Lenin’s Exploration of the Role of Politics in the Social Development Process of Backward Countries

I. Formulation of the Problem

一、问题的提出

As a classical Marxist writer, the founder of the world’s first socialist state, and the founder of the first proletarian ruling party, Lenin’s theoretical contributions in the history of Marxist development and his practical achievements in the history of the international communist movement are both monumental and far-reaching. He profoundly revealed the inherent laws of the capitalist imperialist stage, creatively proposed that socialism might first achieve a breakthrough and victory in the weak links of the imperialist chain, greatly enriched the theory of the proletarian party, and resolutely defended the integrity and practicality of Marxist theory. He led the Bolshevik Party in establishing the world’s first socialist state, turning socialism from theory into reality and achieving great accomplishments in human history. In his later years, he focused on the major proposition of socialist construction in backward countries, opening a new path for economically and culturally backward countries to move toward socialism, thereby not only adding new content to the treasure trove of Marxist theory but also providing valuable experience for the modernization process of numerous backward countries worldwide.

列宁作为马克思主义经典作家和世界上第一个社会主义国家的缔造者、第一个无产阶级执政党的创建者，在马克思主义发展史上的理论贡献和在国际共产主义运动史上的实践业绩都是居功至伟且影响深远的。他深刻揭示了资本主义帝国主义阶段的内在规律，创造性地提出了社会主义有可能首先在帝国主义链条的薄弱环节取得突破与胜利，极大地丰富了无产阶级政党学说，坚决捍卫了马克思主义理论的严整和实践性；他领导布尔什维克党建立了世界上第一个社会主义国家，使社会主义从理论变成了现实，取得了人类历史的伟大成就；他晚年聚焦落后国家进行社会主义建设这一重大命题，开启了经济文化落后国家走向社会主义的新道路，既为马克思主义理论宝库增添了新的内容，又为全世界广大落后国家的现代化进程提供了宝贵经验。

Throughout Lenin’s life, whether during the revolutionary or the construction period, he fully valued and was adept at fully leveraging the key “reactive effect” of politics on the economic base. In Lenin’s view, politics, as part of the superstructure, is ultimately determined by the economic base, but at the same time, the active reactive effect of the political superstructure on the economic base is enormous, and under specific historical conditions it can even play a decisive role. He pointed out: “Politics is the concentrated expression of economics” and “politics cannot but take precedence over economics.” [1]1 V. I. Lenin, “Once Again on the Trade Unions, the Current Situation and the Mistakes of Trotsky and Bukharin,” *Collected Works*, Vol. 32, p. 83. (The original Chinese text cites the standard Chinese edition of Lenin’s works; the English rendering follows the standard English edition.) This assertion by Lenin fully demonstrates his masterful application of dialectical materialism and embodies the scientific methodology of Marxism.

列宁一生，无论是革命还是建设时期，都充分重视并善于充分发挥政治对经济基础的关键“反作用”。在列宁看来，作为上层建筑的政治归根结底是由经济基础决定的，但与此同时，政治上层建筑对经济基础能动的反作用是巨大的，在特定历史条件下甚至起到决定性的作用。他指出：“政治是经济的集中表现”，并且“政治同经济相比不能不占首位”。列宁的这一论断充分彰显了对唯物辩证法炉火纯青的运用，体现了马克思主义的科学方法论。

Domestic academic research on Lenin’s political outlook covers multiple dimensions, including the theory of the proletarian party, the theory of the state, the relationship between politics and economics, and the theory of political culture, laying a good foundation for further in-depth study of Lenin’s political outlook. Regarding the theory of the proletarian party, scholars have conducted in-depth research focusing on key issues such as the political tasks of the proletarian party, mobilization mechanisms, organizational forms, intra-party democracy, and self-revolution, elucidating Lenin’s understanding of the functions, roles, and construction of the proletarian party. Regarding the theory of the state, scholars have mainly explored the organizational form of state power under democratic centralism, methods for optimizing the distribution of power, possible paths for political reform, the institutional and party foundations of an effective state, and the contemporary significance of Lenin’s political theory. Regarding the relationship between politics and economics, some scholars have taken the New Economic Policy as an example to explore how Lenin handled the relationship between politics and economics in concrete practice, in order to better exert the important role of politics. Other scholars have focused on political culture, examining how Lenin comprehensively advanced the construction of political culture, developed political identity and consensus, and carried out ideological and political education.

国内学界关于列宁政治观的研究覆盖无产阶级政党学说、国家理论、政治与经济的关系以及政治文化理论等诸多维度，为进一步深入研究列宁的政治观奠定了良好基础。关于无产阶级政党学说，学者们聚焦无产阶级政党的政治任务、动员机制、组织形态、党内民主与自我革命等关键问题进行了深入研究，阐明了列宁对于无产阶级政党的功能、作用、建设等维度的认识；关于国家理论，学者们主要对民主集中制的国家政权组织形式、权力分配的优化方法、政治改革的可能路径、有效国家的制度与政党基础、列宁政治理论的时代意义等内容进行了探讨；关于政治与经济的关系，有学者以新经济政策为例探讨了列宁在具体实践中如何处理政治与经济的关系，以更好地发挥政治的重要作用；还有学者聚焦政治文化，研讨列宁如何整体性推进政治文化建设、发展政治认同与共识以及开展思想政治教育等内容。

The focus of existing research tends to examine internal factors of the political system, such as political structure, power systems, and political reform, while studies on the pathways, mechanisms, and processes through which political functions act on the fields of economics, culture, and society remain insufficiently detailed. Compared with research on how politics functioned in the Soviet Russian socialist revolution, studies on the role of politics in promoting economic and social development during Soviet Russian socialist construction are still relatively lacking. In fact, for countries carrying out socialist revolution and construction on a relatively backward economic and cultural foundation, exploring how to exert the role of politics is both a focal point of Lenin’s thinking and a practical issue commonly faced by all countries in the process of modernization today. Mao Zedong pointed out: “Political work is the lifeblood of all economic work. This is especially true during periods of fundamental change in the socioeconomic system.” [2]2 Mao Zedong, “A Critique of the Economy of the Soviet Union,” *Selected Works of Mao Zedong*, Vol. 8 (Chinese edition), p. 131. (The original Chinese text cites Mao’s remark from his reading notes on the Soviet textbook *Political Economy*; the English rendering is a standard translation of the Chinese quotation.) In view of this, this article attempts to take the relationship between politics and economics, and between politics and other elements of the superstructure, as the research entry point, to delve into Lenin’s theoretical thinking and practical exploration after the victory of the October Revolution regarding how to exert the key role of politics under conditions of economic and cultural backwardness, so as to drive economic and social development and accelerate the realization of socialist modernization.

现有研究关注的焦点侧重于考察政治结构、权力体系、政治改革等政治体系内部因素，对于政治功能对经济、文化、社会等领域的作用路径、作用机制和作用过程等的研究还不够细致，相较于对政治在苏俄社会主义革命中如何发挥作用的研究，关于政治在苏俄社会主义建设中对于经济社会发展作用的研究仍然相对缺乏。事实上，对于在相对落后的经济文化基础上进行社会主义革命、建设的国家来说，探索如何发挥政治的作用，既是列宁思考的重点，也是当今世界各国现代化进程中普遍面对的现实课题。毛泽东指出：“政治工作是一切经济工作的生命线。在社会经济制度发生根本变革的时期，尤其是这样。”鉴于此，本文尝试以政治与经济、政治与上层建筑其余要素之间的关系作为研究切口，深入探讨十月革命胜利后列宁关于在经济文化落后条件下如何发挥政治的关键作用，以牵引经济社会发展、加速实现社会主义现代化的理论思考与实践探索。

II. General Laws of Social Development and Two Models for the Role of Politics

二、社会发展一般规律与政治作用发挥的两种模式

Marxism holds that “the sum of the productive forces accessible to people determines the condition of society,” but in the dialectical movement of social development, it is also “the productive forces and relations of production, the economic base and the superstructure, that interact with and condition each other, governing the entire process of social development.” [3]3 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, *The German Ideology* and *Anti-Dühring*, as cited in the Chinese text. (The first quotation is from *The German Ideology*, the second is a paraphrase of Engels’ formulation in *Anti-Dühring*; the English rendering follows standard translations.) These two assertions clarify: first, productive forces are the fundamental driving force and basic premise for the evolution of social formations and the development of human society; second, the fundamental status of productive forces cannot be vulgarized into “economic determinism” or “the omnipotence of productive forces.” These two basic laws provide the logical starting point for Lenin’s theory of socialist construction.

马克思主义认为：“人们所达到的生产力的总和决定着社会状况”，但在社会发展的辩证运动过程中，又是“生产力和生产关系、经济基础和上层建筑相互作用、相互制约，支配着整个社会发展进程”。这两个论断阐明：其一，生产力是社会形态演变、人类社会发展的根本动力与基础前提；其二，不能把生产力的根本地位庸俗化为“经济决定论”或“生产力万能论”。这两条基本规律，为列宁社会主义建设理论提供了逻辑起点。

On the one hand, from the perspective of a long historical cycle, productive forces and the economic base play a decisive role. Marx once pointed out: “In the social production of their existence, people enter into definite, necessary relations that are independent of their will, namely, relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material productive forces. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation on which a legal and political superstructure arises and to which definite forms of social consciousness correspond.” [4]4 Karl Marx, “Preface to *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*,” *Marx-Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 29, p. 263. This passage, which Lenin called a “complete formulation” of Marx’s dialectical materialism, indicates that the essence of relations of production is determined by productive forces, and the essence of the superstructure is determined by the economic base. Correspondingly, grasping the laws of economic construction and the laws of state construction must return to the relationship between the economic base and the superstructure; that is, “at all times, it is in the direct relationship between the owners of the conditions of production and the direct producers—a relationship whose particular form always naturally corresponds to a definite stage in the development of the mode of labor and therefore of the social productive forces—that we find the innermost secret, the hidden foundation of the entire social structure, and consequently also of the political form of sovereignty and dependence, in short, of the particular form of the state at any given time.” [5]5 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 3, *Marx-Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 37, p. 777. In summary, although history is full of contingencies, from the perspective of a long historical period, the decisive role of productive forces and the economic base is the fundamental driving force and determining factor of social history and political change.

一方面，长历史周期视域下生产力与经济基础发挥着决定性作用。马克思曾指出：“人们在自己生活的社会生产中发生一定的、必然的、不以他们的意志为转移的关系，即同他们的物质生产力的一定发展阶段相适合的生产关系。这些生产关系的总和构成社会的经济结构，即有法律的和政治的上层建筑竖立其上并有一定的社会意识形式与之相适应的现实基础。”这段被列宁称为对马克思唯物辩证法的“完整的表述”表明，生产关系的本质由生产力决定，上层建筑的本质由经济基础决定。相对应地，把握经济建设的规律和国家建设的规律，必须回归到经济基础与上层建筑的关系之中，即在“任何时候，我们总是要在生产条件的所有者同直接生产者的直接关系——这种关系的任何当时的形式必然总是同劳动方式和劳动社会生产力的一定的发展阶段相适应——当中，为整个社会结构，从而也为主权关系和依附关系的政治形式，总之，为任何当时的独特的国家形式，发现最隐蔽的秘密，发现隐藏着的基础”。概括而言，尽管历史发展中充满着偶然性，但从长历史时段来看，生产力与经济基础的决定性作用，是社会历史与政治变革的根本动因、决定力量。

On the other hand, under specific historical conditions, politics may play an extremely key role. From the perspective of dialectical materialism, the relationship between productive forces and the various relations of production constituting the economic base, as well as the elements of the superstructure—politics, culture, thought, art, religion, and philosophy—is not a one-to-one linear relationship, nor a chain-like sequence that changes in a specific order, but rather a complex system in which the elements of the system are constantly interacting. The superstructure does not always appear simply as a “companion” to changes in the economic base; rather, it exerts a reactive effect on the economic base, promoting or hindering changes in the economic base. As Engels pointed out: “The economic situation is the basis, but the various elements of the superstructure—political forms of the class struggle and its results, such as constitutions established by the victorious class after a battle, etc., juridical forms, and even the reflexes of all these actual struggles in the brains of the participants, political, juristic, philosophical theories, religious views and their further development into systems of dogmas—also exercise their influence upon the course of the historical struggles and in many cases determine their form in particular.” [6]6 Frederick Engels, “Letter to Joseph Bloch,” *Marx-Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 49, p. 34. “The various elements of the superstructure” include politics, culture, thought, art, and many other non-material elements, and not every element exerts the same reactive effect on the economic base in a specific historical time and space. The political superstructure is the most important component of the entire superstructure. Political institutions, as the highest political superstructure, are most closely related to political power, and their reactive effect on the economic base is the most direct and decisive, incomparable to other parts of the superstructure.

另一方面，特定历史条件下政治可能发挥极为关键的作用。在唯物辩证法的视域下，生产力与构成经济基础的各种生产关系、构成上层建筑的政治、文化、思想、艺术、宗教与哲学等要素之间，并不是一一对应的线性关系，也不是按照特定路径依次变化的链式顺序，而是一个复杂的系统，各系统要素时刻处于交互作用之中。上层建筑并不总是单纯的作为经济基础变化的“伴随者”而出现，而是会对经济基础产生反作用，推动或者阻碍经济基础的变化。正如恩格斯所指出的：“经济状况是基础，但是对历史斗争的进程发生影响并且在许多情况下主要是决定着这一斗争的形式的，还有上层建筑的各种因素。”“上层建筑的各种因素”包含政治、文化、思想、艺术等诸多非物质要素，并不是每种要素在特定历史时空中对于经济基础的反作用都是相同的。政治上层建筑是整个上层建筑中最重要的组成部分，政治制度作为最顶端的政治上层建筑，与政治权力的关系最为密切，对经济基础的反作用是最直接、最具决定性的，是上层建筑的其他部分所不能比拟的。

The two aspects mentioned above determine that the evolution of social formations is a dialectical process of unity and diversity. Viewed from the general law, changes in productive forces and the economic base are the fundamental constraining conditions and driving forces of the evolution of social formations. Under the precondition of this fundamental stipulation, there are two possibilities for the driving forces of the evolution of social formations: first, over a long historical cycle, fully exert the decisive role of productive forces and the economic base, taking the development of productive forces as the fundamental driving force of the evolution of social formations; second, under specific historical conditions, fully exert the counteractive role of the superstructure, especially the key role of politics, first realize the systemic transformation of the superstructure, promote changes in the economic base through changes in the superstructure, or, on the basis of realizing changes in the political superstructure, directly act on the economic base through politics. How to choose a specific path must be examined and judged within the specific historical environment and social conditions.

上述两个方面决定了社会形态的演进是统一性和多样性的辩证发展过程。从一般规律来看，生产力和经济基础的变化是社会形态演进的根本约束条件与动力。在这一根本规定性的前提条件下，社会形态演进的动力存在两种可能：一是在长历史周期上，充分发挥生产力与经济基础的决定性作用，以生产力发展作为社会形态演进的根本动力；二是在特定历史条件下，充分发挥上层建筑的反作用尤其是政治的关键性作用，首先实现上层建筑的系统性变革，通过上层建筑的变化推动经济基础的变化，或者在实现政治上层建筑的变革的基础上，通过政治直接作用于经济基础。如何选择具体路径，必须置于具体历史环境与社会条件中来考察判断。

After the victory of the October Revolution, Lenin’s choice of the path for socialist construction reflected a profound understanding of the laws of the evolution of social formations. Within the leftist camp at that time, there were two main views on how Russia should build socialism: first, the so-called “vulgar determinist” view, which distorted and misunderstood the first path—the fundamental role of productive forces over a long cycle—as “productive forces determinism.” Its representatives included Plekhanov, Kautsky, and others. They ignored specific historical conditions, arguing that “Russian history has not yet ground the flour from which the socialist pie will eventually be baked” and that “Russia’s productive forces have not yet developed to the level where socialism can be implemented,” fundamentally denying the October Revolution. Second, the view of the Bolshevik faction represented by Lenin, which held that it was possible to first realize political change through revolution, and then, on the basis of an advanced political model, create various conditions for socialism and promote socialist construction. That is, “Why could we not first use revolutionary means to achieve the prerequisites for reaching this certain level, and then, on the basis of the workers’ and peasants’ government and the Soviet system, catch up with other nations?” Fully exerting the key role of politics also became a logical thread running through Lenin’s theoretical thinking and practical exploration of how to carry out socialist construction after the October Revolution. However, carrying out socialist construction in economically and culturally relatively backward countries was a complex problem for Lenin and even for the entire world socialist movement. Comparing the period before and after the October Revolution, politics was the variable that changed fastest and most profoundly in the process of transformation, while changes in elements such as the mode of production and cultural superstructure were relatively gradual and slow. Therefore, the crux of the problem lay in how to exert the key role of the element of politics, exploring the paths, mechanisms, modes, and driving forces through which politics acts on the superstructure and the economic base.

十月革命胜利后，列宁对社会主义建设道路的选择体现了对社会形态演进规律的深刻理解。在当时的左派阵营中，对俄国如何建设社会主义这一问题主要有两种看法：一是所谓“庸俗决定论”的观点，将第一种路径即生产力在长周期的根本作用，歪曲误解为“生产力决定论”，代表人物有普列汉诺夫、考茨基等，他们忽略具体历史条件，认为“俄国历史还没有磨好将来要用它烤成社会主义馅饼的那种面粉”，“俄国生产力还没有发展到可以实行社会主义的高度”，这是从根本上否定十月革命；二是以列宁为代表的布尔什维克派的观点，认为可以通过革命首先实现政治变革，然后以先进的政治模式为基础，创造社会主义的各种条件，推动社会主义建设，即“我们为什么不能首先用革命手段取得达到这个一定水平的前提，然后在工农政权和苏维埃制度的基础上赶上别国人民呢？”充分发挥政治的关键作用也成为贯穿列宁在十月革命后关于如何进行社会主义建设的理论思考和实践探索的一条逻辑主线。然而，在经济文化相对落后的国家进行社会主义建设，对于列宁乃至整个世界社会主义运动来说都是一个复杂的难题。对比十月革命前后，政治是变革过程中变化速度最快、变化程度最深刻的变量，而生产方式和文化上层建筑等要素的变化则明显相对渐进、缓慢。因此，问题的关键在于如何发挥政治这一要素的关键作用，探索政治作用于上层建筑和经济基础的路径、机制、模式与动力。

The practice of Lenin’s promotion of socialist construction after the October Revolution can be summarized as the “political axis model,” that is, taking politics as the axis of social change and development, driving other elements of the country to “co-rotate around the same axis,” so that the superstructure and the economic base better adapt to each other, thereby advancing socialist construction. The “political axis model” underwent a clear process of evolution and iteration: from 1917 to the end of 1920, Lenin attempted to comprehensively adjust the relations of production through politics, intervening in the entire process of production and distribution, implementing the policy of War Communism, directly reshaping the economic base with political power, while simultaneously sweeping away the old economy, old system, and old culture entirely through the proletarian revolution; from the beginning of 1921, Lenin gradually abandoned the idea of “direct transition,” turning to the New Economic Policy and beginning to explore issues of political reform, political development, and social culture. During this period, Lenin gradually moved away from the idea of directly shaping and controlling the relations of production through politics, instead turning to consider the interactive relationship between politics and the remaining elements of the superstructure, attempting to promote socialist construction through political system reform and the development of socialist culture. That is, using political reform to perfect the political system, demonstrate governance effectiveness, drive cultural development, and ultimately use a more perfected superstructure to drive changes in the economic base.

十月革命后列宁推进社会主义建设的实践可概括为“政治中轴模式”，即以政治作为社会变化、发展的中轴，带动国家其他要素“同轴共转”，使上层建筑与经济基础更好地相适应，以推进社会主义建设。“政治中轴模式”经历了明显的演进和迭代过程：1917年到1920年底，列宁试图通过政治全盘调整生产关系，使政治介入生产、分配全过程，实行战时共产主义政策，以政治权力直接重塑经济基础，同时通过无产阶级革命全盘扫清旧经济、旧制度、旧文化；自1921年初，列宁逐渐放弃了“直接过渡”的想法，转向新经济政策并开始探索政治改革、政治发展以及社会文化问题，这一时期列宁逐渐走出通过政治直接塑造与控制生产关系的思路，转而思考政治与上层建筑其余要素的互动关系，尝试通过政治体制改革与发展社会主义文化推进社会主义建设，即以政治改革来完善政治体制、彰显治理效能、带动文化发展，最终以更完善的上层建筑带动经济基础变革。

III. The Attempt to Reshape the Economic Base with Political Power (1917–1920)

三、以政治权力重塑经济基础的尝试（1917—1920年）

After the victory of the October Revolution, the newly born Soviet regime simultaneously faced international and domestic pressures and the reality of backward productive forces. Only by fully exerting the counteractive role of the superstructure on the economic base, continuously adjusting the mode of production and the pattern of resource allocation to adapt to the needs of the domestic and international situation, could the survival and development of the red regime be ensured. During this period, Lenin’s core proposition regarding the role of politics in socialist construction was to reshape the economic base with political power, while simultaneously sweeping away the old economy, old system, and old culture entirely through the proletarian revolution, attempting to quickly complete the transition and enter socialist society.

十月革命胜利后，新生的苏维埃政权同时面临着国际国内的压力与生产力落后的现实状况，只有充分发挥上层建筑对于经济基础的反作用，不断调整生产方式与资源配置模式，使其适应国内外形势需要，才能保证红色政权的存活与发展。这一时期，列宁关于发挥政治在社会主义建设中作用的核心主张在于，以政治权力重塑经济基础，同时通过无产阶级革命全盘扫清旧经济、旧制度、旧文化，试图迅速完成过渡，进入社会主义社会。

(1) Reshaping the Ownership of the Means of Production with Political Power

（一）以政治权力重塑生产资料所有制

Regarding how to eliminate exploitation, as early as 1896 Lenin proposed “abolishing private ownership of the instruments of labor, placing all factories and mines, as well as all large estates, etc., under the ownership of the whole society.” In 1918, the first constitution of Soviet Russia explicitly stated that the main task at that time was “to establish a strong dictatorship of the urban and rural proletariat and the poor peasants in the form of the All-Russian Soviet power, in order to completely suppress the bourgeoisie, abolish the exploitation of man by man, and lay the foundation for socialism without class divisions and without state power.” Guided by this theory, from 1917 to 1920, Lenin led the Soviet regime to forcefully and substantially complete the reshaping of the ownership of the means of production in the two major fields of agriculture and industry.

针对如何消灭剥削，1896年列宁就提出要“消灭劳动工具的私有制，所有工厂和矿山以及所有大地产等等都归整个社会所有”，1918年苏俄的第一部宪法中明确表述当时的主要任务是“确立强大的全俄苏维埃政权形式的城乡无产阶级与贫农专政，以便完全镇压资产阶级，消灭人对人的剥削，而奠立没有阶级划分、没有国家权力的社会主义”。在理论的指引下，1917—1920年，列宁领导苏维埃政权强有力、大幅度地完成了对农业、工业两大领域的生产资料所有制重塑。

In the agricultural field, on the day after the victory of the October Revolution, Lenin drafted the “Decree on Land,” which required the abolition of feudal land ownership. This decree was reviewed and passed by the All-Russian Congress of Soviets and then vigorously implemented and enforced. After the state confiscated the landlords’ land, it redistributed the land. Starting in 1918, despite the strong pressure of the civil war, Lenin still led the Soviet regime to vigorously promote the land reform cause nationwide. By the beginning of 1921, the land reform was basically completed, and most of the land had been distributed to landless or land-poor peasants. Lenin quickly completed the transformation of land ownership through the power of the dictatorship of the proletariat, relying on the state apparatus to abolish feudal land ownership, laying a solid foundation for socialism.

在农业领域，十月革命胜利的第二天，列宁起草了《土地法令》，要求废除封建土地所有制，该法令经全俄苏维埃代表大会审议通过后得到有力的贯彻与实施。国家没收地主土地后，对土地进行再分配。1918年起，尽管面临着内战的强大压力，列宁仍然领导苏维埃政权在全国范围内大力推进土地改革事业。截至1921年初，土地改革基本完成，大部分土地已分配给无地或少地的农民。列宁通过无产阶级专政的力量迅速完成了土地所有制变革，依靠国家机器废除了封建土地所有制，为社会主义奠定了坚实基础。

In the industrial field, immediately after the victory of the October Revolution, Lenin led the Soviet regime to begin the process of changing the ownership of the means of production in large-scale industry. From the end of 1917 to the beginning of 1918, Lenin led the Soviet regime to gradually nationalize key areas related to people’s livelihoods and national defense; on June 28, 1918, Lenin signed a decree for the nationalization of large-scale industry nationwide; by the end of 1918, the nationalization process for large enterprises was completed; in November 1920, the Soviet Russian government decreed that all small factories employing ten or more workers, or those with mechanical power employing five or more workers, should be nationalized; by the end of 1920, all industry and private commerce had been nationalized. During the process of transforming the ownership of industrial means of production, the Soviet regime led by Lenin resolutely suppressed the resistance of capitalists and the speculative behavior of some merchants, achieving the nationalization of the means of production in the industrial field through a powerful dictatorship of the proletariat.

在工业领域，十月革命刚刚胜利，列宁就领导苏维埃政权开始了改变大工业生产资料所有制的进程。1917年底到1918年初，列宁领导苏维埃政权对事关民生与国防的关键领域逐步实行国有化；1918年6月28日，列宁签署了全国大工业国有化的法令，截至1918年底，大型企业的国有化进程完成；1920年11月，苏俄政府法令要求将雇工十人以上或有机械动力而雇工五人以上的小工厂全部收归国有，截至1920年底，全部工业以及私人商业已经实现国有化。在工业生产资料所有制的变革过程中，列宁领导的苏维埃政权坚决镇压了资本家的反抗行动和部分商人的投机行为，以强有力的无产阶级专政实现了工业领域生产资料的国有化进程。

(2) Reshaping the Distribution System with Political Power

（二）以政治权力重塑分配制度

The document drafted by Lenin for the Eighth Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) pointed out: “The current task of the Soviet power is to steadfastly continue to replace trade with planned distribution of products on a national scale. The aim is to organize the entire population into a network of unified consumers’ communes, which can strictly centralize all distribution organs, distributing all necessities most rapidly, most systematically, most economically, and with the least amount of labor.” Its core was to use political force as the main body of resource allocation, replacing the market mechanism, to configure the circulation of various factors of production and consumer goods.

列宁指导俄共（布）八大起草的文件指出：“苏维埃政权现时的任务，是坚定不移地继续在全国范围内用有计划的产品分配来代替贸易。目的是把全体居民组织到统一的消费公社网中，这种公社能把全部分配机关严格地集中起来，最迅速、最有计划、最节省、用最少的劳动来分配一切必需品。”其内核是要以政治力量作为资源分配的主体，取代市场机制，对各类生产要素与消费用品的流通进行配置。

In the distribution of industrial means of production, from 1918 onward Lenin led the Soviet regime to gradually intervene in the distribution process of industrial means of production, establishing a system of “rational commodity exchange on a state scale,” whereby industrial means of production such as agricultural machinery and construction materials were forcibly exchanged for grain. In 1918, basic means of production such as fuel were first placed under unified state-directed distribution due to wartime needs, adopting a model of quota-based planned distribution entirely for factories and other major consumption units. In 1920, the Council of Labor and Defense began to formulate specific industrial production plans, and the Supreme Council of the National Economy established more than 50 chief administrations based on the principle of vertical management, which oversaw the distribution of means of production and the distribution of production output within their respective vertical sectors. Individual enterprises did not conduct separate calculations of profit, loss, or cost; the production inputs required by enterprises and their output were directed for distribution according to the needs of war and national industrial construction.

在工业生产资料的分配上，1918年起，列宁领导苏维埃政权逐步介入工业生产资料的分配过程，建立“国家规模的合理的商品交换”制度，将农业机器、建筑材料等工业生产资料与粮食进行强制交换。1918年，燃料等基础性的生产资料由于战争的需要首先开始由国家统一定向分配，对各个工厂及其他主要消费单位完全采取定额计划分配的模式。1920年，劳动和国防委员会开始具体制定工业生产计划，最高国民经济委员会根据垂直管理原则设立50余个管理总局，归口管理本垂直领域企业的生产资料分配与生产产品分配，各企业不单独进行盈亏与成本计算，企业生产所需与生产产品根据战争以及国家工业建设需要定向进行分配。

In the distribution of non-grain daily consumer goods, Lenin led the Soviet regime to explore the adoption of a “supply system,” implementing a unified quota supply system for the entire population. From 1918 onward, Lenin led the Soviet regime to use state-run cooperative distribution stations to supply residents with some daily necessities in a planned manner, imposing a state monopoly on certain personal consumer goods such as matches, cloth, and soap, thereby initially establishing a system of distribution in kind. From 1919 onward, Lenin led the Soviets to further expand the state centralized supply system, establishing a unified distribution organ that merged urban and rural consumer cooperatives into a single distribution agency—the consumer commune—which basically covered the majority of the worker population. In early 1920, the Soviets began to gradually implement a system of issuing goods in kind where conditions permitted, marking the complete materialization of workers’ wages, which was progressively extended to the distribution of various daily necessities and fuel.

在非粮食的日常消费用品分配上，列宁领导苏维埃政权探索采用“供给制”，对全国民众实行统一的定额供给制度。1918年起，列宁领导苏维埃政权通过国营合作社分配站有计划地为居民供应部分生活用品，对一些个人生活商品，如火柴、布匹、肥皂等进行国家垄断经营，初步建立了实物分配制度。1919年起，列宁领导苏维埃进一步扩展了国家集中供应体系，建立了统一的分配机关，将城乡消费合作社联合为一个统一的分配机构——消费公社，基本覆盖了大部分工人群体。1920年初，苏维埃开始在有条件的地方逐步实行物品发放制，这标志着劳动者的工资完全实物化，并逐步推广到各类日用品以及燃料分发上。

In the field of grain distribution, in September 1918 the Council of People’s Commissars passed a resolution revoking all local Soviet decisions on the self-purchase and free transport of food, reducing market-based grain distribution among residents through currency. The population relied on the principle of “he who does not work, neither shall he eat” to obtain basic ration quotas. In early 1919, the “surplus grain appropriation system” was introduced; the People’s Commissariat for Food established the amount to be collected, apportioned from the top down to each peasant household. Households retained the grain necessary for their own subsistence and seeds, and all surplus grain was handed over. On January 17, 1920, the Council of People’s Commissars issued a decree on free public meals, distributing food to residents of large cities through free public canteens. This method of distribution spread from Moscow and Petrograd to various industrial cities; by the end of the year, approximately two million workers obtained food through public canteens.

在粮食分配领域，1918年9月，人民委员会通过决议，撤销地方苏维埃关于自行购买和自由携运食品的一切决定，减少了居民之间通过货币进行粮食分配的市场行为，民众依靠“不劳动者不得食”的原则获得基本配给额度。1919年初，开始实行“余粮收集制”，粮食人民委员部确立征收数额，自上而下摊派到每个农户，农户保留个人生活必需的口粮和种子后，余粮全部上交。1920年1月17日，人民委员会发布了关于免费公共用膳的法令，通过免费公共食堂为大城市的居民进行食物分配。这种分配方式从莫斯科、彼得格勒逐渐向各个工业城市扩散开来，截至年底，大约有200万工人通过公共食堂获得食物。

(3) Reshaping the Resource Allocation Mechanism with Political Power

（三）以政治权力重塑资源配置机制

Lenin believed that in capitalist society, money is “a certificate for obtaining social wealth, which millions of small private owners tightly hold, ‘concealing’ it from the eyes of the state.” Therefore, he very early on proposed the abolition of money and the abolition of the model of resource allocation through the capitalist market, putting forward highly innovative and important propositions such as “replacing money with savings books, checks, and short-term vouchers, etc., stipulating that money must be deposited in banks, etc.,” “merging all banks in the country into a single national bank,” and “turning all citizens into a huge ‘syndicate’—the workers and employees of the entire state.” The core of these propositions was to strengthen the state’s capacity for planned resource allocation and gradually realize resource circulation under the state plan. Guided by this theory, Lenin led the Soviets to begin the process of reshaping the resource allocation mechanism.

列宁认为，在资本主义社会中货币是“取得社会财富的凭证，千百万小私有者紧紧地握住这种凭证，把它‘瞒过’国家的耳目”，因此他很早就提出了消灭货币，消灭以资本主义市场配置资源的模式，提出了“以存折、支票和短期领物证等等来代替货币，规定货币必须存放到银行等等”“把全国所有银行合并成一个全国性的银行”“把全体公民变为一个大‘辛迪加’即整个国家的工作者和职员”等极富创新意义的重要论断，其内核是强化国家计划配置资源的能力，逐步实现国家计划下的资源流通。在这种理论的指导下，列宁领导苏维埃开始了重塑资源配置机制的过程。

From the end of 1917 to the end of 1920, the Soviets gradually deepened the degree of resource allocation, gradually expanded the scope of allocation, and ultimately basically replaced the role of the market. In December 1917, Lenin led the Soviets to establish the Supreme Economic Council, which gradually made systematic adjustments to the model of social resource allocation, supervising and regulating private industry and commerce by managing the circulation of food and daily consumer goods, and stipulating profit margins, thereby greatly enhancing the state’s capacity for resource allocation. In June 1918, the “Decree on the Procurement and Distribution of Cloth” was issued, stipulating that the circulation and allocation of all cloth resources be uniformly conducted by the Soviets, eliminating the possibility of using cloth as a substitute for currency in commercial activities. Concurrently, some retail commerce was nationalized by the cities; the Soviets gradually replaced the market in the sphere of consumer goods exchange through the form of “consumer cooperatives,” and completed the control of the circulation of food and daily necessities nationwide through state management of cooperatives. From 1919 onward, to further implement the policy of abolishing money, the credit functions of the People’s Bank were drastically reduced, some functions were merged into corresponding financial departments, and in 1920 the People’s Bank was formally abolished.

1917年底至1920年底，苏维埃对资源配置的程度逐渐加深，配置领域逐渐扩展，最终基本上取代了市场的作用。1917年12月，列宁领导苏维埃成立最高经济委员会，逐步对社会资源配置模式进行系统性调整，通过管理食品与日用消费品流通的方式对私营工商业进行监督与调节，并规定利润额，极大增强了国家配置资源的能力。1918年6月，发布《关于布匹的采购和分配》法令，规定全部布匹资源的流通与配置统一由苏维埃进行，杜绝了当时以布匹代替货币进行商业活动的可能；与之基本同期进行的还有部分零售商业被收归城市所有，苏维埃通过“消费合作社”的形式在消费品交换领域逐步替代市场，并通过国家管理合作社的形式完成对全国食品与日用品的流通控制。1919年起，为进一步贯彻消灭货币的方针，人民银行的信贷职能大幅削减，部分职能归并至相应的财政部门，1920年正式撤销人民银行。

It should be noted that during this historical period, Soviet Russia also carried out a series of constructions in the political, cultural, and social spheres, using political power to abolish various reactionary cultural institutions and promote socialist cultural undertakings. However, the most prominent feature of Soviet socialist construction at this time was undoubtedly the direct intervention in relations of production through the political form of the dictatorship of the proletariat, attempting to fundamentally transform Russia’s economic base with strong political power. Objectively speaking, under specific historical conditions, this model did have a positive effect on the development of Soviet socialist undertakings, especially in concentrating efforts to face the internal and external predicament of encirclement by imperialist powers and economic crisis, enabling Soviet Russia to successfully defend the newborn red regime, so that “a weak and backward country could defeat several of the world’s strongest countries.” [8]8 Lenin, “Report on the Work of the Council of People’s Commissars,” March 21, 1921. However, over time, this policy gradually provoked relatively strong discontent among the peasants, and the enthusiasm of urban workers was also increasingly frustrated, leading to various problems such as peasant rebellions and disorganization in factories. By early 1921, various economic indicators, including industrial output, grain output, oil output, and steel output, had declined significantly compared to 1913. This policy model became unsustainable and had reached a point where reform was imperative. Clearly, Lenin’s attempt to directly and comprehensively transform relations of production through political power in order to transition to socialism encountered serious setbacks in practice, urgently requiring the exploration of new paths and new models for politics to play a key role.

需要指出的是，在这一历史时期，苏维埃俄国同样进行了政治、文化与社会领域的一系列建设，运用政治权力废除了各种各样的反动文化机构，推广社会主义文化事业。但此时苏俄社会主义建设最显著的特点，无疑是通过无产阶级专政的政治形态直接介入生产关系，尝试以强有力的政治权力彻底改变俄国的经济基础。客观来讲，在特定历史条件下，这种模式确实对苏俄社会主义事业的发展产生了正面作用，尤其是集中体现在面对帝国主义列强包围和经济危机的内外交困局面，苏俄成功地保卫了新生的红色政权，让“又弱又落后的国家竟战胜了世界上几个最强大的国家”。但是随着时间的推移，这种政策逐渐激发起农民较为强烈的不满，城市工人的积极性也日益受挫，出现了农民叛乱、工厂组织混乱等各类问题，至1921年初，包括工业产值、粮食产量、石油产量、钢铁产量等指标在内的各项经济数据相比1913年出现明显下滑，这种政策模式难以为继，已经到了必须改革的地步。显然，列宁试图通过政治权力直接全盘改造生产关系，以过渡到社会主义的尝试在实践中遇到了严重挫折，迫切需要探索政治发挥关键作用的新路径、新模式。

IV. Adjustments and Conceptions for Perfecting the Superstructure through Political Reform (1921–1924)

四、以政治改革完善上层建筑的调整与构想（1921—1924年）

Reflection on the policy of War Communism was the logic of the emergence of political reform. Faced with setbacks in the cause of socialist construction, Lenin repeatedly admitted in public: “We made a mistake: we decided to make a direct transition to communist production and distribution.” In the spring of 1921, he made substantial policy adjustments to address the problems encountered in socialist construction, replacing the attempt to directly reshape the economic base with political power with the New Economic Policy, which was more in line with the laws of economic development, allowing a certain degree of development of the commodity economy and allowing the market to play a role in resource allocation, thereby better conforming to the general laws of economic development. In 1922, Lenin systematically considered many key issues in the socialist construction of backward countries and the role of politics in them. The core proposition of Lenin’s theory and practice regarding the role of politics in socialist construction at this stage was to promote the improvement of the governance system and the enhancement of governance functions through political reform, and then to promote social and cultural prosperity through effective political capacity, ultimately acting on the economic base to liberate and develop the productive forces, laying a solid material and cultural foundation for socialist construction.

对战时共产主义政策的反思是政治改革的出场逻辑。面对社会主义建设事业中的挫折，列宁多次在公开场合承认：“我们犯了错误：决定直接过渡到共产主义的生产和分配。”1921年春，他针对社会主义建设中遇到的问题进行了大幅度的政策调整，以更加顺应经济发展规律的新经济政策取代了政治权力直接重塑经济基础的尝试，允许商品经济在一定程度上的发展，允许市场在资源配置中发挥作用，更加顺应经济发展的一般规律。1922年，列宁又系统性地思考了落后国家在进行社会主义建设时的诸多关键问题以及政治在其中的作用。这个阶段，列宁关于发挥政治在社会主义建设中作用的理论与实践的核心主张是，通过政治改革促进治理体系完善与治理功能提升，进而通过有效的政治能力推动社会文化繁荣，最终作用于经济基础，解放和发展生产力，为社会主义建设奠定坚实的物质基础和文化基础。

It is noteworthy that this new model does not mean Lenin abandoned the attempt to transform the economic base. On the contrary, Lenin believed that the fundamental object of politics remained the economic base. Lenin pointed out: “From the material, economic, and productive sense, we have not yet reached the ‘antechamber’ of socialism, and without passing through this ‘antechamber’ which we have not yet reached, we cannot enter the door of socialism.” From this judgment it can be seen that political reform and cultural revolution have a very clear ultimate goal, namely, to liberate and develop the productive forces and reach the “antechamber” of socialism. There is no doubt that socialist construction is a complex activity involving elements such as the economy, politics, and culture. The reason time and energy are spent studying the complex relationships among these elements and exploring “activating domestic commerce under the correct regulation (guidance) of the state” is that “if we cannot grasp the whole chain, we cannot build the foundation of socialist socio-economic relations.” The reason for developing superstructural elements such as culture is that “if we speak only of domestic economic relations, then the focus of our work at present indeed lies in culturalism.” These judgments clearly indicate that the ultimate goal of the chain points to socialist economic relations. Therefore, although Lenin to some extent abandoned the attempt to directly reshape the economic base through political power during this period, he always firmly grasped the prerequisite and foundational task of socialist construction—developing the productive forces and transforming the economic base—concentrating his thinking on political reform and cultural construction, so as to perfect the state system and political capacity through political reform, promote cultural development, and thereby create the preconditions and conditions for transforming the economic base and realizing the development of the productive forces through a more perfected superstructure.

值得注意的是，这一新模式并不意味着列宁放弃了改造经济基础的尝试。恰恰相反，列宁认为政治的根本作用对象仍是经济基础。列宁指出：“从物质、经济、生产意义上说，我们还没有到达社会主义的‘前阶’，而不通过我们尚未到达的这个‘前阶’，就不能走进社会主义的大门。”从这个论断可以看出，政治改革与文化革命具有非常清晰的最终目标，即解放与发展生产力，达到社会主义的“前阶”。毫无疑问，社会主义建设是涉及经济、政治、文化等要素在内的复杂活动，而之所以要花费时间精力研究这些要素的复杂关系，探索“在国家的正确调节（引导）下活跃国内商业”，是因为“掌握不了整个链条，建不成社会主义社会经济关系的基础”，而之所以要发展文化等上层建筑，是因为“只就国内经济关系来说，那么我们现在的工作重心的确在于文化主义”。这些论断鲜明地指出，链条的最终目的指向的是社会主义经济关系。因此，尽管列宁在这一时期一定程度上放弃了以政治权力直接重塑经济基础的尝试，但是他始终牢牢把握住发展生产力、变革经济基础这一社会主义建设的前提条件、基础任务，把思考的重点聚焦于政治改革和文化建设上，以政治改革完善国家制度、政治能力、文化发展，从而以更加完善的上层建筑为经济基础变革、实现生产力发展创造前提与条件。

(I) Promoting Political Development through Reform of the Governance System and Enhancement of Governance Effectiveness

（一）以治理体系的改革和治理效能的提升促进政治发展

Lenin recognized that socialist construction in backward countries must drive political development through political reform in two dimensions: the governance system and governance capacity. Among these, the governance system focuses more on the static angle, referring to the complete set of institutional and mechanistic arrangements formed by the state in governance practice, covering various fields such as the economy, politics, and social construction. Governance capacity focuses more on the dynamic angle, depending on whether state organs and political parties can, on the basis of a given institutional framework and supply of institutional resources, effectively manage various social affairs, perform governance functions, and translate the governance system into governance outcomes.

列宁认识到，在落后国家进行社会主义建设必须以治理体系和治理能力两个维度的政治改革带动政治发展。其中，治理体系更加侧重于静态角度，指国家在治理实践中形成的一整套体制机制安排，覆盖经济、政治与社会建设等各个领域；而治理能力更加侧重于动态角度，取决于国家机关与政党能否在给定制度框架与制度资源供给的基础上，有效管理社会各项事务，发挥治理功能，将治理体系转化为治理效果。

First, promoting political development through in-depth reform of the governance system. Regarding reform of the governance system, Lenin’s central idea was to perfect the basic pattern of power distribution and institutionally expand democratic participation and supervision. In terms of perfecting the pattern of state power distribution, Lenin proposed the following measures: First, perfect the pattern of power distribution and operational mechanisms between the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the Soviets. In March 1922, Lenin pointed out: “It is necessary to clearly demarcate the functions of the Party (and its Central Committee) and the Soviet government.” The Party’s function is to “exercise general leadership over the work of all state organs.” Soviet state organs need to possess independence and autonomy; the Party itself cannot directly exercise state power but exercises state power through leadership over state organs. That is, the Party is not a sphere of coercion; only the state is a “sphere of coercion,” clarifying the mutual relationship and political pattern between the Party and the state power. Second, perfect the distribution and operation of state legislative power. In his later years, Lenin believed that in fields involving specialized knowledge, such as formulating economic plans, some legislative power should be granted to the State Planning Commission, composed of “experts, specialists, and scientific and technical personnel,” so that “decisions of the State Planning Commission cannot be overturned by ordinary Soviet review procedures, and changing decisions requires special procedures.” This would raise the degree of specialization and operability of legislation and improve the situation where “some comrades who can exert a decisive influence on the direction of state affairs exaggerate the administrative aspect.” Lenin attempted to check the already emerging trend of individual concentration of power by perfecting the distribution and operation of legislative power. Third, perfect the institutional mechanisms for political supervision. On the one hand, the political status of the Central Control Commission and the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspectorate should be raised, changing the pattern where the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspectorate served as an “appendage” or “assistant” of Central Committee members, so that “the Central Committee, together with the Central Control Commission, will finally take the road of becoming the highest representative conference of the Party.” On the other hand, the powers of the Central Control Commission should be institutionally consolidated, stipulating that documents related to meetings of the Political Bureau “must be delivered to all members of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission 24 hours before the meeting,” and that members of the Central Control Commission must attend meetings of the Political Bureau and perform supervisory functions.

其一，以治理体系的深入改革促进政治发展。对于治理体系的改革，列宁的中心思想是完善权力分配基本格局，制度化地扩大民主参与、监督。在完善国家权力分配格局方面，列宁提出了如下措施：一是完善俄共（布）与苏维埃之间的权力分配格局与运行机制。1922年3月，列宁指出：“必须十分明确地划分党（及其中央）和苏维埃政权的职责”，党的职能是“对所有国家机关的工作进行总的领导”，苏维埃国家机关需要拥有独立性与自主性，党本身不能直接行使国家权力，而是通过对国家机关的领导来行使国家权力，即党不是强制的领域，只有国家才是“实行强制的领域”，明确了政党与政权之间的相互关系与政治格局。二是完善国家立法权的分配与运行。列宁晚年认为，对于制定经济计划等涉及专业知识的相关领域，要赋予由“内行、专家、科技界人士”所组成的国家计划委员会部分立法权，“使国家计划委员会的决定不被通常的苏维埃审议程序推翻，改变决定要有特别程序”。提高立法的专业化程度与可操作性，改善“我们某些能够对国家事务的方针起决定性影响的同志夸大了行政这一方面”的影响。列宁试图通过完善立法权的分配与运行，制约已经出现的个人集权趋势。三是完善政治监督体制机制。一方面，要提高中央监察委员会与工农检查院的政治地位，改变工农检查院作为中央委员的“附属品”或中央委员的“助手”的格局，走上“中央委员会就会同中央监察委员会一起最终走上变成党的最高代表会议的道路”；另一方面，要制度化地巩固中央监察委员会的权力，规定凡与政治局会议有关的文件，“一律应在会议前24小时送交中央委员会和中央监察委员会的各委员”，同时中央监察委员会必须有委员出席政治局会议并履行监督职能。

Second, promoting political development through continuous enhancement of governance effectiveness. A good governance system must be translated into reality through the realization of governance functions. In Lenin’s political conception, perfecting governance functions was mainly reflected in continuously improving the governance effectiveness of state organs and Party departments. First, expand the degree of democracy in organs. The Central Committee should “absorb many workers into the Central Committee,” and these workers “should mainly not come from those who have done long-term Soviet work.” By expanding the number of Central Committee members and adjusting the composition of members, excessive concentration of power in a few people could be avoided. For the State Planning Commission, professional talents and scientists should be further absorbed, and opinions of technical professionals should be widely solicited in decision-making. At the same time, it was suggested that Stalin be removed from the post of General Secretary. [9]9 Stalin held the post of General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) from April 1922. Lenin’s suggestion to remove him, made in his “Letter to the Congress” (often called his “Testament”) in late 1922–early 1923, was based on concerns about Stalin’s concentration of power and personal qualities. Second, curb bureaucratic practices. Lenin believed that bureaucratic practices and serfdom were “the worst kind of culture before the bourgeois system.” To deal with bureaucracy, the most crucial thing was to mobilize the masses over the long term: “Only when all residents participate in management work can the struggle against bureaucracy be carried through to the end.” At the same time, state organs needed to be streamlined. Of the more than 120 state organs and people’s commissariats existing at the time, Lenin believed only 16 were truly necessary, and proposed drastically reducing the number of personnel in the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspectorate. “The most important urgent task at present, and also the most important task in the next few years, is to continuously streamline Soviet organs and reduce their expenses by reducing Soviet organs, improving organization, eliminating red tape and bureaucracy, and cutting non-productive expenditures.” Third, implement scientific management methods. Lenin fully absorbed useful experiences and practices from capitalist civilization, critically incorporating reasonable elements of the Western civil service system to improve the work efficiency of state organs and Party departments. For example, he proposed improving the document system, stating that on the basis of learning from Western document systems, “norms for document work should be formulated and then comprehensively promoted.” He advocated establishing a system of personal responsibility, clarifying the scope of authority to avoid collective leadership turning into no leadership, reducing the frequency of meetings and increasing their efficiency, and clearly stipulating that each people’s commissariat should meet no more than twice a week, each meeting no more than two hours, etc., continuously improving the scientific nature of the system and the effectiveness of management in state and Party organs.

其二，以治理效能的不断提升促进政治发展。良好的治理体系必须通过治理功能的实现才能转化为现实。在列宁的政治设想中，完善治理功能，主要体现在不断提高国家机关与党的部门的治理效能上。一是扩大机关民主程度。中央委员会要“吸收很多工人参加中央委员会”，而且“应当主要不是来自那些做过长期苏维埃工作的工人”，通过扩大中央委员会的人数，调整委员结构，避免权力过分向少数人集中。对于国家计划委员会，则进一步吸纳专业人才与科学家，在决策中广泛征求技术专业人士的意见，同时建议将斯大林调离总书记岗位。二是遏制官僚主义作风。列宁认为官僚主义作风和农奴制是“资产阶级制度以前的糟糕之极的文化”。应对官僚主义，最关键的是长期发动群众，“只有当全体居民都参加管理工作时，才能把反官僚主义的斗争进行到底”。同时需要精简国家机关，对于当时存在的120多个国家机关与人民委员会，列宁认为真正有必要的只有16个，并提出要大幅度削减工农检查院的人数。“当前最主要的迫切任务，也是最近几年最重要的任务，就是通过缩减苏维埃机关、改善组织、消灭拖拉作风和官僚主义、减少非生产开支，来不断地精简苏维埃机关和减少其费用。”三是推行科学管理方法。列宁充分汲取资本主义文明中的有益经验做法，批判吸收西方文官制度中的合理因素，以此改善国家机关与党的部门的工作效率，如改进文书制度，提出要在借鉴西方文书制度的基础上，“制定出文牍工作规范，然后全面推广”。他主张建立个人责任制度，明确职权范围，避免集体领导变为无人领导，降低会议频率并提高会议效率，明确规定各人民委员会每周开会不得超过两次，每次不得超过两小时等，不断提高国家和党的机关的制度科学性、管理有效性。

(II) Fully Exerting the Key Role of Politics to Promote the Development of Socialist Culture

（二）充分发挥政治关键作用，推动社会主义文化发展

In building socialism in backward countries, it is also necessary to fully exert the key role of politics to promote the development of socialist culture. Due to the ruling class of the Tsarist era deliberately implementing obscurantist policies, depriving a large number of residents, especially female residents, of the right to education, coupled with years of war, the cultural level of Russian residents was generally low. This backward cultural situation severely constrained political construction and the development of productive forces, causing the rule that should have been exercised by the proletariat to be “in fact exercised through the advanced stratum of the proletariat for the management of the workers, not through the organs managed by the working masses.” The excessively low educational level of the peasants prevented the cooperative movement in the countryside from having the necessary preconditions, because “this condition itself includes the question of the cultural level of the peasants (who are the most numerous).” Therefore, how to use political power to rapidly promote social and cultural development also became an important focus of Lenin’s later thinking.

在落后国家进行社会主义建设，还要充分发挥政治的关键作用，推动社会主义文化发展。由于沙俄时期统治阶级有意识地推行愚民政策，剥夺了大量居民尤其是女性居民的受教育权利，加之常年的战争状态，导致俄国居民的文化水平普遍较低。而这种落后的文化状况严重制约了政治建设、生产力发展，导致本该由无产阶级进行的统治“实际上却是通过无产阶级先进阶层来为劳动者实行管理而不是通过劳动群众来实行管理的机关”。农民过低的受教育程度导致农村合作化缺乏前提条件，因为“这一条件本身就包含有农民（正是人数众多的农民）的文化水平的问题”。因此，如何运用政治的力量快速推动社会文化发展，同样成为列宁晚年的重要思考。

First, use advanced politics to guide cultural development. Faced with the social reality of cultural backwardness, Lenin, based on his country’s actual conditions, made the judgment that “the center of gravity of our work has shifted to cultural work.” How to build a socialist culture? Lenin’s answer was that politics should lay the foundation and precondition for cultural development. As early as 1894, Lenin reflected on the relationship between politics and culture, holding that the proletarian party is the “ideological leader” of socialist cultural construction and must play a leading role in cultural development, while also regarding cultural propaganda work as the “cog” and “screw” of the proletarian revolutionary cause. Socialist cultural construction must submit to the political needs of the proletariat—this idea ran through all of Lenin’s practice. After the October Revolution, regarding the newly established cultural institutions, Lenin again stressed “sending Communists to serve as ‘political commissars’ in the central organs and leading organs of that bureau.” Lenin believed that advanced culture must serve politics and that cultural development must be guided through politics.

一是以先进的政治引导文化发展。面对文化落后的社会现实，列宁结合本国实际情况作出了“我们的重心转移到文化主义上去了”的判断。如何建设社会主义文化？列宁给出的答案是以政治为文化发展奠定基础和前提。早在1894年，列宁就对政治与文化的关系进行了思考，认为无产阶级政党是社会主义文化建设的“思想领导者”，必须发挥政党对文化发展的领导性作用，同时将文化宣传工作视为无产阶级革命事业的“齿轮”与“螺丝钉”，社会主义文化建设必须服从无产阶级的政治需要，这一思想贯穿列宁的全部实践。十月革命后，针对新成立的文化机构，列宁又强调“派共产党员到该局各中心机关和领导机关去担任‘政治委员’”。列宁认为先进的文化要服务于政治，要通过政治来引导文化的发展。

Second, reform the selection mechanism and learning atmosphere of Party and government organs, giving full play to their exemplary and leading role. Lenin believed that cultural construction must first start with the reform of the Party and government organs themselves, and that institutional guarantees and autonomous learning should be used to continuously raise the cultural level of staff. On the one hand, he held that it was necessary to raise the cultural level of existing staff, and that staff of Party and government organs “must set themselves the task: first, to study; second, to study; and third, still to study.” On the other hand, he believed that the selection orientation of Party and government organs should be reformed, absorbing more outstanding workers and intellectuals to further improve the quality of personnel in these organs, “concentrating in the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection truly modern-quality personnel, that is, personnel who are not inferior to the outstanding personnel of Western Europe,” and using a culturally advanced political organ to drive the development of social culture.

二是改革党政机关的选拔机制与学习风气，充分发挥示范带头作用。列宁认为，文化建设必须首先从党政机关自身的改革做起，要以制度化的保障和自主的学习来不断提高工作人员的文化水平。一方面，他认为需要提高既有工作人员的文化水平，党政机关的工作人员“一定要给自己提出这样的任务：第一是学习，第二是学习，第三还是学习”；另一方面，他认为应该改革党政机关的选拔导向，吸纳更多优秀的工人与知识分子，进一步提高党政机关的人员素质，“把具有真正现代素质的人才，即同西欧优秀人才相比并不逊色的人才集中到工农检查院里来”，以一个文化先进的政治机关带动社会文化发展。

Third, reform the national resource allocation model, tilting more toward the field of education. Lenin believed that developing national education was the most critical task of building a socialist culture, and he conceived of a series of policies to tilt social resources toward education. First, increase education funding by streamlining institutions and eliminating redundant personnel to cut unnecessary expenditures, “so that the funds cut can be transferred to the People’s Commissariat for Education,” thereby strengthening the financial guarantee for promoting national education. Second, raise teachers’ treatment, attach high political importance to teachers, create a good social atmosphere of respecting teachers and valuing education, elevate teachers’ status to the level it deserves, increase material guarantees for teachers, remind Party and government organs “not to begrudge increasing teachers’ bread rations any longer,” while simultaneously “continuously strengthening the work of organizing national teachers,” boosting the spirit of the teaching force, and strengthening the construction of the teaching force. Third, reform educational institutions. Lenin specifically mentioned the Chief Administration for Vocational Education, holding that its establishment was too large, leading to personnel redundancy, and that much of its work was motivated not by concern for national education but by departmental interests. Therefore, it was necessary to streamline institutions and carry out functional restructuring to optimize the capacity for educational supply.

三是改革国家资源配置模式，更多向教育领域倾斜。列宁认为，发展国民教育是建设社会主义文化最关键的任务，列宁构想通过一系列政策将社会资源向教育领域倾斜。第一，增加教育经费，通过精简机构、清除冗员来削减不必要的经费，“以便把削减下来的款项转用于教育人民委员部”，强化对推行国民教育的经费保障；第二，提高教师待遇，在政治上高度重视教师，营造全社会尊师重教的良好氛围，把教师地位提到应有的高度，增加对教师的物质保障，提醒党政机关“不要再舍不得增加教师的面包配给额了”，同时“不断地加强组织国民教师的工作”，振奋教师队伍精神，强化教师队伍建设；第三，进行教育机构改革，列宁特别提到了职业教育总局，认为其编制过于庞大，导致人员冗余，大量工作并非出于对国民教育的关切而是以部门利益为出发点，因此必须精简机构，进行职能再造，以优化教育供给能力。

Fourth, innovate the coordination methods of Party and government organs to make up for cultural differences between urban and rural areas. After the victory of the October Revolution, Russia remained an agricultural country, with peasants still constituting the majority of the population. Moreover, compared with cities, rural residents had lower literacy rates and educational levels, which significantly hindered the process of agricultural cooperation. Lenin engaged in deep reflection on how to rapidly strengthen rural cultural construction and raise the cultural level of peasants. On the one hand, it was necessary to give fuller play to the role of state organs, invest more in rural education, and “not begrudge spending money” on various projects “going to the countryside.” On the other hand, it was necessary to give fuller play to the role of the Communist Party and mass organizations, especially emphasizing the exemplary and leading role of the working class and the advanced party. A large number of cultural assistance groups were established in factories to support rural cultural development, and Lenin creatively proposed the organizational method of “branch co-construction,” suggesting “arranging for all urban party branches to be ‘assigned’ to various rural party branches… to meet the various cultural needs of their brother branches,” thereby accelerating the flow of urban and rural resources and promoting the development of rural culture.

四是创新党政机关协同方式，弥补城乡间文化差异。十月革命胜利后，俄国仍然是农业国家，农民仍然占据全部人口的多数，且相较于城市，农村居民识字率与受教育水平更低，显著阻碍了农业合作化的进程。对于如何迅速加强农村文化建设、提升农民文化水平，列宁进行了深入思考。一方面，要更加充分地发挥国家机关作用，对农村教育进行更多投入，对于“下农村”的各类项目“不要舍不得花钱”；另一方面，要更加充分发挥共产党以及群众团体的作用，尤其强调发挥工人阶级以及先进政党的示范带动作用，在工厂中成立大量文化帮扶团体，支援农村文化发展，并且富有创造性地提出了“支部共建”的组织方法，提出要“做到把所有的城市支部都‘分配’给各农村支部……来满足自己的兄弟支部的各种文化需求”，通过加速城乡资源的流动，促进农村文化的发展。

V. Conclusion

五、结语

Xi Jinping points out: “A country’s political system is determined by its economic and social base, and in turn reacts upon its economic and social base, even playing a decisive role. Among the various systems of a country, the political system occupies a key link.” The general laws of human social development show that the modernization of backward countries is often advanced under highly compressed temporal and spatial conditions, characterized by rapid speed, large scale, wide scope, numerous contradictions, and intense resistance. It is especially necessary to give full play to the role of the political superstructure, coordinate the coordinated progress of all social spheres, maintain the stable political and social order necessary for advancing modernization, and resolve the various conflicts and contradictions that arise in the process of rapid transformation from traditional to modern society. After leading the victory of the October Revolution, Lenin’s exploration of how to give play to the role of politics in the social development process of economically and culturally relatively backward countries possesses theoretical and practical value that transcends time and space, providing inspiration and reference for our further comprehensive deepening of reform and advancement of Chinese-path modernization.

习近平指出：“一个国家的政治制度决定于这个国家的经济社会基础，同时又反作用于这个国家的经济社会基础，乃至于起到决定性作用。在一个国家的各种制度中，政治制度处于关键环节。”人类社会发展的一般规律表明，落后国家进行现代化建设往往是在高度压缩的时空条件下推进的，具有速度快、幅度大、领域广、矛盾多、反抗烈的显著特点，尤其需要充分发挥政治上层建筑的作用，统筹社会各个领域协调并进，以维持推进现代化必需的稳定政治社会秩序，化解传统社会急速向现代社会转型过程中出现的各类矛盾冲突。列宁在领导十月革命胜利后，围绕如何发挥政治在经济文化相对落后国家社会发展进程中作用的探索，具有穿越时空的理论和实践价值，为我们进一步全面深化改革、推进中国式现代化提供了启示与借鉴。

On the one hand, giving play to the role of the “political axis” must conform to the laws of economic development. For the situation Lenin faced, “directly changing the relations of production through politics in order to make a direct transition to pure socialist forms and pure socialist distribution was beyond our strength.” Therefore, Lenin abandoned the approach of completely reshaping the economic base in the short term and instead first sought a transition through the “expedient” New Economic Policy. As his understanding of the laws of economic development deepened, Lenin further realized that this new type of political-economic relationship—under the leadership of Soviet power, with public ownership as the mainstay, recognizing commodity exchange, recognizing the role of the market, allowing the development of private enterprises, and maintaining appropriate government intervention—was not a short-term expedient but needed to be “implemented seriously and for a long time (of course, as we have correctly pointed out, not forever),” and was a policy and method that needed to be adhered to for a long time in socialist construction. This enlightens us that social construction and development have their own inherent objective economic laws, and blind rashness will only cause serious political and economic consequences. In advancing Chinese-path modernization, we must respect the laws of the market economy, give full play to the decisive role of the market mechanism in resource allocation, and promote resource allocation according to market rules, market indicators, and market competition to maximize benefits and optimize efficiency. On this basis, we must give full play to the government’s economic function of macroeconomic regulation, strengthen and optimize public services, ensure fair competition, strengthen market supervision, maintain market order, and remedy market failures. By accelerating the construction of a high-level socialist market economy system and continuously developing new quality productive forces, we will consolidate the material foundation for socialist modernization.

一方面，发挥“政治中轴”作用必须顺应经济发展规律。对于列宁所面临的情况而言，通过政治直接改变生产关系以此来“向纯社会主义形式和纯社会主义分配直接过渡，是我们力所不及的”。因此，列宁放弃了在短期内全盘重塑经济基础的做法，而是先以“权宜之计”新经济政策寻求过渡。随着对经济发展规律认识的深化，列宁进一步意识到这种在苏维埃政权领导下以公有制为主，承认商品交换、承认市场作用、允许私人企业发展、保持适当政府干预的新型政治经济关系不是短期的权宜之计，而是需要“认真地和长期地（当然，正如我们已经正确指出的，并不是永远）执行这个政策”，是在社会主义建设中需要长期坚持的政策与方法。这就启示我们，社会建设与发展有其内在的客观经济规律，盲目冒进只会造成严重的政治经济后果。在推进中国式现代化的进程中，必须尊重市场经济规律，充分发挥市场机制在资源配置中的决定性作用，推动资源配置依据市场规则、市场指标、市场竞争实现效益最大化和效率最优化；在此基础上，充分发挥政府宏观调控的经济职能，加强和优化公共服务、保障公平竞争、加强市场监管、维护市场秩序、弥补市场失灵。通过加快构建高水平社会主义市场经济体制，不断发展新质生产力，为社会主义现代化建设夯实物质基础。

On the other hand, to give play to the role of the “political axis,” it is necessary to continuously improve the superstructure. For Lenin, the danger of capitalist restoration at home and the practical demand to “prevent the counter-revolutionary states of Western Europe from strangling us” and to hold out until the arrival of world revolution constituted the objective situation before him. Under the premise that the economic base could hardly undergo a qualitative change in the short term, after careful consideration, Lenin proposed in 1923 that “we are faced with two epoch-making tasks”: the first was “to transform our state apparatus, which we inherited from the old era in its entirety and which is utterly useless”; the second was “cultural work among the peasants.” The essence of this was to seize on politics as the core, rapidly promote the development of the superstructure, and use a more perfected superstructure to react upon the economic base and respond to changes in the international situation. This enlightens us that, in the process of comprehensively advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation through Chinese-path modernization, we must take upholding and improving the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics and advancing the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity as the overall goal of comprehensively deepening reform, adhere to institutional improvement as the main line, consolidate fundamental institutions, improve basic institutions, and innovate important institutions. By continuously strengthening the building of the Marxist ruling party, perfecting the institutional system of whole-process people’s democracy, adhering to law-based governance in all respects and improving the socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics, deepening the reform of the cultural system and mechanisms, and promoting better alignment between relations of production and productive forces, between the superstructure and the economic base, and between national governance and social development, we can provide strong momentum and institutional guarantees for Chinese-path modernization.

另一方面，发挥“政治中轴”作用必须不断完善上层建筑。对于列宁而言，国内资本主义复辟的危险与“阻止西欧反革命国家扼杀我们”并坚持到世界革命的到来的现实要求是摆在他面前的客观形势。在经济基础短期内难以发生质变的前提下，经过深思熟虑，列宁在1923年提出“我们面前摆着两个划时代的主要任务”：第一个是“改造我们原封不动地从旧时代接收过来的简直毫无用处的国家机关”；第二个是“在农民中进行的文化工作”，其实质是扭住政治这个核心，迅速推动上层建筑发展，以更加完善的上层建筑来反作用于经济基础、应对国际形势变化。这就启示我们，在以中国式现代化全面推进中华民族伟大复兴的进程中，必须把坚持和完善中国特色社会主义制度、推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化作为全面深化改革的总目标，坚持以制度建设为主线，筑牢根本制度、完善基本制度、创新重要制度。通过不断加强马克思主义执政党建设，健全全过程人民民主制度体系，坚持全面依法治国、完善中国特色社会主义法治体系，深化文化体制机制改革，推动生产关系和生产力、上层建筑和经济基础、国家治理和社会发展更好相适应，为中国式现代化提供强大动力和制度保障。

Of course, it must also be noted that, compared with Soviet Russia more than 100 years ago, in Lenin’s time, today’s China differs greatly in its specific national conditions. The distinctive Chinese characteristics displayed by Chinese-path modernization—such as a huge population size, common prosperity for all the people, coordination between material and cultural-ethical progress, harmony between humanity and nature, and a path of peaceful development—as well as China’s unique historical heritage, cultural traditions, and stage of economic and social development, are significantly different from the objective conditions faced by Soviet Russia in its socialist construction. In advancing Chinese-path modernization, we must, on the basis of firmly grasping the essence of Lenin’s thought on how politics plays a key role, adhere to emancipating the mind, seeking truth from facts, keeping pace with the times, and being realistic and pragmatic. We must integrate the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s specific realities and with the best of traditional Chinese culture, continuously enrich and develop the theoretical system of Chinese-path modernization, and contribute Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to expanding the pathways for developing countries to achieve modernization.

当然也必须注意到，与列宁所处的100多年前的苏俄相比，当今的中国在具体国情上大相径庭，中国式现代化所展现的人口规模巨大、全体人民共同富裕、物质文明和精神文明相协调、人与自然和谐共生、走和平发展道路等鲜明的中国特色，以及中国独特的历史传承、文化传统和经济社会发展阶段与苏俄社会主义建设面临的客观条件存在显著不同。在推进中国式现代化的进程中，我们要在牢牢把握列宁关于政治如何发挥关键作用思想的精髓的基础上，坚持解放思想、实事求是、与时俱进、求真务实，把马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合、同中华优秀传统文化相结合，不断丰富和发展中国式现代化理论体系，为拓展发展中国家走向现代化的途径贡献中国智慧和中国方案。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗