Premium Essay

Leninism And Communism

Submitted By
Words 1174
Pages 5
Considering the grand narrative established by Lenin’s interpretation of Marx’s doctrine is imperative for disseminating what is sacred and what is profane in Leninism. He observed from Marx’s doctrine that all of history has been a class struggle between the oppressors—the bourgeoisie—and those being oppressed—the proletariat. (195) The goal of Communism was to engage in class warfare and uproot the “tyranny and despotism” the proletariat faced. The Bolshevik leader stated that Communism is based on, “the scientific, and moreover, materialist world-outlook” which operated through anti-capitalist and anti-religious propaganda, as well as revolution, in order to achieve a utopia. (196) With this in mind, the sacred aspects of Leninism become …show more content…
In fact, Lenin had no issue with religious people joining the Party, so long as they didn’t talk about or practice their faith. However, Lenin did consider there to be a singular initiation rite: becoming class-conscious. Lenin wrote incessantly about the class-conscious worker because it was only through this self-realization that they may be baptized into the Party. From that point, they could understand grand narrative of Communism and partake in movement against evil—the bourgeoisie. Durkheim also considered the Church to be an essential part of religion. Lenin and the Bolsheviks didn’t go to temple on Saturdays, nor did they attend Sunday morning mass. The Church of Leninism took another, more revolutionary form. Instead of priests distributing Eucharists to the masses, the Bolsheviks would distribute propaganda pamphlets to the proletariat. Instead of reciting psalms in a cathedral, the Bolsheviks would shout versus of Marx in the streets. Instead of partaking in a tradition, the Bolsheviks would strike and revolt. All of these actions, while not necessarily typically of a faith, categorize Leninism as a religion because their were people gathered practicing their belief system. This wasn’t a small movement either. In 1914, just two years after Lenin became the head of the Bolshevik Party, 647,000 class-conscious workers were involved in political strikes in Russia. The political strikes tested the strength of Lenin’s Church and it rose above the Russian government. These political strikes provided Lenin and the Bolsheviks with opportunities to share their beliefs, which withstood substantial pressure. While these were larger events, the Bolsheviks engaged in religious activities very frequently. For example, Lenin’s speeches were attended by thousands. At these events, the Bolsheviks listened to their prophet and discussed their beliefs, very similar to an actual

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Marxism-Leninism

...Marxism-Leninism is a political way to realize the ideology of Marxism. Leninism is a derivative of Marxism. Leninism follows the general principles of Marxism, but it show some differences between them when it comes to their ideologies. Moreover, Leninism was altered to better fit the Russia’s October Revolution and also suitable for the early 20th century. Marx only worked in theories, so it seems that the system was no real meaning since in his minds he already made perfect sense. According to Marxist analysis, as the contradiction becomes apparent to the proletariat, social unrest between the two antagonistic classes intensifies. Thence there will culminate in a social revolution to resolve this problem. Based upon a materialist interpretation of historical development, history moved on an inevitable path from hunter-gatherer to slavery, to feudalism to capitalism to imperialism to socialism and finally achieve communism. Marxism stated that each of these stages evolve into the next stage when they were fully mature and through a process which is class struggle. In Lenin opinion, Russia was imperialist and barely capitalist, Although it had only just shaken off feudalism, this stage could be telescoped or shortened to allow for a socialist revolution. Other major revision was that Marx claimed that the peasantry was always conservative and would support the existing regime. Lenin tried to put Marx's theories into practice. Leninism is a type of political system...

Words: 455 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Socialism And Communism: The Rise Of Marxism

...The Rise of Socialism and Communism: Marxism “The classes and the races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way. They must, perish in the revolutionary holocaust” (Karl Marx). Marxism was created in the mid-1800s by two German philosophers named Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Since the beginning of the 21st century Marxism has been making a comeback due to Marxism-Leninism in Asia and Eastern Europe, different morals of the upcoming generation, and due to the fact that it is one of the key components of the Communist style government that is being introduced around the world. Marxism-Leninism was created together in 1929, which was 5 years after Lenin’s death, by Joseph Stalin. Many communist parties today imagine it...

Words: 1502 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Stalin the Red Tsar. How Far Do You Agree with This Judgement?

...Stalin the Red Tsar. How far do you agree with this judgement? Stalin, upon his rise to power in 1929, assured the Russian peoples that he was a dedicated follower of Leninism; often saying that “Lenin is always with us” indicating that he wished to show how similar to Lenin he was going to be in his leadership. Despite this claim, in actual fact there were a number of distinctly Tsarist elements to his leadership. A Tsar is a leader who rules without parliaments in an absolute autocracy, often being resistant to any reforms; maintaining the feudal, peasant-based illiterate society. Furthermore, they were often intrinsically bound with the Russian Orthodox Church as well as being distinctively imperialistic and chauvinistic. To a large degree, Stalin fitted this model, perhaps most notably due to his “top-down” approach to leadership, thus leading to the idea that he was a “Red Tsar”. He did not fit the model fully, though, especially when it came to being anti-reform, where in fact Stalin was all for reform (though not always for the better) and believed in modernising the USSR and, despite his anti-Western stance, was a Westerniser and not a Slavophile. He was also not imperialistic like the Tsarist leaders had been, and knew that people would react badly to Russian cultural imperialism. The belief that Stalin was a Red Tsar perhaps also came from his self-portrayal as a ‘God-like’ figure, and his employment of very traditional tactics of fear and propaganda in his unquestionable...

Words: 1613 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Mao Strategy and Ideology

...agree with this statement to a small extent as to me strategy was as equally as important as ideology was. An ideology is a set of conscious and unconscious ideas that constitute one's goals, expectations, and actions. Strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall aim. From 1927 to 1937 the first civil war began when the kmt, victorious over the warlords, turn against the ccp. From 1937 to 1946 second united front unite against the Japanese. Unlike the earlier forms of Marxism-Leninism in which the urban proletariat was seen as the main source of revolution, and the countryside was largely ignored, Mao focused on the peasantry as a revolutionary force which, he said, could be mobilized by a Communist Party with their knowledge and leadership. The model for this was of course the Chinese Communist rural insurgency of the 1920s and 1930s, which eventually brought the Communist Party of China to power. Furthermore, unlike other forms of Marxism-Leninism in which large-scale industrial development was seen as a positive force, Maoism made all-round rural development the priority. Mao felt that this strategy made sense during the early stages of socialism in a country in which most of the people were peasants. Unlike most other political ideologies, including other socialist and Marxist ones, Maoism contains an integral military doctrine and explicitly connects its political ideology with military strategy. In Maoist thought, "political power comes from the...

Words: 836 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Reasons for Collapse of Ussr

...rulers in the West have always argued that the totalitarian regime created by Stalin and maintained by his heirs was the inevitable consequence of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. The capitalists were greatly assisted in this task by the Stalinists' claim to represent the tradition of Marx and Lenin. The capitalists cynically accepted the Stalinists' description of their hideous police regimes as representing "socialism" in order to prejudice the workers of the West against socialism by identifying it with the denial of democratic freedoms, and to promote the idea that bourgeois parliamentary democracy is the highest embodiment of human freedom. While this bourgeois propaganda campaign certainly succeeded in discrediting Marxism and Leninism among large sections of working people in the imperialist democracies during the long capitalist boom and the Cold War, there remained a sizable component of the working class and the lower middle-class in many imperialist countries that resisted this ideological campaign. However, most of these people continued to have illusions in Stalinism — associating it only with Stalin's autocratic dictatorship, and regarding the more "liberal" bureaucratic regimes that succeeded...

Words: 657 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Glasnost': the Decimation of the Ussr

...Glasnost': The Decimation of the USSR April 16, 2002 I) Since the beginning of mankind the world has been under various ruling powers with only one goal in mind. A) This led to the rise of monarchies with their kings and queens, the socialists with their presidents, and the communists with their tsarist rulers. B) In 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev brought upon the world the idea of Glasnost', which led to the changing of the largest ruling power in the world to a new power benefiting everyone. II) The Former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics before Glasnost'. C) Different styles of Soviet government from the early 1900s up to 1985. 1) Leninism to Stalinism to Khrushchev to Brezhnev. D) Coups and the Great Purge III) What lead to Glasnost' and what it is. E) In 1986, Gorbachev dismayed at the slow process of reform being conducted in the country proposed to the citizens of the USSR and the entire world a two new ideas to help bring reform to the country in a much more radical direction. F) Gorbachev called for a glasnost’ (openness or candor) in the media and culture. IV) Changes within Russia and Foreign changes. G) Banned works and speaking out are no longer dangerous crimes against the state. 2) Criticizing the government led to the formation of a large number of independent nationalistic movements in the USSR. 3) Scholars and scientists are allowed to share their findings with others...

Words: 2288 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

Research Paper On Vladimir Lenin

...Vladimir Lenin was best known for being the founder of the Communist Party of Russia. Lenin was born in Simbirsk, Russian on April 22, 1870. His mother and father were both well educated and his dad was a professor. During his childhood, Lenin was a very gifted and intelligent student. He became fascinated with the studies of Karl Marx and was convinced that the teachings of “Marxism” were used to model the idea of a perfect government. In the year 1917, Lenin and the Bolshevik Party overthrew the Russian government. This takeover is referred to as the Bolshevik Revolution. After taking over the government, Lenin created the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic and appointed himself to be the head of this new government. Upon establishing...

Words: 442 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Impact of the Secret Speech- Khrushchev

...Gobbet 2- Khrusschev’s Secret Speech The Source is an extract of a speech given by Nikita Khrushchev at the Twentieth Party Congress of the Soviet Union on February 25th 1956. Khrushchev served as First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1953 to 1964, and as Chairman of the Council of Ministers, or Premier, from 1958 to 1964. Khrushchev was responsible for the partial de-Stalinization of the Soviet Union, for backing the progress of the world's early space program, and for several relatively liberal reforms in areas of domestic policy. Stalin's political heirs fought for power after his death in 1953, a struggle in which Khrushchev, after several years, emerged triumphant. In 1956, at the Twentieth Party Congress, he delivered the "Secret Speech", vilifying Stalin and ushering in a less repressive era in the USSR. The speech was delivered on the very last day of the Congress, when it was announced that an unscheduled session had been called for the Soviet delegates. Because of the obvious secrecy of the meeting, the speech would have been unknown to those outside the conference, however an Israeli Mossad agent was in secret attendance copying its contents eventually allowing Khrushchev's denouncing of Stalin to be circulated throughout Western media. Although it was not officially published in the Soviet Union until 1988. The speech itself was based on the results of a special party commission known as the Pospelov Commission which was prepared by its...

Words: 1330 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

How Far Did Stalin Destroy Lenin’s Legacy?

...How far did Stalin destroy Lenin’s legacy? Stalin destroyed Lenin’s Legacy: • Stalin created a personal dictatorship, Lenin ruled through the party etc. Stalin was more interested in furthering his own interests... as suggested by the excessive use of the cult of personality etc. • Lenin was against the concept of the cult of personality and personal rule, under Lenin there was much more debate within the party, unlike Stalin’s reign where he forced his policies through with the use of fear or the party machine etc. • It also seems that Stalin was hungry to achieve supreme power right from the word go, using Lenin’s funeral to his own advantage setting himself up as his disciple and also damaging Trotsky’s reputation. • This would suggest that Stalin did not care so much for the creation of a communist state/party policies/welfare of the people etc, but more so his own rise to power. • This is shown by his policies which lay in the centre of the party, he also changed his policies depending on who he needed to destroy next – the left and right. At first he supported the NEP, but when the need to destroy Bukharin and the right arose he turned against it advocating rapid industrialisation, reverting to the left ideology of Zinoviev, Kamenev and Trotsky. • This also shows another discontinuation from Lenin to Stalin – Stalin’s use of terror within the party, Lenin never resorted to killing his comrades/other communists, only exiling Mensheviks etc. Stalin also destroyed...

Words: 551 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Historian

...had to sacrifice a lot to get the Communist utopia Karl Marx foresaw. Despite it being a modification of the official ideology which people refer to as Leninism, it had major flaws which made you question, was Lenin really successful in creating a totalitarian society? Lenin was very successful in creating a totalitarian society; one of his beneficial areas of control was his one party state which was crucial in order to achieve Lenin’s adaptation to Marxism, this would mean the Bolsheviks would have complete control over the state and get rid of all and any opposition to their ideology. Lenin did this by dissolving the constituent assembly which meant a step forward in a totalitarian state by means of no opposition, Lenin made sure it stayed this way by ensuring the ban on factions within the Party as well as using the Cheka to make sure everyone stays in line and does not oppose the new Bolshevik regime. This was effective as it now left the Bolsheviks in complete control in this area. Another reason Lenin was successful was the fact he had control over the economy which is absolutely essential in any Totalitarian regime as controlling the economy meant they have the financial capability needed to maintain and produce a totalitarian society. As well as that, it meant sure that the state controls everything and that communism is stable linking back to the first point of the one party state, that everyone should be controlled by the state to ensure a communist and totalitarian...

Words: 913 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Social Theories

...In a way, communism is an extreme form of socialism. Many countries have dominant socialist political parties but very few are truly communist. In fact, most countries - including staunch capitalist bastions like the U.S. and U.K. - have government programs that borrow from socialist principles. "Socialism" is sometimes used interchangeably with "communism" but the two philosophies have some stark differences. Most notably, while communism is a political system, socialism is primarily an economic system that can exist in various forms under a wide range of political systems. Comparison chart | |Communism |Socialism | |Philosophy |From each according to his ability, to each according to |From each according to his ability, to each according to| | |his needs. Free-access to the articles of consumption is |his contribution. Emphasis on profit being distributed | | |made possible by advances in technology that allow for |among the society or workforce to complement individual | | |super-abundance. |wages/salaries. | |Economic System |The means of production are held in common, negating the |The means of production are owned by public enterprises | | |concept of ownership in...

Words: 3092 - Pages: 13

Premium Essay

Communism vs Capitalism

...Capitalism vs. Communism Throughout history, there have been many systems developed in order to have a better society. Two of the most analyzed, and debated systems that have tired to change an economy for the best are communism, and capitalism. Communism, and capitalism have been compared on many levels, such as why they will or will not work, and which one works better. Throughout this essay I will concentrate on the differences, and similarities of how each operates, along with the benefits, and problems that each of them produces. Both of these economic systems theories came about around the same time, in the late 17th to mid18th centuries. One of the main contributor for capitalism was Adam Smith, writing The Wealth of a Nation in 1776, and Karl Marx for communism publishing the Communist Manifesto in 1848. These both were looked as a manual or guide for achieving such advancements. Communism called for the people to not be selfish and work for the benefits of the community rather for their well being. It asks them to see that what benefits the whole, benefits themselves. Capitalism on the other hand is focused on working for individual growth, and personal ownership to provide wealth for one's self. Communism plans to have a higher power or government control the economy to create a better way of living, by which all goods are equally distributed. As capitalism wants the government to not play a big role in the system, but instead wants it to be up to private ownership...

Words: 1788 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

My Opinion About About Marxism

...progress through class struggle: a conflict between an ownership class that controls production and a proletariat that provides the labour for production. He called capitalism the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie," believing it to be run by the wealthy classes for their own benefit; and he predicted that, like previous socioeconomic systems, capitalism produced internal tensions which would lead to its self-destruction and replacement by a new system: socialism. He argued that under socialism society would be governed by the working class in what he called the "dictatorship of the proletariat", the "workers' state" or "workers' democracy". He believed that socialism would eventually be replaced by a stateless, classless society called communism. Yes it's true that through out human history it's always been the oppressors against the oppressed which in my own opinion no matter what kind of system of government a society practiced there's always going to be oppressors against the oppressed. Life is like a battle field where only the strong and determined can survive and so is the society we live. Even if we all start from one level in life we might all...

Words: 940 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Polarization Of The Cold War Essay

...With policies such as containment and the Red Scare in the US, an official war was avoided, but an arms race greatly escalated tensions. The death of Stalin in 1953, led to the rise of Khrushchev, who began to Destalinize. Despite this, tensions on the international scale, led to continual oppressive regulations in effort to compete with the West. The West feared the spread of the sphere of influence of communism, so they tried to contain it and tensions arose over control of the Third World. Polarization of the Cold War was evident through the formation of NATO and in reaction the Warsaw Pact. The Cuban Missile Crisis almost began a war, however, the Helsinki Accords created some peace on the international scale. Still, internally, especially in satellite states, there was heavy censorship and oppression in an effort to come ahead on the international race for superiority with the United States. While the communist regime later ended under Gorbachev, the effects of the totalitarian rule of Stalin was lasting. Although originally an effort to make everyone equal, it created poverty and allowed the leaders to enforce oppressive...

Words: 984 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Communism vs. Capitalism

...Communism vs. Capitalism   In Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto, he describes the Communists as the party that "fights for the interests of the working class"(136), while in a Capitalist society, the "living person is dependent and has no individuality-----only capital is dependent and has individuality"(84). That is not the case of today's society once you take a closer view at the comparison and contrast of communist Vietnam versus the democratic United States of America through their economy systems, educational systems, judicial systems, and the life style of their citizens in general. In a capitalist, democratic nation such as the U.S., freedom gives us just about everything and anything that the Vietnamese do not have under their communist government. Contrary to what Karl Marx has written in his manifesto, the living people of a capitalist nation (i.e. USA) of today are more independent and possess more individualities than ever. Economic-wise, Americans are the most progressive people in the world. The U.S. government is not directing the flow of its economy, but the individual businesses of its people are. These people have all the rights in the world to improve their businesses, as long as they are conducting them under the legal guidelines of the government. Such freedom in a capitalist society gives the Americans much greater advantages over the Vietnamese in improving economic conditions. When we touch upon the subject of education, only eighty percent...

Words: 1072 - Pages: 5