Testament or Action Plan? (On the Centenary of V. I. Lenin’s Last Works)[Завещание Или План Работы? (К Столетию Последних Статей В. И. Ленина)]

One hundred years ago Lenin dictated what became known as his Political Testament. He recommended alterations in the administrative system of the Party and of the country. He also proposed removing Stalin as the Party’s General Secretary. An analysis of Lenin’s last works leads to several conclusions. It lays to rest the claim that these texts were partially falsified. Furthermore, Lenin makes only cursory mention of industrialization. His dream – total cooperation of peasantry – was not feasible, and the kolkhoz system had nothing to do with cooperation. What worried Lenin were two potential rifts. One was a split between workers and peasants in which the peasants would make common cause with the urban bourgeoisie. The second was a schism within the Communist Party leadership brought on by conflict between Stalin and Trotsky. The first split might be avoided if the Communist Party implemented adequate policies. To prevent the second split, Lenin suggested expanding the Central Committee by including more workers. The People’s Commissariat of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspectorate (Rabkrin) was to be merged with the Central Control Commission (CCC). This would improve the state’s administrative apparatus and provide control over the Politburo of the Party’s Central Committee. Lenin’s comrades did not follow his recommendations. Although the CCC and Rabkrin were merged, no control over the Politburo was established. The membership of the Central Committee was not expanded. Stalin remained General Secretary, and he avoided the rifts which Lenin had anticipated in a way quite different from Lenin’s proposals.