Lenin replaced dual progress with the doctrine of total, all-embracing struggle.

Evidence

Kirchheimer’s dissertation made it clear that he despised the Social Democrats’ respect for parliamentary democracy and the constitution, and admired the position of the Bolsheviks, which he characterized in terms of Schmitt’s categories of sovereignty and the enemy. The Social Democrats, according to Kirchheimer, believed in `dual progress’, in the idea that the progress of the capitalist economy would correspond to progress in the education of humanity. But Lenin had replaced this doctrine with the doctrine of all-embracing, total struggle. The Social Democrats were fetishizing a state which amounted to less than a sovereign state with a definite enemythat is, merely a constitutional state. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 252

Categorization

• XREF: Ties to Neumann’s own intellectual trajectory and to the Weimar sovereignty debates the reader has been tracking. — connects to: Lenin silenced opposition by branding all dissent as counter-revolutionary — Cedric J. Robinson, Black Marxism_ The Making of the Black…, 1035
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Lenin silenced opposition by branding all dissent as counter-revolutionary — Cedric J. Robinson, Black Marxism_ The Making of the Black…, 1035