Revolutionen mot kapitalet
Resumé
The article deals with Lenin's political strategy during the changing conjunctures of the Russian revolution. However, this is not primarily a study of these conjunctures per se or of the influence Lenin came to have during them. The purpose is rather to show through an examination of Lenin's writings how his discourse in practical form chisels out a concept of conjuncture which in fact means a theoretical revolution within the marxism of the time. In his political practice, although not in an explicit theoretical form, lenin effected a radical break with the teleological notions which, both in its reformist and in its pretended revolutionary variant, marked and characterized the Second international and which after lenin came to dominate also in the Third international.
Referencer
1. Jean-Jaques lecercle, Lénine et l’arme du langage, Paris 1924, s. 14-20.
2. Michel Foucault, Vetandets arkeologi, Stockholm 1972, s. 217.
3. Louis althusser, Att läsa Kapitalet, Stockholm 1970, s. 37.
4. Jacques Derrida, Penser Ce Qui Vient, Le Nouveau Monde, nr. 92, 1994, s. 91-110.
5. Edmund Wilson, To the Finland Station, London, 1960; R. n. Carew-Hunt, The Theory and practice of Communism, London 1950; John Plamenatz, German and Russian Marxism, London, 1954.
6. Wilson, 1960, op.cit., s. 390.
7. Tamás Krausz, Reconstructing Lenin: An Intellectual Biography, New York: Monthly Review press, 2015, s. 19.
8. Neil Harding, Lenin and his Critics: Some problems of interpretation, European Journal of Sociology, vol. 17, nr. 2, 1976, s. 366-383.
9. Neil Harding, Lenin’s Political Thought, vol. ii, London 1983, s. 5.
10. Eckard Bolsinger, The Autonomy of the Political: Carl Schmitt’s and Lenin’s Political Realism, Westport 2001, s. 3-21. Bolsinger säger om Lenin: “The unity of his thought lies in the declared precedence of political over economic questions […] instead of economics, he emphasizes the primacy of politics as a distinctive form of class struggle […] if Lenin’s thinking has any analytical value, this it is only as a specific and original political theory”. ibid., s. xiv.
11. Christine Buci-Glucksmann, Sur la critique de gauche du stalinisme, Dialectiques, no. 15-16, 1976, s. 34.
12, “Lenin´s marxism strove for totality in its manner of contemplation […] in contrast with Western social democracy and the partial solution it had offered since the turn of the century, Lenin took the position of considering the whole. He restored the Hegelian marxist theoretical and methodological awareness, based on “totality” to its rightful place.” Krausz, 2015, op.cit., s. 365.
13, Vesa Oittinen, Which Kind of Dialectician Was Lenin?, i T. Rockmore, N. Levine, (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Leninist Political Philosophy, London, 2018, s. 63-88; Vesa Oittinen, Ilyenkov and Lenin’s Dialectic, Marxism & Sciences nr. 3/1, 2024, s. 187-198. Oittinen skriver: “He [ Lenin] is not construing a totality in which all the details would form moments submitted to the teleological movement of the Whole. For Lenin, the principle of the concreteness of the truth is the way which makes it possible to escape the grip of abstract and dogmatic determinism. to my mind, it is important to see that although both Hegel and Lenin criticised abstract theories, their incentives were different: for Hegel, the goal was to construct an organic, richly detailed totality, while for Lenin there was no such “totalist” ambitions; what he aimed at, was to find by a detailed analysis the fissures in the seemingly monolithic façade of, for example, such a determinist theory of history, as marxism was interpreted by the protagonists of the Second international.” Oittenen, 2024, op.cit., s. 192.
14. Sven-Eric Liedman, Karl Marx: En biografi, Stockholm 2015, s. 651.
15. ibid., s. 652-54. För en kritik av den ii internationalens tänkare se Lucio Colletti, From Rousseau to Lenin, London 1972, s. 43-108.
16. Om Kautskys inflytande på Lenin se Lars T. Lih, Lenin Rediscovered. What Is to Be Done? in Context, Leiden 2006, s. 74-101.
17. Om Engels´ formulering se Sven-Eric Liedman, Motsatsernas spel: Friedrich Engels’ filosofi och 1800-talets vetenskap, Malmö 1983, s. 457-462.
18. Antonio Gramsci, I Massimalisti Russsi, Il Grido del Popolo, Julio 28 1917, i Scritti politici, vol i, Rom 1978, s.116. Althusser menar att Gramsci “läser Lenin genom Machiavelli, precis som han läser Machiavelli genom Lenin”. Althusser, Lettres à Franca (1961-1973), Paris: Éditions Stockholm/IMEC, 1998, s. 624.
19. Antonio Gramsci, La Rivoluzione Contro il Capitale, Avanti, 24 November 1917, I Scritti politici, 1978, op.cit., s. 130.
20. Karl Marx, Kapitalet, Uddevalla 1969, s. 670f.
21. Dominique Lecourt, Lenin/Hegel/Marx, Theoretical Practice, nr. 7/8, 1973, s. 22. Robert Mayer har påpekat att Aristoteles var ett mer betydelsefullt inflytande än Hegel. Mayer, Lenin and The practice of Dialectical Thinking, Science and Society, nr. 63/1, 1999, s. 40-62.
22. Lenin, vad är ’folkvännerna’, i valda verk, i:1, s. 77. om narodnikerna se Franco venturi, Roots of Revolution, London 1960.
23. Lenin, Folklighetsrörelsens ekonomiska innehåll, i Samlade skrifter, band 20, Stockholm 1942, s. 263f.
24. E. H. Carr påpekar att den mensjevikiska linjen: “ruled out any policy of immediate preparation for the socialist revolution and condemned the proletariat at the present stage to the rule of a subsidiary of the bourgeoise. The menshevik did not believe that the Russian proletariat could anticipate marxist destiny by enlisting the alliance of the peasant masses.” E.H. Carr, The Bolshevik Revolution, vol. 1, London 1966, s. 4.
25. Samuel Baron, Plekhanov: The Founder of Russian Marxism, London1963; Christopher Read, George Plekhanov, Socialism and political Struggle, i Rachel Hammersley, (ed.), Revolutionary Moments: Reading Revolutionary Text, London 2015, s. 125-132. Plekhanovs syn på Lenin förändrades efter 1902: “it was with the greatest surprise that it eventually came to him that Lenin was actually a greater heretic than any of the men he had ever fought, and that his scheme of party organization was designed not to safeguard orthodoxy but to move against the stream, to violate the objective laws of history, as he, Plekhanov, had defined them.”, Leopold H. Haimson, The Russian Marxists & The Origins of Bolshevism, Cambridge, mass. 1955, s. 208.
26. G.V. Plekhanov, Den monistiska historieuppfattningens utveckling, Solna 1972.
27. E. H. Carr hävdar: “The dispute between Bolsheviks and mensheviks, though it appeared to turn on esoteric points of marxist doctrine, raised issues fundamental to the history of the Russian revolution. The mensheviks, clinging to the original marxist sequence of bourgeois-democratic and proletarian socialist revolutions, never really accepted Lenin’s hypothesis, thrown out as early as 1898, of an indissoluble link between them.” Carr, 1966, op.cit., s. 50.
28. Lenin, “Den ii internationalens sammanbrott”, Samlade skrifter i urval, band 9, Stockholm: arbetarkultur, 1937, s. 80.
29. Lenin, “Den internationella socialistiska kongressen i Stuttgart”, Samlade skrifter i urval, band 7, Stockholm: arbetarkultur, 1939, s. 376.
30. Som en brittisk historiker av den ryska revolutionen uttryckt det: “He injected a distinctly Russian dose of conspiratorial politics into a marxist dialectics that might have remained passive otherwise, tied down by a willingness to wait for the revolution to develop socially rather than bringing it about through political action. it was not marxism that made Lenin a revolutionary but Lenin who made marxism revolutionary” Orlando Figes, The Story of Russia, London 2023, s. 169.
31. För en utförlig diskussion av det ryska ordet stikhiinost hos Lenin, vilket normalt översätts med “spontanitet”, se. Lih, 2006, op.cit. s. 613-628.
32. Lars T. Lih, Lenin, London 2011, s. 66-72 och 107.
33. Lih, 2006, op.cit., s. 794.
34. om de allianser som Lenin menade kunde och borde skapas mot tsarismen se Donald W. Treadgold, Lenin and his Rivals, New York 1955, s. 154-178.
35. Lih, 2011, op. cit., s. 96. Lih framhåller: “The most remarkable feature of Lenin’s 1907 book Agrarian Programme is his enthusiasm about the revolutionary fervor of the petty-bourgeois peasant”, op. cit., s. 98. Se även Esther Kingston-Mann, a Strategy for marxist Bourgeois Revolution: Lenin and the peasantry, 1907-1916, The Journal of Peasant Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, 1980, s. 135ff.
36. Kingston-Mann hävdar att Lenin redan 1902 hade avlägsnat sig från determinismen i Kapitalismens utveckling i Ryssland publicerad 1899, Lenin and the Problem of Marxist Peasant Revolution, New York 1983, s. 185. För en diskussion av Kapitalismens utveckling i Ryssland se Robert Service, Lenin: A Political Life vol I, London 1985, s. 65-73.
37. Lenin, Förord till den ryska översättningen av K. Marx ’ brev till l. Kugelman, Samlade skrifter, band 18-19 el II, Stockholm 1937, s. 548f.
38. Alan Shandro, Lenin and the Logic of Hegemony, Leiden 2014; Lih, 2011, op.cit., s. 84ff.
39. För begreppet överbestämning se althusser, För Marx, Stockholm: Cavefors, 1968, s. 223.
40. Lenin, mot bojkotten: ur en socialdemokratisk publicists anteckningar, Samlade skrifter, band 6, Stockholm 1941, s.161.
41. Lenin, till parollerna, Valda verk, ii:1, s. 80.
42. Krausz, op. ci., s. 199.
43. Lenin, till parollerna, Valda verk, ii:1, s. 87.
44. om begreppet tidsacceleration se Reinhart Koselleck, Zeitsichten: Studien zur Historik, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2000.
45. Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, The February Revolution, Petrograd, 1917, Leiden 2018.
46. Lenin, Brev från fjärran, Valda verk, i:2, s. 610.
47. Lars T. Lih, all power to the Soviets: Marx meets Hobbes, Radical Philosophy nr. 201, 2018, s. 64-78
48. Lenin, proletariatets uppgifter i vår revolution, Valda Verk ii:1, s. 21f.
49. Stephen Kotkin, Stalin: Vol 1 Paradoxes of Power, New York 2014, s. 190.
50. Tariq Ali, The Dilemmas of Lenin, London 2017, s.166.
51. Lenin, några teser, Samlade skrifter, band 9, Stockholm 1937, s. 47.
52. Lenin, Brev från fjärran, Valda verk I:2, s. 608f.
53. Jfr. Nicos Poulantzas, Political Power and Social Classes, London 1978, s. 97: “without this conception, Lenin would’ve remained at the Second international economist interpretation of Marx, which is ultimately an economist theory of the strongest link”.
54. Citerad av Lenin i Brev om taktiken: Första brevet, Samlade skrifter, band 10, Stockholm 1940, s. 52f.
55. Lenin, Brev om taktiken: Första brevet, Samlade skrifter, band 10, Stockholm 1940, s. 53.
56. Robert C. tucker, Stalin as Revolutionary, 1879-1929. New York 1973, s. 168.
57. Lenin, Brev om taktiken, Samlade skrifter, band 10, Stockholm 1940, s. 44-ff.
58. Lenin, Brev från fjärran, Valda verk I:2, s. 616f.
59. Lenin, Maktkrisen, Samlade skrifter, band 11, Stockholm 1939, s. 16.
60. alexander Rabinowitch, Prelude to the Revolution: The Petrograd and the July 1917 Uprising, Indianapolis 1991; Geoffrey Swain, The Russian Revolution, London 2017, p. 78-84; tony Cliff, Lenin, vol 2, All Power to the Soviets, London 1976, 260f; Christopher Read, Lenin: A Revolutionary Life, London 2005, s. 157-164.
61. Lenin, till parollerna, Valda verk, II:1, s. 80-90. om denna text se Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guattari, Mille plateaux, Paris 1980, s. 100-106; Jean Salem, Lénine et la révolution, Paris 2006, s. 61-68; lecercle, 2024, op.cit., s. 39-50.
62. Swain, 2017, op. cit., s. 131-35.
63. Lenin, om kompromisser, Samlade skrifter, band 11, Stockholm 1939, s. 104f.
64. Lenin, marxismen och upproret, Valda verk II:1, s. 166.
65. Lenin, Råd från en utomstående, Valda verk II:1, s. 184.
66. Lenin, Brev till de kamrater bolsjeviker, vilka deltog i sovjetkongressen för norra området, Samlade skrifter, band 11, Stockholm 1939, s. 212f.
67. Lenin, om vår revolution, Valda verk II:2, s. 794. Fritt översatt: “Först måste man ge sig in i en allvarlig kamp, och sedan får man se.’
68. Lenin, Brev till Centralkommitténs medlemmar, Valda verk II:2, s.192ff. Om detta brev se Gerard Walter, Lénine, Paris 1971, s. 364f.
69. Lenin, Brev från fjärran, Valda verk I:2, s. 613.
Downloads
Publiceret
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2026 SFAH og forfatterne
Dette værk er under følgende licens Creative Commons Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel – Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd).
