* * *¶
Core Argument¶
Chapter Digest: Against the ‘Democratic Revolution’ – A Leninist Polemic¶
This chapter delivers a sharp polemic against the German IKD, accusing them of abandoning the Leninist class criterion for a pre-Leninist theory of ‘democratic’ revolution in post-Hitler Europe. The core argument is that this revisionism, born from proletarian defeats and the isolation of emigration, represents a capitulation to bourgeois democracy. The text insists that in modern society, only the proletariat or the bourgeoisie can rule; the petty bourgeoisie cannot lead independently. The IKD’s call for a vague ‘people’s’ movement is therefore a snare that obscures the class character of the struggle, repeating the catastrophic errors of Stalinism in China and Europe.
The chapter grounds its critique in the Marxist theory of the state, citing Lenin and Trotsky to assert that any transitional regime between bourgeois and proletarian dictatorship is impossible. Democratic demands are merely transitional weapons for the proletariat, not the content of a separate revolution. The so-called ‘democratic’ phase is, in fact, a preventative democratic counter-revolution. The bourgeoisie, unable to rule by fascist or military dictatorship, switches to bourgeois democratic manipulation via its Stalino-reformist agents. The text draws a historical parallel to 1918 Germany, where Social Democracy strangled a proletarian revolution under the slogan of ‘democracy’. It argues that Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin feared proletarian revolution, not democratic revolution.
The chapter contends that the objective conditions for proletarian revolution are present across Europe, as Lenin defined them; only the subjective condition—the revolutionary party—is lacking. The resistance movement was a class struggle, and ‘unconditional support’ for it means backing imperialist or Stalinist leadership. The struggle against foreign oppression can only be waged as a class struggle. In Germany, appealing to the traditions of 1813 and 1848 is reactionary; the tradition of the 1918 proletarian revolution must be upheld. The struggle for German national liberation can only be a struggle against the German bourgeoisie, for the proletarian revolution. The epoch remains one of proletarian revolution and bourgeois counter-revolution, not democratic revolution. The ‘Three Theses’ orientation towards a ‘democratic’ revolution is backward and capitulates to nationalism.