DISCUSSION OF LENIN'S REPORT ON THE
TACTICS OF THE RUSSIAN COMMUNIST PARTY
HEMPEL(Jan Appel): It is first necessary that I ask something of
comrade Radek who is apparently absent (cries: he is there). I
ask comrade
Radek to
spare us his jokes in identifying us with the Mensheviks, because these jokes when
they become repeated often become ridiculous. Next, comrades, comrade Radek has invited us to respond to the question: Is
Russian policy correct for Russia and for the
International? We say briefly on this subject: whether the internal policy of the RCP is correct the Russian comrades can judge
themselves. We were of the opinion that the tactics that the Russian comrades are following in
their country are correct. Today, after comrade Kollontai has spoken, we
learn that it is necessary to agree to strive more to raise the initiative of the workers, in
order not to be forced to make so many concessions to the capitalists. If the
state of things is as comrade Kollontai has described it, we
must say that it is a fault of the Russian policy. We say this because we have for Germany and for Western Europe another conception of the party dictatorship of the proletariat. According to our conception, it's
true, the dictatorship
was
correct in Russia, because of the Russian
situation, because there weren't sufficient forces, sufficiently developed forces within the
proletariat and that the dictatorship must be exercised more by the top. But when we see
some efforts emerge today within the Russian proletariat, when we see it want to also contribute
itself to the development, then it is necessary to support these efforts, it is necessary to
take notice of these thrusts upward; in this way one has a force that supports the
proletarian dictatorship even more than foreign capital. If we turn this force
to the widest account we will have less greater concern to make
concessions to the capitalists.
Secondly, it is necessary to examine the
question of knowing how the Russian policy acts on the International. In this case we
say: at this moment, it
is true, we cannot
yet see if the path taken is totally false. But we see that the preparations that are made are
false, and this is what it is necessary to analyse.
The question is: are the comrades in Russia supermen, are they
men who can
detach themselves from the
relationships of forces, or are there actions even determined by the things that
surround them? This is what we must examine. For us then, it is uninteresting to criticise; but we
see the error and also the fact that it will grow and that it will have to
grow. Comrade Trotsky said it clearly and it is in this way that we intend it also: to gain
time. Everything
depends on
whether
the vanguard succeeds in
surpassing, whether we succeed in surpassing this state of uncertainty as comrade Lenin said. Because
then will come the aid of the world revolution or of the revolution of some country. And this vanguard, this state power, can it survive this
state of uncertainty? Such is the question. Trotsky responds from another side:
we come to nought if we do not take this so simple path, that is to say which
consists in making concessions to the petty bourgeoisie (which means petty capitalism) on
one side, and to foreign capitalism on the other (which means state capitalism). This is the necessity. Who
can refrain from doing a thing, when only this thing is possible? But if one
does this, can one at the same time remain
communist? Will one be as solid as this? Well, now I want to get back to the core of things. Will this communist party be able to survive doing
this if it lasts for a year or some years? Will this
party remain what it
is today? Won't it have, for any cause whatever, a great interest in not carrying the revolution beyond? For this
means a new poverty. If the revolution breaks out in Germany, it will last
perhaps one year or more; then we will not be able to aid Russia. We must think it
over; the entire population and with it the Russian party has gotten used to the reconstruction, to a period of
rest, of stability, of security. How this
goes in itself! This population will rise up against the dominant state power if
troubles return, if commercial relations cease, if poverty revives. This is how
the question
presents
itself. Consequently, it is proven that there is a need for revolutionary rest with the broad masses, a need for rest after the revolution. This
already becomes perceptible, and later this will have an influence on the communist party. It must be taken into
account. I ask if it will then be strong enough.
I now deal with other things. We know that the economy is put out of order when one charges oneself
with the reconstruction of capitalism; this brings into each country an enormous corruption, as that which we witness today in Germany. We witness then the black
market which rages here also. We have heard more talk of many things, reaching and striking within the
communist
party,
and against
which some valuable people, like Lenin and Trotsky, are impotent.
There is the great danger. It must not be lost from view. That is
whv, we sav it is in the
interest of the Russian revolution,
of the world revolution and of communism that this state of uncertainty not
last too long. We will arrive there quickly. We put ourselves almost in agreement in the matter. We will
see how to attain an acceleration.
The Russian comrades lack a
comprehension of things as they happen in western Europe. The Russian comrades reckon with a population
such as they have in Russia. The Russians endured a long tsarist domination, they are hard and solid, whereas with us the
proletariat is penetrated by parliamentarism and is
completely infested with it. In Europe it is a question of
doing something else. It’s a question of barring the road to opportunism (cries: Scheidemannian theory}. Absurdity! this
is not
a Scheidemannian theory! Since when does Scheidemann want to bar the route to opportunism? It's a
question of barring the evasion of opportunism from the proletarian fighters,
from the communist parties, who must struggle in the front line, and
opportunism with us is the utilisation of bourgeois
institutions in the economic domain; same thing for the attempt to use the consumers'
co-operatives as a means of struggle to aid Russia, not with
revolutionary means, but with the means of capitalism, insofar as the proletariat is
inclined. Yes, comrades, what does this signify? On acts over the international
proletariat? When you propose to your consumers' co-operatives to enter into
commercial relations with Russia, are you then doing something for Russia? No, nothing. The
consumers' co-operatives must, exactly like any other entrepreneur.,
reckon with capitals. With them it will come even dearer. This will lead away from the
right path. This is the central point. The 3rd Internationa1 must see to it that Russia may not be pushed
from outside
by capitalist means, but by the
proletariat, with revolutionary means. There is the central point. And this will not be
brought about by adopting the tactics that the Third International gives itself.
We call for a harder line (Hilarity)The comrades can well laugh. Comrade Lenin laughs
also, we can say no more. Such is our honest conviction. (Interruption: comrade Bukharin will tell
why we laugh). Each can laugh. I want once again to point out this point that in
Germany, in all the countries of the world, coming after the prolonged development of
democracy, democracy that is not revolutionary, the working class and with it the
great mass communist party, in which even opportunist elements are found, without any
further ado, takes the road that consists of not using difficult means, and it uses parliamentarism, the trade unions and other means in
order to aid Russia. But this is not an aid; it is a deviation from the
struggle. Trotsky says now: to leave this state of uncertainty as quickly as possible.
Then I come to the second point: the danger that is there, if one does not exert oneself, by all
means, to offer the least possibilities to foreign capitalists to expand here, if one
does not attentively keep watch and if one does not allow the proletarians to
control. The danger, is that the Soviet Union, in our opinion, will
then run into a situation, in quite a different manner than what Trotsky thinks, that will see
international capitalism rise on the martyrdom of the international
proletariat. It will not rise so as to be totally healed, but in such a way that it takes more time
to drag on. The policy of the Third International must be to render this period, this development of capitalism impossible. This can be done
through the sabotage of production in the factories. We naturally don't speak
of the destruction of the means of production; it's a question of
not making things profitable for the capitalists. Such is the task of the proletarians
of the entire world in order to advance the revolution in a very short time. For it is also true that the revolution is born
of the poverty of the working
population.
Thus, comrades, what we have to say to the 3rd International, is that the Russian party must more and more recognise
the dangers and express them. Then it becomes less important. The Russian party must
be conscious that it is the foundation of the Third International and that the other parties
have absolutely no possibility, neither intellectual, nor material, to go
against it. One sees in this that no opinion can be raised here against the
Russian comrades. The latter must thus see and recognise that they are themselves more and
more constrained, by the course of things — we say it one last time -- to lead their Russian state policy towards the
right; they
are no longer supermen, and they need a counterweight, and this counterweight must be a third
international liquidating all tactics of compromise, parliamentarism and old trade
unions.