Text and Context in the Argument of Leninâs What Is to Be Done?
In: Historical MaterialismSearch for other papers by Alan Shandro in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Lars Lihâs Lenin Rediscovered aims to overthrow what he labels the textbook-myth of Leninism through a comprehensive reconstruction of Leninâs relationship, both to the Kautskyite orthodoxy that dominated the international socialist movement, and more local polemics. While the resulting rereading of Leninâs early Marxism is a powerful counter to the âtextbook-interpretationâ of Leninism, Lih has perhaps âbent the stickâ too far in an attempt to prove Leninâs orthodoxy. Importantly, he misconstrues Leninâs critique of âeconomismâ through a too-narrow reading of âeconomismâ. Lih would have been better served to recognise the importance of Leninâs polemic as an attempt, not simply to paint his opponents on the Russian Left as âeconomistsâ, but, more importantly, to grasp the organic nature of reformism and thus the true scale of the difficulties involved in challenging its hegemony within the workersâ movement.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 421 | 66 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 151 | 4 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 195 | 13 | 2 |
Text and Context in the Argument of Leninâs What Is to Be Done?
In: Historical MaterialismSearch for other papers by Alan Shandro in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Lars Lihâs Lenin Rediscovered aims to overthrow what he labels the textbook-myth of Leninism through a comprehensive reconstruction of Leninâs relationship, both to the Kautskyite orthodoxy that dominated the international socialist movement, and more local polemics. While the resulting rereading of Leninâs early Marxism is a powerful counter to the âtextbook-interpretationâ of Leninism, Lih has perhaps âbent the stickâ too far in an attempt to prove Leninâs orthodoxy. Importantly, he misconstrues Leninâs critique of âeconomismâ through a too-narrow reading of âeconomismâ. Lih would have been better served to recognise the importance of Leninâs polemic as an attempt, not simply to paint his opponents on the Russian Left as âeconomistsâ, but, more importantly, to grasp the organic nature of reformism and thus the true scale of the difficulties involved in challenging its hegemony within the workersâ movement.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 421 | 66 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 151 | 4 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 195 | 13 | 2 |
