Theory of the Transition to Socialism in Economically Backward Countries

The theory of Russia’s transition to socialism under the conditions of inheriting an underdeveloped capitalism and under the conditions of predominance of small farmers.

After the victory of the October Revolution, the Bolshevik party changed from persuading Russia, seizing Russia, and then managing Russia. In the spring of 1918, Lenin put forward the plan of building the foundation of socialist economy in “The Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government”, and envisioned to transform private enterprises of great significance to the national economy and people’s livelihood into state-owned enterprises. The rest of the private enterprises are transformed by means of state statistics and supervision, gradually transitioning to a new socialist relationship and creating a social structure and labor productivity higher than that of capitalism. Due to the direct armed intervention of several imperialist states and the domestic counter revolutionary rebellion, Lenin’s idea of “gradual transition” to socialism could not be realized.

From the summer of 1918 to the beginning of 1921, the Soviet government was forced to practice wartime communism. In March 1921, the Tenth Congress of the Russian Communist Party (B) decided to replace the system of collecting surplus grain forcedly from farmers with grain tax (tax-in-kind), Lenin advocated－ on the basis of the practical experience and lessons of Russian socialist transformation in Russia, which was then relatively backward in economy, should take a path different from that of developed countries in its transition to socialism. He clearly proposed that the special “wartime communism” had proven to be mistake, now Russia should give up trying to transit “directly” into socialism, instead Russia should follow “a roundabout way” in transiting to socialism, he also analyzed the new economic policy (NEP) should be revised according to the “roundabout way” strategy, i.e., which included building socialism through new economic ways.

Lenin also put forward that communism equals the Soviet regime plus the electrification (the then newest technology in the world) of the whole country, which is the political premise and material basis for the transition to socialism. The political system of Russia was more advanced than that of Britain or Germany, but it lagged behind the most backward countries of Western Europe in terms of civilization and material production and the level of productive forces. Only by putting the economic work in the first place and realizing the electrification of the whole country, could Russia turn the small-scale peasant economic foundation into a large-scale industrial economic foundation, transform the whole national economy on the basis of acquiring latest achievements of modern science and technology, and complete the transformation that can dig out the old roots of capitalism. This would certainly be a long and arduous path. Lenin called this “Electrification Plan Covering Whole Russia” as the “second party platform” of Russian communists.

Lenin pointed out that the major significance of the NEP lies in finding the “combination of the new economy with the peasant economy” that Russia started to build. In Russia, where small-scale farmers economy was dominant, changing the system of collecting surplus grain forcedly from the peasants to grain tax was a compromise to farmers, including allowing the free trade of surplus grain. To establish a normal economic relationship between industry and agriculture, it was necessary to preserve and develop commodity production and commodity exchange by currency. In this way the power of the proletariat aimed to establish an economic alliance between the proletariat and the peasants by means of commodity, currency and market methods, and it was absolutely necessary to consolidate the worker-peasant alliance which was on the verge of bankruptcy due to the former war communism policy, as well as communists needed to attract millions of peasants to participate in socialist construction. Lenin regarded the domestic commerce activity under the regulation of the state as “a link that to be grasped with all our might”, and criticized the “sentimental socialism” which instinctively despised commerce.

Lenin also pointed out that the economically backward countries should not implement direct transition from small production to socialism. As a spontaneous product of small production and exchange, allowing the development of capitalism in a certain range would be inevitable. Therefore, we should make use of capitalism, especially state capitalism, as an intermediate link in the transition to socialism and as a means to improve productive forces. Lenin proposed for the first time that the state capitalism under the dictatorship of the proletariat is the capitalism whose scope is defined and regulated by the proletariat.

Lenin proposed four main forms of state capitalism for Russia: the concessions and privileges system; co-operative system; the third form was the state enlisting the capitalist as a merchant and pays him a definite commission on the sale of state goods and on the purchase of the produce of the small producer; fourth system was that the state leasing to the capitalist entrepreneur an industrial establishment, oilfields, forest tracts, land, so forth.

The purpose of the proletariat’s use of state capitalism was to strengthen large-scale production against small-scale production, to strengthen advanced production against backward production, and aimed to learn how to operate and manage the economy and the enterprises, thus win in severe examinations. Lenin estimated that the implementation of state capitalism would inevitably strengthen the influence of capitalism to a degree, and the state power of the proletariat should severely punish economic crimes and resist the corrosion effects of capitalism. He also insisted that only by using capitalism could socialism be established, instead of abstractly putting “capitalism” against “socialism”, communists should handle this opposition concretely and use capitalism in favor of building socialism. In the spring of 1918, Lenin called for shifting the focus of the government to economic and cultural work. Lenin refuted the foreign arguments that building socialism needs a definite level of culture, they argued that since Russia was backward and uncivilized, it could not proceed towards socialism. Lenin wrote: “if a definite level of culture is required for the building of socialism… Why cannot we began by first achieving the prerequisites for that definite level of culture in a revolutionary way”. In January 1923, in his “On Cooperation” he also put forward his thoughts on “cultural revolution” in Russia. Lenin said: now the emphasis is changing and shifting to peaceful, organizational, “cultural” work. I should say that emphasis is shifting to educational work… the emphasis in our work is certainly shifting to education. For Lenin, in Russia the political and social revolution preceded the cultural revolution, but now Russia should undertake this very enterprise of cultural revolution; but this undertaking does not purely possess a purely cultural character, but must also have a material character, because in order to be cultured, Russia must achieve a certain development of the material means of production, it must have a certain material base.

After completing the political and social revolution, Russia could only proceed towards socialism by eliminating illiteracy, popularizing education, and improving their scientific and cultural level, socialist consciousness, only by such a cultural revolution can the small farmers transform their old psychology and habits, grasp the benefits of cooperatives for them.

We should reform the party and state organs, overcome corruption and bureaucracy, and improve the level of leadership and management. To make the intellectuals study again, transform consciously, criticize and inherit the cultural heritage, construct socialist culture and cultivate new intellectuals, the whole of Russia will be transformed from a peasant, a peasant and a poor horse to a large machine industry, electrification and modern science and technology.

All these changes that will nurture the material and spiritual wealth of the people should be the main tasks of the cultural revolution. Lenin, lastly pointed out: our cultural revolution would now suffice to make our country a completely socialist country. Lenin’s above transition theory and measures reflect the characteristics of Russia and the East, has greatly enrich Marx and Engels’ transition theory, has an international significance, as well.