One Hundred Years Since Lenin’s Death: New Developments in International Lenin Studies

21 January 2024 marks the 100th anniversary of Lenin’s death. At this temporal juncture, international academia has set off a wave of commemorating and studying Lenin. Publications and journals such as *Monthly Review*, *Jacobin*, *Platypus Review*, *Morning Star*, *In Defense of Marxism*, *Communist*, *International Communist Review*, and *Peoples Democracy* have either opened special columns or published commemorative special issues, or issued editorials and written book reviews. Left-wing institutions such as Germany’s Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung, Greece’s “In Defense of Communism,” and India’s “Countercurrents” have respectively published multiple in-depth analytical articles on their websites. Left-wing political parties such as the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) and the Workers World Party (WWP) of the United States, as well as international organizations such as the International Marxist Tendency (IMT) and the International Coordination of Revolutionary Parties and Organizations (ICOR), have also held a series of activities, conducting multi-dimensional, interdisciplinary discussions around themes such as Lenin studies, revealing the latest theoretical landscape and academic trends in international Lenin studies.

2024年1月21日是列宁逝世100周年纪念日。值此时间节点，国际学术界掀起了纪念和研究列宁的热潮。《每月评论》(Monthly Review)、《雅各宾》(Jacobin)、《鸭嘴兽评论》(Platypus Review)、《晨星报》(Morning Star)、《捍卫马克思主义》(In Defense of Marxism)、《共产党人》(Communist)、《国际共产主义评论》(International Communist Review)、《人民民主》(Peoples Democracy)等报刊杂志或是开辟专栏、出版纪念特辑，或是发表社论、撰写书评；德国罗莎·卢森堡基金会(Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung)、希腊“保卫共产主义”(In Defense of Communism)、印度“反潮流”(Countercurrents)等左翼机构分别在其网站上刊载了多篇深度分析文章；俄罗斯联邦共产党(CPRF)、美国工人世界党(WWP)等左翼政党以及国际马克思主义趋势(IMT)、革命政党和组织国际协调(ICOR)等国际组织也举行了一系列活动，围绕列宁研究等主题展开了多维度、跨学科的研讨，展现出国外列宁研究的最新理论图谱与学术动向。

I. Commemorative and Discussion Activities on the Centenary of Lenin’s Death

一、列宁逝世百年的纪念与研讨活动

First, international academia, through media platforms such as left-wing websites, academic journals, and party newspapers, has intensively published a series of theoretical articles that bear both a tone of commemoration and defense and highlight critique and scrutiny, attempting through academic tracing, analysis, and debate to “reposition Lenin’s life and thought within the ever-changing historical landscape.”(1) Representative articles include: “Lenin’s World Dialectics and the State Tasks of the Proletarian Revolution and the Development of the Soviet State” published by the Communist Union of Ukraine (CKY); “Reflections on Lenin’s Dialectics” by Peter Kondrashov, Chief Researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences; “The February Revolution and Lenin’s Attitude toward the Liberals” by British left-wing activist and journal editor Dylan Cope; “Lenin Lives! Towards a Revolutionary Communist Party!” by Rob Sewell; “Lenin and the Importance of the Workers’ Press” by James Kilby; “Lenin, Dialectics, and Transgender Liberation” by American scholar Alex Adamson; “The Crisis of Leninism in Latin America and Its Critique” by Bruno Bosteels; “Lenin’s Socialism: A Perspective Based on the Future” by Hungarian Marxist theorist Tamas Krausz; “Defending True Leninism” by Shaun Morris; “Saving Lenin” by Argentine political scientist Atilio Boron; “Lenin, Communism, and Women’s Liberation” by Marie Frederiksen, editor of the Danish newspaper *Revolution*; and “The Evolution of Lenin’s Thought on the National Question: Self-Determination, Secession, and Federalism” by Spanish scholar Jaime Pastor, among others.

第一，国外学界通过左翼网站、学术杂志、政党报刊等媒介平台集中发表了一系列既带有缅怀和辩护色彩又凸显批判和审视意味的理论文章，试图通过学术性的溯源、辨析和争鸣“在不断变化的历史图景中重新定位列宁的生平和思想”(1)。其中有代表性的文章包括：乌克兰共产党人联盟(CKY)发表的《列宁的世界辩证法和无产阶级革命的国家任务与苏维埃国家的发展》,俄罗斯科学院首席研究员彼得·孔德拉绍夫(Пётр Кондрашов)发表的《对列宁辩证法的思考》,英国左翼活动家和报刊编辑迪伦·科普(Dylan Cope)发表的《二月革命与列宁对自由派的态度》、罗布·斯维尔(Rob Sewell)发表的《列宁还活着!走向革命共产党!》、詹姆斯·基尔比(James Kilby)发表的《列宁与工人报刊的重要性》,美国学者亚历克斯·亚当森(Alex Adamson)发表的《列宁、辩证法与跨性别解放》和布鲁诺·博斯蒂尔斯(Bruno Bosteels)发表的《列宁主义在拉丁美洲面临的危机及其批判》,匈牙利马克思主义理论家塔马斯·克劳斯(Tamas Krausz)发表的《列宁的社会主义：基于未来的视角》和肖恩·莫里斯(Shaun Morris)发表的《捍卫真正的列宁主义》,阿根廷政治学家阿蒂利奥·博隆(Atilio Boron)发表的《拯救列宁》;丹麦报纸《革命》编辑玛丽·弗雷德里克森(Marie Frederiksen)发表的《列宁、共产主义和妇女解放》,西班牙学者海梅·帕斯托尔(Jaime Pastor)发表的《列宁民族问题思想的演变：自决、分离和联邦制》,等等。

Second, international academia has held a series of discussion activities. On 20 January 2024, the Marx Memorial Library in London held a themed seminar “Lenin in Britain,” discussing Lenin’s thoughts on imperialism, the labor aristocracy, and other issues, as well as his book *The State and Revolution*.(2) On 21–22 January, the Italian Association for Marxist Political Culture of the 21st Century (L’associazione Marx 21) held an online seminar themed “Reflections of Communists on an Extraordinary Theoretical and Political Legacy.” On 21–24 January, the Lenin Centenary Commemoration Committee held an international conference in Abuja, Nigeria, themed “Lenin, Leninism, Africa, and the World,” discussing topics such as “the historical and contemporary development of Marxism-Leninism and its world significance,” “Marxism-Leninism as a tool for analysis and political practice,” and “neoliberalism, globalism, the changing multilateral world, and the rise of the BRICS countries.”(3) On 21–27 January, the Platypus Affiliated Society, a left-wing group in the United States, held its sixth European annual conference in Berlin, themed “What is the Left? 100 Years After Lenin,” aiming to “critically examine the legacy of the failed world revolutions of the 20th century” and “contribute to clearing the obstacles facing the future left.”(4) On 22 January, Cuba’s national television flagship program “Round Table Interview” planned a special episode titled “Lenin is the Banner of Socialism,” inviting prominent Cuban philosophers to address topics such as “Lenin’s contribution to Marxism,” “the inspiration Lenin provides for today’s anti-imperialist and anti-colonial struggle,” and “returning to Lenin.”(5) From 27 January to 5 May, with the joint initiation and academic support of journals such as the UK’s *Historical Materialism*, *Jacobin America Latina*, Spain’s *Viento Sur*, and Cuba’s Juan Marinello Cultural Center (JMCICR), over 60 political, academic, and media figures from around the world, across more than 20 cities globally, conducted a series of academic commemorative activities—including themed conferences, roundtables, dialogues, and new book launches—through a combination of online and offline formats, under the theme “100 Years with Lenin, 100 Years Without Lenin.”(6)

第二，国外学界举办了一系列研讨活动。2024年1月20日，英国马克思纪念图书馆在伦敦举办“列宁在英国”主题研讨会，围绕列宁对帝国主义、工人贵族等问题的思考以及《国家与革命》一书展开了研讨。(2)1月21—22日，意大利21世纪马克思政治文化协会(L'associazione Marx 21)举办了主题为“共产党人对非凡理论政治遗产的反思”的线上研讨会。1月21—24日，列宁逝世百年纪念委员会在尼日利亚首都阿布贾举办了主题为“列宁、列宁主义、非洲与世界”的国际会议，围绕“马列主义的历史和当代发展及其世界意义”“马列主义作为分析和政治实践的工具”“新自由主义、全球主义、不断变化的多边主义世界以及金砖国家的崛起”等议题进行了研讨。(3)1月21—27日，美国左翼团体鸭嘴兽支部(Platypus Affiliated Society)在柏林召开第六届欧洲年会，会议主题为“何为左翼?列宁之后的100年”,目的是“批判性地审视20世纪世界革命失败的遗产”,“为扫清未来左翼所面临的障碍作出贡献”。(4)1月22日，古巴国家电视台旗舰节目“圆桌访谈”策划了一期题为“列宁是社会主义的旗帜”的特别节目，邀请本国著名哲学家就“列宁对马克思主义的贡献”“列宁给当今反帝反殖民斗争的启示”以及“回到列宁”等议题进行解答。(5)1月27日至5月5日，在英国《历史唯物主义》(Historical Materialism)、《拉美雅各宾》(Jacobin America Latina)和西班牙《南风》(Viento Sur)等杂志以及古巴“胡安·马里内略文化中心”(JMCICR)的共同发起和学术支持下，来自世界各地的60多位政界、学界、媒体人士在全球20多个城市通过线上与线下相结合的方式，以“与列宁在一起的100年，没有列宁的100年”为主题，开展了包括主题会议、圆桌会议、对话会、新书发布会等在内的一系列学术纪念活动。(6)

Third, some left-wing scholars, media outlets, or publishing houses abroad have published or republished a large number of Lenin’s works, biographies, and research monographs. Representative works include: *A Guide to Reading “What Is to Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement”* edited by Prakash Karat, former General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)]; the revised edition of *Selected Works of Lenin* edited and translated by Japanese historian Haruki Wada; *Social Revolution: Lenin and Latin America* by Chilean political scientist Marta Harnecker; *War and Lenin in the 21st Century* by Gary Wilson, editor of the US website “Struggle-la-lucha”; the two-volume biography *In Defense of Lenin* by Alan Woods, editor-in-chief of the UK website “Marxist,” and others; and *Lenin: The Legacy We Will “Never” Abandon* co-edited by Bolivian writer Hjalmar Eichhorn and Canadian scholar Patrick Anderson, among others.

第三，国外一些左翼学者、媒体或出版机构出版或再版了一大批列宁的著作、传记及研究性著作。其中有代表性的作品包括：印度共产党(马克思主义)[CPI(M)]前总书记普拉卡什·卡拉特(Prakash Karat)主编的《〈怎么办?——我们运动中的迫切问题〉导读》,日本历史学家和田春树主编并翻译的《列宁精选》修订版，智利政治学家玛尔塔·哈内克(Marta Harnecker)撰写的《社会革命：列宁与拉丁美洲》,美国“为社会主义而斗争”网站(Struggle-la-lucha)编辑加里·威尔逊(Gary Wilson)撰写的《21世纪的战争与列宁》,英国“马克思主义者”(Marxist)网站主编艾兰·乌兹(Alan Woods)等人撰写的两卷本传记《捍卫列宁》,玻利维亚作家哈尔玛·艾希霍恩(Hjalmar Eichhorn)与加拿大学者帕特里克·安德森(Patrick Anderson)共同主编的《列宁：我们“绝不”放弃的遗产》,等等。

II. Tracing and Reinterpreting the Theoretical Origins of Lenin’s Philosophical Thought

二、对列宁哲学思想理论溯源的追溯与再阐释

In the process of leading the revolution, Lenin not only attached importance to political action and organizational construction, but also paid attention to philosophical exploration and theoretical innovation, authoring immortal masterpieces such as *Philosophical Notebooks* and *Materialism and Empirio-Criticism*. International scholars positively evaluate Lenin’s dialectical materialist thought as an original contribution to enriching and developing Marxist philosophy, as well as Lenin’s sublation and transcendence of the theories of the Second International and of Russian thinkers.

列宁在领导革命的过程中不仅重视政治行动和组织建设，而且关注哲学探索和理论创新，著有《哲学笔记》《唯物主义和经验批判主义》等不朽名篇。国外学者积极评价列宁的唯物辩证法思想为丰富和发展马克思主义哲学作出的原创性贡献，以及列宁对第二国际理论和俄国思想家思想的扬弃与超越。

Kondrashov points out that from the dialectics of the objective material world to the dialectics of socialist revolution and construction is Lenin’s comprehensive development of dialectical materialism. He believes that Lenin deeply studied dialectical materialism and applied it throughout all fields: from the dialectics of the objective material world, to the dialectics of the revolutionary process and the dialectics of building a socialist society. “Social dialectics” is Lenin’s new interpretation and new development of dialectical materialism; it includes “the dialectics of social processes” and “the dialectics of social practice.” This society is not spontaneously generated by abstract historical inevitability, but is created by the people themselves, because the people are the creators of their own history.[7]7 The reference “(7)” in the original text likely cites a Russian-language source (Kondrashov); the specific work is not identified here.

孔德拉绍夫指出，从客观物质世界的辩证法到社会主义革命和建设的辩证法是列宁对唯物辩证法的全面发展。他认为列宁深入研究了唯物辩证法，并将其贯穿到所有领域：从客观物质世界的辩证法，到革命过程的辩证法和建设社会主义社会的辩证法。“社会辩证法”是列宁对唯物辩证法的新阐释和新发展，它包括“社会过程辩证法”和“社会实践辩证法”。这个社会不是由抽象的历史必然性自行产生的，而是由人民自己创造的，因为人民就是自己历史的创造者。(7)

Kevin B. Anderson, an American scholar who has long engaged in the study of Lenin’s philosophy, links Lenin’s dialectical thought with his classic works on imperialism, anti-colonial movements, and the state, sorts out Lenin’s study of Hegel’s philosophy, clarifies how Hegel’s dialectics laid the philosophical foundation for Lenin’s revolutionary dialectics after 1914, and Lenin’s original contribution to the development of Hegel’s dialectics. Anderson also examines the influence of Lenin’s *Philosophical Notebooks* on Western Marxism.[8]8 Kevin B. Anderson is a prominent Western Marxist scholar known for his work on Lenin, Hegel, and Marx.

长期从事列宁哲学研究的美国学者凯文·安德森(Kevin B.Anderson)将列宁的辩证法思想与其关于帝国主义、反殖民运动和国家的经典著作联系起来，梳理了列宁对黑格尔哲学的研究，阐明了黑格尔的辩证法何以为1914年后列宁的革命辩证法奠定了哲学基础，以及列宁对黑格尔辩证法的发展作出的原创性贡献。安德森还考察了列宁的《哲学笔记》对西方马克思主义的影响。(8)

Another American scholar, Carlos L. Garrido, argues that Lenin’s *Materialism and Empirio-Criticism* developed Marxist materialism by criticizing the idealism of Machism and its negative impact on the spread of Marxism in Russia; while the *Philosophical Notebooks* contain Lenin’s philosophical development of the Marxist worldview. In Garrido’s view, although Marx did not form the thought of “dialectics” into a text, Lenin’s philosophical research in Switzerland in 1914, especially his critical reading of Hegel’s *Science of Logic*, provides us with a materialist interpretation of Hegel and Marxism’s sublation of his dialectical worldview, and is therefore one of the greatest advances of dialectical materialism.[9]9 Machism is a philosophical current named after Ernst Mach, which Lenin criticized as a form of idealism in *Materialism and Empirio-Criticism*.

另一位美国学者卡洛斯·加里多(Carlos L.Garrido)认为，列宁的《唯物主义和经验批判主义》通过批判马赫主义的唯心主义及其对俄国马克思主义传播产生的负面影响发展了马克思主义的唯物主义；而《哲学笔记》则包含了列宁对马克思主义世界观的哲学发展。在加里多看来，虽然马克思并没有将“辩证法”思想形成文本，但列宁于1914年在瑞士的哲学研究，特别是他对黑格尔《逻辑学》的批判性阅读，为我们提供了关于黑格尔的唯物主义解释以及马克思主义对其辩证世界观的扬弃，因此是辩证唯物主义最伟大的进步之一。(9)

French scholar Michael Löwy traces the intellectual leap Lenin made from his *Philosophical Notebooks* to the *April Theses*. In his view, the *April Theses* represent Lenin’s complete break with the political theory of the Bolshevik tradition before the First World War. As early as 1905, Lenin advocated a revolutionary alliance of the proletariat and the peasantry, and a thorough deepening of the revolution without the liberal bourgeoisie, or even against it. In light of this, the new Bolshevism born in April 1917 is the true heir of the old Bolshevism. He argues that although the *Philosophical Notebooks* constitute Lenin’s philosophical break with early Leninism, it must also be acknowledged that the method he employed in his political writings before 1914 was more dialectical than that of Plekhanov or Kautsky.[10]10 The *April Theses* were Lenin’s 1917 program for the Russian Revolution, calling for a transition from the bourgeois-democratic revolution to a socialist revolution. Plekhanov and Kautsky were leading Marxist theorists of the Second International whom Lenin criticized.

法国学者迈克尔·洛威(Michael Löwy)追溯了列宁如何从他的《哲学笔记》中推导出《四月提纲》的思想跃迁的历程。在他看来，《四月提纲》代表了列宁同第一次世界大战前布尔什维克传统的政治理论的彻底决裂。早在1905年，列宁就主张无产阶级与农民的革命联盟，以及在没有自由资产阶级、甚至反对自由资产阶级的情况下彻底深化革命。鉴于此，1917年4月诞生的新布尔什维主义是旧布尔什维主义的真正继承者。他认为，虽然《哲学笔记》构成了列宁同早期列宁主义的哲学决裂，但也必须承认他在1914年前撰写的政治著作中所采用的方法比普列汉诺夫或考茨基的方法更加辩证。(10)

III. Contemporary Interpretations and Discussions of Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism

三、对列宁帝国主义论的当代解读及探讨

In 1916, Lenin provided a penetrating analysis of imperialism in *Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism*. More than a century later, the basic features of imperialism outlined by Lenin—exploitation, plunder, inequality, war, and destruction—have further intensified, with international finance capital running rampant, and neoliberalism, racism, chauvinism, and neo-fascism clearly on the rise.[11]11 *Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism* (1916) is Lenin’s key work analyzing monopoly capitalism. These new changes in contemporary capitalism have prompted international scholars to re-study and re-examine Lenin’s theory of imperialism. International scholars believe that the theory of imperialism, as a core theory by which Lenin expanded the connotation of Marxism, is a landmark concept and pioneering theoretical advance of Leninism.[12]12 “Leninism” refers to the Marxist theory developed by Lenin, especially on imperialism, the vanguard party, and revolution. Lenin’s study of global political economy, especially monopoly capitalism and modern imperialism, gave him a keen understanding of the broad applicability of Marxism on a global scale, thereby deepening the Marxist understanding of the political economy of imperialism and the monopoly capitalist stage.[13]13 Monopoly capitalism is the stage of capitalism characterized by the dominance of large monopolies, as analyzed by Lenin.

1916年，列宁在《帝国主义论》中对帝国主义进行了精辟的分析。在一个多世纪后的今天，列宁所概述的剥削、掠夺、不平等、战争和破坏等帝国主义的基本特征进一步加剧，国际金融资本横行，新自由主义、种族主义、沙文主义和新法西斯主义等明显抬头。(11)当代资本主义的这些新变化推动了国外学者对列宁帝国主义论的再研究、再审视。国外学者认为，帝国主义论作为列宁拓展马克思主义内涵的核心理论，是列宁主义的标志性概念及开创性的理论进步。(12)列宁对全球政治经济、特别是垄断资本主义和现代帝国主义的研究，使他对马克思主义在全球范围内的广泛适用性有了敏锐认识，从而深化了马克思主义对帝国主义和垄断资本主义阶段的政治经济学的理解。(13)

In Kalat’s view, Lenin was a Marxist who broke with traditional understanding; he saw how imperialism developed into a world system due to the inherent requirements of monopoly capitalism, and combined the theory of imperialism with the strategy and tactics of the world proletarian revolution. Lenin also pointed out that in the era of imperialism, as long as the weakest link in the chain of global capitalist exploitation was broken, revolution would erupt. Therefore, Lenin’s understanding of imperialism laid the foundation for linking the class struggle of the working class in advanced capitalist countries with the national liberation struggle in the colonies.[14]14 The “weakest link” thesis is Lenin’s argument that revolution could first succeed in a country like Russia, where capitalism was less developed and contradictions were most acute.

在卡拉特看来，列宁是打破传统认识的马克思主义者，他看到了帝国主义如何因垄断资本主义的内在要求发展成为一种世界体系，并将帝国主义论与世界无产阶级革命的战略和策略结合起来；列宁还指出了在帝国主义时代只要打破全球资本主义的剥削链条中最薄弱的一环，就会爆发革命。因此，列宁对帝国主义的理解为将先进资本主义国家的工人阶级斗争与殖民地的民族解放斗争联系起来奠定了基础。(14)

Indian economist Prabhat Patnaik argues that Lenin’s theory of imperialism developed Marxism in five important respects. These five aspects include: incorporating countries in the “remote regions of the world,” which Hegel regarded as having no history, into the scope of world revolution; expanding Marxism from a theory of proletarian revolution in developed capitalist countries into a theory of world revolution; providing a completely new explanation for the “moribund nature” of capitalism; regarding socialism as the goal of all revolutions; and putting forward the view that imperialism uses a portion of the super-profits it extracts to bribe a “labor aristocracy,” thereby revealing the internal reasons for the prevalence of reformism and various opportunisms in the European workers’ movement.[15]15 The “labor aristocracy” thesis holds that imperialist super-profits allow the bourgeoisie to bribe a section of the working class, creating a stratum that supports reformism.

印度经济学家普拉巴特·帕特奈克(Prabhat Patnaik)认为列宁的帝国主义论在五个重要方面发展了马克思主义。这五个方面包括：将被黑格尔视为没有历史的“世界边远地区”国家纳入了世界革命范围；将马克思主义从发达资本主义国家的无产阶级革命理论扩展为世界革命理论；为资本主义的“垂死性”提供了全新解释；将社会主义视为一切革命的目标；提出了帝国主义从其所攫取的超额利润中拿出一部分去收买“工人贵族”的观点，进而揭示了欧洲工人运动中改良主义和各种机会主义盛行的内在原因。(15)

At the same time, some international scholars have also noted that in the era of economic globalization, faced with the replacement of national monopoly capital by international financial monopoly capital, and new changes in imperialism such as the hegemony of international finance capital manifested in the form of the neoliberal order, new research and new interpretations are needed regarding the imperialist tendencies inherent in the brutal expansion of the logic of capital in the era of neoliberal globalization. For example, Indian scholar Sunanda Sen and others point out that the old imperialist model in the works of John Hobson, Rudolf Hilferding, and Lenin was constructed in the context of colonial relations between the ruling country and the ruled colonies, where the former provided the basis for economic domination through political conquest and military occupation. However, imperialism and its systems and modes of oppression have changed significantly. Unlike the traditional forms of the colonial era, the new imperialism of contemporary capitalism is marked by international finance capital hegemony, globalization, and neoliberal policies, exercising diverse forms of domination through financialization and neo-mercantilism, thereby affecting the economic and political sovereignty of nation-states and the lives of working people.[16]16 Neoliberalism is a political-economic ideology promoting free markets, privatization, and deregulation, dominant since the late 20th century. These changes do not mean that the aggressiveness and predatory nature of imperialism have weakened. The contradictions within imperialism have not triggered wars among imperialist powers, but have instead led imperialist alliances to wage war against national liberation movements to maintain hegemony, impose economic blockades and coercive sanctions on countries that obstruct their hegemonic designs, and accumulate capital by plundering and exploiting the resources of developing countries.[17]17 Neo-mercantilism refers to state policies that promote exports and protect domestic industries, often associated with contemporary capitalist competition.

与此同时，一些国外学者也注意到，在经济全球化时代，面对国际金融垄断资本对国家垄断资本的替代，以及以新自由主义秩序为表现形式的国际金融资本霸权等帝国主义的新变化，需要对新自由主义全球化时代资本逻辑的残酷扩张中所固有的帝国主义倾向进行新研究、新阐释。例如，印度学者苏南达·森(Sunanda Sen)等指出，约翰·霍布森、鲁道夫·希法亭和列宁著作中的旧帝国主义模式是在统治国家与被统治的殖民地之间的殖民关系背景下构建的，前者通过政治征服和武力占领使殖民地为其提供经济统治的基础。然而，帝国主义及其制度和压迫模式已经发生了很大变化，与殖民主义时代的传统形式不同，当代资本主义的新帝国主义以国际金融资本霸权、全球化和新自由主义政策为标志，通过金融化和新重商主义进行多样化的统治，进而影响民族国家的经济和政治主权以及劳动人民的生活。(16)这些变化并不意味着帝国主义的侵略性和掠夺性有所减弱，帝国主义内部的矛盾并没有引发帝国主义列强之间的战争，反而导致了帝国主义联盟对民族解放运动发动战争以维持霸权，对阻碍其霸权图谋的国家实施经济封锁和强制制裁，通过掠夺和剥削发展中国家的资源来积累资本。(17)

IV. Reflections on Lenin’s Theory of Socialist Revolution and Construction

四、对列宁社会主义革命和建设理论的思考

International academic circles believe that Lenin achieved the unity of a theoretician of practice and a practitioner of theory; his thought is an extremely rare combination of theory and practice, movement and organization. They emphasize that Lenin pioneered, in the field of revolutionary practice, the revolutionary strategy of the industrial proletariat and the peoples of colonial and oppressed countries, as well as the strategy of the worker-peasant alliance, and put forward the idea of the revolutionary party as the vanguard of the working class.[18]18 The vanguard party is a Leninist concept of a disciplined revolutionary party leading the working class.

国外学界认为列宁实现了理论的实践家与实践的理论家的统一，其思想是理论与实践、运动与组织极其罕见的结合，强调列宁在革命实践领域开创了工业无产阶级与殖民地和被压迫国家人民的革命战略和工农联盟战略，提出了革命政党作为工人阶级先锋队的思想。(18)

First, Lenin’s Exploration and Practice of the Worker-Peasant Alliance Issue.

第一，列宁对工农联盟问题的探索与实践。

Mary Davis, a visiting professor at the University of London, explored Lenin’s contribution to Marxist theory and practice and its relationship with the series of major events of 1917, proposing that Lenin developed Marxism in three important and interrelated aspects (the theory of socialism in one country, the theory of imperialism, and the analysis of the land question and the role of the peasantry).[19]19 The “theory of socialism in one country” holds that a socialist revolution can succeed in a single country, even a relatively backward one, contrary to Marx and Engels’ earlier expectation of simultaneous revolution in advanced capitalist countries. The “theory of imperialism” analyzes capitalism’s highest stage as a system of monopoly, finance capital, and colonial exploitation. The “land question” refers to the Bolsheviks’ policy of confiscating large estates and distributing land to the peasantry. Ashok Dhawale, chair of the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS), argued that Lenin creatively put forward the worker-peasant alliance as the core of socialist revolution, advancing the victory of socialist revolution in Russia as well as in China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, and other countries. In the era of imperialist globalization, with the continuous rise of right-wing forces, the importance of establishing and strengthening worker-peasant alliances in various countries is highlighted; only by strengthening the unity of the two major classes, the workers and the peasants, can the impact of neoliberalism be resisted.[20]20 The All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) is a major peasant organization in India, historically linked to the Communist Party of India.

伦敦大学客座教授玛丽·戴维斯(Mary Davis)探讨了列宁对马克思主义理论和实践的贡献及其与1917年系列重大事件的关系，提出列宁在三个重要且相互关联的方面(一国胜利论、帝国主义论以及对土地问题和农民作用的分析)发展了马克思主义。(19)全印农民协会(AIKS)主席阿肖克·达瓦勒(Ashok Dhawale)认为，列宁创造性地提出了工农联盟是社会主义革命的核心，推动了社会主义革命在俄国以及中国、越南、朝鲜、古巴等国取得胜利。在帝国主义全球化的时代，随着右翼势力持续崛起，建立和加强各国工农联盟的重要性凸显，只有工农两大阶级加强团结，才能抵抗新自由主义的冲击。(20)

Second, Lenin’s theory of the new-type proletarian party.

第二，列宁关于新型无产阶级政党的理论。

Karat analyzed Lenin’s concepts of class consciousness, the proletarian vanguard, centralization, and democratic centralism. The proletarian vanguard is composed of politically conscious activists from the working class; it supports not only the working class but also all oppressed strata in society. To create a party that achieves political unity under centralized political leadership, the proletarian vanguard must be organized from the top down. The core issue of democratic centralism lies not only in the party’s organizational structure but also in its fundamental role. For a proletarian party committed to overthrowing the order of capitalism and its ruling class and ultimately replacing it with socialism, it must be an institution capable of waging political, ideological, and organizational struggle against the powerful state apparatus and the ruling class. Such an institution is built through class struggle and mass movements, capable of functioning under all legal, semi-legal, and illegal conditions, which requires a centralized party. Karat believes that the historical experience of 20th-century revolutions has proven the effectiveness of Lenin’s organizational theory and the practice of democratic centralism; for parties based on Marxism and class struggle, democratic centralism is the most suitable organizational principle.[21]21 Prakash Karat is a prominent Indian communist theorist and former General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). In the view of Francesco Helbling, a leader of the Swiss left-wing youth, the Leninist party structure and organizational model are not only crucial for pursuing political goals but also a solution to the current extreme individualist ideology of capitalism. Unlike other parties, the Leninist party is more like an organism that can adjust and develop according to the needs of the historical stage and adopt the most effective line.[22]22 “Leninist party” here refers to the vanguard party model based on democratic centralism, as developed by Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

卡拉特分析了列宁的阶级意识、无产阶级先锋队、集权和民主集中制等概念。无产阶级先锋队是由具有政治意识的工人阶级积极分子组成的，它不仅支持工人阶级，而且支持社会中所有被压迫的阶层。为了创建一个在集中的政治领导下实现政治统一的政党，无产阶级先锋队必须是自上而下组织起来的。民主集中制问题的核心不仅在于党的组织结构，还在于党的基本作用。对于致力于推翻资本主义及其统治阶级的秩序并最终以社会主义取而代之的无产阶级政党来说，它必须是一个能够与强大的国家机器和统治阶级进行政治、意识形态及组织斗争的机构。这样的机构是通过阶级斗争和群众运动建立起来的，能够在一切合法、半合法和非法的条件下发挥作用，这就需要一个中央集权的政党。卡拉特认为，20世纪革命的历史经验证明了列宁的组织理论和民主集中制实践的有效性，对于以马克思主义和阶级斗争为基础的政党来说，民主集中制是最适合的组织原则。(21)而在瑞士左翼青年领袖弗朗西斯科·赫尔布林(Francesco Helbling)看来，列宁主义的政党结构和组织模式不仅对于追求政治目标至关重要，而且是当前对抗资本主义的极端个人主义意识形态的解决方案。与其他政党不同，列宁主义政党更像是一个有机体，能够根据历史阶段的需要调整和发展，并采取最有效的路线。(22)

Third, Lenin’s theory on the national and colonial question and the right of nations to self-determination.

第三，列宁关于民族殖民地问题和民族自决权的理论。

Sitaram Yechury, General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), pointed out that while leading the Russian revolution and construction, Lenin also closely followed and supported the liberation struggles of oppressed nations in the colonies, historically integrating the domestic people’s movement in Russia with the global anti-imperialist struggle. On the basis of Marx and Engels’ slogan “Workers of the world, unite!”, he put forward the fighting slogan “Workers and oppressed peoples of the world, unite!”. Thus, Lenin’s program on the colonial question laid the theoretical foundation both for developing a global anti-imperialist united front combining the proletarian revolutionary movement with the national liberation struggle, and for integrating the national liberation movements of all colonial countries with the global anti-imperialist struggle.[23]23 The slogan “Workers and oppressed peoples of the world, unite!” was introduced by Lenin at the Second Congress of the Communist International in 1920, expanding Marx and Engels’ original call. In the view of American scholar Jonah Henkle, Lenin’s proposal to smash racial and national chauvinism that attempts to split the working class was not about crudely eliminating national, religious, and racial differences, but about developing internationalism, democracy, and socialism within each country.[24]24 “Racial and national chauvinism” refers to ideologies of national or racial superiority that divide the working class along ethnic lines. Pastor, meanwhile, pointed out that Lenin understood the right of nations to self-determination as the right to secede from the state to which the oppressed nation belongs, arguing that the working class must seek a democratic solution to the national question by recognizing the self-determination of oppressed nations.[25]25 The “right of nations to self-determination” was a key Leninist principle supporting the right of oppressed nationalities to secede from imperial or multinational states.

印度共产党(马克思主义) 总书记西塔拉姆·亚秋里(Sitaram Yechury)指出，列宁在领导俄国革命和建设的同时，也密切关注和支持殖民地被压迫民族的解放斗争，并历史性地将俄国国内的人民运动与世界反帝斗争结合起来，在马克思恩格斯的“全世界无产者联合起来”口号的基础上提出了“全世界无产者和被压迫民族联合起来”的战斗口号。由此，列宁关于殖民地问题的纲领既为发展无产阶级革命运动与民族解放斗争相结合的世界反帝统一战线奠定了理论基础，也为把所有殖民地国家的民族解放运动同全球反帝斗争结合起来奠定了理论基础。(23)在美国学者乔纳·亨克尔(Jonah Henkle)看来，列宁建议粉碎试图分裂工人阶级的种族和民族沙文主义，并不是要粗暴地消除民族、宗教和种族差异，而是要在每个国家内部发展国际主义、民主和社会主义。(24)帕斯托尔则指出，列宁把民族自决权理解为与被压迫民族所属的国家分离的权利，认为工人阶级必须通过承认被压迫民族的自决权来寻求民主地解决民族问题。(25)

Fourth, Lenin’s theory and practice of world proletarian revolution.

第四，列宁关于世界无产阶级革命的理论与实践。

From around the victory of the October Revolution to the early to mid-1920s, the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), the Communist International, and Soviet Russia (the USSR), based on Lenin’s theory of imperialism, combined the class struggle in imperialist countries, revolutionary movements in Europe, and the liberation struggles of colonial countries, actively promoting the worldwide proletarian socialist revolution. In this regard, the Union of Communists of Ukraine proposed: Proletarian socialist revolution is the core of the dialectics of the revolutionary process, and its deepest contradiction is the contradiction between the world tasks and the national tasks of the proletariat. Lenin broke through the traditional “theory of simultaneous victory”, creatively proposed and practiced the “theory of socialism in one country”, and after achieving victory in the October Revolution, starting from the essential characteristic of proletarian revolution as “international”, he used the victory in one country to maximally promote the development of world revolution, striving to ultimately defeat capitalism on a global scale. However, with the ebbing of the European revolutionary wave, the formation of a European balance of power, and adjustments in the leadership of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), the Soviet Union’s revolutionary strategy also shifted from the “theory of world revolution” to the “theory of socialism in one country”.[26]26 The “theory of simultaneous victory” (or “permanent revolution”) held that socialist revolution must occur simultaneously in several advanced capitalist countries. The “theory of socialism in one country” was later developed by Stalin. The “European balance of power” refers to the stabilization of interstate relations in Europe after the revolutionary wave of 1917–1923 receded.

在十月革命胜利前后至1920年代中前期，俄共(布)、共产国际以及苏俄(联)以列宁的帝国主义论为基础，将帝国主义国家的阶级斗争、欧洲各国的革命运动与殖民地国家的解放斗争相结合，积极推动了世界范围内的无产阶级社会主义革命。对此，乌克兰共产党人联盟提出：无产阶级社会主义革命是革命进程辩证法的核心，其最深刻的矛盾是无产阶级的世界任务与国家任务之间的矛盾。列宁突破了传统的“共同胜利论”,创造性地提出并实践了“一国胜利论”,并在取得十月革命胜利后，从“国际性”这一无产阶级革命的本质特征出发，利用本国胜利最大限度地推动了世界革命的发展，争取在全球范围内最终战胜资本主义。然而，随着欧洲革命浪潮退去、欧洲均势格局形成以及俄共(布)领导层的调整，苏联的革命策略也从“世界革命论”转变为“一国社会主义论”。(26)

Fifth, Lenin’s preliminary exploration of the socialist transition period.

第五，列宁关于社会主义过渡阶段的初步探索。

Italian scholar Andrea Catone, starting from the interpretation of the concept of “transition”, introduced Lenin’s *State and Revolution*, pointing out that Lenin regarded transition as a multi-stage process occurring in different fields and at different times, and used the Russian question as a case study to analyze the problem of transition to socialism in backward countries. By comparing it with the concept of transition in Nikolai Bukharin’s *Economics of the Transition Period*, Catone analyzed the particularity and complexity of the transition period in Soviet Russia (the USSR) from 1921 to 1923. In his view, it is difficult to give a unified answer to the question of when and why the Soviet transformation stagnated, as this requires a careful study of nearly 70 years of Soviet history. Lenin regarded transition as a multi-stage process occurring in different fields and at different times.[27]27 Nikolai Bukharin was a leading Bolshevik theorist and later a rival of Stalin. His *Economics of the Transition Period* (1920) analyzed the economic transformation from capitalism to socialism. Klaus, meanwhile, analyzed the shift in Soviet Russia from the policy of War Communism to the New Economic Policy. In his view, the main direction of Lenin’s socialist theory and his political activities was the gradual extrication from the capitalist system; the concrete historical experience he summarized remains relevant until we fully realize socialism.[28]28 War Communism (1918–1921) was the Bolshevik policy of nationalization, forced grain requisitioning, and centralized economic control during the Civil War. The New Economic Policy (NEP, 1921–1928) reintroduced limited market mechanisms and private trade.

意大利学者安德烈·卡托内(Andrea Catone)从“过渡”概念的释义出发介绍了列宁的《国家与革命》,指出列宁将过渡视为在不同领域、不同时期发生的多阶段过程，并以俄国问题为个案剖析了落后国家向社会主义过渡的问题。通过与尼古拉·布哈林的《过渡时期经济学》中的过渡概念进行比较，卡托内分析了1921—1923年苏俄(联)过渡时期的特殊性和复杂性。在他看来，对于苏联转型何时以及为何停滞的问题，很难给出统一的答案，因为这需要仔细研究苏联近70年的历史。列宁将过渡视为在不同领域、不同时期发生的多阶段过程。(27)克劳斯则分析了苏俄从战时共产主义政策向新经济政策的转变。在他看来，列宁的社会主义理论及其政治活动的主要方向就是逐步摆脱资本主义制度，他所总结的具体的历史经验在我们完全实现社会主义之前仍然具有现实意义。(28)

Sixth, Lenin’s strategy and tactics for proletarian revolution.

第六，列宁关于无产阶级革命的战略与策略。

Brazilian historian Valerio Arcary, taking Lenin’s four tactical shifts between the February Revolution and the October Revolution as examples, focused on elaborating Lenin’s strategic clarity and tactical flexibility, and on this basis explored how to transform them into effective methodological tools directly applicable to analysis, in order to provide a reference for Latin America and the world in opposing the rise of the extreme right.[29]29 The February Revolution (March 1917) overthrew the Tsar; the October Revolution (November 1917) brought the Bolsheviks to power. Lenin’s four tactical shifts refer to his changing positions on issues such as support for the Provisional Government, the slogan “All Power to the Soviets”, and the decision to launch an armed insurrection. Nazareno Godeiro, a researcher at the Latin American Institute of Socioeconomic Research, praised Lenin as “the greatest revolutionary in human history”, arguing that “his entire contribution to Marxism is embodied in the continuous struggle of the international workers’ movement against opportunism and sectarianism, and in the resolutions of the first four congresses of the Communist International”. In his view, all the tactics implemented by Lenin leading the Bolshevik Party served the strategy of the proletariat seizing state power and building a socialist society, such as encouraging economic struggle, launching guerrilla warfare, striving for reforms, participating in parliaments and elections, and forming various alliances.[30]30 The Communist International (Comintern, 1919–1943) was the international organization of communist parties founded by Lenin. Its first four congresses (1919–1922) set the strategic and tactical line for the world communist movement.

巴西历史学家瓦莱里奥·阿卡里(Valerio Arcary)以列宁在二月革命到十月革命期间做出的四次策略性转变为例，着重阐述了列宁的战略明确性与策略灵活性，并在此基础上探讨了如何将其转变为直接适用于分析的有效方法论工具，以便为拉丁美洲乃至全世界反对极右翼势力的崛起提供参考。(29)拉美社会经济研究所研究员纳扎雷诺·戈代罗(Nazareno Godeiro)盛赞列宁“是人类历史上最伟大的革命家”,认为其“对马克思主义的全部贡献体现在国际工人运动反对机会主义和宗派主义的不断斗争中，体现在共产国际前四次代表大会的决议中”。在他看来，列宁领导布尔什维克党实施的所有策略都是为无产阶级夺取政权和建设社会主义社会的战略服务的，例如，鼓励经济斗争、发动游击战、争取改革、参加议会和选举、结成各种联盟等。(30)

V. The True Essence and Contemporary Significance of Leninism

五、列宁主义的思想真谛和当代意义

As a fierce critic of global capitalism and the first practitioner of world socialism, Lenin’s grasp of the epoch’s questions and his vision of future society remain instructive today. Therefore, re-examining the contemporary relevance of Leninism in the 21st century has become a hot topic of discussion among international scholars.

作为全球资本主义的激烈批判者和世界社会主义的最初实践者，列宁对时代课题的把握和对未来社会的设想在今天仍然具有启发性。因此，重新审视列宁主义在21世纪的现实意义成为国外学者热议的话题。

First, the continuous exploration of historical laws in the pursuit of human emancipation is the highest aspiration of Leninism.

第一，在对历史规律的持续探索中寻求人类解放是列宁主义的最高追求。

Bolong points out that we are living at the beginning of a new era and must treat Lenin, the great revolutionary theorist and practitioner, fairly; we must reread Lenin’s works, restore his theoretical legacy, and dialectically integrate it with the changes of the times, so as to advance world revolution on a broader scale and end the dictatorship of capital and the atrocities of imperialism.[31]31 Bolong is a transliteration of the name of a foreign scholar; the original source is not specified in the text. Mexican scholar Jaime Ortega argues that Leninism is a catalyst for Latin American Marxism in the face of new revolutionary situations and conditions, and a useful reference for carrying out revolution in Latin America. This is not because Latin America resembles Russia in the early 20th century or because Lenin’s thought is flawless, but because Leninism shows us the power of thinking about politics.[32]32 Jaime Ortega is a Mexican scholar; the original source is not specified.

博隆指出，我们正生活在一个新时代的开端，必须公正地对待列宁这位伟大的革命理论家和实践者，重新阅读列宁的著作，恢复列宁的理论遗产，并将其与时代变迁辩证地结合起来，在更大范围内推动世界革命，结束资本的独裁和帝国主义的暴行。(31)墨西哥学者海梅·奥尔特加(Jaime Ortega)认为，列宁主义是拉丁美洲马克思主义面对革命新形势、新条件的催化剂，也是拉丁美洲革命得以进行的有益参考。这并非因为拉丁美洲与20世纪初的俄罗斯相似或列宁主义思想无懈可击，而是因为列宁主义向我们展示了思考政治的力量。(32)

Second, empowering the people through revolutionary social transformation is the practical concern of Leninism.

第二，在社会的革命性变革中向人民赋权是列宁主义的现实关怀。

In Paul Le Blanc’s view, compared with Lenin’s era, most countries today lack mass workers’ movements and socialist movements. For this reason, he calls for rebuilding a global mass socialist movement.[33]33 Paul Le Blanc is an American historian and socialist activist. Carlos Martinez also points out that Marxism-Leninism in the 21st century means returning to the world anti-imperialist united front of socialist countries, oppressed nations, and the working class of imperialist countries; it means resolutely opposing imperialist hegemony, opposing racism, sexism, and all forms of exploitation and oppression, and striving for the future of socialism.[34]34 Carlos Martinez is a British socialist writer and activist.

在保罗·勒布朗克(Paul Le Blanc)看来，与列宁所处的时代相比，现在的大多数国家都缺乏群众性的工人运动和社会主义运动，为此，他呼吁重建全球群众性的社会主义运动。(33)卡洛斯·马丁内斯(Carlos Martinez)亦指出，21世纪的马列主义意味着回到社会主义国家、被压迫民族和帝国主义国家工人阶级的世界反帝统一战线，意味着坚决反对帝国主义霸权，反对种族主义、性别歧视和一切形式的剥削压迫，为社会主义的未来而奋斗。(34)

Third, striving for fairness and justice through the scientific resolution of epochal questions is the political pursuit of Leninism.

第三，在对时代课题的科学解答中争取公平正义是列宁主义的政治追求。

Luca Cangemi, leader of the Italian Communist Party, explores the issue of global justice from the perspective of the relationship between East and West. He argues that the Russian Revolution and Lenin’s thought ignited the East and produced strong reverberations among radicals and intellectuals in the subcontinent. For the Bolshevik Party, the “East” had at least three political layers of meaning: the Muslim East, India and the Far East and China, and the global East. Currently, the scope of the “global East” extends not only to Africa and Latin America but also includes countries that are not geographically Eastern but belong to the East from a political perspective; the East has become a synonym for the colonial question and anti-imperialism, and current discussions about the “Global South” are also related to this.[35]35 Luca Cangemi is a leader of the Italian Communist Party (Partito Comunista Italiano). Giuseppe Amata emphasizes that the discussion about Lenin must never be left to bourgeois historians who manipulate facts to fit the current geopolitics of the “collective West”; left-wing theorists must, through empirical comparison and discussion and by depicting the vision of the revolutionary class leading the people toward social liberation and achieving common goals, demonstrate the fundamental principles of communism for all humanity. He believes that the working class and revolutionary forces of various countries share common goals on the path forward, such as maintaining peace, opposing imperialist hegemony, and demanding equal treatment for small and large countries on issues such as environmental pollution, climate change, disarmament, and economic relations based on reciprocity.[36]36 Giuseppe Amata is an Italian left-wing scholar; the original source is not specified.

意大利共产党领导人卢卡·坎吉米(Luca Cangemi)从东方与西方之间关系的视角探讨全球正义问题。他认为，俄国革命和列宁的思想点燃了东方，并在次大陆的激进人士和知识分子中产生了强烈反响。对于布尔什维克党来说，“东方”至少具有东方穆斯林和印度、远东和中国、全球东方三层政治含义。当前，“全球东方”的范围除了延伸到非洲和拉丁美洲，还包括在地理上不是东方、但从政治角度来看却属于东方的国家，东方已经成为殖民问题和反帝的代名词，而当前关于“全球南方”的讨论也与此相关。(35)朱塞佩·阿玛塔(Giuseppe Amata)强调，决不能将关于列宁的讨论留给操纵事实、使其符合“集体西方”当前的地缘政治的资产阶级历史学家，左翼理论家必须通过经验的比较和讨论以及描绘革命阶级领导人民走向社会解放、实现共同目标的愿景来展现全人类共产主义的基本原则。他认为，各国的工人阶级和革命力量在前进的道路上有着共同的目标，例如，维护和平，反对帝国主义霸权，要求小国与大国在环境污染、气候变化、裁军和基于互惠的经济关系等问题上享有平等待遇。(36)

VI. Conclusion

六、结语

Looking at the overall progress of current international Lenin studies—whether it is the theoretical tracing of Lenin’s philosophical thought, the reactivation of the contemporary value of his theory of imperialism, or the realistic examination of his theory of socialist revolution and construction—all fully demonstrate that Lenin’s political theoretical status is beyond question, his contributions in areas such as dialectical materialist epistemology and the construction of a new type of proletarian party are indelible, and he has had a profound impact on revolutionaries worldwide, including Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Josip Broz Tito, Fidel Castro, and Che Guevara. Faced with the new situation in the world today, many left-wing political parties and progressive individuals have issued a call to “return to Lenin.” This not only indicates the relevance of Leninism to the present era but also foreshadows that Marxism and world socialism will surely radiate vigorous vitality in the 21st century. Of course, regarding the views put forward by international scholars in commemorative seminars and activities, we should make scientific judgments and clearly state our positions through analysis and discrimination.

综观当前国外列宁研究的总体进展，无论是对列宁哲学思想的理论溯源，还是对其帝国主义论的当代价值的重新激活，抑或是对社会主义革命与建设理论的现实审视，都充分证明了列宁的政治理论地位不容质疑，其在辩证唯物主义认识论、新型无产阶级政党建设等方面的贡献不可磨灭，而且对包括毛泽东、胡志明、铁托、卡斯特罗、切·格瓦拉在内的全世界革命者都产生了深远影响。面对当今世界的新形势，不少左翼政党和进步人士发出了“回到列宁”的呼吁。这不仅表明了列宁主义与当今时代的相关性，也预示着马克思主义、世界社会主义在21世纪必将焕发蓬勃生机。当然，对于国外学者在纪念研讨活动中提出的观点，我们应在分析鉴别中作出科学判断、明确表明立场。

First, we must have a firm stance on issues concerning international academic evaluations of Lenin.

第一，对国外学界关涉列宁的评价问题要有坚定的立场。

During Lenin’s lifetime, there were serious disagreements and heated debates within the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the international socialist camp over fundamental issues such as Leninism, the Russian Revolution, and the construction of Soviet socialism. After Lenin’s death, Stalin took the lead in promoting and bringing about the Soviet model of socialism. While achieving historic successes, this model gradually became rigid, and its various drawbacks became increasingly prominent after World War II, becoming an important historical root of the later dissolution of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in Eastern Europe. Currently, under the influence of the “de-Sovietization” wave and the trend of historical nihilism, some Western scholars and politicians constantly “demonize” Lenin with various arguments, attempting to “completely bury” Lenin, the October Revolution, and the historical achievements of Soviet socialism. However, it is precisely thanks to Lenin’s theory and practice that human society has witnessed the leap of socialism from theory to reality. In this regard, we should follow historical materialism and conduct a comprehensive, historical, and dialectical analysis of all this under the specific historical conditions of the 20th century’s particular era and society, summing up its experiences and lessons.

在列宁生活的年代，俄共(布)党内及国际社会主义阵营曾对列宁主义、俄国革命和苏维埃社会主义建设等根本性问题进行过严重分歧与激烈讨论。列宁逝世后，斯大林转而主导并促成了社会主义的苏联模式，但后者在取得历史性成就的同时却日渐走向僵化，种种弊端也在二战后愈发凸显，成为日后苏联解体、东欧剧变的重要历史根源。当前，在“去苏化”浪潮与历史虚无主义思潮的影响下，一些西方学者和政客不断以各种论调“妖魔化”列宁，试图“彻底埋葬”列宁、十月革命和苏联社会主义的历史成就。然而，正是得益于列宁的理论和实践，人类社会才能见证社会主义从理论到现实的飞跃。对此，我们应该遵循唯物史观，将这一切置于20世纪特定时代和社会的历史条件下进行全面、历史、辩证地分析，总结其中的经验和教训。

Second, we must have a clear understanding of the political and historical logic behind international academic commemorations of Lenin.

第二，对国外学界纪念列宁背后的政治历史逻辑要有清醒的认识。

Currently, parties, organizations, and scholars outside socialist countries who are interested in and have feelings for Lenin roughly fall into three groups. The first consists of communist factions within the communist movements of various countries that take Marxism-Leninism as their guiding ideology. Most of them were established under Lenin’s inspiration, influenced by the October Revolution, and with the assistance of the Communist International. To this day, they still adhere to Leninism politically, theoretically, and organizationally, and are therefore called “Leninist parties” or “Leninist-type parties.” They focus more on Lenin’s critique of non-Marxist and erroneous social trends, believe in the theory of violent revolution, and affirm that Lenin developed and enriched Marxism in the era of imperialism in areas such as the proletarian party, revolutionary violence, the state, the dictatorship of the proletariat, imperialism, the peasant question, the women’s question, the national question, and imperialist war. The second group consists of Trotskyist parties, organizations, and groups that are quite active among the radical left in the West and Latin America. They often have distinct political tendencies, regard themselves as the “orthodox” inheritors of the spirit of Leninism and the legacy of the Russian Revolution, and believe they are closer to the origin of Marxism-Leninism and communist revolution. They attempt to “build a bridge” from Lenin to Trotsky by praising Lenin and denigrating Stalin, thereby sustaining the existence of the international Trotskyist movement and their respective political theories. The third group consists of independent left-wing scholars, socialist intellectuals, and Marxists who harbor aspirations for the socialist cause while maintaining a critical stance toward capitalism. Their main bases are universities, research institutions, and academic groups. From the spectrum of the pan-left, the values, political stances, and ideologies of these three groups share certain similarities with Lenin as a symbol of revolution and liberation. They are all committed to exploring the laws of human social history and striving for the emancipation of the proletariat through a critical revelation of modern capitalism and imperialism.

当前，社会主义国家之外对列宁抱有兴趣、怀有情愫的政党、组织和学者大致来自三类群体。一是各国共产主义运动中以马列主义为指导思想的共产党派别，它们大多是在列宁的感召下受十月革命影响和共产国际援助得以建立起来的，时至今日仍在政治、理论和组织上坚持列宁主义，因而被称为“列宁式政党”或“列宁主义政党”。它们更多关注列宁对非马克思主义思潮、错误社会思潮的批判，信奉暴力革命理论，肯定列宁在无产阶级政党、革命暴力、国家、无产阶级专政、帝国主义、农民问题、妇女问题、民族问题、帝国主义战争等方面发展和丰富了帝国主义时期的马克思主义。二是在西方及拉美激进左翼中颇为活跃的托派政党、组织和团体。它们往往带有鲜明的政治倾向，以列宁主义精神和俄国革命遗产的“正统”继承者自居，自以为更加接近马列主义、共产主义革命的本源，试图通过颂扬列宁、贬抑斯大林而“架起”从列宁到托洛茨基的“桥梁”,以此维系国际托洛茨基主义运动及各自政治理论的存在。三是一些对社会主义事业抱有憧憬、同时对资本主义持批判立场的独立左翼学者、社会主义知识分子、马克思主义者，他们以高校、研究机构、学术团体为主要阵地。从泛左翼的谱系来看，这三类群体的价值观、政治立场和意识形态与作为革命和解放象征的列宁具有一定的相似性，都致力于通过对现代资本主义、帝国主义的批判性揭示来探寻人类社会历史规律，争取无产阶级的解放。

Third, we must make scientific judgments on the major theoretical and practical issues that have sparked debate in international academic circles.

第三，对国外学界引发争论的重大理论和现实问题要有科学的判断。

In the more than one hundred years since the publication of *Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism*, human society has experienced what Eric Hobsbawm called the “short twentieth century” and the “age of extremes.” In particular, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in Eastern Europe, the new changes in contemporary advanced capitalism have further posed severe challenges to scientific socialism, triggering ongoing discussions in international left-wing theoretical circles about the stage of capitalist development, the theme of the era, and the stage of socialist revolutionary development. From the highly complex socio-historical concept of “imperialism,” there have even emerged different research propositions and interpretive paradigms such as “new imperialism,” “post-imperialism,” “neoliberal imperialism,” “super-imperialism,” “hegemonic imperialism,” “late imperialism,” “digital imperialism,” “financial imperialism,” “cultural imperialism,” and “ecological imperialism.” Compared with the traditional fierce critique of the United States and the West, some left-wing scholars and organizations have also linked the rise of emerging market countries, the transformation of the world system, and the alternation of old and new imperialisms with the struggle for hegemony within the world capitalist system. The Communist Party of Greece (KKE) and others have even bluntly stated that “it is necessary to follow Lenin’s instructions on the question of imperialist war,” believing that “today Lenin’s exposition of the question of imperialist war, based on proletarian internationalism, is more important than ever” [37]37 The Communist Party of Greece (KKE) is a Marxist-Leninist party founded in 1918; its reference to “Lenin’s instructions” alludes to Lenin’s analysis of imperialist war as rooted in inter-imperialist rivalry, as developed in works such as *Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism* (1917).. In this regard, we must not only deeply draw on the historical experiences and lessons of Lenin and the Soviet Union, but also “use the Marxist stance, viewpoint, and method to observe the world and analyze the world, truly understand the epochal issues we face, deeply grasp the direction of world development, and clearly recognize the general trends of China and the world” [38]38 This quotation is from a speech or official document of the Chinese Communist Party, emphasizing the need to apply the Marxist worldview and methodology to understand contemporary global and Chinese developments..

《帝国主义论》问世后的百余年间，人类社会经历了艾瑞克·霍布斯鲍姆(Eric Hobsbawm)所说的“短暂的20世纪”与“极端的年代”。特别是苏联解体、东欧剧变后，当代发达资本主义的新变化进一步对科学社会主义提出了严峻挑战，引发国际左翼理论界对资本主义发展阶段、时代主题和社会主义革命发展阶段的持续探讨。从“帝国主义”这一极具复杂性的社会历史概念中，更是衍生出诸如“新帝国主义”“后帝国主义”“新自由主义的帝国主义”“超级帝国主义”“霸权帝国主义”“晚期帝国主义”“数字帝国主义”“金融帝国主义”“文化帝国主义”“生态帝国主义”等不同的研究命题与解释范式。相较于传统意义上对美西方的激烈批判，一些左翼学者和组织还将新兴市场国家的崛起、世界体系的变动与新旧帝国主义的更替和世界资本主义体系中争夺霸权的对抗联系起来。希腊共产党(KKE)等更是直言“有必要在帝国主义战争问题上遵循列宁的指示”,认为“今天列宁以无产阶级的国际主义为基础的、关于帝国主义战争问题的阐述比以往任何时候都更显重要”(37)。对此，我们既要深刻汲取列宁及苏联的历史经验和教训，更要“运用马克思主义立场观点方法观察世界、分析世界，真正搞懂面临的时代课题，深刻把握世界发展走向，认清中国和世界发展大势”(38)。

Online editor: Zhang Jian

网络编辑：张剑