V. I.

Lenin

Second Congress of the R.S.D.L.P.

July 17 (30)-August 10 (23), 1903

17. Second Speech in the Discussion on the Agrarian Programme

August 1 (14)

Before passing to details, I want to object to certain general statements,
and in the first place to those of Comrade Martynov. Comrade Martynov says
that it is not the feudalism of the past we must combat, but the feudalism
that exists today. That is true, but let me remind you of my reply to
X. The latter referred to Saratov Gubernia. I have consulted the data for
that gubernia and found that the cut-off lands there amount to 600,000
dessiatines, i.e., two-fifths of the total land held by the peasants under
serfdom, while the rented land amounts to 900.000 dessiatines. Consequently, two-thirds of the rented land consists of
cut-off lands. That means that we are out to restore two-thirds of the
laud held in tenure. Hence it is not a ghost we are fighting, but a real
evil. We would arrive at the state of affairs which exists in Ireland,
where the present peasant reform was required, which is turning the tenant
farmers into small owners. The analogy between Ireland and Russia was
already pointed out by the Narodniks in their economic literature. Comrade
Gorin says that the measure I propose is not the best; that it would be
better to turn the peasants into free tenant farmers. But he is mistaken
in thinking that it would be better to turn semi-free tenants into free
tenants. We are not inventing a transition, but are proposing one that
would bring the land tenure laws into conformity with the actually
existing conditions of land tenure, thereby abolishing the bondage
relations that exist today. Martynov says that it is not our demands that are meagre, but the principle from which they are derived. But that
is like the arguments the. Socialist-Revolutionaries bring against us. We
are pursuing two qualitatively different aims in the countryside: firstly,
we want to achieve freedom for bourgeois relations; secondly, we want to
conduct the proletarian struggle. Despite the Socialist-Revolutionaries’
prejudices, it is our task to show the peasants where the revolutionary
proletarian task of the peasant proletariat begins. Comrade Kostrov’s
objections are therefore groundless. We are told that the peas ants will
not be satisfied with our programme and will go further. But we are not
afraid of that; we have our socialist programme for that eventuality, and
consequently are not afraid even of a redistribution of the land, which
terrifies Comrades Makhov and

Kostrov [1] so much.

I conclude. Comrade Yegorov has called our reliance on the peasants
chimerical. No! We are not carried away; we are sufficiently sceptical,
and that is why we say to the peasant proletarian: “Now you are
fighting by the side of the peasant bourgeoisie, but you must always be
prepared to fight against that same bourgeoisie, and you will wage that
fight together with the urban industrial proletarians.”

In 1852 Marx said that the peasants had judgement as well as
prejudices. And now, when we point out to the poor peasants the cause of
their poverty, we may count on success. We believe that, since the
Social-Democrats have now taken up the struggle for the interests of the
peasants, we shall in future be reckoning with the fact that the peasant
masses will get used to looking upon Social-Democracy as the defender of
their interests.

---
Notes:
[1]
Makhov—pseudonym of the Menshevik D. P. Kalafati; Kostrov — pseudonym of the Menshevik N. N. Jordania.