JUNIUS, THE CRISIS OF SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY[10101010 10101010]

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

NOTEBOOK “ζ”

(“ZETA”)

Junius, The Crisis of Social-Democracy. Supplement: “Theses on the Tasks of International Social-Democracy.” Zurich, 1916, _109_pp. (105-09,theses).

“Introduction” dated January 2, 1916: the pamphlet is stated to have been written in April 1915.

p. 6: “The capitulation of international Social-Democracy ... the most stupid thing would be to conceal it”....

p. 24: “Two lines of development ... lead ... to this war.” 1) 1870, N.B., the annexation of Alsace and Lorraine, and 2) imperialist development in the last 25 years.

p. 28: Bülow’s speech on December 11, 1899.A clear imperialist programme: the British have“Greater Britain”, the French their “New France”,the Russians—Asia, the Germans “Greater Germany”.	N.B.

pp. 31-33: excellent account of the plunder of Turkish peasants in Asia Minor by German finance capital.

p. 42: ...“The existence of only two countries—Belgium and Serbia—is at stake in the present war”.

p. 43: In Russia, imperialism is “not” so much “_economic expansion_” as “_the political interest of the state_”.

p. 48: The break-up of Austria was accelerated “by the emergence of independent national states in the immediate neighbourhood of the monarchy”....

...“The internal _un_-viability of Austria was shown”....

...“The Hapsburg monarchy is not the political organisation of a bourgeois state, but only the loose syndicate of cliques of social parasites” (49)....

...“An inevitable dilemma: either the Hapsburgmonarchy or the capitalist development of theBalkan countries” (49)....

N.B.	...“Historically, the liquidation of Austria-Hun-gary is but the continuation of the disintegration ofTurkey, but at the same time it is a requirement ofthe historical process of development” (49-50).

“German imperialism, chained to two decomposing corpses, steered straight into the world war” (50).

...“For ... an alleged attempt (at high treason)... Duala Manga Bell of the Cameroons was hanged quietly, amidst the noise of war, without the troublesome procedure of a court trial.... The Reichstag group shrouded the body of Chief Duala in a discreet silence” (56).

p. 60: two causes of the 1905 defeat:

?	(1) its “huge” political programme; “some (of theproblems), such as the agrarian question, are alto-gether insoluble within the framework of the presentsocial order”....

(2) the aid of European reaction....

71: “The dangers to the ‘free development of Ger-many’ do not lie in Russia, as the Reichstag groupthought, but in Germany herself”... (and, inciden-tally, the expression: “the Zabern policy”,p. 71).

74: “Does not the socialist principle of the right of nations to self-determination imply that every people is entitled and bound to defend its freedom and independence?”... (75) “certainly, a people that surrenders to an external enemy is contemptible”....

75: A quotation from The Civil War in France: “The highest heroic effort of which old society is still capable is national war; and this is now proved to be a mere governmental humbug”....[2]

76: “In bourgeois society, therefore, invasion and class struggle are not opposites, as the official legend has it, but one is the means and expression of the other. And if for the ruling classes invasion represents a well-tried means against the class struggle, for the ascending classes the sharpest class struggle still proves to be the best means against invasion”.... The history of the Italian towns in the Middle Ages, and especially 1793.

77: The same applies to self-determination: “True,socialism recognises the right of every nation to inde-pendence and freedom, to independent mastery of itsdestinies. But it is a real mockery of socialism whenthe modern capitalist states are presented as theexpression of this right of the nations to self-determi-nation. In which of these states has the nation yetdetermined the forms and conditions of its (sic!) national,political or social existence?” By “self-determinationof the German people”, Marx, Engels, Lassalle under-stood “the united, great German republic”. [ModernGermany has been built (N.B.) (77) “on the ruins of theGerman people’s right to national (N.B.) self-determina-tion (N.B.)”....]

77 ...“or is it, perhaps, the Third Republic with colonial possessions in four continents, and colonial atrocities in two of them, that is an expression of the ‘self-determination’ of the French nation?”...

78: “In the socialist sense of this concept, thereis not a single free nation, if its existence as a staterests on the enslavement of other peoples, for thecolonial peoples, too, are reckoned as peoples andas members of the state. International socialismrecognises the right of free, independent and equalnations, but it is only socialism that can create suchnations, and only it can realise the right of nationsto self-determination. And this socialist sloganserves like all the other socialist slogans notto justify the existing order of things, but toindicate the way forward, and to stimulate theproletariat in its active, revolutionary policyof transformation”....
N.B.

78: “In the socialist sense of this concept, thereis not a single free nation, if its existence as a staterests on the enslavement of other peoples, for thecolonial peoples, too, are reckoned as peoples andas members of the state. International socialismrecognises the right of free, independent and equalnations, but it is only socialism that can create suchnations, and only it can realise the right of nationsto self-determination. And this socialist sloganserves like all the other socialist slogans notto justify the existing order of things, but toindicate the way forward, and to stimulate theproletariat in its active, revolutionary policyof transformation”....

N.B.

?	In the imperialist situation of today therecannot be any more “national wars of defence” (78)... to ignore this situation means “_to build on sand_”.

Hence “the question of defence and attack, the question of who is to ‘blame’, is quite meaningless” (78); for both France and Great Britain it is not a matter of “self-defence”, they are defending “not their national, but their world political position”....

N.B.: ...“in order to dispel the phantom of ‘nationalwar’ which dominates Social—Democratic policy at pre-sent” (81).

Imperialist policy is an international phenomenon, the result of “the world-wide development of capital” (79).... “It is only from this starting-point that the question of ’national defence’ in the present war can be correctly posed” (80).... The system of alliances, military interests, etc., immediately involve imperialist interests and countries.... “Finally, the very fact that today all capitalist states have colonial possessions which in time of war, even if it begins as a ‘national war of defence’, are in any case drawn into the war from military-strategic considerations” ... the “holy war” in Turkey, the instigation of uprisings in the colonies...—“this fact, too, today automatically converts every war into an imperialist world conflagration” (82)....

The example of Serbia (behind which stands Russia), Holland (her colonies and so forth).... “In this way, it is always the historical situation created by present-day imperialism that determines the character of the war for the different countries, and it is because of this situation that nowadays national wars of defence are in general no longer possible” (84)....

He quotes K. Kautsky: Patriotism and Social-Democracy, 1907, p. 16 in particular, that “under these conditions a war for the defence of national freedom can no longer be expected anywhere” (Kautsky, quoted by Junius, p. 85). (K. Kautsky, pp. 12-14 on “national problems”, that they can be solved “only (N.B.) after (N.B.) the victory of the proletariat”.) [K. Kautsky, p. 23. N.B.]

What then is the task of Social-Democracy? Notto be “passive”. “Instead of hypocritically dressingthe imperialist war in the cloak of national defence,we should take seriously [author’s italics] the rightof nations to self-determination and national defenceand use them as a revolutionary lever _against_[author’s italics] the imperialist war (85). Themost elementary requirement of national defenceis that the nation should take defence into its ownhands. The first step in that direction is a militia,i.e., not merely immediate arming of the entireadult male population, but above all the decisionby the people of the question of war and peace;it implies also immediate abolition of all politicaldisfranchisement, since the people’s defence mustbe based on the greatest political freedom. Andit was the prime duty of Social-Democracy to pro-claim these genuine national defence measures,and strive for their realisation” (86). But the Social-Democrats abandoned the demand for a militia_until after the war!!! although we have said that“_only a militia” is capable of defending thefatherland!!!
?
???N.B.

What then is the task of Social-Democracy? Notto be “passive”. “Instead of hypocritically dressingthe imperialist war in the cloak of national defence,we should take seriously [author’s italics] the rightof nations to self-determination and national defenceand use them as a revolutionary lever _against_[author’s italics] the imperialist war (85). Themost elementary requirement of national defenceis that the nation should take defence into its ownhands. The first step in that direction is a militia,i.e., not merely immediate arming of the entireadult male population, but above all the decisionby the people of the question of war and peace;it implies also immediate abolition of all politicaldisfranchisement, since the people’s defence mustbe based on the greatest political freedom. Andit was the prime duty of Social-Democracy to pro-claim these genuine national defence measures,and strive for their realisation” (86). But the Social-Democrats abandoned the demand for a militia_until after the war!!! although we have said that“_only a militia” is capable of defending thefatherland!!!

???N.B.

“Our teachers had a different conception of de-fence of the fatherland”... (Marx in The Civil War,in support of the national war of the Commune)...and ... Frederick Engels in 1892, in support of a rep-etition of 1793.... But alongside this: “_When Engelswrote that, he had in mind a situation quite differentfrom the present one_” (87)—prior to the Russian revo-lution. “He [Engels] had in mind a genuine nationalwar of defence by a suddenly attacked Germany”(87)....
N.B.!

“Our teachers had a different conception of de-fence of the fatherland”... (Marx in The Civil War,in support of the national war of the Commune)...and ... Frederick Engels in 1892, in support of a rep-etition of 1793.... But alongside this: “_When Engelswrote that, he had in mind a situation quite differentfrom the present one_” (87)—prior to the Russian revo-lution. “He [Engels] had in mind a genuine nationalwar of defence by a suddenly attacked Germany”(87)....

N.B.!

And further: “Yes, it is the duty of the Social-Democrats to defend their country during a greathistorical crisis. And precisely therein lies thegrave guilt” of the Social-Democratic Reichstaggroup.... “They did leave the fatherland unprotectedin the hour of its greatest peril. For their firstduty to the fatherland in that hour was to show thefatherland what was really behind the present impe-rialist war; to sweep away the web of patriotic anddiplomatic lies covering up this encroachment onthe fatherland; to proclaim loudly and clearly thatfor the German people both victory and defeat in thepresent war are equally fatal...; to proclaim the neces-sity of immediately arming the people and of allow-ing the people to decide the question of war andpeace ... finally, to oppose the imperialist war pro-gramme, which is to preserve Austria and Turkey, i.e.,perpetuate reaction in Europe and in Germany, withthe old, truly national programme of the patriotsand democrats of 1848, the programme of Marx,Engels and Lassalle—the slogan of a united, greatGerman Republic. This is the banner that shouldhave been unfurled before the country, which wouldhave been a truly national banner of liberation,and which would have been in accord with thebest traditions of Germany and with the interna-tional class policy of the proletariat” (88).	????
N.B.
??
N.B.

...“Hence, the grave dilemma—the interests ofthe fatherland or the international solidarity of theproletariat—the tragic conflict which prompted ourparliamentarians to side, ‘with a heavy heart’,with the imperialist war, is purely imaginary,a bourgeois-nationalist fiction. On the contrary,there is complete harmony between the interestsof the country and the class interests of the prole-tarian International, both in time of war and intime of peace: both war and peace demand the mostenergetic development of the class struggle, themost determined fight for the Social-Democraticprogramme” (89)....But what should the Party have done? Call a massstrike? Or call for refusal to serve in the army? Itwould be absurd to try to answer. The revolutioncannot be “made”. “Prescriptions and recipes ofa technical nature” would be “_ridiculous_” (90);it is not a question of such things, but of a clearpolitical slogan. (Expatiates against technique,etc., etc., “small conspiratorial circles”, etc.)(N.B. 101-02).
100:

...“Hence, the grave dilemma—the interests ofthe fatherland or the international solidarity of theproletariat—the tragic conflict which prompted ourparliamentarians to side, ‘with a heavy heart’,with the imperialist war, is purely imaginary,a bourgeois-nationalist fiction. On the contrary,there is complete harmony between the interestsof the country and the class interests of the prole-tarian International, both in time of war and intime of peace: both war and peace demand the mostenergetic development of the class struggle, themost determined fight for the Social-Democraticprogramme” (89)....But what should the Party have done? Call a massstrike? Or call for refusal to serve in the army? Itwould be absurd to try to answer. The revolutioncannot be “made”. “Prescriptions and recipes ofa technical nature” would be “_ridiculous_” (90);it is not a question of such things, but of a clearpolitical slogan. (Expatiates against technique,etc., etc., “small conspiratorial circles”, etc.)(N.B. 101-02).

100:

§ VIII (93-104) deals especially with the questionof “victory or defeat”, endeavours to prove thatboth are equally bad (ruin, new wars, etc.). Tochoose between them would be “a hopeless choicebetween two lots of thrashing” (98)... “except inone single case: if by its revolutionary interventionthe international proletariat upsets all the calcu-lations” (of both imperialisms) (98).... There canbe no status quo (99), no going “backwards”, onlyforward to the victory of the proletariat. Not hare-brained schemes of disarmament, not “utopias”or “partial reforms” (99), but the struggle againstimperialism.

p. 102—the threat of “mass collapse ofthe European proletariat” (102).... “When thehour strikes, the signal for the social revolu-tion that will set mankind free will comeonly from Europe, only from the oldestcapitalist countries. Only the British, French,Belgian, German, Russian and Italian workerstogether can lead the army of the exploitedand enslaved in the five continents of theworld” (103).
butAmerica??andJapan??

p. 102—the threat of “mass collapse ofthe European proletariat” (102).... “When thehour strikes, the signal for the social revolu-tion that will set mankind free will comeonly from Europe, only from the oldestcapitalist countries. Only the British, French,Belgian, German, Russian and Italian workerstogether can lead the army of the exploitedand enslaved in the five continents of theworld” (103).

butAmerica??andJapan??

Notes

[1] See present edition, Vol. 22, pp. 305-20.—Ed.

[2] See Marx and Engels, Selected Works, Moscow, 1982, Vol. I, p. 540. p. 310

| | Works Index | | | Volume 39 | | | Collected Works | | | L.I.A. Index | | | -------------------------------------------------------- | -- | ------------------------------------------------------- | -- | ---------------------------------------------- | -- | ---------------------------------- | | | < Backward | | Forward > | | | | | |

JUNIUS, THE CRISIS OF SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY[10101010 10101010] (original) (raw)

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

NOTEBOOK “ζ”

(“ZETA”)

JUNIUS, THE CRISIS OF SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY[1]

Notes