full

full
Published on:

5th Sep 2024

Lenin's The State And Revolution: A Deep Dive Into Class Society And Revolution

Delve deep into Lenin's "The State and Revolution" to understand class

society and revolution in this insightful video analysis. A must-watch

for political theory enthusiasts!

Hear it Here - https://bit.ly/stateandrevolution


00:00:00 State and Revolution

00:00:05 Preface To The First Edition.

00:03:44 1. The State - A Product of the Irreconcilability of Class Antagonisms

00:12:22 2. Special Bodies Of Armed Men, Prisons, Etc.

00:19:42 3. The State - an Instrument for the Exploitation of the Oppressed Class

00:27:59 4. The “Withering Away” of the State, and Violent Revolution


"State and Revolution" (1917) describes the role of the State in

society, the necessity of proletarian revolution, and the theoretical

inadequacies of social democracy in achieving revolution. It represents

the inherent nature of the State as a tool for class oppression, a

creation born of one social class's desire to control all other social

classes. Whether a dictatorship or a democracy, the State remains in the

ruling class's control. Even in a democratic capitalist republic, the

ruling class will never willingly relinquish political power,

maintaining it via various strategies. Hence, according to this view,

the communist revolution is the sole remedy for the abolition of the

state.


#RussellNewton #NewtonMG

Transcript
Speaker:

State and Revolution

Speaker:

Unabridged Audiobook

Speaker:

Play Free

Speaker:

With 30-Day Free Trial

Speaker:

Add to Cart

Speaker:

Price $3.99

Speaker:

Written Written by

Speaker:

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, narrated by russell newton.

Speaker:

Preface To The First Edition.

Speaker:

The question of the state is now acquiring particular importance both in theory

Speaker:

and in practical politics.

Speaker:

The imperialist war has immensely accelerated and intensified the process of

Speaker:

transformation of monopoly capitalism into state­monopoly capitalism.

Speaker:

The monstrous oppression of the working people by the state,

Speaker:

which is merging more and more with the all­powerful capitalist associations,

Speaker:

is becoming increasingly monstrous.

Speaker:

The advanced countries ­ we mean their hinterland ­ are becoming military

Speaker:

convict prisons for the workers.

Speaker:

The unprecedented horrors and miseries of the protracted war are making the

Speaker:

people's position unbearable and increasing their anger.

Speaker:

The world proletarian revolution is clearly maturing.

Speaker:

The question of its relation to the state is acquiring practical importance.

Speaker:

The elements of opportunism that accumulated over the decades of comparatively

Speaker:

peaceful development have given rise to the trend of social­chauvinism which

Speaker:

dominated the official socialist parties throughout the world.

Speaker:

This trend ­ socialism in words and chauvinism in deeds (Plekhanov,

Speaker:

Potresov,

Speaker:

Breshkovskaya,

Speaker:

Rubanovich,

Speaker:

and,

Speaker:

in a slightly veiled form,

Speaker:

Tsereteli,

Speaker:

Chernov and Co. in Russia;

Speaker:

Scheidemann.

Speaker:

Legien,

Speaker:

David and others in Germany;

Speaker:

Renaudel,

Speaker:

Guesde and Vandervelde in France and Belgium;

Speaker:

Hyndman and the Fabians1 in England,

Speaker:

etc.,

Speaker:

etc.)

Speaker:

­ is conspicuous for the base,

Speaker:

servile adaptation of the "leaders of socialism" to the interests not only of

Speaker:

"their" national bourgeoisie,

Speaker:

but of "their" state,

Speaker:

for the majority of the so­called Great Powers have long been exploiting and

Speaker:

enslaving a whole number of small and weak nations.

Speaker:

And the imperialist war is a war for the division and redivision of this kind

Speaker:

of booty.

Speaker:

The struggle to free the working people from the influence of the bourgeoisie

Speaker:

in general,

Speaker:

and of the imperialist bourgeoisie in particular,

Speaker:

is impossible without a struggle against opportunist prejudices concerning the

Speaker:

"state"

Speaker:

First of all we examine the theory of Marx and Engels of the state,

Speaker:

and dwell in particular detail on those aspects of this theory which are

Speaker:

ignored or have been distorted by the opportunists.

Speaker:

Then we deal specially with the one who is chiefly responsible for these

Speaker:

distortions,

Speaker:

Karl Kautsky,

Speaker:

the best­known leader of the Second International (1889­1914),

Speaker:

which has met with such miserable bankruptcy in the present war.

Speaker:

Lastly,

Speaker:

we sum up the main results of the experience of the Russian revolutions of 1905

Speaker:

and particularly of 1917.

Speaker:

Apparently,

Speaker:

the latter is now (early August 1917)

Speaker:

completing the first stage of its development;

Speaker:

but this revolution as a whole can only be understood as a link in a chain of

Speaker:

socialist proletarian revolutions being caused by the imperialist war.

Speaker:

The question of the relation of the socialist proletarian revolution to the

Speaker:

state,

Speaker:

therefore,

Speaker:

is acquiring not only practical political importance,

Speaker:

but also the significance of a most urgent problem of the day,

Speaker:

the problem of explaining to the masses what they will have to do before long

Speaker:

to free themselves from capitalist tyranny.

Speaker:

The Author August 1917.

Speaker:

Preface To The Second Edition.

Speaker:

The present,

Speaker:

second edition is published virtually unaltered,

Speaker:

except that section 3 had been added to Chapter Ii.

Speaker:

The Author Moscow,

Speaker:

December 17,

Speaker:

1918.

Speaker:

Chapter I .- Class Society And The State.

Speaker:

1. The State .- A Product of the Irreconcilability of Class Antagonisms What

Speaker:

is now happening to Marx's theory has,

Speaker:

in the course of history,

Speaker:

happened repeatedly to the theories of revolutionary thinkers and leaders of

Speaker:

oppressed classes fighting for emancipation.

Speaker:

During the lifetime of great revolutionaries,

Speaker:

the oppressing classes constantly hounded them,

Speaker:

received their theories with the most savage malice,

Speaker:

the most furious hatred and the most unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander.

Speaker:

After their death,

Speaker:

attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons,

Speaker:

to canonize them,

Speaker:

so to say,

Speaker:

and to hallow their names to a certain extent for the “consolation” of the

Speaker:

oppressed classes and with the object of duping the latter,

Speaker:

while at the same time robbing the revolutionary theory of its substance,

Speaker:

blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it.

Speaker:

Today,

Speaker:

the bourgeoisie and the opportunists within the Labor movement concur in this

Speaker:

doctoring of Marxism.

Speaker:

They omit,

Speaker:

obscure,

Speaker:

or distort the revolutionary side of this theory,

Speaker:

its revolutionary soul.

Speaker:

They push to the foreground and extol what is or seems acceptable to the

Speaker:

bourgeoisie.

Speaker:

All the social­chauvinists are now “Marxists” (don't laugh!).

Speaker:

And more and more frequently German bourgeois scholars,

Speaker:

only yesterday specialists in the annihilation of Marxism,

Speaker:

are speaking of the “national­German” Marx,

Speaker:

who,

Speaker:

they claim,

Speaker:

educated the labor unions which are so splendidly organized for the purpose of

Speaker:

waging a predatory war!

Speaker:

In these circumstances,

Speaker:

in view of the unprecedently wide­spread distortion of Marxism,

Speaker:

our prime task is to re­establish what Marx really taught on the subject of

Speaker:

the state.

Speaker:

This will necessitate a number of long quotations from the works of Marx and

Speaker:

Engels themselves.

Speaker:

Of course,

Speaker:

long quotations will render the text cumbersome and not help at all to make it

Speaker:

popular reading,

Speaker:

but we cannot possibly dispense with them.

Speaker:

All,

Speaker:

or at any rate all the most essential passages in the works of Marx and Engels

Speaker:

on the subject of the state must by all means be quoted as fully as possible so

Speaker:

that the reader may form an independent opinion of the totality of the views of

Speaker:

the founders of scientific socialism,

Speaker:

and of the evolution of those views,

Speaker:

and so that their distortion by the “Kautskyism” now prevailing may be

Speaker:

documentarily proved and clearly demonstrated.

Speaker:

Let us begin with the most popular of Engels' works,

Speaker:

The Origin of the Family,

Speaker:

Private Property and the State,

Speaker:

the sixth edition of which was published in Stuttgart as far back as 1894.

Speaker:

We have to translate the quotations from the German originals,

Speaker:

as the Russian translations,

Speaker:

while very numerous,

Speaker:

are for the most part either incomplete or very unsatisfactory.

Speaker:

Summing up his historical analysis,

Speaker:

Engels says - “The state is,

Speaker:

therefore,

Speaker:

by no means a power forced on society from without;

Speaker:

just as little is it 'the reality of the ethical idea',

Speaker:

'the image and reality of reason',

Speaker:

as Hegel maintains.

Speaker:

Rather,

Speaker:

it is a product of society at a certain stage of development;

Speaker:

it is the admission that this society has become entangled in an insoluble

Speaker:

contradiction with itself,

Speaker:

that it has split into irreconcilable antagonisms which it is powerless to

Speaker:

dispel.

Speaker:

But in order that these antagonisms,

Speaker:

these classes with conflicting economic interests,

Speaker:

might not consume themselves and society in fruitless struggle,

Speaker:

it became necessary to have a power,

Speaker:

seemingly standing above society,

Speaker:

that would alleviate the conflict and keep it within the bounds of 'order';

Speaker:

and this power,

Speaker:

arisen out of society but placing itself above it,

Speaker:

and alienating itself more and more from it,

Speaker:

is the state."

Speaker:

This expresses with perfect clarity the basic idea of Marxism with regard to

Speaker:

the historical role and the meaning of the state.

Speaker:

The state is a product and a manifestation of the irreconcilability of class

Speaker:

antagonisms.

Speaker:

The state arises where,

Speaker:

when and insofar as class antagonism objectively cannot be reconciled.

Speaker:

And,

Speaker:

conversely,

Speaker:

the existence of the state proves that the class antagonisms are irreconcilable.

Speaker:

It is on this most important and fundamental point that the distortion of

Speaker:

Marxism,

Speaker:

proceeding along two main lines,

Speaker:

begins.

Speaker:

On the one hand,

Speaker:

the bourgeois,

Speaker:

and particularly the petty­bourgeois,

Speaker:

ideologists,

Speaker:

compelled under the weight of indisputable historical facts to admit that the

Speaker:

state only exists where there are class antagonisms and a class struggle,

Speaker:

“correct” Marx in such a way as to make it appear that the state is an

Speaker:

organ for the reconciliation of classes.

Speaker:

According to Marx,

Speaker:

the state could neither have arisen nor maintained itself had it been possible

Speaker:

to reconcile classes.

Speaker:

From what the petty­bourgeois and philistine professors and publicists say,

Speaker:

with quite frequent and benevolent references to Marx,

Speaker:

it appears that the state does reconcile classes.

Speaker:

According to Marx,

Speaker:

the state is an organ of class rule,

Speaker:

an organ for the oppression of one class by another;

Speaker:

it is the creation of “order”,

Speaker:

which legalizes and perpetuates this oppression by moderating the conflict

Speaker:

between classes.

Speaker:

In the opinion of the petty­bourgeois politicians,

Speaker:

however,

Speaker:

order means the reconciliation of classes,

Speaker:

and not the oppression of one class by another;

Speaker:

to alleviate the conflict means reconciling classes and not depriving the

Speaker:

oppressed classes of definite means and methods of struggle to overthrow the

Speaker:

oppressors.

Speaker:

For instance,

Speaker:

when,

Speaker:

in the revolution of 1917,

Speaker:

the question of the significance and role of the state arose in all its

Speaker:

magnitude as a practical question demanding immediate action,

Speaker:

and,

Speaker:

moreover,

Speaker:

action on a mass scale,

Speaker:

all the Social­Revolutionaries and Mensheviks descended at once to the

Speaker:

petty­bourgeois theory that the “state” “reconciles” classes.

Speaker:

Innumerable resolutions and articles by politicians of both these parties are

Speaker:

thoroughly saturated with this petty­bourgeois and philistine

Speaker:

“reconciliation” theory.

Speaker:

That the state is an organ of the rule of a definite class which cannot be

Speaker:

reconciled with its antipode (the class opposite to it)

Speaker:

is something the petty­bourgeois democrats will never be able to understand.

Speaker:

Their attitude to the state is one of the most striking manifestations of the

Speaker:

fact that our Socialist­ Revolutionaries and Mensheviks are not socialists at

Speaker:

all (a point that we Bolsheviks have always maintained),

Speaker:

but petty­bourgeois democrats using near­socialist phraseology.

Speaker:

On the other hand,

Speaker:

the “Kautskyite” distortion of Marxism is far more subtle.

Speaker:

“Theoretically”,

Speaker:

it is not denied that the state is an organ of class rule,

Speaker:

or that class antagonisms are irreconcilable.

Speaker:

But what is overlooked or glossed over is this - if the state is the product of

Speaker:

the irreconcilability of class antagonisms,

Speaker:

if it is a power standing above society and “alienating itself more and more

Speaker:

from it",

Speaker:

it is clear that the liberation of the oppressed class is impossible not only

Speaker:

without a violent revolution,

Speaker:

but also without the destruction of the apparatus of state power which was

Speaker:

created by the ruling class and which is the embodiment of this “alienation”

Speaker:

As we shall see later,

Speaker:

Marx very explicitly drew this theoretically self­evident conclusion on the

Speaker:

strength of a concrete historical analysis of the tasks of the revolution.

Speaker:

And — as we shall show in detail further on — it is this conclusion which

Speaker:

Kautsky has “forgotten” and distorted.

Speaker:

2.

Speaker:

Special Bodies Of Armed Men,

Speaker:

Prisons,

Speaker:

Etc.

Speaker:

Engels continues - “As distinct from the old gentile [tribal or clan]

Speaker:

order,[2] the state,

Speaker:

first,

Speaker:

divides its subjects according to territory...."

Speaker:

This division seems “natural” to us,

Speaker:

but it costs a prolonged struggle against the old organization according to

Speaker:

generations or tribes.

Speaker:

“The second distinguishing feature is the establishment of a public power

Speaker:

which no longer directly coincides with the population organizing itself as an

Speaker:

armed force.

Speaker:

This special,

Speaker:

public power is necessary because a self­acting armed organization of the

Speaker:

population has become impossible since the split into classes....

Speaker:

This public power exists in every state;

Speaker:

it consists not merely of armed men but also of material adjuncts,

Speaker:

prisons,

Speaker:

and institutions of coercion of all kinds,

Speaker:

of which gentile [clan] society knew nothing...."

Speaker:

Engels elucidates the concept of the “power” which is called the state,

Speaker:

a power which arose from society but places itself above it and alienates

Speaker:

itself more and more from it.

Speaker:

What does this power mainly consist of?

Speaker:

It consists of special bodies of armed men having prisons,

Speaker:

etc.,

Speaker:

at their command.

Speaker:

We are justified in speaking of special bodies of armed men,

Speaker:

because the public power which is an attribute of every state “does not

Speaker:

directly coincide” with the armed population,

Speaker:

with its “self­acting armed organization"

Speaker:

Like all great revolutionary thinkers,

Speaker:

Engels tries to draw the attention of the class­conscious workers to what

Speaker:

prevailing philistinism regards as least worthy of attention,

Speaker:

as the most habitual thing,

Speaker:

hallowed by prejudices that are not only deep­rooted but,

Speaker:

one might say,

Speaker:

petrified.

Speaker:

A standing army and police are the chief instruments of state power.

Speaker:

But how can it be otherwise?

Speaker:

From the viewpoint of the vast majority of Europeans of the end of the 19th

Speaker:

century,

Speaker:

whom Engels was addressing,

Speaker:

and who had not gone through or closely observed a single great revolution,

Speaker:

it could not have been otherwise.

Speaker:

They could not understand at all what a “self­acting armed organization of

Speaker:

the population” was.

Speaker:

When asked why it became necessary to have special bodies of armed men placed

Speaker:

above society and alienating themselves from it (police and a standing army),

Speaker:

the West­European and Russian philistines are inclined to utter a few phrases

Speaker:

borrowed from Spencer of Mikhailovsky,

Speaker:

to refer to the growing complexity of social life,

Speaker:

the differentiation of functions,

Speaker:

and so on.

Speaker:

Such a reference seems “scientific”,

Speaker:

and effectively lulls the ordinary person to sleep by obscuring the important

Speaker:

and basic fact,

Speaker:

namely,

Speaker:

the split of society into irreconcilable antagonistic classes.

Speaker:

Were it not for this split,

Speaker:

the “self­acting armed organization of the population” would differ from

Speaker:

the primitive organization of a stick­wielding herd of monkeys,

Speaker:

or of primitive men,

Speaker:

or of men united in clans,

Speaker:

by its complexity,

Speaker:

its high technical level,

Speaker:

and so on.

Speaker:

But such an organization would still be possible.

Speaker:

It is impossible because civilized society is split into antagonistic,

Speaker:

and,

Speaker:

moreover,

Speaker:

irreconcilably antagonistic classes,

Speaker:

whose “self­acting” arming would lead to an armed struggle between them.

Speaker:

A state arises,

Speaker:

a special power is created,

Speaker:

special bodies of armed men,

Speaker:

and every revolution,

Speaker:

by destroying the state apparatus,

Speaker:

shows us the naked class struggle,

Speaker:

clearly shows us how the ruling class strives to restore the special bodies of

Speaker:

armed men which serve it,

Speaker:

and how the oppressed class strives to create a new organization of this kind,

Speaker:

capable of serving the exploited instead of the exploiters.

Speaker:

In the above argument,

Speaker:

Engels raises theoretically the very same question which every great revolution

Speaker:

raises before us in practice,

Speaker:

palpably and,

Speaker:

what is more,

Speaker:

on a scale of mass action,

Speaker:

namely,

Speaker:

the question of the relationship between “special” bodies of armed men and

Speaker:

the “self­acting armed organization of the population"

Speaker:

We shall see how this question is specifically illustrated by the experience of

Speaker:

the European and Russian revolutions.

Speaker:

But to return to Engels' exposition.

Speaker:

He points out that sometimes — in certain parts of North America,

Speaker:

for example — this public power is weak (he has in mind a rare exception in

Speaker:

capitalist society,

Speaker:

and those parts of North America in its pre­ imperialist days where the free

Speaker:

colonists predominated),

Speaker:

but that,

Speaker:

generally speaking,

Speaker:

it grows stronger - “It [the public power] grows stronger,

Speaker:

however,

Speaker:

in proportion as class antagonisms within the state become more acute,

Speaker:

and as adjacent states become larger and more populous.

Speaker:

We have only to look at our present­day Europe,

Speaker:

where class struggle and rivalry in conquest have tuned up the public power to

Speaker:

such a pitch that it threatens to swallow the whole of society and even the

Speaker:

state."

Speaker:

This was written not later than the early nineties of the last century,

Speaker:

Engels' last preface being dated June 16,

Speaker:

1891.

Speaker:

The turn towards imperialism — meaning the complete domination of the trusts,

Speaker:

the omnipotence of the big banks,

Speaker:

a grand­scale colonial policy,

Speaker:

and so forth — was only just beginning in France,

Speaker:

and was even weaker in North America and in Germany.

Speaker:

Since then “rivalry in conquest” has taken a gigantic stride,

Speaker:

all the more because by the beginning of the second decade of the 20th century

Speaker:

the world had been completely divided up among these “rivals in conquest",

Speaker:

i.e.,

Speaker:

among the predatory Great Powers.

Speaker:

Since then,

Speaker:

military and naval armaments have grown fantastically and the predatory war of

Speaker:

1914­17 for the domination of the world by Britain or Germany,

Speaker:

for the division of the spoils,

Speaker:

has brought the “swallowing” of all the forces of society by the rapacious

Speaker:

state power close to complete catastrophe.

Speaker:

Engels' could,

Speaker:

as early as 1891,

Speaker:

point to “rivalry in conquest" as one of the most important distinguishing

Speaker:

features of the foreign policy of the Great Powers,

Speaker:

while the social­chauvinist scoundrels have ever since 1914,

Speaker:

when this rivalry,

Speaker:

many time intensified,

Speaker:

gave rise to an imperialist war,

Speaker:

been covering up the defence of the predatory interests of “their own"

Speaker:

bourgeoisie with phrases about “defence of the fatherland",

Speaker:

“defence of the republic and the revolution",

Speaker:

etc.!

Speaker:

3. The State - an Instrument for the Exploitation of the Oppressed Class The

Speaker:

maintenance of the special public power standing above society requires taxes

Speaker:

and state loans.

Speaker:

“Having pubic power and the right to levy taxes,” Engels writes,

Speaker:

“the officials now stand,

Speaker:

as organs of society,

Speaker:

above society.

Speaker:

The free,

Speaker:

voluntary respect that was accorded to the organs of the gentile [clan]

Speaker:

constitution does not satisfy them,

Speaker:

even if they could gain it...."

Speaker:

Special laws are enacted proclaiming the sanctity and immunity of the officials.

Speaker:

“The shabbiest police servant” has more “authority” than the

Speaker:

representative of the clan,

Speaker:

but even the head of the military power of a civilized state may well envy the

Speaker:

elder of a clan the “unrestrained respect” of society.

Speaker:

The question of the privileged position of the officials as organs of state

Speaker:

power is raised here.

Speaker:

The main point indicated is - what is it that places them above society?

Speaker:

We shall see how this theoretical question was answered in practice by the

Speaker:

Paris Commune in 1871 and how it was obscured from a reactionary standpoint by

Speaker:

Kautsky in 1912.

Speaker:

“Because the state arose from the need to hold class antagonisms in check,

Speaker:

but because it arose,

Speaker:

at the same time,

Speaker:

in the midst of the conflict of these classes,

Speaker:

it is,

Speaker:

as a rule,

Speaker:

the state of the most powerful,

Speaker:

economically dominant class,

Speaker:

which,

Speaker:

through the medium of the state,

Speaker:

becomes also the politically dominant class,

Speaker:

and thus acquires new means of holding down and exploiting the oppressed

Speaker:

class...."

Speaker:

The ancient and feudal states were organs for the exploitation of the slaves

Speaker:

and serfs;

Speaker:

likewise,

Speaker:

“the modern representative state is an instrument of exploitation of

Speaker:

wage­labor by capital.

Speaker:

By way of exception,

Speaker:

however,

Speaker:

periods occur in which the warring classes balance each other so nearly that

Speaker:

the state power as ostensible mediator acquires,

Speaker:

for the moment,

Speaker:

a certain degree of independence of both...."

Speaker:

Such were the absolute monarchies of the 17th and 18th centuries,

Speaker:

the Bonapartism of the First and Second Empires in France,

Speaker:

and the Bismarck regime in Germany.

Speaker:

Such,

Speaker:

we may add,

Speaker:

is the Kerensky government in republican Russia since it began to persecute the

Speaker:

revolutionary proletariat,

Speaker:

at a moment when,

Speaker:

owing to the leadership of the petty­bourgeois democrats,

Speaker:

the Soviets have already become impotent,

Speaker:

while the bourgeoisie are not yet strong enough simply to disperse them.

Speaker:

In a democratic republic,

Speaker:

Engels continues,

Speaker:

“wealth exercises its power indirectly,

Speaker:

but all the more surely",

Speaker:

first,

Speaker:

by means of the “direct corruption of officials” (America);

Speaker:

secondly,

Speaker:

by means of an “alliance of the government and the Stock Exchange" (France

Speaker:

and America).

Speaker:

At present,

Speaker:

imperialism and the domination of the banks have “developed” into an

Speaker:

exceptional art both these methods of upholding and giving effect to the

Speaker:

omnipotence of wealth in democratic republics of all descriptions.

Speaker:

Since,

Speaker:

for instance,

Speaker:

in the very first months of the Russian democratic republic,

Speaker:

one might say during the honeymoon of the “socialist” S. R. s and

Speaker:

Mensheviks joined in wedlock to the bourgeoisie,

Speaker:

in the coalition government.

Speaker:

Mr. Palchinsky obstructed every measure intended for curbing the capitalists

Speaker:

and their marauding practices,

Speaker:

their plundering of the state by means of war contracts;

Speaker:

and since later on Mr. Palchinsky,

Speaker:

upon resigning from the Cabinet (and being,

Speaker:

of course,

Speaker:

replaced by another quite similar Palchinsky),

Speaker:

was “rewarded” by the capitalists with a lucrative job with a salary of

Speaker:

120,000 rubles per annum — what would you call that?

Speaker:

Direct or indirect bribery?

Speaker:

An alliance of the government and the syndicates,

Speaker:

or “merely” friendly relations?

Speaker:

What role do the Chernovs,

Speaker:

Tseretelis,

Speaker:

Avksentyevs and Skobelevs play?

Speaker:

Are they the “direct” or only the indirect allies of the millionaire

Speaker:

treasury­looters?

Speaker:

Another reason why the omnipotence of “wealth” is more certain in a

Speaker:

democratic republic is that it does not depend on defects in the political

Speaker:

machinery or on the faulty political shell of capitalism.

Speaker:

A democratic republic is the best possible political shell for capitalism,

Speaker:

and,

Speaker:

therefore,

Speaker:

once capital has gained possession of this very best shell (through the

Speaker:

Palchinskys,

Speaker:

Chernovs,

Speaker:

Tseretelis and Co.),

Speaker:

it establishes its power so securely,

Speaker:

so firmly,

Speaker:

that no change of persons,

Speaker:

institutions or parties in the bourgeois­democratic republic can shake it.

Speaker:

We must also note that Engels is most explicit in calling universal suffrage as

Speaker:

well an instrument of bourgeois rule.

Speaker:

Universal suffrage,

Speaker:

he says,

Speaker:

obviously taking account of the long experience of German Social­Democracy,

Speaker:

is “the gauge of the maturity of the working class.

Speaker:

It cannot and never will be anything more in the present­day state."

Speaker:

The petty­bourgeois democrats,

Speaker:

such as our Socialist­Revolutionaries and Mensheviks,

Speaker:

and also their twin brothers,

Speaker:

all the social­chauvinists and opportunists of Western Europe,

Speaker:

expect just this “more” from universal suffrage.

Speaker:

They themselves share,

Speaker:

and intill into the minds of the people,

Speaker:

the false notion that universal suffrage “in the present­day state" is

Speaker:

really capable of revealing the will of the majority of the working people and

Speaker:

of securing its realization.

Speaker:

Here,

Speaker:

we can only indicate this false notion,

Speaker:

only point out that Engels' perfectly clear statement is distorted at every

Speaker:

step in the propaganda and agitation of the “official” (i.e.,

Speaker:

opportunist)

Speaker:

socialist parties.

Speaker:

A detailed exposure of the utter falsity of this notion which Engels brushes

Speaker:

aside here is given in our further account of the views of Marx and Engels on

Speaker:

the “present­day” state.

Speaker:

Engels gives a general summary of his views in the most popular of his works in

Speaker:

the following words - “The state,

Speaker:

then,

Speaker:

has not existed from all eternity.

Speaker:

There have been societies that did without it,

Speaker:

that had no idea of the state and state power.

Speaker:

At a certain stage of economic development,

Speaker:

which was necessarily bound up with the split of society into classes,

Speaker:

the state became a necessity owing to this split.

Speaker:

We are now rapidly approaching a stage in the development of production at

Speaker:

which the existence of these classes not only will have ceased to be a

Speaker:

necessity,

Speaker:

but will become a positive hindrance to production.

Speaker:

They will fall as they arose at an earlier stage.

Speaker:

Along with them the state will inevitably fall.

Speaker:

Society,

Speaker:

which will reorganize production on the basis of a free and equal association

Speaker:

of the producers,

Speaker:

will put the whole machinery of state where it will then belong - into a museum

Speaker:

of antiquities,

Speaker:

by the side of the spinning­wheel and the bronze axe."

Speaker:

We do not often come across this passage in the propaganda and agitation

Speaker:

literature of the present­day Social­Democrats.

Speaker:

Even when we do come across it,

Speaker:

it is mostly quoted in the same manner as one bows before an icon,

Speaker:

i.e.,

Speaker:

it is done to show official respect for Engels,

Speaker:

and no attempt is made to gauge the breadth and depth of the revolution that

Speaker:

this relegating of “the whole machinery of state to a museum of

Speaker:

antiquities” implies.

Speaker:

In most cases we do not even find an understanding of what Engels calls the

Speaker:

state machine.

Speaker:

4. The “Withering Away” of the State,

Speaker:

and Violent Revolution Engels’ words regarding the “withering away” of

Speaker:

the state are so widely known,

Speaker:

they are often quoted,

Speaker:

and so clearly reveal the essence of the customary adaptation of Marxism to

Speaker:

opportunism that we must deal with them in detail.

Speaker:

We shall quote the whole argument from which they are taken.

Speaker:

“The proletariat seizes from state power and turns the means of production

Speaker:

into state property to begin with.

Speaker:

But thereby it abolishes itself as the proletariat,

Speaker:

abolishes all class distinctions and class antagonisms,

Speaker:

and abolishes also the state as state.

Speaker:

Society thus far,

Speaker:

operating amid class antagonisms,

Speaker:

needed the state,

Speaker:

that is,

Speaker:

an organization of the particular exploiting class,

Speaker:

for the maintenance of its external conditions of production,

Speaker:

and,

Speaker:

therefore,

Speaker:

especially,

Speaker:

for the purpose of forcibly keeping the exploited class in the conditions of

Speaker:

oppression determined by the given mode of production (slavery,

Speaker:

serfdom or bondage,

Speaker:

wage­labor).

Speaker:

The state was the official representative of society as a whole,

Speaker:

its concentration in a visible corporation.

Speaker:

But it was this only insofar as it was the state of that class which itself

Speaker:

represented,

Speaker:

for its own time,

Speaker:

society as a whole - in ancient times,

Speaker:

the state of slave­owning citizens;

Speaker:

in the Middle Ages,

Speaker:

of the feudal nobility;

Speaker:

in our own time,

Speaker:

of the bourgeoisie.

Speaker:

When at last it becomes the real representative of the whole of society,

Speaker:

it renders itself unnecessary.

Speaker:

As soon as there is no longer any social class to be held in subjection,

Speaker:

as soon as class rule,

Speaker:

and the individual struggle for existence based upon the present anarchy in

Speaker:

production,

Speaker:

with the collisions and excesses arising from this struggle,

Speaker:

are removed,

Speaker:

nothing more remains to be held in subjection — nothing necessitating a

Speaker:

special coercive force,

Speaker:

a state.

Speaker:

The first act by which the state really comes forward as the representative of

Speaker:

the whole of society — the taking possession of the means of production in

Speaker:

the name of society — is also its last independent act as a state.

Speaker:

State interference in social relations becomes,

Speaker:

in one domain after another,

Speaker:

superfluous,

Speaker:

and then dies down of itself.

Speaker:

The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things,

Speaker:

and by the conduct of processes of production.

Speaker:

The state is not 'abolished'.

Speaker:

It withers away.

Speaker:

This gives the measure of the value of the phrase 'a free people's state',

Speaker:

both as to its justifiable use for a long time from an agitational point of

Speaker:

view,

Speaker:

and as to its ultimate scientific insufficiency;

Speaker:

and also of the so­called anarchists' demand that the state be abolished

Speaker:

overnight."

Speaker:

(Herr Eugen Duhring's Revolution in Science [Anti­Duhring],

Speaker:

pp.301­03,

Speaker:

third German edition.)3 It is safe to say that of this argument of Engels',

Speaker:

which is so remarkably rich in ideas,

Speaker:

only one point has become an integral part of socialist thought among modern

Speaker:

socialist parties,

Speaker:

namely,

Speaker:

that according to Marx that state “withers away” — as distinct from the

Speaker:

anarchist doctrine of the “abolition” of the state.

Speaker:

To prune Marxism to such an extent means reducing it to opportunism,

Speaker:

for this “interpretation” only leaves a vague notion of a slow,

Speaker:

even,

Speaker:

gradual change,

Speaker:

of absence of leaps and storms,

Speaker:

of absence of revolution.

Speaker:

The current,

Speaker:

widespread,

Speaker:

popular,

Speaker:

if one may say so,

Speaker:

conception of the “withering away" of the state undoubtedly means obscuring,

Speaker:

if not repudiating,

Speaker:

revolution.

Speaker:

Such an “interpretation”,

Speaker:

however,

Speaker:

is the crudest distortion of Marxism,

Speaker:

advantageous only to the bourgeoisie.

Speaker:

In point of theory,

Speaker:

it is based on disregard for the most important circumstances and

Speaker:

considerations indicated in,

Speaker:

say,

Speaker:

Engels' “summary” argument we have just quoted in full.

Speaker:

In the first place,

Speaker:

at the very outset of his argument,

Speaker:

Engels says that,

Speaker:

in seizing state power,

Speaker:

the proletariat thereby “abolishes the state as state"

Speaker:

It is not done to ponder over the meaning of this.

Speaker:

Generally,

Speaker:

it is either ignored altogether,

Speaker:

or is considered to be something in the nature of “Hegelian weakness” on

Speaker:

Engels' part.

Speaker:

As a matter of fact,

Speaker:

however,

Speaker:

these words briefly express the experience of one of the greatest proletarian

Speaker:

revolutions,

Speaker:

the Paris Commune of 1871,

Speaker:

of which we shall speak in greater detail in its proper place.

Speaker:

As a matter of fact,

Speaker:

Engels speaks here of the proletariat revolution “abolishing” the bourgeois

Speaker:

state,

Speaker:

while the words about the state withering away refer to the remnants of the

Speaker:

proletarian state after the socialist revolution.

Speaker:

According to Engels,

Speaker:

the bourgeois state does not “wither away",

Speaker:

but is “abolished” by the proletariat in the course of the revolution.

Speaker:

What withers away after this revolution is the proletarian state or semi­state.

Speaker:

Secondly,

Speaker:

the state is a “special coercive force"

Speaker:

Engels gives this splendid and extremely profound definition here with the

Speaker:

utmost lucidity.

Speaker:

And from it follows that the “special coercive force” for the suppression

Speaker:

of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie,

Speaker:

of millions of working people by handfuls of the rich,

Speaker:

must be replaced by a “special coercive force” for the suppression of the

Speaker:

bourgeoisie by the proletariat (the dictatorship of the proletariat).

Speaker:

This is precisely what is meant by “abolition of the state as state"

Speaker:

This is precisely the “act” of taking possession of the means of production

Speaker:

in the name of society.

Speaker:

And it is self­ evident that such a replacement of one (bourgeois)

Speaker:

“special force” by another (proletarian)

Speaker:

“special force” cannot possibly take place in the form of “withering away"

Speaker:

Thirdly,

Speaker:

in speaking of the state “withering away",

Speaker:

and the even more graphic and colorful “dying down of itself",

Speaker:

Engels refers quite clearly and definitely to the period after “the state has

Speaker:

taken possession of the means of production in the name of the whole of

Speaker:

society",

Speaker:

that is,

Speaker:

after the socialist revolution.

Speaker:

We all know that the political form of the “state” at that time is the most

Speaker:

complete democracy.

Speaker:

But it never enters the head of any of the opportunists,

Speaker:

who shamelessly distort Marxism,

Speaker:

that Engels is consequently speaking here of democracy “dying down of

Speaker:

itself",

Speaker:

or “withering away"

Speaker:

This seems very strange at first sight.

Speaker:

But is “incomprehensible” only to those who have not thought about

Speaker:

democracy also being a state and,

Speaker:

consequently,

Speaker:

also disappearing when the state disappears.

Speaker:

Revolution alone can “abolish” the bourgeois state.

Speaker:

The state in general,

Speaker:

i.e.,

Speaker:

the most complete democracy,

Speaker:

can only “wither away"

Speaker:

Fourthly,

Speaker:

after formulating his famous proposition that “the state withers away",

Speaker:

Engels at once explains specifically that this proposition is directed against

Speaker:

both the opportunists and the anarchists.

Speaker:

In doing this,

Speaker:

Engels puts in the forefront that conclusion,

Speaker:

drawn from the proposition that “the state withers away",

Speaker:

which is directed against the opportunists.

Speaker:

One can wager that out of every 10,000 persons who have read or heard about the

Speaker:

“withering away” of the state,

Speaker:

9,990 are completely unaware,

Speaker:

or do not remember,

Speaker:

that Engels directed his conclusions from that proposition not against

Speaker:

anarchists alone.

Speaker:

And of the remaining 10,

Speaker:

probably nine do not know the meaning of a “free people's state” or why an

Speaker:

attack on this slogan means an attack on opportunists.

Speaker:

This is how history is written!

Speaker:

This is how a great revolutionary teaching is imperceptibly falsified and

Speaker:

adapted to prevailing philistinism.

Speaker:

The conclusion directed against the anarchists has been repeated thousands of

Speaker:

times;

Speaker:

it has been vulgarized,

Speaker:

and rammed into people's heads in the shallowest form,

Speaker:

and has acquired the strength of a prejudice,

Speaker:

whereas the conclusion directed against the opportunists has been obscured and

Speaker:

“forgotten”!

Speaker:

The “free people's state” was a programme demand and a catchword current

Speaker:

among the German Social­ Democrats in the seventies. this catchword is devoid

Speaker:

of all political content except that it describes the concept of democracy in a

Speaker:

pompous philistine fashion.

Speaker:

Insofar as it hinted in a legally permissible manner at a democratic republic,

Speaker:

Engels was prepared to “justify” its use “for a time” from an

Speaker:

agitational point of view.

Speaker:

But it was an opportunist catchword,

Speaker:

for it amounted to something more than prettifying bourgeois democracy,

Speaker:

and was also failure to understand the socialist criticism of the state in

Speaker:

general.

Speaker:

We are in favor of a democratic republic as the best form of state for the

Speaker:

proletariat under capitalism.

Speaker:

But we have no right to forget that wage slavery is the lot of the people even

Speaker:

in the most democratic bourgeois republic.

Speaker:

Furthermore,

Speaker:

every state is a “special force” for the suppression of the oppressed class.

Speaker:

Consequently,

Speaker:

every state is not “free” and not a “people's state"

Speaker:

Marx and Engels explained this repeatedly to their party comrades in the

Speaker:

seventies.

Speaker:

Fifthly,

Speaker:

the same work of Engels',

Speaker:

whose arguments about the withering away of the state everyone remembers,

Speaker:

also contains an argument of the significance of violent revolution.

Speaker:

Engels' historical analysis of its role becomes a veritable panegyric on

Speaker:

violent revolution.

Speaker:

This,

Speaker:

“no one remembers"

Speaker:

It is not done in modern socialist parties to talk or even think about the

Speaker:

significance of this idea,

Speaker:

and it plays no part whatever in their daily propaganda and agitation among the

Speaker:

people.

Speaker:

And yet it is inseparably bound up with the 'withering away" of the state into

Speaker:

one harmonious whole.

Speaker:

Here is Engels' argument - “...That force,

Speaker:

however,

Speaker:

plays yet another role [other than that of a diabolical power] in history,

Speaker:

a revolutionary role;

Speaker:

that,

Speaker:

in the words of Marx,

Speaker:

it is the midwife of every old society which is pregnant with a new one,

Speaker:

that it is the instrument with which social movement forces its way through and

Speaker:

shatters the dead,

Speaker:

fossilized political forms — of this there is not a word in Herr Duhring.

Speaker:

It is only with sighs and groans that he admits the possibility that force will

Speaker:

perhaps be necessary for the overthrow of an economy based on exploitation —

Speaker:

unfortunately,

Speaker:

because all use of force demoralizes,

Speaker:

he says,

Speaker:

the person who uses it.

Speaker:

And this in Germany,

Speaker:

where a violent collision — which may,

Speaker:

after all,

Speaker:

be forced on the people — would at least have the advantage of wiping out the

Speaker:

servility which has penetrated the nation's mentality following the humiliation

Speaker:

of the Thirty Years' War.4 And this person's mode of thought — dull,

Speaker:

insipid,

Speaker:

and impotent — presumes to impose itself on the most revolutionary party that

Speaker:

history has ever known!

Speaker:

(p.193,

Speaker:

third German edition,

Speaker:

Part Ii,

Speaker:

end of Chap.Iv)

Speaker:

How can this panegyric on violent revolution,

Speaker:

which Engels insistently brought to the attention of the German

Speaker:

Social­Democrats between 1878 and 1894,

Speaker:

i.e.,

Speaker:

right up to the time of his death,

Speaker:

be combined with the theory of the 'withering away" of the state to form a

Speaker:

single theory?

Speaker:

Usually the two are combined by means of eclecticism,

Speaker:

by an unprincipled or sophistic selection made arbitrarily (or to please the

Speaker:

powers that be)

Speaker:

of first one,

Speaker:

then another argument,

Speaker:

and in 99 cases out of 100,

Speaker:

if not more,

Speaker:

it is the idea of the “withering away” that is placed in the forefront.

Speaker:

Dialectics are replaced by eclecticism — this is the most usual,

Speaker:

the most wide­spread practice to be met with in present­day official

Speaker:

Social­Democratic literature in relation to Marxism.

Speaker:

This sort of substitution is,

Speaker:

of course,

Speaker:

nothing new;

Speaker:

it was observed even in the history of classical Greek philosophy.

Speaker:

In falsifying Marxism in opportunist fashion,

Speaker:

the substitution of eclecticism for dialectics is the easiest way of deceiving

Speaker:

the people.

Speaker:

It gives an illusory satisfaction;

Speaker:

it seems to take into account all sides of the process,

Speaker:

all trends of development,

Speaker:

all the conflicting influences,

Speaker:

and so forth,

Speaker:

whereas in reality it provides no integral and revolutionary conception of the

Speaker:

process of social development at all.

Speaker:

We have already said above,

Speaker:

and shall show more fully later,

Speaker:

that the theory of Marx and Engels of the inevitability of a violent revolution

Speaker:

refers to the bourgeois state.

Speaker:

The latter cannot be superseded by the proletarian state (the dictatorship of

Speaker:

the proletariat)

Speaker:

through the process of 'withering away",

Speaker:

but,

Speaker:

as a general rule,

Speaker:

only through a violent revolution.

Speaker:

The panegyric Engels sang in its honor,

Speaker:

and which fully corresponds to Marx's repeated statements (see the concluding

Speaker:

passages of The Poverty of Philosophy5 and the Communist Manifesto6,

Speaker:

with their proud and open proclamation of the inevitability of a violent

Speaker:

revolution;

Speaker:

see what Marx wrote nearly 30 years later,

Speaker:

in criticizing the Gotha Programme of 18757,

Speaker:

when he mercilessly castigated the opportunist character of that programme)

Speaker:

— this panegyric is by no means a mere “impulse”,

Speaker:

a mere declamation or a polemical sally.

Speaker:

The necessity of systematically imbuing the masses with this and precisely this

Speaker:

view of violent revolution lies at the root of the entire theory of Marx and

Speaker:

Engels.

Speaker:

The betrayal of their theory by the now prevailing social­chauvinist and

Speaker:

Kautskyite trends expresses itself strikingly in both these trends ignoring

Speaker:

such propaganda and agitation.

Speaker:

The supersession of the bourgeois state by the proletarian state is impossible

Speaker:

without a violent revolution.

Speaker:

The abolition of the proletarian state,

Speaker:

i.e.,

Speaker:

of the state in general,

Speaker:

is impossible except through the process of “withering away"

Speaker:

A detailed and concrete elaboration of these views was given by Marx and Engels

Speaker:

when they studied each particular revolutionary situation,

Speaker:

when they analyzed the lessons of the experience of each particular revolution.

Speaker:

We shall now pass to this,

Speaker:

undoubtedly the most important,

Speaker:

part of their theory.

Speaker:

This has been

Speaker:

State and Revolution

Speaker:

Unabridged Audiobook

Speaker:

Play Free

Speaker:

With 30-Day Free Trial

Speaker:

Add to Cart

Speaker:

Price $3.99

Speaker:

Written Written by

Speaker:

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, narrated by russell newton.

Next Episode All Episodes Previous Episode

Listen for free

Show artwork for Voice over Work - An Audiobook Sampler

About the Podcast

Voice over Work - An Audiobook Sampler
Audiobook synopsises for the masses
You know that guy that reads all the time, and always has a book recommendation for you?

Well, I read and/or produce hundreds of audiobooks a year, and when I read one that has good material, I feature it here. This is my Recommended Listening list. These choices are not influenced by authors or sponsors, just books worthy of your consideration.

About your host

Profile picture for Russell Newton

Russell Newton