties 1 v i t ћ

Marx 1 v е г е

s t ' e n g t ћ e n e d ,

at

Ieast in out1vard

а р р е а r а п с е . In

the second case, t ћ е у 1vere

1veakened.

Social

d e v e l o p r n e п t and

the developrnent of ideas

led

to

severe

s c ћ i s m the European

socialist

r n o v e m e п t . R o н g h l y

speaking, t ћ е c ћ a n g e s political and econornic conditions co

incided 1vith c h a п g e s

i п t ћ е

ideas of

tl1e

socialist t ћ e o r i s t s ,

because they interpreted reality in т e l a t i v e manner, that is,

incornplete а п d one-sided 1vay ћ о m tl1eir 0 \ V П partisan

p o i п t of

vie1v.

L e п i n in R ш s i a and Bernstein G e г r n a п y а т е

the

t>vo ex

tremes through 1vhich t Ь е d i f f e г e n t c ћ a n g e s , social and eco

п o r n i c , а п d

t ћ е d i f f e г e п t

" т e a l i t i e s " of t ћ е 1 v o т k i n g - c l a s s move

ments f o u п d e x p т e s s i o п .

Alrnost п o t h i n g т e r n a i n e d

of

o г i g i п a l : м a r x i s m . In

the West

it had died out or 1vas in t ћ е process of dying out; in the East,

as

т e s u l t

of t ћ е e s t a Ь l i s ћ r n e n t of C o r n r n u п i s t rule, only res

idue of

o r ш a l i s r n and dogmatisrn т e r n a i n e d of Marx s dialectics

and m a t e г i a l i s r n ;

t ћ i s

1vas used for t ћ е

pur-pose

of

cernenting

po1ver, justifying t y т a n n y а п d violating ћ u r n a n c o п s c i e n c e .

A l t ћ o u g l 1

it

in fact also

been

а Ь а п d о п е d in t ћ е East, Marx

ism operated t ћ e r e as r·igid dogrna 1 v i t ћ incr·easing po1ver. It

1vas rnore

than

an idea t ћ e r e ; it 1vas ne1v government,

nevv

econorny, п е 1 v social systern.

A l t ћ o u g Ь Marx ћ а d f u r n i s ћ e d ls disciples 1 v i t ћ t ћ е i m p e t н s

for s н с ћ developrnent, Ь а d Yery

little

desire f о т · s u c ћ develop-


10/112

10

Т Н Е N W CLASS

ment nor did he expect it. History betrayed

this

great master

as it

has

others 1vho have attempted to interpret its laws.

What

ћ а s

been the nature of t ћ е

development

since Marx?

In the 1870 s, the formation of c o r p o r a t i o п s а п d monopolies

had

b e g u п in

c o u r н r i e s 1 v ћ e r e the i п d u s t r i a l revolution ћ а d

already t a k e п place, s u c ћ as Germany, E п g l a п d

and

t ћ е U п i t e d

States.

This

d e v e l o p m e п t 1vas

in

full

swing the

beginning

of the H v e п t i e t ћ century. Scientific analyses were made of it

Hobson, Hilferding,

and

others.

L e n i п in Imperialism, the

Final Stage of Capitalism, made political analysis, based

ш а i п l у on tllese authors, containing predictions w h i c ћ

ћ а v е

proved mostl inaccurate.

Marx s

t ћ e o r i e s

about tlle increasing i m p o v e r i s ћ m e n t of t ћ е

1vorking class 1;vere not. Ь о ш е out d e v e l o p ш e n t s those

c o u п t r i e s

from 1vblch

bls

theories ћ а d been

derived.

However,

as Hugh Seton- \>Vatson sta tes in From Lenin to Malenkov,

they

appeared to r · e a s o n a Ь l y

accurate for the most part in

t ћ е

case of the agr·ar ian East

European

countries. T ћ u s while

in

the

vVest his stature 1vas r e d п c e d

to

that

of

blstorian and

scholar, Marx became

the

p г o p h e t of ne1v era in e a s t e ш

Europe.

His

teachings

ћ а d i п t o x i c . a t i п g

effect, similar to

п е w religion.

Т ћ е

s i t п a t i o п

1vestern Europe tllat c o n t r i b п t e d to the

theories of E п g e l s

and Marx

is

d e s c г i Ь e d Andre

Maurois in

the

Y п g o s l a v

edition

of

The

History Df England:

ћ e n

Engels visited

: М а n с ћ е s t е г

in 1844, found 350,000

> v o г k e r · s с г п s ћ е d and crmvded into darnp, dirty, broken-down

houses

> v ћ e r e

tlley breathed an atrnospllere

r e s e r n Ь i i n g а

mix

ture of 1vater and coal. In

t ћ е

rnines, he saw half-naked

wornen, who 1vere

t т e a t e d

Iike tlle lowest of draft animals.

Cllildr·en s p e п t the day in

dark

tunnels, wllere t ћ е у were

employed

in

o p e п i n g and closing t ћ е primitive openings for

ventilation, and o t ћ e r d i f f i c п l t tasks. t ћ е Ј а с е i n d u s t г y

e x p l o i t a t i o п reached s u c ћ

point

t ћ a t four-year-old cllildren

worked for virtually р а у

• New York, Frederick Praeger,

1953.

ORIGINS

E n c т e l s

lived to see

an

entirely different

picture

of

Great

B r i t a i п but he sa>v still ш о r е l ю п i Ь l е

a n d - w ћ a t

1s

ш о r е

i m p o r t a n t - ћ o p e l e s s

poverty in Russia, the

B a l k a ~ s

Asia а п d

Africa.

Technological i ш p r o v e ш e n t s

brougl1t about vast and con-

crete с h а п и е s the vVest,

i ш ш е п s е

f r o ш every

p o i п t

of v i e - ~ v .

Т ћ е у

led

~ tlle f o r - m a t i o п

of

ш o п o p o l i e s а п d

to the

p a r t i t i ? п

of the 1vorld i п t o s p l l e г e s of i п t e r e s t for tlle developed c o u п t п e s

а п d for

t ћ е

ш o п o p o l i e s . Tlley also

led to

the F i т s t World War

а п d t Ъ е October R e v o l u t i o п .

the developed

c o u п t т i e s

the rapid rise

in p r o d u c t i o п and

tlle a c q u i s i t i o п of

c o l o п i a l

sources of materials а п d ш a r k e t s

m a t e г i a l l y c h a п g e d

t ћ е

p o s i t i o п of the 1 v o r k i п g class. The strug

gle f о г т е f о r ш for better

ш a t e r i a l

c o п d i t i o п s together 1vith

t ћ е

a d o p t i o п of p a r l i a ш e n t a r y f o r ш s of

g o v e г п m e n t

Ь е с а ш е

mor-e т е а l а п d

v a l п a Ь l e tl1a11 r e v o l u t i o п a r y

ideals. I п s п с ћ places

r e v o l u t i o п became п o n s e n s i c a l and u п r e a l i s t i c .

The countl ies 1 v h i c ћ were

п о t

yet

i п d u s t r i a l i z e d

p a г t i c u l a r l y

Russia, 1vere in an e п t i r e l y

d i f f e г e п t

s i t u a t i o п . They found


d i l e ш r n a ;

they llad either· to becorne

i п d u s t r i a l

ized,

or

to

d i s c o п t i п u e

active

p a r t i c i p a t i o п

the stage of

Ы s t o r - y

t п ш i п g i п t o captives of t ћ е developed c o u п t r i e s

and

t ћ e i r ш o п o p o l i e s t ћ н s

doomed to

degeneracy.

Local capital

and t ћ е class and

p a г t i e s

r e p r - e s e n t i п g it 1 v е г е too 1veak

to

solve

the p r o Ь i e m s of r·apid i п d н s t r i a l i z a t i o п . In

t ћ e s e

c o u п t r i e s

г e v o

l п t i o п

became

i n e s c a p a Ь i e п e c e s s i t y

Yital need for t ћ е п а

t i о п and

only one class could

b г i n g

it

a b o u t - t Ъ e

p г o l e t a г i a t

or

the

r e v o l п t i o п a г y р а г t у

r-epr-esenting it.

The

г e a s o n

f о г tbls is t ћ a t t l 1 e г e is i m m u t a Ь l e la.v-that

е а с ћ hurnan society and all i п d i v i d u a l s p a г t i c i p a t i n g i п it str-ive

to increase and p e г f e c t р г о d п с t i о п . I п d o i п g

tbls

t ћ е у

come in

c o п f l i c t \ v i t ћ

o t ћ e r societies а п d individuals, so

t ћ a t t ћ е у

corn

pete

1 v i t ћ

е а с ћ

o t ћ e r o г d e r

to

SUI \'iYe. This i п п е а s е

and

e x p a n s i o п of p г o d п c t i o n

c o п s t a п t l y

faces n a t п r a l and sociai

b a п i e r s sucl1 as

individual, political,

legal,

а п d

international


11/112

12

Т Н NEW CL SS

customs and relationships. Since

it

rnust overcorne obstacles,

society, that

is,

those who at g i v e п n ю r n e n t r e p r e s e п t its

productiYe forces, rnust eliminate, change,

or

destroy the ob

stacles \Vhich arise either inside or outside its boundaries.

Classes, parties, political systerns, political ideas, are expres

s i o п of t.his ceaseless p a t t e r п of rnovernent and stagnation.

N society

or nation

alla...vs

production

to lag to such

an

extent t l ш t its existence

is

threatened. Т о lag rneans to die.

People never die \villingly; they are ready to undergo

а п у

sacri

fice

to overcorne the d i f f i c н l t i e s \Vhich stand in the >vay of their

econornic p r o d н c t i o п а п d t h e i г e x i s t e п c e .

The

e n v i r · o п m e п t а п d the material а п d intellectual level de

t e r r n i п e the

m e t l ю d ,

forces,

а п d m e a п s

t ћ a t will used

to

b r i п g about. t ћ е


а п d е х р а п s i о п of p r o d u c t i o п ,

а п d t ћ е social I esults >vhich

follo>v.

Ho>vever, t Ъ е

п e c e s s i t y

for

tl1e


а п d

e x p a n s i o п

of

p i o d u c t i o п - u п d e r

а п у ideo

logical Ь а п п е r

or

social fOl ce-does п о t

d e p e п d i п d i v i d u a l s ;

because t ћ е у > v i s ћ to survive, societies а п d п a t i o n s f i п d the

leaders а п d ideas > v ћ i с ћ ,

at g i Y e п m o m e п t ,

are best suited

to

that ' i \ ' ћ i с ћ t ћ е у must and \vish to attain.

R e v o l u t i o п a r y Marxism >vas t i a n s p l a п t e d

d н r i п g t ћ е

period

of monopolistic capitalism

fmm

t ћ е

i п d u s t i ' i a l l y

developed

\Vest

t.o

c o u п t r i e s of the i п d u s t r i a l l y u п d e v e l o p e d East, s н с ћ as

Russia

а п d С ћ i п а . T ћ i s is

about the time > v ћ е п socialist move

m e п t s

\vere d e v e l o p i п g i п t ћ е East а п d \Vest. T ћ i s stage

of socialist

movement

began > v i t ћ its u п i f i c a t i o п and c e п t r a l

i z a t i o п t Ъ е S e c o п d

I п t e ш a t i o п a l , а п d

e п d e d \ v i t ћ

division

i п t o t ћ е Social

D e m o c г a t i c

(I eform)

>ving

and t ћ е Communist

(revolutionary) > v i п g , l e a d i п g to t ћ е I ' e v o l u t i o п Russia а п d

t ћ е f o г m a t i o п of t ћ е T ћ i r · d I п t e ш a t i o n a l .

c o u п t r i e s > v ћ e r e

t ћ e i ' e \Vas

no

o t ћ e i '

1vay

of

b r i п g i п g about

i п d u s t r i a l i z a t . i o п , there >ve 'e special п a t i o п a l r e a s o п s for t ћ е

C o m m u п i s t r e v o l u t i o п .

R e v o l u t i o п a r y

m o v e m e п t s

existed

in

semi-feudal R н s s i a over half с е п t н r у before the

а р р е а r а п с е

of

t ћ е

Marxists the late

n i п e t e e п t h

c e п t u r y . Moreover, there

ORIGINS

13

\vere u r g e п t а п d specific concrete

reasons-international

eco

п o m i c , political-for r e v o l н t i o n . The basic r e a s o п - t ћ e

v i ~ a l

п е е d for i п d u s t r i a l c ћ a п g e - > v a s c o m m o п to all t ћ е c o u п t п e s

s н с ћ as Russia, С Ь l п а , and Yugoslavia, \Vl1ere r e v o l u t i o п took

place.

It

>vas

ћ i s t ш i c a l l y i п e v i t a Ь l e that. most of

t ћ е

European

socialist

ш о v е ш е п t s

after Mar·x

\Vere not о п l у ш a t e т i a l i s t i c

and

Marxist,

but

to

c o п s i d e r a Ь l e d e g т e e

ideologically

e x c l н ~ i v e .

A и a i п s t

t ћ e m vere u п i t e d all t ћ е forces of

t ћ е

old soCiety:

d

с l ш т с ћ , s c ћ o o l , private

o w п e r s b l p ,

g o v e r п m e п t an , mm·e Im-

p o r t a п t , t ћ е

vast.

pO\ver

m a c ћ i n ~ r y

~ ћ i с ћ t ћ е Е ш о р е а п c o u п

tries ћ а d developed since early times ш t ћ е face of t ћ е constant

c o п t i n e п t a l

> v a r в .

А п у о п е w ћ о >vants

to c ћ a n g e

t ћ е > v o т l d

f u п d a m e n t a l l y must

first of all interpi et

it

f u п d a m e п t a l l y а п d " w i t l ю u t

е п о r . "

Jf::;·· >v

movement must

i ~ e o l o g i c a l l y

exclusive, esp:ciall.y

i i i о п is

the о п l у

1vay

victory

с а п iVOil.

А п d If t ћ 1 s

\;\ t

is

s н c c e s s f u l

its

v е т у

success must

s t r e п g t ћ e n

its

,

I'e

s· :lhd ideas.

Т ћ о u g ћ

successes

t ћ r · о н g ћ

a d v e п t u r o u s par

l i a m e п t a т y

m e t l ю d s

а п d sti ikes s t r · e п g t ћ e п e d t ћ е . т e f o r m i s t t r ~ п d

the

G e ' m a п а п d

o t ћ e r · Social D e m o п a t i c part1es,

t ћ е R u s s ш n

\vorkers,

\ v ћ о

could п о t improve their p o s i t i o п

Ь у о п е

kopeck

\ \ i t ћ o н t

Ь l o o d y

l i q u i d a t i o п s ,

ћ а d no

с ћ о i с е but

to use \ v e a p o п s

to escape despair· а п d d e a t ћ s t a r v a t i o п .

Т ћ е

o t h e г c o u п t r i e s

of

e a s t e п 1 Е ш о р е - Р о l а п d , C z e c ћ o

slovakia, Н н п g а r у ,

R u m a п i a ,

а п d Bulgaria-do not fall н п d е r

t ћ i s rule at Ieast п о t t ћ е

fir·st

t ћ т е е

c o u п t r i e s . Т ћ е у

did п о t

e x p e r i e n ~ e

r e v o l н t i o п s i п c e t ћ е

C o m m u п i s t

system

w ~ s

im

posed

them

t ћ е pO\ver of tlle Soviet Arrny. Т ћ е у d1d n?t

even p т e s s for i n d н s t r · i a l c h a п g e , at least п о t t ћ е o m ш u ш s t

m e t ћ o d ,

for

some of t ћ е ш had already a t t a i п e d it.

t ћ e s e

c o u п t r · i e s , r e v o l u t i o п

>vas

imposed from the outside а п d frorn

above, foreign b a y o п e t s а п d t Ъ е macblnery of force.

The

C o m m u п i s t movements

>vere

weak, except the ш o s t devel

oped

of

t ћ е

c o u п t r i e s , Czechoslovakia, 1vhere

the C o ш m u п i s t


12/112

l

Т Н Е

N W CLASS

т о : е ~ е п t had closely r e s e m Ь l e d leftist а п d p a г l i a m e п t a r y

~ o o a l i s t

m o v e m e п t s

up

to

the time

of d i г e c t Soviet i п t e r v e п t i o n

t h ~ 1 v ~ r and the

coup d etat

of February 1948. S i п c e the Com

m u ш s t ~ these

c o u п t r i e s

1vere 1veak, the s u b s t a п c e

а п d

f o r п l

of the1r

o m m u п i s m had

to i d e п t i c a l 1vith that of the

U . S . S . ~ .

The

U.S.S.R. imposed its system them,

а п d

the

dom:stic Communists adopted

it

gladly.

The

1veaker

C o r п

m u ш s п ~ . 1vas t ~ e ~ o r e it h.ad to imitate е v е п in form its Ь i g

brother - t o t a l i t a r i a п Russiail

C o m m u п i s m .

C o u п t r i e s

such as France and Italy, 1 v ћ i c h had relatively

st:ong

C o m m u п i s t movements, had llard time keepina up

; v н h

the industrially better-developed

c o u н t r i e s а п d

thu;

ш t о s o c i ~ l

d i f f i c ~ l t i e s . ~ i n c e

tlley. llad already passed througll

democratrc

and ш d u s t п a l

r e v o l u t i o п s ,

their C o m m u н i s t

m o v e ~

me?ts

differed g r e ~ t l y

ћ о m

those in Russia, Yugoslavia, and

С h ш а . T ћ e r e f o r e

France

and Italy revolution

did not

ћ а v е

real chance. Since they 1vere livina and operatina in an e н v i ~

ronment of political democracy,

e v e ~

t ћ е

Ieaders of

t ћ e i r

Com

~ u n i s t p a r t ~ e s 1 ~ e r e п о t

а Ь l е

to free t ћ e ш s e l v e s entirely of par

l l a m e п t a r y

I l l u s ю п s . As far as r e v o l u t i o п 1vas с о п с е r п е d they

t e п d e d

to rely

mot·e the i п t e r п a t i o п a l C o m m u п i s t move·

m e п t

а п d

t ћ ~

aid

of

the U S . S . ~ t l : a н t ћ e i r o>vn r e v o l u t i o п a r y

p o 1 ~ e r .

T ћ e r r f o l l o 1 v e r ~ , c o п S i d e г ш g t ћ e i r leaders to fighters

a g a t ~ s t

poverty

а п d misery, п a ' i v e l y believed

t ћ a t

t ћ е party 1vas

f i g h t ш g for br·oader а п d truer

d e ш o c r a c y .

M o d e r ~ п o m m u п i s m Ь е g а п

as

idea 1 v i t ћ

the

i п c e p t i o п of

m o d e r ~ ш d u s t r y . It is

d y i п g out

or b e i п g e l i m i п a t e d i п t ћ o s e

c ~ u п t r r e s

1vhe:re

i п d u s t r i a l

d e v e l o p ш e n t

has acbleved its basic

a1ms. It f l o u r i S ћ e s those

c o u п t r i e s

1vhere tbls ћ а s п о t yet

h a p p e п e d .

. Т ћ е historical role of o m m u п i s m i п t ћ е u п d e v e l o p e d coun

t:Ies has.

e t , : r m i п e d

the course and

the

character of the revolu

t ю п

w h к h It has

ћ а d

to

b r i п g

about.

Character o the Revolution

1

History sh01vs that in countries where C o m m u п i s t revolu

tions have taken place other parties too have been dissatisfied

1vith e x i s t i п g c o п d i t i o п s . The best example is Russia, where

the

party

which

accomplished

the Cornmunist revolution

1vas

п о t

о п l у revolutionary р а т - t у .

However, о п l у the Communist p a г t i e s were both revolu-

t i o п a r y i п their opposition to the

status quo

а п d s t a u п c h and

c o п s i s t e n t their support of t.he i п d u s t r i a l t r a n s f o r r n a t i o п .

practice, tbls meant radical destruction of e s t a Ь l i s h e d O>mer

ship r e l a t i o п s . No other party 1 v e п t so far in t.his respect. None

1vas industrial to that degree.

It

is

less clear 1vhy these parties had to socialist their

program. Under the back1vard c o п d i t i o n s e x i s t i п g Czarist

Russia, capitalist private 01mership

not о п l у

sho1ved itself in

c a p a Ь l e

of

rapid i п d u s t r i a l t r · a п s f o r m a t i o n but actually ob

structed it. The private property class had developed

c o u п t r y

1vhich extrernely po1verful feudal t · e l a t i o п s h i p s still

existed, 1vhile monopolies of rnore developed countries retained

their grip this enormous area

a b o u п d i n g in ra1v

rnaterials

a ld markets.

Czarist Russia, a c c o r d i п g

to

its history, had

to

latecomer

15


13/112

16

Т Н NEW CL SS

with т e s p e c t to

the industrial

revolution. It is

the

only Е ш о

р е а п c o u п t r y

1vhich

did п о t

pass

t ћ r o u g h t.he R e f o r m a t i o п and

the R e п a i s s a п c e .

It

did not

have

a n y t h i п g

like

t.he

medieval

E u r o p e a п

city-states. Back1vard, semi-feudal, w i t ћ absolutist

m o п a r c h y

а п d bureaucratic

centralism, 1vith

rapid

i ш . т е а s е

of

t.he

proletariat

several centers, Russia

found ћ e r s e l f

in

the

w ћ i r l p o o l of

modem

world

capitalism, and

in

t ћ е s п a r e s

of the financial interests of t.he gigantic

banking

centers.

Lenin states his work Imperial ism the Final Stage of

Capi:alism t ћ a t

t . h r e e - f o ш t ћ s of the

capital of t ћ е large

b a п k s

in

R u s ы a was

in the

h a п d s of f o r e i g п capitalists. Trotsky his

history of the R u s s i a п revolution emphasizes that foreigners

c o п t r o l l e d forty

per

cent

of the s ћ a r e s of i п d u s t r i a l capital ir1

Russia, and

that

this percentage >vas

е v е п g г e a t e r in

some lead

i п g i п d u s t r i e s . As for Yugoslavia, f o r e i g п e r s

had

decisive

influence in

the

most i m p o г t a n t br·ar1ches of Yugoslav economy.

These

facts alone do

not р т о v е a n y t ћ i n g .

But they

s ћ m v that

foreigtl capitalists used

t ћ e i r

pmver to с ћ е с k progress

in

these

countries, to develop

t ћ e m

exclusively

as t ћ e i r О \ \ 1 1

sources

of

raw materials

and

cheap labor, 1vith tlle result that t ћ e s e na

tions became unprogt·essive

and

even began to decline.

Т ћ е party

> v h i c ћ ћ а d t ћ е

historic task of carrying out

t ћ е

revolution in t ћ e s e countries ћ а d to anti-capitalistic in its

internal

policy а п d

a п t i - i m p e г i a l i s t i c

in its

f o r e i g п

policy.

Internally domestic capital 1vas 1veak, and 1vas lar·gely

~ n s t _ r u m e n t or

affiliate

of f o r e i g п

capital. It 1vas

r ю t t ћ е

cap

Italist. class

but

a п o t l l e r class, t ћ е

proletariat

1 v ћ i c h 1vas arisino

from

the

i п c r e a s i n g

р о v е н у

of

t ћ е

peasantry,

t ћ a t

1vas

vitall;

interested t ћ е industrial r e v o l u t i o п . Just as t ћ е elimination

of outrageous exploitation \\ as

ш a t t e r

of Iife

а п d

deatll for

t.hose w ћ о already were p r o l e t a г i a n s , so 1vas industrialization

ш a t t e r

of

survival for

t ћ o s e

1 \ ћ о

in their t н г п w е г е about

to

become proletarians. Т ћ е movement 1 v ћ i с ћ represented bot.h

of t ћ e s e ћ а d

to

a п t i - c a p i t a l i s t i c ,

t ћ a t is, socialistic in its

ideas, slogans

and

pledges.

CH R CTER

OF Т Н REVOLUTION

17

Т ћ е

r e v o l н t i o п a r y party

o н l d not

e r i o н s l y

contemplate exe

c н t i o n

of

i п d u s t r i a l r e v o l н t i o п н n l e s s it concentrated all do

mestic

r e s o н т c e s

in its o1vn ћ а п d s p a r t i c н l a r l y t l ю s e of native

capitalists against 1\ hom

the a s s e s

1vere also

e m Ь i t t e r e d

because

of severe e x p l o i t a t i o п а п d t ћ е use of i n ћ н m a n e ш e t h o d s . Т ћ е

r e v o l u t i o п a r y party

had to take

s i ш i l a r s t a п d

against

f o r e i g п

capital.

Other

par·ties 1vere

u п а Ь l е

to follo1v similar program.

of

t ћ e m

eitl1er aspired to return to t ћ е

old

system, to preserva

t i o п

of vested, static

r e l a t i o п s h i p s ;

or

at.

best, to g r a d н a l and

peaceful development. Even

t ћ е

p a н i e s 1vhich 1vere anti-capital

istic, as

f о г

example

t ћ е

SRs S o c i a l i s t - R e v o l u t i o n a т y Party) in

Russia, aspired to1var·d г e t u r n i п g society to idyllic p т i m i t i v e

peasant

Ш е . Even t ћ е

socialist parties s н с ћ

as

t ћ е Mensheviks

in Russia did not go f a r t ћ e r · t ћ a n to

push

for tl1e v i o l e п t over

t ћ r o > v of the barriers to f г е е capitalist development.

Т ћ е у

took

t ћ е p o i п t of

vie1v t.hat

it. >vas п e c e s s a r y

to

ћ а v е

fully developed

capitalism и e r to arrive

at

socialism later. Ho1vever,

the

p r · o Ь l e m

ћ е г е 1vas differ·ent; Ь о t ћ г e t н r n to t ћ е old system а п d

u п ћ a m p e r e d

development of

capitalism

1 v е г е

i m p o s s i Ь i e for

t ћ e s e c o н n t г i e s .

N

i t ћ e r

s o l u t i o п 1vas с а р а Ь l е , н п d е r · t ћ е given

i n t e m a t i o п a l and

internal

c o п d i t i o n s , of resolving t ћ е urgerlt

р г о Ь i е m of f н т t ћ е r · development of

these c o н n t r i e s , i.e., t ћ e i r

industrial

r · e v o l u t i o п s .

О п l у t ћ е р а н у 1 v h i c ћ 1vas favor of the a п t i - c a p i t a l i s t

revolution

а п d

Iapid i п d u s t г i a l i z a t i o n

ћ а d pr-ospects for suc

cess.

O b v i o н s l y t ћ a t

party

Ь а d to

Ь е , i п

a d d i t i o п ,

socialist

its

c o п v i c t i o n s .

But

s i п c e

it

1vas

o Ь l i g e d

to

operate

under

pre

v a i l i п g c o n d i t i o п s

general, а п d

t ћ е labor

or socialist

m o v e ш e n t s s н с ћ party Ь а d to

d e p e п d

ideologically

t ћ е

с о п с е р t of t ћ е i n e v i t a Ь i l i t y а п d н s e f u l п e s s of m o d e т n industry

as 1vell as

t ћ е

tenet t ћ a t r e v o l н t i o n v\ as

н п a v o i d a Ь l e .

This

concept

a l т e a d y

existed,

it

\vas п е с е s s а г у only to modify it. Т Ь е

concept was

M a r x i s ш - i t s 1 · e v o l u t i o п a r y

aspect. A s s o c i a t i o п

1 v i t ћ

r e v o l u t i o п ю - y

M a r x i s ш

> 9 i t Ь t ћ е Е н г о р е а n socialist move-


14/112

18

Т Н NEW CLASS

ment, \Vas natural for t ћ е party t h e п . Lat.er, w i t ћ t ћ е develop·

m e п t

of

t ћ е r e v o l н t i o п

and

with

the o r g a п i z a t i o n a l changes in

t ћ е

deyeJoped c o u п t r i e s it became just

as

essential for it t

separ·ate itself from

t ћ е

reformism of European socialism.

The inevitability of revolution

and

of rapid n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o п

w ћ i с ћ exacted enormous sacrifices and involved rutbless vio

lence, required п о t only promises but faith in t ћ е possibllity of

t ћ е kingdom

of ћ e a v e n

on e a r t ћ . A d v a n c i п g as

o t ћ e r s

also do,

a l o п g the l i п e of least r e s i s t a п c e the supporters of revolution

and industrialization often departed from e s t a Ь l i s ћ e d Marxist

а п d socialist d o c t r i п e . However,

it.

was i m p o s s i Ь l e for them to

shed the doctrine e п t i r e l y .

Capitalism а п d capitalist r e l a t i o п s b l p s were t ћ е proper а п d

at

the g i v e п moment the i п e v i t a Ь l e

forms

а п d t e c ћ n i q u e s

w ћ i c h society expressed its needs and aspirations for improving

а п d e x p a n d i п g p г o d u c t i o n .

In

Great

Britain, in

the

first

ћ a l f

of t ћ е п i n e t e e n t h с е п t u т у capitalism improved and e x p a п d e d

production.

nd just

as

t ћ е

industrialists

in Britain had

to de

stroy the peasantry in order

to attain

h i g ћ e r degree of produc

t i o п

the industrialists, or t ћ е b o ш g e o i s i e

in

Russia ћ а d t

become Yictim of the industrial revolution.

Т ћ е p a r t i c i p a п t s

and the forms wei e different, but t ћ е la\v \Vas t ћ е same

in

both

cases.

In

Ь о t ћ instances socialism \vas

i n e v i t a Ь l e - a s а s l o g a п

а п d

pledge,

as f a i t ћ а п d

lofty ideal, and, in fact, as particular

f o r ш

of g o v e r п m e n t а п d O\vnersblp \ v b l c ћ \vould facilitate the

industrial reYolution and make p o s s i Ь l e improvement а п d

е х ·

p a n s i o п of p r o d u c t i o п .

2.

All the r e v o l u t i o п s of past o r i g i п a t e d after п е \ v economic

or social r elationsblps

ћ а d begun to

prevail, and the old politi·

CHARACTER O Т Н REVOLUTION

19

.:;al system

had

e c ~ m e the sole obstacle to further development.

None of these revolutions s o н g h t а п у t ћ i п g other t.han the

destruction of the old political forms and an o p e ~ i n g o.f ~ h e

1vay

for

a l г e a d y

m a t ш e social forces а п d relationsh1ps e ~ I s t : n g

in t ћ е old society. Even

in

those cases

\ v ћ e i e

t ћ е r e Y o l н t ~ o ш s t s

desired something else, s u c ћ

as

t ћ е b н i l d i n g of econom1:: a ~ d

social r e l a t i o n s ћ i p s means of for·ce, as

did

the Ј а с о Ь ш ~ ш

the French

r e v o l н t i o n

t ћ е у

ћ а d

to accept

f a i l ш e

and

S\Vlftly

eliminated.

In

all preYious revolutions, force

and

violence appeared

p r e d o m i п a n t l y as consequence, as an i п s t r н m e п t of _ne'v ~ н t

already prevailing economic

and

social

f ш c e s а п d

r . e l ~ t ю n s h i _ P S ·

Even 1 v ћ е п f о т с е and

v i o l e п c e

surpassed proper

l1m1ts

~ t m n g

t ћ е course of r e v o l u t i o п in

the

i п a l analysis t ћ е

r e v o l u t ю n a r y

forces

ћ а d

to directed toward positive and a t t a i n ~ Ь l e . goal.

these cases t e п o r and despotism

t n i g ћ t ћ а v е

been ш е v н а Ь l е

but solely t e m p o т a r y m a п i f e s t a t i o п s . . .

All so-called bourgeois

r e v o l u t i o п s \ v ћ e t ћ e r a c ћ 1 e v e d

П о т

belmv, i.e.,

\ V i t ћ

p a r t i c i p a t i o п of t ћ е masses as F r ~ n c e

or

from above, i.e., coup d etat

as

in G e r m a п y н n d е г B1smar·ck,

ћ а d to е п d up political democracy. Т ћ а t is u п d e . r s t a п d ~ ~ l e .

T ћ e i r

task \Vas c ћ i e f i y to destioy t ћ е old despotlc pollt.Ical

system, and to

p e т m i t t ћ е e s t a Ь l i s h m e n t

of political

т e l a t ю ~ -

s ћ i p s

\ V ћ i с ћ would adequate for ali·eady existing е с о r ю n н с

and

other

needs, particularly those concerning t ћ е f т е е produc-

t i o п of goods. .

Т ћ е case is e п t i r e l y diffeieilt \vith

c o п t e m p o r a r y

C o m m u ш s t

r e v o l u t i o п s .

These

т e y o l u t i o п s

did not

occur

Ь е с а н s е

ne\V,

let

us say socialist,

r e l a t i o n s ћ i p s

\vere already

e x i s t i п g

in

t ћ е

econ·

· · d

1

d О п the con-

omy,

or

because

c a p н a l l s m

\Vas over eve о р е .

trary.

Т ћ е у

did occur because capitalism was not fully

veloped and because

it \Vas

п о t

а Ь l е

to carry out the

i n d u s t п a l

transfoimation of country.

In

F t - a п c e

capitalism had already prevailed in the economy,


15/112

20

Т Н Е

NEW

CL SS

in social re lationships,

and

even the

p u Ь l i c

conscience p т i o r

t

ш с е р ~ ю ?

of the r e v o l u t ю n . The case is hardly c o m p a r a Ь e

With soctallsm in Russia, China, or Yugoslavia.

The leaders of the Russian r e v o l u t i o п themselves wer e ю v a r e

of this

f a ~ t . Speaking

at the Seventh Congress of the

R u s s i a п

C o m m u ш s t Party March 7, 1918, while the r e v o l u t i o п 1vas

still

in

progress,

Lenin

said:

· · . One of the fundamental differences b e t \ v e e п bourgeois

а п ~ socia ist revolutions is that in bourgeois revolution,

w h ~ c h a п s e s from f e u d a l i s ш , new

e c o n o ш i c

organizations

w l н c 1 graduaiiy с ~ а п g е all aspects of feudai society are pro

gresSively

created

ш

the midst of the old order.

In a c c o ш

p l i s h i п g . this

t ~ s k , e v ~ r y _ b o ш g e o i s

revolution a c c o ш p l i s h e s

aii that

.Is

. r · e q ш r e d

o_f

It:. It. a s t e п s the grmvth of c a p i t a l i s ш .

А

socialist r · e v o l u t ю п

S ш

e п t i r · e l y d i f f e r - e п t s i t п a t i o п .

the.

e x t e п t

that c o u п t r - y \vhich had to b e g i п socialist

r e v o l u t ю i _ I , _ because of the vagaries of

history

is back

1

vard,

the

t r a п s l t l o п

f r - o ш

old capitalist

r e l a t i o п s

to socialist rela

t i o п s is i п c r e a s i п g l y difficult

The

. d i f f e г ~ п c e

Ь е ~ 1 v е е п socialist r e v o l u t i o п s а п d bourgeois

I " e v o l u t ю п s

l1es speCifically

t ћ е

fact t ћ a t . the Iatter case

e s t a Ь l i s h e d forms of capitalist I e l a t i o п s

e x i ~ t

1vhile the s o v i e ~

power-the proletaiiat-does п о t a t t a i п such r e l a t i o п s , if

;ve

exclude t ћ е ш o s t de;reloped forms of c a p i t a l i s ш , 1vhich actually

e п c o ~ p a s s e d smaii

n u ш b e r

of top i п d u s t r i e s

а п d о п l у

very

s c a п t i l y touclled agriculture,

I

quote

Lenin,

but

I could

quote

any leader

of

the Com

munist

e v o l u t i o n and u m e r o u s

other authors,

as

c o n f i r m a t i o п

of the fact that. settled т e l a t i o n s h i p s

did not

exist for the

Pe;v society,

but

t ~ a t

s o m e o п e ,

in this case the "soviet po

1

ver,"

must t ћ e r e f o r e

bUild them. f the

ne1v

"socialist" r e l a t i o п s h i p s

had ~ e e n devel?ped to the fullest in the

country in

i\'hich Com

m u ш s t т e v o l u t ю п 1vas

а Ь i е

to emerge victor-ious, ther·e

1

vould

have

been need

for so many assurances,

d i s s e i t a t i o п s ,

and

efforts embracing the ' Ъ u i l d i п g of socialism."

CH R CTER OF Т Н REVOLUTION

21

This leads to an

a p p a r e п t

c o n t r a d i c t i o п . f tlle conditions

for п е w society 1vere not sufficiently prevalent, tllen wllo

needed the revolution? Moreover, hoiv ;vas the т e ; r o l u t i o п pos

s i Ь l e ?

Ho1v could

it

survive

in

;rie1v of the fact

that

the

п е w

social

r e l a t i o п s h i p s

1vere not yet in the formative process in

the

old

society?

No r e v o l u t i o п

or party

had

ever before set itself

to

the task

of building social r e l a t i o п s h i p s or ne;v society. But this 1vas

the primary objective of the C o m m u п i s t Ievolution.

Communist leaders,

thougll no better

a c q u a i п t e d than

others

with the

la1vs

1vhich g o v ш society, discover·ed that in the coun

t т y in 1vhich

t h e i т

revolution 1vas p o s s i Ь l e , industrialization Nas

also p o s s i Ь l e , particularly when it involved

t т a n s f o r m a t i o n

of

society keeping 1vith their ideological hypothesis.

E x p e r i e п c e

-the success of revolution

u п d e r

u n f a v o т a Ь l e conditions

confirmed this for them; the building of socialism" did like-

1\'ise.

This

s t r · e п g t h e n e d their· illusion

that

they

kne>v

the laws

of social

development.

In

fact, they 1vere

in t Ъ е position of

making Ь l u e p r i n t for ne;v society, and t h e п of s t ю · t i n g to

build

it, making c o п e c t i o n s here and leaving out sometblng

tl1ere, all

the

while

adhering

closely to

their

p l a п s .

I n d u s t т i a l i z a t i o n , as i n e v i t a Ь l e ,

legitimate necessity of

society, and the Communist 1vay of accomplishing it, j o i п e d

forces in t Ъ е c o u п t г i e s of C o r ш n u n i s t revolutions.

However, neither of tllese, though

tl1ey

progressed togetller

and on p a г a l l e l tracks, could achieve success o v e ш i g h t . After

the completion

of

the revolution,

someone

had

to shoulder

the

r e s p o n s i Ь i l i t y

for

industrialization.

the West, tbls

т о l е

1vas

taken over t ћ е economic forces of capitalism l i Ь e r a t e d

from

the despotic political chains, while in the countries of Com

munist

revolutions no

similar forces existed and, thus, tlleir

function had

to taken

over the revolutionary organs

themselves,

the

new authority, that is, the revolutionary party.

In earlier revolutions, revolutionary force and violence be

came

hindrance

to the е с о п о m у as

soor1

as the

old

order 1vas


16/112

22

overthrmvn

In С

. Т Л Е

NEW

CLASS

· o m m u ш s t revolutio 1 f

condition for further d

1

s orce and vio1ence are

Words of earlier revo1ut1. eve ~ р m е щ and even progress. In

the

o n a п e s for·ce and . I

necessary

evil and

' ю ence were on1y

. means to an

end

I h

m u ш s t s force

and

.

1

. · Il t 1vords of Corn-

f

' ю ence are

elev

t d

cu1t and

an

ult to t lofty position

.

1 Ш а t е

с т о а i In

the

t h I

1vh1ch made

up ? ·

pas ' t asses and forces

. ne\v society already xi t d f

t ю n erupted Th С . s ore the revolu-

have

had

to

~ r e a t е

o m m u ш . s t

revo1utions are the fi.r-st 1Vhich

Even as tl

ela ~ e \ v ~ O c 1 e t y

and ne\v social fOI·ces.

le revo

u t ю n s

th

vV

h d .

democracy

after

aii the . es:. 1 ~ ~ v ~ t a Ь l y to end in

the

East, the r evolutions had

; : : : ~ : 7 s а п d

.

н h d r a w a 1 s ,

of

terror а п d v i o 1 e п c e

in

the W despot1sm. The methods

lous, а п d е v е п h i п d r a п c e est b e ~ ~ m ~ п e e d l e s s а п d ridicu

the

r e v o l u t i o п a r i e s а п d

r е т т 1

a ~ c o m p 1 S l н n g the

revo1ution

for

' п t ю n а г у part"

1

case was the opposite.

Not

on1 d"d d ~ e s n the East, t ћ е

East

Ь е с а п s е

the t г a п s f o . 1 . espot1sm c o п t i п u e in the

· п n a t ю n of ш d u s t г ·

t1me, Ь п t ,

as 1ve

shaii see 1ater· t d r e q ш r e d so mucll

t

h · ' 1 aste

l o n c т

aft · d

Ion ad taken

р 1 а с е .

er ustrializa-

TI ere are other basic d1 ff

1

. erences

betw

.

vo u t ю n s

а п d ear1ier ones 1 een o m m u ш s t re-

had reached the point of re ·d. I ~ r revolutions, though t ћ е у

I П e s s 1n an

Were u n a Ь l e

to br·eak out with economy and society,

We now knmv the e n e г a l cond" . о и t a d v a п t a g e o u s conditions.

and

success

of

г e v o l u t i o п

Н

I t ю n s

necessary

for

the

e r п p t i o n

addition to these g e п e r a i

o;e;er,

e ~ e r y revolution has, in

make its planning and е х е c ~ n I t ю п ~ , Its pecuiiarites w h i c ћ

w

c u t ю n

p o s s i Ь l e

. ar, or more precisely, n a t i o п a i с о Ј .

z а t ю п , was u n n e c e s s a г y for ast I a p ~ e of t ћ е state o r g a п i -

Iarger ones. Until no,v

ћ о w

; . e v o l u t ю n s , at Ieast for the

for the victory

of С о ~ ~ v e r , t

Is

ћ ~ s

been basic

c o n d i t i o л

m u ш s t

r e v o l u t ю n s т ь ·

.

. Is

Is

е v е п valid

1

t

1

CHARACTER OF Tl fE REVOLUTION

23

for C h i п a ; true, there

the

revolution began prior to

the

Ј а р а -

п е s е i п v a s i o n , but it c o п t i n u e d for an entire decade to spread

а п d finally to

e m e г g e

v i c t ш i o п s with

t ћ е

е п d of t ћ е war. The

S p a п i s ћ

revolution

of

1936,

1 v b l c ћ could ћ а v е

been

an

excep

tion, did п о t have time to transfor·m itself i п t o а purely Com

rnunist revolution,

а п d

theiefore,

п e v e r

emerged victorious.

Т ћ е

reason

1var

1vas necessary for tlle C o m m u п i s t .

r e v o l u t i o п ,

or

t ћ е

do1vnfall of

t ћ е

stat.e machinery,

n ш s t s o u g ћ t

in the

immaturity of t ћ е е с о п о m у and society. s e r i o п s collapse

of system, а п d p a r t i c u l a т l y i п war 1 v h i c Ъ ћ а s Ь е е п u п s u c c e s s -

ful for tlle exist.ing

т u l i n g

circles and state system, small but

well-organized а п d disciplined group is i п e v i t a Ь l y а Ь l е to take

a u t l ю r i t y in its

h a п d s .

T ћ u s at

the

time

of

t ћ е Oct.ober

Revolution

the

Communist

Par·ty ћ а d about 80,000 members. Т ћ е Yugoslav C o m m п п i s t

Р а н у began the 1941 revolution with about 10,000 members.

grasp po1ver, the support а п d active p a т t i c i p a t i o n of at 1east

part of t ћ е people

is

necessary, but in every case the party

which leads t ћ е revolution а п d a s s п m e s power is minority

g г o u p

т e l y i п g

exclusively on exceptionally f a v o r a Ь l e condi

tions.

F u r t ћ e п n o r · e

such

party c a п n o t

majority

group

п n t i l it becomes the permanently e s t a Ь l i s h e d authority.

The

accomplishment of s u c ћ а grandiose t a s k - t ћ e destruc

tion of social order and

t ћ е

building of

п е w

society when

conditions for s u c ћ undertaking are r ю t p r o p t o п s in the

е с о n о ш у

or

society-is task а Ь l е to a t t т a c t о п l у а minority,

and

at that, only those

1 v ћ о

believe fanat.ically in its p o s s i Ь i l i t i e s .

Special conditions

а п d

particular party

are basic charac

teristics of

C o ш m u п i s t

r e v o l u t i o п s .

The

a c h i e v e m e п t

of

е v е г у т e v o l п t i o п ,

as well as of every

victor·y in 1var d e ш a п d s c e п t r a l i z a t i o n of all forces. A c c o r d i п g

to the

M a l t l ш s i a п

theory, the

F r · e п c h

r e v o l u t i o п 1vas the fir·st

w h i c Ъ all

t ћ е resources of people at. 1var 1vere placed

the hands of the authorities: people, food, c l o t ћ i п g . T ћ i s ш u s t

t ћ е

case to an е v е п greater degree in C o m m u п i s t "im-


17/112

Т Н Е N E Т V CL SS

24

mature

revolution: not only all material means but all i n ~

tellectual means must fall

into

the hands of the party, and

the

party itself I Ш I S t become politically,

and as an

organization,

c e п t r a l i z e d to the fullest e x t e п t . О п l у C o m m u п i s t parties,

politically

u п i t e d ,

firmly grouped

a r o u п d

the c e п t e r ,

а п d

pos

s e s s i п c r i d e п t i c a l ideolocrical

v i e > v p o i п t s ,

are

а Ы е to

carry out

such

а т e v o l u t i o п .

C e п t r a l i z a t i o п

of all forces

а п d

means as well as some

kind

of political u п i t y

of the revolutionary

parties

are

essential

c o ~

d i t i o п s for every successful т e v o l u t i o п . F о т

the

C o r n m н m s t

г e v o l н t i o n these

c o п d i t i o п s

а т е е v е п m о т е

i r n p o т t a п t ,

since

f г o m t l т e

very

b e c r i п п i п c r

tlle Communists exclude every

o t l l e т

'

independent

political g r o н p or party f г o m b e i п g

an

ally of

their р а г t у .

At the same time they

demand н п i f o т m i t y

of all

v i e > v p o i п t s , i п c l н d i п g

pr·actical political

vieiVS as >vell

as theo

retical, pllilosopllical, and е v е п moral vie>vs. Т Ъ е fact t l т a t

the

l e f t o f c e п t e т

SR s (Socialist-Revolutionaries)

p a т t i c i p a t e d

in

t l т e

October Revolution, а п d t l т a t i п d i v i d н a l s а п d groups

816_Đilas, milovan, the new class - an analysis of the communist system, thames and hudson, 1957

Documents