Air and Steel

On Stalin

(The synthesizer of aforementioned 'Marxism-Leninism')

It is difficult for me to imagine what 'personal liberty' is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry, and cannot find employment. Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread. Only in such a society is real, and not paper, personal and every other liberty possible.

Joseph Stalin

Joseph Stalin (born Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili) was the democratically-elected leader of the USSR and synthesizer of Marxism-Leninism, covered first in On Europe.

For W.E.B. Du Bois' thoughts, see his On Stalin.

TODO: more of a bio

Quotes

These are mostly sourced from vilenin.substack.com and @tweets_of_steel on twitter, run by the folks at historic.ly.

Marxism is not only the theory of socialism, it is an integral world outlook, a philosophical system, from which Marx’s proletarian socialism logically follows. This philosophical system is called dialectical materialism. -- "Anarchism Or Socialism?" (Dec. 1906 – Jan. 1907)

[I]n order to overcome difficulties it is necessary to exert all efforts, to display firmness and endurance, and since not everybody possesses sufficient firmness and endurance ... it is just here that vacillations and waverings begin to take place ...

There are people in our Party who [...] proclaim a fight against the Right danger in the same way as priests sometimes cry "Hallelujah! Hallelujah!" But they will not undertake any practical measures at all to organise the fight against the Right deviation on a firm basis ... -- "The Right Danger in the C.P.S.U.(B.)" (Speech Delivered at the Plenum of the Moscow Committee and Moscow Control Commission of the C.P.S.U.(B.), October 19, 1928)

Social-Democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism ... They are not antipodes, they are twins. It [is] a mistake to think that “pacifism” signifies the liquidation of fascism ... “pacifism” is the strengthening of fascism with its moderate wing pushed to the forefront. —- "Concerning the International Situation" 6 January-November 1924

For now, I'll link some works (in a logical order) and post some of my own notes for quick takeaways:

For physical copies, check out RedPrintsPublishing

Dialectical and Historical Materialism (1938) notes

"In its essence, dialectics is the direct opposite of metaphysics."

I: Marxist Dialectical Method

a) Nature Connected and Determined

  • dialectics regards nature as a connected whole -> no phenomenon in nature can be understood if taken by itself, isolated from surrounding phenomena

b) Nature is a State of Continuous Motion and Change

  • dialectics regards nature as a state of constant movement -> requires that phenomena should be considered not only from the standpoint of their interconnection and interdependence, but also from the standpoint of their change and development

c) Natural Quantitative Change Leads to Qualitative Change

  • dialectics regards the process of development as passing from insignificant and imperceptible quantitative changes to open 'fundamental changes' to qualitative changes; a development in which the qualitative changes occur not gradually, but rapidly and abruptly, taking the form of a leap from one state to another; they occur not accidentally but as the natural result of an accumulation of imperceptible and gradual quantitative changes.
  • eg. ice freezing (abrupt qualitative change) after temperature change (gradual quantitative change) - "What are known as the constants of physics are in most cases nothing but designations for the nodal points at which a quantitative increase or decrease of movement causes a qualitative change in the state of the given body, and at which, consequently, quantity is transformed into quality." (Engels)

d) Contradictions Inherent in Nature

  • dialectics holds that internal contradictions are inherent in all things and phenomena of nature, for they all have their negative and positive sides, a past and a future, something dying away and something developing; and that the struggle between these opposites, the struggle between the old and the new, between that which is dying away and that which is being born, between that which is disappearing and that which is developing, constitutes the internal content of the process of development, the internal content of the transformation of quantitative changes into qualitative changes
  • thus, the dialectical method holds that the process of development takes place as a disclosure of the contradictions inherent in things and phenomena, as a "struggle" of opposite tendencies which operate on the basis of these contradictions.

If the world is in a state of constant movement and development then it is clear that there can be no "immutable" social systems, no "eternal principles" of private property and exploitation, no "eternal ideas" of the subjugation of the peasant to the landlord, of the worker to the capitalist. Hence, the capitalist system can be replaced by the socialist system, just as at one time the feudal system was replaced by the capitalist system.

Further, if the passing of slow quantitative changes into rapid and abrupt qualitative changes is a law of development, then it is clear that revolutions made by oppressed classes are a quite natural and inevitable phenomenon. Hence, the transition from capitalism to socialism and the liberation of the working class from the yoke of capitalism cannot be effected by slow changes, by reforms, but only by a qualitative change of the capitalist system, by revolution. Hence, in order not to err in policy, one must be a revolutionary, not a reformist.

II: Marxist Philosophical Materialism

III: Historical Materialism

These irreconcilable contradictions between the character of the productive forces and the relations of production make themselves felt in periodical crises of over-production, when the capitalists, finding no effective demand for their goods owing to the ruin of the mass of the population which they themselves have brought about, are compelled to burn products, destroy manufactured goods, suspend production, and destroy productive forces at a time when millions of people are forced to suffer unemployment and starvation, not because there are not enough goods, but because there is an overproduction of goods.

The Foundations of Leninism (1924) notes

I. The Historical Roots of Leninism

Imperialism - moribund capitalism led by three contradictions: between labour and capital, the contradiction among the various financial groups and imperialist Powers in their struggle for sources of raw materials and foreign territory, and the contradiction between the handful of ruling, "civilised" nations and the hundreds of millions of the colonial and dependent peoples of the world.

Due to the combination of tsar rule and capitalist exploitation, Russia was ripe for revolution during the early 1900s.

II. Method

  1. test dogma by trying to join theory with practice, 2. test policy by the material effects they have on the masses, 3. reorganize the party along revolutionary lines in preparation for revolutionary struggle, and 4. ruthlessly self-criticize in order to train genuine cadres and leaders of the party.

"The attitude of a political party towards its own mistakes is one of the most important and surest ways of judging how earnest the party is and how it in practice fulfils its obligation towards its class and the toiling masses. Frankly admitting a mistake, ascertaining the reasons for it, analysing the circumstances which gave rise to it, and thoroughly discussing the means of correcting it-that is the earmark of a serious party; that is the way it should perform its duties, that is the way it should educate and train the class, and then the masses"

III. Theory

  1. Importance: Theory is the experience of the working-class movement in all countries taken in its general aspect. Of course, theory becomes purposeless if it is not connected with revolutionary practice, just as practice gropes in the dark if its path is not illumined by revolutionary theory.

"Without a revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement"

"The role of vanguard fighter can be fulfilled only by a party that is guided by the most advanced theory"

  1. The "theory" of spontaneity is a theory of opportunism, a theory of worshipping the spontaneity of the labour movement, a theory which actually repudiates the leading role of the vanguard of the working class, of the party of the working class.

In practice this theory, which appeared on the scene even before the first revolution in Russia, led its adherents, the so-called "Economists," to deny the need for an independent workers' party in Russia, to oppose the revolutionary struggle of the working class for the overthrow of tsarism, to preach a purely trade-unionist policy in the movement, and, in general, to surrender the labour movement to the hegemony of the liberal bourgeoisie.

Marx said that the materialist theory could not confine itself to explaining the world, that it must also change it.

  1. The theory of the proletarian revolution proceeds from three theses:
  • i) The domination of finance capital in the advanced capitalist countries; the issue of stocks and bonds as one of the principal operations of finance capital; the export of capital to the sources of raw materials, which is one of the foundations of imperialism; the omnipotence of a financial oligarchy, which is the result of the domination of finance capital-all this reveals the grossly parasitic character of monopolistic capitalism, makes the yoke of the capitalist trusts and syndicates a hundred times more burdensome, intensifies the indignation of the working class with the foundations of capitalism, and brings the masses to the proletarian revolution as their only salvation HENCE: intensification of the revolutionary crisis within the capitalist countries and growth of the elements of an explosion on the internal, proletarian front in the "metropolises."
  • ii) The increase in the export of capital to the colonies and dependent countries; the expansion of "spheres of influence" and colonial possessions until they cover the whole globe; the transformation of capitalism into a world system of financial enslavement and colonial oppression of the vast majority of the population of the world by a handful of "advanced" countries-all this has, on the one hand, converted the separate national economies and national territories into links in a single chain called world economy, and, on the other hand, split the population of the globe into two camps: a handful of "advanced" capitalist countries which exploit and oppress vast colonies and dependencies, and the huge majority consisting of colonial and dependent countries which are compelled to wage a struggle for liberation from the imperialist yoke HENCE: intensification of the revolutionary crisis in the colonial countries and growth of the elements of revolt against imperialism on the external, colonial front.
  • iii) The monopolistic possession of "spheres of influence" and colonies; the uneven development of the capitalist countries, leading to a frenzied struggle for the redivision of the world between the countries which have already seized territories and those claiming their "share"; imperialist wars as the only means of restoring the disturbed "equilibrium"-all this leads to the intensification of the struggle on the third front, the inter-capitalist front, which weakens imperialism and facilitates the union of the first two fronts against imperialism: the front of the revolutionary proletariat and the front of colonial emancipation HENCE: under imperialism wars cannot be averted, and that a coalition between the proletarian revolution in Europe and the colonial revolution in the East in a united world front of revolution against the world front of imperialism is inevitable.

Anarchism or Socialism? (1906) notes

Contents:

  • The Dialectical Method
  • The Materialist Theory
  • Proletarian Socialism

The Dialectical Method:

  • Dialectics tell us everything in the world is changing (in constant motion). We must ask what is being destroyed and what is being created; what grows and what decays?
  • Minor, quantitative changes (evolution) lead to major, qualitative changes (revolution)
  • Hegel's dialectical method repudiates all immutable ideas and is thus scientific and revolutionary; his philosophical system, which rests on the immutable idea, is metaphysical (and this reliance on the "unknowable" leads to an unscientific, empty theology). Marx thus praised the dialectical method while laying criticism to the Hegel's metaphysical system.
  • How can something be good and bad at the same time? Consider a democratic republic. It is neither all good nor all bad. It is good when it destroys the feudal system but bad when it strengthens the bourgeois system. Thus we must fight for it while it is a positive and fight against it while it is negative. Thus the same democratic republic can be "good" and "bad" at the same time - it is both "yes" and "no."
  • Cuvier's cataclysms were due to unknown causes, but Marx and Engel's catastrophes are engendered by dialectics; revolution is not caused spontaneously at random, but is brought on by the development of the productive forces. Darwinism repudiates Culvier's cataclysms and it dialectically understood development, including revolution; it is not accepted uncritically in Marxism, but serves to show both evolution and revolution (quantitative and qualitative changes) are two essential forms of the same motion.
  • Anarchists fail to understand the dialectical method of Marx and Engels. They conjure up their own dialectics and fight against them ruthlessly. They fight their own imagination, smashing their own inventions, while heatedly asserting that they are smashing the opponent.

The Materialist Theory:

  • "It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness." ~Marx
  • Both ideal and material phenomena exist in the world - they exist as different forms of the same nature or society. The dualists said they negate each other, which isn't true. The idealists necessitation on a "universal idea" is nonsense as well. Marxism allows us to identify shifts in power (quantifiable evolutions in "nature" eg. in the material world) that lead to and allow for hierarchical shifts (qualitative changes in the hierarchical structure and "social life" eg. in the ideal world).
  • A single indivisible nature can be expressed in two different forms (material and ideal); a single and indivisible social life can be expressed in these two forms as well. They develop simultaneously. This is the monism of the materialist theory.
  • In the same way that conscious thought held requirements in the structure of an organism and the development of its nervous system, development of the ideal and of consciousness is preceded by development of the material side.
  • Hence arose the well-known materialist proposition: in the process of development content precedes form, form lags behind content. eg. Shoemaker who closes his own business due to competition from larger firms then becomes a proletariat worker. His views will not match those of the proletariat until after acclimation to his new placement within the social hierarchy.
  • In social life, too, first the external conditions change, first the material conditions change, and then the ideas of men, their habits, customs and their world outlook change accordingly. In Marx's opinion, economic development is the "material foundation" of social life, its content, while legal-political and religious-philosophical development is the "ideological form" of this content, its "superstructure," Marx draws the conclusion that: "With the change of the economic foundation the entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly transformed."
  • On this point the materialist theory says that our conceptions, our "self," exist only in so far as external conditions exist that give rise to impressions in our "self." Whoever unthinkingly says that nothing exists but our conceptions, is compelled to deny the existence of all external conditions and their effects on the self.
  • "When I look at a tree and see it—that only shows that this tree existed even before the conception of a tree arose in my head, that it was this tree that aroused the corresponding conception in my head...."
  • "the existing form never fully corresponds to the existing content: the former lags behind the latter, to a certain extent the new content is always clothed in the old form and, as a consequence, there is always a conflict between the old form and the new content."

Proletarian Socialism:

  • The economic development of the capitalist system shows that present-day production is assuming a social character, that the social character of production is a fundamental negation of existing capitalist property; consequently, our main task is to help to abolish capitalist property and to establish socialist property.
  • the process of production has assumed a social, collective character but the private character of appropriation does not correspond to the social character of production -> since collective labor must lead to collective property, proletarian socialism is inevitable
  • Strikes, boycott, parliamentarism, meetings and demonstrations are all good forms of struggle as means for preparing and organising the proletariat. But not one of these means is capable of abolishing existing inequality. All these means must be concentrated in one principal and decisive means; the proletariat must rise and launch a determined attack upon the bourgeoisie in order to destroy capitalism to its foundations. This principal and decisive means is the socialist revolution.
  • ". . . The first step in the revolution by the working class, is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class. . . . The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands . . . of the proletariat organised as the ruling class . . ." ~Marx, 1847
  • The socialist dictatorship of the proletariat is needed to enable the proletariat to expropriate the bourgeoisie, to enable it to confiscate the land, forests, factories and mills, machines, railways, etc., from the entire bourgeoisie. The expropriation of the bourgeoisie—this is what the socialist revolution must lead to.
  • But trade unions and co-operatives alone cannot satisfy the organisational needs of the militant proletariat. This is because the organisations mentioned cannot go beyond the limits of capitalism, for their object is to improve the conditions of the workers under the capitalist system. The workers, however, want to free themselves entirely from capitalist slavery, they want to smash these limits, and not merely operate within the limits of capitalism. Hence, in addition, an organisation is needed that will rally around itself the class-conscious elements of the workers of all trades, that will transform the proletariat into a conscious class and make it its chief aim to smash the capitalist system, to prepare for the socialist revolution. Such an organisation is the Social-Democratic Party of the proletariat.

Marxism and Problems of Linguistics (1950) notes

  • Is it true that language is a superstructure on the base? -> No. The base is the economic structure of society (ie. the phase of development; eg. feudalism, capitalism, socialism). A change in base leads to change in the superstructure (ie. its political, legal and other views, and the corresponding institutions). The change in base has little inherent impact on language (new vocabulary enriches the language, but the underlying system does not change). -> Further, the superstructure is created to ensure the elimination of moribund superstructures via active defense of its base. Language changes over the course of history, not established by any one class to protect their class interests. "Hence the functional role of language, as a means of intercourse between people, consists not in serving one class to the detriment of other classes, but in equally serving the entire society, all the classes of society. This in fact explains why a language may equally serve both the old, moribund system and the new, rising system; both the old base and the new base; both the exploiters and the exploited." -> Lastly, the superstructure is not directly connected with production, with man's productive activity. It is connected with production only indirectly, through the economy, through the base. Language, on the contrary, is connected with man's productive activity directly, and not only with man's productive activity, but with all his other activity in all his spheres of work, from production to the base, and from the base to the superstructure. For this reason language reflects changes in production immediately and directly, without waiting for changes in the base. For this reason the sphere of action of language, which embraces all fields of man's activity, is far broader and more comprehensive than the sphere of action of the superstructure. More, it is practically unlimited.
  • a) Language, as a means of intercourse, always was and remains the single language of a society, common to all its members; b) The existence of dialects and jargons does not negate but confirms the existence of a language common to the whole of the given people, of which they are offshoots and to which they are subordinate; c) The "class character" of language formula is erroneous and non-Marxist.
  • In the forties of the past century when there was no monopoly capitalism as yet, when capitalism was developing more or less smoothly along an ascending line, spreading to new territories it had not yet occupied, and the law of uneven development could not yet fully operate, Marx and Engels concluded that a socialist revolution could not be victorious in one particular country, that it could be victorious only as a result of a joint blow in all, or in most, civilized countries. This conclusion subsequently became a guiding principle for all Marxists...However, at the beginning of the twentieth century, especially in the period of the first world war, when it became clear to everyone that pre-monopoly capitalism had definitely developed into monopoly capitalism, when rising capitalism had become dying capitalism, when the war had revealed the incurable weaknesses of the world imperialist front, and the law of uneven development predetermined that the proletarian revolution would mature in different countries at different times, Lenin, proceeding from Marxist theory, came to the conclusion that in the new conditions of development, the socialist revolution could fully prove victorious in one country taken separately, that the simultaneous victory of the socialist revolution in all countries, or in a majority of civilized countries, was impossible owing to the uneven maturing of the revolution in those countries, that the old formula of Marx and Engels no longer corresponded to the new historical conditions...It is evident that here we have two different conclusions on the question of the victory of socialism, which not only contradict, but exclude each other.
  • Marxism is the science of the laws governing the development of nature and society, the science of the revolution of the oppressed and exploited masses, the science of the victory of socialism in all countries, the science of building communist society. As a science, Marxism cannot stand still, it develops and is perfected. In its development, Marxism cannot but be enriched by new experience, new knowledge -- consequently some of its formulas and conclusions cannot but change in the course of time, cannot but be replaced by new formulas and conclusions, corresponding to the new historical tusks. Marxism does not recognize invariable conclusions and formulas, obligatory for all epochs and periods. Marxism is the enemy of all dogmatism.

index tags: Philosophy, Communists, Reading List, Reading Notes, Marxism, Marxism-Leninism, Dialectics, Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Joseph Stalin, Stalin, Mao Zedong, W.E.B. Du Bois, Dialectical Method, Materialist Theory, Proletarian Socialism, National Question, Historical Materialism, Anarchism, Socialism, Communism, Dialectical and Historical Materialism, Foundations of Leninism, Anarchism or Socialism?, Marxism and the National Question, Marxism and Problems of Linguistics, RedSails, RedPrintsPublishing, Vilenin.substack.com, @tweets_of_steel, Historic.ly, The Right Danger in the C.P.S.U.(B.), Concerning the International Situation

category tags: Famous Communists

Next

On This Site

Hi! Aaron, nice to meet ya. This site is where I'm documenting as I go, in order to keep my learnings and thoughts in an easily accessible digital notebook. My purpose in life is organizing (engineering, if you will) and building the change I want to see in the world; to help as much as possible, while I've got the chance to do it.