ABSTRACT
From the formal-methodological standpoint, the author contests some of the ways of reading Lenin prevalent today and, treating this contestation as a point of departure, offer a reading of Lenin heavily indebted to Derridian deconstruction and to the patient mediations it supplies. It is important to note from the outset that the contested ways of reading are not themselves homogenous and, therefore, should not be rejected in toto. Still without naming the Leninist substitute for elaboration, let us diligently follow the work/economy and the state/politics nexus in State and Revolution since this nexus, or at least its latter part, is what interests our "elaborationists." It is hardly doubtful that Lenin's 1917 writings display strong tendencies toward the obliteration of equivocacy and the literalization of meaning that would ensure the undisturbed reign of revolutionary presence.
