Vladimir Ilyich Lenin quote Destroy the family, you destroy the country.
The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into small states and all-national isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge them.
Only an armed people can be the real bulwark of popular liberty.
A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.
The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.
The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.
...the concentration of capital and the growth of their turnover is radically challenging the significance of the banks. Scattered capitalists are transformed into a single collective capitalist. When carrying the current accounts of a few capitalists, the banks, as it were, transact a purely technical and exclusively auxiliary operation. When, however, these operations grow to enormous dimensions we find that a handful of monopolists control all the operations, both commercial and industrial, of capitalist society. They can, by means of their banking connections.It would be the greatest mistake, certainly, to think that concessions mean peace. Nothing of the kind. Concessions are nothing but a new form of war. All our lives we fought against exalting the individual, against the elevation of the single person, and long ago we were over and done with the business of a hero, and here it comes up again: the glorification of one personality. This is not good at all.
While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State.
Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
One of the basic conditions for the victory of socialism is the arming of the workers (Communist) and the disarming of the bourgeoisie (the middle class).
...first ascertain exactly the position of the various capitalists, then control them, influence them by restricting or enlarging, facilitating or hindering their credits, and finally they can entirely determine their fate.
Ideological talk and phrase mongering about political liberties should be disposed with; all that is just mere chatter and phrase mongering. We should get away from those phrases.
We do not have time to play at “oppositions” at “conferences.” We will keep our political opponents... whether open or disguised as “nonparty,” in prison.
The bourgeoisie is many times stronger than we. To give it the weapon of freedom of the press is to ease the enemy’s cause, to help the class enemy. We do not desire to end in suicide, so we will not do this.
I don’t care what becomes of Russia. To hell with it. All this is only the road to a World Revolution.
The surest way to destroy a nation is to debauch its currency.
Behind the October Revolution there are more influential personalities than the thinkers and executors of Marxism.
Others at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/v/vladimir_lenin.html
Who, whom? ex Wiki
Who, whom? (Russian:
кто кого?) is a
Bolshevist principle or slogan which was formulated by
Lenin in 1921.
Lenin is supposed to have stated 2nd All-Russian Congress of Political Education Departments, on 17 October 1921,
- Весь вопрос — кто кого опередит?
- "The whole question is — who will overtake whom?"
Leon Trotsky used the shortened "who whom" formulation in his 1925 article, "Towards Capitalism or Towards Socialism?"[1]
The shortened form was invoked by Joseph Stalin in 1929, in a speech to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which also gave the formula its "aura of hard-line coercion" (while Lenin's phrase indicated a willingness to embrace economic competition)
- "The fact is, we live according to Lenin's formula: Kto-Kovo?: will we knock them, the capitalists, flat and give them (as Lenin expresses it) the final, decisive battle, or will they knock us flat? ".[2]
It came to be used as a formula describing the inevitability of
class struggle, i.e. who (which of two antagonists) will dominate the
other. In this view, all compromises and promises between enemies are just
expedients — tactical manoeuvres in the struggle for mastery.[3][4]
