"The revolution itself went shockingly well, the problems were rooted far more in the fact that what happened wasn’t at all what Lenin and the Bolsheviks expected. The Russian revolution was “supposed to” be a global rallying cry and lead a massive worker uprising against the bourgeoisie in the wake of the nightmarish world war. When the European uprisings were crushed (Bavarian Soviet Republic, Hungarian Soviet Republic) and this didn’t happen, they had to radically change plans. The New Economic Policy (NEP) was as much a response to peasant revolts as it was to the failure to start a world revolution. This resulted in the communist party fracturing into multiple factions:

Stalin’s faction, the most popular, wanted to bunker down and develop “socialism in one country”, doing the best they could with what they had.

Trotsky’s faction, popular with the military high command, wanted to rapidly militarize society and start a “permanent revolution” by turning the forces of the Red Army back on Europe.

Bukharin’s faction, favoring the party bureaucrats, wanted to further capitulate and expand the NEP, believing that the socialist revolution was ultimately a failure due to the perceived lack of ability to build up productive forces.

The rest is history, but this situation and the political chaos it unleashed is the real root of all splits within Leninism today."

What I find so interesting about it is that it’s essentially confirmation of why Marxism-Leninism has been so successful. When Lenin saw that the revolution of other countries were either being crushed or not coming soon enough he realized that he had to make a choice, either just focus on the country or engage in self destruction that would spread the revolution so thin that the country collapses, or just allow complete capitalist restoration and the end of the Communist Party and the revolution itself; capitulating to the capitalists in the end.

Socialism in one country seems like a pill that’s too hard to swallow for ultra lefts. It’s respectable wanting to create a world revolution but we now know that that isn’t possible. This kind of also feeds into the idea of China and how some people feel they’ve lost their way and while I’m not one to be uncritical of China I also know what they’ve had to deal with. We have hindsight and know that China had to adapt, even more so after the fall of the Soviet Republics.

The balancing act between revisionist social democrat and dogmatist ultra left is such a delicate one I’ve realized. It’s a fine line that Marxism Leninism walks that takes a lot of study to be able to understand the different aspects of a society and being able to find solutions on concrete analysis. Ultra lefts would have us stretch our forces so thin that we’d be seen as reckless aggressors exporting revolution to other countries. Revisionists would have us stop short of the finish line, giving the bourgeoisie the platform to restore themselves to power.