82
PAR.TISAN REVIEW
long struggle against Stalin - cannot but be affected by what we think
of these theories, both of which Sartre claimed were true, both of which
I hold in important respects are false.
Let me look at the Theory of Permanent Revolution. It consists of
two propositions: l)it is easier to make a revolution against capitalism in
a country where such a revolution could not succeed than in a country
where it might succeed, being on the order of the day, and 2)if made in
a country in which it could not succeed, such a revolution would spread
to a country or countries where it could not be initiated but might have
every chance of success. Now proposition number one was vindicated if
not proved by the October Revolution, which, aimed at capitalism,
took place not in an advanced but in a backward country. The second
proposition was of course not vindicated by the revolution, which did
not spread from Russia to any other country of Europe. And all the
problems of the Soviets: the deliberately imposed famine, the Trotsky–
Stalin controversy, the purges, the crimes of Stalin, followed from the
nontruth of this second proposition of the Theory of Permanent Revo–
lution. What also follows is a possible charge of crime against Lenin
himself He acted finally on the supposition that the Theory of Perma–
nent Revolution was substantially correct; if that theory is false, then the
bloody actions he undertook on the basis of its assumed truth can hardly
be justified.
One more point about this theory. Why could not a revolution
against capitalism take place in a country where it had some chance of
success, why was it
necessary
to start such an action in a country where it
was almost certainly bound to fail? This question the Bolsheviks never
replied to when it was raised by Martov. Moreover, they never consid–
ered what was to be done if the revolution did
not
spread. In not con–
sidering these matters the Bolshevik leaders, Lenin included, are open to
the charge of criminal behavior which Maxim Gorky leveled against
them immediately after their seizure of power in October of 1917.
I have found the two theories on the basis of which Lenin and
Stalin justified their political deeds
to
be invalid, if not completely false.
But this judgment is hardly enough to prove their immorality. If guilty
of crimes, they are to be judged criminals. What follows from the valid–
ity or invalidity of the theories discussed is not whether or not Lenin and
Stalin were guilty of criminal deeds; that they were. What follows from
our judgment of their theories is an answer to a related question: are
their crimes forgivable? Let us suppose for a moment that the theory of
socialism in one country had proved true, the evidence for this being that
the Soviet Union, instead of verging on economic catastrophe today
could offer a higher quality of life to its citizens than obtains in the
