OF THE SOCIALIST-REVOLUTIONARIES
AND OF THE SOCIAL-DEMOCRATS43
OUTLINE OF LECTURE
FIRSTVARIANT
THEAGRARIANPROGRAMME
OFTHESOCIALIST -REVOLUTIONARIES 44
ANDOFTHESOCIAL -DEMOCRATS
In order to make a comparison of the programmes and to assess them, it is necessary to examine the principles, the
theory, from which the programme flows.
A) Attitude of the S.R.s to the Narodniks.45
1. S.R.s are neither for nor
against.
2. Rudin46 29: “valuable legacy” (“the purified”!?)
3. Rudin denies differentiation Rudin 1. (!)
4. Bashful
concealment of
Narodism.
5. And failure to understand its
historical significance (the initial form of democracy “agrarische
Demokratie”).
6. Deviation: the orthodox,
the dogmatists start from Russian relations and data, where-
as the “heirs” of the Narodniks have nothing to say about this,
but then they travel all over
Belgium & Italy.
“Already land in some parts of Russia
! is flowing from cap- italto labour”
No. 8, p. 847
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 11, pp. 8-9: David and K. Kautsky and
Guesde and Jaurès and
Belgium and Italy!!
Trying to draw in the peasant. Intowhat ?
K
K

V. I. LENIN

B) Failure to Understand the Whole of the Historical and
Economic Evolution of Russia.
1. Sitting between two stools;
between the Narodniks and Marxism.
Vestnik Russkoi Revolutsii
No. 1 “the creative side” of !!!
capitalism.
(quotation in Zarya No. 1, editorial).
!
2. Failure to understand the
total change of the two structures of life in Russia (the patriarchal structure based on serfdom !
and the capitalist)
See:
3. Are there any relicts of
serfdom? Is there a task to develop capitalism?
No: Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 8, p. 4. Yes: Revolutsionnaya
Rossiya, No. 15, 6.
“The 1861 reforms have cleared the way (!) and given full (!!!)
scope to the development of capitalism.”
4. Cut-off lands—indenture.
Let’s assume that’s so (Rudin
14). “But not widely comprehensive” Rudin 14 (!)
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 1, 6: the peasant— “servant and master” lives a life based on the
“law of labour”
The class struggle in the countryside (Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 11).
“We do not agree that the peasantry belongs” to the petty - bourgeois sections.
(A centre of Narodism and Marxism!)
“family” and “bourgeoiscapitalist” economies
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 11, p. 9: “they failed to see that the creative role of capitalism in agriculture gives
way to the destructive one”, “the disorganising” one.
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 15, 6: if the peasantry is demanding an “equalisation of land”
there are only two ways:
(1) transfer to individual ownership or (2)
to
collective ownership, socialisation.
PNNNMNNNQ
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
||
||
||
!!


This fails to give abroad!!
provision of land” (Rudin 14).
“Give” more, promise more!!
5. Mr. Rudin’s two theses (17)
(α) Allotment of land will help the peasant to fight capitalism!
(β) it will slow down the capital- !
isation of large-scale farming, (a process!!)
which is grindingslowasitis
Perhaps&thesis (γ) the “blunting” of the class struggle (17).
!
C. Failure to Understand the Class Struggle and Efforts to
Obscure It.
1. The peasantry will not stop
at the cut-off lands. Rudin 18.
2. The peasantry—“labour”
principle (and not class struggle?)
Rudin 1 8.
3. What will happen after
the cut-off lands? Consequent on the cut-off lands? (Class struggle.)
Don’t analyse!
What for?
What does the peasant want? “addition o f land” !!
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 8, p. 7?
we do not count on the well-to-do peasants, for this is the start of the
socialist movement
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 13, p. 5: “no doubt” that the peasant movement is not socialist.
But from half-socialist ideas the propagandist may arrive at “purely
socialist conclusions”.
The poor versus the rich, whereas
Ilyin speaks of the merger of the bourgeois and the proletarian
elements in the movement
Half-socialist programme of the peasants.
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8, p. 3/1.
“Labour principle.”
TNNNNMNNNNU
TNNNNMNNNNU
TNNNMNNNU
TNNNMNNNU
TNMNU

V. I. LENIN

Hence:*
E. Failure to Understand the Russian Revolution.
1. Is it bourgeois o r democratic? Revolutsionnaya
Rossiya No. 8, p. 3/ and “Revolutionary Adventurism”.
Sowing illusions.
2. Vulgar socialism: private property must not be defend-
ed. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 13, pp. 5 and 6. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 15, 6.
(Socialists—vehicles of the bourgeois spirit!)
Con Marx in 1848.
3. The peasant’s equality (“To All the Russian Peasantry”,
p. 8, §1).48—and denial of the right to dispose of the land.
4. Freedom of movement—and the commune “To All
the Russian Peasantry”, p. 8, § 1.
(Maslov’s data)
F. The Social-Democratic Agrarian Programme.
1. Unfeasible?
We vouch
2. Its principles (α) Serfdom
(β) Class struggle (γ) Socialism.
3. Its meaning = the rural proletariat must help the rich and well-to-do
peasant to fight serfdom.
5. What are we going to tell the
peasant?
*) Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8, p. 7 , 1: “pettybourgeoissections” “alwaysingeneral”
“holdontotheexistingorder” (Sic!)
* Lenin indicated a switch of points by means of a bracket in blue pencil,
but failed to alter the alphabetical order of the points. They are given as indicated.—Ed.
Martynov “Fearful for Martynov” Rudin 6.
Quote from Martynov.49
Rudin “not all the peasants are hostile to the old*) regime” 15-16.
Against: quote from Engel - hardt 50
Agrarian system (1 0 : 1 2 —2—6 2)51 (!)
]
]
]
]
]
]
}
è


4. The question of reviewing
the peasant reform has been raised by all the progressive (= liberal) intelligentsia of Russia.
Quotefrom V . V . 52
Hence:
D. Vulgarised Petty-Bourgeois
Narodism & Bourgeois “Criticism”
1. Between the orthodox and
the critics (Vestnik Russkoi Re- volutsii No. , p. 57). The small
is growing.
2. “New Way to Socialism”
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya.
3. Game: distortion of Engels
(extracts). Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 14, p. 6 and Rudin 1.
4. Attitude to the small peasant on the part of our programme and the whole working-class = Social-Democratic
socialism.
5. Co-operatives. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8, p. 11
(“all possible types”).
in general!
(Levitsky)
Bourgeois and socialist co-operatives
German and Russian data!
German
Rocquigny53
Russian
G. Unprincipled Stand of the Socialist-Revolutionaries
1. Man without convictions—party without principles.
2. Rudin 16: “the future will clarify”.
3. Ibid: “try to prevail upon the farm hand” (!!)
4. Noprogramme ! Con—Rudin, 4
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya also boasts in No. 11, p. 6 (“Our
programme has been put forward”) (?)
Cf. Ireland.
1) agrarian non-capitalist struggle.
2) buying out now.
3) the Narodniks draw a
comparison between
Russia and Ireland.
Unprincipled attacks (wails) against the “dogmatists” etc.
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 8 passim.
Engels supplemented by
Böttger: Engels’s prediction is coming true.
TNNMNNU

V. I. LENIN

Thus,
H. “Universal men”
We have seen the co-operatives, but about
Socialisation .
Four meanings:
1) = nationalisation.
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8,
p. 11.
(economic association et al.).
2) = socialist revolution (“To
All the Russian Peasantry”)
p. 31, §1. (minimum?)
3) = commune. Popular anarchy. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 8, pp. 4, .
“The peasantry proclaims the equalisation principle.”
“We are free from idealisation”, but it is easier to start
from the “traditions of communal management”. “Superstitious hostility to the communal principle.”
“Colossal organisation of the communal peasantry”
No. 8, p. 9.
!! no other class is so impelled to political struggle. Ibidem,
p. 8
use on labour and equal lines to be “implemented to the
end” No. 8, p. 8.
(Equalisation?
between communes?)
4. = “Dutch meaning” Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 15,
p. 8, “the Dutch type is most suitable”*), i.e., communalisation
(petty-bourgeois triviality)
“Universal men” indeed!
Written before February 18 (March 3), 1903
First published in 1932
Printed from the original in Lenin Miscellany XIX
*) Dutch: “extension of the commune’s rights in taxing,
buying out and expropriating land”. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 15, 7.
“Fellows, there’s more land to be had!”
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 8, p. 7.
stressing this to be a minimum!
socialisation = i.e., “transfer to the ownership of society and the
use of the working people?”
PNNMNNQ


SECONDVARIANT
THEAGRARIANPROGRAMMEOFTHE
SOCIALIST - REVOLUTIONARIES
ANDOFTHESOCIAL - DEMOCRATS
Three main themes: I. The Basic Principles of an Agrarian
Programme. II. The Agrarian Programme of the Social-
Democrats. III. The Agrarian Programme of the Socialist-
Revolutionaries .
I. The
Basic
Principles o f a n
Agrarian Programme (= the views of
Russian socialists of the agrarian question in Russia).
1. Narodism—the Σ of the old socialist views of the
agrarian question. The whole history of Russian socialist thinking on the agrarian question is a history of Narodism and its struggle against Marxism.
2. S.R.s neither here nor there.
On the one hand—the “creative” side of capitalism (Vestnik
Russkoi Revolutsii No. 1, p. )
not saying: “We are Narodist Socialists”.
On the other hand—“they do not recognise the petty-bourgeois nature of the peasantry” (Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 1 1, p. 7)
“family and bourgeois-capitalist economies” ibidem
Rudin (21) denies the “differentiation” (Rudin 21) “already landinsomeparts” “i s
flowing from capital to labour” (Revolutsionnaya
Rossiya No. 8, p. 8).
the peasant—“law of labour”, “servant and master” (Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 12, 6).

V. I. LENIN

3. Equivocation. War on the “dogmatists”, the orthodox,
and at the same time avoidance of a straightforward stand on
questions of Russian socialism, and travel all over Belgi-
um & Italy!
Between the “critics” and the “orthodox”
David and K. Kautsky etc. etc.
Jaurès and Guesde
Compare Vestnik Russkoi Revolutsii No. , p. 57; (K. Kautsky and “critics”)
4. “Game”: quotations from Engels. “Agreeing” with
Liebknecht, and with Marx and with Engels!!
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya N o. 1 4, p. û, quotations from
Engels (idem Rudin briefly 21)
(total distortion of Engels)
Extracts from Engels.
Engels supplemented by Böttger. (The prediction is coming true.)
5. An instance of confusion in Russian issues: are
there any relicts of serfdom? N o : Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8, p. 4.
Full scope given!!!

Yes, not juridical but economic.
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 1 5, 6.
{No straightforward answer!! No principle at all!!}
In the event, our agrarian programme or the “cut-off lands” cannot be understood!!
Nothing can be understood without clarifying your attitude to the relicts of serfdom and to the whole “change”,
all the post-reform economic evolution.
6. Socialists can never stand up for private property:
“socialists” are “vehicles” of the “bourgeois spirit”. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 1 3, 5 and 6, N o. 1 5, 6.
they have adopted the “slogans of the bourgeois camp”, etc.
“introduction of the bourgeois spirit” into the programme.
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 1 5, p. 7.
(vulgar socialism)
Con—Marx in 1848*
* In the MS., Point 6 is crossed out in plain pencil.—Ed.
!


extracts
7. Failure to understand (1) relicts of serfdom
(2) historical significance of small privatefree property leads to total incomprehension of the cutoff lands.
Instead of assessing the historical significance they make an assessment in general in the sense of provision. Rudin 1 4: it involves indenture, etc., but not
“widely comprehensive”!! ( there is no “broad land provision”)
(Rudin 14)
good wishes instead of a conclusion from the evolution: either “allotment of land” to
peasants as their private property, or the “organisation” of equalised peasant land
tenure.
8. Rudin’s “Theses” (p. 17)
(1) Allotment, of land will help to fight capitalism (2) it will slow down the capitalisation of privately
owned farms, which is grindingslow asitis (3) it will blunt the class struggle.
9. They will not stop at the cut-off lands (Rudin 18). Of
course, not. What then? The class struggle or the “labour”
principle (Rudin 18)??
II. The
Agrarian
Programme o f the
Social - Democrats.
1. Unfeasible? We vouch—(in what sense).
2.
Its principles (1) relicts of serfdom—cf. Martynov, p. 34.

Rudin, 26 “fearful for Martynov” (2) class struggle (3) socialist revolution of the proletariat.
Revolutsionnaya
Rossiya
No. 15, 6
TNMNU
K

V. I. LENIN

3. The land issue is being seen in the cut-off lands, where-
as that is only a way of formulating the struggle againstserfdom, of eliminating the relicts of serfdom.
4. The question of reviewing the “1861 reform” has been
raised by all the progressive (= liberal = bourgeois-democratic) thinking in Russia.
Quotationfrom V . V .
5. The meaning of our agrarian programme: the

Russian proletariat (including the rural) must support the peasantry in the struggle against serfdom.
Rudin 15-16: “notallthepeasants arehostiletotheoldregime”.
Cf. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8, p. 7:
“petty-bourgeois sections” “always in general” “hold on to the existing order”.
6. What
are w e going t o tell the peasant? The “peasantry’s” agrarian system

Con Engelhardt
The Socialist Party and the immediate task= start of the class struggle for socialism.
III. The
Agrarian
Programme o f the
Socialist - Revolutionaries.
1. Man without convictions = party without theory
2. Rudin 16: “the future will clarify”: “We must go
out both to the worker and to the peasant”
3. Noprogramme . Con—Rudin 4 and Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 11, p. 6.
(“our programme has been put forward”)
4. Reactionary silence on the historic tasks of the moment—
and invention of benevolent, confused wishes of “socialisation”.
the peasant’s equality “To All the Russian Peasantry”,
p. 28, § 1
—and no right to dispose of the land freedom of movement—and no withdrawal from the
commune.
(Maslov’s data)


5. C o - operatives : Revolutsionnaya
German
Rossiya N o. 8, p. 1 1
Russian
Rocquigny
6. Socialisation
1) = nationalisation. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya
No. 8, p. 11. Talks on land, 15 one in
2) = socialist revolution. “T o
All the four
Russian Peasantry”, p. 31, § 12.
parts
3) = commune. “Colossal
organisationofthecommunalpeasant- r y” N o. 8, p. 9.
“easier to start from” “communal traditions”, etc.
“equalisation principle to be implemented to the end” No. 8, p. 8.
(although we are free from “idealisation”!)
4) Dutch herring
“extension of the commune’s rights in taxing, buying out and expropriating land”. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 15, p. 7
“The Dutch type is most suitable.”
Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 15, p. 8.
Universal men!!
Written before February 18 (March 3), 1903
First published in 1932
Printed from the original in Lenin Miscellany XIX
K
K
PMQ
PMQ