Twentieth Century Chronicle

Page 143

Perhaps we should raise our evaluation of the Labour Party and not assume that its goals are limited to domestic revolution and the achievement of national independence.

Therefore, when Lin Feng appeared in the meeting room, although the Labor Party representatives did not say much, Babushkin and Balansky realized that the Labor Party had raised the level of the talks. Compared with Yang Tok Seng, who needed to ask his superiors for instructions before adjusting the content of the talks, this member of the Labor Party's Central Committee could directly adjust the content of the talks.

Babushkin was immediately energized, hoping to make substantial progress in today's talks. If even he couldn't accept their demands, it would mean that the talks between the two parties were truly on the verge of breaking down.

However, before Babushkin could figure out how to express the Far Eastern Commission's sincere willingness to cooperate, Lin Feng posed a pointed question to the three: "Currently, Europe is increasingly divided into two opposing camps, one being the Austro-German bloc centered on Germany, and the other being the Anglo-French bloc. Although Russia's defeat in the Far East has dealt a blow to the Tsarist government's rule, I do not believe that the Tsarist government will collapse as a result."

While Russia is currently experiencing numerous worker and peasant uprisings, its industrialization has not stalled. As long as external capital continues to flow into Russia, the increased social wealth resulting from productivity growth will ultimately alleviate domestic social tensions. Only when external capital ceases to flow into Russia, causing its productivity to stagnate, will these social contradictions truly erupt.

The only factor that stopped external capital flowing into Russia was the outbreak of the European war. The British and French capital injections to save the Tsarist government were aimed at getting Russia to join their side against the Austro-German bloc. Therefore, I want to know the Social Democratic Party's stance on this European war: should the proletariat submit to national and ethnic interests and heed the Tsar's call to join the war, or should they transform the imperialist war into a domestic revolutionary war?

Chapter 511 The Problem of the Russian Revolution

"Why will we fail? Today, the lower classes in Russia can no longer tolerate the Tsar's brutal rule. Protests are everywhere, from cities to villages. Even the army has lost its loyalty to the Tsar. If we can establish the Workers', Peasants', and Soldiers' Soviets in Chita, we certainly can in other parts of Russia. As long as the Russian people rise up against the Tsar's rule, the revolution cannot fail. And what ability do Britain and France have to bypass Germany and interfere in the Russian Revolution?"

After hearing the questions relayed by the translator, Kurnatovsky was the first to question Lin Feng. Clearly, he could not agree with the Chinese judgment that the Russian revolution was bound to fail. Babushkin and Balansky also stared at Lin Feng with serious expressions, wanting to know his answer.

The Russians had such high expectations for this revolution that they didn't even bother to care about the real questions they were raising, Lin Xinyi thought to himself after listening to the translated questions.

However, this question was not difficult for him to answer. After a moment's thought, he said, "I believe that this Russian revolution will fail, based on two points."

First, the reactionary forces in Russia remained united around the Romanov dynasty. The loyalty of the old nobles and landowners to Nicholas II had not disappeared, and the new Russian bourgeoisie had no intention of overthrowing the Romanov dynasty. They had neither the power to do so nor the power to suppress the working class's struggle.

Secondly, no class in Russia is prepared to lead post-revolutionary Russia. The various anti-government movements in Russia today are actually driven by three main forces: progressive intellectuals, peasants who want to acquire land, and workers who want to improve their living conditions.

First, intellectuals cannot be considered an independent class; they need to unite with a certain class to translate their political ideas into practice. Currently, progressive intellectuals in Russia have not achieved a unified will to unite with the proletariat. A glance at reports about Russia reveals that some intellectuals aspire to establish parliamentary politics similar to those in Western Europe, while others advocate for peasant socialism; only a minority of intellectuals stand with the working class.

Secondly, since May, peasant uprisings have been escalating across Russia. Although they had political demands to resist the Tsarist government, judging from the reports of these events, the peasants' main targets were not the Tsar and the entire Russian upper class. They only wanted to overthrow the landlords and officials around them, and even peasant uprisings in neighboring counties were unrelated.

Finally, although the Russian working class put forward a clear political demand to overthrow the Tsar, the level of industrialization in Russia limited the power that the Russian working class could mobilize. If it could not get the support of the Russian peasants, then the Russian Revolution could not succeed. The Russian peasants did not care about the demands of the Russian working class, and they did not even care about the demands of peasants outside their hometown.

Even within your own Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, aren't you now divided into a majority and a minority? A revolution without a brain or a leader—how can such a revolution possibly succeed? Therefore, I believe the failure of this Russian revolution was inevitable.

Babushkin glanced at his two companions. Kurnatovsky was speechless, seemingly wanting to refute the Chinese but unsure how. Balansky, on the other hand, was deep in thought. Clearly, the young Chinese man's words had greatly shaken them. In fact, he felt the same way, but his experience working with Lenin had allowed him to adapt to the current situation more quickly. Having witnessed Lenin's insight, he had developed some resistance.

Having adjusted his mindset, Babushkin asked Lin Feng for advice: "Now that you have seen the many problems of the Russian Revolution, what do you think we should do to avoid its failure?"

Lin Xinyi looked at Babushkin and replied bluntly, "Of course, we must first solve the problem of the revolution's brain. How can a social democratic labor party with internal disagreements about the revolutionary path guide the proletariat to lead the revolution? That's the reason for the question I just raised."

What exactly is the Social Democratic Party's stance? Should the proletariat submit to national and ethnic interests and heed the Tsar's call to join the imperialist war, or should the imperialist war be transformed into a domestic revolutionary war?

If it is the former, then there is no basis for complete cooperation between the Workers' Party and the Social Democratic Party, because the Chinese proletariat will not allow a party flying the Tsarist flag to represent the Russian proletariat and restrict our actions. Even if the Tsarist government is now our common enemy, we cannot accept your continued discriminatory and oppressive policies towards other nationalities, as this is inconsistent with the principles of proletarian revolution.

Kurnatovsky did not entirely believe that the Workers' Party was a purely proletarian party. Although he thought that Lin Feng's words were indeed in line with the theory of proletarian revolution, he still retorted with dissatisfaction: "If you think that our attempt to maintain the unity of Russia is to inherit the Tsarist government's policy of national oppression, then what about your attempt to bring Outer Mongolia back under the rule of the Qing Dynasty?"

Lin Xinyi shook his head at him and said, "First of all, we do not want to bring Outer Mongolia under the rule of the Qing Dynasty, but to liberate the Mongolian people from the oppression of Russian imperialism and Mongolian princes."

Secondly, the Workers' Party did not believe that the Qing Dynasty needed to continue. In the coming period, the Workers' Party would raise the issue of ending Qing rule, and a new China would be formed through consultation among all ethnic groups under the principle of national self-determination. This new China would not claim to have inherited the Qing Dynasty's power to oppress all ethnic groups.

So what does your party intend to do? On the one hand, it claims that the Tsar's autocratic rule is an oppression of the Russian people and needs to be overthrown, while on the other hand, it claims that the Slavic people inherited all the power of Tsarist Russia, including the power to oppress other nationalities?

If you intend to do this, then the Workers' Party can only unite with those nations oppressed by the Tsarist government, not only to overthrow the Tsar's autocratic rule, but also to overthrow the Pan-Slavism you represent.

Kurnatovsky was furious at the answer, but he quickly calmed down because he realized that unless he abandoned the proletarian position or put the interests of the Slavic people above class interests, he could not deny the Chinese man’s logic.

But if he did that, it would be tantamount to denying the legitimacy of the Chita Republic. The Chita Republic arose because workers and soldiers believed that the Tsarist government had betrayed them. The so-called defense of the motherland's interests was actually only the defense of the interests of the Tsar, nobles, and capitalists. Russian workers and soldiers, like the Chinese, were victims of this war.

It was through the propaganda of the class interests of workers and soldiers and the exposure of the atrocities of the Tsarist autocratic government that workers, soldiers and peasants joined the uprising. Now, his change of stance is a betrayal of the insurgents and civilians, which means that the uprising is a betrayal of the national interests, and the Republic of Chita will be thrown into chaos first.

What Kurnatovsky could think of, Babushkin and Baransky also considered. The Russian Social Democratic Labour Party was founded much later than the Social Democratic Labour Parties in Western Europe, and therefore its members were much more naive. Almost all the ideologies of the Social Democratic Labour Parties in Western Europe could be seen within the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party.

Simply put, the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party did not expand from a single point like the Workers' Party, but rather developed independently in various parts of Russia simultaneously with the introduction of various popular socialist ideas from Western European countries. Therefore, the theoretical struggles within the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party were much more intense than those within the Social Democratic Labour Parties in Western European countries, because no truly socialist theory that met the needs of the Russian proletariat had yet gained a decisive advantage.

In 1893, Lenin expelled the Russian Populists, who called themselves socialists, from the Social Democratic Labour Party; at the Second National Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party in 1903, Lenin gained the support of the majority of delegates on the question of how to realize the dictatorship of the proletariat, thus giving rise to the Bolshevik faction within the party.

All these struggles illustrate one point: the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party is not yet a mature revolutionary party. For this party, theoretical struggle is more important than organizational struggle, because the party is currently unable to constrain the behavior of its members through organizational means and can only rely on theoretical consensus to gain their support.

This means that once the Far Eastern Committee of the Russian Social Democratic Party loses its theoretical legitimacy, it also loses its status as a pioneer in revolutionary practice within the party. Central party groups in Europe and Russia, as well as central committee members of parties abroad, will not recognize the Far Eastern Committee's erroneous decisions, and they will have to take responsibility for their own erroneous ideas.

The Far Eastern Committee certainly did not want its bloodshed and sacrifice to result in such an outcome. The three members of the Russian Social Democratic Party finally shifted their attention from how to adjust the distribution of postwar interests between China and Russia to the ideological differences between the Social Democratic Party and the Workers' Party, or more precisely, whether the Bolshevik faction's propositions had a major ideological conflict with the Workers' Party.

Although these three Bolsheviks still considered the Bolsheviks as part of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party and tried to bridge the differences between the Bolshevik and Menshevik factions, they still tended to use some Bolshevik ideas to guide the entire party group. Although Bolshevikism had not yet been put into practice, the framework of this ideology had already begun to take shape, and the Bolsheviks began to get used to calling themselves Bolsheviks.

The questions Lin Xinyi raised to them essentially highlighted the need for the Bolsheviks to transform from factions within the party into a unified ideology and direction. Only after Bolshevikism was established could cooperation between the Labor Party and the Social Democratic Party have a solid ideological foundation. After speaking with Lin Xinyi, Babushkin also discovered that, aside from the principle of national self-determination which he was uncertain about, most of the Bolsheviks' supported positions aligned with the Labor Party's ideology.

Lin Xinyi finally spoke frankly to the three Russians: "Since you are undecided, why don't you send a telegram to Comrade Lenin? I believe that Comrade Lenin's judgment is in line with the interests of the Russian proletariat and will certainly be supported by your party. What we want now is simply for the Russian proletariat to correctly understand what its own interests truly are..."

Chapter 512 in London

Yang Dusheng initially felt that the alliance between the Chinese and Russian proletarians advocated by Comrades Tian Junyi and Lin Feng was weak. Since the Opium War, this was the first time that the Chinese army had defended the country outside its own territory. Even if they did not retaliate against the Russians, they should at least make the Russians admit defeat and make war reparations to China. That would be more satisfying.

However, Yang Dusheng felt that Lin Feng's remarks after the talks were too harsh, and he worried that the Russians would not be able to tolerate Lin Feng's views, causing the negotiations to break down. Although China had won the current war, he also knew that China was not capable of continuing the war, and Russia was not China's only enemy. Therefore, peace was an inevitable choice for China, and he also did not want the negotiations to break down.

So after the Russians left at the end of the meeting, Yang Dusheng couldn't help but express his concerns to Lin Xinyi, "Comrade Lin Feng, aren't you worried that they will be angered by your outspoken support for the independence of ethnic minorities within Russia?"

While tidying up his notes on the table, Lin Xinyi replied without looking up: "First of all, the proletariat neither does nor needs to hide its views, because we always represent the interests of the broadest masses of people. A true proletariat will not feel that it has the right to oppress other proletarians, even if there are differences in ethnicity or country between them."

Secondly, this negotiation is a joint communication between the Chinese and Russian people. We must not only determine whether we represent the Chinese people, but also whether the other side represents the Russian people. If they deny this, then the negotiation becomes meaningless.

We can unite with other classes or forces to fight against a common enemy, but we cannot unite with other classes or forces to oppress the proletariat. This is the most fundamental difference between a proletarian-led united front and a bourgeois-led reactionary alliance. We must not forget whose interests we stand here on behalf of.

Yang Dusheng fell silent for a moment. He realized that he had underestimated the vision of Tian Junyi and Lin Feng. He often viewed issues from the perspective of the Party, the nation, and the country, and rarely from the perspective of the proletariat. He always felt that the proletariat in China was illusory, far less real than the Party, the nation, and the country. However, judging from today's talks, the proletariat is indeed a very real force.

As Yang Dusheng reflected on his overly superficial views of the proletariat, the three Russians who returned to their lodgings also reflected on the day's talks.

The Russians were staying not far from the meeting place, which was located within the Workers' Party Provincial Committee's guesthouse, where they were staying. The guesthouse was situated on the shore of a lake in the northeast corner of the city. Several small buildings had been built along the western bank of the lake, and paddy fields lay on the opposite bank, creating a very tranquil environment.

Kurnatovsky, Babushkin, and Balansky sat in a gazebo by the lake, where the view was wide open and it was easy to see others approaching, making it safer for them to have a secret conversation than in a room.

Kurnatovsky was still deeply troubled by the meeting that morning. He said to his two companions, "The Chinese are trying to threaten us. They are as greedy as the Tsar, just looking for an excuse to demand land from us, not wanting to help us out of class friendship."

They don't seem like a proletarian party to me; they seem more like a party of nationalists. If we compromise, the Chinese will inevitably demand the abrogation of the numerous border treaties signed with the Tsarist government, and may even demand the restoration of the border between the two countries as stipulated in the Treaty of Nerchinsk. Then, are we really going to hand over the Russian people on those lands to the Chinese?

Baransky frowned and said, "Of course, we can't hand over the Russians in the Far East to the Chinese to rule; we wouldn't be able to explain that back home. For our country, the most valuable places in the Far East are actually Primorsky Krai and Sakhalin Island, which are the gateways to the Pacific Ocean. Losing these two regions would be very harmful to the economy of the Far East, Siberia, and Central Asia."

If we can preserve the Chinese Eastern Railway and the Primorsky Krai province, then handing over the Amur province and Sakhalin Island to China and Japan would be acceptable. For the Republic of Chita, if this domestic revolution truly fails, then the Chinese Eastern Railway and the Primorsky Krai province will become the republic's lifeline; without this railway line and access to the sea, we cannot survive.

Babushkin frowned as he pondered. He knew his two companions had valid points, but he wasn't particularly concerned about the survival of the Chita Republic. He saw it as merely a component of the Russian Revolution, and his real aim was to use it as a base to launch attacks on Europe and Russia, ultimately completing the revolution.

However, after taking the Chita region, he discovered that the road to the west was blocked by the Tsar's army, and hundreds of thousands of Tsarist Russian troops in Manchuria threatened the existence of the Chita Republic. Therefore, he persuaded everyone to advocate cooperation with the Chinese, with the purpose of cooperation still being the success of the Russian Revolution.

But today's meeting made him begin to doubt whether the revolution could succeed. While his two companions were still preoccupied with the Chinese desire for Russian territory, Babushkin focused his attention on one question: what would Russia do if the revolution failed?

He finally spoke up, interrupting his two companions' complaints, saying, "The border issue between us and China is not an important matter right now. The most important thing is our revolution. If our revolution fails, will the agreement we reached with the Chinese still stand?"

Comrade Lin said a lot today, and I think one thing he said was truly correct: we should report our situation here to Comrade Lenin, especially the Chinese comrades' assessment of the failure of our revolution. I think we should let Comrade Lenin take this as a reference.

Previously, we were limited by conditions and found it difficult to contact Comrade Lenin. However, communication with Europe is relatively convenient from here. I think we should send a telegram to Comrade Lenin. Baransky, you and I will go to send the telegram. Kurnatovsky, you make a detailed record of today's meeting. If Comrade Lenin needs it, you can mail it to him later…”

On September 26, after some maneuvering, a Bolshevik delivered a telegram signed by Babushkin to Lenin's residence on Tottenhamcourt Road. There, Lenin and his wife disguised themselves as a German couple.

Although Babushkin had tried his best to condense the wording, the telegram still exceeded 2000 words, making it a truly long telegram. When Lenin received the telegram, he was discussing selected articles for the Proletarian newspaper with Vorovsky and Lunacharsky. After reading the telegram, he fell into deep thought.

Vorovsky and Lunacharsky read the telegram, and the latter couldn't help but say with some dissatisfaction: "Have Babushkin and the others been intimidated by the Chinese? Few of those Chinese have even been to Russia. What makes them so sure that our revolution will fail? We don't even know if this Workers' Party truly represents the proletariat."

Vorovsky, however, said more cautiously: "I don't think the Chinese are trying to scare Babushkin. They seem to firmly believe that an imperialist war in Europe is inevitable, so Britain and France will spare no expense to save the Tsarist government, thus giving Britain and France a good ally in dealing with Germany."

Of course, I disagree with the Chinese assessment. I think their view of the Russian Revolution is overly pessimistic. They seem to underestimate the power of the Russian proletariat and also the consciousness of the European proletariat. I don't believe that the proletariat in various European countries would kill each other for the interests of the king and the bourgeoisie; they would certainly have prevented the war.

Lenin quickly waved his hand, interrupting their discussion, and said, "No, no, dear Vorovsky, we cannot arbitrarily deny that the situation our Chinese comrade is talking about will not occur. The war crisis caused by the Moroccan crisis has already proven that the British and French proletariat may meet the German proletariat on the battlefield for the interests of the bourgeoisie. We should prevent this from happening, not deny the possibility of it."

Comrade Lunacharsky, although the Chinese Workers' Party is still some distance from scientific socialism, judging from their revolutionary program regarding land, they simply lack a proper understanding of the complete theory of scientific socialism, rather than opposing it. They claim to represent the interests of the Chinese proletariat, which I see as perfectly acceptable, unless they later deviate from the path of scientific socialism.

Vorovsky and Lunacharsky both turned their attention to Lenin with some doubt. After the Second Congress of the Party, the Party officially split into the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. Although the Bolsheviks gained more support among local groups and workers, the Mensheviks still won in the central organs of the Party, especially in gaining control of the central organ newspaper, Iskander.

Although Lenin quickly announced the establishment of *Vorgeline*, declaring it the official organ of the Bolsheviks and breaking with the New Scinda (the Islamic Party), he still could not change the enormous influence *Scinda* had accumulated among the working class. Even though workers who had read Lenin's articles felt he was correct, they still habitually relied on *Scinda* to learn about socialist theory and the workers' movement.

Therefore, Lenin did not gain any advantage within the party in the past three years. This is also why the debates between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks were all ideological, which ordinary workers found difficult to understand and felt had little to do with them, so they did not express their opinions.

The outbreak of the Far Eastern War and the defeat of the Russian army intensified social contradictions within the country. The workers' and peasants' movement began to spread throughout Russia. The proletariat urgently needed a revolutionary theory to guide revolutionary practice, and the ideological struggle between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks began to intensify.

Lenin, who had advocated for the separation of the party's central organs from the party over the past three years, also believed that the party should temporarily reconcile because it needed to join the Russian Revolution, guide the proletariat in seizing power, and overthrow the Tsarist autocracy. Lenin proposed convening the Third Party Congress to discuss revolutionary issues such as armed struggle.

However, the Mensheviks objected at this point. They believed that for the past three years, it had been the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, who had been splitting the party. Therefore, to bridge the division within the party, Lenin should abandon his erroneous ideas and obey the decisions of the party's central organs.

However, the central organs of the Mensheviks did not fully support armed struggle and did not agree with joining the provisional revolutionary governments in various places. They believed that this would expose the party's strength and thus be suppressed by the Tsarist government, causing losses to the party and the proletariat.

A large number of Mensheviks advocated supporting the bourgeois democrats and pursuing a constitutional monarchy. They believed that the Russian bourgeoisie was far more powerful than the working class and could also receive support from foreign bourgeois groups; therefore, only the bourgeoisie could stand against the Tsar and his army.

Lenin vehemently opposed this erroneous proposition by the Mensheviks, ultimately convening the Third Party Congress in London with only Bolshevik representatives, and publicly announcing the Mensheviks' actions to split the party. The Mensheviks, in turn, held their Third Congress in Geneva and denied the legitimacy of the London Congress.

What puzzled Vorovsky and Lunacharsky was why Lenin, who opposed the Mensheviks' pessimistic and disillusioned stance on the Russian Revolution, would agree with the Chinese assessment that the Russian Revolution was doomed to fail.

Chapter 513 The Perfection of Leninism

Lenin quickly noticed Vorovsky and Lunacharsky's confusion, and he had to explain, "The Chinese comrades do not believe that the Russian Revolution is bound to fail, but rather emphasize that the Russian Revolution without the leadership of the proletariat is bound to fail. So who is preventing the proletariat from leading the Russian Revolution? It is precisely those opportunists who claim that the proletariat is incapable of leading the revolution."

It is precisely because of the loss of proletarian leadership that the widespread worker and peasant uprisings throughout the country have failed to unite into a unified revolutionary force to overthrow the Tsarist autocracy. If we want to win the revolution, we must first gain the proletariat's leadership, rather than passively watching the spontaneous uprisings of workers and peasants unfold, hoping the Tsarist government will collapse on its own, and then taking over Russia.

Lenin was describing the views of the bourgeois democrats and socialist democrats on this revolution. They did not want to expose themselves in the revolution and thus be targeted by the Tsarist government, but they hoped that the spontaneous uprising of workers and peasants would shake the rule of the Tsarist government, causing it to make political concessions and hand over political power to them. This is the opportunity that opportunists emphasized.

Since the Bolsheviks held their Third Congress in London, Lenin had been fighting against these opportunists. In Lenin's view, the telegram from Babushkin was the best rebuttal to the opportunists.

Vorovsky and Lunacharsky then realized that it wasn't that they couldn't see the telegram's content was favorable to the London Conference resolutions, but rather that they hadn't initially regarded the Chinese Workers' Party as a socialist party, nor had they connected the Chinese revolution with the European revolutions, since the revolution that broke out in China wasn't so obvious.

The assertion that the Chinese Workers' Party was leading a revolution in China was only recognized by Lenin and others after the Workers' Party announced its land revolution program, nearly ten months after the Wuhan Mutiny. Before that, European assessments of the Chinese Workers' Party were largely similar to those of Eastern nationalists influenced by Western civilization, attempting to transform their country according to Western standards.

Even after the Workers' Party published its land revolution program, European social democrats did not, like Lenin, judge it to be a social democratic party representing the proletariat. They felt that China did not have a proletariat, or that the Chinese proletariat was not yet a political force. After all, the Boxer Rebellion did not exhibit proletarian characteristics, and it was impossible for Chinese peasants to evolve to proletarian consciousness in just a few years.

Therefore, the Labour Party is very similar to a political force combining peasants and the bourgeoisie. Such small parties are not uncommon in Europe. Their main political demands actually revolve around the interests of peasants. Although they have accepted some socialist ideas of equality, the purpose of accepting these ideas is to defend the private land ownership of peasants, not to achieve socialism.

This revolution is actually more akin to the transformation of old feudal landlords into capitalist farm owners, and is completely different from the proletarian revolution expected by socialists. Vorovsky and Lunacharsky naturally would not associate this revolution with the European revolution or the Russian revolution, which is the basis for their dismissive judgment of the Workers' Party's propositions.

However, if the Workers' Party is considered a member of a socialist party, then the Wuhan Workers', Peasants' and Soldiers' Soviet regime led by the Workers' Party has become the only surviving proletarian regime. This proletarian regime is not only thriving now, but may even go further and establish a state of proletarian dictatorship.

For European socialists, the voice of the Workers' Party carried significant weight. After all, the Workers' Party had taken a major step forward in the practice of the dictatorship of the proletariat and had survived the Paris Commune. From this perspective, the Workers' Party's assessment of the failure of the Russian Revolution was essentially a piece of advice from a proletarian party that had already achieved initial victories to the Russian proletariat, which was highly politically significant, especially for the Russian Social Democratic Party, which was mired in internal divisions.

After taking a deep breath, Vorovsky suggested to Lenin, "Or we should publish Babushkin's telegram in the next issue of Proletarian Newspaper, which would be a powerful critique of those opportunists who are still hoping for the bourgeoisie."

Lenin nodded and said, “That’s exactly what I wanted to say. I also want to publish a commentary explaining that the Chinese comrades are already ahead of us, at least in the practice of the revolution. If we cannot quickly enable the working class to play a leading role in the revolution, then this revolution will be on the verge of failure. The failure of this revolution will not lie in how powerful the Tsar's autocratic forces are, but in the weakness of our internal opportunists, which has caused the revolution to lose unified leadership and thus fail…”

After listening to the two men's comments on Babushkin's telegram, Lunacharsky suddenly thought of a question and asked Lenin: "Should we also publish the principle of national self-determination in the telegram? Wouldn't that distract from the party's discussion on the proletariat's leadership of the revolution?"

Standing by the desk, one hand in his pocket, Lenin replied without hesitation: "Of course it should be published as well. China, like Russia, is a multi-ethnic country under a monarchical autocracy. Just as Tsarist Russia was a prison for all nationalities, China is also a great prison that imprisons all nationalities."

Since our Chinese comrades can openly and frankly discuss the issue of national self-determination, why can't we? At the Second National Congress of the Communist Party of China, the Party Program we adopted included the principle of national self-determination. If we were to avoid discussing this now, it would be tantamount to betraying our own political ideals, and the proletariat of China and Russia would be unable to achieve mutual trust.

Lenin paused for a moment, pondered, and said to the two comrades, "We should thank the Chinese comrades; their insistence on the principle of national self-determination has, in turn, upheld the theory of the dictatorship of the proletariat."

In the past, we have given more consideration to the political demands of the urban working class, while neglecting the political and economic demands of various ethnic groups in a multi-ethnic country. For example, a multi-ethnic country like China has not yet entered the industrial age like Europe, and its national economy mainly relies on agriculture. This means that land is of great significance to an agricultural country like China.

Therefore, ethnic conflicts in China often revolve around struggles over land. These ethnic groups fight for land to gain the right to survival, not to acquire more wealth, which differs from the situation in Europe and the United States. In Europe and the United States, ethnic self-determination primarily focuses on political and cultural independence, with relatively less emphasis on economic matters.

Therefore, in our view, as long as the dictatorship of the proletariat is established, the conditions for national self-determination will naturally be met. However, in the eyes of our Chinese comrades, national self-determination and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat go hand in hand; there is no question of which comes first.

I believe the Chinese comrades' viewpoint is correct. Only by placing national self-determination and the dictatorship of the proletariat on an equal footing will the non-Slavic peoples, who constitute 57 percent of Russia, join us in overthrowing the Tsarist autocracy. Opportunists believe that after liberating the Slavic peoples, they can grant freedom to the non-Slavic peoples, which is clearly inconsistent with the objective laws of class struggle…”

The emergence of the Chinese Workers' Party led Lenin to focus his attention slightly on revolutionary issues outside Europe. The Workers' Party's theory on the principle of national self-determination was indeed more progressive than that of European socialists and more aligned with his views on the national question. However, the European proletariat had not yet become the dominant force in the European revolution, so he was more concerned with mobilizing the proletariat and had little time to devote to other issues.

This Russian revolution was another revolutionary practice of the European proletariat after the Paris Commune. As a relatively backward imperialist country in Europe and a multi-ethnic country, Russia began to face the national question during this revolution.

The persecution of Jews in Odessa transformed into a joint worker-peasant uprising, which was a spontaneous proletarian revolutionary practice of correcting national contradictions. Although this revolutionary practice had not yet yielded any experience that could be elevated to part of the theory of proletarian revolution, some professional proletarian revolutionaries had already recognized that nationalism was an obstacle to the proletarian revolution.

Lenin's praise of the Chinese revolution as being ahead was not a compliment, but a statement of fact. The Workers' Party's insistence on the principle of national self-determination made Lenin realize that the Workers' Party was now facing and wanted to resolve the national contradictions faced by the proletarian regime after the revolution, which was precisely the problem that the European proletariat had not yet addressed, because the proletarian revolution in Europe had not yet reached this stage.

Although Lenin incorporated the principle of national self-determination into the party program at the Second Party Congress, this principle was actually quite vague and purely a theoretical concept. The Workers' Party, on the other hand, was turning this principle of national self-determination into practical activities, which filled the gap in the Bolsheviks' practice of the principle of national self-determination and greatly advanced Bolshevism.

While Lunacharsky was still pondering whether publishing the Workers' Party's principle of national self-determination would further exacerbate the party's internal divisions, Lenin had already vaguely envisioned a completely new model of inter-national relations after the success of the revolution. This model of equal relations among nations was unprecedented and represented the advanced nature of scientific socialism.

Babushkin's telegram provided the Bolsheviks with a powerful weapon and prompted Lenin to rethink the direction of the Russian and world revolutions. He believed that while the Chinese Workers' Party's seizure of power in China would deal a heavy blow to imperialism, it would not reverse the balance of power between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The center of the proletarian revolution remained in Europe, and only a proletarian victory in Europe could end imperialist rule over the world.

Of course, the victory of the Chinese revolution would provide favorable support for the Russian revolution, and the victory of the Russian revolution would shake the rule of Western European capitalism. Therefore, reaching a mutually supportive alliance with the Workers' Party was extremely important for the Russian proletariat. Lenin quickly telegraphed his thoughts to Babushkin.

Chapter 514 Strengthening Theoretical Research

After returning to Wuhan, Lin Xinyi did not want to get too involved in practical work, because he knew that he would soon return to Japan. Interfering in the practical work in Wuhan would only make things half-hearted. In Wuhan, he only wanted to promote the alliance between the Chinese and Russian proletariat, improve the Asian alliance institutions, and then examine the political, economic and cultural changes in Wuhan before offering some suggestions on the general direction.

However, as his daily activities in Wuhan began to stabilize, a lot of work naturally came up in front of him. After all, Tian Junyi and others had been advancing along the revolutionary path he envisioned for the past few years, and they had encountered many problems in practice. Therefore, they naturally took advantage of his time in Wuhan to bring these problems to his attention.

As he put forward different views or solutions to these problems, he naturally attracted more attention. Ultimately, although the Labour Party was a socialist party established according to the principle of centralism, its members' understanding of socialist theory was indeed rather superficial, especially regarding the path after the establishment of a proletarian dictatorship. Many people were unclear about the direction, because socialist studies in Europe had not yet reached the practical stage, and the nascent socialist studies in the East were naturally even more bewildered.

However, for a time traveler, these problems had all occurred in history. He only needed to provide a general direction. Before the party's centralized system developed into a leadership-centralized system, the party's work naturally fell into Lin Xinyi's hands. In the last few days of September, Lin Xinyi suddenly found that most of his energy was tied up in an increasing amount of unexpected work. From industrial planning and development, financial and credit policies, and the handling of foreign relations, to party organization and personnel, all were being referred to him by various committee members for their advice.

On the evening of October 1, at the regular meeting of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, Lin Xinyi made suggestions to the members regarding his work. He said, “In the past few days, various ministries and commissions have forwarded many issues to my office. After studying them, I found that most of the issues were actually already solved by the members themselves. The main reason they forwarded them to me was that they were unsure whether their solutions would lead to new problems.”

I believe this is not because the committee members are less capable than I am, but rather because they haven't found a basis for their understanding of socialist theory that aligns with their own thinking. Simply put, the Party's theoretical research has lagged behind its practical application. Although our Party was formed based on shared political interests, it is primarily guided by socialist theory, not by daily practical activities.

Why are there such big differences between proletarian political parties and bourgeois political parties? Because the goal of the proletariat is to transform the world and establish a new world that conforms to proletarian values. We need to discard many old traditions that do not conform to proletarian values. However, the goal of the bourgeoisie is to ensure that they always occupy the top position in the world. They do not need a new world, so they only need to act in accordance with their own interests. Their motivation to transform the world comes from maintaining their position at the top of the world so as not to fall.

Therefore, for the proletariat, socialist theory, which guides the practice of proletarian revolution, is extremely important, because without this theory, the practice of proletarian revolution is impossible. So where does this theory come from? It needs to be summarized from practice, and it also needs to be reflected upon and summarized by others.

Without Marx's *Capital*, the proletariat would not have understood the source of the bourgeoisie's exploitation of them, nor would they have recognized their enemy. However, Marx and Engels did not outline a revolutionary theory for overthrowing the bourgeoisie, which is why the Paris Commune failed.

However, the failure of the Paris Commune taught the proletariat a harsh lesson: the bourgeoisie would unite with all reactionary forces to eliminate the proletarian revolution. Without a unified and centralized revolutionary government and the support of the broad masses of awakened people, even a proletarian revolution that represents a better future can be strangled by united reactionary forces.

This is why we need to establish a centralized proletarian party. To awaken the class consciousness of the broadest masses of people, we must be guided by correct proletarian theory. When the broad masses of people awaken to their class identity and devote themselves to class struggle, then the reactionary forces will quickly collapse.

What we currently lack is a complete proletarian theory to guide our progress. We need to study a proletarian theory suitable for China, as well as a proletarian theory suitable for Japan, Korea, Vietnam, India, and even the rest of the world, because the bourgeoisie cannot coexist peacefully with the proletariat. The bourgeoisie can survive by exploiting the proletariat. As long as the bourgeoisie exists in a place, it will eventually make a comeback.