论文部分内容阅读
史振荣、张步仁二同志就本刊1989年第4期刊登的《浅议“帝国主义是社会主义革命的前夜”》一文寄来商榷文章。我刊不拟就此问题展开讨论。为使读者了解在这个问题上的不同观点、看法,我们连同《浅议》一文作者李景治、廖鹤同志的答复一并摘编发表。《浅议》主要论述两个问题:(1) 针对有的同志认为列宁关于帝国主义是社会主义革命的前夜的论断主要是从当时革命形势提出的,今天已不存在这种形势,因而列宁提出的“前夜”论断已完全过时的看法,《浅议》阐明“前夜”论断的提出虽然同当时的革命形势发展有关,而更为主要的,是建立在对帝国主义的全面考察与分析之上的。“前夜”的最根本、最深层的含义,是表明资本主义向社会主义过渡已经开始,垄断资本主义下一个发展历史阶段必然是社会主义,不能把“前夜”狭隘地理解为革命在明天就要爆发。因此。只要列宁关于帝国主义的本质、矛盾、地位的基本观点没有失效,就不能说列宁的“前夜”论断过时。 (2) 针对有的同志认为列宁关于“前夜”的论断在当时也并不完全正确,即只对当时有革命形势的俄国有意义,而对其他西方国家不具有普遍意义的看法,《浅议》一文阐明,尽管列宁当时对世界社会主义革命进程估计过快、期望过高,但既然“前夜”论断主要是从对帝国主义本质分析中得出来的,那就不能否认其具有普遍的指导意义;不能因为人们过去对“前夜”论断偏重于从革命形势方面的不全面理解,而淡忘了该论断的最根本的含义,更不能由此断定它在当时也并不完全正确。该文还认为,鉴于人们长期以来对革命的理解往往同暴力联系在一起,同十月革命的方式等同;鉴于人们易于从革命危机的角度理解“前夜”的含义,今天不用“帝国主义是社会主义革命前夜”来表述资本主义向社会主义过渡的必然性,也并非是不可以的。
Two articles by Shi Zhenrong and Zhang Bu-jen, published in the fourth issue, published in 1989, discuss the issue of “imperialism is the eve of the socialist revolution”. I do not want to discuss this issue. In order to make readers understand the different views and opinions on this issue, together with the replies of authors Li Jingzhi and Liao He of the author of “Shallow Discussion”, they are both published together. The “discussion” mainly discusses two issues: (1) For some comrades, Lenin's thesis that Lenin's assertion that the imperialism was the eve of the socialist revolution was mainly based on the revolutionary situation at that time did not exist today; therefore, Lenin proposed The “overnight” argument has been totally out of date. “Shallow Discussion” states that although the proposition of “the eve of the night” is related to the development of the revolutionary situation at that time, and more importantly, it is based on the comprehensive inspection and analysis of imperialism of. The most fundamental and deepest meaning of “eve” is that it shows that the transition from capitalism to socialism has begun. The next historical stage of monopolistic capitalism must be socialism. We must not narrowly understand “eve of the eve of” the revolution in the future. break out. therefore. As long as Lenin's fundamental view on the essence, contradictions and status of imperialism has not failed, Lenin's “eve of the past” can not be said to be outdated. (2) For some comrades, Lenin's assertion on “Eve before” was not entirely correct at the time, that is, it only made sense for Russia, then in a revolutionary situation, but not for other Western countries The article states that although Lenin was over-estimating and over-looking for the process of world socialist revolution at the time, it can not be denied that it has universal guiding significance since the “overnight” thesis is mainly derived from the analysis of the essence of imperialism ; We can not forget the most fundamental meaning of the thesis because we have not always emphasized the incomplete understanding of the “overnight etiquette” from the revolutionary situation. Nor can we conclude that it was not entirely correct at the time. The article also argues that in view of the fact that people's long-standing understanding of the revolution is often associated with violence, the same pattern as the October Revolution; given that it is easy to understand the meaning of “eve” from a revolutionary crisis perspective, it is not necessary today that “imperialism is society It is not impossible to state the inevitability of the transition from capitalism to socialism on the eve of the ”revolutionary revolution."