Mike Macnair on Stalinism

7/23/2019 Mike Macnair on Stalinism

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mike-macnair-on-stalinism 1/40

Thursday May 01 2008

Weekly Worker 719

Anything but Marxism

Neither social democracy nor 'official communism' offer anything in the 21stcentury, writes Mike Macnair

“How can it be that in 2003 the Socialist Workers arty led what was !ossibly the lar"estde#onstration in $ritain e%er& but in 2008 the $ritish 'ar le't is in a dire condition o''ra"#entation and ine''ecti%eness() *ne o' our readers& who does not share the +,$-s!olitics& !osed this .uestion to #e so#e days a"o/

Hal' the .uestion is about an illusion/ The #assi%e de#onstration in ebruary 2003 owedits sie not to the role o' the SW or any !art o' the 'ar le't& but to the at least !artialbackin" o' the Daily Mirror & The Independent and the $$+/ $ehind that backin" was the'act that the $ritish state core 4 the ar#y and security ser%ices and the senior ci%il ser%ice 4

was s!lit down the #iddle about whether to su!!ort 5S !lans to in%ade 6ra./ The role o'the SW and their allies in the Sto! the War +oalition was #erely analo"ous to that o'cyber4s.uatters who had occu!ied a do#ain called antiwar/co#-& and hence could not bedis!ensed with/

The other hal' o' the .uestion is #ore 'unda#ental/ The le't is #assi%ely weaker than 4 onso#e ideas o' !olitics 4 it ou"ht to be-& "i%en the "lobal econo#ic and !olitical situation/Moreo%er& with the %ery !artial and li#ited ece!tion o' atin :#erica& it is tendin" to "etweaker as ti#e "oes on/

LEFT’S WEAKNESS

+a!italis# in the 'irst decade o' the 21st century is not in !articularly "ood sha!e/ Thetriu#!halis# which "reeted the 'all o' the So%iet 5nion and its satellites& and thedee!enin" #arket turn in +hina& is lar"ely "one/ There is increasin"ly wides!readawareness that the 'ree4#arket nostru#s o' the +hica"o econo#ists and the Washin"tonconsensus- !roduce dee!enin" ine.uality both on a world scale and within indi%idualcountries/ :'ter the e!erience o' the 1998 east :sian- and 2001 dot4co#- #arketcrashes& the credit crunch- has re#inded us yet a"ain that ca!italis# inherently in%ol%esbust as well as boo#/ ;%en the 5S ar#y has 'inally realised that the etre#e 'ree4#arketshock thera!y- i#!osed on 6ra. a'ter the 2003 in%asion has contributed to the insur"ency

they see# unable to de'eat/1

The !olitical le't& howe%er& is in worse sha!e/ This sort o' state#ent is o'ten #ade si#!lyas a way o' sayin" that the author-s own "rou!-s %iews are not "enerally acce!ted/ 6 do not#ean to say this 4 thou"h it is& o' course& true that %iews o' the sort held by +,$co#rades are shared only by a s#all #inority/ The !oint is that& thou"h 'ree4#arket'unda#entalis# is in decline& the !olitical le't in general has not bene'ited 'ro# thisdecline/

The abour and Socialist !arties are now as co##itted to 'ree4#arket do"#as as thetraditional !arties o' the ri"ht 4 in so#e cases #ore so/ : lar"e !art o' the 'or#er o''icialco##unists- now 'all into this ca#!< whether as being the #a=or le't- !arty& as in 6taly& oras !ro%idin" the hard core o' the !ro4#arket win" o' the le't-& like the e4;uroco##unistand 'ellow4tra%eller $lairites in $ritain/

$ut this co##it#ent has hardly bene'ited these !arties/ Thou"h in $ritain abour hasclun" to o''ice with ca!italist su!!ort now ebbin" away& and in ,er#any& rance& S!ain



and 6taly social4liberal- !arties ha%e #o%ed in and out o' o''ice& the underlyin" trend hasbeen one o' declinin" nu#erical su!!ort 'or all the !arties o' the consensus& includin"those which sel'4identi'y as o' the le't-> increased abstentions> e!isodic sur"es in %otin"su!!ort 'or anythin" !ercei%ed as an alternati%e-& usually on the ri"ht but occasionally onthe le't> and a wides!read belie' that they- !oliticians are all corru!t/

Hence on a "lobal scale& reli"ious and nationalist trends are #a=or "rowin" ele#ents/ The

#ost ob%ious e!ressions are in the 5S 4 where the le%era"e o' reli"ious !olitics has notbeen di#inished by the narrow %ictory o' the ?e#ocrats in the 200@ +on"ressionalelections 4 and the #usli# countries- in the belt stretchin" 'ro# Morocco in the west tocentral :sia and akistan in the east& and in south4east :sia/

The :lliance 'or Workers- iberty characterises the isla#ist !olitical #o%e#ents as “isla#o4'ascist)/ This is #isleadin"/ The 5S christian ri"ht is 'ar #ore like the 6talian ascisti and,er#an Aais/ ike the#& it a!!eals to the traditions o' the 'or#ation o' the nation4state inwhich it li%es ,er#an Bo#antic nationalis#& 6talian uni'ication and Italia irridenta& :#erican radical !rotestantis#/ ike the#& it is in'or#ed by a Dolchstosstheorie stab4in4the4back theory in which #ilitary 'ailure in the 5S case in Cietna# was caused by the

disloyalty o' the le't and the liberals-/ :nd like the#& it is a''ected by #illenarianirrationalis# the renewed Bo#an e#!ire in 6taly& the thousand4year Beich in ,er#any&the end ti#es- in the 5S reli"ious ri"ht/ The isla#ists& in contrast& are closer to the

catholic4led anti4se#itic #o%e#ents o' late 19th century ;uro!e/2 $ut the :W-scharacterisation does at least ca!ture the 'act that& thou"h so#e o' the isla#ists arecurrently 'i"htin" 5S i#!erialis# and its $ritish side4kick& their domestic !olitics areune.ui%ocally reactionary/

Weaker %ersions o' the sa#e or si#ilar !heno#ena can be 'ound widely/ or ea#!le& thehindu4nationalist ri"ht is in the ascendant in 6ndia> the Doiu#i and :be "o%ern#ents inEa!an ha%e !ro#oted re%isionist-4re%anchist nationalis# and re#ilitarisation> eastern

;uro!e and the Bussian ederation ha%e seen stron" "rowth o' 'ar4ri"ht trends> western;uro!e has witnessed re!eated& so 'ar short4li%ed& electoral !rotest %otes- 'or 'ar4ri"ht!arties/

eft electoral alternati%es to neoliberal orthodoy are& on the whole& 'ar weaker/ The!roble# is that when they ha%e "ot to any sie they ha%e been sucked into the role o' =unior !artners to the social4liberals- in ad#inisterin" the ca!italist re"i#e& and therebyunder#ined their clai# to o''er an alternati%e to the neoliberal consensus/ The $railianWorkers arty T 4 in ori"in a le't alternati%e !arty 4 under ula da Sil%a has become asocial4liberal !arty o' coalition "o%ern#ent/ The 6talian Bi'ondaione +o#unista in 200@entered the social4liberal rodi coalition "o%ern#ent& with disastrous conse.uences in the2008 elections/ :nd so on/

6n the late 1990s and early 2000s there !erha!s see#ed to be a non4electoral- alternati%e<that o' the anti4"lobalisation #o%e#ent-/ *n a s#all scale riots in ondon& Seattle and,enoa& on a lar"er scale the Meican Fa!atistas and :r"entinean pi!ueteros were seenby anarchists and council co##unists- 4 and by so#e Trotskyists 4 as a si"n that at lasttheir ti#e was be"innin" to co#e/ The social 'oru# #o%e#ent was built at least !artly inan anarchist i#a"e/ Howe%er& with the ince!tion o' the war on terror- in 2001 and still #orewith the 2003 in%asion o' 6ra.& the destructi%e !ower o' the ca!italist stateshas thrust itsel'rudely on the #o%e#ent/ The result has una%oidably been a renewed e#!hasis on hi"h!olitics< e%en in atin :#erica& where networks o' resistance-& the Fa!atistas andHolloway-s chan"e the world without takin" !ower- had #ost in'luence& the le't has shi'ted

onto the electoral terrain/

The results ha%e !roduced a continued social4liberal "o%ern#ent in $rail& and si#ilar"o%ern#ents in 5ru"uay rente :#!lio and +hile 4 and "o%ern#ents which at least in



rhetoric are to their le't< +hG%e in Ceneuela& the %ictories o' Morales in $oli%ia and+orrea in ;cuador/ These are all undoubtedly !olitical de'eats 'or neoliberalis#/ Howe%er&e%en the Ceneuelan case is not su''iciently ur"ent 'or Washin"ton to di%ert #a=or attentionand resources to it/ To the etent that they are not 'ocussed on the Middle ;ast&

Washin"ton-s eyes are on Ha%ana/3

"h#$ismo has !ro%oked enthusiastic su!!ort 'ro# a distance a#on" a si"ni'icant !art o'the le't& and has had so#e in'luence on electoral !olitics elsewhere in atin :#erica in thesense o' increasin" the !olitical a%ailability o' le't rhetoric/ $ut it has not yet be"un toresha!e the le't internationally& as $olshe%is# did a'ter 1917& or as Maois# and& to alesser etent& +astrois#,ue%aris# did in the 19@0s/

6n !art& this is a #atter o' wait and see-/ The le't internationally has seen a lar"e nu#ber o'so#eti#es $ery radical and le't4talkin" nationalist and third4worldist charis#atic indi%idualleaders co#e and "o in the last hal'4century/ So#e ha%e the#sel%es turned realist-& likeAkru#ah& Muse%eni& Eerry Bawlin"s or the leaders o' the South :'rican :A+> so#e ha%ebeen ousted andor killed by realists- in their own nationalist #o%e#ents& like Sukarno&$en $ella or Tho#as Sankara/ *''icial co##unists-& Maoists and Trotskyists in the

!rocess o' #o%in" towards o''icial co##unist- !olitics& ha%e celebrated one and all as thenet +astro> 'or none has the celebration been lon"4li%ed/ ,i%en this back"round& it isunderstandable that in s!ite o' the enthusias# o' a !art o' the le't& the broader #o%e#entshould e''ecti%ely sus!end =ud"#ent on "h#$ismo/

6n !art& and #ore 'unda#entally& the !roble# is that "h#$ismo o''ers no real strate"iclesson 'or the le't beyond ind yoursel%es a charis#atic leader-/ erha!s it should be Tryto win =unior ar#y o''icers to le't !olitics-( $olshe%is# o''ered a worked4out strate"ic line'or the road beyond ca!italis#& whether this line was ri"ht or wron"/ The sa#e was true o'Maois#/ The etensi%e international in'luence o' +astrois#,ue%aris# consisted in !art inthe 'act that +he ,ue%ara 'alsi'ied the course o' the +uban re%olution into an ea#!le o'

the Maoists- !rolon"ed !eo!le-s war- strate"y/ 6n !art it was due to the 'act that +astro andhis co4thinkers !ro#oted third4worldis#& a dilute 'or# o' the Maoists- "lobal !olicy o'surroundin" the cities-/ 6n both as!ects& the +ubans- sel'4!resentation as so#ethin"different from the o''icial co##unist- bureaucratic re"i#es and !arties o''ered to ro#anticyoun" le'tists the ho!e o' an alternati%e strate"y/ "h#$ismo& as yet& o''ers no e.ui%alent/

The or"anised 'ar le't across the world 4 the Trotskyist& Maoist& etc "rou!s 4 had ho!es thatthe anti4"lobalisation #o%e#ent- si"nalled a new rise in class co#bati%ity like the later19@0s> or at least the re4e#er"ence o' a new le't- trend& out o' which they could ho!e torecruit and build/ More than 10 years on 'ro# the Mandelite ourth 6nternational-s turn tothe #ilieu that beca#e the anti4"lobalisation #o%e#ent-& and se%en years since the $attleo' Seattle-& this belie' has !ro%ed illusory/ The or"anised 'ar le't has "ained so#e "round inthe trade union #o%e#ent internationally/ $ut it has done so !artly throu"h "enerationalre!lace#ent and !artly because the decline o' the acti%ist base o' the socialist andco##unist !arties has been stee!er than the corres!ondin" decline o' #ost o' the "rou!so' the 'ar le't/ :t best these "rou!s ha%e sta"nated/

The a!!arent no%elty that allowed the 'ar le't to a!!ear as an alternati%e to lar"e nu#berso' radicalisin" youth in the 19@0s and 1970s is "one 4 today the le't has a lar"e& hostile!eri!hery o' e4#e#bers who re#ain acti%e in the broader #o%e#ent/ :nd the 'ar le't iswidely 4 and o'ten accurately 4 !ercei%ed as unde#ocratic in its internal 'unctionin"& astendin" to e!ort this unde#ocratic !ractice into the broader #o%e#ent and as unable tounite its own 'orces 'or e''ecti%e action/

6n short& ca!italis# un'ettered has not !roduced the blessin"s the neoliberals clai#ed itwould/ 6nstead& it is !roducin" dee!enin" social ine.uality both within and betweennations& econo#ic instability and e!isodic& so 'ar localised& crises 4 as Mar !redicted it



would/ :nd it shows e%ery si"n o' !roducin" an increasin" tendency towards utterlydestructi%e wars 4 as the classical Marists- !redicted it would/ $ut the !olitical le't has notbeen the "ainer/ The #ain !olitical "ainer& instead& has been the anti4ca!italist- right /

REBUILD SOIAL!DEMORA"# : %ery co##on res!onse o' that !art o' the le't which has not abandoned le'tis#

alto"ether is to ar"ue that the !roble# is si#!ly that the rest o' the le't has abandonedle'tis#/ Thus& since the social de#ocrats ha%e abandoned social de#ocracy& it isnecessary to build a new abour arty& which will be #ore co##itted to le't ideas/ This isthe substance o' the !ro=ect o' the +a#!ai"n 'or a Aew Workers- arty and o' Bes!ect 4but there are si#ilar !ro=ects e%erywhere/ The $railian T ori"inated in this way/

The !roble# with this !olicy is that it 'ails to ask why the social de#ocrats ha%eabandoned social de#ocracy& when they #aintained it and acted on it throu"h the 19I0s480s/ The shi't o' abour and si#ilar !arties to the ri"ht then a!!ears as a #oti%elessbetrayal/ ;ach such betrayal 'ro# another section o' the le't 4 'ro# ula& 'ro# $ertinotti&'ro# the le't trade union leaders and abour Ms who re'used to back Eohn Mc?onnell-sleadershi! bid 4 thus co#es as a new& un!leasant sur!rise/

The !roble# is at its root the !roble# o' re'or# or re%olution-/ $ut it is not the !roble# o're'or# or re%olution- in the way in which this is usually !osed by the 'ar le't< that is& that thetraditional social de#ocrats re'use to acce!t the use o' re%olutionary #eans- in the senseo' !olitical strikes& de#onstrations and insurrections/ Bather& it is that the traditional socialde#ocrats insisted that o!en stru""le a"ainst the state would !roduce only re!ression>hence& that the only way to obtain i##ediate re'or#s is to 'or# a "o%ern#ent/

urther& the only way to "et to 'or# a "o%ern#ent without brin"in" down the state& whichinter%enes in its own interests in elections is to dis!lay cons!icuous loyalty to theeistin" state order & both in the 'or# o' nationalis# and ar"uin" that re'or#s are in the

co##on national interest-& and in the 'or# o' constitutionalis# and le"alis#/ Thetraditional social de#ocrats thus re=ected not so #uch re%olutionary- means asre%olutionary ends< ie& radical chan"e in the state order and in who rules-/

This !ro=ect worked as lon" as ca!ital was willin" to concede to labour an increasin" shareo' the total social sur!lus/ 6t thus worked to so#e etent& in success'ul i#!erialistcountries& in the hi"h !eriod o' classical i#!erialis# between the 1870s and World War 6&when i#!erialist ca!ital was willin" to use i#!erialist su!er4!ro'its to #ake concessions tosections o' the do#estic workin" class in order to #aintain social !eace at ho#e/ 6tworked a"ain and #ore "enerally in the cold war !eriod& when "lobal ca!ital was willin" to#ake substantial #aterial concessions to the workin" class 'or the sake o' thecontain#ent- o' So%iet co##unis#-/

Howe%er& in the late 19@0s and early 1970s this "lobal syste# be"an to 'ail< the leadin"role o' the 5S& which was !i%otal to the syste#& beca#e o%eretended Cietna# and thecolla!se o' the $retton Woods #onetary syste# and workers and other subordinateclasses be"an to de#and too #uch 19@8& the 6talian cree!in" May-& wildcat strikers- inthe 5S and ,er#any& the $ritish stru""les o' the early 1970s& Cietna# and the colonialliberation #o%e#ents& the ortu"uese re%olution //// +a!ital turned to a new !olicy& whichwas in so#e ways a return to its !olicy o' the late 19th century 'inancialisation& in otherways a return to the days before the hi"h !eriod o' classical i#!erialis# 'ree trade andliberal natural !ro!erty ri"hts ideolo"y/ 6n this "lobal contet& e%ery ca!ital and e%ery stateis in co#!etition with e%ery other ca!ital and state to reduce the share o' total social

sur!lus "oin" to labour/

5nder these new "lobal conditions the !olitical lo"ic o' winnin" i##ediate re'or#s istrans'or#ed/ +uttin" labour-s share o' the total social sur!lus is .uite "enuinely in the



national interest > any concessions 'ro# ca!ital ha%e to be !aid 'or& and !ayin" 'or the#de#ands #aintainin" the nation-s co#!etiti%e !osition- 4 which turns out to #eanune#!loy#ent& s!eed4u!& loss o' !ension ri"hts& cuts in the !ro!ortion o' !ublice!enditure actually a!!lied to the end4users o' !ublic ser%ices and& con%ersely& increasesin subsidies to ca!italist buildin" contractors and so on who su!!ly the !ublic ser%ices& andall the rest o' the current cra!/

These new world dyna#ics !resent an intense contradiction 'or social de#ocrats/ 6' they#ake any !ro#ises o' re'or#s which will benefit the working class throu"h winnin""o%ern#ent o''ice& these !ro#ises ha%e to be either strai"ht'orward lies $lair and co or'antasies which will #elt away when o''ice is actually obtained Mitterrand in the 80s& theT& Bi'ondaione and so on/ 6n reality& the #ost they can really o''er is to be Thatcheriteswith a hu#an 'ace-/ Hence the endless series o' betrayals-/ Hence also the "eneral!erce!tion that !oliticians are all corru!t and liars/

$ut Thatcheris# with a hu#an 'ace- is a !retty sli"ht reason to bother to %ote 'or the socialde#ocracy& and e%en less o' a reason 'or acti%ists on the "round to co##it ti#e& ener"yand #oney to building these !arties/ Hence the "radual or not4so4"radual decay o' abour

and si#ilar !arties/

The conse.uence is that the idea o' rebuildin" a #ass social de#ocratic !arty #ore to thele't o' the eistin" !arties& but still within the 'ra#e o' nationalis# and re'or#is#& is a 'utileillusion/ The social de#ocracy we already ha%e $lair4$rown and co& and so on is the bestand only possible sort o' social de#ocracy& as lon" as !resent "lobal conditions continue/

6s social de#ocracy doo#ed to decline and colla!se with u!s and downs in the !rocessor can it re%i%e( The answer de!ends on whether capital can turn a"ain to concedin" anincreased share o' the total social sur!lus !roduct to labour/ or this there are twoconditions/ The 'irst is that ca!ital should 'oresee a 'uture o' continuin" or increased!ro'its e$en if the concessions are #ade to the workin" class< which in the 1870s41900s it

'oresaw throu"h i#!erialis#& and in the 19I0s4@0s throu"h the 5S4led world order/ 6n #yo!inion this is not !ossible without the o%erthrow o' the #ilitary and 'inancial !ower o' the5S: and its re!lace#ent with a new ca!italist world he"e#on/

The second condition is that ca!ital should be put in fear o' the workin" class on aninternational scale/ The concessions on the basis o' i#!erialis# 'ollowed& in $ritain& the#ass #o%e#ents o' the 18@0s around the su''ra"e and around anti4sla%ery solidarity> incontinental ;uro!e& they 'ollowed the rise o' the irst 6nternational and the aris+o##une/ The concessions in the wake o' World War 66 'ollowed an i##enseinternational wa%e o' #ilitant hostility to ca!italis# be"innin" in the latter !art o' that warand continuin" in the 'irst years a'ter it/

There is thus a !arado/ There is no .uestion o' re%i%in" social de#ocracy by atte#!tin"to build on the basis o' social de#ocratic ideas< because these ideas are !reciselyabout not !uttin" the ca!italists in 'ear/ 6' the ca!italists are !ut in 'ear by the rise o' a#ass workers- #o%e#ent which does not res!ect national borders and constitutionalle"ality& they will !robably turn to the social de#ocrats to hel! the# out> but& as lon" as thele't clin"s to !retendin" to be social de#ocrats& there will be no such #o%e#ent/

TR" STALINISM A$AIN#The lar"er !art o' the "lobal le't which is not simply social de#ocratic clin"s to the ideas o'o''icial co##unis#-/ +uba now stands in 'or the 'or#er So%iet 5nion< it is necessary todisre"ard the econo#ic liberalisation- #o%es already undertaken under idel& Baul+astro-s e!ressed ad#iration 'or the +hinese sweatsho! o' the world& and his continuin"#o%es to liberalise-/



This o''icial co##unist- !olitics is now shared by the %ery lar"e #a=ority o' the "rou!sori"inatin" in Trotskyis#/ The Socialist Workers arty-s anti4i#!erialis#- has beco#eMaoist4+astroist third4worldist in character with its e''ecti%e !olitical su!!ort 'orthe neoliberal & clerical%capitalist re"i#e in Tehran/ Eohn Bees and :lan Thornett alike 4 and#any si#ilar 'ar4le'tists across the "lobe 4 de'end Dimitro$&s non4a""ression conce!t o'the united 'ront 'ro# his re!ort to the 7th +on"ress o' the +o#intern& 'alsely attributin" it to

enin and Trotsky& and characterise enin-s and Trotsky-s conce!t o' the united 'ront assectarianis#-/

The idea o' buildin" a new #ass social de#ocratic !arty 'ails to 'ace u! to the chan"e in"lobal !olitical4econo#ic conditions since the 1980s/ allin" back on o''icial co##unis#-'ails to 'ace u! to one o' the #ost 'unda#ental chan"es o' this !eriod< that bureaucraticsocialis# manifestly failed /

6t is not #erely that these re"i#es were #urderously tyrannical/ The !oint is that all thesacri'ices& both o' !olitical liberty and o' #aterial well4bein"& which the re"i#es de#andedo' those they ruled& ha$e only led back to capitalism/ :s lon" as the le't appears to be!ro!osin" to re!eat this disastrous e!erience we can e!ect #ass hostility to liberal

ca!italis# to be e!ressed #ainly in the 'or# o' ri"htis#< that is& o' nostal"ia 'or the pre%ca!italist social order/

Aow the Trotskyists #ay ar"ue that this does not a''ect the# or& to the etent that it does&co#!lain that this is un'air to the#/ :'ter all& they o!!osed the bureaucratic re"i#es andcalled 'or their re%olutionary o%erthrow/ So#e s#all #inorities within this "eneral trend 4the "riti!ue "rou!& the S!artacists& the neo4Marcyites 4 e%en 'oresaw that the continueddictatorshi! o' the bureaucracy would lead to a colla!se& andor back to ca!italis#/

Hu#ans ha%e no "uide to action in the 'uture other than theorisin" on what has ha!!enedin the !ast/ ;!eri#ent in the !hysical sciences is no #ore than a wayo' formalising reliance on !ast actions as a "uide to 'uture actions/ 6n !olitics& there can be

no laboratory/ *ur only e!eri#ental e%idence is the e%idence o' our history/ Trotskyis#astheory 4 and here includin" "riti!ue& the S!artacists and the neo4Marcyites 4 !redictedthat the workin" class in the countries run by bureaucratic socialist- re"i#es would resistthe restoration o' ca!italis#/ Trotsky 4 and& 'ollowin" hi#& the S!artacists and neo4Marcyites 4 !redicted that this resistance would 'ind a !olitical re'lection in !olitical s!litswithin the bureaucracy/ The #a=ority o' the orthodo- Trotskyists used this !rediction toconclude that there could not be a restoration o' ca!italis#/ :ll o' these !redictions werecate"orically 'alse/ There has been no accountin" 'or their 'alsity/

The !oint runs dee!er/ 5nder ca!italis#& there is an obecti$e dynamic 'or the workin"class to create !er#anent or"anisations to de'end its i##ediate interests 4 trade unions

and so on/ This dyna#ic is !resent e%en under hi"hly re!ressi%e !olitical re"i#es 4 as canbe seen in a!artheid South :'rica& South Dorea be'ore its de#ocratisation- and so on/These or"anisations tend& e.ually& to beco#e a si"ni'icant 'actor in !olitical li'e/ 6t is thesetendencies which su!!ort the ability o' the !olitical le't to be #ore than s#all uto!iancircles/

5nder the So%iet4style bureaucratic re"i#es there was no obecti$e tendency towardsindependent self%organisation of the working class/ Bather there were e!isodic e!losions>but to the etent that the bureaucracy did not succeed in !uttin" a !olitical ca! on these&they tended towards a pro%capitalist de%elo!#ent/ The strate"ic line o' a workers-re%olution a"ainst the bureaucracy 4 whether it was called !olitical re%olution-& as it was bythe orthodo Trotskyists& or social re%olution-& as theorists o' state ca!italis# andbureaucratic collecti%is# dubbed it 4 lacked a #aterial basis/

This ob=ection a!!lies with e.ual 'orce to those #is"uided souls who like Tony +lark o'



the +o##unist arty :lliance ar"ue that the So%iet4style bureaucratic re"i#es were intransition towards socialis#> that this ine%itably “has both !ositi%e and ne"ati%e 'eatures tobe"in with)& but that the transition was turned into its o!!osite by the seiure o' !ower bythe bour"eoisie “"ainJin"K control o' co##unist !arties and socialist states under the

banner o' anti4Stalinis#)/L

6' we #o#entarily acce!t this analysis 'or the sake o' ar"u#ent& the .uestion it !oses is<why ha%e the true re%olutionaries& the Stalinists& been so utterly inca!able o' or"anisin" ane''ecti%e resistance to this take4o%er& "i%en that socialis#- in their sense co%ered a lar"e!art o' the "lobe and or"anised a lar"e !art o' its !o!ulation( This is eactly the sa#e!roble# as the Trotskyists- !olitical re%olution- strate"y& only with a di''erent substanti%eline/ The weakness o' (talinist o!!osition to the !ro4ca!italist e%olution o' the leadershi!sin Moscow& $ei=in" and so on re%eals the sa#e !roble# as that 'acin" the ad%ocates o'!olitical re%olution-/ There were neither institutional #eans in the re"i#es throu"h whichthe non4re%isionists- could resist re%isionis# nor any ob=ecti%e tendency in the re"i#estowards on"oin" #ass workin" class sel'4or"anisation on which o!!onents o' re%isionis#could base the#sel%es/

The Trotskyists o' all %arieties continue to !ut 'orward as !ositi%e socialist strate"y are%olution in the i#a"e o' 1917 in Bussia/ $ut& as e%eryone knows& what ha!!ened to theBussian Be%olution was the e#er"ence o' the bureaucratic re"i#e& which has now ended4 or is in !rocess o' endin" 4 in ca!italis#/ Trotskyists are there'ore re.uired to account'or how the bureaucratic re"i#e arose& and to o''er reasons for supposing that the processwould not be duplicated anywhere else which had a )1*1+%style& re$olution/

Trotsky-s account was& 'unda#entally and correctly& that 1917 was a "a#ble on the short4ter# etension o' the world re%olution/ $ut this "a#ble 'ailed/ :nd& "i%en the 'ailure o' theBussians- "a#ble& the Trotskyist account does not e!lain why any atte#!t to re!eat are%olution in the i#a"e o' 1917 would not end in the sa#e way/ 6t is ridiculous to i#a"ine

that the "lobal& i#!erialist4led syste# o' states would not bend e%ery e''ort to isolate anew 1917-/ +ountries which are #ore de%elo!ed- than the tsarist e#!ire in 1917 now#ost countries are more dee!ly inte"rated in the "lobal di%ision o' labour& and isolationwould there'ore !roduce more scarcity and hence more need 'or a state4bureaucratic!olice#an-/

Bather than address this !roble#& the Trotskyists ha%e clun" to the basic ideas o' the early+o#intern 4 es!ecially on the !arty .uestion/ They insist that these ha%e nothin" to do withthe rise o' the bureaucracy 4 e%en as their own or"anisations& like the SW& dis!lay eactlythe sy#!to#s o' bureaucratic do#inance described o' the +S5 by Trotsky in The ThirdInternational after enin& and are in the !rocess o' ada!tin" their or"anisations- !olitics tothe class4collaborationis# and !eo!le-s 'rontis# o' classical Stalinis#/

or the Bussians& the bureaucratic de"eneration o' workers- or"anisations was a newe!erience a'ter 1917< be'ore the re%olution& the *khrana hel!'ully 'orced the re#o%al o'!otential career o''icials o' the socialist !arties and trade unions by =ailin" and eilin" the#/$ut it was not new to the western le't< it was already identi'ied by the Webbs in the $ritish

trade union #o%e#ent in the 1890s& and by Michels in the ,er#an S? in the 1900s/I

$ureaucratic internal nor#s& and realistic- nationalist4re'or#ist and class4collaborationist!olitics& #arch inesca!ably hand in hand/ This is as #uch a lesson o' $ritain and ,er#anyin the late 19th and early 20th centuries as it is o' Bussia since the 1920s/ Eust as So%iet4style bureaucratic socialis# !ro%es to be only a road back to ca!italis#& so the

inter!retation o' early +o#intern ideas by the #a=ority o' the or"anised 'ar le't !ro%es to beonly a road back to social de#ocracy 4 the $railian case !ro%idin" a !articularly clearea#!le/



robably #ost !eo!le who co#e into contact with the or"anised le't do not think about theissue at this le%el o' analysis< ie& that the le't has 'ailed to account !ro!erly 'or Stalinis#/What they see is so#ethin" #uch si#!ler< that the le't "rou!s are #assi%ely di%ided> and&i' they are 'a#iliar with the "rou!s or !ass throu"h #e#bershi! o' the#& that the "rou!sare not really de#ocratic but either no more democratic than the capitalist parliamentaryconstitutional regime as is true o' the Mandelite ourth 6nternational and its lar"er

sections or that they are characterised by bureaucratic tyranny =ust like Stalinis# as istrue o' the SW and nu#erous other 'ar4le't "rou!s/ 6n reality& the di%ision is to aconsiderable etent the !roduct o' bureaucratic centralis#& and both are at least in!art produced by the 'ailure to account !ro!erly 'or Stalinis#/

TR" MAR%ISMThis is enou"h to e!lain why the decay o' ca!italis#& and lar"e e!isodic #o%e#ents likethe anti4war #o%e#ent in $ritain& or the #o%e#ents a"ainst the ;5 constitution or theyoun" workers re'or#- in rance& and so on elsewhere& do not 'ind !olitical e!ression inthe "rowth o' the le't/ The 'act is that the le't is 4 in its lar"e #a=ority 4 clin"in" to strate"icideas which belon" to ob=ecti%e conditions that ha%e disa!!eared/ 5nder the new

conditions these ideas are !olitically !aralysin"/

What has not in the recent !ast been tried is the basic political !rescri!tions o' Mar and;n"els< to build the workers- #o%e#ent as an inde!endent class #o%e#ent& not as !art o'a broader le't-> 'or the workin" class to coo!erate internationally under capitalism& notsi#!ly atte#!t to win !ower in sin"le countries> to 'i"ht 'or concrete re'or#s&while refusing "o%ern#ent o''ice and coalitions ai#ed at "o%ern#ent o''ice> to 'i"ht'or political democracy & both a"ainst the ca!italist state order and a"ainst the labourbureaucracy/

This is not so#ethin" which can be done by a s#all 'ra"#ent o' the le't on its own&whether it is to be the +,$ or so#e other "rou!/ 6t needs the le't as a whole or a lar"e

!art o' it to "et out o' the tra#lines o' social de#ocratic and o''icial co##unist- thou"ht/Howe%er& as lon" as the le't does not be"in to try& it will continue to decay/

N&t's

1/ To ste# 6ra.i %iolence& 5S ai#s to create =obs- ashington -ost ?ece#ber 12 200@/

2/ See ? Derter .nholy war ondon 2003> and #y re%iew& The !olitics o' !urity- eekly orker Euly 22

200L/

3/ +o##ission 'or :ssistance to a ree +uba& Be!ort to the !resident-& Euly 10

200@& www/ca'c/"o%ca'cr!t200@@8097/ht#> si"ned o'' by co4chairs secretary o' state +ondoleea Bice

and secretary o' co##erce and +uban #i"r +arlos ,utierre/

L/ +o#rade +lark-s letter to the eekly orker on this issue was !artially cut& with the cut #aterial

a!!earin" in a 'urther letter which char"ed us with “e!ur"atin") the ori"inal< the 'ull tet can be 'ound

atwww/one!arty/co/uk under What-s new-/

I/ S Webb& $ Webb Industrial democracy ondon 1902& !8> The history of trade unionism 1///%1*20 ondon

1920& !!20L& L@@470 4 both describin" the 1890s> B Michels -olitical parties Aew Nork 1911 cited 'ro# the

19@2 edition o' the ;n"lish translation



Thursday May 29 2008

Weekly Worker 723

Trying Sta(inism again#

"an there be a repeat of (o$iet%style bureaucratic socialism Mike Macnairresponds to Tony "lark

Tony +lark-s re!ly etters& May 22 to co##ents in #y article :nythin" but Maris#- May1 raises so#e i#!ortant issues& and 6 think it would be hel!'ul i' co#rade +lark is willin"to "i%e a 'uller account o' his %iews& which are a %ariant 'or# o' those widely held on the'ar le't/ 6n the #eanti#e 6 would #ake 'our !oints in res!onse to the ar"u#ents o' hisletter/

+o#rade +lark-s ar"u#ent about institutions is incoherent/ His ar"u#ent about

bureaucracy- raises an i#!ortant issue& but is #isleadin"/ His ar"u#ents about thecauses o' the 'all o' the So%iet and si#ilar re"i#es re%eal #ore clearly what is wron" withtryin" Stalinis# a"ain-/

INSTITUTIONSirst& 6 do not say& as co#rade +lark #akes #e say& that the so4called socialist countries-“had no institutional sa'e"uard a"ainst counterre%olution)/ 6 say that 'ro# the date o' the1921 ban on 'actions& they had no institutional #eans by which the proletariat as aclass could 'ind !olitical e!ression o' its %iews and interests/

Mar and ;n"els clai#ed that only the #o%e#ent o' the !roletariat as a class and the%ictory o' this class o%er the ca!italists and #iddle class 4 workin" class rule 4 can brin"about a co##unist society> and the other side o' the sa#e coin that the workin" classcan only e#anci!ate itsel' by layin" collecti%e hands on the #eans o' !roduction< ie& by'i"htin" 'or co##unis#/

The underlyin" "round o' this clai# is that because the !roletariat as a class is 4 unlike!easants and artisans 4 separated from indi%idual ownershi! o' the #eans o' !roduction&!roletarians can only !ursue their interests throu"h free, $oluntary cooperation incollecti$e organisation& which 'oreshadows the nature o' co##unist society “the 'reelyassociated !roducers)/

6t 'ollows that the !roletariat as a class can only #aintain control o' its own or"anisations

trade unions& !arties& states by 'reedo# to or"anise collecti%ely 'or !articular"oals within the#/ Hence& in 1921 the !roletariat was politically epropriated by theBussian !arty and state a!!aratus/ This a!!aratus #aintained a'terwards a #erelyideological in the ne"ati%e sense o' #ysti'icatory or a!olo"etic link to the idea o' workin"class rule/

$etween 1920 and the terror- o' the 1930s& the a!!aratus ste! by ste! e!elled 'ro# itsel'and 'ro# society all those ele#ents who& in one way or another& sou"ht a ste! backtowards the !re41920 $olshe%is# which !olitically re!resented the !roletariat/ Thea!!aratus de%elo!ed its ideolo"ical o!!osition to workin" class rule& 'irst in the 'or# o' theidea o' the sanctity o' the smychka& the worker4!easant alliance& then& 'ro# the 1930s& inthe 'iction that classes had already been abolished in the 5SSB/

There can& o' course& be no institutional guarantees a"ainst counterre%olution/ $utinstitutional 'or#s can #ake counterre%olution #ore or less likely& and bureaucratic



centralis# #ade counterre%olution more likely/ The sneer o' co#rade +lark 4 and& 'or that#atter& those o' the orthodo Trotskyists 4 towards institutional 'or#s is in 'act only directeda"ainst democratic institutional 'or#s< they clai# that !ur"es co#rade +lark or councilselected 'ro# work!laces orthodo Trotskyists& co#bined with a bureaucratic centralist!arty both& #ake counterre%olution less likely/ $ut these are no less institutional 'or#s-than 'reedo# o' !arties and o' 'actions& 'reedo# o' in'or#ation& 'reedo# o' s!eech and so

on/

BUREAURA"+o#rade +lark says that “the Trotskyists outlined a stru""le to o%erthrow- the bureaucracy4 an ultra4le't !osition& since bureaucracies& "enerally s!eakin"& cannot be o%erthrown-)/This clai# see#s to #e to in%ol%e a sli!!a"e in the #eanin" o' the word bureaucracy-/

The word bureaucracywas ori"inally coined in the 18th century by the rench !hysiocrat-

econo#ist Cincent de ,ournay&1 and was already in use by Mar in his "riti!ue of 3egel&s-hilosophy of right / ro# its be"innin"s it has had two o%erla!!in" #eanin"s/ The 'irst isrule o%er society by state o''icials 'or their own bene'it-/ 6n this sense the word is

analo"ous to de#ocracy-& #onarchy- and so on/ The second is the state o''icials as a"rou! usually with a dero"atory sense that they are !arasites on society/ 6n this sensethe word is analo"ous to aristocracy- as a word 'or the landlord class/

6n the second sense o' the word& co#rade +lark is .uite correct to say that “bureaucracies&"enerally s!eakin"& cannot be o%erthrown-)/ The 'act that there are bureaucrats arises inthe 'irst !lace because there are bureaucratic- =obs which ob=ecti%ely need to be doneaccu#ulatin" in'or#ation& dra'tin" a"endas& co##unicatin" decisions& and so on& andsecondly 'ro# di''erential access to the skills associated with these =obs/ What can be saidis that bureaucracy can be #ade to wither away / This is in !art by returnin" so#e =obswhich are now bureaucratic to the !eo!le as& 'or ea#!le& trial by =ury rather than trial by =ud"e/ 6t is in !art by the restriction o' o''icial salaries to the skilled worker-s wa"e& electionand recallability& and rotation o' o''icials/

:s enin !ut it in (tate and re$olution& “O we will reduce the role o' the state o''icials tothat o' si#!ly carryin" out our instructions as res!onsible& re%ocable& #odestly !aid'ore#en and bookkee!ers- o' course& with the aid o' technicians o' all sorts& ty!es andde"rees/ This is our !roletarian task& this is what we can and #ust start with inacco#!lishin" the !roletarian re%olution/ Such a be"innin"& on the basis o' lar"e4scale!roduction& will o' itsel' lead to the "radual witherin" away- o' all bureaucracy& to the"radual creation o' an order& an order without .uotation #arks& an order bearin" nosi#ilarity to wa"e sla%ery& an order in which the 'unctions o' control and accountin" 4beco#in" #ore and #ore si#!le 4 will be !er'or#ed by each in turn& will then beco#e a

habit and will 'inally die out as the s!ecial 'unctions o' a s!ecial section o' the !o!ulation/)2

*n the other hand& in the 'irst sense o' the word 4 the political rule o' the bureaucracy 4bureaucracies certainly can be o%erthrown/ There is a %ery etensi%e bureaucracy secondsense in $ritain or the 5S& but this bureaucracy rules- only as the ser%ant o' the ca!italistclass/ What ha!!ened in the late 1980s4early 1990s in the 'or#er So%iet de!endencies o'eastern ;uro!e was that the bureaucracy atte#!ted to trans'or# itsel' into a ca!italistclass 4 but& by and lar"e& it did not succeed< instead the !olitical rule o' the bureaucracywas o$erthrown by the ca!italist class/

6 do not share the %iew that the So%iet etc bureaucracy was a bureaucratic collecti%ist- orstate ca!italistclass/ Bather& the bureaucratic !olitical rule o' the 5SSB and eastern bloc-

was #erely a %ery lar"e4scale and !rolon"ed instance o' 4onapartism< the te#!orary and!artial autono#y o' the state a!!aratus due to unstable e.uilibriu# between the classes/*n the world scale& it balanced between the bour"eoisie and the !roletariat> on the



national scale& between the !roletariat and the !etty !ro!rietors !easants& intelli"entsia/

6n this sense o' bureaucracy-& 6 =ud"e alon" with co#rade +lark that it was i#!ossible'or the proletariat to o%erthrow the bureaucracy-/ $ut 6 #ake this =ud"#ent not because itis i#!ossible 'or bureaucracies- in the sense o' bureaucratic !olitical rule to be o%erthrownat all/ Bather& 6 =ud"e that the te#!orary %ictory o' the !roletariat in Bussia in 1917418re'lected the 5uropean relation o' class 'orces> that the 6ussian relation o' class 'orces in

isolation would not e%en su!!ort transition 'ro# 'eudalis# to ca!italis#> and& hence& thatthe de'eats o' 1918421 in western ;uro!e and isolation o' the Bussian Be%olutionsu!!orted the creation o' a 4onapartism which fro7e in place a stage in the transition fromfeudalism to capitalism/ This& in turn& re!licated itsel' a'ter 19L3 in countries with si#ilarrelations o' class 'orces +hina& etc/

Within this 'ra#ework& the natural wei"ht o' the So%iet re"i#e in the international workers-#o%e#ent worked a to #aintain the national isolation o' the workers- #o%e#ents in eachindi%idual country throu"h the ideolo"ies o' une%en de%elo!#ent- and national roads-> bto su!!ort& by de'endin" bureaucratic centralis#& the social de#ocratic and !ure tradeunionist- labour bureaucracy in the ca!italist countries& which are the #ain su!!ort o' the

ca!italist class in these countries> and c to !ro#ote class4collaborationis#/ The e''ectwas to !reser%e the international e.uilibriu# o' class 'orces which su!!orted the$ona!artist re"i#e& until the bourgeoisie brou"ht the $ona!artist re"i#e down/

6n all these res!ects international ca!ital acti$ely supported o''icial co##unis#-/ 6t did sothrou"h #easures like the 5S 19L0 Coorhis :ct which bans the a''iliation o' 5S workers-!arties to internationals and the state re"ulation o' !olitical !arties& trade unions& etc&#ore "enerally/ :nd it did so throu"h the usual acade#ic and #edia dri!& dri! o'con"ratulations to realistic- national4road& bureaucratic and class4collaborationist le'tistsand conde#nation o' uto!ian- class4inde!endence& radical4de#ocratic and !roletarian4internationalist le'tists 6 do not #ean by this latter cate"ory Trotskyists< Trotskyists were

always #erely a part o' the s#all sur%i%in" 'ully Marist le't/

IDEOLO$IAL DEFEAT+o#rade +lark says that “The de'eat o' socialis# in the 1980s and 90s was an ideolo"icalde'eat& the result o' a !rolon"ed ideolo"ical stru""le wa"ed by i#!erialis# a"ainstsocialis#/) He e!lains this ideolo"ical de'eat- by& on the one side& the lon" boo#& thenuclear threat to the socialist countries-& and the re%isionist leadershi! in the 5SSB and itsreliance on oil e!orts #akin" the So%iet econo#y %ulnerable/

*n the other side& the carrot held out by the i#!erialists was “consu#er ca!italis#)< butthis& co#rade +lark ar"ues& is now leadin" to ecolo"ical disaster and to a “ni"ht#are ///soon to be %isited on those in the i#!erialist countries& where li%in" standards will be"in to

!lun"e towards third world le%els& as the conse.uences o' !eak oil beco#es the do#inantreality)/ :lthou"h not e!licitly& co#rade +lark ar"ues that this ni"ht#are will #akeclassical Stalinis#& with an ecolo"ical twist& look like an attracti%e alternati%e/

The 'irst !art o' these ar"u#ents& the characterisation o' the de'eat o' the 5SSB& etc asan ideological de'eat& is decidedly !eculiar/ The de'eat co#rade +lark describes is insubstance an economic de'eat/ ut bluntly& the 5SSB4+o#econ was not !roducti%eenou"h to a''ord both "uns and butter> 5S i#!erialis#& with its subordinate ca!italiststates& was/ This econo#ic de'eat was epressed in the nuclear threat and the need 'orconstant ar#s inno%ations& leadin" to ar#s e!enditure dislocatin" the ci%il econo#y& andso on/ The econo#ic de'eat was reflected in the triu#!h o' re%isionis#-& as the So%iet

leadershi! reco"nised in !ri%ate that their clai#s that the 5SSB sur!assed ca!italist!roducti%e ca!acity were !ro%ed in the hard li"ht o' #ilitary ca!ability to be 'alse& andturned to i#itatin" ca!italis#/ The atte#!t to use oil re%enue to s.uare the circle in the



1970s was #erely a short4ter# e!edient and one which had been used& in relation toti#ber and other !ri#ary !roducts& under Stalin/

$ut then why did the econo#ic de'eat ha!!en( 6n the 'irst !lace& the 5SSB started out#assi%ely behind the 5S:/ Aationalisations and !lani'ication allowed some catchin" u! 4as was also true& indeed& #ore success'ully& o' Wilhe#ine ,er#any and Mei=i Ea!an&thou"h these started at a %astly hi"her !roducti%e and cultural le%el than the 'or#er tsarist

e#!ire/ $ut this is !recisely a test o' destruction o' socialis# in a sin"le country-< itdid not deli%er o%ertakin" the ca!italist world& contrary to enin-s tentati%e su""estion in1923 4 “why cannot we be"in by 'irst achie%in" the !rere.uisites 'or that de'inite le%el o'culture in a re%olutionary way& and then& with the aid o' the workers- and !easants-

"o%ern#ent and So%iet syste#& !roceed to o%ertake the other nations()3

Secondly& the !olitical ideolo"ies o' the bureaucratic $ona!artist re"i#e undermined theecono#y/ Socialis# in one country- and national roads- !re%ented the plannedintegration o' the +o#econ econo#ies with that o' the 5SSB itsel'& resultin" in du!licationo' %ery si#ilar hea%y4industry co#!lees in e%ery country/ The in'or#ation #ono!oly o' thebureaucracy& "uaranteed by to!4down a!!oint#ents and the ban on 'actions& turned into

a disinformation #ono!oly& as 'actory and state and collecti%e 'ar# #ana"ers s!un- theirresults to #ake the#sel%es look better/ This is a 'a#iliar 'eature o' $lairis#& borrowed 'ro#the e4o''icial co##unists- and 'ellow4tra%ellers in the $lairite ranks> it is less catastro!hicunder Aew abour because there is a world outside the world o' #ana"erial tar"ets-/ 6nthe So%iet4style re"i#es- there was none/ The class collaborationis# o' !eo!le-s 'rontis#!ro#oted the re%isionist- illusions in su!!osedly neutral technocrats- and& in the 1970s&sucked at least the eastern ;uro!ean re"i#es into the third world debt tra!/

$REEN AUSTERIT"Will ca!italist ecolo"ical crisis and the new oil !rice shock& leadin" to the end o' consu#erca!italis#-& #ake classical Stalinis# look attracti%e( 6n the 'irst !lace& it is certainly truethat a ni"ht#are 'or workin" !eo!le is co#in"& thou"h how .uickly is debatable/ Secondly&'or #any workin" class !eo!le in the 'or#er 5SSB the 4re7hne$ite !eriod o' sta"nation-looked attracti%e 'ro# the de!ths o' the results o' neoliberal shock thera!y- in the 1990s42000s/ There is a si#ilar 'eature o' 8stalgie in !arts o' the 'or#er ,?B/

This is not& howe%er& the sa#e thin" as #ass nostal"ia 'or the (talin !eriod& when labourdisci!line was routinely en'orced by the use o' sla%e4labour death ca#!s& !aranoia at theto! o' the bureaucratic hierarchy !roduced #eanin"less !ur"es& and !etty dis!utes aboutthe allocation o' 'lats& etc could lead to 'alse denunciations to the D,$& torture and death/Aor is there any si"ni'icant e%idence o' #ass nostal"ia 'or the "reat lea! 'orward- orcultural re%olution- in +hina/

+o#rade +lark says that in the new crisis “li%in" standards will be"in to !lun"e towardsthird world le%els)/ 6s there si"ni'icant e%idence o' #ass su!!ort 'or classical Stalinis# inthe third world-( The answer needs to be a little nuanced/ 6n !laces where there is a #ass!easantry not yet inte"rated in #arket relations& Maois# can win #ass su!!ort< witnessAe!al& and the Aaalites in !arts o' 6ndia/ $ut in third world countries with a !ower'ul urban!roletariat& classical Stalinis#& and e%en o''icialco##unis# re%isionis#- in co#rade+lark-s eyes has ne$er succeeded in winnin" #a=ority su!!ort/

6t has 'ailed to do so 4 in s!ite o' a!!allin" workin" and li%in" conditions 4 in the 'irst !lace!recisely because o' the ob=ecti%e interest o' the workin" class in !olitical de#ocracy/ Thusthe +uban re%olutionaries& 'or ea#!le& e!licitly distanced the#sel%es 'ro# the !olitical

'or#s o' classical Stalinis#/

6t has 'ailed to do so& secondly& because national roads-& the anti4i#!erialist 'ront- and!o!ular4'rontist class4collaborationis# ha%e hitched the co##unists to the wa"ons o' a



series o' bour"eois4nationalist #o%e#ents which ha%e continued the subordination o' the!roletariat and in due course& when the ti#e was ri"ht& turned on the co##unists andcrushed the#/

6t has 'ailed to do so& thirdly& because the class4collaborationis# o' the labour bureaucracyis not uni.ue to the i#!erialist countries& but can be 'ound also in e%ery colony and se#i4colony to ha%e a si"ni'icant trade union #o%e#ent< and the o%erthrowin" o' the political

dominance o' this bureaucracy& which re.uires a stru""le 'or radical de#ocracy& isnecessary i' the workin" class is to take !olitical !ower/

6n the contet o' the rest o' his ar"u#ent& co#rade +lark-s criti.ue o' “consu#erca!italis#) and assertion o' the need 'or an “ecolo"ically sustainable socialist society) is#erely a !olitics o' nostal"ia 'or bureaucratically #ana"ed austerity as #uch as ,reen!olitics is/ Which bits o' consu#eris#- are we to ask workers to "i%e u!( +hea! 'ooda%ailable without lon" .ueues( *!!ortunities 'or in'or#ation and co##unication throu"htrans!ort& tele!hones& the web& etc( The %ery& %ery li#ited e#anci!ation o' wo#en 'ro#do#estic labour throu"h labour4sa%in" de%ices(

Stalinis# can win #a=ority su!!ort in !easant4#a=ority areas and countries because it is& atthe end o' the day& a $ona!artis# socially based on the atomised petty proprietors seekin"

“rain and sunshine 'ro# abo%e) 'ro# an all4!ower'ul state/L Hence the natural o%erla! withthe e.ually !etty4!ro!rietor !olitics o' ,reen austerity/

The way out o' ca!italis# will not be !ro%ided by either o' these !olitics o' nostal"ia/ Theway 'orward is about the working class taking o$er the running of society & and #akin" itsown decisions about all sorts o' .uestions/ +o#rade +lark-s atte#!t to re!ly to #y article!recisely re%eals why& as 6 said in it& tryin" Stalinis# a"ain- is no use/

Aotes1/ 17124I9 4 'r/wiki!edia/or"wikiCincentPdeP,ournay

2/ C6 enin (tate and re$olution $ei=in" 1970& !!I84I9/3/ *ur re%olution- " Col 33& !!L7@480<www/#arists/or"archi%eleninworks1923=an1@/ht#L/ D Mar The 18th $ru#aire o' ouis $ona!arte cha!ter 7/



Thursday Se!te#ber 0L 2008

Weekly Worker 73I

Ta)ing Sta(inism s'ri&us(y

hat does 'production for need' mean Mike Macnair responds to Tony "lark

6n this series o' three articles 6 !ro!ose to res!ond to the Eune 19article in these !a"es byco#rade Tony +lark o' the +o##unist arty :lliance and Stalin Society(/ 6t is worthdoin" so because& thou"h co#rade +lark-s ideas belon" in the dustbin o' history& they area %ersion o' what are !robably still the maority %iews o' the "lobal le't/

6n the !rocess in the net article 6 will re%iew a recent book by ?a%id riestland& (talinismand the politics of mobilisation 2007/ The co#bination is !osed because riestlandaddresses so#e o' the sa#e issues as +lark& albeit 'ro# a %ery di''erent an"le< the

Weberian assu#!tion that Mar-s ideas are uto!ian& and the belie' that this e!lainsStalinis#/

+o#rade +lark& in contrast& adheres to Stalinis#-/ He =ud"es 4 in 'act& correctly 4 that theanti4Stalinis#- o' Dhrushche% and his co4thinkers was !ro4ca!italist& tended to under#inethe 5SSB& and hence led to 1991/ He re=ects Trotsky-s ideas on the basis o' the standardand 'alse Stalinist criti.ues o' the#& and does not consider at all Menshe%ik andDautskyite or le't- and council- co##unist criti.ues o' the So%iet re"i#e/ Hence&Stalinis#-& in the sense o' u!holdin" pre%1*9: o''icial So%iet ideolo"y& is his tabula innaufragium, his !lank to clin" to in the shi!wreck o' o''icialco##unis#/

6n this article 6 will be"in with a central issue in co#rade +lark-s ar"u#ents< the #eanin" o'

socialis#-& on which co#rade +lark 4 like o''icial co##unists- "enerally 4 breaks with theabsolute core o' Mar-s ideas& the !ers!ecti%e o' workers- !ower& in 'a%our o' an ethical oruto!ian socialis#/ The net ste! is to discuss riestland-s ar"u#ents/ 6t will then be!ossible to return to three other 'eatures o' co#rade +lark-s ar"u#ents 4 the .uestion o'bureaucracy-> =ud"in" the "lobal role o' the 5SSB> and the case a"ainst Trotsky/

*RODUTION FOR NEED+o#rade +lark writes that “the essence o' socialis# is !roduction 'or need)/

The e!ression& !roduction 'or need-& is a co##on way o' e!ressin" what the le't stands'or& and it has a sort o' Marist warrant in Mar-s "riti!ue of the ;otha programme 187I/6n 187I it stood in o!!osition to “the assallean catchword) that the workers should obtainthe “undi#inished !roceeds o' labour)/ The old $ritish abour arty clause 'our 4 “Tosecure 'or the workers by hand or by brain the 'ull 'ruits o' their industry) 4 was a %ariant o'assalle-s slo"an/ 6t stands o!!osed to 4 'or ea#!le 4 redistribution o' !ro!erty to #akee%eryone into a !easant or artisan& e.ualisation o' shares throu"h taation and %ariousother such uto!ias/

$ut it is necessary to .uote at least the i##ediate !ara"ra!h o' Mar-s "riti!ue in which itis used< “6n a hi"her !hase o' co##unist society& a'ter the ensla%in" subordination o' theindi%idual to the di%ision o' labour& and therewith also the antithesis between #ental and!hysical labour& has %anished> a'ter labour has beco#e not only a #eans o' li'e but li'e-s!ri#e want> a'ter the !roducti%e 'orces ha%e also increased with the all4around

de%elo!#ent o' the indi%idual& and all the s!rin"s o' coo!erati%e wealth 'low #oreabundantly 4 only then can the narrow horion o' bour"eois ri"ht be crossed in its entiretyand society inscribe on its banners< ro# each accordin" to his ability& to each accordin"



to his needs-Q)1

The 'la"s are there 4 al#ost the whole o' the !ara"ra!h 4 to e#!hasise and re4e#!hasisethe !oint Mar is #akin"< that e%en on the best !ossible assu#!tions we do not !assi##ediately 'ro# ca!italis# to !roduction 'or need-/

6n 'act& the re'erence to the o%erco#in" o' the di%ision o' labour in the 'irst sentence #akes

clear that what Mar #eans by “ro# each accordin" to his ability& to each accordin" tohis needs) is a restate#ent o' what was already in The ;erman ideology 18LI< “O inco##unist society& where nobody has one eclusi%e s!here o' acti%ity but each canbeco#e acco#!lished in any branch he wishes& society re"ulates the "eneral !roductionand thus #akes it !ossible 'or #e to do one thin" today and another to#orrow& to hunt inthe #ornin"& 'ish in the a'ternoon& rear cattle in the e%enin"& criticise a'ter dinner& =ust as 6

ha%e a #ind& without e%er beco#in" hunter& 'isher#an& herds#an or critic/)2

:s Mar #akes clear& to #ake this !ossible re.uires that “the !roducti%e 'orces ha%e alsoincreased with the all4around de%elo!#ent o' the indi%idual& and all the s!rin"s o'coo!erati%e wealth 'low #ore abundantly)/ 6n other words& it re.uires a #a=or increase in

social !roducti%ity co#!ared to where we are now& enablin" a hi"her !ro!ortion o'indi%iduals- li%es to be s!ent on "eneral education& on retrainin" 'or new tasks& and on sel'4chosen creati%e acti%ities/

+o#rade +lark ad%ocates an “ecolo"ical !ers!ecti%e within socialis#)& and says that the“consu#erist conce!tion o' socialis#) was “always i#!licit in the old socialist tradition)/ 6t#ay be that he #eans by this to acce!t the ob=ections to Mar-s ar"u#ents on this issueas !roducti%ist-& ro#ethean- and unsustainable-& which ha%e been #ade by se%eral

"reens& and 'ro# within the traditional le't by ,re"or $enton in 1989/3

My o!inion& 'or what it is worth& is that these "reen ar"u#ents are wron"/ 6' we break withthe !ro'it4dri%en syste# and a!!ly resources to democratically chosen !ro=ects& we could& 6

think& within a century or two !ro%ide the #aterial conditions "lobally 'or o%erco#in" thedi%ision o' labour- in Mar-s sense< that is& li'elon" hu#an s!ecialisation on !articular skillsand tasks/ :nd we could do so without breakin" the bounds o' the "lobal ecosyste#& buton the contrary could re!air the da#a"e that has already been done/

Aonetheless& this may turn out to be i#!ossible/ :nd in any case it would certainly not bethe i##ediate result o' o%erthrowin" ca!italis# worldwide let alone atte#!tin" to re!laceca!italis# in a sin"le country& which would result #erely in another disaster like those o'the 20th century/ There are there'ore una%oidable choices to be #ade about thea!!lication o' li#ited resources/

+OIESThe !roble# which is then !osed by a “society based on !roduction 'or need) is< whodecides what counts as “need)& and which needs are to be "i%en !riority(

“Aeed) is a sli!!ery word which can ha%e an e!ansi%e or a restricti%e sense/ L Thee!ansi%e sense re.uires Mar-s inter!retation o' !roduction 'or need-< ie& a society with%ery hi"h !roducti%ity& in which the di%ision o' labour is o%erco#e/ $ut su!!ose we ado!tthe restricti%e sense& and say si#!ly that !eo!le need 'ood& clothes& housin"& access totrans!ort and co##unication& education& health ser%ices and !ublic health #easures& andso on/ These basic needs are %ery etensi%ely unsatis'ied in the ca!italist world/ *n theother hand& a "reat deal o' what is currently o''ered 'or sale in the ca!italist #arket cannotbe said to be thin"s we need in the #ost e!ansi%e sense o' the word/ They #ay& indeed&be thin"s we need not to ha$e< 'or ea#!le& ci"arettes& urban LLs& and instru#ents andtechni.ues o' torture/ 6n this li#ited sense co#rade +lark-s criti.ue o' consu#eris#- isentirely =usti'ied/



Within the restricti%e sense o' need& howe%er& there re#ain una%oidable choices/ To "i%e alar"e4scale ea#!le/ Su!!ose that we o%erthrew ca!italist rule worldwide/ Whether the"reens are ri"ht that we need to cut down the hu#an 'oot!rint- on the earth and hencereduce resource e!enditure& or whether an increase in !roducti%ity which does notdestroy the earth is !ossible in the lon" run& #aterial resources would initially re#ainli#ited/ We would ha%e to #ake choices about !riorities/ What is the relati%e !riority

between i#!ro%in" trans!ort in'rastructure& education or health ser%ices( What is therelati%e !riority between i#!ro%in" healthcare 'or the old in $ritain& and i#!ro%in" basic4le%el healthcare in atin :#erica( ;ither choice will be a decision to use !roduction 'orneed< !ro'it would not enter into the .uestion/ $ut the choice will nonetheless ha%e to be'aced/

How will the choice be #ade( The +,$-s a!!roach is to say that we will ha%e to #akethe# democratically > that that is the only way in which the working class can e''ecti%elytake decisions/ Hence a#on" other reasons our %ery stron" e#!hasis on the stru""le 'oretre#e de#ocracy as the centre o' our !olitical !ro"ra##e/

$ut the #a=ority tradition o' the 20th century le't& includin" the Stalinists& was that the

choices should be #ade by e!erts-/ 6t #akes no di''erence whether these e!erts- are tobe technical e!erts& or cadres- !olitical e!erts-< they ha%e still been taken away 'ro#the !eo!le ulti#ately a''ected/ : tri%ial ea#!le& datin" back to the 1970s< a local councildecided it would be bene'icial to council tenants to li%e in an architect4desi"ned block> thee!ert architect desi"ned the block with a#ber windows> tenant co#!laints they wantedclear windows were una%ailin"/

6t is an accu#ulation o' !etty e!ert- stu!idities o' this sort& to"ether with real cuts in !ublice!enditure leadin" to cuts in re!airs& etc& on council housin"& which under#ined #asssu!!ort 'or council housin" and o!ened the political way 'or the Tory ri"ht to buy-le"islation/ 4ureaucratic collecti%e- decision4#akin" is so unattracti%e as to #ake !ro4

ca!italist ideolo"ues- o''er o' increased indi$idual decision4#akin" 4 !art o' what co#rade+lark calls consu#eris#- 4 look attracti%e/

The So%iet and eastern ;uro!ean re"i#es were& and the +hinese& Cietna#ese and AorthDorean re"i#es re#ain& #uch #ore etre#e ea#!les o' this !roble#< that the broadmasses are denied the ri"ht to #ake decisions& and the result is bureaucratic stu!iditieswhich do not con'or# to !eo!le-s actual needs/

The result in 'act was not !roduction 'or hu#an need at all/ 6n the Stalin4era 5SSB& allother needs were subordinated to the needs o' the state 'or arms !roduction< hence the!riority accorded to hea%y industry/ 6t is "rotes.ue to i#a"ine that the Mar who in 1871characterised the aris +o##une as “a re%olution a"ainst the state itsel'& o' this

su!ernaturalist abortion o' society& a resu#!tion by the !eo!le 'or the !eo!le o' its ownsocial li'e)I would ha%e thou"ht that the 5SSB was an ea#!le o' !roduction 'or need-/

Besent#ent about subordination to decisions arbitrarily taken by e!erts- is !artlybecause o' the bad results o' the decisions/ $ut it is also& in 'act& an aspect of humanbasic needs/ Status ine.uality is& inde!endent o' absolute wealth or !o%erty& a cause o' ill4

health/@Since the !heno#enon is inde!endent o' absolute wealth or !o%erty& hierarchicalrelations o' decision4#akin"& in which so#e !eo!le are !er#anently subordinated toothers& are i#!licated in this !roble# =ust as #uch as #onetary inco#e ine.uality/ 6naddition& o' course& !er#anent relations o' do#ination and subordination will tend to!roduce inco#e ine.uality& since the decision4#akers will tend to 'a%our the#sel%es< as

already a!!eared in the 5SSB in 1922& with the creation o' s!ecial #aterial !ri%ile"es 'orcadres-/7

roduction "enuinely ai#ed at the basic hu#an need 'or health would there'ore in%ol%e



re!ublican e.uality-< ie& the end o' !er#anent relations o' do#ination and subordination

between hu#ans/8 This "oal& in turn& in%ol%es 4 as Mar !oints out in the "riti!ue of the;otha programme& .uoted abo%e 4 the end o' “the ensla%in" subordination o' the indi%idualto the di%ision o' labour& and therewith also the antithesis between #ental and !hysicallabour)/

WORKERS’ *OWER6n co#rade +lark-s account we can lea! i##ediately 'ro# ca!italis# to socialis# 4 de'inedas !roduction 'or need- 4 in a sin"le country/ :s we ha%e already seen& this was certainlynot Mar-s %iew/ So what ca#e before the de%elo!#ent o' 'ull co##unis# 'or Mar and;n"els(

:ctually& the answer is that they s!oke #ainly not o' what 'ull co##unis# would be like&but o' what would i##ediately succeed ca!italist rule/ :nd that was< the !olitical rule o' the!roletariat as a class o%er the other classes sur%i%in" ca!italists& !etty !ro!rietors&#ana"ers& lu#!en class/

Thus& in the "ommunist manifesto we 'ind the 'or#ula< “The 'irst ste! in the re%olution by

the workin" class is to raise the !roletariat to the !osition o' rulin" class& to win the battleo' de#ocracy/)9 *' the aris +o##une& The ci$il war in <rance says this< “6ts true secretwas this< it was essentially a workin" class "o%ern#ent& the !roduct o' the stru""le o' the!roducin" a"ainst the a!!ro!riatin" class& the !olitical 'or# at last disco%ered under which

to work out the econo#ical e#anci!ation o' labour/)10 6n 1890& ;n"els wrote< “*' late& thesocial de#ocratic !hilistine has once #ore been 'illed with wholeso#e terror at the words&dictatorshi! o' the !roletariat-/ Well and "ood& "entle#en& do you want to know what thisdictatorshi! looks like( ook at the aris +o##une/ That was the dictatorshi! o' the

!roletariat/)11

6n 189L& a letter o' ;n"els to Turati contains a direct .uotation 'ro# the "ommunist

manifesto/ :'ter this direct .uotation& he !ara!hrases< “+onse.uently they JsocialistsK takean acti%e !art in all the !hases o' the de%elo!#ent o' the stru""le between the two classeswithout in so doin" losin" si"ht o' the 'act that these !hases are only =ust so #any!reli#inary ste!s to the 'irst "reat ai#< the con.uest o' political !ower by the proletariat as

the #eans towards a new or"anisation o' society/)12

6n "eneral 4 the "riti!ue of the ;otha programme is an a!!arent ece!tion 4 Mar and;n"els were .uite concrete about i##ediate !ro!osals 'or workin" class rule& but a%oideds!eculation about the sha!e o' the 'uture co##unist society beyond its broadest outlines>and they criticised the uto!ians o' one sort or another 'or !recisely such s!eculation anddetailed blue!rints/ Thus in The ci$il war in<rance<

“6' coo!erati%e !roduction is not to re#ain a sha# and a snare> i' it is to su!ersede theca!italist syste#> i' united coo!erati%e societies are to re"ulate national !roduction u!onco##on !lan& thus takin" it under their own control& and !uttin" an end to the constantanarchy and !eriodical con%ulsions which are the 'atality o' ca!italist !roduction 4 whatelse& "entle#en& would it be but co##unis#& !ossible- co##unis#(

“The workin" class did not e!ect #iracles 'ro# the +o##une/ They ha%e no ready4#adeuto!ias to introduce par decret du peuple/ They know that in order to work out their owne#anci!ation& and alon" with it that hi"her 'or# to which !resent society is irresistiblytendin" by its own econo#ical a"encies& they will ha%e to !ass throu"h lon" stru""les&throu"h a series o' historic !rocesses& trans'or#in" circu#stances and #en/ They ha%e no

ideals to realise& but to set 'ree the ele#ents o' the new society with which old& colla!sin"

bour"eois society itsel' is !re"nant/)13



,FIRST *+ASE’ :n ece!tion& which appears to discuss the sha!e o' socialis#& is 'ound in a !assa"e o'the "riti!ue of the ;otha programme& co#in" i##ediately be'ore the section .uotedearlier/ Here Mar !ostulates what has been called a lower sta"e- o' co##unis#& “the 'irst!hase o' co##unist society as it is when it has =ust e#er"ed a'ter !rolon"ed birth !an"s'ro# ca!italist society)/ This “'irst !hase) ca#e in the Second 6nternational to be called

socialis#-& and in o''icial co##unis#- a ri"id distinction was drawn between thissocialis#- and co##unis#-/ Socialis#-& #eanin" the “'irst !hase)& the 5SSB clai#ed toha%e achie%ed/ +o##unis#-& #eanin" eclusi%ely the hi"her sta"e& it did not clai# toha%e achie%ed/

6n this “'irst !hase)& the #eans o' !roduction are owned in co##on& and hence “/// no4onecan "i%e anythin" ece!t his labour& and ///& on the other hand& nothin" can !ass to theownershi! o' indi%iduals& ece!t indi%idual #eans o' consu#!tion)/

The total social !roduct is 'irst allocated to co##on !ur!oses< “<irst & co%er 'orre!lace#ent o' the #eans o' !roduction used u!/ (econd & additional !ortion 'or e!ansiono' !roduction/ Third & reser%e or insurance 'unds to !ro%ide a"ainst accidents& dislocations

caused by natural cala#ities& etc/) Then& “<irst & the "eneral costs o' ad#inistration notbelon"in" to !roduction/ This !art will& 'ro# the outset& be %ery considerably restricted inco#!arison with !resent4day society& and it di#inishes in !ro!ortion& as the new societyde%elo!s/ (econd & that which is intended 'or the co##on satis'action o' needs& such asschools& health ser%ices& etc/ ro# the outset& this !art "rows considerably in co#!arisonwith !resent4day society& and it "rows in !ro!ortion as the new society de%elo!s/ Third &'unds 'or those unable to work& etc< in short& 'or what is included under so4called o''icial!oor relie' today/)

What re#ains is then distributed& not in !ro!ortion to need & but in !ro!ortion to workcontributed / “O the indi%idual !roducer recei%es back 'ro# society 4 a'ter the deductions

ha%e been #ade 4 eactly what he "i%es to it/ What he has "i%en to it is his indi%idual.uantu# o' labour/ or ea#!le& the social workin" day consists o' the su# o' theindi%idual hours o' work> the indi%idual labour ti#e o' the indi%idual !roducer is the !art o'the social workin" day contributed by hi#& his share in it/ He recei%es a certi'icate 'ro#society that he has 'urnished such4and4such an a#ount o' labour a'ter deductin" hislabour 'or the co##on 'unds> and with this certi'icate& he draws 'ro# the social stock o'#eans o' consu#!tion as #uch as the sa#e a#ount o' labour cost/ The sa#e a#ount o'labour which he has "i%en to society in one 'or#& he recei%es back in another/

“Here& ob%iously& the sa#e !rinci!le !re%ails as that which re"ulates the echan"e o'co##odities& as 'ar as this is echan"e o' e.ual %alues /// the sa#e !rinci!le !re%ails as inthe echan"e o' co##odity e.ui%alents< a "i%en a#ount o' labour in one 'or# is

echan"ed 'or an e.ual a#ount o' labour in another 'or#/

“Hence& e!ual right here is still in !rinci!le bourgeois right & althou"h !rinci!le and !racticeare no lon"er at lo""erheads& while the echan"e o' e.ui%alents in co##odity echan"eeists only on the a%era"e and not in the indi%idual case/

“6n s!ite o' this ad%ance& this e.ual ri"ht is still constantly sti"#atised by a bour"eoisli#itation/ The ri"ht o' the !roducers is proportional to the labour they su!!ly> the e.ualityconsists in the 'act that #easure#ent is #ade with an e!ual standard & labour/

“$ut one #an is su!erior to another !hysically& or #entally& and su!!lies #ore labour in thesa#e ti#e& or can labour 'or a lon"er ti#e> and labour& to ser%e as a #easure& #ust be

de'ined by its duration or intensity& otherwise it ceases to be a standard o' #easure#ent/This e!ual ri"ht is an une.ual ri"ht 'or une.ual labour/ 6t reco"nises no class di''erences&because e%eryone is only a worker like e%eryone else> but it tacitly reco"nises une.ual



indi%idual endow#ent& and thus !roducti%e ca!acity& as a natural !ri%ile"e/ 6t is& there'ore&a ri"ht o' ine.uality& in its content& like e%ery ri"ht/

“Bi"ht& by its %ery nature& can consist only in the a!!lication o' an e.ual standard> butune.ual indi%iduals and they would not be di''erent indi%iduals i' they were not une.ualare #easurable only by an e.ual standard inso'ar as they are brou"ht under an e.ual!oint o' %iew& are taken 'ro# one de'inite side only 4 'or instance& in the !resent case& are

re"arded only as workers and nothin" #ore is seen in the#& e%erythin" else bein"i"nored/ urther& one worker is #arried& another is not> one has #ore children thananother& and so on and so 'orth/ Thus& with an e.ual !er'or#ance o' labour& and hence ane.ual in the social consu#!tion 'und& one will in 'act recei%e #ore than another& one willbe richer than another& and so on/ To a%oid all these de'ects& ri"ht& instead o' bein" e.ual&

would ha%e to be une.ual/)1L

There is a stron" case 'or takin" this !assa"e less seriously than it has been taken both byMarists and by acade#ic Marolo"ists/

6n the 'irst !lace& the whole o' this !art o' the "riti!ue of the ;othaprogramme is not an

ar"u#ent 'or insertin" !ositi%e Marist 'or#ulations in the !ro"ra##e& but'or remo$ing assallean 'or#ulations 'ro# it/ 6n !articular& this !assa"e is !art o'a reductio ad absurdum o' the assallean 'or#ulae that “the !roceeds o' labourbelon" undiminished & with e!ual right & to all #e#bers o' society) "ehRrt der ;rtra" der :rbeit un$erk=r7t & nach gleichem 6echte& allen ,esellscha'ts"liedern and“a fair distribution o' the !roceeds o' labour) gerechter Certeilun" des

:rbeitsertra"s/1I Mar is concerned to show that e.ual ri"ht- or a 'air-& =ust-& or e.ual-distribution would at the end o' the day be une.ual& so that the assallean slo"an is sel'4contradictory/ He reaches the conclusion& the !ayo'' o' the ar"u#ent& in the last !ara"ra!h.uoted/ There is there'ore little reason to su!!ose that the labour certi'icates- idea isactually a !ositi%e !ro!osal 'or or"anisin" distribution/

Secondly& the econo#ic analysis is slo!!y< unsur!risin" in a ne"ati%e criti.ue& written ats!eed& but a "ood "round 'or su!!osin" that the !assa"e is no #ore than a ne"ati%ecriti.ue/ Mar #ost unusually s!eaks o' the cost o' labour “he draws 'ro# the social stocko' #eans o' consu#!tion as #uch as the sa#e a#ount o' labour cost) 4 “und ieht /// ausde# "esellscha'tlichen Corrat %on Donsu#tions#itteln so%iel heraus& als "leich %iel :rbeitkostet) rather than the cost o' labour%power / The distinction is 'unda#ental toMar-s "apital < labour- does not& in 'act& ha%e a cost& and the cost o' labour- is actuallyeither the re!roduction cost o' labour4!ower& or the !rice o' labour4!ower/ We could re4read this as the cost o' the !roducts drawn by the labourer 'ro# the social stock& assessed!urely in their labour inputs& but such a readin" would be inconsistent with Mar-s criticis#&

at the %ery be"innin" o' the "riti!ue& o' the assallean clai# that “abour is the source o'all wealth and all culture)/

The sa#e issue has a #ore 'unda#ental as!ect/ The analysis o' the di%ision o' the totalsocial !roduct !roceeds on the basis that the clai# o' the labourers on this !roduct is aresidual clai#/ irst deduct so #uch 'or re!lace#ent o' the #eans o' !roduction& 'unds 'or"rowth& insurance& ad#inistrati%e costs& !ublic ser%ices and !ay#ents to those unable towork> then what re#ains is di%ided a#on" the labourers in !ro!ortion to their work/ :s !arto' a reductio ad absurdum o' the assallean slo"an this #akes !er'ect sense/ $ut 'ro# the!oint o' %iew e!ounded in "apital the total social labour4!ower is =ust as #uch a #eans o'!roduction which has to be re!roduced as the #aterial #eans #achines& buildin"s& etc/

:t least the #ini#u# cost o' re!roduction o' social labour4!ower& includin" not #erely thecost o' bare subsistence& but also the cost o' ac.uisition by workers o' necessary skills&there'ore should a!!ear as a necessary deduction 'ro# the distributable 'und- before the



“additional !ortion 'or e!ansion o' !roduction)/ The accountin"distributi%e sche#e o' the“'irst !hase) is there'ore si#!ly untenable ece!t inso'ar as it is internal criti.ue o' thecoherence o' assalleanis# on the basis o' assalle-s own assu#!tions/

What& then& are we to #ake o' “the 'irst !hase o' co##unist society as it is when it has =uste#er"ed a'ter !rolon"ed birth !an"s 'ro# ca!italist society)& and which is still& at least!artially& within “the narrow horion o' bour"eois ri"ht)(

The answer is that it is& i' it is anythin" at all& the outcome of the dictatorship of the proletariat / Mar-s ar"u#ent about this “'irst !hase) su!!oses the continued eistence o'what is& in substance& the relation o' wa"e labour& and hence o' the !roletariat as a class/“6t reco"nises no class di''erences& because e%eryone is only a worker like e%eryone else/)$ut what is #eant by this is that the other classes ha%e been absorbed into the !roletariat/$y %irtue o' the !roletariat beco#in" and re#ainin" the rulin" class #eanin" the ulti#atedecision4#akers in society it beco#es #ore attracti%e to work 'or wa"es than to run as#all 'a#ily business or 'ar#> and at the end o' this !rocess there is nothin" le't in societyece!t wa"e4workers& with the result that classes cease to eist/

Stran"e as it #ay see#& we can already see a tendency in this direction in conte#!orary$ritish society< accordin" to a 2007 sur%ey& I7 o' the !o!ulation think o' the#sel%es asworkin" class& includin" #any !eo!le who be'ore World War 66 would ha%e sel'4identi'ied

as #iddle class/1@ 6' the workin" class ruled& the tendency would be #uch stron"er/

The heart and centre o' Mar-s and ;n"els- !olitical ar"u#ents was the stru""le 'or “thecon.uest o' !olitical !ower by the !roletariat)/ The discussion o' the “'irst !hase) o'co##unis# in the "riti!ue of the ;otha programme& which a!!ears su!er'icially to tell adi''erent story& turns out on close analysis to be a %ariant o' the sa#e story/ The transitionbeyond class society is throu"h workin" class rule& to e%eryone beco#in" wa"e4workers&so that classes as such cease to eist< thereby& in turn& !uttin" us on the road too%erco#in" the di%ision o' labour- and “the antithesis between #ental and !hysical

labour)/ Why is there this constant e#!hasis on workin" class !olitics(

: little earlier in the "riti!ue& Mar wrote< “O e.ually incontestable is this other !ro!osition<6n !ro!ortion as labour de%elo!s socially& and beco#es thereby a source o' wealth andculture& !o%erty and destitution de%elo! a#on" the workers& and wealth and culture a#on"the non4workers/- This is the law o' all history hitherto/ What& there'ore& had to be donehere& instead o' settin" down "eneral !hrases about labour- and society-& was to !ro%econcretely how in present capitalist society the material, etc conditions ha$e at last beencreated which enable and compel the workers to lift this social curse) e#!hasis added/

The !oint is that ca!italis# 'or the 'irst ti#e since the end o' !ri#iti%e co##unist- hunter4"atherer society makes communism possible/ 6t does so& on the one hand& because thede%elo!#ent o' !roducti%ity #akes it !ossible to "o beyond the di%ision o' labour/ 6t doesso& on the other& because ca!italis# both socialises the #a=or #eans o' !roduction andthrows u! a class 4 the !roletariat 4 which lacks !ro!erty in the #eans o' !roduction/

6n !re4ca!italist society co##unis# is desirable because it is #ore consistent with thebasics o' hu#an nature than class society/ Witness the !ersistent rea!!earance in #any!eriods and cultures o' uto!ian co##unist ideas/ $ut it is impossible& 'or two reasons/ The'irst is that the econo#y is insu''iciently !roducti%e to 'ree the lar"e #a=ority o' !eo!le 'ro#i##ediate labour to enable the# to ac.uire the skills o'& and !artici!ate in& social4decision4

#akin"/17 The second is that co##unis# re.uires social decision4#akin"> and this isinconsistent with s#all4scale !ri%ate ownershi! and !etty 'a#ily4based 'ar#in" and artisan

!roduction/ +a!italis# re#o%es both obstacles to co##unis#/

The !roletariat as a class is the class whose "rowth epresses this trans'or#ati%e



!ossibility/ Workers& because they are se!arated 'ro# the #eans o' !roduction& are 'orcedto create %oluntary associations 4 trade unions& tenants- associations& coo!erati%es&!olitical !arties 4 to de'end their interests/ These %oluntary associations 'oreshadow a'uture world o' the “'reely associated !roducers)/ 6t is there'ore through the class rule o'the !roletariat that it is !ossible to !ass to the end o' classes and co##unis#/

,OFFIIAL OMMUNISM’*''icial co##unis#-& and with it co#rade +lark& breaks with this 'unda#ental core o'Mar-s and ;n"els- !olicy/ The !rocess o' the break will be the sub=ect o' the net article&#y re%iew o' riestland on Stalinis#/ The epression o' the break has two sides/ irst&o''icial co##unists- characterise the 5SSB and si#ilar countries as socialist- when therewere trans!arently social classes in these countries& so that the #ost that these re"i#escould !ossibly ha%e been was the dictatorshi! o' the !roletariat& the !olitical !ower o' theworkin" class o%er the other classes in 'act& they were not that either/

Second& in the !olitics o' the ca!italist countries& the i##ediate alternati%e to ca!italis#is the political power of the working class/ *''icial co##unists- instead o''er a socialis#-/This socialis#- ignores the !roble# o' workin" class !olitical rule and atte#!ts to create across4class coalition 'or a morally better society/ +lark-s eco4socialist- a!!roach is one%ariant> Bes!ect is another> the o''icial- +,$-s broad de#ocratic alliance- was a third/

This break is in the 'ace o' o%erwhel#in" e%idence con'ir#in" Mar-s and ;n"els- ori"inalidea that it is only ca!italis# and the rise o' the !roletariat that #akesco##unis# possible& and that the only road to co##unis# is throu"h the class rule o' the!roletariat o%er the other classes/ The 5SSB and its 'all and the 'all with it o' the eastern;uro!ean and South Ne#en satellite states& and the #arket turns in +hina and Cietna#and #ost recently +uba are !art o' that e%idence/ 6t is to this .uestion that we #ust netturn> and 6 will do so by re%iewin" riestland/

Aotes1/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks187I"othach01/ht#2/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks18LI"er#an4ideolo"ych01a/ht#aL3/ Maris# and natural li#its- New eft 6e$iew 'irst series& Ao178/L/ +'/ #y re%iew o' 6an raser-s 3egel, Mar> the concept of need 1998< He"elian !it'alls- eeklyorker Euly 31 2003> and also Aor#an ,eras-s in #y o!inion unsatis'actory discussion o' Mar-s 'or#ula&in The contro%ersy about Mar and =ustice-1989<www/#arists/or"re'erencesub=ect!hiloso!hyworksus"eras/ht#I/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks1871ci%il4war4'rancedra'tsch01/ht#@/ B Wilkinson The impact of ine!uality> how to make sick societies healthier 200I> or outline su##aryatwww/nationalestatechurches/or"Wilkinson20+on'200@/!d' 7/ : odsheldolkin& The ori"ins o' the Stalinist bureaucracy 4 so#e new historical 'acts-< www/re%olutionary4history/co/uksu!!le#!odsheld/ht#

8/ or the use o' re!ublican e.uality- here c' ettit 6epublicanism1997& thou"h ettit-s !olicy!rescri!tions are in substance social de#ocratic/ +o#!are also Mar-s co##ent in 6nstructions 'ordele"ates o' the !ro%isional "eneral council- 18@@< “We acknowled"e the coo!erati%e #o%e#ent as one o'the trans'or#in" 'orces o' the !resent society based u!on class anta"onis#/ 6ts "reat #erit is to !racticallyshow that the !resent !au!erisin" and des!otic syste# o' the subordination of labour to ca!ital can besu!erseded by the re!ublican and bene'icent syste# o' the association of free and e!ual producers/)9/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks18L8co##unist4#ani'estoch02/ht#10/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks1871ci%il4war4'rancech0I/ht#11/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks1871ci%il4war4'rance!ostscri!t/ht#12/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks189Lletters9LP01P2@/ht#13/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks1871ci%il4war4'rancech0I/ht#1L/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks187I"othach01/ht#1I/ ;n"lish tet at source cited abo%e> ,er#an tet 'ro#www/#arists/or"deutscharchi%#ar4

en"els187Ikritikrand"los/ht#/ ;#!hases added/1@/ news/bbc/co/uk1hi#a"aine@29I7L3/st#17/ easants can sel'4#ana"e their %illa"es& artisans their local "uilds/ $ut both are !art o' lar"er di%isions o'



labour& which they arenot able to sel'4#ana"e/



Thursday Se!te#ber 11 2008

Weekly Worker 73@

Bur'au-ra-y an. t'rr&r

Mike Macnair re$iews Da$id -riestland's (talinism and the politics of mobilisation>ideas, power and terror in inter%war 6ussia 8ford 200+, pp:?+, @AB9?

?a%id riestland-s book is a contribution to the acade#ic study o' the history o' the 5SSB&and in !articular the ori"ins o' the 1930s terror/ 6t is distin"uished by the atte#!t to takeseriously the political ideas o' the Stalinists and their connection to& and !artial di%er"ence'ro#& the ideas o' the $olshe%iks a'ter the re%olution/ 6t is this& as well as the wealth o'docu#entation in the book 4 es!ecially o' political turns within the re"i#e 4 that #akes itworth readin"/

6 a# re%iewin" the book in the contet o' a re!ly to Tony +lark-s article& ?e'endin"Stalin-/1 The 'irst article in this series criticised co#rade +lark-s de'inition o' socialis#- ande#!hasised co#rade +lark-s and other o''icialco##unists- break with the 'unda#entalso' the ar"u#ents o' Mar and ;n"els/ : third article& to 'ollow& will address the .uestion o'bureaucracy-& co#rade +lark-s use o' standard Stalinist ar"u#ents a"ainst Trotsky as a'or# o' indirect de'ence o' Stalin and his =ud"#ent o' the role o' the 5SSB on the worldsta"e/

The re%iew will& there'ore& to so#e etent assu#e the ar"u#ents o' the 'irst article< that is&that Mar and ;n"els thou"ht that the only road beyond ca!italis# was throu"hthe political power of the working class> that ca!italis# made communism

possible because it under#ined s#all4scale !ri%ate ownershi! o' #eans o' !roduction and'a#ily !roduction and re!laced it with wa"e labour> and that Stalinis# constituted a breakwith these ideas/

riestland analyses the e%olution o' the Stalinists- !olitical ideas within the 'ra#ework o' abroadly Weberian su!!osition that Marism as such is uto!ian/ riestland does not 'ullyar"ue out this %iew& but #erely assu#es it at the outset& but then in effect !roducese%idence 'or it in the sha!e o' the cala#itous history o' the 5SSB in the 1920s and 30sand& in the 'inal cha!ter& o' +hina under Mao/

+o#rade +lark identi'ies with Stalinis#- because he =ud"es 4 correctly 4 that the anti4Stalinis#- o' Dhrushche% and his co4thinkers was !ro4ca!italist& tended to under#ine the

5SSB& and hence led to the 'all o' the 5SSB in 1991/ $ut riestland de#onstrates 'ro#the docu#ents that what beca#e Dhruschche%ite re%isionis#- was already present withinhigh%period (talinism> and that Stalin !ersonally and his i##ediate co4thinkers i"4a""edbetween this !olicy and a le'tist- !olicy o' #obilisin"- the #asses to denounce the#ana"ers& kulaks& bureaucrats& etc in the !ur"es !eriod characterised as “Trotskyite4$ukharinite wreckers) who were alle"edly sabota"in" the econo#y/

*n each occasion the le'tist- !olicy was abandoned because it disrupted !roduction/ The%ictory o' the re%isionists- a'ter Stalin-s death& and their anti4Stalinis#-& was #erely these#i4!ublic codi'ication o' a !olicy choice which had already been #ade 4 brie'ly in theri"htwards le"s o' Stalin-s i"a"s in the 1920s and 30s& and decisi%ely with the end o' the'ull4scale terror in 1938439/

6n other words& riestland-s ar"u#ents address issues which are i##ediately rele%ant toco#rade +lark-s ar"u#ents/



riestland-s core ar"u#ents are& as we shall see& al#ost !ain'ully ideolo"ical4a!olo"etic/His underlyin" co##it#ent to liberalis#- #eanin" the ca!italist order& rather than eithertheorised !olitical liberalis# or neoliberalis# and his cold war acade#ic- Weberianassu#!tions and silences dee!ly de'or# the story he tells/ They #ake the I74!a"eintroduction in !articular a tortuous read/ Aonetheless& the book is worth readin"/

:cade#ic history is now usually written under the e#!irical #ethodolo"ical disci!lines

established by ,er#an acade#ics in the later 19th century 4 the 'ullest !ossible use o'both !ri#ary sources and eistin" literature& accurate citation o' sources& their assess#entas witnesses usin" techni.ues borrowed 'ro# the law o' e%idence& and the atte#!t toe!lain e%ents as econo#ically as !ossible *cca#-s raor-/ This sort o' history is& likethe !hysical sciences& a cu#ulati%e science< it leads to us knowin" #ore about the !ast/This is still true e%en where 4 as in the case o' (talinism and the politics of mobilisation% the 'ra#ework o''ered by the author to e!lain the e%ents studied is dee!ly !roble#atic/

6n addition riestland is !robably correct to ar"ue that the lar"e #a=ority o' the $olshe%iks&includin" #uch o' the le't& 'ro# the 1920s were tra!!ed within uto!ian ideolo"icaldiscourses& and that the nature o' these discourses sha!ed the de%elo!#ent o' So%iet

!olitics and hel!ed lead to the terror/

*RIESTLAND’S T+EOR"The central .uestion riestland !oses to Mar and Marists& on the basis o' which he =ud"es Maris# to be uto!ian ideolo"y& is this<

“How could a #odern industrial syste#& based on a syste# o' wa"e incenti%es andcoordination by a technocratic elite& be reconciled with the desire to trans'or# work intocreati%e sel'4e!ression and to 'ree workers 'ro# all subordination() !2I

This state#ent is a hi"hly ideolo"ical4a!olo"etic 'or#ulation o' a real contradiction in 19thand 20th and !erha!s 21st century socialist !olitics& and it will be necessary to return to it

a'ter su##arisin" the rest o' riestland-s ar"u#ent and narrati%e/

The sa#e !a"e o''ers a di''erent contradiction- in Mar-s thou"ht< that “Mar !ro%ideddi''erent accounts o' the 'orces that dri%e history 'orward& and in !articular the relationshi!between econo#ic 'orces and the consciousness o' the workin" class/)

This second !oint is in substance #erely abusi%e/ : tension between structural causaldyna#ics and indi%idual and "rou! a"ency is inherent in any historical& econo#ic orsociolo"ical account o' hu#an society& and& 'or that #atter& any !ro!osal 'or !oliticalaction/ Mar #akes eactly this !oint in one o' his #ost 'a#ous .uotations< “Men #aketheir own history& but they do not #ake it as they !lease> they do not #ake it under sel'4selected circu#stances& but under circu#stances eistin" already& "i%en and trans#itted

'ro# the !ast/ The tradition o' all dead "enerations wei"hs like a ni"ht#are on the brainso' the li%in"/)2 The tension is also u!4'ront in riestland-s own book !!34L& L94IL andelsewhere/

6n any such !ro=ect it is there'ore !ossible to etract .uotations which e#!hasise thea"ency side o' the .uestion and !resent the# as “ro#antic) or “%oluntarist)& and etract.uotations which e#!hasise structural causal dyna#ics and characterise the# as“scientistic)> and this is what riestland !roceeds to do/ This then sets u! a second non4dialectical contradiction within Maris# between “scientis#) and “%oluntaris#)/ :s aresult& riestland is able to dia"nose 'our Maris#s-< elitist and scientistic> elitist and%oluntarist> non4elitist and scientistic> !o!ulist and %oluntarist !!3243L/

6n $olshe%is# in !ower& says riestland& these 'our %ersions o' Maris# #utate into 'i%e"eneral !ositions/ “Coluntaris#) beco#es “re%i%alis#) !!394LL/ 6n this %iew !roletarianclass4consciousness was a %ital 'orce in history and !olitics& on which the !arty had to



draw by #obilisin" workers- ener"y and enthusias#/ olitical ideas were !ri#ary> ene#ieswere identi'ied as bour"eois- or !etty bour"eois-> !ur"in"- or cleansin"- !arty and stateinstitutions was i#!ortant/ $ut there were two %ariants o' “re%i%alis#)/ -opulist re%i%alis#sou"ht to rely on workin" class s!ontaneity 4 without concedin" actual decision%making tothe workers 4 and to !roletarianise- the bureaucracy by recruitin" workers toit/ 5litist re%i%alis# sou"ht #erely to #obilise workers under a #ilitary co##and and

control re"i#e> this trend beca#e “unco#'ortable with the lan"ua"e o' class and classstru""le& and in the 1930s they so#eti#es clai#ed that class di''erences had beeno%erco#e ///) !LL/

“Scientis#) beco#es “technicis#) !!LL4L7/ This trend 4 !articularly associated with$ukharin in the 1920s 4 'a%oured the use o' #aterial incenti%es and "radual de%elo!#ent&and “tended to 'a%our /// the technical intelli"entsia) !LI/ *nly a 'ew ultra4"radualists who'a%oured #ore etensi%e use o' #arket #echanis#s and law could be described as non4elitist technicists !!L@4L7& technicists "enerally bein" elitists/

The 'i'th !osition riestland characterises as “neo4traditionalist) !!L74L9/ This idea hasbeen a!!lied in so#e o' the acade#ic literature to Stalinis# in "eneral& but riestland

reduces it to a trend within $olshe%is# in !ower/ 6n this %iew society was di%ided intohereditary status "rou!s with distinct tasks& in e''ect !re4ca!italist estates- 4 industrialworkers& collecti%ised !easants& So%iet intelli"entsia and loyal- nationalities on the "oodside> on the ene#y side 'or#er bour"eois& !etty bour"eois and kulaks lar"e 'ar#ers andunreliable national #inorities/ riestland reco"nises that neo4traditionalis# could not becharacterised as Marist& and hence could not really be o!enly s!oken& but su""eststhat aspects o' this discourse were !resent throu"hout and that the class lan"ua"e usedby “re%i%alists) could shade into it/

*RIESTLAND’S NARRATI/E+ha!ters 14I o' the book atte#!t to cash out- this theoretical analysis o' contradictions

within $olshe%is# in the 'or# o' 'airly detailed historical narrati%e/ 6 will su##arise this inetre#e outline& ine%itably o%ersi#!li'yin"/

+ha!ter 1 ar"ues that enin in his !olitics be'ore 1917 atte#!ted to synthesise “!o!ulis#)and “scientis#)& but that the line o' (tate and re$olution was %oluntarist and “!o!ulist4re%i%alist)& thou"h an ele#ent o' “elitis#) in the 'or# o' the role o' the %an"uard !arty wasalso !resent in enin-s ideas/ This !olicy was !ro%ed uto!ian by the chaos o' winter 1917418/ 6n :!ril 1918 the leadershi!& led by enin and Trotsky& abandoned the line o' (tate andre$olution in 'a%our o' an elitist !osition& which %eered between technicis# talk o' stateca!italis#- and “elitist re%i%alis#) subbotniks or un!aid o%erti#e> Trotsky-s e''orts on#ilitarisation and #ilitary #orale/ 6n this contet bureaucracywas used by leadershi!

s!eakers and writers to #ean red ta!e- and ine''iciency rather than the anti4de#ocraticas!ect o' bureaucracy/

The contradiction between the new line and $olshe%ik and wider Bussian workin" classtraditions resulted in the e#er"ence o' a series o' o!!ositions 4 the e't +o##unists& theWorkers- *!!osition and the ?e#ocratic +entralists& and the Military *!!osition/ These"rou!s "enerally !ursued a !o!ulist4re%i%alist line/ Since they could not return toliberalis#& their o!!osition to bureaucracy& #eanin" the elitist authority relations& had tobla#e alien classes& es!ecially the technical s!ecialists spetsy and su""est #ore!ro#otion o' workers into o''icial !ositions as a re#edy/ This sort o' a!!roach could slideo%er into neo4traditionalis#< workers seen as %irtuous because their !arents were workers/

Thou"h Stalin did not 'or#ally "o into o!!osition& beyond an in'or#al relationshi! with theMilitary *!!osition& his !olitical ideas were closer to those o' the o!!ositions/

6n 1920421 the econo#y was still 'allin" a!art in s!ite o' e''ecti%e %ictory in the ci%il war/



The 'irst res!onse o' the leadershi! was to etend the use o' coercion& Trotsky bein" the#ost %i"orous ad%ocate labour #ilitarisation/ aced with a #a=ority a"ainst thisa!!roach& enin backed o'' 'ro# su!!ortin" Trotsky/ 6n 1921 there was an actual !oliticalcrisis !easant re%olts& strikes& Dronstadt and enin and the !arty leadershi! abandonedwar co##unis#- and turned to #arket #echanis#s and the Aew ;cono#ic olicy/ Thisre!resented a #a=or shi't towards technicis#/ :lon" with it went attacks by leadershi!

'i"ures on the roletkult !roletarian culture #o%e#ent and etended de'ence o' the spetsy /$ukharin-s 3istorical materialism ad%ocated a social e.uilibriu#- theory& which could beused to su!!ort "radualis# in econo#ic !olicy/

:'ter the initial successes o' A;& !arty discontent and o!!osition and worker discontentbe"an to de%elo!/ The result was the creation o' an alliance between elitist re%i%alistsTrotsky& iatako% and others and !o!ulist re%i%alists& #ainly 'or#er ?e#ocratic+entralists/ This a!!eared 'irst in the Moscow e't *!!osition/ Then Fino%ie% andDa#ene% went into o!!osition on a #uch #ore workerist and !o!ulist4re%i%alist !lat'or#the enin"rad *!!osition& and these ideas do#inated the 5nited *!!osition o' 192@427/The 'irst !ublication o' ;n"els- Dialectics of nature in 192I s!urred the "rowth o' ideas o' a

!olicy o' dialectical lea!s 'orwardin the econo#y& #ost stron"ly ar"ued by Stru#ilin andiatako%/

Stalin and his "rou!& thou"h still in alliance with $ukharin a"ainst the o!!ositions& werealready #o%in" away 'ro# $ukharin-s "radualis# and towards the !olitics o' theenin"rad5nited *!!ositions 'ro# 192I& while usin" the criti.ue o' Trotskyis#- todistin"uish the#sel%es 'ro# the o!!osition/ They were able to base the#sel%es onre"ional !arty bosses-& who were worried about A; technicis# reducin" their !oliticalrole& but too concerned about the threat 'ro# below to "o o%er to the o!!osition/

6n 192@427 the de'eat in +hina& the breakin" o'' o' di!lo#atic relations by $ritain a'ter theFino%ie% letter- and the rench re'usal to ne"otiate on co##ercial credits and e!ulsion o'

Bako%sky !roduced a war scare/ :t the sa#e ti#e a new and acute scissors crisis-!easants re'usin" to sell "rain because the !rice was too low a!!eared in the econo#y/ :'ter dis!osin" o' the o!!osition with e!ulsions and a !ur"e& the Stalin 'action abru!tlybroke with $ukharin-s "radualist line in early 1928 and ado!ted a #ore etre#e %ersion o'the “re%i%alist) !olitics o' the o!!osition/ The result was the !olicy o' 'orced collecti%isationand crash industrialisation/ This had an “elitist) as!ect 4 the workers were to be #obilised-by the cadres- without really "ettin" the ri"ht to #ake decisions& and there were truly#assi%e cuts in real wa"es and s!eed4u!/ 6n this contet& the lar"e #a=ority o' theo!!osition “ca!itulated) Trotsky-s e!ression< ie& =oined 'orces with the Stalinists/

$ut it also had a “!o!ulist) as!ect& which took the 'or# o' attacks on kulaks& bureaucratsand spetsy & startin" with the show4trial o' Shakty en"ineers in March 1928/ riestland

care'ully docu#ents the rhetorical shi'ts in the line o' the Stalinist leadershi! towardsde#ocracy-& socialist e#ulation- and so on/ roletkult was re%i%ed/ :nother ele#ent was aconnection bein" #ade between sce!ticis# about the !lan tar"ets& sabota"e and real orsu!!osed international cons!iracies a"ainst the So%iet state 4 e!ressed in the 6ndustrialarty- and Menshe%ik 5nion $ureau- trials o' 1930431/

6n 'act& the turn !ro%ed to be disastrous/ orced collecti%isation resulted in 'a#ine/ Therewere etre#e bottlenecks in industrial !roduction/ The industrial out!ut 'i"ures were'alsi'ied& not only directly& but because inco#!lete buildin"s and 'actories were counted asout!ut-/ Workers used the e"alitarian rhetoric to attack #ana"ers and to create workcollecti%es- which under#ined wa"e incenti%es- by le%ellin" di''erentials/ 6ncreased !lan

tar"ets 'or !roduction led to se%ere 'alls in .uality/ The Bi"ht *!!osition- around $ukharin&thou"h out o' !ower& had not yet been !ur"ed and their criticis#s had increasin"resonance/



The result was that the Stalin "rou! turned& 'ro# around 1931& to a #uch #ore “technicist)orientation/ lan tar"ets were relaed and the tar"etin" o' kulaks& bureaucratsand spetsy dra#atically tailed o''/ Thou"h the #ain body o' the land re#ainedcollecti%ised-& !easants were allowed !ri%ate !lots/ 6n this contet& there was a shi'ttowards le"ality-& and Stalinists be"an to talk about the state sur%i%in" in socialis#> therewas also a substantial renewal o' Bussian nationalist rhetoric> and the use o' the lan"ua"e

o' class be"an to shi't away 'ro# Maris#- towards neo4traditionalis#/Aonetheless& Stalin had not 'unda#entally broken with “re%i%alis#)/ Thou"h the new“technicist) orientation allowed real econo#ic "rowth and industrialisation throu"h theco#!letion o' !ro=ects un'inished in 1928431& this "rowth slowed in the #id430s& =ust as theca!italist econo#ies were be"innin" to reco%er/ Stalin-s res!onse was to #o%eincreasin"ly back towards “re%i%alis#)/ ro# 193I this shi't beca#e #ore #arked/

The lan"ua"e o' class stru""le-& howe%er& did not rea!!ear< riestland su""ests that thiswas due to the leadershi! 'earin" a re!eat o' the !artial loss o' control o' 1928431/ This#eant that the e#!hasis on coercion& !ur"es& show4trials and international cons!iracieshad to be all the stron"er& leadin" to the #ass4scale terror o' 1937& !ri#arily directed

a"ainst spetsy and old !arty acti%ists identi'ied as bureaucrats- and saboteurs-/ $ut“re%i%alis#) was =ust as econo#ically irrational as it had been in 1928431 and si#ilarly ledto a 'all in !roducti%e out!ut/ $y 1938& it was clear that this le't- turn& too& was 'ailin"& andthe leadershi! brou"ht it to an end/

riestland-s conclusion su##arises his 'indin"s& and co#!ares the# with the %ery si#ilardyna#ic in +hina under Mao< “technicis#) in the 19I0s& 'ollowed by the “re%i%alist) ,reatea! orward in 19I8& 'ollowed by a return to “technicis#)& 'ollowed by the “!o!ulistre%i%alis#) o' the +ultural Be%olution 19@@4@7/ “o!ulist re%i%alis#)& he concludes& led tothe ado!tion o' irrational !olicies/

IDEOLO$IALThe core stren"th o' riestland-s book is si#!le/ 6t takes seriously Stalin-s ideas& those o'his i##ediate co4thinkers and their relationshi! to the ideas current in the $olshe%ik artyand the So%iet 5nion #ore "enerally/ :s a result& it breaks 'ree 'ro# seein" what Stalinsaid and wrote as #ere lies co%erin" 'or his !ersonal character as an indi%idual #onster&or co%erin" 'or the interests o' the So%iet bureaucracy- as an undi''erentiated e!loitin""rou!/

6t thus hel!s e!lain why the So%iet re"i#e ado!ted positi$ely irrational !olicies& whichactually reduced !roduction and #ilitary !re!aredness& in 1928431 and 193I438& and were4 as co#rade +lark correctly says 4 o!!osed to the interests o' the bureaucracy as suchcontrary to co#rade +lark-s %iew& they were o!!osed to e%eryone else-s interests& too/ 6t

hel!s us to understand why the #a=ority o' the o!!ositions o' the 1920s “ca!itulated) in1928431> why the sa#e !attern !layed out in +hina under Mao> and why le'tists could ande%en today still do choose to be Stalinists #eanin" real Stalinists like co#rade +lark& not =ust o''icial co##unists-/

:t the sa#e ti#e& as 6 said at the outset& riestland-s broadly Weberian theory isideolo"ical4a!olo"etic/ There is an ob%ious as!ect to this< na#ely& that the international place o' Bussia& the Bussian Be%olution and the So%iet re"i#e is nearly wholly out o' the!icture ece!t 'or the war scare o' 192@427/

$oris Da"arlitsky in 5mpire of the periphery 2008 #akes the 'unda#ental !oint that& inter#s o' world syste#s theory& Bussia be'ore the re%olution was a !eri!heral country& not acore country/ 6n eninist ter#s& it was a se#i4colony which was also sub4i#!erialist< ie& theBussian core was do#inated by western ca!ital& while the colonised areas o' the east andsouth were do#inated by Bussian ca!ital/ The country-s econo#y had been sha!ed since



the 17th century to 'it western 4 #ainly ?utch and $ritish& and 'ro# the late 19th centuryrench 4 interests in raw #aterials and ca!ital e!orts/ These interests had dri%en thesecond ser'do#-& the #aintenance o' the autocracy& and sub4i#!erialist "eo"ra!hicale!ansion/ Bussia-s !roble# was not isolation from the world ca!italist syste#&butintegration in it as a subordinate country /

6##ediately& the re%olution o' 1917 was !roduced in the contet o' World War 6/ The

$olshe%ik leaders 4 and not only the $olshe%iks& but also the e't SBs 4 thou"ht that whatthey were doin" was starting the 5uropean proletarian re$olution& not creatin" a nationallyisolated socialist- or workers- re"i#e/ The debates which riestland discusses were 4down to the late 1920s and !erha!s e%en down to 1933 4 al#ost entirely 'ra#ed in thatcontet/

: critical conse.uence o' that contet was that the ;uro!ean ca!italist states undoubtedlysaw the Bussian Be%olution and So%iet Bussia as an ene#y throu"hout the!eriod& did wish 'or its o%erthrow and took concrete actions towards this end/ MichaelDettle-s inco#!lete three4%olu#e 6ussia and the Cllies 1*1+%1*20 & with all its de'ects&#akes it clear 'ro# $ritish docu#ents that !lots and industrial sabota"e s!onsored by

$ritish intelli"ence were .uite real throu"hout the ci%il war !eriod& as well as the :llieddirect #ilitary inter%ention in the ci%il war/ 6n the ,er#an #ilitary inter%ention o' early 1918&udendor'' sacri'iced the chance o' %ictory on the western 'ront in order to !ut the$olshe%iks in their !lace-/ :'ter the ci%il war we do not ha%e the sa#e docu#entation& butthere were clearly what would now be called 'inancial sanctions a"ainst the So%iet re"i#e/

The crash o' 1929 and the ensuin" slu#!& #uch dee!er in the 5S than in $ritain& led 5S#anu'acturers o' !roducer "oods to be brie'ly willin" to break with this syste# o' .uasi4sanctions and sell industrial !lant to the 5SSB on credit ter#s in s!ite o' the risk/ ;%en so&to raise the hard currency to !ay 'or the e.ui!#ent the re"i#e had to hal%e real wa"esand continue e!ortin" "rain while !eo!le were star%in"> and it was only when there was

a retreat 'ro# the !olitical line o' 1928431 that the new !lant could be"in to be !ute''ecti%ely into o!eration and the 5SSB could e!erience ra!id "rowth& until the newStalinist con%ulsion o' 193I438/

riestland-s alternati%e is liberalis#-/ $ut the !eriod his book studies in the 5SSB is one inwhich liberalis#- was une.ui%ocally in retreat / Horthy-s cou! in Hun"ary 1920 and the'ascist takeo%er in 6taly 1922 were 'ollowed by #ore o%erthrows o' constitutional re"i#es<$ul"aria in 1923& oland& ortu"al and ithuania in 192@& Nu"osla%ia in 1929& ,er#any in1933& :ustria& at%ia and ;stonia in 193L& ,reece in 193@& S!ain in the ci%il war o' 193@439& and Bo#ania in 1938/ ,er#an #ilitary o!erations in 19394L0& cou!led with localca!italist de'eatis#& accounted 'or +echoslo%akia& rance& $el"iu#& the Aetherlands&?en#ark and Aorway& lea%in" Sweden& inland and Switerland as the only countries in

continental ;uro!e with constitutional re"i#es which sur%i%ed the !eriod/

With this back"round& riestland-s ar"u#ents #ake the $olshe%iks- 4 and e%en theStalinists- 4 ideas look #uch #ore cray than they actually were/ They #ake liberalis#- 4ie& western ca!italis# 4 look #uch #ore attracti%e than it actually was be'ore World War 66set 'ree the conditions 'or renewed ca!italist de%elo!#ent in the 19I0s/

+o#rade +lark Eune 19 says that “Mike 'or"ets that #ost o' the austerity i#!osed on theSo%iet 5nion was by i#!erialis#/) 6 do not 'or"et it in the least/ 6 ar"ue !recisely that anynational re%olution will i##ediately be 'aced with war 'ro# the i#!erialist centres 4whether this war takes the 'or# o' acti%e hostilities& as in 1918421 and 19L14LI& or o'continuous war threats cou!led with 'inancial sanctions& blockade and e''orts atsub%ersion& as in 1921439 and 19L7491/ The 5SSB was in an unusually strong !osition toresist these o!erations& co#!ared to #ost countries/ Aonetheless& it was not able tode'eat the 5S:& but 'ell/ My ar"u#ent is there'ore !recisely that 4 as Da"arlitsky ar"ues 4



ca!italis# is a world syste# which can only be o%erthrown at the "lobal le%el& not byatte#!tin" to secede 'ro# it/

INTELLETUAL *RO*ERT" :s 6 said earlier& the core o' riestland-s ar"u#ent that Maris# is a uto!ian ideolo"y isthis< “How could a #odern industrial syste#& based on a syste# o' wa"e incenti%es and

coordination by a technocratic elite& be reconciled with the desire to trans'or# work intocreati%e sel'4e!ression and to 'ree workers 'ro# all subordination()

Aow this .uestion is at one le%el ob%iously ideolo"ical4a!olo"etic/ 6t i#!licitly characterisesthe +ity and Wall Street wide4boys who ha%e "i%en us the credit crunch-& and 4 "od hel!usQ 4 $ritish or 5S industrial #ana"e#ent as a technocratic elite-/ The characterisation o'the ca!italist #arket order as a “syste# o' wa"e incenti%es) is si#ilarly ideolo"ical4a!olo"etic/ 6t is true that the ca!italist order as a whole is a syste# o' ca!italistincenti%es& which includes “wa"e incenti%es)& both in the sense o' the stick o' 'ear o'une#!loy#ent as #oti%atin" !er'or#ance at work and the carrot o' i#!ro%ed access toconsu#er "oods i' wa"es can be increased/ $ut to 'ocus in on wa"e incenti%es alone is toi#!ly that the only thin" that can "o wron" with an econo#y is the loss o' labourdisci!line-/

$ehind this ideolo"ical sche#e& howe%er& is a real !roble#/ 6t is undoubtedly true thatMar ar"ued and Marists ar"ue that workers can take o%er runnin" the society& and thatthe e%entual socialis# or co##unis# will be a society without the di%ision o' labour- in thesense o' li'e4lon" s!ecialisation on !articular =obs 4 and in !articular the di%ision between#ental and #anual labour-< ie& the role o' #ana"ers and technocrats-/ 6t should be saidthat riestland-s “'ree the workers 'ro# all subordination) e#!hasis added was certainlynot Mar-s !osition/ This can be seen 'ro# 4 'or ea#!le 4 Mar-s #ar"inal notes on$akunin-s (tatism and anarchy 187L/ What was in .uestion was& rather& to 'ree theworkers 'ro# permanent subordination< ie& that nobody should be !er#anently

#ana"ercoordinatorbureaucrat in char"e o' other !eo!le/ 6#!licit in riestland-s .uestionis the clai# that this is i#!ossible/

:ctually& lookin" at any o' the ad%anced ca!italist countries- aka the i#!erialist centres&riestland-s i#!licit ar"u#ent is a lot less !lausible/ ookin" at these countries& we seehi"h le%els o' "eneral education& and a "reat deal o' technical in'or#ation o' one sort oranother codi'ied in books& a%ailable on the web and so on> and .uite a lot o' skilled tasksdeskilled or !artially deskilled by bein" incor!orated in #achines/ 5nder these conditionsthe de#ands o' general education increase& and the de#ands o' specific skills trainin"decrease/ 6' !eo!le do not “hunt in the #ornin"& 'ish in the a'ternoon& rear cattle in thee%enin"& criticise a'ter dinner)& it is certainly true that #any chan"e =obs radically a'ter a

'ew years& retrain& take adult education& etc/ :ndy Warhol-s “in the 'uture& e%erybody will be'a#ous 'or 1I #inutes) is i#a"inable& i' not yet an i##ediate !ros!ect/

This is where we are "oin"/ 6t is not& howe%er& where we are co#in" 'ro#> and it iscertainly not where Bussia was at the date o' the re%olution/ Eust 'or ea#!le& the urban

literacy rate in Bussia in 191L has been esti#ated at around LI/3

Mar-s idea is that co##unis# beco#es !ossible because ca!italis# tends to socialisethe #eans o' !roduction a central !oint o' the 'irst article in this series/

6n'or#ation and skills are !art o' the #eans o' !roduction/ ,oin" back to the stone a"e&knowin" how to kna! 'lint "i%es you %ariety o' tools once you can 'ind a 'lint/ +on%ersely& i'

so#eone "a%e #e a ca!stan lathe& it would be 4 to #e 4 a hea! o' =unk& not a #eans o'!roduction& until 6 learned how to work it/ +a!italis# tends to socialise in'or#ation andskills 4 throu"h "eneral education& throu"h !ublishin"& throu"h re!lace#ent o' skills by#achines and so on/ $ut to the etent that in'or#ation and skills are not socialised they



are !ri%ate !ro!erty/

ar"e !ro!erty in in'or#ation takes the 'or# o' technical #ono!olies which recei%etechnical rents usually !atents and other intellectual !ro!erty ri"hts> but there are alsoun!atented trade secrets- in #any #achines& which re.uire re%erse en"ineerin"- byskilled en"ineers to allow du!lication o' the #achine/ The tsarist e#!ire s!ecialised ine!ortin" raw #aterials& #ainly "rain& in the ho!e o' "ainin" access to ?utch and $ritish&

and later rench& intellectual !ro!erty in %arious 'or#s Da"arlitsky/ The 5SSB had tobreak its back e!ortin" in 1928431 in order to "ain access to 5S intellectual !ro!erty inthe 'or# o' #achines/

5nder ca!italis#& s#all !ri%ate !ro!erty in skills or in'or#ation can in so#e cases be usedto run a s#all business like !lu#bers& dentists or !ractisin" lawyers/ Si#ilarly& a 'a#ily'ar# or !easant holdin" does not =ust consist o' land/ 6t also in%ol%es #o%able ca!italani#als& etc and a %ery wide ran"e o' skills/ :da# S#ith #ade the !oint that the 'ar#er

or 'ar#worker needs more skills than the urban s!ecialist artisan/L

6n other cases& the collecti%e #ono!oly o' the skill held by a "rou! o' !eo!le allows the# in

wa"e bar"ainin" to insist on so#e sort o' !re#iu# o%er the wa"e/ This !re#iu# can be in#oney> or it can be in better workin" conditions white4collar workers& in !artial 'reedo#'ro# #ana"erial control or in #ana"erial control o%er others/

6' we take away the ca!italist #arket when there has not already been etensi%e ca!italistsocialisation o' intellectual !ro!erty and other s#all !roduction& we take away with it thedyna#ic which tends to socialise intellectual !ro!erty ri"hts& etc/ The !ossessors o' s#all!ro!erty then con'ront the rest o' the society as #ono!olists/ 5nless they are coerced&they will re'use to work until they "et what they want& whether it is #oney& workin"conditions or bein" in char"e/

RUSSIAN IDEOLO$IES

This is !art o' what ha!!ened to the Bussian Be%olution/ The Bussian re%olutionariesthou"ht in *ctober 1917 that they were startin" the ;uro!ean re%olution/ When the,er#an workers had not co#e to their aid by ebruary4March 1918& they were in asituation like cartoon characters who ha%e walked o'' a cli'' and suddenly notice thatnothin" is holdin" the# u!< the econo#y was colla!sin" because the !ossessors o's!ecialist in'or#ation 4 whether they were ci%il ser%ants and ar#y o''icers& technicians&#ana"ers or !easant 'ar#ers 4 were withholdin" their ser%ices 'ro# the "eneral econo#y/To #eet this !roble# the $olshe%iks used coercion +heka& hosta"e4takin" and so on/$ut they also had to !ro%ide a carrot< and this carrot was concessions to the spetsy & which#eant the end o' workers- control and a return to the subordination o' the workin" class tothe #ana"ers/

They had also sucked #ost o' the #e#bers o' the $olshe%ik arty into the new statea!!aratus/ Babinowitch-s The 4olshe$iks in power 2007 !ro%ides the #ost detaileddiscussion o' the conse.uences in their etro"rad stron"hold/ More "enerally& as o'*ctober 1917 the $olshe%ik !arty had around 2I0&000 #e#bers& #ostly workers/ :s o'1921 it had a sli"htly lar"er #e#bershi!& but now two4thirds co#!osed o' state

o''icials/I The cadres- had beco#e a new section o' the intelli"entsia& !etty !ri%ate!ro!rietors o' in'or#ation and skills/

6' the re%olutionary #o%e#ents elsewhere in ;uro!e had succeeded in 1918421& all o' thiswould ha%e a#ounted to no #ore than short4ter# e#er"ency #easures& which is certainly

how the $olshe%ik leaders thou"ht o' it at the ti#e/ @ $ut what actually ha!!ened was$olshe%ik %ictory in the ci%il war& and de'eat o' re%olutionary #o%e#ents in the west/ 5nderthese conditions the $olshe%iks "radually slid 'ro# seein" what they were doin" as



e#er"ency #easures to seein" it as socialist construction within the li#its o' the workers-state 4 and then to the idea o' socialist construction in a se!arate country/

:round the ti#e that the Stalinist core abandoned the Marist- lan"ua"e o' class stru""lein 193143I& socialist construction in a se!arate country #utated into socialism in onecountry and with it the clai# that the state would sur%i%e in socialis#& the denial o' theeistence o' classes and class con'lict in the 5SSB and so on/

6n a se!arate country and es!ecially a backward or !eri!heral- one& riestland-s ob=ectionto Maris# is true< without the !rior socialisation o' !etty !ro!erty by ca!ital& the !ro=ect o'co##unis# is uto!ian as& in 'act& Mar said //// The result is inherent and irresol%ablecontradictions between the industrial workers& the intelli"entsia in the two 'or#s o' the#ana"ers and techs on the one side and the cadres- on the other and the !easants/5nder such conditions Marist- !olitics is dri%en to take the uto!ian 'or#s riestlanddescribes 4 elitist4re%i%alist& technicist& !o!ulist4re%i%alist/ What beca#e Stalinis# in thebroad sense o' o''icial So%iet and later Maoist& etc ideolo"y& is dri%en by this lo"ic/ ;actly

the sa#e thin" ha!!ened& albeit in less etre#e 'or#s& in +uba/7

$ut then 4 as 6 said at the outset 4 co#rade +lark ado!ts only one side o' Stalinis#& the!olitics o' 1928431& o' the terror and o' the +hinese ,reat ea! orward and +ulturalBe%olution/ He re=ects the other side 4 the technicist- ar# o' the i"4a"s as bein"re%isionis#-/ riestland-s book shows clearly that this side was already !resent underStalin and that Stalin contributed to it> as well as the 'act that each o' these e''orts failed /

Aotes1/ eekly orker Eune 19/2/ The 5ighteenth 4rumaire of ouis 4onaparte<www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks18I218th4bru#airech01/ht#3/ B Wort#an (cenarios of power rinceton 199I& !1L/L/ : S#ith ealth of nations 177@ book 6& cha!ter 10& !art 2<www/ada#s#ith/or"s#ithwon4b14c104!t4

2/ht#I/ ; :cton 6ethinking the 6ussian re$olution Aew Nork 1990& !!19349L& 207/@/ T ih& The #ystery o' the :$+- (la$ic 6e$iew s!rin" 1997/7/ WM eo"rande and EM Tho#as& +uba-s .uest 'or econo#ic inde!endence- ournal of atin Cmerican(tudies May 2002& !!32I43@3 !ro%ides a con%enient narrati%e/



Thursday Se!te#ber 18 2008

Weekly Worker 737

Sta(inist i((usi&ns 'x0&s'.

Mike Macnair eplodes the myths about the 'gains' of the .((6

This is the third !art o' #y re!ly to co#rade Tony +lark-s article o' Eune 19& which

de'ended his Stalinist !olitical line/1

6n the 'irst article2 6 ar"ued that co#rade +lark-s idea o' socialis#-& like o''icial co##unist-ideas in "eneral& in%ol%e a break with the #ost 'unda#ental !olitical ideas o' Mar and;n"els/ These are& 'irst& that it is ca!italis# that #akes co##unis# socialis#- !ossible/Second is the idea that co##unis# socialis#- can only co#e about throu"h the %ictoryo' the !roletariat& the wa"e4worker class& o%er ca!italist rule& and the class rule o' the

!roletariat 4 as the #a=ority o' society 4 throu"h etre#e de#ocracy& o%er the otherclasses/ The other classes- here #eans& #ainly& the !etty !ro!rietor class& includin" thetechnical and #ana"erial intelli"entsia/ State and !artyunion bureaucrats are #erely !artso' the technical and #ana"erial intelli"entsia/

6n the second article&3 by re%iewin" ?a%id riestland-s (talinism and the politics ofmobilisation& 6 addressed the .uestion o' how this break 'ro# the 'unda#entals o' Maris#ca#e about/ 6 ar"ued that the #aterial conditions 'or the dictatorshi! o' the !roletariat o%erthe other classes did not eist in the 'or#er tsarist e#!ire& in isolation& in 1918/ :s a result&the $olshe%iks were dri%en to concessions& es!ecially to the !easants and the technicaland #ana"erial intelli"entsia spetsy / These concessions in%ol%ed the subordination o'

the !roletariat& both to the #ana"erial spetsy and to a new se"#ent o' this class& the !artycadres-/ The !ro=ect o' socialist construction in Bussia in isolation was uto!ian& and the#ore the $olshe%iksBussian + clun" to this !ro=ect& the #ore $olshe%ik ideolo"y"radually #utated into uto!ian 'or#s described by riestland 'ro# an anti4Mariststand!oint/ $y the 1930s& clin"in" to socialis# in a sin"le country- had led to theabandon#ent o' Mar-s class4!olitical !ers!ecti%e/

The uto!ian ideolo"ies had both ri"htist technicist re%isionist- and ultra4le't %oluntaristStalinist4!ro!er sides/ These were re!eated in the history o' both +hina and #ore#ildly +uba/ 6n each case& the ultra4le't %oluntarist side was disastrous 'or the country& 'orthe workers and !easants& and e%en 'or the state a!!aratus> it was 'or this reason that in

each case it was abandoned& leadin" to an underlyin" tendency 'or the ri"htist side to bestren"thened and the %ictory o' re%isionis#-/ +o#rade +lark adheres to the ultra4le't&%oluntarist side o' Stalinis# a"ainst the ri"htist- side o' this sa#e tendency/ $ut& since thisis uto!ian and can lead only to disasters& this adherence will ine%itably lead only to new%ictories 'or the ri"htist side& re%isionis#-/

This third article concludes the ar"u#ent by tacklin" three other as!ects o' co#rade+lark-s ar"u#ents/ The 'irst and brie'est is the .uestion o' bureaucracy-/ The second isthe role o' the 5SSB in the international class stru""le 4 and& with it& So%iet econo#icde%elo!#ent/ The third is the .uestion o' Trotskyis#- 4 and with it& the dyna#ics o' "lobalca!italis# and the "lobal class stru""le/

BUREAURA"6n #y May 29 article& to which co#rade +lark-s Eune 19 article was a re!ly& 6 said thatbureaucracy- could #ean either “rule o%er society by state o''icials 'or their own bene'it)&



or “the state o''icials as a "rou! usually with a dero"atory sense that they are !arasites onsociety)/ 6 said that in the second sense o' bureaucracy-& the need to e#!loy s!ecialisto''icials& co#rade +lark was correct to say that the bureaucracy could not be o%erthrownbut only #ade to wither away> but that in the 'irst sense& the political rule o' the

bureaucracy& this !olitical rule could be o%erthrown/L

+o#rade +lark re!lies si#!ly< “This distinction between the two ty!es o' bureaucracysee#s to #e to be co#!letely arbitrary/) This is #erely a bald state#ent without anysu!!ortin" ar"u#ent/

There is& howe%er& an additional and i#!ortant !oint to be #ade/ 6n #akin" the distinctionbetween bureaucracy sense 2-& #eanin" the need to use s!ecialist o''icials& andbureaucracy sense 1-& the !olitical rule o' bureaucrats& 6 a# i#!licitly ar"uin" that politicalinstitutions matter / The deter#ination o' !olitics by econo#ics in the last instance- doesnot i#!ly that !olitics disa!!ears and only econo#ic choices ha%e any si"ni'icance/ The!roletariat has a class interest in !olitical de#ocracy/

6n sayin" this& 6 a# sayin" so#ethin" which is a co##on +,$ !osition& which +,$

co#rades kee! "oin" on- about& a"ainst the do#inant econo#is# o' the $ritish 'ar le't/ 6a# also 'ollowin" the substanti%e line o' Mar and ;n"els a"ainst the roudhonists and

later the assalleans& state socialists& etc/I

6t is ironical that in re!lyin" to +lark-s Eune 29 article& which is #ostly about de'endin"Maris#4eninis#- a"ainst Trotskyis#-& 6 a# also here 'ollowin" enin in !ole#icaldisa"ree#ents& be'ore 1917& withTrotsky & and with other le'tists who had co##on!ositions with Trotsky/ enin-s case 'or the de#ocratic dictatorshi! o' the !roletariat and!easantry- was in !art that& e%en thou"h he thou"ht the #ost that could be achie%ed by theBussian Be%olution was ca!italis#& there was a choice a%ailable between a #orede#ocratic and a less de#ocratic ca!italis#& and the !roletariat should choose a strate"y

which would lead to a #ore de#ocratic ca!italis#/

@

The sa#e issue arose in enin-s !ole#ics in 191@ o%er national sel'4deter#ination& withthe olish le't around Badek& with Trotsky and with the so4called i#!erialist4econo#ist-

tendency in the $olshe%iks $ukharin& yatako% and others/7 Aational sel'4deter#ination&says enin& is a political & democratic de#and> and the 'act that economic sel'4deter#inationis i#!ossible in the e!och o' i#!erialis# does not alter the 'act that political sel'4deter#ination is !re'erable to re"i#es o' political o!!ression o' one nation by another/Whate%er one #ay think o' the #erits o' enin-s indi%idual ar"u#ents in these debates& theidea that takin" !olitical institutions seriously is Trotskyis#- as o!!osed to eninis#- is'oolish/

The #aterial base 4 the econo#y 4 in the last instance li#its what is !olitically !ossible/The co#!lete abolition o' bureaucrats 4 s!ecialist o''icials 4 is 'or this reason not !ossibleanywhere in the world today/ $ut it does not 'ollow 'ro# this that the political dictatorship ofthe officials o$er the proletariat 4 e!ressed in the 'or# o' bannin" or control by o''icials o'!arties and 'actions& state or union or !arty censorshi! o' what can be said& the ri"ht- o'o''icials to control what in'or#ation is "i%en out to the ranks& the to!4down a!!oint#ent o'local and sectoral o''icials& and so on 4 cannot be o%erthrown/

Moreo%er& since o''icials and cadres- are the#sel%es a se"#ent o' the intelli"entsia& whichis a se"#ent o' the class o' !etty !ro!rietors& to the etent that there is a !oliticaldictatorshi! o' the o''icials o%er the workin" class& the dominant tendency will be towardsacco##odation with the ca!italist class/ 5to!ian le'tist anti4bureaucratis#- which does nottackle the institutional !olitical 'or#s o' the dictatorshi! o' the o''icials& like Stalin-s andStalinists-& ser%es only as a #inor4key te#!orary interru!tion to this tendency& and onewhich is doo#ed to de'eat/



Fino%ie% were still #e#bers o' the !olitburo and the international trade union work was ledby To#sky& who was 'actionally ali"ned with $ukharin in the ri"ht-& not directly with theStalin "rou!/

So%iet #aterial aid to the S!anish re!ublic is hi"hly a#bi"uous& as it was acco#!anied bythe !ro#otion o' the !eo!le-s 'ront !olicy& which Trotskyists ar"ue hel!ed in the de'eat o'the re!ublic& and with ADC? assassination o!erations a"ainst the S!anish le't/

So%iet 'inancial aid to 'orei"n co##unist !arties is e.ually a#bi"uous/ ;%en i' it is#oti%ated by the desire to s!read re%olutionary ideas& such aid creates a relation o'de!endence o' the recei%in" !arty on the source o' 'unds/ This is inconsistent with the aid4recei%in" !arty bein" de!endent on the local workin" class it is su!!osedly tryin" toor"anise/ 6t is thus inconsistent 'or co#rade +lark to si#ultaneously laud So%iet aid to'orei"n +s and da#n “tryin" to direct world re%olution 'ro# an international centre)< theaid ine%itably reduces the !olitical autono#y o' the national +s/

To #ake this !oint is& o' course& to lea%e aside the .uestion o' whether the ideas the+S5 !ro#oted in and throu"h the 'orei"n co##unist !arties were re%olutionary ideas& orones which tended to !ro#ote class4collaborationis#/

So%iet su!!ort 'or “anti4i#!erialist #o%e#ents around the world) 4 ie& le't nationalists 4 canonly be seen as a "ain 'or the world re%olution i' one o' two clai#s is true/ The 'irst!ossibility is that the result o' the creation o' re!licas o' the 5SSB in so#e countries& andle't4nationalist one4!arty re"i#es in others& created a socialist ca#!- which could stand u!to the ine%itable i#!erialist res!onse/ $ut this is !recisely what is dis!ro%ed by the 'all o'the 5SSB and the !ro4#arket turn in +hina& etc/

The second !ossibility is that but 'or this su!!ort& the classical colonial e#!ires wouldha%e continued to eist/ Howe%er& this clai# is i#!lausible/ The neo4colonialis#- o' the!ost4World War 66 third world- #erely re!licates the relations between $ritain and atin :#erica in the 19th century with a new world he"e#on/ The o%erthrow o' the classicalcolonial e#!ires was an interest o' the 5S in etendin" its he"e#ony $is%E%$is $ritain andrance& and this interest was re'lected in 5S di!lo#acy in the !eriod o' decolonisation/

The contribution o' So%iet su!!ort was thus not #ainly to assist in the o%erthrow o' 'or#alcolonialis#& but to !ro#ote socialis# in one country- as an alternati%e road tode%elo!#ent-/ 6n so#e cases this led to So%iet4style re"i#es abo%e/ 6n others& the!eo!le-s 'ront !olicy !ro#oted by the 5SSB led to utter disaster 'or the local workers-#o%e#ent& as in 6ndonesia& 6ra. and 6ran/

Moreo%er& the possibility o' the so4called socialist ca#!- was& in reality& created by theresults o' World War 66/ The only real ar"u#ent that “buildin" socialis# in one country

ser%ed the interest o' the world re%olution) is thus the clai# that the Stalin !eriod- “turnedthe So%iet 5nion into an industrial !ower stron" enou"h to !lay the leadin"& or at leastdecisi%e& role in the de'eat o' 'ascis#)/

This is also& in 'act& the #ain ar"u#ent co##only used by Trotskyist co#rades to de'endtheir belie' that the 5SSB was a de"enerated workers- state-/ They ar"ue that the 5SSBwas able to de'eat the ,er#an Aai re"i#e because o' the nationalisations and the !lan/

$ut how 'ar is the ar"u#ent true(

STALINISM1 T+E NA2I RE$IME AND T+E WARThe 'irst !oint to be #ade is about co#rade +lark-s characterisation o' the Aai %ictory in

1933& that “co##unist sectarianis# #ade it easier 'or social de#ocracy to betray theworkin" class in ,er#any)/ This is a whitewash/ The D? was not weak enou"h 'or the1933 de'eat to be the sole or !redo#inant res!onsibility o' the S?/ 6n the Ao%e#ber



1932 election the S? obtained 20/L o' the %otes and 121 de!uties> the D? 1@/9 and100 de!uties/ The D? was a !arty with #ass su!!ort& not a #ar"inal han"er4on o' anS? #ass leadershi!/ Moreo%er& the :ustrian Social ?e#ocrats 'ou"ht back a"ainst the193L 'ascist cou!& thou"h they were de'eated/ The D? in 1933 #ade no atte#!t toor"anise resistance/

: D? united4'ront !olicy in 1928433 and resistance to the rise o' the Aais might ha%e

ended in de'eat/ $ut it #i"ht also ha%e succeeded/ 6t is clear that the third !eriod- !olicy#ade this i#!ossible/ The !olicy was #ade in Moscow and subordinated the 'ate o' the,er#an workin" class to the percei$ed state4di!lo#atic interests o' the 5SSB in its#ilitary collaboration with the ,er#an #ilitary ri"ht which the S? attacked& leadin" toMoscow-s third !eriod- turn/ 6' the 1933 cou! had been de'eated& the .uestion o' the19394LI war would not ha%e arisen/

Secondly& the !ur"e o' the o''icers in 1937438 undoubtedly weakened the de'ence o' the5SSB/ The !ur"e was a !roduct o' the terror discussed in the second article in thisseries& and this was the !roduct o' the le'tist- %ariety o' Stalinis# co#rade +lark supports/6t was 'ollowed by the 1939 Hitler4Stalin !act< the resultin" So%iet occu!ation o' oland

and the $altics also weakened the So%iet #ilitary de'ence when the Aais did attack in19L1& by drawin" the Bed :r#y 'orward out o' !artially !re!ared de'ences and into hostile&

occu!ied territory and dislocatin" #obilisation !lans/9

The core o' the .uestion& howe%er& is whether the industrialisation o' 1928439 had allowedthe 5SSB to catch u!- and thereby be able to de'eat the Aais/ There are "ood reasons tosu!!ose that it had not/

6t is certainly true that the industrialisation dri%e !re%ented the 5SSB 'ro# falling furtherbehind / $y 1928& the 5SSB had only achie%ed out!ut co#!arable to the tsarist e#!ire in191L> while the ca!italist countries& a'ter a brie' !ost4war crisis& had #o%ed ra!idly 'orwardin the roarin" 20s-/ 6n 1913 the ,? !er head o' the tsarist e#!ire was sli"htly less than

hal' that o' ,er#any& 30 o' the 5D& and 23 o' the 5S/ 6n 19L0 So%iet ,? !er headhad risen by @0/ $ut it was still only LI o' that o' ,er#any& 3@ o' the 5D& and 28 o'

the 5S/10

The bureaucratically !lanned- econo#y characteristically had the e''ect that shock-ca#!ai"ns to raise !roduction in one area reduced !roduction in another& causin"!roduction bottlenecks> while the syste# o' bureaucratic tar"ets led to reduced !uality o'

out!ut& and there was !ersistent under!roduction in collecti%ised- a"riculture/11Had the5SSB been on its own in 'i"htin" the ,er#ans& these !roduction !roble#s #i"ht wellha%e led to de'eat/

$ut the 19L14LI war was 'or the 5SSB a sin"le4'ront war& while ,er#any was 'i"htin" onse%eral 'ronts< holdin" down territory in western ;uro!e> atte#!tin" to cut $ritish su!!lyroutes& the Sue canal in the north :'rican ca#!ai"n and the :tlantic throu"h 54boato!erations> and #aintainin" an increasin"ly di''icult air de'ence a"ainst strate"ic bo#bin"attacks 'ro# the western :llies/

Moreo%er& the de'iciencies o' the !lanned econo#y- were !artly #ade "ood by su!!lies o'#ilitary #aterial& etc 'ro# the :llies/ Thou"h theabsolute numbers were not hi"h!ro!ortional to total So%iet war !roduction& the nu#bers in relation to !articular !roductionbottlenecks were hi"h/ This was both in relation to $ritish tank& aircra't and hi"h4techradar& etc deli%eries in 19L14L2& when So%iet out!ut was disru!ted by the need to re4establish !lants which had been e%acuated 'ro# the western 5SSB as the ,er#ansad%anced& and in relation to 5S deli%eries o' trucks and trans!ort e.ui!#ent& hi"h4"rade

steels and strate"ic #etals& etc& and 'ood/12



;%en so& the 5SSB su''ered enor#ous casualties in the war/ The eact nu#ber isdebated& but is in the re"ion o' 2I #illion in total& !robably includin" 10 #illion #ilitarycasualties& around twice as #any as total eastern 'ront #ilitary casualties on the :is

side/13 The willin"ness o' both re"i#es to take #assi%e casualties #eant that si#!le!o!ulation& and hence #obilisable !o!ulation& was a decisi%e 'actor< ,er#any in 1939 had

a !o!ulation o' 87/1 #illion& the 5SSB 173/1 #illion/ 1L 6n so#e ways& the So%iet role in

World War 66 looks etraordinarily like Da"arlitsky-s descri!tion o' the ;uro!ean #ilitaryrole o' the tsarist e#!ire between eter the ,reat and the +ri#ean war< a su!!lier o'cannon4'odder to ;uro!ean wars in the interests o' the :tlantic !owers& who !aid 'or the

troo!s with #ilitary technolo"y/1I

6n other words& the 5SSB did not win the war because o' econo#ic su!eriority/ 6t won thewar because o' absolute nu#bers& s!ace and cli#ate the sa#e way the Bussiansde'eated Aa!oleon in 1812 and because it was allied to $ritain and the 5S/

This actually e!lains the 'act that the war "a%e a !ower'ul boost to Stalinis# as anideolo"y/ The war was 'ou"ht under the banner o' the !eo!le-s 'ront/ 6n the a'ter#ath o'the war& !eo!le-s 'ront "o%ern#ents were created across ;uro!e/ 6n western ;uro!e&these !ro%ided a way 'or the ca!italists to restabilise their !osition/ $ut in eastern ;uro!e&they rested on So%iet bayonets in Nu"osla%ia and :lbania& on co##unist !artisan 'orces/When the western :llies be"an to try to take back eastern ;uro!e& the Dre#lin res!ondedby so%ietisin"- the re"i#es/

The 5S and $ritain #ainly the 5S had raised u! the #ilitary !ower o' the 5SSB is orderto de'eat the :is !owers/ Meanwhile& the 1930s and the war had !roduced #ass !o!ularhostility to ca!italis#/ The 5S now had to contain co##unis#-/ 6t did so !artly by the coldwar& but !artly by lar"e4scale econo#ic concessions to the subordinate classes& or"anisedthrou"h the re"i#e o' #ana"ed trade under the ,eneral :"ree#ent on Tari''s and Tradeand $retton Woods& throu"h concessions to the trade unions& and throu"h the social

de#ocracy in ;uro!e and nationalist re"i#es elsewhere/

The results looked like enor#ous "ains 'or socialis#- under the banner o' the !eo!le-s'ront/ They ha%e re#ained e%er since the 'unda#ental reason 'or !eo!le to be Stalinists or#ore "enerally o''icial co##unists-/ $ut the So%iet %ictory in 19L14LI was not 4 unlike the$ritish ca!italist state-s %ictories o%er the 'eudal4absolutist re"i#es between 1@89 and177@ 4 a result o' a su!erior econo#ic and social syste# de'eatin" an in'erior one/ The5SSB re#ained econo#ically in'erior to the central i#!erialist countries and continued tobe econo#ically in'erior in s!ite o' its econo#ic "rowth in the 19I0s which slowed to ahalt in $rehne%-s !eriod o' sta"nation-/ 6n the end& the 'act that it was not a su!eriorecono#ic or social syste# led to its de#ise/

With the de#ise& one o' the !ri#ary reasons 'or the econo#ic concessions to thesubordinate classes o' the cold war !eriod has "one/ The ability o' ca!ital to take theconcessions back bit by bit has re%ealed the political weakness o' the workin" class/Stalinis# contributes to that !olitical weakness/

,TROTSK"ISM’1 $LOBAL D"NAMIS AND STRATE$"The So%iet 5nion and its satellites and i#itators did not construct socialis# in a sin"lecountry& did not catch u! with the i#!erialist west and did not ser%e as a bastion o' theinternational workin" class #o%e#ent/ The strate"y o' buildin" socialis# in a sin"lecountry- was 'alse& and so was the deri%ati%e strate"y o' Maois# o' surroundin" the "lobalcities-/

+o#rade +lark res!onds& in the 'irst hal' o' his ar"u#ents& by re4runnin" the Stalinistar"u#ent de%elo!ed in the 1920s in 'act by $ukharin and his co4thinkers that buildin"



socialis# in a sin"le country- 'ollowed 'ro# eninis# and o!!osition to it a#ounted toTrotskyis#-& #eanin" a re%i%al o' Trotsky-s !re41917 di''erences with enin/

:s usual with Stalinist history& this ar"u#ent is a !ack o' lies/ +o#rade +lark is !ut 'orwardby the +o##unist arty :lliance website as an e!ert on Trotskyis#-/ $ut he has eithernot read Trotsky-s central works on the dis!ute 6esults and prospects and1*09 or is lyin"about their content/ His account o' the dis!utes o' the 1920s is not one any serious

historian& e%en one se%erely hostile to Trotsky& would now de'end< the ri"ht- o' $ukharin&Byko% and To#sky& and the enin"rad o!!osition- o' Fino%ie% and Da#ene%& and a wholehost o' lesser 'i"ures& are airbrushed out o' the !icture/

6n one o' his !ieces on the +o##unist arty :lliance website& co#rade +lark cites anacade#ic article which su""ests that Trotsky-s o%ert su!!ort in 192342L in Moscow was#ainly 'ro# the a!!aratus and the intelli"entsia& but o#its one o' the #ain conclusions'ro# that article< na#ely& that the internal discussion was ri""ed by bureaucratic #eans/The result is that we ha%e no knowled"e o' whether there was or was not as +lark clai#s

an actual #a=ority in the !arty a"ainst Trotskyis#-/1@

This is all the #ore true o' the 1927 con"ress& at which Trotsky and the other leaders o'the 5nited *!!osition were e!elled 'ro# the !arty/ Within #onths& the Stalin "rou! was toturn on its $ukharinite coalition !artners at this con"ress and ado!t an ea""erated& ultra4le't %ersion o' the !olicies o' the 5nited *!!osition discussed in the second article in thisseries/ 6' this i#!endin" turn had been disclosed e%en to the hand4!icked dele"ates&would there ha%e been a #a=ority 'or the e!ulsions(

Aonetheless& behind the screen o' lies there is a heart and centre o' the !olitical !roble#and it is one still rele%ant today a'ter the 'all o' the 5SSB& etc/ This is the so4called law o'

une%en de%elo!#ent-/17Trotsky& in 'act& accepted this law- when it was thrown at hi# inthe 1920s& and in The permanent re$olution 1931 ada!ted it into the law o' une%en andco#bined de%elo!#ent-/

The blunt 'act is< e%en i' it was enin& rather than his successors& who de%elo!ed the ideao' buildin" socialis# in a sin"le country- on the basis o' the law o' une%en de%elo!#ent-&he was wrong < as is shown by the later history o' the 20th century/ :nd Trotsky-sada!tation o' it was also wron"/

The law o' une%en de%elo!#ent- is& in 'act& not a theoretical law at all/ 6t is an abstract4e#!irical "eneralisation& like the bour"eois econo#ists- law o' su!!ly and de#and-/ ikethe law o' su!!ly and de#and-& it does not look below sur'ace a!!earances& and as aresult has only li#ited !redicti%e !ower/

The a!!earance on which the law- is built is the eistence in "lobal ca!italis# o'

ad%anced- and backward- countries and also& thou"h this is considerably less i#!ortant&ad%anced- and backward- re"ions and econo#ic sectors within indi%idual countries/ 6nthis sense it builds on Mar-s co##ent in the !re'ace to the 'irst edition o' %olu#e 6o' "apital that “The country that is #ore de%elo!ed industrially only shows& to the less

de%elo!ed& the i#a"e o' its own 'uture/)18

Howe%er& while this was true o' the relation o' ,er#any to 18@0s ;n"land& ithas not !ro%ed to be true in the sa#e sense o' #any countries outside ;uro!e& or e%en ineastern ;uro!e/ The 5S has& o' course& o%ertaken ;n"land/ $ut atin :#erica re#ainsbackward- 200 years a'ter the o%erthrow o' the colonial re"i#e o' S!anish absolutis# 4and& as we ha%e seen in this and the last article& the 5SSB and now the Bussian

ederation re#ained backward- a'ter the re%olution and socialis# in one country-/+a!italis# does not #erely inherit une%en de%elo!#ent& but also produces it/



6n 'act& there is not #uch reason 'or su!!osin" that ca!italis# inherits une%ende%elo!#ent either/ :nti.ue social orders the ,reek and Hellenist world& ancient Bo#e&!re4re%olutionary +hina draw a shar! line between the ci%ilised- and the outsidebarbarians-& but s!read #ore or less ho#o"enous relations o' !roduction across thedo#ain o' the ci%ilised-/ eudalis# in the !eriod o' its e!ansion in the central #iddle a"escould be !icked u! and ado!ted within a "eneration or a bit #ore by kin"do#s 4 'or

ea#!le& oland or Scotland/19 The new 'eudal re"i#es created by this #eans or bycolonisation were not in a centre4!eri!hery relationshi! o' econo#ic or !oliticalsubordination to the old countries o' the historic 'eudal core-/

5ne%en de%elo!#ent- in ca!italis#& in other words& is not a #ere #atter o' te#!oral!riority in ado!tin" new relations o' !roduction/ 6t is a !heno#enon produced andreproduced by the laws o' #otion o' ca!ital/

6' une%en de%elo!#ent between countries is to be seen as a !roduct o' the laws o' #otiono' ca!ital& not #erely o' te#!oral !riority& the .uestion !osed is how the laws o' #otion o'ca!ital i#!ose the#sel%es on whole countries/ The answer is not hard to 'ind/ +a!italis#de%elo!s 4 ra!idly 4 international 'inancial #arkets& an international di%ision o' labour and

international4le%el o!eration o' the leadin" ca!italist states< a dee!enin" world #arket-/The 17th century second ser'do#- in eastern ;uro!e and Bussia was not a si#!leinheritance 'ro# 'eudalis#& but a !roduct o' the de#ands o' the ?utch and $ritish #arkets'or 'ood and raw #aterials& =ust as colonial !lantation sla%ery and the latifundistas o' 19th

and 20th century atin :#erica ser%ed $ritish and& later& 5S #arkets/20

$ut the world #arket has e''ects other than the !roduction o' une%en de%elo!#ent/ 6tdri%es labour #i"ration& leadin" to the 'or#ation o' an internationally #ied and linkedworkin" class in 'act& the #ain route by which Marist ideas entered the 5S and by whichMaoist ideas entered $ritain/ 6t 'acilitates the di''usion o' cultural !roducts and !oliticalideas/ :nd it !roduces boo#4bust cycles which are 4 increasin"ly 4 "lobal/

This has a result in turn/ The o''ensi%e #o%e#ents o' the workin" class& and the acute!olitical crises o' ca!ital& do not #ature in their own ti#e- in each indi%idual country/ Theyare internationally coordinated < 18L8> the early 20th century workin" class o''ensi%e> thecrisis and re%olutionary o''ensi%e at the end o' World War 6> a si#ilar crisis and o''ensi%e atthe end o' World War 66> the late 19@0s and early 1970s/

5ne%en de%elo!#ent is a real sur'ace !heno#enon& =ust as the law o' su!!ly andde#and- describes a real sur'ace e''ect/ $ut i' we look below the sur'ace to the underlyin"dyna#ics& we can see why the idea o' buildin" socialis# in a sin"le country is illusory/Bussia was all alon"& and re#ained throu"hout the So%iet !eriod& tra!!ed by une%ende%elo!#ent i#!osed by the global capitalist order / That order can only be o%erthrown by

the co#bined e''orts o' the workers in the i#!erialist and colonial countries& not country bycountry/

Aotes1/ 6n de'ence o' Stalin-& Eune 19/2/ Takin" Stalinis# seriously-& Se!te#ber L/3/ $ureaucracy and terror-& Se!te#ber 11/L/ Tryin" Stalinis# a"ain(-& eekly orker May 29/I/ H ?ra!er Farl Mar&s theory of re$olution !art L< "riti!ue of other socialisms Aew Nork 1990 has thedetails/@/ Two tactics<www/#arists/or"archi%eleninworks190Itacticsinde/ht#& es!ecially cha!ters 2& @/7/ ;/"/ C6 enin& The discussion on sel'4deter#ination su##ed u!-

191@< www/#arists/or"archi%eleninworks191@=ul01/ht#> Be!ly to Die%sky-191@<www/#arists/or"archi%eleninworks191@se!00b/ht#> and other tets/8/ , Howell& The Euche idea in the li"ht o' Maris#4eninis#-<www/one!arty/co/ukinde/ht#l(htt!3:www/one!arty/co/ukht#ltctalk02/ht#l



9/ ? ,lant (tumbling colossus Dansas 1998 is a recent detailed treat#ent o' the state o' the Bed :r#y atthe be"innin" o' the war/10/ BW ?a%ies& M Harrison& S, Wheatcro't eds The economic transformation of the (o$iet .nion 1*1G%1*:9 +a#brid"e 199L& !270/11/ See 'i"ures in BW ?a%ies et al & op cit > H Ticktin The origins of the crisis in the .((6 Aew Nork 1992 isthe clearest e!lanation o' why the dyna#ics o' bureaucratic !lannin"- should !roduce these results/12/ : Hill& $ritish lend4lease aid and the So%iet war e''ort& Eune 19L14Eune 19L2- ournal of Military

3istory Euly 2007& !!7734808> B Muntin"& end4lease and the So%iet war e''ort- ournal of "ontemporary3istory Euly 198L& !!L9I4I10/13/ BW ?a%ies et al & op cit !!78479/1L/ ,er#an !o!ulation< www/tacitus/nuhistorical4atlas!o!ulation"er#any/ht#> So%iet !o!ulation< BW?a%ies et al & op cit !2@9/1I/ $ Da"arlitsky 5mpire of the periphery ondon 2008& !!1LI4L8& 173/1@/ ? Hincks& Su!!ort 'or the o!!osition in Moscow in the !arty discussion o' 192342L- (o$iet (tudies 1992&!!13741I1/17/ +ited by co#rade +lark 'ro# C6 enin " Col 21& !3L2/18/ www/#arists/or"archi%e#arworks18@74c1!1/ht#19/ B $artlett The making of 5urope rinceton 1993/20/ or #ore de!th on the case o' Bussia& see $ Da"arlitsky op cit /

Mike Macnair on Stalinism

Documents

Transcript of Mike Macnair on Stalinism