This month marks a significant milestone in the history of political thought, as it has been 80 years since James Burnham’s pivotal article, “Lenin’s Heir,” graced the pages of Partisan Review. While many Americans may not recognize its name, this article stands as one of the earliest public alerts to the brewing tensions of the Cold War, written during a time when the Soviet Union was still seen as a crucial ally in the fight against the Axis powers.
At the time of writing, Burnham was deeply entrenched in the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the precursor to the CIA. Just a year earlier, he had penned a secret analysis for the OSS, claiming that the Cold War—what he termed the “Third World War”—was already underway, even as World War II raged on. This assertion came well before George Kennan’s famous “Long Telegram” and the subsequent containment strategy that would define U.S. foreign policy for decades. In retrospect, Burnham’s insights deserve recognition as they foreshadowed the geopolitical landscape that would unfold in the latter half of the 20th century.
Burnham’s journey into the world of political commentary began in the late 1930s when he started contributing to Partisan Review. His ideological evolution saw him break away from Marxism—specifically the Trotskyite faction—and embark on a path toward conservatism. By the time he authored “Lenin’s Heir,” he could be categorized as a liberal anti-communist, although his later writings would reflect a rejection of all ideological labels.
Fast forward a decade, and Burnham found himself at National Review, where he would spend the next 23 years articulating his views on the Cold War. His columns were lauded for their clarity and depth, with Brian Crozier noting them as some of the finest international affairs commentary in the English language.
In “Lenin’s Heir,” Burnham challenged the prevailing narrative surrounding Stalin, who Trotsky had dismissed as a mere “mediocrity.” Instead, Burnham argued that Stalin’s actions during and after the war revealed a ruthless strategist, one who wielded power with a brutality reminiscent of historical tyrants. He painted a picture of a leader who feasted while millions suffered, consolidating power through purges and terror, all the while expanding Soviet influence across Europe and Asia.
Burnham’s analysis extended beyond mere observation; he articulated a vision of Stalin as a geopolitical player with ambitions that echoed the theories of British strategist Halford Mackinder. Stalin’s goal, as Burnham saw it, was nothing less than the domination of the Eurasian landmass, using it as a launchpad for global communist expansion. This perspective underscored a critical understanding of the threats posed by the Soviet Union, long before they became widely acknowledged in the political discourse of the West.
Fast forward to today, and we find ourselves facing a new set of challenges, particularly with China emerging as a formidable rival. Many contemporary commentators draw parallels between Xi Jinping and historical figures like Mao Zedong, suggesting that Xi embodies a similar geopolitical ambition. Writers such as Hannah Beech and Christopher Marquis have explored this connection, highlighting the implications for U.S. foreign policy. Michael Pillsbury’s book, The Hundred-Year Marathon, serves as a stark warning about China’s strategy to supplant the United States as the leading global superpower, a narrative that echoes Burnham’s earlier warnings.
Xi’s vision for China, much like Stalin’s for the Soviet Union, is characterized by bold initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative and a significant military buildup. As he seeks to reclaim what Mao referred to as the “century of humiliation,” the stakes for the United States and its allies have never been higher.
In reflecting on Burnham’s “Lenin’s Heir,” we are reminded of the importance of historical context in understanding current geopolitical dynamics. The lessons from the Cold War, particularly the insights of figures like Burnham and Kennan, remain relevant as we navigate the complexities of modern international relations. As we confront new threats, it is vital to heed the warnings of the past, ensuring that we remain vigilant in the face of emerging global challenges.