For the masses of the working population the slogans of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity revealed themselves as an empty pretense, covering only the substitution of the rule of one class by that of another; the masses remained in conditions of grinding toil, poverty and servitude. The anarchy of production and distribution; the recurrent crises; the limitless extremes and ever-widening gulf of wealth and poverty; the wild scramble of commercialism and profit-seeking; all were revealing the inner contradictions of capitalism.

This analysis will illustrate Lenin’s views on imperialism which inspired him to leadership and totalitarianism. The enlightenment views of thinkers like Jean Jacques Rousseau will then be offered in contrast to Lenin’s counter-enlightened viewpoint. A conclusion will address how the groundwork laid down on imperialism by Lenin was the very ground Joseph Stalin would use to stand up

Lenin’s communism is basically a revision of Marxism. When it came to a rejection of European capitalism and his interest in imperialism, Lenin was mainly interested in the tactical aspect of imperialism. He was intrigued by the opportunities it provided a revolutionary leader. The discontent of the people played into his hand in this matter. Lenin was able to make Marxism succeed in a country that was undeveloped industrially and mainly consisted of a peasant base. Lenin used Marx as a bible. He held up quotes or concepts from Marx as ideals on one hand, while on the other hand he argued against countries he found contrary to Marx’s ideology. Chief among Lenin’s beliefs was that only a social revolution would create a communist society minus the evils of capitalism (i.e. imperialism) “Monopolies, oligarchy, the striving for domination instead of striving for liberty, the exploitations of an increasing number of small or weak nations by a handful of the richest or most powerful nations—all these have given birth to those distinctive characteristics of imperialism which compel us to define it as parasitic or decaying capitalism.”

Sabine, G. H. A History of Political Theory. (4th edit.). Illinois, Dryden Press, 1973.

Now that we have addressed Lenin’s theories on imperialism, we can make some distinctions between his views and those of his bloody successor, Joseph Stalin. Understanding the differences between the two makes one capable of seeing how the socioeconomic troubles experienced by Russia in the 1980s and 1990s came about. Lenin did not actually create a solution to the problem of how to build a worker’s state in a peasant society. However, there is quite a bit of continuity between Lenin’s early ideas and those of Joseph Stalin, his successor. Some critics disagree with this interpretation, but they generally use the New Economic Policy formulated by Lenin in t