The plans for the pamphlet “On the Food Tax”
Approximately:*

1. The General Significance of the Tax.
Backward? Forward? (toward commodity exchange.)
Is it “Brest”?
The Transition from Compulsory Grain Requisitioning (the levying of surpluses) to Commodity Exchange.
“War Communism” vs. Rational Economic Relations.

2. Taxation and Free Trade.
Taxation and Free Trade.
Freedom of Trade vs. the Economic Base—namely, the “local circulation” of small-scale farming. o\ » » vs. the state power of the proletariat.
^ » » vs. Concessions. The Measure and Conditions of Free Trade.

3. The Middle Peasantry. (Equalization.)
A Bet on the Kulak—or on the Middle Peasantry? Equalization. The Diligent Peasant. Increasing Agricultural Output.

* - Approximately. Ed.
** - versus - accordingly. Ed.

4. Paths Toward Socialist Agriculture
Small-Scale Peasantry
Collective Farms
Electrification. J5] Cooperatives. |b] Struggling Against Bureaucracy
(its Economic Foundations). 7. The International Situation and Domestic Relations.

8. Party and Political Crises (1920–1921).
Mensheviks + Socialist-Revolutionaries + Anarchists (Kronstadt).

9. “Agreement” with the Peasantry? Or Dictatorship?

10. Non-Party Conferences.
Pamphlet Outline:
Heavy!
More precisely, it should convey the following: On the Replacement of Grain Requisitioning with a Tax in Light of the General Tasks and Conditions of This Political Moment.
The Replacement of Grain Requisitioning with a Tax in Light of the Specific Conditions of This Political Moment.
On the Replacement of Grain Requisitioning with a Tax—and on Agreement with the Peasantry (or On the Tasks of the Workers’ Government in a Peasant Country) and on the Tasks of the Working Class in Relation to the Peasantry.

Plans for the Pamphlet “On the Food Tax”
The Replacement of Grain Requisitioning with a Tax: Its Fundamental Significance—From “War Communism” to a Sound Socialist Foundation.
Not Grain Requisitioning, nor a Tax—but the Exchange of Products from Large-Scale (“Socialized”) Industry for Peasant Produce—such is the Economic Essence of Socialism, its Base.
Grain Requisitioning is not an “ideal,” but a bitter and sorrowful necessity. To look back is a dangerous error.
Grain Requisitioning and the “Apparatus.” Without the “Apparatus,” we would have perished long ago. Without systematic, persistent struggle to improve the apparatus, we shall perish before the socialist base is established.
The Alliance Between Workers and Peasants—? and ? of Soviet Power. The “Necessary and Sufficient” Condition for Its Stability.
This alliance against Denikin and Co. is not merely an alliance—in economic construction as well.
The First = Bourgeois Revolution; the Second = Socialist Revolution.
The Transition from War to Construction.
The Ninth Congress, 1920 (cf.* IV, 1918) versus the Tenth Congress (III, 1921).
The Transition from Grain Requisitioning to Rational Commodity Exchange.
In Principle, We Can Agree on Taxation, Harmonizing It with Free Trade in Bread and Other Commodities.
Formal Democracy versus the Reality of Class Relations in the Question of Taxation and Similar Issues.
Coercion + Persuasion (in Grain Requisitioning)—in Taxation—in “Commodity Exchange.” To What Extent Is There “Freedom of Trade”? After Tax Payment.

* - confer – compare. Ed.

Room for Experimentation, for Practice. Small-Scale Trade...
The Task of Local Workers. The Task of Local Authorities.
The Type of Economic Relations—or Economic System—Preceding the Proletarian Revolution in Many Major Countries = Concentration at the Top
Freedom for Peasant Trade at the Bottom... a Kind of State Capitalism (cf. IV, 1918).
A “Bet” on the Middle Peasantry? On the Kulak? The Restoration of Bourgeois Relations? The Equalization of the Countryside
…a further equalizing redistribution
To the “Poor Peasantry”
To Seize Land from the Kulak
To Provide Extraordinary Assistance from the State.
Now, the Key to Success—indeed, the Cornerstone—becomes the Increase in Agricultural Output (cf. the RCP Program, 130). Inde*: A “Bet” on the Middle Peasantry in Agriculture.
The Diligent Peasant as the “Central Figure” of Our Economic Upturn.
Individual Commodity Exchange.
The Role of Collective Farms: They Have Made Many Mistakes. Under Trial for Failure to Implement the Law and for Incompetence (Three Years).
Is Individualism Among Peasants a Threat to Socialism? Their “Free Trade”? No.
Electrification: the Benchmark. A Distant Plan—but a Plan, and (ergo) a Criterion. (Every Plan Is a Benchmark, a Criterion, a Beacon, a Milestone, etc.)
If Electrification Comes in 10–20 Years, Individualism Among Small Farmers and Their Free Trade Within Local Circulation Will Be No Cause for Concern. If Electrification Does Not Come, a Return to Capitalism Will Still Be Inevitable.

* - Hence. Ed.
** - Therefore. Ed.

Plans for the Pamphlet “On the Food Tax”
The International Situation Has Developed Favorably: A New Balance Has Been Established.
Their Disintegration Is Our Consolidation.
The Entente versus Germany. America versus Japan (and England). America versus Europe. The Imperialist World versus “Asia.”
Ch) Ch)
(0.250 ? 7 = 1.75) (1000 billion out of 1750) 131.
Ten to Twenty Years of Rational Relations with the Peasantry—and Secured Victory on a Global Scale (even if the Proletarian Revolutions, which are Growing, Are Delayed)—otherwise, 20–40 Years of Torment Under White-Guard Terror.
Aut – aut. Tertium non datur*.
“Agreement” with the Peasantry? Constituent Assembly (both Openly and Concealed), Voting, Constitutional Amendment, Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks + Anarchists.
NB:
Cooperation. Its Economic and Political Dimension (Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries).
The Ambiguity of the Concept of “Agreement,” Especially Versus “Dictatorship.”
The Experience and Lessons of Kronstadt (a New Chapter in the Political History of Soviet Power).
Uncompromising Struggle Against the Mensheviks, Socialist-Revolutionaries, and Anarchists.
Quid est “politica”?** (1) The Vanguard of the Proletariat toward Its Masses
(2) The Proletariat toward the Peasantry (3) The Proletariat (and the Peasantry) toward the Bourgeoisie.

* - Either-or. There Is No Third Option. Ed.
** - What Is “Politics”? Ed.

,
Fatigue, exhaustion, despair… No strength left… “A respite”… bureaucratism—(the antithesis of the peasantry).
and among both the working class and the peasantry.
NB:
The utter disintegration of the “upper echelons” and the emergence of new figures from the “lower ranks”—namely, (a) the youth; (?) the non‑party members.
????:
Anarchism and the “Marxist” struggle against it. “Despair”?
The pace is all wrong—both in wartime and in peacetime construction.
Back in April 1918 and again in April 1920, we envisioned the transition from war to peaceful reconstruction as a simple shift along the same political tracks.
But the transition is complex: different relations with the peasantry, a different tempo, a different context.
Demobilization of the army.
Banditry. (Devastation. The Seven‑Year War.)
Either White Guard terror—or the leadership (increasingly tempered) of the proletariat, its dictatorship.
What is so frightening about the word “dictatorship”?
The non‑party peasant as a measure, as an indicator, as a counselor—and as a political slogan (= for the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks). To vote? To overthrow the government? Or to seek compromise with it?
NB:
Non‑party conferences are not absolute. A political instrument wielded by the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries—plus anarchists. Caveant consules!**
A common tactic of ordinary bourgeois party politics and bourgeois parliamentarism:

* – Reflection. Ed.
** – Let the consuls be vigilant! Ed.

PLANS FOR THE BROCHURE “ON THE FOOD TAX”
NB
We are willing to make concessions—but we do not recognize the very foundations of bourgeois parliamentarism, of “ordinary (bourgeois) party politics”! !
NB: NB: NB
“The Economic Foundations of the Withering Away of the State” (“On the State and Revolution”): here too, we find the “economic bases” of the withering away of bureaucratism, of the upper echelons and of the lower ranks, of inequality (cf. “The First Steps from Capitalism to Communism”). There is still no economic basis for socialism. What is that basis? In the exchange of commodities with the peasantry!!
NB
+ Note. The significance of the spring (March–May) political crisis of 1921 (“transitions”) and the party crisis (November or September 1920 – March 1921). Should the party’s leadership be brought into line with its mass base—or vice versa?** Should the party be aligned with the masses (first the proletariat, then the peasantry), or…?
3
State capitalism is not something to fear—it is something to be welcomed.
Learn from state capitalism.
Examples:
1) Concessions.
2) Cooperatives.
3) Commission agents.
4) Leasing arrangements.
Unorganized capitalism.
Everything must be done in moderation and under clearly defined conditions. But what is that measure?
“Nature’s forces” c’est le mot*”
1794 versus 1921.

* See Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 33, pp. 1–119. Ed.
** – vice versa – on the contrary. Ed.
*** – here is the word. Ed.

Experience will tell.
Approximately 1/4.
“Turnover”: Fighting speculation.
primarily—and above all—in the first instance. Quid est?*
The food tax and turnover. Directives for food administrators:
100 + 100 = 200% ?<100 + 25 60 + 60
These (3 and 4) approaches are weak, because we ourselves are weak and foolish: Cf. bureaucratism…
Freedom of trade—(a) to foster the productive forces of the peasant economy, to develop small-scale industry; (b) to combat bureaucratism.
What is the measure? What are the conditions? Practice must show. Food administrator: gather 100%.
100 + 100 = 200 Approximately: 100 + 25 = 125 1 1 60 + 60 = 120 J Fighting speculation? Quid est?
The political dimension:
The petty-bourgeois element will be swept away (May 5, 1918):
“The Model” of the French Revolution cf. October 1918
Anti-Kautsky
Pessimism or optimism?
Accounting for strengths. Sobriety and frenzied passion.

* – What is this? Ed.
** See Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 36, pp. 283–314. Ed.
*** Ibid., vol. 37, pp. 235–338. Ed.

PLANS FOR THE BROCHURE “ON THE FOOD TAX”
Conclusion. Approximately:
The shift toward politics.
The economy of spring 1921 was transformed into politics: “Kronstadt.”
The role of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks (Dan, Rozhkov & Co., Martov & Co.). Even a “small reshuffle” will still move things either to the right or to the left.
Milyukov is smarter than Chernov and Martov: it’s not hard to be smarter than these self‑absorbed fools, heroes of empty phrases, knights of the petty‑bourgeois doctrine (1789–1848–1920).
Their proper place is in prison—not at a non‑party conference.
11794 versus 1921| The fluctuating nature of “nature’s forces” (quid est nature’s forces) and the need for steadfastness. The selection and promotion of leaders.
Pessimism or optimism? The most sober assessment of evil and difficulty. Unyielding commitment in the struggle. ?? =
Results:
1) “Turnover.” Quid est?
2) Small-scale industry. Where is the raw material?
3) Exchange.
4) Capitalism.
5) State capitalism.
6) Local initiative.
7) The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries—plus the non‑party members.
Written in late March–April 1921.
First published in 1925 in Lenin’s Collected Works, Volume IV

Printed from manuscript