- 10 Oct 2012 15:53
#14078699
They might have only built state capitalism in russia, but they nonetheless were marxists who tied their revolution to the international socialist revolution. Prior to then, we could only wait and pray for the bourgeoisie to be revolutionary and liberate nations from reactionary grip.
Lenin taught us in the era of imperialism the bourgeoisie is not revolutionary, and the peasants and workers must ally if they want to crush the aristocracy, its backwards ideals, and end imperialist war in russia. That was the bourgeois character of the russian revolution, socialists marching with peasants. When isolated, this revolution is lost and the revolutionaries can only emulate the most efficient and calculating state capitalism, like the germans had.
I disagree. They were (/are) state capitalist.
They might have only built state capitalism in russia, but they nonetheless were marxists who tied their revolution to the international socialist revolution. Prior to then, we could only wait and pray for the bourgeoisie to be revolutionary and liberate nations from reactionary grip.
Lenin taught us in the era of imperialism the bourgeoisie is not revolutionary, and the peasants and workers must ally if they want to crush the aristocracy, its backwards ideals, and end imperialist war in russia. That was the bourgeois character of the russian revolution, socialists marching with peasants. When isolated, this revolution is lost and the revolutionaries can only emulate the most efficient and calculating state capitalism, like the germans had.