Editing Bolshevism (section)

===Anti-imperialism===
{{Main|Anti-imperialism}}
{{Quote box|width=25em|align=right|bgcolor=ivory|quote=Imperialism is capitalism at a stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance-capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun; in which the divisions of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.|source=—Lenin, citing the main features of capitalism in the age of imperialism in ''Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism''.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=352}}}}

The Marxist theory on imperialism was conceived by Lenin in his book, ''[[Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism]]'' (published in 1917).{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=339}} It was written in response to the theoretical crisis within Marxist thought, which occurred due to capitalism's recovery in the 19th century.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=339}} According to Lenin, imperialism was a specific stage of development of capitalism; a stage he referred to as [[state monopoly capitalism]].{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=339}} The Marxist movement was split on how to solve capitalism's resurgence and revitalisation after the great depression of the late-19th century.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|pp=344–347}} [[Eduard Bernstein]], from the [[Social Democratic Party of Germany]] (SDP), considered capitalism' revitalisation as proof that capitalism was evolving into a more humane system, further adding that the basic aims of socialists were not to overthrow the state, but rather to take power through elections.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|pp=344–347}} On the other hand, [[Karl Kautsky]], from the SDP, held a highly [[dogmatism|dogmatic]] view, claiming that there was no crisis within Marxist theory.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|pp=344–347}} Both of them, however, denied or belittled the role of class contradictions in society after the crisis.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|pp=344–347}} In contrast, Lenin believed that capitalism' resurgence was the beginning of a new phase of capitalism; this stage being created because of a strengthening of class contradiction, not because of its reduction.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|pp=344–347}}

Lenin did not know when the imperialist stage of capitalism began, and claimed it would be foolish to look for a specific year, however he did assert it began at the beginning of the 20th century (at least in Europe).{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=352}} Lenin believed that the economic crisis of 1900 accelerated and intensified the concentration of industry and banking, which led to the transformation of the finance capital connection to industry into the monopoly of large banks."{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=353}} In ''Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism'', Lenin wrote; "the twentieth century marks the turning-point from the old capitalism to the new, from the domination of capital in general to the domination of finance capital."{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=353}} Lenin's defines imperialism as the monopoly stage of capitalism.{{sfn|McDonough|1995|p=354}}

Despite radical anti-imperialism being an original core value of Bolshevism, the Soviet Union from 1939 onward was widely viewed as a [[de facto]] imperial power whose ideology could not allow it to admit its own imperialism. Through the Soviet ideological viewpoint, pro-Soviet factions in each country were the only legitimate voice of "the people" regardless of whether they were minority factions. All other factions were simply class enemies of "the people", inherently illegitimate rulers regardless of whether they were majority factions. Thus, in this view, any country that became Soviet or a Soviet ally naturally did so via a legitimate voluntary desire, even if the requesters needed Soviet help to accomplish it. The principal examples were the [[Winter War|Soviet invasion of Finland]] yielding the annexation of Finnish parts of [[Karelia]], the [[Soviet invasion of Poland]], the [[occupation of the Baltic states|Soviet occupation of the Baltic states]], and the postwar de facto dominance over the [[satellite state]]s of the [[Eastern Bloc]] under a pretense of total independence. In the [[post-Soviet states|post-Soviet era]] even many Ukrainians, Georgians, and Armenians feel that their countries were forcibly annexed by the Bolsheviks, but this has been a problematic view because the pro-Soviet factions in these societies were once sizable as well. Each faction felt that the other did not represent the [[no true Scotsman|true]] national interest. This [[civil war]]–like paradox has been seen in the [[annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation]], as pro-Russian Crimeans have been viewed as illegitimate by pro-Ukrainian Crimeans, and vice versa.