Lenin on the
Woman Question
The
following excerpts were taken from Clara Zetkin’s “My Recollections
of Lenin, an Interview on the Woman Question” which she held with
Lenin in Moscow in the autumn of 1920. (Reprinted from The Emancipation
of Women, From the Writings of Lenin, International Publishers.
“It is therefore perfectly right for us to put forward demands
for the benefit of women. This is not a minimum programme, nor a
programme of reform in the Social-Democratic sense, in the sense
of the Second International. It does not go to show that we believe
the bourgeoisie and its state will last forever, or even for a long
time. Nor is it an attempt to pacify the masses of women with reforms
and to divert them from the path of revolutionary struggle. It is
nothing of the sort, and not any sort of reformist humbug either.
Our demands are no more than practical conclusions, drawn by us
from the crying needs and disgraceful humiliations that weak and
underprivileged women must bear under the bourgeois system. We demonstrate
thereby that we are aware of these needs and of the oppression of
women, that we are conscious of the privileged position of the men,
and that we hate – yes, hate – and want to remove whatever oppresses
and harasses the working woman, the wife of the worker, the peasant
woman, the wife of the little man, and even in many respects the
woman of the propertied classes. The rights and social measures
we demand of bourgeois society for women are proof that we understand
the position and interests of women and that we will take note of
them under the proletarian dictatorship. Naturally, not as soporific
and patronising reformists. No, by no means. But as revolutionaries
who call upon the women to take a hand as equals in the reconstruction
of the economy and of the ideological superstructure.”
I assured Lenin that I was of the same opinion, but that
it would no doubt be opposed. Uncertain and timid minds would reject
it as suspicious opportunism. Nor could it be denied that our present
demands for women might be incorrectly understood and interpreted.
“What of it?” Lenin exclaimed, somewhat annoyed. “This risk
exists in everything we say or do. If we are going to let fear of
this stop us from doing the advisable and necessary, we might as
well turn into Indian stylites. We mustn’t budge, we mustn’t budge
on any account, or we shall tumble from the lofty pillar of our
principles! In our case it is not only a matter of what we demand,
but also of how we demand. I believe I have made that sufficiently
clear. It stands to reason that in our propaganda we must not make
a fetish out of our demands for women. No, we must fight now for
these and now for other demands, depending on the existing conditions,
and naturally always in association with the general interests of
the proletariat.”
“Every tussle of this kind sets us at loggerheads with the
respectable bourgeois clique and its no less respectable reformist
lackeys. This compels the latter either to fight under our leadership
– which they do not want – or to drop their disguise. Thus, the
struggle fences us off from them and shows our communist face. It
wins us the confidence of the masses of women, who feel themselves
exploited, enslaved and crushed by the domination of the man, by
the power of their employers and by bourgeois society as a whole.
Betrayed and abandoned by all, working women come to realise that
they must fight together with us. Must I avow, or make you avow,
that the struggle for women’s rights must also be linked with our
principal aim – the conquest of power and the establishment of the
dictatorship of the proletariat? At present, this is, and will continue
to be, our alpha and omega. That is clear, absolutely clear. But
the broad masses of working women will not feel irresistably drawn
to the struggle for state power if we harp on this one demand, even
though we may blare it forth on the trumpets of Jericho. No, a thousand
times no! We must combine our appeal politically in the minds of
the female masses with the sufferings, the needs and the wishes
of the working women. They should all know what the proletarian
dictatorship will mean to them - complete equality of rights with
men, both legal and in practice, in the family, the state and in
society, and that it also spells the annihilation of the power of
the bourgeoisie.”
“Soviet Russia proves this,” I exclaimed. “This will be our
great example!”
Lenin went on:
“Soviet Russia casts a new light on our demands for women.
Under the dictatorship of the proletariat they are no longer an
object of struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.
Once they are carried out, they serve as bricks for the building
of communist society. This shows the women on the other side of
the border the decisive importance of the conquest of power by the
proletariat. The difference between their status here and there
must be demonstrated in bold relief in order to win the support
of the masses of women in the revolutionary class struggle of the
proletariat. Mobilisation of the female masses, carried out with
a clear understanding of principles and on a firm organisational
basis, is a vital question for the communist parties and their victories.
But let us not deceive ourselves. Our national sections still lack
the proper understanding of this question. They adopt a passive,
wait-and-see attitude when it comes to creating a mass movement
of working women under communist leadership. They do not realise
that developing and leading such a mass movement is an important
part of all Party activity, as much as half of all the Party work.
Their occasional recognition of the need and value of a purposeful,
strong and numerous communist women’s movement is but platonic lip-service
rather than a steady concern and task of the Party.”
“They regard agitation and propaganda among women and the
task of rousing and revolutionising them as of secondary importance,
as the job of just the women communists. None but the latter are
rebuked because the matter does not move ahead more quickly and
strongly. This is wrong, fundamentally wrong! It is outright separatism.
It is equality of women a rebours, as the French say, i.e.,
equality reversed. What is at the bottom of the incorrect attitude
of our national sections? (I am not speaking of Soviet Russia.)
In the final analysis, it is an underestimation of women and of
their accomplishments. That’s just what it is! Unfortunately, we
may still say of many of our comrades, 'Scratch the communist and
a philistine appears.' To be sure, you have to scratch the sensitive
spots – such as their mentality regarding women. Could there be
any more palpable proof than the common sight of a man calmly watching
a woman wear herself out with trivial, monotonous, strength- and
time-consuming work, such as her housework, and watching her spirit
shrinking, her mind growing dull, her heartbeat growing faint, and
her will growing slack? It goes without saying that I am not referring
to the bourgeois ladies who dump all housework and the care for
their children on the hired help. What I say applies to the vast
majority of women, including the wives of workers, even if these
spend the day at the factory and earn money.”
“Very few husbands, not even the proletarians, think of how
much they could lighten the burdens and worries of their wives,
or relieve them entirely, if they lent a hand in this ‘women’s work’.
But no, that would go against the ‘ privilege and dignity of the
husband’. He demands that he have rest and comfort. The domestic
life of the woman is a daily sacrifice of self to a thousand insignificant
trifles. The ancient rights of her husband, her lord and master,
survive unnoticed. Objectively, his slave takes her revenge. Also
in concealed form.... I know the life of the workers, and not only
from books. Our communist work among the masses of women, and our
political work in general, involves considerable education among
the men. We must root out the old slave-owner’s point of view, both
in the Party and among the masses. That is one of our political
tasks, a task just as urgently necessary as the formation of a staff
composed of comrades, men and women, with thorough theoretical and
practical training for Party work among working women.”
To my question about present-day conditions in Soviet Russia,
Lenin replied:
“The government of the proletarian dictatorship - jointly
with the Communist Party and the trade unions of course - makes
every effort to overcome the backward views of men and women and
thus uproot the old, non-communist psychology. It goes without saying
that men and women are absolutely equal before the law. A sincere
desire to give effect to this equality is evident in all spheres.
We are enlisting women to work in the economy, the administration,
legislation and government. All courses and educational institutions
are open to them, so that they can improve their professional and
social training. We are organising community kitchens and public
dining-rooms, laundries and repair shops, crêches, kindergartens,
children’s homes and educational institutions of every kind. In
brief, we are quite in earnest about carrying out the requirements
of our programme to shift the functions of housekeeping and education
from the individual household to society. Woman is thus being relieved
from her old domestic slavery and all dependence on her husband.
She is enabled to give her capabilities and inclinations full play
in society. Children are offered better opportunities for their
development than at home. We have the most progressive female labour
legislation in the world, and it is enforced by authorised representatives
of organised labour. We are establishing maternity homes, mother-and-child
homes, mothers’ health centres, courses for infant and child care,
and the like. We are making every effort to provide for needy and
unemployed women.”
“We know perfectly well that all this is still too little,
considering the needs of the working women, and that it is still
far from sufficient for their real emancipation. Yet it is an immense
stride forward from what there was in tsarist and capitalist Russia.
Moreover, it is a lot as compared with the state of affairs where
capitalism still holds undivided sway. It is a good start in the
right direction, and we shall continue to develop it consistently,
and with all available energy, too. You abroad may rest assured.
Because with each day that passes it becomes clearer that we cannot
make progress without the millions of women. Think what this means
in a country where the peasants comprise a solid 80% of the population.
Small peasant farming implies individual housekeeping and the bondage
of women. You will be far better off than we are in this respect,
provided your proletarians at last grasp that the time is historically
right for seizure of power, for revolution. In the meantime, we
are not giving way to despair, despite the great difficulties. Our
forces grow as the latter increase. Practical necessity will also
impel us to find new ways of emancipating the masses of women. In
combination with the Soviet state, comradely solidarity will accomplish
wonders. To be sure, I mean comradely solidarity in the communist,
not in the bourgeois, sense, in which it is preached by the reformists,
whose revolutionary enthusiasm has evaporated like the smell of
cheap vinegar. Personal initiative, which grows into, and fuses
with collective activity, should accompany comradely solidarity.
Under the proletarian dictatorship the emancipation of women through
the realisation of communism will proceed also in the countryside.
In this respect I expect much from the electrification of our industry
and agriculture. That is a grand scheme! The difficulties in its
way are great, monstrously great. Powerful forces latent in the
masses will have to be released and trained to overcome them. Millions
of women must take part in this.”
Someone had knocked twice in the last ten minutes, but Lenin
had continued to speak. Now he opened the door and shouted:
“I’m coming!”
.... Lenin helped me on with my coat.
“You should dress more warmly,” he suggested solicitously.
“Moscow is not Stuttgart. You need someone to look after you. Don’t
catch cold. Good-bye.”
He shook my hand firmly.