Marksizem-leninizem

Iz Wikipedije, proste enciklopedije

Marksizem-leninizem je komunistična ideologija in glavno komunistično gibanje 20. stoletja.[1] To je bilo uradno ime uradne državne ideologije, ki jo je sprejela Sovjetska zveza,[2] njene satelitske države v vzhodnem bloku in različni samooklicani znanstveni socialistični režimi v gibanju neuvrščenih in tretjem svetu med hladno vojno,[3] kot tudi komunistična internacionala po boljševizaciji. Danes je marksizem-leninizem ideologija več komunističnih strank in ostaja uradna ideologija vladajočih strank Ljudske republike Kitajske, Kube, Laosa in Vietnama kot enotnih enostrankarskih socialističnih republik in Nepala v večstrankarski demokraciji.[4][5] Na splošno marksisti-leninisti podpirajo proletarski internacionalizem in socialistično demokracijo ter nasprotujejo anarhizmu, fašizmu, imperializmu in liberalni demokraciji. Marksizmo-leninizem meni, da je za zamenjavo kapitalizma potrebna dvostopenjska komunistična revolucija. Vangardna stranka, hierarhično organizirana skozi demokratični centralizem, bi prevzela oblast "v imenu proletariata" in vzpostavila socialistično državo pod vodstvom komunistične stranke, za katero trdi, da predstavlja diktaturo proletariata. Država nadzoruje gospodarstvo in produkcijska sredstva, zatira buržoazijo, protirevolucijo in opozicijo, spodbuja kolektivizem v družbi in utira pot morebitni komunistični družbi, ki bi bila tako brezrazredna kot brezdržavna. Zaradi svojega državno usmerjenega pristopa so marksistično-leninistične države zahodni akademiki običajno imenovali komunistične države.[6]

Marksistično-leninistično ideologijo je kot prakso razvil sovjetski predsednik Josif Stalin leta 1924, na podlagi svojega razumevanja in sinteze ortodoksnega marksizma in leninizma. Po smrti Vladimirja Lenina leta 1924 je marksizem-leninizem postal posebno gibanje v Sovjetski zvezi, ko so Stalin in njegovi podporniki prevzeli nadzor nad stranko. Zavrnil je splošno predstavo zahodnih marksistov o svetovni revoluciji kot predpogoju za izgradnjo socializma v prid konceptu socializma v eni državi. Po njegovih privržencih je postopni prehod iz kapitalizma v socializem pomenila uvedba prvega petletnega načrta in sovjetska ustava iz leta 1936. Do poznih dvajsetih let prejšnjega stoletja je Stalin vzpostavil ideološko ortodoksnost med Rusko komunistično partijo (boljševiki), Sovjetsko zvezo in Komunistično internacionalo, da bi vzpostavil univerzalno marksistično-leninistično prakso.[7][8][9][10][11][12] Formulacija sovjetske različice dialektičnega in zgodovinskega materializma v tridesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja s strani Stalina in njegovih sodelavcev, kot na primer v Stalinovi knjigi Dialektični in zgodovinski materializem, je postala uradna sovjetska interpretacija marksizma, za zgled pa so jo vzeli marksisti-leninisti v drugih državah. V poznih tridesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja je Stalinov uradni učbenik Zgodovina komunistične partije Sovjetske zveze (boljševikov) (1938) populariziral marksizem-leninizem kot izraz.[13][14][15][16][17][18]

Internacionalizem marksistično-leninističnega socializma v eni državi se je izražal v podpiranju revolucij v drugih državah, sprva prek komunistične internacionale, nato pa v konceptu socialističnih držav po destalinizaciji. Ustanovitev drugih komunističnih držav po drugi svetovni vojni je povzročila sovjetizacijo in te države pod vodstvom komunistov so sledile sovjetskemu marksistično-leninističnemu modelu petletnih načrtov in hitre industrializacije, politične centralizacije in represije. Med hladno vojno je bil marksizem-leninizem gonilna sila v mednarodnih odnosih večino 20. stoletja. S smrtjo Stalina in destalinizacijo je marksizem-leninizem doživel več revizij in prilagoditev, kot so guevarizem, misel Ho Ši Minha, hodžaizem, maoizem, socializem s kitajskimi značilnostmi in titoizem.[19][20] To je povzročilo tudi več razcepov med marksistično-leninističnimi državami, kar je povzročilo spor Tito-Stalin, kitajsko-sovjetski in kitajsko-albanski razkol. O družbeno-ekonomski naravi marksistično-leninističnih držav, zlasti Sovjetske zveze v času Stalina, se je veliko razpravljalo, različno so bili označeni kot oblika birokratskega kolektivizma, državnega kapitalizma, državnega socializma ali popolnoma edinstven način proizvodnje. Vzhodni blok, vključno z marksistično-leninističnimi državami v Srednji in Vzhodni Evropi ter socialističnimi režimi tretjega sveta, so bili različno opisani kot "birokratsko-avtoritarni sistemi", kitajska družbeno-ekonomska struktura pa je bila označena kot "nacionalistični državni kapitalizem".[21][22][23][24]

Kritika marksizmo-leninizma se v veliki meri prekriva s kritiko vladavine komunizma in se osredotoča predvsem na dejanja in politike, ki so jih izvajali marksistično-leninistični voditelji, predvsem Stalin, Mao Cetung in Pol Pot. V praksi je marksistično-leninistične države zaznamovala visoka stopnja centraliziranega nadzora s strani države in komunistične partije, politična represija, državni ateizem, kolektivizacija, uporaba prisilnega dela in delovnih taborišč ter brezplačno univerzalno izobraževanje in zdravstveno varstvo, nizka brezposelnost in nižje cene določenega blaga. Zgodovinarji, kot sta Silvio Pons in Robert Service, so izjavili, da sta represija in totalitarizem izhajala iz marksistično-leninistične ideologije.[25][26][27][28] Zgodovinarji, kot sta Michael Geyer in Sheila Fitzpatrick, so predstavili druge razlage in kritizirali osredotočenost na višje družbene ravni in uporabo konceptov hladne vojne, kot je totalitarizem, ki so zakrili resničnost sistema.[29][30][31] Medtem ko je pojav Sovjetske zveze kot prve nominalno komunistične države na svetu privedel do razširjene povezave komunizma z marksizmom-leninizmom in sovjetskim modelom, je več akademikov in ekonomistov, med drugimi znanstveniki, navedlo, da je bil marksistično-leninistični model v praksi oblika državnega kapitalizma ali nenačrtovanega administrativno-komandnega sistema ali poveljniške ekonomije.[32][33][34]

Glej tudi[uredi | uredi kodo]

Sklici[uredi | uredi kodo]

  1. Lansford, Thomas (2007). Communism. New York: Cavendish Square Publishing. str. 9–24, 36–44. ISBN 978-0761426288. By 1985, one-third of the world's population lived under a Marxist–Leninist system of government in one form or another.
  2. Evans, Alfred B. (1993). Soviet Marxism-Leninism: The Decline of an Ideology. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. str. 1–2. ISBN 9780275947637.
  3. Hanson, S. E. (2001). "Marxism/Leninism". International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (1st izd.). str. 9298–9302. doi:10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/01174-8. ISBN 9780080430768.
  4. Cooke, Chris, ur. (1998). Dictionary of Historical Terms (2nd izd.). Palgrave Macmillan. str. 221–222. ISBN 978-0-333-67347-8.
  5. Bhattarai, Kamal Dev (21 February 2018). "The (Re)Birth of the Nepal Communist Party". The Diplomat. Arhivirano iz prvotnega spletišča dne 2 March 2021. Pridobljeno dne 29 November 2020.
  6. Cooke, Chris, ur. (1998). Dictionary of Historical Terms (2nd izd.). Palgrave Macmillan. str. 221–222. ISBN 978-0-333-67347-8.
  7. Cooke, Chris, ur. (1998). Dictionary of Historical Terms (2nd izd.). Palgrave Macmillan. str. 221–222. ISBN 978-0-333-67347-8.
  8. Morgan 2015, str. 657, 659: "Lenin argued that power could be secured on behalf of the proletariat through the so-called vanguard leadership of a disciplined and revolutionary communist party, organized according to what was effectively the military principle of democratic centralism. ... The basics of Marxism-Leninism were in place by the time of Lenin's death in 1924. ... The revolution was to be accomplished in two stages. First, a 'dictatorship of the proletariat,' managed by the élite 'vanguard' communist party, would suppress counterrevolution, and ensure that natural economic resources and the means of production and distribution were in common ownership. Finally, communism would be achieved in a classless society in which Party and State would have 'withered away'."
  9. Busky, Donald F. (2002). Communism in History and Theory: From Utopian Socialism to the Fall of the Soviet Union. Greenwood Publishing. str. 163–165. ISBN 978-0275977481.
  10. Albert, Michael; Hahnel, Robin (1981). Socialism Today and Tomorrow. Boston, Massachusetts: South End Press. str. 24–26. ISBN 978-0896080775.
  11. Andrain, Charles F. (1994). Comparative Political Systems: Policy Performance and Social Change. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. str. 140. ISBN 978-1563242809. The communist party-states collapsed because they no longer fulfilled the essence of a Leninist model: a strong commitment to Marxist-Leninist ideology, rule by the vanguard communist party, and the operation of a centrally planned state socialist economy. Before the mid-1980s, the communist party controlled the military, police, mass media, and state enterprises. Government coercive agencies employed physical sanctions against political dissidents who denounced Marxism-Leninism.
  12. Evans, Alfred (1993). Soviet Marxism-Leninism: The Decline of an Ideology. ABC-CLIO. str. 24. ISBN 978-0275947637. Lenin defended the dictatorial organization of the workers' state. Several years before the revolution, he had bluntly characterized dictatorship as 'unlimited power based on force, and not on law', leaving no doubt that those terms were intended to apply to the dictatorship of the proletariat. ... To socialists who accused the Bolshevik state of violating the principles of democracy by forcibly suppressing opposition, he replied: you are taking a formal, abstract view of democracy. ... The proletarian dictatorship was described by Lenin as a single-party state.
  13. Cooke, Chris, ur. (1998). Dictionary of Historical Terms (2nd izd.). Palgrave Macmillan. str. 221–222. ISBN 978-0-333-67347-8.
  14. Morgan 2015, str. 657, 659: "Lenin argued that power could be secured on behalf of the proletariat through the so-called vanguard leadership of a disciplined and revolutionary communist party, organized according to what was effectively the military principle of democratic centralism. ... The basics of Marxism-Leninism were in place by the time of Lenin's death in 1924. ... The revolution was to be accomplished in two stages. First, a 'dictatorship of the proletariat,' managed by the élite 'vanguard' communist party, would suppress counterrevolution, and ensure that natural economic resources and the means of production and distribution were in common ownership. Finally, communism would be achieved in a classless society in which Party and State would have 'withered away'."
  15. Busky, Donald F. (2002). Communism in History and Theory: From Utopian Socialism to the Fall of the Soviet Union. Greenwood Publishing. str. 163–165. ISBN 978-0275977481.
  16. Albert, Michael; Hahnel, Robin (1981). Socialism Today and Tomorrow. Boston, Massachusetts: South End Press. str. 24–26. ISBN 978-0896080775.
  17. Andrain, Charles F. (1994). Comparative Political Systems: Policy Performance and Social Change. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. str. 140. ISBN 978-1563242809. The communist party-states collapsed because they no longer fulfilled the essence of a Leninist model: a strong commitment to Marxist-Leninist ideology, rule by the vanguard communist party, and the operation of a centrally planned state socialist economy. Before the mid-1980s, the communist party controlled the military, police, mass media, and state enterprises. Government coercive agencies employed physical sanctions against political dissidents who denounced Marxism-Leninism.
  18. Evans, Alfred (1993). Soviet Marxism-Leninism: The Decline of an Ideology. ABC-CLIO. str. 24. ISBN 978-0275947637. Lenin defended the dictatorial organization of the workers' state. Several years before the revolution, he had bluntly characterized dictatorship as 'unlimited power based on force, and not on law', leaving no doubt that those terms were intended to apply to the dictatorship of the proletariat. ... To socialists who accused the Bolshevik state of violating the principles of democracy by forcibly suppressing opposition, he replied: you are taking a formal, abstract view of democracy. ... The proletarian dictatorship was described by Lenin as a single-party state.
  19. Bullock, Allan; Trombley, Stephen, ur. (1999). The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought (3rd izd.). Harper Collins. str. 506. ISBN 978-0006863830.
  20. Lisichkin, G. (1989). "Мифы и реальность" [Myths and reality]. Novy Mir (ruščina). Vol. 3. str. 59.
  21. Wilczynski, J. (2008). The Economics of Socialism after World War Two: 1945-1990. Aldine Transaction. str. 21. ISBN 978-0202362281. Contrary to Western usage, these countries describe themselves as 'Socialist' (not 'Communist'). The second stage (Marx's 'higher phase'), or 'Communism' is to be marked by an age of plenty, distribution according to needs (not work), the absence of money and the market mechanism, the disappearance of the last vestiges of capitalism and the ultimate 'whithering away' of the State.
  22. Steele, David Ramsay (September 1999). From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court. str. 45. ISBN 978-0875484495. Among Western journalists the term 'Communist' came to refer exclusively to regimes and movements associated with the Communist International and its offspring: regimes which insisted that they were not communist but socialist, and movements which were barely communist in any sense at all.
  23. Rosser, Mariana V.; Barkley Jr., J. (23 July 2003). Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy. MIT Press. str. 14. ISBN 978-0262182348. Ironically, the ideological father of communism, Karl Marx, claimed that communism entailed the withering away of the state. The dictatorship of the proletariat was to be a strictly temporary phenomenon. Well aware of this, the Soviet Communists never claimed to have achieved communism, always labeling their own system socialist rather than communist and viewing their system as in transition to communism.
  24. Williams, Raymond (1983). "Socialism". Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition. Oxford University Press. str. 289. ISBN 978-0-19-520469-8. The decisive distinction between socialist and communist, as in one sense these terms are now ordinarily used, came with the renaming, in 1918, of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) as the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). From that time on, a distinction of socialist from communist, often with supporting definitions such as social democrat or democratic socialist, became widely current, although it is significant that all communist parties, in line with earlier usage, continued to describe themselves as socialist and dedicated to socialism.
  25. Service 2007, str. 5–6: "Whereas fascist totalitarianism in Italy and Germany was crushed in 1945, communist totalitarianism was reinforced in the USSR and other Marxist-Leninist states ... enough was achieved in the pursuit of comprehensive political monopoly for the USSR – as well as most other communist states – to be rightly described as totalitarian."
  26. Service 2007, str. 301: "The labor camps developed in the USSR were introduced across the communist world. This was especially easy in eastern Europe where they inherited the punitive structures of the Third Reich. But China too was quick in developing its camp network. This became one of the defining features of communism. It is true that other types of society used forced labour as part of their penal system … What was different about communist rulership was the dispatch of people to the camps for no reason other than the misfortune of belonging to a suspect social class."
  27. Pons & Service 2010, str. 307.
  28. Pons & Service 2010, str. 308–310: "The linkages between ethnic cleansing and the history of communism in power are manifold. Communist governments, wherever they arose, sought to increase the purview of their states by homogenizing, categorizing and making more transparent their populations. … The state would weed out the weak and ungovernable ... and eliminate those ethnicities or nationalities that proved able to perpetuate their cultural, political and economic distinctiveness. ... Ethnic cleansing and communism are linked not only in the history of the Soviet Union and Stalin ... Communist governments saw it in their interests to establish ethnically-homogeneous states and territories, sometimes even claiming that 'national' expulsions constituted a 'social' revolution, since those expelled were the bourgeois or aristocratic 'oppressors' of the native peoples"
  29. "Communism". The Columbia Encyclopedia (6th izd.). 2007. Arhivirano iz prvotnega spletišča dne 10 February 2009. Pridobljeno dne 29 November 2020.
  30. Ball, Terence; Dagger, Richard (2019). "Communism". Encyclopædia Britannica (revised izd.). Arhivirano iz prvotnega spletišča dne 16 June 2015. Pridobljeno dne 10 June 2020. Neznan parameter |orig-date= ni upoštevan (pomoč)
  31. Busky, Donald F. (2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. str. 6–8. ISBN 978-0-275-96886-1. In a modern sense of the word, communism refers to the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. ... [T]he adjective democratic is added by democratic socialists to attempt to distinguish themselves from Communists who also call themselves socialists. All but communists, or more accurately, Marxist-Leninists, believe that modern-day communism is highly undemocratic and totalitarian in practice, and democratic socialists wish to emphasise by their name that they disagree strongly with the Marxist-Leninist brand of socialism.
  32. Chomsky, Noam (1986). "The Soviet Union Versus Socialism". Our Generation. Arhivirano iz prvotnega spletišča dne 4 January 2019. Pridobljeno dne 10 June 2020.
  33. Howard, M. C.; King, J. E. (2001). "'State Capitalism' in the Soviet Union" (PDF). History of Economics Review. 34 (1): 110–126. doi:10.1080/10370196.2001.11733360. Arhivirano (PDF) iz prvotnega spletišča dne 28 July 2019. Pridobljeno dne 12 April 2017.
  34. Fitzgibbons, Daniel J. (11 October 2002). "USSR strayed from communism, say Economics professors". The Campus Chronicle. University of Massachusetts Amherst. Pridobljeno dne 22 September 2021. See also Wolff, Richard D. (27 June 2015). "Socialism Means Abolishing the Distinction Between Bosses and Employees". Truthout. Pridobljeno dne 29 January 2020.