Introduction

The foundations of Leninism: it is a big subject. To expound it thoroughly, a whole volume, or several, would be needed. Obviously, then, the present exposition cannot possibly be exhaustive. At best, it can be nothing more than an outline of the foundations of Leninism. Nevertheless, it may be of considerable use.

An exposition of the foundations of Leninism is a different thing from an exposition of the foundations of Lenin’s philosophy. Lenin is a Marxist, so of course his philosophy is based upon Marxism. But this does not mean that an account of Leninism ought to begin with an account of the foundations of Marxism. To expound Leninism means to expound what is distinctive in the work of Lenin, what new thing Lenin brought to Marxism, what is particularly connected with Lenin’s name. Only in this sense shall I speak here of the foundations of Leninism.

What, then, is Leninism?

According to some, it is the application of Marxism to the peculiar conditions of Russia. This definition contains only part of the truth, not the whole. It is true that Lenin applied Marxism to the Russian situation, and that his application was masterly. But if Leninism were nothing more than the application of Marxism to the peculiar conditions of Russia, it would have a purely Russian and exclusively national character. Nevertheless, as we know, Leninism is an international phenomenon. It is rooted in internationalism, and is not solely Russian. That is why the foregoing definition is too narrow.

Others declare that Leninism is a revival of the Marxism of the late forties, as contrasted with the Marxism of subsequent years, which (they contend) became “moderate”, and lost its revolutionary fire. Although it is stupid to split up Marx’s teaching in this way into “revolutionary Marxism” and “moderate Marxism”, we have to admit that the second definition of Leninism, for all its inadequacy, likewise embodies part of the truth. It is a fact that Lenin brought to light once more the revolutionary content of Marxism, which had been glossed over by the opportunists of the Second International. But that is only a fragment of the truth. The whole truth is that Leninism is not merely a revival of Marxism, but is a step forward. Leninism is a development of Marxism adapting it to the new conditions of capitalism and to the class struggle of the proletariat.

What, then, is Leninism?

Leninism is the Marxism of the epoch of imperialism and of the proletarian revolution. To be more precise: Leninism is the theory and the tactic of the proletarian revolution in general, and the theory and the tactic of the dictatorship of the proletariat in particular. Marx and Engels lived in a prerevolutionary period, when imperialism was still in an embryonic condition, when the workers were only preparing for the revolution, when the proletarian revolution had not yet become an immediate and practical necessity. Lenin, the disciple of Marx and Engels, lived in a period of fully developed imperialism; in a period when the proletarian revolution was already under way; in a period when the proletarian revolution had already triumphed in one country, had made an end of bourgeois democracy, and had begun the era of proletarian democracy, the era of soviets.

That is why I describe Leninism as a development of Marxism.

It is usual to point out that Leninism is preeminently combative and revolutionary. There are two reasons why Leninism has these peculiar characteristics. First of all, Leninism issued from the proletarian revolution, and therefore necessarily bears the imprint of that revolution. Secondly, Leninism originated and grew strong in conflict with the opportunism of the Second International—a conflict essential to success in the struggle against capitalism. We must never forget that between the epoch of Marx and Engels and the epoch of Lenin came the epoch when the opportunism of the Second International held unrestricted sway; and that a ruthless fight with this opportunism was one of Lenin’s chief tasks.