You are in duty bound to call their bourgeois-democratic and parliamentary prejudices what they are—prejudices. But at the same time you must soberly follow the actual state of the class-consciousness and preparedness of the entire class (not only of its communist vanguard), and of all the working people (not only of their advanced elements).
We’re still in the pretty heavy wake of McCarthyism, we’re not at “run our own candidates on the general ballot” yet, we’re at “vote lesser evil on the general ballot while we run our own candidates locally and try to win primaries”.
Whilst you lack the strength to do away with bourgeois parliaments and every other type of reactionary institution, you must work within them because it is there that you will still find workers who are duped by the priests and stultified by the conditions of rural life; otherwise you risk turning into nothing but windbags.
Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body. If the forces of democracy take decisive, terroristic action against the reaction from the very beginning, the reactionary influence in the election will already have been destroyed.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Address of the Central Comittee to the Communist League, 1850
Yeah and I think 1) that was 175 years ago 2) that while a brilliant thinker on the subject of structures and inevitabilities, Marx was pretty naïve when it came to implementation.
Lenin’s push for participation in elections was due to the Duma which kept getting dissolved by the Czar for becoming increasingly anti monarchy. Between 1906 and 1917 several had been dissolved due to growing constitutional monarchy among the peasants.
Without historical context it sounds like lenin advocated participating in all bourgeoisie elections.
Uh, no. The context is very clear, he offers it himself. He’s talking about movements in other countries, where class consciousness isn’t sufficient for more direct alternatives, specifically Germany. He didn’t mention the Czar or the Duma once in this text.
You should really just read it, it’s pretty short.
Lol, not even close. You’re just cynically using an ideology to make it say whatever you want. You might have better luck with religion. You’d get more support from other wackos and less people like OP completely destroying your position like what’s happening in this thread.
Any vote in the oligarchy is a vote thrown away.
You should read more theory
Lenin is talking about participating in voting for our own candidates and government, NOT for supporting the bourgeoisie.
We’re still in the pretty heavy wake of McCarthyism, we’re not at “run our own candidates on the general ballot” yet, we’re at “vote lesser evil on the general ballot while we run our own candidates locally and try to win primaries”.
Karl Marx on liberal ‘lesser evil’
Yeah and I think 1) that was 175 years ago 2) that while a brilliant thinker on the subject of structures and inevitabilities, Marx was pretty naïve when it came to implementation.
Lenin’s push for participation in elections was due to the Duma which kept getting dissolved by the Czar for becoming increasingly anti monarchy. Between 1906 and 1917 several had been dissolved due to growing constitutional monarchy among the peasants.
Without historical context it sounds like lenin advocated participating in all bourgeoisie elections.
Uh, no. The context is very clear, he offers it himself. He’s talking about movements in other countries, where class consciousness isn’t sufficient for more direct alternatives, specifically Germany. He didn’t mention the Czar or the Duma once in this text.
You should really just read it, it’s pretty short.
How dare you be reasonable and actually try and solve problems instead of just complaining and demonizing anyone who’s not left enough!
They did no such thing. They used a typical liberal approach by finding something that they think aligns with their ideology and claims ‘gotcha’
Lol, not even close. You’re just cynically using an ideology to make it say whatever you want. You might have better luck with religion. You’d get more support from other wackos and less people like OP completely destroying your position like what’s happening in this thread.
Removed by mod
Those supporting the oligarchy are the haters of democracy
LOL american doesn’t know better and thinks that is democracy.