Patriotism: Lenin’s Views on Patriotism and Its Lessons:  Quotes from Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin on Patriotism from 3 Aspects

Author, Dr. Liu Lifei is from School of Marxism at Liaoning University and a lecturer at the School of Marxism at Shenyang Agricultural University, January 2022

【Abstract】Lenin’s view on patriotism is the essence of proletarian patriotic thought formed in revolutionary practice by creatively applying Marxist standpoints, viewpoints and methods in the face of unprecedentedly sharp national contradictions and class struggles under a special historical background. Its essential meaning of the unity of rationality and sensibility, principle and flexibility.

“Defending the Fatherland” in an Imperialist War Is Not Real Patriotism

During the First World War, Western imperialist powers fought for colonies and expanded their sphere of influence, spreading the flames of war throughout Europe and extending to the Asian and African continents. During the tense stage of the war, various erroneous patriotic trends such as old and narrow nationalism and social chauvinism of the petty bourgeoisie emerged, seriously impacting and interfering with the revolutionary direction and process of the proletariat, and seriously deviating from the proletariat’s internationalist position. Lenin severely exposed and criticized this.

The so-called “defending the motherland” was essentially narrow nationalism. The ruling groups of military feudal autocracy Tsarist Russia and other countries in the stage of bourgeois rule often define the nature of war by “offense” and “defense”, and shout slogans of “defending the motherland” to deceive their people into imperialist plundering wars. Lenin pointed out that the nature of a war does not depend on who is attacking, but on which class is waging the war.

“Defending the motherland” in an imperialist war was the “patriotism” of bourgeois chauvinism. Supporting “defending the motherland” in an imperialist war was actually supporting the evil imperialism and the ruling and exploiting bourgeoisie. Lenin believed that wars for national independence and liberation and wars to resist imperialist aggression were just wars, and that “defending the motherland” at such times was a legitimate “patriotism” and that every Marxist should be a practitioner of this “patriotism”.

and in the face of reactionary wars launched by imperialism aimed at plundering resources and wealth and oppressing weak nations, supporting them in the name of “defending the motherland” was a typical narrow nationalism and was falling for the tricks of the international bourgeoisie to deceive, disintegrate and disperse the international proletariat.

The limitations of traditional petty-bourgeois patriotism

 In his article “The Precious Confession of Pitirim Sorokin”, Lenin explained that “patriotism is an extremely deep feeling formed by the isolation of their respective motherlands for thousands of years”.  Because countries around the world are in a political and economic environment of “isolation from each other”, the economic status of the petty bourgeoisie determines its feelings towards the country, and this feeling rises to patriotism, which becomes an old, blind and radical patriotism. Lenin pointed out that “the proletariat strives to overthrow the imperialist bourgeoisie by revolutionary means, while the petty bourgeoisie strives to “improve” imperialism and adapt to imperialism by reformist means under the condition of obeying imperialism.”

 The traditional patriotism of the petty bourgeoisie can play a role in rallying national strength and resisting external aggression in a certain period, but during the imperialist war, this “patriotism” ignored the proletarian internationalist position, advocated supporting the foreign war of the bourgeois government of the country, and pursued social reformism instead of social revolution. The limitations of the bourgeoisie seriously hinder the development of the proletarian social revolutionary movement and seriously undermine proletarian internationalism, and must be resolutely criticized and transformed. Using war to overthrow the rule of the bourgeoisie and turning to civil war against imperialism is the correct direction of struggle and a social revolution in the true sense.

The compromise and capitulationism of the Second International was a complete betrayal of socialism. During the war, most leaders of the Second International advocated supporting the bourgeoisie and compromising and capitulating to the social chauvinists, which seriously undermined the international workers’ alliance and unity. Lenin believed that calling the imperialist war a defensive war or a revolutionary war was a deception of the people, and that supporting such a policy of compromise and capitulation was to support the petty bourgeoisie in fooling the workers and to cruelly drag the workers onto the imperialists’ chariot to serve the evil capital. Lenin also severely criticized Kautsky and others for their inference during the imperialist war that “socialism is based on the equality, freedom and consciousness of all nations… Socialists have the right and obligation to defend the motherland.” He believed that this inference was a mockery of socialism in theory and could not stand the test of political practice. The arguments of Kautsky and others replaced the concept of “defending the motherland”, blurred the boundaries between them and the social chauvinists, and confused internationalism with philistine nationalism.

This is undoubtedly a complete betrayal of socialism and proletarian internationalism. The conscious working class must resolutely resist these erroneous views and take revolutionary actions.

The decisive break with “patriotism” during the Brest-Litovsk Peace period was a strategic compromise to preserve the revolutionary power of the proletariat

After the victory of the October Revolution in Russia, the Soviet regime was established at the beginning, and the regular Red Army had not yet been established, and the revolutionary regime was in danger. In order to preserve the revolutionary spark and strive for the final victory of the international revolution, Lenin sacrificed the greatest national interests at a painful price, almost putting the Bolsheviks in a situation of complete division, and insisted on signing the humiliating Brest-Litovsk Treaty with the German invaders.

Compromises to consolidate the fruits of the proletarian revolution.

On November 7, 1917 (October 25 in the Russian calendar), the Bolshevik Party headed by Lenin led Russian workers, peasants and revolutionary soldiers to launch an armed uprising in the capital Petrograd, overthrowing the rule of the bourgeoisie and establishing the world’s first proletarian dictatorship.

At that time, the newly established regime was extremely unstable, and the revolutionary forces had yet to continue to grow, unable to resist the attack of German imperialism. Lenin advocated signing a peace treaty with Germany immediately to preserve the revolutionary forces and consolidate the fruits of victory. However, the “Left Communists” headed by Bukharin firmly opposed the signing of a peace treaty and advocated declaring war on Germany, while Trotsky advocated “no war, no peace”, that is, on the one hand, announcing the cessation of the war, and on the other hand, not signing a peace treaty.

Lenin pointed out that it was futile for a country without an army and destroyed by war to rely on propaganda for a peace treaty without annexation and indemnity in the face of powerful robbers. In the absence of any choice, only by making necessary strategic compromises and national sacrifices can we gain a real respite, buy time to consolidate the fruits of the revolutionary victory, and finally welcome the arrival of the world revolution. The correctness and foresight of Lenin’s views were also confirmed. The November Revolution in Germany in 1918 overthrew the regime of Wilhelm II and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was subsequently abolished.

We should achieve the unity of firm principles and flexible policies.

 During the signing of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty, Lenin also faced painful emotional torment. “If I had any way to avoid such a peace treaty, I would neither want to see it nor abide by it.” When facing the many opposition parties clamoring that the Bolsheviks were “betraying the motherland”, Lenin pointed out that “when the strong step on the chest of the weak, it is very painful and extremely painful to sign an unfortunate, extremely harsh, and infinitely humiliating peace treaty.”

But at the same time, Lenin believed that this pain and sacrifice were strategic and necessary, and were an inevitable choice made in a special historical period. In Lenin’s view, under specific and historical conditions, a firm socialist should sacrifice his patriotic feelings for the international revolution, and it is also inevitable to adhere to the firmness of patriotic principles and the flexibility of strategies. On the one hand, it is necessary to safeguard the long-term interests of the country and the nation and strive to achieve the ideal goal of communism. On the other hand, it is also necessary to choose necessary compromises that are beneficial to the revolution. This compromise is “surrendering secondary interests and preserving fundamental interests.” It was under the guidance of this correct strategy and viewpoint that the fragile Soviet regime was able to reorganize the national economy, establish a regular Red Army, and consolidate the results of the revolution in a short period of time.

Lenin Inherited and developed Marx’s patriotic thought.

 Lenin’s patriotic viewpoints show a firm proletarian, internationalist and world revolutionary standpoint, which is consistent with Marx’s patriotic thought, and also creatively develops Marx’s patriotic thought. In the view of Marx and Engels, “workers have no country”.

 Only when the rule of the bourgeoisie is overthrown, the proletariat seizes power, and establishes a rule that represents the interests of the proletariat, can patriotism have true meaning. Before and after the signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk during the First World War, Lenin’s severe criticism and ruthless exposure of various patriotic thoughts were precisely the embodiment of inheriting this Marxist thought. Lenin believed that “the proletariat has no country”. Under the capitalist system, the motherland only exists for the bourgeoisie, and the proletariat has no country. At the same time, Lenin was not against patriotism, but believed that patriotism that started from the interests of the proletariat and was consistent with the socialist cause and the world revolutionary movement was true patriotism. “In the criminal wars waged by the exploiting classes to consolidate their class rule, adopting “defensivism” (motherland) was  a betrayal of socialism”.

When the rule of the bourgeoisie has been overthrown, the wars waged by the proletariat to consolidate and develop socialism are reasonable and just. History has fully proved that it was the revolutionary power of the Russian working class that accelerated the process of the world socialist revolution, lit up a brilliant beacon for the proletarian revolution throughout the world, and provided strong support.

Lenin Cultivated the spirit of patriotism by accurately grasping the historical logic of patriotism

Lenin’s view on patriotism was of great significance in shaping correct values ​​and guiding mainstream values ​​in the early days of the former Soviet Union. It also inspired us that to ensure the correct direction of cultivating patriotism, we must deeply understand the standpoints, views and methods contained in Marx’s patriotic thought and accurately grasp the essential connotation and characteristics of patriotism.

To promote the spirit of patriotism and cultivate patriotic sentiments, we must strengthen the ideological unity of building a socialist modern power with Chinese characteristics under the leadership of the Communist Party of China.

 In Lenin’s patriotic view, “patriotism” means loving the Bolsheviks and loving the socialist motherland. In China in the new era, loving the party, loving the country, and loving socialism are unified and are an organic whole that is interconnected and mutually reinforcing.

General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: “The fate of the motherland is inseparable from the fate of the party and the fate of socialism. Only by adhering to the unity of patriotism, loving the party, and loving socialism can patriotism be vivid and real. This is the most important manifestation of the patriotic spirit of contemporary China.”

The 100-year history of our party and the history of the construction of New China have fully proved that at the moment when the Chinese nation faced life and death, it was socialism that appeared in time and saved the suffering China; in the turbulent international competition, it was the Communist Party of China that united and led the people of the whole country, adhered to the improvement and development of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and firmly moved forward and made steady progress on the road to realizing the Chinese dream of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. The Communist Party of China, socialist China, and the broad masses of the people have formed an organic community of destiny.

Only by adhering to the leadership of the Communist Party of China and unswervingly following the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics can we build and develop China’s strong patriotic sentiments.

To promote the spirit of patriotism and cultivate patriotic sentiments, we must strengthen the emotional identification of resolutely safeguarding national unity and ethnic unity.

Lenin’s patriotic views, under specific historical conditions, contain rational and profound patriotic feelings, and contain strong national sentiments for striving for national independence and liberation. In socialist China, generations of Communists have worked hard, united, relayed, and tenaciously, and have achieved a hard-won good situation of people’s democratic dictatorship, which should be cherished. In cultivating patriotism, on the one hand, we must highlight national identity. Only by fighting against all acts and forces that split the country with a clear stand can we safeguard national dignity and integrity; on the other hand, we must highlight national identity. Only when people of all ethnic groups embrace each other tightly, respect each other, tolerate each other, and help each other….. …..can we realize the common aspirations of all Chinese people, safeguard the fundamental interests of the Chinese nation, and protect the development and construction achievements of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

To carry forward the spirit of patriotism and cultivate patriotic sentiments, we must strengthen our responsibility to strive to build a community with a shared future for mankind. This is in fact internationalism..

Lenin’s patriotic viewpoint has a distinct internationalist color, requiring support for the international socialist revolutionary movement and the promotion of world socialist development. The world today is undergoing a major change that has not been seen in a century. The world is becoming more multipolar and economic globalization is deepening.

The interests of various countries are more closely intertwined than ever before, and global issues are becoming increasingly prominent. The destinies of the people of all countries have never been as closely linked as they are today. In December 2012, General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out in a symposium with foreign experts and representatives: “The international community is increasingly becoming a ‘community with a shared future’ where you are in me and I am in you. Faced with the complex situation of the world economy and global issues, no country can be immune and stand out alone.” Focusing on building a community with a shared future for mankind is a new concept for China to rationally respond to changes in the international order and the challenges of globalization. It is China’s solution and wisdom for the current survival status and development trend of mankind. In China in the new era, the cultivation of patriotism should not only be rooted in the local area, but also be oriented to the world. We must keep in mind the “big things of the country”, have a broader international perspective and strategic vision, overcome narrow nationalism and national egoism, and contribute China’s strength to the cause of progress and development of all mankind with a more reasonable value perspective.

Quotes from Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin on Patriotism from 3 Aspects

The motherland is a historical category

Please note that if a war breaks out (of course, this war can only be against countries that are opposed to communism), the members of this society will definitely defend their true motherland and their true homeland. Therefore, they will fight with full spirit, determination and courage, making even modern mechanized armies invincible.

— Engels: Speech at Elberfeld (February 8, 1845)

In reality, it is the bourgeois motherland that is destroying, damaging, destroying and ruining the “flesh and blood ties” between the German workers and the German soil by establishing “ties” between slaves and slave owners. In reality, only by destroying the bourgeois motherland can the workers of all countries “be connected with the soil”, have the freedom to use the language of the motherland, and have bread and cultural wealth.

— Lenin, “The Schuettegum Clique in Russia” (January 19-February 1, 1915)

In Western European countries, national movements are a thing of the past. In countries such as Britain, France, and Germany, the “fatherland” has already sung its song and played its historical role, which means that there can no longer be any progressive national movements that can arouse new masses of people to participate in the new economic and political life.

There, the question on the historical agenda was not the transition from feudalism or patriarchal barbarism to national progress, to a civilized and politically free fatherland, but the transition from an outdated, capitalistically overripe “fatherland” to socialism.

The situation in Eastern Europe is different. For example, in the case of the Ukrainians and Belarusians, only people who live in a dream on Mars could deny that the national movement is not yet complete, that the people are still being awakened to their own language and their own language literature (which is a necessary condition and accompaniment for the full development of capitalism and the complete penetration of exchange to the last peasant household).

Here, the “fatherland” has not yet finished singing the whole song of its history. Here, “defending the fatherland” can also mean defending democracy, defending the native language and political freedom, fighting against oppressive nations and against medievalism, whereas today the English, French, Germans and Italians are lying when they say they are defending the fatherland in this war, because what they are actually defending is not their native language, not the freedom of their national development, but their rights as slave owners, their colonies, the “spheres of influence” of their finance capital in other countries, and so on.

— Lenin, “On the Transfiguration of Marxism and “Imperialist Economism”” (August-September 1916)

You seize upon a sentence from the Communist Manifesto (the workers have no country) and seem to intend to apply it unconditionally, even to the point of negating national wars. The whole spirit of Marxism, its entire system, requires that every principle be examined (α) historically, (β) in connection with other principles, and (γ) in connection with concrete historical experience. The motherland is a historical concept.

In the epoch of the struggle for the overthrow of national oppression, or rather in such periods, the fatherland is one thing; in the epoch when the national movement has long since ended, the fatherland is another thing. The principle of the fatherland and its defence cannot apply equally to all “three types of states” (the 6th thesis on self-determination), equally under all conditions.

The Communist Manifesto states that the workers have no country. This is true. But it does more than just point this out. It also states that the role of the proletariat is somewhat different in the period of the formation of national states. It would be a great mistake to focus on the first principle (the workers have no country) and forget its connection with the second principle (the workers are organized into a national class, but not in the sense in which the bourgeoisie understands it).

What is this connection? I believe that it is the fact that in a democratic movement (at such a time and under such concrete circumstances) the proletariat cannot refuse to support this movement (and, therefore, cannot refuse to defend the fatherland in a national war).

—Lenin, “To I. F. Armand” (November 30, 1916), The Collected Works of Lenin, 2nd edition, Vol. 47

Fatherland, nation – these are historical categories. If in times of war it is a question of defending democracy or fighting national oppression, I am in no way opposed to such a war, and if the words “defending the fatherland” refer to a war or an uprising of this nature, I am not afraid of these words. Socialists always stand on the side of the oppressed, and therefore they will not oppose a war whose purpose is to wage a democratic or socialist struggle against oppression.

—Lenin, “Open Letter to Boris Souvarine”

Since October 25 we have openly said that we are for the defence of the fatherland, because we have a fatherland, we have driven the Kerenskyites and Chernovites out of it, we have abolished the secret treaties, we have suppressed the bourgeoisie, …

— Lenin: The Fourth Extraordinary All-Russian Congress of Soviets (August 1918)

We did not have a motherland in the past and could not have had one, but now that we have overthrown capitalism and power is in our hands, in the hands of the people, we have a motherland and we must defend its independence.

— Stalin: On the Tasks of Economic Personnel (February 4, 1931)

 Under different historical conditions, patriotism has different contents

There is no contradiction in the international workers’ party striving for the restoration of the Polish nation. On the contrary: only when Poland has regained her independence, only when she has regained control of her destiny as an independent nation, will her internal development process begin again and she will be able to promote the social transformation of Europe as an independent force. When a vital nation is oppressed by foreign invaders, it must devote all its strength, all its efforts, all its energy to fighting against the foreign enemy.

——Engels, “Support for Poland”

I will not say anything about the use of the word patriot, about your claim to be the only “real” patriot. The word has such a one-sided meaning – or rather an ambiguous one, as the case may be – that I have never dared to apply it to myself. I am as much a German when I speak to non-Germans as I am a pure internationalist when I speak to Germans.

—Engels, “To Paul Lafargue,” London, June 27, 1893

The fatherland, as a political, cultural and social environment, is the most powerful factor in the proletariat’s class struggle; Vollmar is wrong in prescribing to the proletariat a “true German” attitude towards the “fatherland”, but Hervé is also wrong in his unforgivable, unanalytical attitude towards this important factor in the proletariat’s struggle for liberation.

The proletariat cannot be indifferent and apathetic to the political, social and cultural environment in which it conducts its struggle, and therefore cannot be indifferent to the fate of its country. But the proletariat is interested in the fate of the country only because it concerns its class struggle, and not out of any “patriotism” of which the bourgeois Social-Democrats disdain to speak.

— Lenin, “Militarism and the Social-Democratic Tactics against Militarism”

Therefore, we say: the only way to “defend the fatherland” in Europe in the twentieth century (even in the extreme east of Europe) was to use all revolutionary means to fight the monarchy, the landowners and the capitalists of one’s own country, against these most odious enemies of our country; the Great Russians can “defend the fatherland” only by hoping that the tsarist government will be defeated in all wars, which will cause the least harm to nine-tenths of the Great Russian population, because the tsarist government not only oppresses these nine-tenths of the population economically and politically, but also corrupts and shamelessly makes them accustomed to oppressing foreign peoples and to covering up their shameful behavior with some hypocritical phrases that sound patriotic.

——Lenin, “On the National Pride of the Great Russians”

We have been patriots since October 25, 1917. We are in favor of “defending and serving the country”, but the patriotic war we are preparing to wage is a war to defend the socialist motherland. Defending socialism means defending the motherland, and defending the Soviet Republic means defending a detachment of the world socialist army.

— Lenin: “The Main Task of the Present Time” (August 11, 1918)

After October 25, 1917, we were defencists. I have stated this clearly and repeatedly, and you dare not refute it. It is necessary to defend the socialist fatherland precisely in order to “strengthen ties” with international socialism. Whoever takes a lighthearted attitude towards the national defence of a country where the proletariat has won victory is undermining ties with international socialism. When we were representatives of the oppressed classes, we did not take the question of defending the fatherland in an imperialist war lightly; we denied such defence in principle. Now that we have become representatives of the ruling class that is beginning to organise socialism, we demand that everyone take national defence seriously.

– Lenin, “On the Childishness and Petty-bourgeois Character of the “Left Wing””

Patriotism is an extremely deep feeling formed by the isolation of one’s own country from another for thousands of years. One of the particularly great and one can say unique difficulties of our proletarian revolution was that it had to go through a period of decisive break with patriotism, the period of the Brest-Litovsk Peace. The pain, resentment and anger caused by this peace are understandable. Naturally, we Marxists can only hope that the conscious vanguard of the proletariat will understand the following truth: for the highest interests of the world proletarian revolution, we bear and must bear the greatest national sacrifice.

— Lenin, “The Valuable Confession of Pitirim Sorokin” (November 20, 1918)

Different classes have different understandings of patriotism

The lies and distortions about Poland and Italy, which the old government organs had so lavishly spread, the attempts to artificially stir up hatred, the exaggerated platitudes about German honor and German power – all these magic tricks have lost their effect.  Only where these patriotic rhetoric contains material interests, and only among a section of the big bourgeoisie who pursue their own interests under the guise of formal patriotism, will this formal patriotism still have its market. The reactionary parties understand and take advantage of this.

——Engels, “Germany’s Foreign Policy”

The army is the point d’honneur of the small peasant, for it makes him a hero who defends his new-found property against foreign enemies, celebrates his newly acquired national unity, plunders the world and revolutionizes it. The uniform is his formal attire, the war is his poetry, the small plot of land enlarged and completed in his imagination is his fatherland, and patriotism is the ideal form of private property.

—— Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte

The pure patriotism of the bourgeoisie, which is natural to the real owners of “national” industry in various countries, has now become only a deceptive cover due to the world character of their financial, commercial and industrial activities.

— Karl Marx, The Civil War in France (April-June 1871), Selected Works of Marx and Engels, Vol. 2, p. 428

The real content of bourgeois “patriotism” was soon exposed. Having concluded a shameful peace with the Prussians, the Versailles government set about its immediate task of attacking the armed forces of the Paris proletariat, which frightened it. The workers responded by proclaiming the Commune and civil war.

——Lenin, “Lessons of the Paris Commune”

Do we, the class-conscious proletarians of Great Russia, have no sense of national pride at all? Of course not! We love our language and our country, and we are doing our utmost to raise the class-consciousness of the working masses of our country (that is, nine-tenths of its inhabitants) to the level of democrats and socialists.

——Lenin, “On the National Pride of the Great Russians”

To refuse to “defend the fatherland” in a democratic war, i.e., to refuse to participate in a democratic war, is absurd and has nothing in common with Marxism. To apply the concept of “defending the fatherland” to an imperialist war, i.e., to whitewash it by describing it as a democratic war, is to deceive the workers and to go over to the side of the reactionary bourgeoisie.

— Lenin, “On the Transfiguration of Marxism and “Imperialist Economism””

“Hate the Germans, kill the Germans” – this is always the usual patriotic slogan, that is, the slogan of bourgeois patriotism. We say, “Hate the imperialist robbers, hate capitalism, eliminate capitalism.” But at the same time, we say, “Learn from the Germans! Remain faithful to the fraternal alliance with the German workers. They came to our aid too late. We must buy time, we will wait for them, and they will definitely come to our aid.

— Lenin, “The Main Task of the Present Time” (March 11, 1918), Selected Works, Vol. 3, p. 492

The principle that the bourgeoisie values ​​most is: “Wherever is good, there is the motherland.” In terms of money, the bourgeoisie is always international, and they are currently stronger than us worldwide.

— Lenin’s Report on Rural Work