Study On Plekhanov’s Democracy Thought

Plekhanov’ democracy thought has a profound social background. On the one hand, it isthe background that Russia’ three failures of foreign wars and its subsequent political change.On the other hand, it is the background of Western Europe at that time, especially the labormovement of Western Europe. Plekhanov’ democracy thought also has obvious sources oftheory. Populism from the East and Marxism from the western are two main ones, and theirrelation of influence has an odd and complex evolution law. Plekhanov began to use Marxismclearing his Populism thought as early as in1883. The thinking traces of Populism, however,never disappeared. Lewis Coser even argued that this rule is suitable for the vast majority ofthe Russian Marxists. There are limitations and advantages in political philosophy ofPlekhanov. Actually, the Pragmatist concept of democracy is just the philosophy foundation ofall sorts of non-democratic forms that he always opposed. The result of logical deductionfrom his Pragmatist concept of democracy is rule by man. Himself cannot escape from“inchworm effect” in the political practice. Plekhanov’ concept about democratic subject isscientific, especially the explain of dialectical relationship between elite and mass is a modelusing Marxist philosophy to analyze problem.In Plekhanov point of view, after the human society going into the modern civilization,there will be two democratic form: capitalist democracy and the socialist democracy. WesternEurope had overthrow the feudal autocracy and established the capitalist democracy, and thenext task was to pursuit socialist democracy. Being different from Western Europe, Russiawas suffering at the pain of both the development of capitalist production and insufficient ofthe development. According to “the so-called ‘productivity’ theory debased by the leaders ofthe Second International”（Stalin said), Plekhanov set up a “three states, two transition” routemap of democracy （please see picture1) for Russia. The appearance of the route map seemslike the theory in the textbook of the Soviet Union. However, they differ sharply from eachother. He believes the first step of Russian political movement should be independent unitingbetween the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, aiming to oppose tsarist autocracy and “people’styranny” and pursuit the capitalist democracy. His analysis about the peasants class in theprocess is very wonderful and penetrated. After the February Revolution Russian, thetransition period, Plekhanov claimed that Russian should establish a bourgeois coalition government, convoke the constitutional convention to safeguard political freedom, oppose theGerman invaders, the restoration of the tsar, anarchy and clique dictatorship. He especiallyopposed clique dictatorship. He believed that the Bolshevik clique dictatorship is sharplydifferent from dictatorship of the proletariat of Marxism, but inherited the mantle of “people’styranny”, and its essence is the dictatorship of the few revolutionaries to the proletariat. Thiskind of dictatorship is one of the most dangerous enemies for political freedom. Plekhanovbelieved capitalist democracy have both advantages and limitations, which is an inevitableand long-standing democracy stage. He argued that the proletariat cannot seize power at thisstage, and should promote continuously capitalist democracy as extreme opposition.Plekhanov also discussed the topic whether the proletariat represents may attend thebourgeois government. After the development of capitalism matures, dictatorship of theproletariat will be essential transitional stage. Being different from later dictatorship in SovietUnion, Plekhanov set strict conditions for implement of the dictatorship of the proletariat suchas productivity, class consciousness and the proportion of the proletariat population, andstressed again and again transitivity of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Finally, society willachieve socialist democracy.Plekhanov’s political stance had no fundamental change. He was always in pursuit ofpolitical democracy, and successively opposed autocratic tsar, people’s authoritarian ofPopulism, dictatorship of Bolshevik. Historical trajectory didn’t obey Plekhanov’s planseemingly, but Stalin system realized Plekhanov’s criticizes about people’s autocracy andclique dictatorship. Plekhanov’s democracy thought has many limitations. However, there isno denying that Plekhanov’s democracy thought has its prospective and current value.Plekhanov is an intellectual, rather than a politician. He bore his role of the opposition for thesake of faith. Actually Plekhanov is a microcosm, which represents the weakness of ideals andjustice in front of the utilitarian calculation.