rd
administration, from the democratic and other principles of the
Soviet rule. Some of the Socialist-Revolutionists of the left wing
carried on a plainly demagogic agitation against the decree on
dictatorship, appealing to the evil instincts and to the petty
bourgeois desire for personal gain. The question thus presented is
of really great significance; firstly, the question of principle
is, in general, the appointment of individuals endowed with
unlimited power, the appointment of dictators, in accord with the
fundamental principles of the Soviet rule; secondly, in what
relation is this case--this precedent, if you wish--to the special
problems of the Soviet rule during the present concrete period?
Both questions deserve serious consideration.[74]

With characteristic ingenuity Lenine attempts to provide this dictatorship
with a theoretical basis which will pass muster as Marxian Socialism. He
uses the term "Soviet democracy" as a synonym for democratic Socialism and
says there is "absolutely no contradiction in principle" between it and
"the use of dictatorial power of individuals." By what violence to reason
and to language is the word _democracy_ applied to the system described by
Lenine? To use words with such scant respect to their meanings, established
by etymology, history, and universal agreement in usage, is to invite and
indeed compel the contempt of minds disciplined by reason's practices. As
for the claim that there is no contradiction in principle between
democratic Socialism and the exercise of dictatorial power by individuals,
before it can be accepted every Socialist teacher and leader of any
standing anywhere, the programs of all the Socialist parties, and their
practice, must be denied and set aside. Whether democratic Socialism be
wise or unwise, a practical possibility or an unrealizable idea, at least
it has nothing in common with such reactionary views as are expressed in
the following:

That the dictatorship of individuals has very frequently in the
history of revolutionary movements served as an expression and
means of realization of the dictatorship of the revolutionary
classes is confirmed by the undisputed experience of history. With
bourgeois democratic principles, the dictatorship of individuals
has undoubtedly been compatible. But this point is always treated
adroitly by the bourgeois critics of the Soviet rule a