1 Robert V. Daniels, “The State and Revolution: A Case Study in the Genesis and Transformation of Communist Ideology,” The American Slavic and East European Review (December, 1953), p. 22.

2 See id. at pp. 30-33. See also Rudolph Schlesinger, Soviet Legal Theory (Oxford, 1945), p. 24.

3 Engels, F., The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (New York: International, 1942), p. 158 Google Scholar.

4 Id. at pp. 156-57.

5 Engels, Introduction to “The Civil War in France,” in Marx, K., Selected Works (New York: International, 1939), II, 460 Google Scholar. Hereinafter cited as Selected Works. See Lenin, V. I., “The State,” in Babb and Hazard, Soviet Legal Philosophy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1951), p. 7 Google Scholar.

6 Engels, , Hen Eugen Dühring's Revolution in Science (Anti-Dühring) (New York: International, 1939), p. 304 Google Scholar. Hereinafter cited as Anti-Dühring,

7 Marx, , “Manifesto of the Communist Party,” in Capital and Other Writings (New York: Modern Library, 1932), p. 323 Google Scholar.

8 Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State, p. 156.

9 The state is a tacit admission by a particular society that it “has involved itself in insoluble self-contradiction and is cleft into irreconcilable antagonisms, which it is powerless to exercise. But in order that these antagonisms, classes with conflicting economic interests, shall not consume themselves and society in fruitless struggle, a power, apparently standing above society, has become necessary to moderate the conflict and keep it within the bounds of ‘order'; and this power, arisen out of society, but placing itself above it and increasingly alienating itself from it, is the state.” Id. at p. 155.

10 Daniels, supra note 1, at p. 30.

11 Ibid.

12 Ibid.

13 Lenin, , State and Revolution (New York: International, 1932), p. 9 Google Scholar. Hereinafter cited as State and Revolution.

14 He relies on statements of Marx in “The Civil War in France,” in Selected Works II, 497.

15 Daniels, supra note 1, at p. 31.

16 Engels, Introduction to “The Civil War in France,” in Selected Works, II, 458.

17 Daniels, supra note 1, at p. 31. Engels could not have possibly agreed with this interpretation, for at the conclusion of his Introduction to “The Civil War in France,” he asserts his basic proposition that “in reality the State is nothing else than a machine for the oppression of one class by another class, and that no less so in the democratic republic than under the monarchy… . “ In Selected Works, II, 460.

18 See, e.g., Engels, “Ludwig Feuerback and the Outcome of Classical German Philosophy,” in Selected Works, I, 463.

19 Anti-Düring, p. 306.

20 Marx, “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,” in Selected Works, II, 411.

21 See A. Vyshinsky, Law of the Soviet Stale (New York: Macmillan, 1948), p. 12. Towster confirms that Marxism rejects non-class struggle concepts of the state. Towster, J., Political Power in the U.S.S.R. (Oxford, 1952), p. 6 Google Scholar. Carew-Hunt specifically critizes Marxism because it does reject the non-class struggle concept of state. Carew-Hunt, , Theory and Practice of Communism (New York: Macmillan, 1951), p. 65 Google Scholar.

22 Marx, “The Civil War in France,” in Selected Works, II, 500.

23 State and Revolution, p. 48.s

24 Marx, Introduction to “Critique of Political Economy,” in Capital and Other Writings, (New York: Modern Library, 1932), p. 11.

25 Marx, “Manifesto of the Communist Party,” in id. at p. 322.

26 Marx, Introduction to “Critique of Political Economy,” in id. at p. 11: “No social formation ever disappears before all the productive forces are developed for which it has room, and new higher relations of production never appear before the material conditions of their existence are matured in the womb of the old society.“

27 Anti-Diihring, p. 306.

28 See State and Revolution, p. 33.

29 See id. at p. 36; Marx, “The Civil War in France,” in Selected Works, II, 498.

30 State and Revolution, p. 37.

31 Id. at p. 75; see id. at p. 37: “Instead of the special institutions of a privileged minority … , the majority can itself directly fulfill all these functions; and the more the discharge of the functions of state power devolves upon the people generally, the less need is there for the existence of this power.“

32 Id. at p. 22.

33 Anti-Dühring, p. 307.

34 Marx, Introduction to “Critique of Political Economy,” in Capital and Other Writings, p. 11; see text at end note 26, supra.

35 State and Revolution, p. 83.

36 Id. at p. 43.

37 See id. at p. 84.

38 Id. at p. 83.

39 Id. at p. 85.

40 In Marx, Selected Works, II, 550.

41 State and Revolution, p. 81.

42 Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Program,” in Selected Works, II, 563.

43 State and Revolution, p. 83.

44 Mat p. 77.

45 Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Program,” in Selected Works, II, 564.

46 State and Revolution, p. 81-82. The term “bourgeois right” in the English translation of State and Revolution should be translated as “bourgeois law.” Cf. Berman, H., Justice in Russia (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1950), p. vii Google Scholar. For the relationship between the withering away of the state and the withering away of law see generally Babb and Hazard, op. cit., Supra note 5.

47 When Engels analyzed the Paris Commune, the model of a Socialist society, he observed that “the highest salary paid by the Commune to anyone was 6,000 francs.” Engels, Introduction to “The Civil War in France,” in Selected Works, II, 459,

48 Marx, “The Civil War in France,” in id., II, 499.

49 State and Revolution, p. 78.

50 Id. at p. 69.

51 Even in this formulation there were many ambiguities. At times Lenin gave the impression that capitalist resistance would be destroyed only in the Communist society and that the withering away of the state would only begin under Communism. See, e.g., id. at pp. 73-74, 75. However, this confusion may be explained by the dual use of the word “Communism” for both the first and second phases of the Communist society. See text at note 41, supra.

52 Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Program,” in Selected Works, II, 566.

53 State and Revolution, p. 79.

54 See, e.g., note 26, supra.

55 Lenin, , “The Discussion of Self-Determination Summed Up,” in Marx, Engels, Marxism (4th ed.: Moscow, 1951), p. 344 Google Scholar.

56 Stalin, J., Foundations of Leninism (New York: International, 1939), p. 36 Google Scholar. See generally Lenin, , Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (Moscow, 1950).Google Scholar

57 See Marx, Introduction to Zasulich's Russian translation of the “Communist Manifesto,” in Marx, and Engels, , The Russian Menace to Europe (Glencoe: Free Press, 1952), p. 228 Google Scholar.

58 See, e.g., Reed, John, Ten Days That Shook the World (New York: Modern Library, 1935), pp. 330 Google Scholar, 338, 340, 357, 364, 368.

59 Quoted in L.Trotsky, Draft Program of the Communist International (Militant, 1929), p. 30.

60 Ibid.

61 Id. at p. 31.

62 Ibid.

63 See Shub, David, Lenin (New York: Mentor, 1948), p. 124 Google Scholar.

64 See generally Trotsky, op. cit. supra note 59.

65 See generally Stalin, , Foundations of Leninism (New York: International, 1939)Google Scholar; Stalin, , Problems of Leninism (New York: International, 1934)Google Scholar.

66 Id. at p. 65.

67 Stalin, “Work of the Fourteenth Conference of the G.P.S.U. (B.),” in Leninism (London, 1928), I, 243.

68 Stalin, History of the Communnist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks)—Short Course (New York: International, 1939), p. 305. Hereinafter cited as Short Course.

69 Id. at p. 319.

70 Stalin, Report to the Seventeenth Congress of the C.P.S.U. (B.) (Moscow, 1951), p. 92.

71 Stalin, , “The Results of the First Five Year Plan,” in Problems of Leninism (Moscow, 1940), p. 457 Google Scholar.

72 See Short Course, p. 324.

73 Stalin, , On the Draft Constitution of the U.S.S.R. (Moscow, 1951), p. 16 Google Scholar.

74 Short Course, p. 343.

75 See Stalin, Report to the Eighteenth Congress oj the C.P.S.U. (B.) (Moscow, 1951), p. 92.

76 Id., at p. 93.

77 See, e.g., R. J. Medalie, “The Policy of Take-Over: The Stages of Totalitarian Development in Eastern Europe,” in Public Policy (Friedrich & Harris ed., 1956), VII, 352.

78 See text at note 67, supra.

79 Stalin, Speech, Feb. 9, 1946 (U.S.S.R. Embassy Information Bulletin), p. 14.

80 Economic Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R., “On the Means for the Gradual Transition from Socialism to Communism,” Voprosy Ekonomiki, Oct., 1950, in Current Digest of the Soviet Press, Feb. 1951, p. 4.

81 Id. at p. 5.

82 Id. at p. 3.

83 See id. at p. 7.

84 Id. at p. 4.

85 See Stalin, Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R. (Moscow, 1952), p. 74.

86 See id. at pp. 76-77.

87 See id at pp 75, 103.

88 Id. at p. 77.

89 N. Khrushchev, Report of the Central Committee to the Twentieth Party Congress, Pravda, Feb. 15, 1956, in Current Digest of the Soviet Press, March 21, 1956, p. 8.

90 See, e.g., Mew York Times, Feb. 10, 1959, p. 9, col. 1.

91 Khrushchev, On Control Figures for Development of the U.S.S.R. National Economy in 1959-1965 (Report to the Twenty-First Party Congress), Pravda, Jan. 28, 1959, in Current Digest of the Soviet Press, March 11,1959, p. 17.

92 Ibid.

93 Id. at p. 13.

94 Id. at p. 15.

95 Ibid.

96 Ibid.

98 Ibid.

98 Ibid.