In this work, Lenin examines, as the title suggests, the economic theories and practice of Narodism. He does so in conjunction with an analysis of the work of Struve, in his book, “Critical Remarks on the Subject of Russia's Economic Development”, highlights of which had been discussed in Appendix II to “What The Friends of the People Are”. Lenin takes as his point of departure the views developed by the earlier Narodniks, whose views differed considerably from those who claimed lineage from them in the ranks of the contributors to Russkoye Bogatsvo.
Lenin says,
“Mr. Struve’s book is a systematic criticism of Narodism—this word to be understood in its broad sense, as a theoretical doctrine that gives a particular solution to highly important sociological and economic problems, and as “a system of dogmas of economic policy” (p. VII). The very posing of such a problem would have made the book of outstanding interest, but of still greater importance is the standpoint from which the criticism is made.” (p 337)
In the Preface to his book, Struve makes clear that he does not base himself on an adherence to Marxism, but he does not set out what principles of Marxism he does adhere to, as against those he does not. That makes necessary a detailed study of his book, in order to establish this distinction.
“... the author gives us, firstly, an exposition of “the subjective method in sociology” as accepted by our Narodniks, criticises it and sets against it the method “of historico-economic materialism.” Then he gives an economic criticism of Narodism, firstly on the strength of “human experience” (p. IX) and, secondly, on the basis of the facts of Russia’s economic history and present-day reality.” (p 337-8)
Lenin sets out that his own purpose is to criticise Struve's book from the perspective of someone who does adhere to all of the principles of Marxism. Those principles, as they had been described in the liberal and Narodnik press, had been badly mangled and misrepresented. It had confused them with Hegelianism, and the concept that it was necessary for Russia to pass through the phase of capitalism. The Marxist position was not that it was necessary for Russia to pass through such a stage, but that the material reality was that it was passing through such a stage.
“Our liberals and Narodniks refused to understand that the starting-point of the Russian Marxist doctrine is a totally different concept of Russian reality, and by looking at that doctrine from the standpoint of their old views of this reality, reached conclusions that were not only absolutely absurd but that in addition levelled the most preposterous accusations at the Marxists.” (p 338)
It was necessary, then, to set out the Marxist position, in contrast to the Narodnik position.
“The comparison will show us what points of departure Narodism and Marxism have in common, and in what they differ fundamentally. It will be more convenient to take the old Russian Narodism, since, firstly, it is immeasurably superior to that of today (as represented by publications such as Russkoye Bogatstvo) in consistency and forthrightness, and, secondly, it gives a fuller picture of the best aspects of Narodism, aspects which in some respects Marxism also adheres to.” (p 339)
Lenin then begins with one of the articles of the old Narodism, and follows Struve, step by step, in his analysis of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment