A.A. Bogdanovs opinion about the reasons of ideological conflicts in RSDRP

During the exile in Vologda the future viceleaderof Bolsheviks A.A. Bogdanov (1873-1928) had an opportunity to study of all sets of oppositional political views existing in TsaristRussia. The scientific analysis of these sights showed that the leaders even of the most radical revolutionary parties were in steadycultural and world-viewing dependence on privileged classes. Proletariat (which was led by them), despite ideological dependency, essentiallydiffered from the intellectual leaders in its position, life style and experience of social cooperation. This circumstance gave riseto obvious contradictions in interaction of the leaders and ordinary members of a party - the foreign-placed leaders-theorists aspired toorganize antiauthoritarian revolutionary movement by especially authoritarian methods and led struggle for their leadership in a partyinstead of organizing methodical agitation and education of proletarians. This work, as Bogdanov said, should have put a start to a reallyoriginal and independent labour movement. On the basis of the above-stated, the scientist judged that there was an inevitably systemdivergence between the managing top of RSDRP and ordinary members of the party - not only on the current tactical questions, butalso on the strategic purposes and tasks: 1) the main purpose of intellectual leaders was maximum close integration in the existing socialand political system; therefore they would be inclined to compromise cooperation with the privileged classes in spirit of opportunismand would focus the proletariat accordingly; 2) the strategic purpose of the proletariat, on the contrary, was a complete transformation ofthe existing social and political system according to the ideals of socialism and collectivism, inherent in the working class; not having anadequate ideological support from the intellectual leaders, the proletariat would be doomed on the spontaneous forms of the protest representingreaction to policy of the high classes, i.e. on preservation and aggravation of political and world-viewing dependency. Therevolution of 1917 looked like a refutation of Bogdanov's conclusion. But "the state-commune" proclaimed by Lenin really converted toa trivial interception of control over the state management system: the organizational methods of the revolutionaries still remained authoritarian, and the proletariat remained its cultural and world-viewing dependency from the leaders. Bogdanov characterized all declarativemaxims about the new social order as "the program of adventure", whose natural end could only be a "long dictatorship of theIron Heel".

Keywords

Authors

References