 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Two-stage theory" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(February 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Thetwo-stage theory, orstagism, is aMarxist–Leninist political theory which argues that underdeveloped countries such asTsarist Russia must first pass through astage of capitalism via abourgeois revolution before moving to asocialist stage.[1]
Stagism was applied to countries worldwide that had not passed through the capitalist stage. In theSoviet Union, the two-stage theory was opposed by theTrotskyist theory ofpermanent revolution.
While the discussion on stagism focuses on theRussian Revolution,Maoist theories such asNew Democracy tend to apply a two-stage theory to struggles elsewhere.
InMarxist–Leninist theory underJoseph Stalin, the theory of two stages gained a revival. More recently, theSouth African Communist Party and theSocialist Alliance have re-elaborated the two-stage theory, although the Socialist Alliance differentiates their position from theStalinist one.[2]
The two-stage theory is often attributed toKarl Marx andFriedrich Engels, but critics such asDavid McLellan[3] and others dispute that they envisaged the strict application of this theory outside of the actually existing Western development of capitalism.[citation needed]
Although all agree that Marx and Engels argue that Western capitalism provides the technological advances necessary for socialism and the "grave diggers" of thecapitalist class in the form of theworking class, critics of the two-stage theory, including most trends ofTrotskyism, counter that Marx and Engels denied that they had laid down a formula to be applied to all countries in all circumstances. McLellan and others cite Marx's "Reply toMikhailovsky":
[Mikhailovsky] feels he absolutely must metamorphose my historical sketch of the genesis of capitalism in Western Europe into a historico-philosophic theory of the general path every people is fated to tread, whatever the historical circumstances in which it finds itself [...] but I beg his pardon. (He is both honoring and shaming me too much.)
— Karl Marx, "Reply to Mikhailovsky"[4]
In the preface to the Russian edition ofThe Communist Manifesto of 1882, Marx and Engels specifically outline an alternative path tosocialism for Russia.[5]
In Russia, theMensheviks believed the two-stage theory applied toTsarist Russia. They were criticized byLeon Trotsky in what became the theory ofpermanent revolution in 1905. Later when the two-stage theory re-appeared in theSoviet Union after the death ofVladimir Lenin, the theory of permanent revolution was supported by theLeft Opposition. The permanent revolution theory argues that the tasks allotted in the two-stage theory to the capitalist class can only be carried out by the working class with the support of the poorpeasantry and that the working class will then pass on to the socialist tasks and expropriate the capitalist class. However, the revolution cannot pause here and must remain permanent in the sense that it must seek worldwide revolution to avoid isolation and move towards international socialism.[citation needed]
Now the question is: can the Russianobshchina, though greatly undermined, yet a form of primeval common ownership of land, pass directly to the higher form of Communist common ownership? Or, on the contrary, must it first pass through the same process of dissolution such as constitutes the historical evolution of the West? The only answer to that possible today is this: If the Russian Revolution becomes the signal for a proletarian revolution in the West, so that both complement each other, the present Russian common ownership of land may serve as the starting point for a communist development.
