By Barry Sheppard.
(From Who Militant: )
The question remains! What is the nature of the Se0viet Union if it gannot be correctly defined as capitalist?
All those eduested in the achool of Stalin wntend that a socialist society was established in Russia under his regimo. The Communist Party continues to maintain that socisliem exists there, while the Progressive Labour Party (PL) now says that the USSR has alid peacefully back to cap ltalianm-
In reality, the Soviet Union has. gone beyond capitaliam but ia still far from having reached sooialian- @yen to approach socialian, a socloty would have to possess greater pmduetive power, higher living and oultursl standards, and more freadom then the moat cfivanced capitalist nations. The Soviet Union, despite all itu impreassi:: achievenonts, has net yet come near that point.
Enormous differsnces remain between city and country; there are two major olaseos, the workers and the poaeantry: there la no workers’ domocracy; and tho level of production and available consumer goods romaina below that in the U-5. The existence of a parasitic bursayorasy is both a refutation of the claim that socialisa exists in the Soviet Union and an obstacle on the path to socialise, which will have to be removed befora socialism can be established.
Having gone beyond capitalism but: not heaving reached socisliam, the USSR i4 a transitional social formation called « workers’ state. This stata in between capitaliam and socialian contains highly w ntradictery features.
In the provious articla I discussed why the clinination of private ownership of the means of production coupled with the axistenes of tha nationalised and planned economy and the monopoly of forcign trade, differontiates the Sovict Union from capltaliom and gives it a proloterjan Glass character. While these relations of production are the fundamental determinants of tho class character of Soviet scoicty, wo must also examine the relations of distribution.
Eyen a socialist rovelution in the U.3., tho most advanocd eapitalian in the world, could not immediately guarentes the satisfaetion of all human nooda- That can only be accomplished through the final victory of workera’ powor ond the creation of 4 slassleas socloty on 2 world sealo, on tha basis of a larel of productivity much superior to the present level- For a time, a workers' state in tha U-3. will be oompelled to apur production and to use, with various changsa and mitigeations, the method of Labour pajymont worked out by ospitaltsm: "To cash aceerding to his work."
As Engola explained in anti-Duhring: "Each now node ‘of production or forn of oxohanga is in the baginning fottored not only tyr. tha old forma and the politioal dinatitutions corresponding ta then, but also by the old mode of distribution. It ia obliged to ongage in a dong atrugeio to abtain the moda of distribution corresponding to it."
The 614 metheda of distribution=- the payment of lebour accerding to
work and the selling of eosmoditics - are inoseapable in the first stages of the soolalist revolution. <A workers!’ state can only gradually replace the principle of payment according to the work perforsed with the princdple of socialiat distritution: "To enoh according to his nocdsa-" The more backward thea coonony a workera'and possants'rovelution inherits from tho past, the herder it will be to overcome tho old inequitable Methods of diatribution- Hersh Conditiona.
The young Soviet republic was crippled by all the beckweriness of Cearian. The world war and civil wer deploted alroaiy exhausted resaurcas, ahattered industry and lead bo facing. Under such sircucstancos, eron after aconomic conditions improved in tho 19208, the stete had striatiy to enforce the bourgeacis norms af ¢ ate trsnutions From the beginning the Soviet State. took on a dual character: agociszlist insofar‘as it defonded-aociel proporty in the meaus of production: bourgeois insofar aa the distribution of life's goods was carried aut under bourgeois. nores-
The early Boviot state was if zhliy demo*-itie dn structura.- I+ waa based upon the dircet, representative demociicy of the sovylets, or councils whieh began as agencies of the workers , soldiers and peasants in the rovolutionary strugeic, snd thon tbeenmo tho organs-o? tho new workers’ state: But under the harsh conditions the Sovict magsce fared, the state auffarcd fron what Lenin called bursaucratic deformations. As tho arbitera over distribution, Soviet officials were able to provide themselves with goods and privilages. which were not availebla to the magass- Those were small priviloges,at first. Hut officoe-holders began to devyolop 4s material intorgat in dinging to their positions. Since Soviet denoersoy.impliod mee control over tburcaucrats, the cdayeloping stratum of offica=holders resonted and subverted these representative institutions. Counted On Ald
Tho Bolashovika counted on tha vilotory of the revolution in one or more of the advanced oountrigs to come to the aid of the bolenamisred and impoverished Soviet Union- Such aid would have cased the mstorial situation and counterod the forces onhancing the powar of the bureaucracy. But revolutions claewhere elther did not matorialize or wero doefeatad whero they did-
Lenin sdyocsted the atrengthoning of workers’ desooracy ss 4 counter to burcauoracy,and spent the last years of his life atteaptinge to socbet ite growth. In core favourable circumstances, and cartainly in any industrialized country, eb a more advanced stage of world eeeeiuiten workers democracy would be able to contain and ocventually elisinate — bureaucracy: Eat tha working class was a small minority in Soviet soaciety and had -soan the best of its fighters cut down in the elyil war. Thess factors, together with the laolation of the revolution and the low standard of living of the masses, helped to dispirit the workers and aided the bureaucrats in their subvoraion of sovict democracy.
The bureaucracy Pound ite chisf spokesmen and leader in tho poersen of Stalin. Given the abovo objective conditions, Stalin was skle to lead the growing burcaucracy ta power, through corruption and purges of tha Bolshevik Party (which, sinea it contained the most politically advancad workers, was tho strongest opposition ta. the burcaucracy) and the soyiata: The result of this political counter=-royolution was the crushing of tha
sovicts and tho rise to full power of tho burcaucratio caste- The principle of "to cach according to hia work” is inhorently unequal, eines it rewards according to unequal output. In addition, the bureaucracy, a5 eae rar over diatribution,could define how much work was worth. Thus their "work" became very valuable indecd. Heving won political supronacy, tho burcaucracy was able to amass more and moro privileges- The gap between workers and bureaucrats widenod. The bureaucracy developed into , daate soparate and apart from tho workers. The existence of this paranitio, selfnackianexavi lane caste makes tha Bevict state a far ory from a hoalthy workoers' state - let alone socialism. Ts indicate ite deformed natura,Marxists call it a bureanoratically degenorated workora!' stato. Reactionary Role.
The bureaucracy views all problems from the narrow atandpoint of its special interests- It is a fundamentally conservative formation which desires to maintain its position,priviloges and powor and keop things ganorally as thay are» In international roalations it aspires to make peace with imperialias, in the vsin hope 1" t the imporialista will let the Soviet Union alone- In retarn for a proclas of live and let live, the buresucrate ato ready to use their influence in the world communiat movemont to sell out revoluticna- Having lost 411 faith in the world ravelution, the bureaucracy transformed the world's Comsunist parties inta docile eppendages of ita foraign poliey = pressure groups sacking alliances with "mod" capitelista: This policy waa first projected by Stalin in the doctrine of “socialiam in ons country"+ The sane policy is now called "Desooful coaxistonce-*
The reactionary role of the bureaucracy in defending end artending inequality and repressing democracy within the Soviet Union and retarding and betraying the strugele for world revolution, does not moan, howeyor, that it is capitalist. The buresucracy's own privileges flow from ita pesition in the nationsliged and planned econozy which it is obliged to defend and develop, poorly and in its own wey To e211 the Joviet Union capitalist because of the many crimes committed by the bureaucracy would be like saying the AFL-CIO ia no longer a workers’ orgenisetion because its leaders uphold capitalian, support the war in Vietnm, don't offer tha workers proper leadership, and vote themselves enormous salaries. In fact the unions remain workers’ organisations in spite of the bureaucrats. The job ahead of the workers ia to build « new,class struggle leadership which san throw the bureaucrats out, democorstisa the undone and cake than effective instraments to combat big tuainesa.
Similarly, the job before the Soviat workera is to throw out the Soviet bureaucrats, re-institute soviet democracy, and in the proceas build a new olasa-struggle leadership in the tradition of Lenin and Trotsky. Marx and Lenin.
It ia instructive to note that,in detailing the crimes of the Soviet