OVIET THEORY FROM LENIN'S REPORT TO IX RESS OF THE RUSSIAN COMMUNIST PARTY.

MOSCOW, "PRAVDA," MARCH 31, 1920

Comrades, allow me to introduce a little theory into this stion of how a class governs and of how the rule of a class resses itself. In this matter we are, of course, not novices, we differ from former revolutions in that in our revoluthere is nothing of a Utopian character. If a new class come to replace the old, it is only in a desperate gle against classes that it maintains itself. And it will in the end only if it is able to bring about the destruction. he old class. The gigantic and complicated process of s struggle puts the matter thus squarely; otherwise you become mired in the marsh of confusion.

How does the rule of a class express itself? How did rule of the bourgeoisie over the feudals express itself? the constitution it was written: "Liberty and equality." was a lie. So long as there are toilers, property holders able and even obliged, as such, to speculate. We say

there was no equality, that the well-fed was not equal to ungry, and the speculator to the toiler. How does the of a class then express itself? The rule of the proletariat esses itself in taking away landlord and capitalistic rty. The very spirit and fundamental content of all er constitutions, including the most republican and ratic, amounted simply to property rights. Our conion has won the right to historic existence because it is imply on paper, that we have written that private prop is abolished. The triumphant proletariat abolished completely destroyed private property, and here has the essence of the rule of a class. Thus, of all, it is a question of property. When we had d in a practical way the question of property, we had same time guaranteed the rule of a class. Then the ution put down on paper what life had decided: re is no capitalistic or landlord property." And the ution added: "And the working class, according to nstitution, has more rights than the peasantry, while ters have no rights at all." Thus was written down the

manner in which was realized the rule of our class, and the manner in which we bound to ourselves the toilers of ali strata, all small groups. The petty-bourgeois property ow ers have been divided into factions. Among them those that have more property are the enemies of those that have less. and the proletarians, when they abolish property, declare against them an open war.

ignorant pers

There are still many unconscious and who will go in for any kind of free trade. But in the strug gle, when they see the discipline and self-sacrifice in the vis tory over exploiters, they themselves cannot fight; they not for us, but they are powerless to come out against us The rule of a class has been defined solely with relation property. The constitution also has been defined in the sa respect. Our constitution has written down faithfully our attitude toward property, and our attitude toward the qu tion of which class should get on top. Whoever goes into questions of democratic centralism when discussing problem of how the rule of a class expressed itself, a thinthat we frequently note, is only introducing such confus. : that no successful work can proceed on this ground. C ness of propaganda and agitation is a fundamental condit, a of work.

If our opponents have recognized that we have ac plished miracles in the development of agitation and paganda, one must not understand this in the external namely that we have expended much paper and agitators ha one must understand it in the internal sense, that the t which was in this agitation has gotten through into the bea of everyone. And one cannot get away from this tra When classes replace one another they change their attit toward property. When the bourgeoisie replaced feudalis it changed its attitude toward property. The constitution the bourgeoisie says: Who has property is not equal to one who is poor. And this was the freedom of the bourg.. This "equality" gave the rule in the State to the capital class.

And what do you think? When the bourgeoisie repar feudalism, did they confuse the State with government! They were not such fools. They said that in order to ge one must have people who know how to govern and,

, they took members of the feudal class and remade them. this a mistake? No, comrades. The ability to govern not fall from the heavens and does not come to one as holy ghost. The fact that the leading class is the leading does not mean that it becomes immediately capable of rning. We see that in many examples.

Until the geoisie triumphed, it used for governing, members of the r. feudal class, because, comrades, there was no other e from which to take. One must look at matters soberly. bourgeoisie took the preceding class, and we are now ronted by a similar task, of knowing how to take, suborte and use the knowledge of the bourgeois, the latter's eration, and to take advantage of all of this for the vicof the working class.

e say that the triumphant class should be mature, but rity is not certified by a signature or diploma, but only xperience and practice. The bourgeoisie triumphed out knowing how to govern, but they guaranteed victory se they declared a new constitution and recruited and -ted their administrators from their own class, and began arn, and took administrators from the former class and to teach and prepare their own new administrators, for this purpose the entire state apparatus, sequestering institutions, admitting to the schools those who were Thus after long years and decades the bourgeoisie preits administrators from its own class. And now in State organized on the basis of a ruling class, one must actly what was done in all States. If certain elements. to take a purely Utopian point of view and use empty s, we must say that we must learn by the experience of r years, and must guarantee the constitution won by the tion; but for administration and governmental conon we must have people who possess the technical edge of government, and who have governmental and nic experience. And such people we can take only he former class.

E: When Lenin says "the working class. ore rights than the peasantry," he simply states a le which is consistently followed in the Constitution almost deprives the peasants of any voting power, and wed also in the practical administration of the govern

Document XVI

SPEECH BY LENIN ON PEASANTS AND SURPLUS GRAIN, MARCH 7, 1920

Comrade Lenin has been elected to the Moscow Soviet of Deputies. In his opening speech he stated the following:

"In the war forced upon us by landowners and capitalists we have broken the enemy's resistance on every side. We are now confronted by a new task-that of internal construction Our ruined country must be reorganized, our economic lif reconstructed. This task cannot be accomplished with t fighting on a bloodless front. We have now been joined by the Siberian peasantry, who are rich in everything and wh. in spite of all, are in favor of free trade. We must take the most stringent measures to prevent this free trade, se peasants who possess a surplus of grain can thus exploit th brothers and become in this way enemies of the working class, against whom we shall be forced to fight. Our fir duty is to destroy all these minor Bourgeois Democrats! it unnecessary to say that only laboring peasants are brothers; we have known that for a long time. But t peasants who possess surplus grain and speculate with it 2our enemies and we shall fight against them with all r and all the ruthlessness with which we waged the war th have just ended, while we shall also fight on the bloodlabor front in order that those who are starving may *74* the surplus grain from those who possess it. We sh.... 4: a definite position by means of the military measures w... we have worked out during the past two years. We t done great work, we have brought many workmen peasants to take part in this work and we have been a• take all that we needed. At a time when former Iss officers were fighting against us, many experts were in 'by us to take part in the work and they helped us ***. with our Commissaries; they taught us how to work and return gave us their technical knowledge. By their a Red Army was enabled to win the victories that it has We must now turn all this work in another direction. must devote all our work to the Labor Front. direct the work of the former propertied classes, who once our enemies."

Document XVII

RAMME OF THE COMMUNISTS (BOLSHEVIKS)

N. BOUKHARIN

Published by

GROUP OF ENGLISH SPEAKING COMMUNISTS IN RUSSIA

1919

AMME OF THE COMMUNISTS (BOLSHEVIKS) REIGN OF CAPITAL, THE WORKING CLASS AND THE RER ELEMENTS OF THE VILLAGE POPULATION.

countries, except in Russia, Capital is predominant. state one takes, whether semi-despotic Prussia, or n France or so-called democratic America-everywer is wholly concentrated in the hands of big capital. A up of people,-landowners, manufacturers and the richrs hold millions and hundreds of millions of town workural poor in slavery and bondage; compelling them to ting them and throwing them on the street as soon as me useless, and worn out and incapable of being a further profit to Lord Capital.

errible power of the bankers and manufacturers over -f toilers is given to them by wealth. Why does a poor is thrown on the street have to starve to death? Because

nothing except a pair of hands which he can sell to list should the capitalist want them. How is it that a -r or business man can do nothing and yet lead an easy I care, getting a solid income and raking in profits daily, even by the minute? Because he possesses not only ands but also those means of production without which possible nowadays; factories, land, machines, railroads, ps and steamers and all kinds of apparatus and inAll over the world except in present day Russia this umulated by man belongs only to capitalists and who have also become capitalists. And it is no wonder h a state of affairs a group of men, having in their hat is indispensable, the most necessary things, domst who possess nothing. Let us take the instance of a