The Militant (logo)  

Vol. 73/No. 3      January 26, 2009

 
Lenin’s 1920s fight to maintain communist course
(Books of the Month column)
 
Printed below is an excerpt from Lenin’s Final Fight. The Spanish edition is one of Pathfinder’s Books of the Month for January. The book contains speeches and writings by V.I. Lenin, the central leader of the October 1917 Russian Revolution, from 1922-23. During this time Lenin fought against mounting odds to maintain the communist course with which the Bolshevik Party had led the workers and peasants to power over the landlords and capitalists of the former tsarist empire and defeated the invading armies of 14 nations. The item quoted is from “Better Fewer, but Better,” written by Lenin on March 2, 1923. In this article Lenin refers to the Workers and Peasants Inspection, which was a body initiated in 1920 to involve both party and nonparty workers and peasants in greater inspection and control of the state and Communist Party apparatus. Copyright © 1995 by Pathfinder Press. Reprinted by permission.

BY V.I. LENIN  
In the matter of improving our state apparatus, the Workers and Peasants Inspection should not, in my opinion, either strive after quantity or hurry.1 We have so far been able to devote so little thought and attention to the efficiency of our state apparatus that it would now be quite legitimate if we took special care to secure its thorough organization, and concentrated in the Workers and Peasants Inspection a staff of workers really abreast of the times, i.e., not inferior to the best western European standards.

For a socialist republic this condition is, of course, too modest. But our experience of the first five years has fairly crammed our heads with mistrust and skepticism. These qualities assert themselves involuntarily when, for example, we hear people dilating at too great length and too flippantly on “proletarian” culture. For a start, we should be satisfied with real bourgeois culture; for a start, we should be glad to dispense with the cruder types of prebourgeois culture, i.e., bureaucratic culture or serf culture, etc. In matters of culture, haste and sweeping measures are most harmful. Many of our young writers and Communists should get this well into their heads.

Thus, in the matter of our state apparatus we should now draw the conclusion from our past experience that it would be better to proceed more slowly.

Our state apparatus is so deplorable, not to say wretched, that we must first think very carefully how to combat its defects, bearing in mind that these defects are rooted in the past, which, although it has been overthrown, has not yet been overcome, has not yet reached the stage of a culture that has receded into the distant past.

I say culture deliberately, because in these matters we can only regard as achieved what has become part and parcel of our culture, of our social life, our habits. We might say that the good in our social system has not been properly studied, understood, and taken to heart; it has been hastily grasped at; it has not been verified or tested, corroborated by experience, and not made durable, etc. Of course, it could not be otherwise in a revolutionary epoch, when development proceeded at such breakneck speed that in a matter of five years we passed from tsarism to the Soviet system.

It is time we did something about it. We must show sound skepticism for too rapid progress, for boastfulness, etc. We must give thought to testing the steps forward we proclaim every hour, take every minute and then prove every second that they are flimsy, superficial, and misunderstood. The most harmful thing here would be haste. The most harmful thing would be to rely on the assumption that we know at least something, or that we have any considerable number of elements necessary for the building of a really new state apparatus, one really worthy to be called socialist, Soviet, etc.

No, we are ridiculously deficient of such an apparatus, and even of the elements of it, and we must remember that we should not stint time on building it, and that it will take many, many years.

What elements have we for building this apparatus? Only two. First, the workers who are absorbed in the struggle for socialism. These elements are not sufficiently educated. They would like to build a better apparatus for us, but they do not know how. They cannot build one. They have not yet developed the culture required for this, and it is culture that is required. Nothing will be achieved in this by doing things in a rush, by assault, by vim or vigor, or in general, by any of the best human qualities. Second, we have elements of knowledge, education, and training, but they are ridiculously inadequate compared with all other countries.

Here we must not forget that we are too prone to compensate (or imagine that we can compensate) our lack of knowledge by zeal, haste, etc.

In order to renovate our state apparatus we must at all costs set out, first, to learn, second, to learn, and third, to learn, and then see to it that learning shall not remain a dead letter or a fashionable catchphrase (and we should admit in all frankness that this happens very often with us), that learning shall really become part of our very being, that it shall actually and fully become a constituent element of our social life. In short, we must not make the demands that are made by bourgeois western Europe, but demands that are fit and proper for a country which has set out to develop into a socialist country.

The conclusions to be drawn from the above are the following: we must make the Workers and Peasants Inspection a really exemplary institution, an instrument to improve our state apparatus.


1. Lenin, Collected Works, vol. 33, pp. 487-502. First published in Pravda, March 4, 1923. In an October 23, 1923, letter, Trotsky informed the Central Committee that the majority of the Political Bureau had been initially opposed to publishing this article at all. At first, only Leon Trotsky and L.B. Kamenev favored printing Lenin’s views, but the others finally gave way. V.V. Kuibyshev, head of the Control Commission, went so far as to propose initially that the article be printed only in a special single copy of Pravda, published solely to deceive Lenin. See Trotsky, “Second Letter to the CC” in The Challenge of the Left Opposition (1923-25) (New York: Pathfinder, 1975), p. 62.

 
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home