{"id":1111,"date":"2019-03-11T23:10:47","date_gmt":"2019-03-11T23:10:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wsm.prolerat.org\/?p=1111"},"modified":"2019-11-25T22:30:56","modified_gmt":"2019-11-25T22:30:56","slug":"russia-was-never-socialist-and-why-what-we-said-over-the-years","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/russia-was-never-socialist-and-why-what-we-said-over-the-years\/","title":{"rendered":"Russia was never socialist – and why: what we said over the years"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
October 1996, U.K.<\/pre>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
So often Russia is described at having tried ‘socialism.’ Russia under Lenin, Stalin\nand the rest is usually described as socialist or communist by the media. Yet, as these\nextracts from our British-based journal, The Socialist Standard<\/em>, argue, Russia was\nnever socialist…………….. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1920<\/strong>
\nWhen we are told that Socialism has been obtained in Russia without the long, hard and\ntedious work of educating the mass of workers in Socialism we not only deny it but refer\nour critics to Lenin’s own confessions. His statements prove that even though a vigorous\nand small minority may be able to seize power for a time, they can only hold it by\nmodifying their plans to suit the ignorant majority. The minority in power in an\neconomically backward country are forced to adapt their programme to the undeveloped\nconditions and make continual concessions to the capitalist world around them. Offers to\npay war debts to the Allies, to establish a Constituent Assembly, to compensate\ncapitalists for losses, to cease propaganda in other countries, and to grant exploitation\nrights throughout Russia to the Western capitalists all show how far along the capitalist\nroad they have had to travel and how badly they need the economic help of other countries.\nIt shows above all that their loud and defiant challenge to the capitalist world has been\nsilenced by their own internal and external weaknesses as we have so often predicted in\nthese pages. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
( . . .) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have often stated that because of a large anti-Socialist peasantry and vast\nuntrained population, Russia was a long way from Socialism. Lenin has now to admit this by\nsaying: ‘Reality says that State Capitalism would be a step forward for us; if we were\nable to bring about State Capitalism in a short time it would be a victory for us. How\ncould they be so blind as not to see that our enemy is the small capitalist, the small\nowner? How could they see the chief enemy in State Capitalism? In the transition from\nCapitalism to Socialism our chief enemy is the small bourgeoisie, with its economic\ncustoms, habits and positions’ (The Chief Tasks of Our Times<\/em>, p11). <\/p>\n\n\n\n
(. . .) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Here we have plain admissions of the unripeness of the great mass of Russian people for\nSocialism and the small scale of Russian production. If we are to copy Bolshevik policy in\nother countries we should have to demand State Capitalism, which is not a step to\nSocialism in advanced capitalist countries. The fact remains, as Lenin is driven to\nconfess, that we do not have to learn from Russia, but Russia has to learn from lands\nwhere large scale production is dominant. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
(. . .) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
That Socialism can only be reached through State Capitalism is untrue. Socialism\ndepends upon large-scale production, whether organised by Trusts or Governments. State\nCapitalism may be the method used in Russia, but only because the Bolshevik Government\nfind their theories of doing without capitalist development unworkable –hence they are\nforced to retreat along the capitalist road. (A Socialist View of Bolshevist Policy<\/em>,\nSocialist Standard<\/em>, July 1920.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have always contended that the Bolsheviks could only maintain power by resorting to\ncapitalist devices. History has shown us to be correct. The January 1920 Congress of\nExecutive Communists in Russia abolished the power of workers’ control in factories and\ninstalled officials instructed by Moscow and given controlling influence. Their\nresolutions printed in most of the Labour papers and the Manchester Guardian here show how\neconomic backwardness has produced industrial conscription with heavy penalties for\nunpunctuality, etc. The abolition of democracy in the army was decreed long ago, but now\nthat the army is being converted by Trotsky into a labour army it means rule from the top\nwith an iron hand. Russia has agreed to repay foreign property-owners their losses and\nallied Governments their ‘debts’. This means continued exploitation of Russian workers to\npay foreign exploiters. With all the enthusiasm of the Communists they find themselves\nfaced with the actual conditions in Russia and the ignorance of the greater part of its\npopulation. There is no easier road to Socialism than the education of the workers in\nSocialism and their organisation to establish it by democratic methods. Russia has to\nlearn that. (The Super-Opportunists. A Criticism of Bolshevist Policy<\/em>, Socialist\nStandard<\/em>, August 1920.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1924<\/strong>
\nThe Bolsheviks will probably remain in control for the simple reason that there is no one\nin Russia capable of taking their place. It will be a question largely as to whether they\nwill be able to stand the strain, for the task is a heavy one, and they are by no means\novercrowded with capable men. But this control will actually resolve itself into control\nfor, and in the interests of, the Capitalists who are willing to take up the development\nof raw materials and industry in Russia. The New Economic Policy points the way. (The\nPassing of Lenin<\/em>, Socialist Standard<\/em>, March 1924.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1928<\/strong>
\nTrotsky presents a long list of remedies which serve only to confirm what we have always\nsaid as to the necessity for Russia to go through capitalism. Trotsky does not admit this\nin so many words. In fact, he vigorously denounces Stalin’s ‘capitalist tendencies’. But\nwhen we examine his programme we find that it is all based implicitly on the continuance\nof capitalism in Russia until such time as a developed capitalist industry and a Socialist\nrevolution outside Russia make Socialism possible. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Most of his proposals might have been lifted out of the programme of any trade union in\nGermany or England: ‘Equal pay for equal work’, less overtime; more unemployment pay; no\nmore Government faking of labour and industrial statistics; retail prices to be brought\ndown to the world price level; no profiteering by capitalist middlemen; no increase in the\nrents of working class houses; every effort to be made to lower the cost of production in\norder to promote the growth of industry; more taxes on rich peasants; abolition of the\nState sale of Vodka, etc. A long programme of reforms, but no mention of the abolition of\ncapitalist farming, capitalist trading and capitalist investment. Both Trotsky and Stalin\ndraw up their programmes within the framework of state and private capitalism which\nprevails in Russia. (Trotsky States His Case<\/em>, Socialist Standard<\/em>, December\n1928.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1930<\/strong>
\nThe facts given in this Year-Book sufficiently illustrate how illusory the communist\ndreams have been. Like many pious hopes embodied in the official documents and\nconstitutions of the rest of the capitalist world these phrases have no relation whatever\nto the actual facts. Russian capitalism, although administered by the Communist Party,\nreproduces almost down to the last detail the paraphernalia of the capitalist world as we\nknow it here. The lesson of this is the one we have tried to drive home for so many years,\nthat it is not possible for a minority to impose Socialism upon a majority who are hostile\nor indifferent; nor is it possible to remedy backward economic development by means of\nfine-sounding but ineffective decrees, issued by dictators.Russia: Land of High Profits<\/em>\n(review of Soviet Union Year-Book 1930<\/em>), Socialist Standard<\/em>, September 1930.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1934<\/strong>
\nAs Russia has not established Socialism and is not doing so in spite of the repeated\nstatements of Communists, it has to carry on its work and build up its industries on lines\nsimilar to normal capitalist countries; it must therefore enter into normal trade\nrelations with the rest of the world, and it does so. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
(. . .) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
When, in 1924, the Bolsheviks decided to throw overboard the ‘world revolution’ (except\nas a mere phrase to give lip-service to) and to concentrate on building up the internal\nresources of the country on the plea that they were building up Socialism in a single\ncountry (a complete reversal of their former views), the Communists of the world, who take\ntheir policy from Moscow, have simply been used to help on this object. The foreign policy\nof Russia is aimed at living more or less amicably with the rest of the capitalist world,\nand they can only do this because they are building as the capitalists do. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Socialism is a system diametrically opposed to capitalism and impossible in a\npredominantly capitalist world. It is impossible in one country alone, owing to\ninternational economic interdependence. It is international not national. The extravagant\nclaims held out of the success of Socialism in Russia have one by one been proved by time\nto be groundless and Russia is rapidly approaching the stage of taking its place as a\nfirst-class capitalist power. (Changing Russia<\/em>, Socialist Standard<\/em>,\nSeptember 1934.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1937 <\/strong>
\nRussia is not a Socialist country –its low industrial productivity and the non-Socialist\noutlook of the vast majority of its population do not bring such a thing within the realms\nof present possibility. It is based on various forms of State capitalism. Goods are\nproduced, not for use only, but for sale at a profit. Industry is carried on largely on\nlines familiar to us in the Post office and other State-capitalist organisations outside\nRussia. The Russian Government borrows from investors (mostly Russian citizens) hundreds\nof millions of pounds for investment in industry, and pays them a high rate of interest on\ntheir investments; this payment to the investors being the first charge on industry.\nInside the industries there are the same kind of gradations of pay as in capitalist\nindustry generally from the mass of workers on or about the bare subsistence level at the\nbottom up through numerous grades to the very favoured few at the top who can enjoy the\nmost pleasant and interesting work and live on a high standard of comfort and luxury. (The\nNew Russian Constitution<\/em>, Socialist Standard<\/em>, January 1937.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1943<\/strong>
\nCertainly Russia has its privileged section of the population and they will buy (because\nthey can afford to do so) the bulk of the luxury articles which the average worker cannot\nafford. These privileged people are the party officials, technical experts, writers,\ndoctors, lawyers, etc. Some of these people receive incomes a hundred times bigger than\nthat of the average worker. With the legality of inheritance in force, accumulation of\nwealth is today bound to be taking place in Russia among the wealthy. They are the\nexploiters, and the Dean is wrong when he says (p. 282) ‘exploitation of man by man is\nentirely abolished’. They can obtain their big incomes only out of the wealth produced by\nthe workers. (Is Russia Socialist?<\/em> (review of The Socialist Sixth of the World<\/em>\nby Hewlett Johnson, Dean of Canterbury, Socialist Standard<\/em>, July 1943.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1948<\/strong>
\nThe reader of these reprinted articles will have seen that the attitude of the SPGB has\nbeen consistent from the start of the Bolshevik regime. We said then as we say now, that\nit is impossible for Socialism to be imposed from above even if the minority who hold\npower genuinely have that as their object. The articles are important also to help to\ncombat the efforts of various political groups which seek to discredit the Socialist\nmovement by holding up Russia as a proof of the impossibility of abolishing capitalism. It\nis not true that Marxian Socialists at first approved of the Bolshevik dictatorship and\nBolshevik policy and only later discovered that Socialism would not be the outcome. As\nthese articles prove, the SPGB foresaw from the first that the attempt must fail. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nor is it correct that the failure in Russia has been the failure of the men in control\n–though dictatorship inevitably corrupts those who wield it– it has been the failure of\nthe whole mistaken policy of the Bolsheviks. Had Lenin lived or Stalin died the result\nwould not have been appreciably different. (Postscript to Russia Since 1917<\/em>\npamphlet, 1948.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1963<\/strong>
\nThe 1917 Revolution overthrew Tsarist Absolutism and allowed nascent capitalist industry\nto develop more freely and rapidly, but only at the expense of submitting the country to a\nmore barbarous absolutism, the Stalinist regime. Now this absolutism has in its turn\nbecome a fetter on capitalist expansion and is being cast aside. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
(. . .) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Russia now has the productive forces of a developed capitalist country yet still the\npolitical regime of a developing country….. Russia is rapidly approaching the stage of\ntaking its place as a first-class capitalist power. (Changing Russia<\/em> , Socialist\nStandard<\/em>, September 1963.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1963 <\/strong>
\nRussia is not a Socialist country –its low industrial productivity and the non-Socialist\noutlook of the vast majority of its population do not bring such a thing within the realms\nof present possibility. It is based on various forms of State capitalism. Goods are\nproduced, not for use only, but for sang’ circles. History, by destroying the illusion\nthat Russia is Socialist, will once again have done our work for us.(Changing Russia<\/em>,\nSocialist Standard<\/em>, August 1963.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1967<\/strong> The social system in Russia can be described as capitalist since the\nessential features of capitalism predominate: class monopoly of the means of production,\ncommodity production, wage-labour and capital accumulation. (. . .) A class is made up of\npeople who are in the same position with regard to the ownership and use of the means of\nwealth-production and distribution. One class has a monopoly over these means of\nproduction if the rest of society are allowed access to them only on terms imposed by the\ngroup in control. This monopoly does not have to be legally recognised though in fact, as\nin Britain, this is generally so. Here the privileged minority, the capitalist class, have\ntitles backed by law to the wealth they own. In Russia the ownership of the privileged\nminority is generally not given formal legal backing, but, as in Britain, they maintain\ntheir monopoly through control over the machinery of government. They occupy the top posts\nin the party, government, industry and the armed forces. Their ownership of the means of\nproduction is not individual but collective: they own as a class. Historically this is not\na new development as is shown by the position of the Catholic church in feudal times. The\nprivileged class in Russia draw their ‘property income’ in the form of bloated salaries,\nbonuses, large monetary ‘prizes’ awarded by the government, and other perks attaching to\nthe top posts. (from chapter Capitalism in Russia<\/em> in pamphlet Russia 1917-1967<\/em>,\n1967.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1988<\/strong>
\nIf it is implemented –and it remains to be seen whether or not this reform will suffer\nthe fate of previous ones– perestroika will represent a fundamental change in the form of\ncapitalism that has existed in Russia until now. It will represent a transition from\ncentrally planned commodity- production and exchange to a more competitive system in which\nthe competing units would be, as in the West, legally and economically autonomous\nenterprises. The economic laws of capitalism will come to operate in Russia through\ncompetition rather than through the State which (. . .) has proved to be an inadequate\nsubstitute.(Where Is Russia Going<\/em>, Socialist Standard<\/em>, September 1988.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1990<\/strong>
\nIt is the longer-term implications of the decision to abandon the Leninist principle of\none-party dictatorship that could prove to be the most significant though, as this could\nherald a change in the way the means of production are monopolised in Russia with the\nruling class there changing itself from a class of collective owners into a class of\nindividual owners as in the West. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
(. . .) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The transformation of the Russian ruling class from a collectively-owning state\nbureaucracy into a class of private capitalists with private property rights vested in\nthem as individuals certainly won’t take the form of the present members of the\nnomenklatura abdicating and handing over their power and privileges to the small group of\nprivately-owning capitalists who have always led a precarious existence on the margins of\nthe Russian state- capitalist economy. Nor would it need to take the crude form of them\nsimply dividing up the presently state-owned industries amongst themselves. It would be\nmore likely to take the form of the Russian government gradually introducing more and more\nopportunities for private capitalist investment — which only those who have already\naccumulated wealth would be able to take advantage of. Most of these will inevitably be\nindividual members of the nomenklatura as the group which for years has enjoyed bloated\nsalaries, cash prizes and opportunities to speculate on the black market (. . .).\nGorbachev (. . .) realises that it is now no longer possible for the nomenklatura to rule\nin the old way and that some sort of flexibility is called for, if only to be able to push\nthrough perestroika without provoking a workers’ revolt. He probably isn’t consciously\nworking towards ushering in a Russia where the nomenklatura has disappeared as such and\nhas succeeded in converting itself into a class of Western-type privately-owning\ncapitalists, but it is in this direction that his reforms can now be seen to be leading. (Russia\nand Private Property<\/em>, Socialist Standard<\/em>, April 1990.) <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Compiled by: Adam Buick <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
Please email your comments about this article to feedback@worldsocialism.org<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
Back to the History Index<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
Back to the World Socialist Movement home page<\/a> <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
October 1996, U.K. So often Russia is described at having tried ‘socialism.’ Russia under Lenin, Stalin and the rest is usually described as socialist or communist by the media. Yet, as these extracts from our British-based journal, The Socialist Standard, argue, Russia was never socialist…………….. 1920 When we are told that Socialism has been obtained…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1987,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"magazine_newspaper_sidebar_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1111","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorised"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1111"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2842,"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111\/revisions\/2842"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1987"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.worldsocialism.org\/wsm\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}