500
PARTISAN REVIEW
turn to Christ" or "the return to Kant," the "return to Rome or
Jerusalem"-we will find that these returns always mark an original
departure in doctrine and movement, sometimes in opposition to the
actual intentions of the innovators.
What is for present purposes more to the point, is that even
Lenin's slogan "Back to Marx," which he borrowed from Rosa Lux–
emburg, marked a tremendous revision in what until then had been
understood by Marxism. Lenin's extremely voluntaristic
What's to
be Done?,
although too simply characterized by some critics as
spawned under Bakuninistic and Blanquist influence, was certainly
not the Marxism of Kautsky and Plekhanov. What Lenin did to
Marx in the name of Marxism, Stalin in lesser measure did to Lenin
in the name of Leninism. This raises the question of the extent to
which it will be possible in the current atmosphere of ambiguous de–
valuation of Stalin to initiate in satellite countries even more far–
reaching departures in Communist theory and practice by "return–
ing" to Marx. I am not here assuming that what may be possible
in the satellite countries can be mechanically extrapolated to devel–
opments within the Soviet Union. This is a different even if related
question.
However we explain it, the historical spectacle of the European
past shows us Christian fighting Christian in the name of "true"
Christianity. It is perhaps hardly an exaggeration to say that had
the West not come to the support of the chameleon Tito when he
was threatened by Stalin, we might have seen Communist fighting
Communist in the name of the principles of "true Communism." Our
problem is: can we disintegrate or transform Communist parties in
satellite countries by heretical reinterpretations of the meaning of
Marx? It is the Communist
parties
we must influence, for the people
are not Communist. Communist regimes lack even the popular sup–
port the Kremlin can command by posing as the defender of Russian
nationalism, for nationalism in all the satellite countries is hostile
to Communism.
Communist theory and practice hang together more closely than
in other ideologies, but it is possible to exaggerate their monolithic
unity. Although adherence to a set of doctrines or better, a set of
formulas, is, and always has been,
de rigueur
for all Communist
parties affiliated with the Kremlin, some variations were permitted
in the road to power--especially
if
they proved successful and were
