Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!cca!inmet!janw
From: janw@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: A Tale of Lenin and the Tsar, II
Message-ID: <28200404@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Dec-85 00:59:00 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.28200404
Posted: Tue Dec 17 00:59:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Dec-85 19:17:43 EST
References: <275@gargoyle.UUCP>
Lines: 74
Nf-ID: #R:gargoyle:-27500:inmet:28200404:000:3497
Nf-From: inmet!janw    Dec 17 00:59:00 1985


[Richard Carnes, ihnp4!gargoyle!carnes]
>I expect to be around to terrorize the net for a while yet.

Delighted to hear that !

>[Another installment of the tale of "Lenin and the tsar"
>by John Roemer].

I realize these are two fictitious characters. However, the
fact that they behave completely out of character for their
historical namesakes *does* reflect, to me, on the value
of the analysis. The author says: here is how two forces
behave, let us understand why. The answer: because you
invented them this way - leaves his conclusions without
foundation.

The fictitious "Lenin" has, as his main priority, the
overthrow of the tsarist regime - which, however,
treats him with relative leniency, and we are invited
to understand that. Having this priority, he calls
for "progressive income redistribution" to obtain
the support of the people. All this, for historical
Lenin and the tsarist government, is complete hogwash.

If you read the complete works of Lenin - the pre-revolutionary
part  (not that I advice it) - you will discover that the bulk of
them is polemical (and rather scurrilous in tone).  And the  bulk
of  this polemics is against fellow socialists of various shades.
Out of the remaining portion, most  is against liberals. Lenin
was, of course, in favor of an anti-tsar revolution. He just con-
centrated on a different task - organizing  a  small  disciplined
group for future action. (Some Bolsheviks did some fighting,
along with other urban groups, in 1905. Lenin had no role in this).

As for "income redistribution" - the error is  even  worse  here.
This  was  not *anywhere* on Lenin's, or the Bolsheviks', list of
priorities. (Redistributionism and "petty-bourgeois  egalitarian-
ism"  are among the swear words of Bolshevik theoretical jargon).
Their agrarian program was very characteristic: the land  of  the
landlords (about half of the land in use) was to be expropriat-
ed, but *not* parcelled to the peasants. Rather,  it  was  to  be
developed  by the state ("bourgeois-democratic" state) with hired
labor, because large-scale production units were more  progres-
sive. The Mensheviks' program differed in that the land was to be
municipal, not central government, property. There was a  party
that  wanted  all the land to go to the peasants - the Socialist-
Revolutionaries (SR) and some other parties with more moderate
redistribution agenda. In 1917, after their coup, Bolsheviks  sud-
denly scuttled their own program and adopted the SR program - for
the good reason that it  had  the  overwhelming  support  of  the
peasants.  Such  lightning  changes  of policy were quite charac-
teristic of Lenin. But of course that had nothing to do with  de-
feating the Tsar who had been deposed long since.

What about SR - do *they* fit the role of "Lenin" in the fable  ?
They  *did*  fight  the  tsarist government a lot; and they *did*
want redistribution.

However, for them it was the land for the peasants that
was the main priority; and the tsar was mainly the enemy
because he stood in the way: quite the opposite motivation
from the one ascribed to "Lenin" by Roemer.

The "Tsar"'s behaviour is described as incorrectly  -  but  I  am
tired  of  this now. So far, the only facts Roemer has marshalled
are: (1) revolutionaries often promise to improve the lot of  the
poor and (2) police in many countries treat poor and obscure peo-
ple more roughly than rich and well-connected people.

Hardly a base for profound conclusions.


		Jan Wasilewsky