The analysis tries to review and group the political trends of the multiparty system in the Soviet Union which exists in a very initial form as yet, and it separates the the different phases of the emergence of a multi-party system. It states that the Soviet Communist Party which cannot be classified as a party for quite some time, involves the most different forces and when these are separated, this party will not have a future any more. The main political forces in the Soviet Union, too, include the national-conservative, the liberal-bourgeois and the labour-socialist (and the „vanguard" which is being pushed into the back). The author's sympathy is with the future party of the workers which, however, is still far from being able to mobilise masses of people.

Szilagyi expounds that bolshevism had two, equally rationally com-mited „souls", two determining trends-one realistic and another one, the romantic. (The two types are personified by Lenin and Trotski.) But neither had anything to do with Stalin: with him and his "irrational realism" a representative of the lumpen strata appeared in power. Szilagyi points to the relationship between the Trotski line and the avantguarde Russian art of the 1920s and the logic of destroying the two together by Stalin.

The article – which has been published for the first time now – is the text of a lecture given last spring. It follows through the history of the Russian model directing the reader's attention to a number of new points of view. He states that the illusion of the possibility to introduce socialism was a common mistake of the bolsheviks and the social democrats. In Russia at the beginning of this century the Leninist road was more feasible than that of the social democracy. He argues that Marxism-Leninism is in fact the ideology of national catching up of the half-peripheries. He deducts the relative survivability of Stalinism from the need of original accumulation on the one hand, and on the other, he claims that the Stalinist model was also in the interest of the USA: in this way, the Soviet Union fulfilled its own regional role in the Pax Americana. The main goal of Khruschev's reforms was to calm down the elite and their failure came from the irrational belief in growth and the playing down of meeting the welfare demands. He judges the present chances pessimistically from the point of view of perestroika, however, optimistically from the point of view of socialism because he thinks that the true chance of Marxism has arrived now.

The failure of the East European (Russian) model is not the failure of the left wing, with the disappearance of the bloodthirsty ghost it is the right wing which looses its arguments. At American universities a new upswing of the left can be expected. The peoples of Eastern Europe long for a welfare social society rather than the model of the existing capitalism.