Revision of the Party Programme Index Revision of the Party Programme I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX All Pages 1917 V.I Lenin The October Revolution of 1917 Page 3 of 10 IILet the reader observe the general arrangement and the sequence of topics in the various sections of the old programme (we follow Comrade Sokolnikov's numerical scheme):1. The labour movement has long since become international. We are one of its contingents.2. The final goal of the movement is determined by the course of development of bourgeois society. The point of departure is that the means of production are privately owned and the proletariat is propertyless.3. The growth of capitalism. The crowding out of the small producers.4. The growth of exploitation (female labour, the reserve labour army, etc.).5. Crises.6. The progress of technology; the growth of inequality.7. Growing struggle on the part of the proletariat. Material conditions for the replacement of capitalism by socialism.8. The proletarian social revolution.9. Its premise—the dictatorship of the proletariat.10. The task of the Party—to lead the struggle of the proletariat for the social revolution.I add another point:11. Capitalism has developed to its highest stage (imperialism), and the era of the proletarian revolution has now set in.Compare this with the arrangement of the subject matter—not the individual corrections to the text, but the subject matter itself—in Comrade Sokolnikov's draft, and also the points he adds on imperialism.1. The labour movement is international. We are one of its contingents. (Inserted—the export of capital, world economy, the growth of the struggle into the world revolution; i.e., a bit of the definition of imperialism is inserted.)2. The final goal of the movement is determined by the course of development of bourgeois society. The point of departure is that the means of production are privately owned and the proletariat is propertyless. (In the middle is inserted: omnipotent banks and syndicates, monopoly combines on a world scale; i.e., another bit of the definition of imperialism is inserted.)3. The growth of capitalism. The crowding out of the small producers.4. The growth of exploitation (female labour, the reserve labour army, foreign workers, etc.).5. Crises and wars. Still another bit of the definition of imperialism is inserted: "attempts to partition the globe"; monopoly associations and the export of capital are repeated once more; the term "finance capital" is explained parenthetically as meaning "the product of a merger of industrial and banking capital".6. The progress of technology; the growth of inequality. Yet another bit of the definition of imperialism is put in: high cost of living, militarism. Monopoly associations are mentioned again.7. Growing struggle on the part of the proletariat. Material conditions for the replacement of capitalism by socialism. In the middle there is an interpolation, again reiterating: "monopoly capitalism", and pointing out how the banks and the syndicates have prepared the apparatus for social regulation, etc.8. The proletarian social revolution. (A note that it will put an end to the rule of finance capital.)9. Its premise—the dictatorship of the proletariat.10. The task of the Party—to lead the struggle of the proletariat for the social revolution. (In the middle there is an interpolation that the latter is now on the order of the day.)I believe that this comparative study clearly shows that Comrade Sokolnikov's draft suffers from the "mechanical" additions some comrades were so afraid of. Without any logical sequence, various bits of the definition of imperialism have been scattered throughout the draft in the form of a mosaic. There is no general and integral characterisation of imperialism. There are too many repetitions. The old canvas is preserved. Preserved also is the general plan of the old programme which points out that the "ultimate goal" of the movement is "determined" by the nature of contemporary bourgeois society and the course of its development. But it is just this "course of development" which is not brought out; and the effect is that odds and ends of the definition of imperialism have been inserted, mostly inappropriately.Let us take the second section. Here Comrade Sokolnikov left unchanged the beginning and the end; the beginning states that the means of production are in the hands of a minority; the end, that the majority of the population are proletarians or semi-proletarians. Right in the middle, Comrade Sokolnikov inserts a special phrase to the effect that "during the last quarter of a century the direct or indirect control of production organised on capitalist lines has passed into the hands of all-powerful" banks, trusts, etc.This is mentioned earlier than the crowding out of the small by the big producersThe latter fact is first mentioned in the third section. But are not trusts the highest and latest manifestation of the very process of the crowding out of small-scale by large-scale production? Is it appropriate to speak first of trusts, and then of the ousting of the small producer? Is it not a violation of logical sequence? Where, then, did the trusts come from? Is this not an error in theory? How and why has control "passed" into their hands? All this cannot be understood before the process of the ousting of the small producer is made clear.Let us take the third section that deals with the crowding out of small by large enterprises. Here too Comrade Sokolnikov retains the beginning (the increasing importance of big enterprises) and the end (small producers are being crowded out). In the middle, however, he adds that big enterprises "have merged into gigantic organisms which combine a series of consecutive steps of production and exchange". But this insertion deals with an entirely different matter, namely, the concentration of the means of production and the socialisation of labour by capitalism, the creation of the material conditions for the replacement of capitalism by socialism. In the old programme this point is not dealt with until the seventh section.Comrade Sokolnikov adheres to the general plan of the old programme. He, too, speaks of the material conditions for the replacement of capitalism by socialism only in the seventh section. He also retains in the seventh section a mention of the concentration of means of production and the socialisation of labour!And so the concentration of capital is indicated in part a few paragraphs before an entire general, summarising section specially devoted to the subject. This is devoid of all logic and is likely to render the programme less intelligible to the masses. Prev Next