By ERNEST MANDEL*
Lecture given in 1978 in honor of Ernst Bloch
[Presentation by Juarez Guimarães]
This beautiful and informed lecture by Ernst Mandel, delivered in 1978 in honor of the author of The Hope Principle, Ernst Bloch, published in the magazine Viento Sur and translated by José Roberto Silva, must be understood as the foundation of an entire generation of democratic socialists who fought for decades in a period of height of North American hegemony and crystallization and crisis of the Stalinist experience of the USSR.
The resumption of the principle of hope, thought of ontologically as an expression of homo sperans and in the Marxist praxis of transformation, it already places as its horizon the overcoming of determinism in the culture of Marxism (the notion of a certainty that socialism will come as a certain result of the movements of history), of a dogmatic understanding of Marx's work (already thought of as an open and incomplete totality). At the same time, it seeks to critically distance itself from the cultivation of illusions that would not be supported by possibilities inscribed in the class struggle itself.
If in a period in which Keynesian or social liberalism was dominant, the principle of hope for a democratic socialist transformation was formulated by Mandel as an antidote to the reformist accommodations of the capitalist order, in a period of neoliberal dominance it becomes even more necessary in view of the escalation of barbarity that the 21st century has announced in the centers of power of global capitalism. It must be understood as the daily bread that feeds the struggles of resistance to neoliberal capitalism and the fight for fundamental rights, against the ongoing ecological catastrophe.
We must dream: anticipation and hope as categories of historical materialism
From a Marxist perspective, work and advanced communication skills are the two most important aspects of the human being as a social being. Social work is impossible without advanced human and interpersonal communication, including the ability to use structured linguistic tools, to form concepts and to develop consciousness.
As materialists, we know that the capacity for more than rudimentary communication – which animals also have – is based on the need for social production in order to earn a living. The inextricable connection between work and communication leads, among other things, to the fact that “We simply cannot avoid the fact that everything that makes people act must find its way through their brain, including eating and drinking, which begins as a consequence of the sensation of hunger or thirst transmitted by the brain, and ends as a result of the sensation of satiety also transmitted by the brain.”".(2)
In this regard, Marx expresses himself very clearly in chapter 7 of the first volume of The capital: work is a specific activity of humanity, it is a conscious activity in a double sense. Marx not only presupposes consciously articulated relations between people: the social production and exchange of use values, of material goods necessary for the maintenance and reproduction of material life, go hand in hand with the production and exchange of sounds, words and socially understood concepts.
Furthermore, human work has the characteristic of requiring mental projects in advance in the consciousness of producers as a condition for its realization: “We conceive of work in a way that qualifies it as exclusively human. A spider performs operations that resemble those of a weaver, and a bee puts many an architect to shame with the construction of its honeycomb. But what distinguishes the worst architect from the best of bees is this, that the architect builds his structure in imagination before he builds it in reality. At the end of every labor process, we obtain a result that already existed at the beginning in the imagination of the worker.”(3).
The ability to imagine
The product of labor as a work project, as a material reality that has not yet been realized, is therefore a prerequisite for its own realization. Humanity's ability to anticipate, to imagine, is inextricably linked to its ability to do social work. homo faber can only be gay faber because the human being is, at the same time, homo imaginasus.
The human capacity to form concepts, to abstract, to imagine and to elaborate projects, that is, the capacity to anticipate, is in turn closely linked to the material and social conditions of life. Even the most elementary human concepts and ideas, and certainly the most complex ones, are not pure products of imagination and mental work, completely independent and unrelated to material production. They ultimately arise as mental processing – by the human brain – of elements of the experiences of material life. Therefore, they are inseparable from the individual's participation in nature and society.
The metabolism between nature and society which is the foundation of this participation, the material need to produce and reproduce life from which this metabolism arises, serves a human purpose in labor, as Marx says. Or in Friedrich Engels's broader explanation: “The influences of the external world on the human being are expressed in his brain, are reflected in it in the form of feelings, impulses, volitions, in short, as “ideal tendencies"(4).
Thus, work projects that arise in the human mind before they are materially realized are ultimately products of material reality, even when they have not yet been materially realized. Even the production of concepts and human thought cannot be completely separated from the material processes that precede and accompany them in nature and society, even if they are not purely mechanical mirror images of these processes. On the contrary, they are elements that correspond to material processes, but which are creatively combined and reprocessed by the human mind, but which remain objectively determined by these processes.
The material basis of the human capacity to anticipate, imagine and elaborate projects that have not yet been realized is based on the instinct of conservation, that is, on the instinctive and unconscious correlation of the compulsion to produce and reproduce material life to which human beings are subject. The main manifestations of this anticipation are fear and hope.
However, although fear may be purely instinctive – it is not always and not necessarily so, but it can be, and is therefore one of the most important instincts in animals – purely instinctive hope is impossible. That is why Ernst Bloch rightly pointed out that even in its most elementary instinctive expressions, hope is already more than pure instinct, it is the capacity for imagination, for ideal anticipation. Hope is therefore the human instinct par excellence. Together with social work and the capacity for forming concepts and consciousness, it belongs to the hard and immutable core of our anthropological specificity. gay faber , the homo imaginasus is human because the human species is homo sperans.
Hope really possible
The work project as a result of material needs and desires is subject to the material conditions for its realization. Not all ideal products of our brain lead to real material production. Not all mental projects are actually realized. Not all foreseen hopes become reality. Only those work projects that meet the objective and subjective conditions for their realization are realized. Not every hope is really a possible hope.
Ernst Bloch draws a clear distinction between the really possible hope and the illusory dream. It is precisely the ability of the mental work to combine concepts, which ultimately only correspond to or arise from life experiences, in the most divergent directions. These combinations do not necessarily reflect an already existing material reality. This leads to the distinction between the anticipation of the really possible and the illusory dream.
But what is actually possible, in turn, is only partly predetermined. This is because human beings produce their own lives in the same way that they make their own history. The active dimension of our anthropological specificity thus defines an intermediate field, a transition zone between what is materially, socially and historically impossible and what is materially, socially and historically possible. This intermediate field includes all the changes in nature and society that are already materially possible, but whose realization depends on a certain concrete human practice. This practice emerges neither automatically nor simultaneously from the existence of this material possibility.
On the other hand, the limits of what is materially possible are not precisely defined in advance in all directions. The general framework is in any case a given condition, but within this framework there are innumerable variants and possibilities.
Once the capitalist method of production became dominant, both the emergence of the proletarian class struggle and, in the long run, the development of the modern workers' movement were inevitable. But the concrete and specific form in which this capitalist mode of production developed, for example, in Great Britain, France, Germany and the United States, its concrete background, i.e., its socio-political past and history, the national peculiarities in the emergence and development of the proletariat itself in each of these countries, the peculiarities of the ideological and political movement that preceded, accompanied and succeeded the conquest of political power by the bourgeoisie in these countries: all this had a profound influence on the concrete development of the proletarian class struggle and the socialist movement in the following 50 years.
As a result, the workers' movements in these four countries took very different forms over a long period of history. However, what was really possible was inscribed within the general framework of the “rise, development, apogee and decline of the capitalist mode of production and the consequent deepening of its internal contradictions”.
Anticipation
Therefore, historical-material reality is always an open totality and therefore an incomplete totality, which includes at least innumerable different possible developments. Some of these possibilities will be realized, others will not. Nothing is more alien to Marxism than historical fatalism or mechanical and economic determinism.
In any mode of production, the class struggle can lead either to the victory of the revolutionary class or to the mutual ruin of the contending classes: Marx and Engels often repeated this. Capitalism does not lead to the inevitable victory of socialism, but to the dilemma: either the victory of socialism or regression to barbarism. Since matter is not static and immobile, but is in constant movement; since human society itself is in constant change; since the object of human thought and practice responds to the constant development and change of the processes of nature and society; since human practice itself actively intervenes in these processes, we can only approach a complete understanding of this totality. In our analysis we must include the “not yet done” but that which is actually possible, as well as what already exists and what could potentially disappear.
To recognize reality as a contradictory totality, as a developing totality, driven by all its internal contradictions, means to incorporate into this knowledge all the possible developments of this totality. Anticipation is therefore not only an anthropological category, but also an epistemological and scientific one; it is a category of historical materialism, writes Ernst Bloch:
"Precisely the extremes that were previously kept as far apart as possible: future and nature, anticipation and matter, are united in the foundation of historical-dialectical materialism. Without matter there is no basis for (real) anticipation, without (real) anticipation no horizon of matter is determinable […] What is really possible begins with the seed that bears within it what is to come.”.(5)
We can now describe more precisely the productive function of the subjective factor together with its instinctive driving force, hope.
If I want to carry out a work project, I must subordinate my will to this goal, says Marx in chapter 7 of the first volume of The capital. This subordination, of course, is stimulated by a subjective attitude towards the project, which is not neutral, but consists of the desire and hope of achieving it. The incentives can be very diverse. They can range from fear to punishment to the desire for reward, from individual desire, from conscious need, to adherence to the social group or community that consumes the product of the work, or even to pure altruism.
But production is always stimulated by the desire and hope of its actual realization. When there is no such desire and hope, or when even the opposite is true, the realization of the project becomes considerably more difficult, i.e., the producer will behave indifferently or even hostilely toward production. Producers may even sabotage it continually (consider the attitude of slaves or forced laborers in certain circumstances). Producers who are completely devoid of all hope are bad, i.e., unproductive producers. This law has been confirmed throughout the history of human society.
Guillerme the taciturn
What applies to elementary human praxis applies even more to totalizing social praxis that aims at transforming society itself. A historical and transitory figure like the semi-feudal leader of the great Dutch bourgeois revolution, William the Silent, was able to coin the beautiful and stoic motto characteristic of small, consciously revolutionary minorities: “Point n'est besoin d'espérer pour entreprendre, ni de defendantsir pour persévérer” [There is no need to have hope in order to act, nor success in order to persevere].
However, such motivation cannot rouse the masses of people into action, much less the social classes as a whole. Their activity is always immediate and directly oriented toward the present. A class praxis that seeks to change society is ultimately determined by the interests of the class, but it grows in scope and effectiveness when it is accompanied by desires and expectations that convey these interests in a form that is immediately comprehensible and accessible to the masses.
The hope of abolishing exploitation and oppression, inequality and lack of freedom, that is, the hope of a classless society, has accompanied the liberation struggle of the modern proletariat at every stage of the stormy rise of the workers’ movement. It has given it an energy and a driving force that cannot arise exclusively from the defense of everyday material interests. In all epochs and countries in which the workers’ movement has confined itself to this defense, this driving force has been limited or even non-existent, despite the undeniable fact that in bourgeois society this hope remains inseparable from the defense of the everyday material interests of the working class, without which the struggle for emancipation evaporates into mere fantasy.
But closely related to the hope, typical of the modern proletariat, of the end of capitalist exploitation through the socialist emancipation of the working class as a vehicle for the emancipation of society as a whole, there is an older historical anticipation.
As socially productive and communicative beings, humans are by nature cooperative. The leap from a classless society to a society divided into antagonistic social classes, which began about 10.000 years ago, caused a tremendous trauma to human feeling and thought, precisely because it corresponded so little to our cooperative nature. That is why human history is not only a history of class struggles, but also a history of countless expectations, projects, anticipations, laments, poems, stories, philosophical discourses, plans and political battles, revolving around the following questions: How can we return to the golden age of the classless society? What is the origin of social inequality? How can this social inequality be eliminated?
Jewish prophets
Greek philosophers and Roman revolutionary politicians; Jewish prophets and the early fathers of the Christian church; the impetuous precursors and representatives of the Reformation; the first utopian socialists and the representatives of the most radical movements within the great bourgeois revolutions have all posed this problem, each in the particular form that corresponded to his time, his society and his class. However, the tremendous potential that derives from the continuity of this problem and the inherent self-critical development of the response to it cannot be overestimated.
The Austrian poet Nikolaus Lenau summarized this continuity in a synthetic and symbolic way in the last stanza of his epic poem The Albigensian"The Albigensians are followed by the Hussites, who pay in blood for what they suffered; after Hus and Ziska come Luther, Hutten, the Thirty Years, the warriors of the Cevennes, the torments of the Bastille, and so on.”.
There is no doubt that most of the advocates of a classless society just mentioned were utopians in the sense that they had no precise idea of the material and social conditions necessary for the realization of their hopeful project. Undoubtedly, on the other hand, all practical and political attempts in the past to build a classless society have failed, because the material and social conditions for this had not yet matured. But this in no way means that all the efforts made by these thinkers and fighters were futile or even harmful. On the contrary.
The utopian socialists prepared, promoted and accelerated the thinking, theory, science and practice of the modern workers' movement, greatly expanding the horizons of what was thought possible. In doing so, they also expanded the knowledge of social reality itself, since such knowledge requires a rigorously critical attitude towards everything that exists, all of which must be considered transitory. And it is precisely the integration into social analysis of what does not yet exist, at the point where it passes from a desire to a real possibility for the future, that gives social criticism a much broader scope.
Not only scientific socialism, but also classical English political economy, classical German philosophy and classical French sociological historiography learned much more from the utopian socialists than one might at first suppose. Even without the earlier work of the utopian socialists, they would probably have achieved their results, but more slowly, with greater difficulty and with more contradictions. If from a historical point of view scientific socialism appears as the overcoming of utopian socialism, it is an overcoming in the Hegelian sense of the word, that is, an overcoming that preserves and reproduces its fertile elements. And this presupposes, in any case, the prior existence of a utopian socialism, of that hoped-for hope of a classless society, as a necessary and fruitful phase in the struggle for the emancipation of working humanity.
When Ernst Bloch writes: “The dialectical-historical science of Marxism is therefore the mediated science of the future of reality plus the objectively real possibility it contains; all this with the aim of acting […] it is the horizon of the future, as Marxism understands it, with the past as an antechamber, which gives reality its real dimension.“, he expresses a double truth.(6)
Hope of fulfillment
Knowledge of reality is always knowledge of its laws of movement, of its laws of development. The greatness of The capital Marx's great achievement lies precisely in the discovery of the laws of the long-term development of the capitalist mode of production, laws that only fully unfolded after Karl Marx's death. Capital itself, contrary to a common (and vulgar) criticism that is often repeated, is much more a work of the twentieth century than of the nineteenth.
On the other hand, the modification of reality – the implementation of the eleventh week program Thesis on Feuerbach, the true birth certificate of Marxism – presupposes not only an orientation towards the future, not only the understanding of what is not yet a real possibility, but also the hope of the realization of what is really possible. It requires the exertion of all mental forces, will and feelings in the pursuit of the goal of realizing what is really possible but not yet achieved, and the greatest effort of the revolutionary individual between the existing reality and the possibility, imbued with hope, that has to be made a reality.
Someone who no longer has both feet on the ground of reality and has lost understanding of the material-social, objective and subjective conditions for the realization of the revolutionary project is not the only type of bad revolutionary. Bad revolutionaries are also those who have become prisoners of existing reality, who are so absorbed in the daily routine that they lose the understanding, the premonition and the sensitivity to make a sudden, unexpected and radical turn in the relationship of forces and in the activity of the revolutionary class. Such people have sacrificed their attentive gaze into the future for the sake of the usual limited daily grind, or what was called in the language of the German workers’ movement: “The stalemate of the revolution.”the old tactic” [the old tried and tested tactic], and will therefore be irremediably surprised, overtaken and paralyzed by the sudden volcanic eruptions of the revolutionary mass struggle. In this sense too, full knowledge of reality is not possible without broadening the horizon of the future.
After August 1914, Vladimir Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg and a handful of their internationalist friends not only expressed their moral aversion to the capitulation of official social democracy to the imperialist war. They also judged this capitulation in the light of the perspective, not yet materialized but based on scientific analysis (and not on mere wishes) of an inevitable intensification of the revolutionary class struggle in the wake of that world war. This struggle would be provoked by the inevitable intensification of the economic, social, political and ideological contradictions of the capitalist mode of production, contradictions of which the war was both the expression and the driving force.
The events of the period 1917-1919 proved them right. But the events that accompanied the end of the world war added an additional dimension to the 1914-1915 struggle of tendencies within the international workers’ movement. Without anticipation of these events, without this perspective, the capitulation of 1914 cannot be fully understood, explained and judged.
The art of prediction
Without revolutionary perspectives, no truly revolutionary politics is possible, and therefore no truly revolutionary practice is real, at least within the framework of scientific socialism. In any case, these perspectives must be based on a correct analysis of reality and not on fantasies, they must start from an analysis of real socio-economic contradictions and reveal their dynamics, they must examine whether and why these contradictions diminish or, on the contrary, intensify, and not start from an abstract and desired development.
Perspectives mean a relationship to the future, i.e. anticipation, hope and fear are decisive aspects of any political activity, be it proletarian, petty-bourgeois or bourgeois. Having lost its revolutionary character, the bourgeoisie defined politics as the art of the possible. The Austro-Marxist Otto Bauer changed this slogan by defining politics as the art of foresight. This certainly goes beyond the narrow-minded citizen who, because of social conservatism, fears any major change and wants to limit politics to small, unimportant steps.
But Otto Bauer’s slogan also reveals the passive and fatalistic dimension of Austro-Marxism: in the art of foresight, the active and transformative element of politics is completely absent. For Marxism, politics is the art of pushing to the maximum the limits of what is possible in the interests of the working class (and the progress of all humanity), based on a scientific perspective of what is objectively and subjectively possible, if the mobilization and initiative of the masses are maximized and the practice of the revolutionary party remains fully integrated into this perspective as a constitutive element of the changing reality.
The hope and fear of revolution played a decisive role in the divisions within the international workers’ movement after August 1914. Initially, the right-wing Social Democrats justified their capitulation to the imperialist war by arguing that contact with the masses should not be lost and that the masses were, after all, enthusiastic about war. However, a few years later, when in countries such as Russia, Germany, Austria, Hungary and Italy these same masses turned so enthusiastically against war and in favour of revolution, the argument suddenly changed.
Now, suddenly, the need to “unconditionally defend principles” was discovered, as well as “a sense of responsibility” and “the courage to be unpopular”. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that automatic adaptation to the “mass movement” was not the real reason for the capitulation of August 1914. And certainly in the years 1917-1920 the fear of revolution, the fear of the risk of losing hard-won gains, the fear of jumping into the unknown, the fear of breaking away from the daily routine, played a decisive psychological role. As Marxists, we must link this fear with the social and material interests of a conservative stratum of the workers’ movement.
In contrast, the hope of revolution animated the radical wing of the working class and the labor movement as quickly as revolutionary changes began to take shape and become reality. Anticipation became experience, the political project became the goal of mass political action.
We are seeing something similar with so-called Eurocommunism. Many trends intersect in this phenomenon. To explain Eurocommunism, it is necessary to take into account numerous historical, social, economic, political, ideological (among other things, the internal logic of theoretical revisionism) and even personal psychological processes, such as the trauma of personal experience of some of the excesses of Stalinism (see in this context the 1978 book by a former leader of the Communist Party of Spain, Jorge Semprún, Autobiography of Federico Sánchez).
But it seems clear to us that the evolution of many communist parties towards Eurocommunist positions was (and is) determined in part by the conviction that in Western countries revolution will not be on the agenda for a long time, which means that it is impossible, and most of them come to the additional conclusion that revolution is also undesirable, because in any case it would lead to a catastrophic defeat. From this perspective, the strategic conclusions follow their logic; something similar happened with classical social democracy before and after the First World War.
Mirror
The socialist transformation of society represents the first attempt in the history of humanity to consciously lead it along previously chosen paths, starting with a conscious transformation of the economy and the state, with the aim of achieving a classless society and the abolition of the state. At the same time, the fact that the realization of this project depends largely on the ability of the exploited and oppressed to organize and liberate themselves makes it all the more audacious and the difficulties of realizing it all the more evident. This liberating and anticipatory project is the culmination of the critically assimilated results of all social sciences, as well as of the theoretical and practical conclusions of utopian-revolutionary thinkers and of the preceding mass uprisings.
The anticipatory character of this project, in turn, is supported and emotionally stimulated by the hope of its realization, a hope and an impulse that fertilizes the revolutionary activity of individuals, groups and social classes, insofar as it responds at the same time to a rational conviction about the necessity and the historical-material possibility of realizing the project.
The interaction between the objective tendency and its correlate in the field of human hope is clearly expressed in Trotsky's comment on the useful role of literature: “If one cannot do without a mirror, even to shave, how can one reconvert oneself or one’s life without seeing oneself in the “mirror” of literature? Of course, no one speaks of an exact mirror. No one would think of asking the new literature to have the same impassivity as a mirror. The deeper literature is, and the more imbued with the desire to give shape to life, the more significant and dynamic will be its capacity to “imagine” life.”(7)
The theory of socialist society, its economy, its political order, the necessary disappearance of commodity production and the state, its permanent cultural transformation, its internationalism and its global emancipatory dynamics has been extensively developed, but is not yet complete. In addition to a strong element of critical (and self-critical) processing of all the historical experiences of past proletarian revolutions, there is also a growing element of anticipation that has not yet been empirically confirmed. Such anticipation has become indispensable for the internal coherence of the theory and in the eyes of the masses for the persuasiveness of the politics it informs.
After the historical catastrophe of Stalinism, Marxists can no longer afford to limit themselves to proclamations of the type: “Let us first overthrow capitalism. As to what kind of society will then be built and what socialism will look like in concrete terms, let us leave that to the historical future (or to future generations).“Today, omitting the socialist anticipation of the concrete revolutionary project means making it implausible in the eyes of the great masses.
A concrete vision of the future
A concrete vision of the socialist future – we prefer this formulation to concrete utopia, because we are convinced that the realization of this model of socialism is really possible – has today become a prerequisite for revolutionary political practice in the developed countries of the West. In these industrialized countries, the proletariat will not overthrow capitalism unless it is convinced that there is a concrete alternative to it. It must be convinced of an alternative that is profoundly different and superior both to capitalism and to the so-called socialism that actually exists in the countries of the Eastern bloc, which is not socialism at all!
Hundreds of thousands of revolutionaries throughout the world are already waiting for the realization of this project. They are thus able to avoid resignation in the face of the catastrophes towards which the bourgeois world is heading, as well as self-destructive despair. This same hope will ultimately inspire the masses on an ever greater scale and contribute decisively to the advance towards world socialism.
Seventy-five years ago, a then little-known young revolutionary wrote a practical treatise on the necessity of a revolutionary newspaper as the collective organizer of the vanguard of the working class. He was writing for the benefit of a small group of illegal socialists who, under a bloody dictatorship, had taken the first steps toward the development of a modern workers' movement. This treatise contains a peculiar ode to dream (or hope), which has very rarely been noticed by the numerous readers of that writing.
This is the passage: “We must dream!” I wrote these words and was frightened. I imagined myself sitting at the “Unification Congress” in front of the editors and contributors of Rabocheye Dyelo. And then Comrade Martynov stood up and addressed me in a threatening tone: “Let me ask you: does the autonomous editorial office still have the right to dream without first consulting the party committees?” After him, Comrade Krichevski (philosophically deepening Comrade Martynov, who had long ago deepened Comrade Pekhanov) stands up and continues in an even more threatening tone: “I will go further, do not forget that, according to Marx, humanity always sets itself achievable tasks, that tactics are a process of growth of tasks, which grow with the party.”
“Just thinking about these threatening questions makes me shiver and look for places to hide. I will try to do so after Pisarev.
"There are disparities and disparities, Pisarev wrote about the disparity between dreams and reality. My dreams can either anticipate the natural course of events, or they can deviate to where the natural course of events can never go. In the first case, dreams do no harm, they can even sustain and strengthen the energies of the worker… In dreams of this kind there is nothing that deforms or paralyzes the labor force. Quite the opposite. If a person were completely deprived of the ability to dream in this way, if he were not able to go forward sometimes and contemplate with his imagination the fully finished picture of the work that begins to take shape in his hand, he could not imagine what motives would compel him to undertake and accomplish vast and arduous enterprises in the field of arts, sciences, and practical life. The disparity between dreams and reality does no harm, provided that the dreamer seriously believes in a dream, carefully looks at life, compares his observations with his castles in the air, and, in general, works conscientiously for the realization of his fantasies. When there is some contact between dream and life, everything goes well.".
This young revolutionary was called VI Lenin and the quote is from What to do?.(8) Lenin is seen as the incarnation of Realpolitik revolutionary. As we can see, anticipation, hope and dreams are not only categories of historical materialism, but also categories of Realpolitik revolutionary.
*Ernest Mandel (1923-1995) was an economist, writer and politician. Author, among other books, of late capitalism (New Culture).
Available in https://www.marxists.org/portugues/mandel/1978/mes/90.htm
Notes
(2) Friedrich Engels, Ludwig Feuerbach and the end of German classical philosophy (1886).
(3) Karl Marx, Capital, vol. I (1867)
(5) Bloch, The beginning of hope.
6) Bloch, op. cit.
(7) Leon Trotsky, Literature and revolution (1924).
8) Lenin, What Is To Be Done? – Ch. V. Plan for an All-Russian Public Newspaper
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE