– From “The Road of the New Yugoslavia” –
I.
To write about Stalin means to write about the most significant historical epoch in the development of mankind — an epoch to which his name is inextricably and creatively linked. To write about Stalin means to write about a great truth that has begun to victoriously transform human society and man; it means to write about a great scientific achievement that leads mankind toward its genuine liberation; and finally, it means to write about a great triumph of the human mind. This is especially true today, after the world-historical victory over the fascist vanguard of reactionary forces — after a war in which all social forces and all of their theoretical and ideological understandings were put to the test.
Of all the sciences, mankind has developed the science that deals with the objective laws of its own social development the most slowly. Science had relatively early — and with great success — penetrated deeply into the objective laws of nature that surround mankind. But in the realm of social relations, it remained too heavily influenced and constrained by the existing social order to be objective. This is neither accidental nor a matter of individual will — it is connected with the overall development of society. However, an analysis of these facts — which Marxist-Leninist theory has thoroughly illuminated — falls outside the scope of this article. The fact remains that a dense darkness once obscured the objective laws of social development from human consciousness. Science had, it is true, achieved significant progress in certain areas of social life, but it had not uncovered the general laws of its development until the emergence of Marxism-Leninism.
It is only natural that under such conditions, mankind was blind and unconsciously subjected to the material forces of social development — just as our so-called “free spirits,” whose “freedom” consists in closing their eyes to reality and developmental inevitability, remain even today blind and unconscious prey to reactionary social forces.
Into that darkness, Marxist-Leninist science shone with a bright light. It did not arise as a product of individual cleverness or imagination, but as a direct continuation of the results achieved by human science throughout history. However, with its findings, Marxism-Leninism brought a fundamental shift to the entire development of social science. It provided the key to understanding the objective laws of social development, clearly pointed to their practical implications, and opened up the prospect of a conscious and planned organization of future social development. Ultimately, this signifies the triumph of awareness and scientific knowledge in the field of social development and political action.
Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin — these are the four peaks in the development of Marxism-Leninism. In close connection with social reality and its development, in close connection with the struggle of class forces, they developed this science, and its theoretical foundations stood up directly to practical testing. And this is precisely where the strength of Marxism-Leninism lies — it did not develop as an academic science cut off from life. It emerged as a “manual for action” — as Marx himself put it — meaning it was, from the outset, a scientific starting point and compass for practical revolutionary political activity. In this way, theoretical principles were directly tested in practice, and the generalized results of that testing led to a further enrichment of the theory.
Marx and Engels laid the foundations and core principles of revolutionary theory during the era of relatively young capitalism, which in many countries still took on revolutionary forms in its struggle against remnants of the feudal system. Their primary activity largely concluded during the period in which capitalism finally overcame or assimilated the remnants of feudalism in Europe, entered a phase of relatively peaceful development and became reactionary. Naturally, Marxism in this first stage of its development bears the imprint of the time in which it emerged and primarily responds to the questions posed to the revolutionary vanguard during that period of capitalist development.
It became necessary to test the fundamental theoretical principles of Marxism under the changed conditions of the period of relatively peaceful capitalist development (after the Paris Commune), and especially under the conditions of imperialism, which began to take shape at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. The opportunists in the workers’ movement were captivated by capitalism’s peaceful development along with parliamentarism and parliamentary democracy. They concluded that parliamentarism was a completely viable and suitable path for the peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism. Accordingly, the core principles of Marxism — which spoke of the inevitability of proletarian revolution — seemed, in their view, incorrect and outdated. And so, the opportunists within the workers’ movement began a revision of Marxism.
Lenin stood firmly against such revisionist and opportunist distortions of Marxism. He clearly saw that the so-called “peaceful” development of capitalism was merely a prelude to new revolutionary class conflicts and wars. The development of imperialism — as a new stage in the evolution of capitalism, which Lenin illuminated with exceptional clarity and foresight — inevitably led to the sharpening of all contradictions and created the possibility, as Lenin stated, of a revolutionary breakthrough in the imperialist chain at its weakest point. All of Lenin’s theoretical and practical work was, therefore, devoted to preparing the working class for such conflicts. Lenin proved that the principles established by Marx and Engels were correct and confirmed even under the new conditions. He further developed them in the context of imperialism and the immediate preparation for proletarian revolution. The Great October Revolution vindicated Lenin — not the revisionists and opportunists in the workers’ movement — and confirmed the principles of Marxism-Leninism, not the revisionist theories of petty-bourgeois “socialism.”
From that Leninist struggle to preserve the scientific and revolutionary essence of Marxism — and to further develop it under the conditions of imperialism — emerged Stalin, Lenin’s most faithful disciple. No one understood the historical role and the magnitude of Lenin’s creative work as profoundly as Stalin did. That is why, even during Lenin’s lifetime, both before and after the Great October Revolution, Stalin became not only his devoted student but also his collaborator in creative work — a co-architect in the further development of Marxism. This is especially true of Stalin’s work on the national question and in laying the ideological and organizational foundations of the Bolshevik Party.
II.
With the victory of the Great October Revolution and the consolidation of the great socialist state, a completely new factor emerged in social development. The working class — together with all genuinely popular and democratic forces, which had previously appeared solely as progressive combatants against the reactionary ruling elites of their own countries — now found in the USSR a stronghold and foundation for organization. The USSR emerged as an international actor, as a force that began to influence even the very sources of power within the global capitalist world. Naturally, this world-historical change created new conditions under which the principles of Marxism-Leninism had to undergo another round of practical testing. It is also natural that Marxism-Leninism was enriched with new results and new insights. That great work was carried out by Stalin.
Stalin assumed leadership in defending the great scientific achievements of Marxism-Leninism at a time when the revolutionary momentum following the First World War had finally subsided and a temporary stabilization of capitalism had begun. In connection with this, the young socialist state was confronted with all the difficulties and complex questions of construction within a single country surrounded by a capitalist environment. Under such conditions, attacks against the scientific foundations of Marxism-Leninism began anew — from the right and from the “left,” both within the USSR and beyond, in the sphere of the international workers’ movement. Clearly, the main thrust of these attacks was aimed at dismantling the fundamental principles of Leninism — to revise them, to claim that these principles were no longer valid under the new conditions. The essence of this campaign was a capitulation to the forces of capitalism, which had temporarily stabilized to a limited extent; it was panic in the face of the challenges confronting the young socialist state surrounded by the capitalist world — a tendency, in the final analysis, toward the restoration of capitalism in the USSR.
Just as Lenin rose to defend the fundamental scientific achievements of Marxism against the attacks of revisionists and opportunists within the Second International — and in doing so greatly advanced those achievements, opening a new stage in the development of Marxism — Stalin, after the Great October Revolution, rose to defend those scientific gains and their revolutionary essence against attacks from both the right and the “left.” In that struggle, Stalin enriched the development of Marxism-Leninism with many new scientific achievements and opened new perspectives for progressive mankind.
The starting point of Stalin’s theoretical and practical work is the question of building socialism in a single country surrounded by a capitalist environment — that is, the question of its possibility, its consequences and the changes it brings for the entire world, particularly for the popular and democratic forces of mankind and for the international workers’ movement, with the existence of a great socialist country where there is no exploitation of man by man and where all nations are equal.
In the struggle against right-wing and “left-wing,” conscious and unconscious restorers of capitalism in the USSR, Stalin not only proved that building socialism in a single country was possible — he also identified the path, the forms of struggle, and the modes of organization that would lead to the preservation and victory of socialism in the USSR. Stalin laid the foundations for the international policy of the socialist state and for the direction of domestic socialist construction. Socialist reconstruction, industrialization, collectivization, the five-year plans, the building of the Red Army and the defence capabilities of the USSR — all of these were the result of Stalin’s theoretical and practical leadership in the fight for the triumph of socialism in the USSR. Through that struggle, Stalin enriched Marxism-Leninism in all its branches with new, significant scientific achievements that today offer progressive mankind — in its battle against reactionary forces — far broader possibilities and much more diverse means than were available in the past.
Naturally, all of these developments had to influence the understanding of the struggle against imperialism and, in connection with that, the role of the international workers’ movement. From the moment of its founding — and especially through its successful construction of socialism — the Soviet Union became the leading force of progressive mankind. It became the main stronghold, the position from which the most important front of progress, freedom, the independence of nations and genuine democracy was defended. It is only natural, then, that the international proletariat and all freedom-loving forces across the world became directly invested in strengthening the USSR as much as possible and in promoting its active role in international affairs and political developments. Previously — that is, before the October Revolution — freedom-loving and progressive forces in individual countries, and above all the working class, could act solely on their own against the reaction of their own state, or through immediate, isolated struggles that were primarily limited to political means. Through international unification, the working class and its revolutionary vanguard could only exert limited influence — and mainly only through political tools — on the development of the international policies of ruling states, on weakening centres of international reaction, and on breaking up reactionary and imperialist blocs, and so on.
With the emergence of the first socialist state — the Soviet Union — the situation changed fundamentally. In the form of the Soviet Union, the progressive and freedom-loving forces of mankind began to exert influence on the centres of international power, using all the means at the disposal of a great and powerful state — a socialist superpower. It is well known that the international imperialists initially sought to prevent precisely such a role for the USSR. That is why they imposed a blockade. However, the Soviet Union not only broke through that blockade, but under Stalin’s brilliant leadership, it gradually secured increasingly strong international positions — until, during the last war, it became a leading force without which nothing lasting could be achieved in international relations.
It is clear that with such a role for the USSR, it became possible to use a much wider range of reserves far more effectively in the struggle for a progressive path in mankind’s development. Stalin, with his deep understanding of the laws governing the development of imperialism, stated that conflict between the socialist country and the vanguard of imperialism was inevitable. But he also maintained that the contradictions within the imperialist system made it possible for the socialist state to form alliances with other peace-loving countries in order to break the most aggressive forces. When, for example, a fascist centre emerged in Germany as the vanguard of the international reactionary forces, the Soviet Union — guided by Stalin’s genius — succeeded in bringing together, within a military alliance against fascist Germany, a broad array of countries that, for various reasons, had an interest in destroying it. By helping to create and strengthen such an alliance against fascist Germany — the centre of international reaction — the Soviet Union, in effect, provided immense support to progressive mankind in its struggle against imperialist reaction in general. It is evident, of course, that these were changes of world-historical significance. The progressive, freedom-loving forces of mankind — led by the USSR — became a powerful and unbreakable international force. All of these facts confirm the correctness of Stalin’s principles on the possibility of building socialism in a single country — principles that formed the basis of the Soviet Union’s international policy, as well as the foundation of its domestic socialist construction and the defensive strength of the great socialist state.
III.
The great war against the Hitlerite fascist bloc fully confirmed the correctness of Stalin’s theoretical principles and his practical leadership. It was demonstrated, first, that socialism can not only be built in a single country — despite being surrounded by capitalism — and not only defended against external attacks, but that a socialist state, in its struggle against external enemies of socialism, can steadily strengthen its international political position. Second, it became clear how correct Stalin was when he firmly connected the issues of socialist reconstruction, industrialization and collectivization with the question of defending the USSR, with the arming of the Red Army, and with the survival of the Soviet Union itself. Had Hitler been met by anything less than an industrialized country with the most advanced agriculture and a well-armed Red Army, the victim of fascist barbarism would not have been the Soviet Union alone, but all of freedom-loving mankind. It was proven, finally, that fascism and imperialism would certainly have triumphed if there had not been a socialist superpower with a stable internal order — with the Soviet system, which alone was capable of withstanding the tremendous pressure of fascist armies and ideology. The Soviet Union played the leading role in saving mankind from the dark, barbaric future that the fascist vanguard — imperialism — sought to impose. And in practical terms, this means that Stalin’s genius showed mankind the way forward, identified its greatest enemy and guided the struggle to achieve victory over it.
More than ever, we can say: Stalin not only faithfully preserved the great legacy of Marx, Engels and Lenin, not only preserved and further developed the great achievements of the October Revolution, not only enriched the treasury of Marxism-Leninism and human knowledge in general with new immortal achievements — he also laid down the fundamental principles and long-term perspectives for an entire era of struggle for the global victory of socialism. From this, Stalin’s creative activity spans an extraordinarily wide range of issues: from the concrete problems of building socialism and a socialist economy in the USSR, to questions of the international workers’ movement; from the strategy and tactics of internal struggle against the enemies of socialism, to the strategy and tactics of progressive mankind’s struggle against imperialist reaction; from the specific issues of organizing the Red Army and defending the USSR, to military strategy and tactics, and so on.
Throughout history, there have been many victorious revolutions. But none has remained as faithful to its own principles as the Great October Revolution in the USSR. This is, of course, understandable, because the October Revolution is the first revolution in history that does not replace one form of exploitation with another — it abolished exploitation altogether. However, it is precisely in preserving that most magnificent achievement in human history under the conditions of a capitalist environment, and in providing a clear perspective for its further development, that the historical greatness of Stalin’s genius is revealed.
Belgrade, December 21, 1945.