State capitalism in Russia - Murray BookchinMurray Bookchin's critique of the USSR's economy as state capitalist. Published inContemporary Issues 7, Autumn 1!" #under pseudonym M. S. Shiloh$. State %apitalism in Russia&he problems of the social system in Russia ha'e often been compared (ith thosecreated by re'olutionary )rance more than a century and a half a*o. An understandin*of both+ it is said+ requires perspecti'e. ,istorians are reminded that the years ha'edissol'ed the acrimony heaped on the e'ents of the -reat )rench Re'olution . thatmore '*ood' than 'harm' (as done. Much the same is implied for Russia. Supporters+e'en mild critics+ of the Stalin re*ime tell us that so 'ne(' a phenomenon requires thetest of many*enerations+ that the/ud*ement nourishedbyimmediatee'ents+ by'passin*' abuses+ must be suspended until lastin* outlines appear. 0n place of the yearsand of abuses en*endered by 'e1pediency'+ a 'ast theoretical corpus has been brou*htto the support of the Russian social system. 2e are in'ited to equate thenationali3ation of industry to pro*ress4 economic plannin* to the elimination of crises4mountin*indicesinsteel+ coal andpetroleumproductiontothe(ell5bein*oftheRussian people. 0n the meantime+ fact pro*ressi'ely contra'enes theory. &henationali3ation of Russian industryhas not been marked byanysort of socialpro*ress. Russian economic plannin* . such as it is . has sharpened crises kno(nto the capitalist (orld. And the mountin* indices in hea'y industry #little as (e areactually permitted to kno( about them$ ha'e been accompanied by ab/ect misery and(orsenin* of conditions for the Russian people. &o anyone informed of Russian sociallife+ the contradiction bet(een theory and reality has reached ni*htmarish proportions.Moreo'er+ /ust as theory has been used to distort the meanin* of e'ents+ so e'entsha'e re'en*ed themsel'es on theory. &he most 'ul*ar prattlin* has been employed too'erride Russian reality from one aspect or another+ and (ith it+ the means for socialanalysis itself. 6ne has onlytoe1amine thetorturedideas of Stalinismanditssupporters on economic theory+ aesthetics+ and+ often enou*h+ e'en science+ to /ud*ethe(holesalemisapplicationof thinkin*toall questions. &heshoeis in'ariablyplaced on the (ron* foot and the adherent is in'ited to limp throu*h a host of broadeconomic+ political+ and cultural+ as (ell as specifically Russian+ problems. 0tbecomes a social responsibility in e'ery sense of the term to brin* fact and theory intoaccord.Althou*h ob/ecti'e and systematic accounts ha'e been a'ailable for some time+ therehas been a marked failure to employ themadequately for the purposes of*enerali3ation. By contrast+ Stalinist theory (as *i'en the semblance of a certain unityand comprehensi'eness. &he rather popular notion that Russia is a 'mana*erial society'is unsatisfactory and starts from the same premises as the Stalinist approach. Bothassumethat Russiarepresentsahistorically5ne(social formation. &he'mana*erialtheory'+ it is true+ poses a si*nificant issue7 if the state e1ercises full control o'er theeconomy+ it is necessary to ask . '2ho controls the state8' &o this question+ Stalinistapolo*ists ha'e noreply4 unless (e are to*i'e serious credence tothe beni*n'intentions' of the Russian leaders or to the claim that Russia has the most democraticconstitution in the (orld. 6n the other hand+ the 'mana*erial theory' e1plains little ofthe ener*i3in*forces of the Russianeconomy7 of its dynamics andof Russiane1pansion abroad. )rom so purely ne*ati'e a definition+ de'eloped in reaction to theincredibilityof the Stalinist 'ie(rather thanfromapositi'e elucidationof theconditionsofRussianmaterial life+ it (ouldbedifficult tofindseriouspointsofdifferencebet(eena'mana*erial society' and+ fore1ample+ Ptolemaic9*ypt. &heposition fails to brin* anythin* into relief . it lacks an e1planation of anythin* that issocially distincti'e.But if Russian society is not to be re*arded as a 'ne(' historical sta*e+ (hat does itrepresent8&he contention made here is that Russia is inte*rally tied to capitalist de'elopment+that its social system may be called state capitalism. Such a /ud*ement follo(s fromt(o considerations. &he first and most *eneral is the entire process of (orld capitalistde'elopment. &he barbari3ation of society+ so *raphically represented by )ascism andits Stalinist predecessor+ is anchored in the bour*eois mode of production. 0t requiresabsolutely no departure from an analysis of capitalist retro*ression to e1plain all thephenomena of Stalinism. 0n point of fact+ Russia reflects this decline in every feature.&hesecondandmorespecificconsiderationis theback(ardnessof Russia. &hishistorically5retarded de'elopment+ suffice to say for the present+ cannot be re*arded asa ba* of e1cuses for /ustifyin* 'contemporary e1cesses' or+ (hat amounts to the samethin*+ for keepin* Russian society in suspended animation .free fromthecompulsionof social la(. &he 'intentions' or (ishes of theStalinleadership.(hate'er they may be . may be disre*arded. Under capitalism+ back(ardness has itso(n la(s+ by (hich Russia+ like -ermany+ 0taly and Spain #each in a certain sense$are relentlessly *o'erned.A discussion of Russia as a state capitalist system+ therefore+ presents the challen*e oflar*e issues. At e'ery point+ the analysis lends itself to homolo*ous de'elopments in9n*land+ America . indeed+ in the entirety of capitalist society. %oncretely+ there isalmost no special startin* place. :e'elopments in (estern 9urope+ amon* the'democracies'+ su**est the same problems that in Russia ha'e achie'ed only *reaterpoi*nancy.Nationalization and the Background of Russian CapitalismRussia to5dayhas a nationali3edand+ alle*edly+ plannedeconomy. &his has+ bycommon consent+ been re*arded as the unique characteristic of Stalinist society4 atonce its point of departure from capitalism and its most 'pro*ressi'e' feature. Plannin*is+ at most+ a claim and may+ for the moment+be put aside.&he nationali3ation ofindustry+ ho(e'er+ remains indisputable. &he question at issue is7 (hy is industrialnationali3ation+ per se, non5capitalist or pro*ressi'e80t is true that nationali3ation+ at least /uridically+ precludes the indi'idual o(nership ofindustrial enterprises. And such indi'idual o(nership has been associated (ithcapitalism and its consequences . more *enerally+ (ith pri'ate property in the meansof production. But many ci'ili3ations ha'e been kno(n (here state o(nership of theproducti'e forces+ for one reason or another+ became the dominant economicinstitution(ithout inanyconcei'ablesenseeliminatin*problems en*enderedbyindi'idual property. Pri'ate property remained in the real sense that the control of theproducti'e forces yielded the relati'ely autonomous decisions that characteri3eindi'idual o(nership.&hepoint tobemadeis that theapparent economicrelationshipof mentotheproducti'e forces must be e1plained by the economic relationship between men. At alltimes+ of course+ a certain technolo*ical le'el is presupposed. ,unters+ for e1ample+cannot be e1pected to establish feudal social relations. But to borro( a*ain from thefruitful analo*y of the ancient (orld+ the feudal social relations of 9*ypt dominatedthe transitions from the centrali3ed+ state5o(ned lands of the 6ld ;in*dom+ throu*hthe some(hat atomi3ed Middle ;in*dom+ into the 9mpire and completely centrali3edeconomy of the ,ellenistic A*e. &hrou*hout+ the relationship bet(een the broad massof serfs and the rulin* nobility and priesthood remained same. Althou*h these chan*esmet many real needs+ feudal problems and relations persisted and dominated 9*yptiansociety.&hepoint behindthisanalo*ycanbe'erifiedinthehistoryofRussiancapitalistde'elopment.0f 9uropeancapitalismof the ei*hteenthandnineteenthcenturies hadroomforde'elopment+ Russiancapitalism+ duetoits belatedappearance+ couldfindlittlesustenance in a precarious (orld market o'ercro(ded by superior ri'als+ and in aninternal market inhibited by feudal relations. &rue+ Russian capitalismdid notrecapitulate the industrial and political history of 9urope. )rom the start+ it (as inpossessionofatechnically5ad'ancedandhi*hlyconcentratedplant. But fromthenature of the situation+ this contained as many disad'anta*es as ad'anta*es. Alon*sidethe peasant+ hun*erin*for landof his o(n+ (as addedtheferment of the ne(labourin*classes+ to(hichtheinsecure+ restrictedbour*eoisie(as incapableof*rantin* reforms. )earin* its o(n masses+ confined by (orld imperialism (hich clun*desperately#asthe*eneral situation(orsened$topri'ile*esacquiredinanearlierperiod+ incapable as a result of its (eakness of effecti'ely forcin* its (ay into theperpetual race for markets+ the Russian bour*eoisie (as compelled to cement many ofits ties (ith the %3arist re*ime. More often than not+ this (as a source of e1tremefrustration. &he re*ime and nobility had its o(n fish to fry+ and the relationship oftenpresented the character of t(o do*s sharin* a bone. But if the bour*eoisie generallystri'es to secure itself by concentration and monopolistic practices+ the narro( mar*inof industrial sur'i'al imperati'ely dictated the formation of *reat combines in Russiathat increasin*ly paralleled and mer*ed (ith the state. &he t(o acted upon each other7as conditions (orsened in the respecti'e sphere of each+ an interpenetration tended tooccur.1&hese (ere the tendencies of pre5re'olutionary capitalist de'elopment. &hey must notbe mistaken for a fait accompli. acquerie and an urban uprisin* (hich 'ariously . but+ on the (hole+ ne*ati'ely .coloured the political acti'ity of Russian capitalism.&he focus of all Russian political acti'ity+ of course+ (as the countryside. %ould thebour*eoisie 'imitate' its )rench brethren and *i'e the land to the peasants8 0n point offact+ the )rench bour*eoisie had not liquidated the land problem. &he breakdo(n ofthe feudal estates (as consummated by the >acobins at the cost of bloody conflicts(ith the capitalist class. Under the leadership of Robespierre+ :anton and ,?bert+ there'olution had o'er5e1tended itself+ *ainin* an indispensable mar*in for the play ofradical social forces. 0n so doin*+ it mana*ed to o'erride the fears+ rural interests andnarro(conser'atismof thebour*eoisie. But after(ardthere'olutionretrenched+retreatin* to the only forms possible at the time.&his+ it mi*ht be supposed+ could also pro'ide a model for the Russian Re'olution.&heparties of theRussian'sans5culottes' (ouldendea'our toestablisharadicaldemocracy+ lar*ely o'er and a*ainst the reactionary summits of Russian capitalism.=and(ouldbedistributedamon*thepeasantsandimpro'ed(orkin*conditionsintroduced in industry. &he bour*eoisie+ no doubt+ (ould fume and storm. 0t mi*htendea'our to raise another =yons and the nobility+ certainly+ another @end?e. But theeconomica1isof suchare'olutioncouldonlybethefull e1tensionof capitalistrelations to the countryside. 0ts most ob'ious result7 the creation of a firm peasantry atthe e1pense of the feudal elements.%ertain sharp differences+ ho(e'er+ are e'ident. &he )rench Re'olution occurred in1AB7 the Russian Re'olution+ in 11A. &he t(o (ere separated by a century and aquarter of capitalist de'elopment. &he)renchRe'olutioncoincided(iththefirstups(in* of the de'elopment4 the Russian Re'olution (ith its decline andretro*ression. Both aspects of the cycle (ere planted in these e'ents. 0n consequence+the Russian Re'olution mi*ht *i'e an initial . perhaps not inconsiderable . impetusto industrial acti'ity. At (orst+ conditions (ould portend the tu*5of5(ar and instabilityfollo(in*theo'erthro(of theSpanishmonarchyin1C1. But under bour*eoisconditions+ instability in Russia (as ine'itable. &he (hole character of (orldeconomic conditions nurtured the persistence and e'entual *ro(th of conditions that(ere already clearly in focus durin* the last years of %3arism. 0n effect+ this meantincreasin* monopoli3ation+ state inter'ention to support sa**in* industries and+finally+ thenationali3ationof industryandtotalitarianpolicin*of thestandardofli'in*.&his is essentially the *amut of Russian e'ents after 11A. &he conditions of the (arprecipitatedalon*standin*crisis+ pushin*thefeudalsystemintotheabyss.&heyser'ed to arouse hopes in the =enin *roup that the ine'itable o'er5e1tension of thedemocraticre'olution(ouldbeconsolidatedeconomicallybyadifferent typeofre'olution in 9urope. &he ebb of the 9uropean re'olution+ ho(e'er+ left theBolshe'ists (ithlittlemorethan(hat theyhadinanycase7 namely+ acapitalisteconomyroundedout bylandsei3ures inthe countryside. &he fact (as clearlyackno(led*ed by the De( 9conomic Policy of 1E1. An open market (as not onlyreco*ni3ed+ but there is e'ery indication to belie'e that a policy of toleratin* smallmerchant andindi'idual peasant enterprises (as calculatedfor alen*thof time*reater than permitted it by the Stalin re*ime.E &he nationali3ation of industry+ (hileprecipitately introduced on the stren*th of other+ more radical hopes . as (ell+ it maybe a*reed+ as many immediate e1pediencies accelerated . an economic de'elopment(hich confronted Russian capitalism in any case.&here can be no question that (e are simplifyin* e'ents (hich mi*ht ha'e at leastretardedthe depth of totalitariande'elopment inRussia had a different insi*htpre'ailed. 0n 9n*land+ for e1ample+ (e are (itnessin* much the same line ofde'elopment for industry. =eft to itself+ British capitalism is apparently mo'in* (ithless of an ed*e than did the Stalinist reaction of 1E!5A. &he possibilities forinter'ention are more pronounced than for Russia durin* those years. )urtherspeculation as to the course of the Russian Re'olution+ ho(e'er+ can be left to those(ho are li'in* (ith+ rather than learnin* from+ the past. 0t is only necessary to stress+here+ the full coincidence of industrial nationali3ation (ith the entire back*round ofRussian capitalist de'elopment. &he presence of capitalism in Russia depends not onnationali3ationper se.(hichmayreflect reactionandretro*ressionas(ell aspro*ress . but on other factors+ (hich accordin*ly make for one or the other.CCapitalism in Russia&he burden of any discussion of Russia as a state capitalist society de'ol'es uponthree issues7 the e1istence and (ei*ht of competition+ the anarchy bred by the 'Plan'+and the difficulties+ disproportions and crises in reproduction created by competitionfor sources of ra( material and skilled labour. &he consequences of these problems+e'enif consideredonlybythemsel'es+ areramifiedthrou*hall channels of theeconomy(ith*ro(in*intensityandreachtheir summit in'factional' stru**les+disputes+ liquidations and re*roupin*s that . like the incessant /ockeyin* for po(eramon*capitalist *roupsin9uropeand America.ha'ebecomecharacteristicofRussian life. &he state+ supportin* the economy as a (hole+ reflectin* by its functionthe (eakness of the entireeconomicstructure+ becomes the arenain(hichthemalad/ustments of the system take form. 0t is not so much a 'Plan' that passes bet(eenthemana*ers+ supplya*encies+ -la'ks#-la'ks areadministrati'eboards directlybelo(People's %ommissariats$. andPeople's %ommissariats+ as anta*onisms andri'alries bet(een indi'idual capitalists and blocs of capitalists attemptin* to secureand ad'ance their positions.F0ntheory+ theRussianmana*er issupposedtoha'e'erylittleindependence. :r.Marshak describes the position of the mana*er as follo(s7'&heSo'iet mana*er is unabletomanipulatefreelythesi3eof his plant or hisin'entories. Dor can he take ad'anta*e of market situations+ current or prospecti'e+ bybar*ainin* (ith sources of supplies or (ith customers for better prices+ or by (innin*customers throu*h lo( prices+ and sources of supplies throu*h hi*h ones. &o be sure+(ith supply chronically la**in* behind demand+ it (ould in any case be pointless foramana*ertoreducepricesinorderto(incustomers. 6ntheotherhand+ to(inpreference for a source of supplies by biddin* up prices for ra( materials (ould notbe pointless. . But it is forbidden.'!Russian la(+ or the official administration of industry+ su**ests an e'en more se'erepicture. Sales contracts+ plant property+ production and labour efficiency norms+ thenumber of (orkers to be employed+ a'era*e earnin*s and the annual payroll . infact+ nearly e'ery detail of the industrial process is supposed to require state appro'al.2herethisisnot pure/uridical fiction+ it affordsarestrictedpicture. 0t (ouldbesurprisin* to conclude that all elements in Russian capitalism reflect a homo*eneouspattern of status and economic control. &he capitalists of Russia+ like those else(here+maintain'arie*atedrelationships amon*themsel'es.Manyaresub/ecttothecrassauthorityofhi*herelements. 6thers+ probablymana*ersoflar*e+ hea'yindustrialenterprises+ are relati'ely independent. Assuredly+ the People's %ommissars+ theMinisters and those (ho are so situated as seriously to influence the po(errelationships bet(een competin* blocs+ correspond to the monopolists andcommandin*bour*eois elements of (esterncapitalist states. :ifferent 'frames ofreference'+ therefore+ e1hibit different 'ie(s. &o a purely /uridical mind+ -erman andRussian economic re*ulations seem to a*ree point by point. 0f (e (ere not familiar(iththeclearlycapitalisticnatureofthe-ermaneconomyunder,itler+Da3ila((ould en*ender the belief that the -erman economy reflects some sort of 'mana*erialsociety'. )rom the standpoint of lesser mana*ers+ or those (ho ha'e not ferreted outthepossibilitiesinherent inany*i'ensituation+ thefull burdenofthetotalitarianre*ulations descends on their shoulders. &o be sure+ Stalinist society is morecentrali3ed than else(here. But by the same token+ influence+ po(er+ e1ploitation andcompetition is more se'ere.0t (ould be absolutely unpardonable and superficial to discount the influence of theplant mana*erasamemberoftheParty+hisconnectionsinthe*o'ernment+ and+abo'eall+ thecountlesstricksandmanoeu'resincludedinsuchrelationships. Bute'en accordin* to /uridical arran*ements+ the mana*er is no mere automaton of theplannin* bodies and state. Bienstock+ discussin* the *ro(th and reco*nition ofmana*erial independence+ (rites7 'Most important+ themana*er becametheonlyperson responsible for the operation of the plant in all its subdi'isions. &he mana*er'sauthority (ithin the plant has increased. ,e rules the (hole production process+ bearsresponsibility for the technolo*ical process+ for quantitati'e fulfilment of the plan+ andfor the quality of the *oods produced. ... 'GSince 1CB+ a sinkin* fund is (ithdra(nfrom plant output . estimated at about ! per cent. of initial capital 'alue . F" to G"percent. of(hichisat themana*er'sdisposal forcapital replacement as(ell asrepairs. &he mana*er+ e'en accordin* to economic re*ulations+ disposes ofconsiderable resources at any *i'en plant le'el. 0t is ob'ious that the lure of a morecommandin* position+ in a country (here disproportions in income are matched onlyby the e1tremities of (ant+ creates and e'en necessitates bitter competition for furtheraccess to such resources.&hepositionof theRussianmana*er *ains *reater reality(hentheauthorityhepossesses is dynami3ed by the actual relationship of plant production to the 'Plan'.Plannin* in Russia has either been *rossly e1a**erated or totally misunderstood. &hishas+ in so many (ords+ been admitted in the day to day reports of the Russian pressitself . all theoretical pronunciamentosand considerations aside. '6ur plannin*isstill toa*reat e1tent clerical andstatistical (ork'+ reportsMei3enber*+ 'absolutelydi'orcedfromeconomic practice.'A0nthis connection+ Bienstockobser'es7 '&hepracticeof plannin*has *raduallybrou*ht theleaders of So'iet economytotheconclusion that tasks set by plan must be ad/usted in accordance (ith practice+ thatplannin* cannot be confined to orders but requires continual checkin* in e'ery phaseof production. 0n theory+ these rules (ere formulated unequi'ocally+ lon* a*o. As amatter of fact+ principles (ere not applied until the outbreak of (ar in the summer of1F1.'B&heremark*ainssi*nificancebecauseit isno(kno(nthat+ if anythin*+plannin* (as considerably rela1ed durin* the (ar conditions. 6n an earlier pa*e+ thesame (riter notes that 'Many plants ha'e been *i'en the initiati'e in (orkin* out theiro(nproductionpro*rammesinline(ithdirecti'esofthepre'iousyears+ (ithout(aitin* for ne( orders from abo'e4 they transmit their pro*rammes to the -la'k ordirectly to the People's %ommissariat. &he -la'k checks and+ if necessary chan*esplans+ takin* into account supply possibilities unkno(n to the plant+ the possibility ofco5operation bet(een plants+ financial resources+ re*ional needs+ etc.'&he Russian mana*er must operate outside the 'Plan'. '%ommodity funds #stocks$ areoften apportioned only fi'e or si1 days before the be*innin* of a quarter7 Hreali3ationH#deli'ery$ is sometimes *reatly delayed. 6rdinarily+ deli'ery is obtained only to(ardstheendof aquarter+ sayinits last threeor four (eeks. &heamount of *oodsapportioned for a quarter is almost belo( a plant's real needs+because the People'sCommissariat andGlavusuallyfear that themanager's applicationfor goods,especiallyscarcematerials, ise!aggerated.'#Bienstock.ouremphasis+ M.S.$1"A*ain7 '&oobtain *oods+ he #the mana*er$ must often send representati'es tosupplyin* factories or to a*encies of People's %ommissariats and -la'ks. Many plantsha'e permanent representati'es in Mosco( or other supply centres (ith the specialtaskofsecurin*thetimelysupplyof*oods+ ofHpushin*Hordersformaterials+ ofarran*in*shipments+ etc. And+ of course+ theplant mana*ement must maintainastora*e or*ani3ation. A plant mana*er (ho does not *et needed *oods in time is oftencompelledtobreakrulesandseekne((aystosupplyhisplant. &hereisthusacontradictionbet(eentheoryandpractice. &heoryhas+ recentlytakenafe(stepsto(ard practice+ e.*.+ the direct a*reements.'11&he author cites se'eral e1amples toillustrate the ma*nitude of these problems #and+ (e may add+ operations$. ' H:urin*the first ei*ht months of 1F"+ the &ractor 2orks spent E""+""" roubles on tele*ramsand E!"+""" roubles on tra'ellin* e1penses.H &he same story (as told half a year laterof another *iant plant+ the Rosto' 2orks for A*ricultural 9n*ineerin*. ...'1E0n thecourse of se'eral articles on Russia in the "erald #ribune, De(man cites I$vestia tothe effect that one third of the ten thousand daily arri'als in Mosco( by rail(ay andplane (ere on 'unnecessary' *o'ernment business.I$vestiamakes the accusation thatthese arri'als (aste millions of rubles in sprees and e1cursions.An entire body of market relations underlies the reproducti'e mechanism of Russianindustry. Accordin*toBienstock+ the'... turn5o'er of manysupplyor*ani3ations+particularly local offices+ is so insi*nificant that they are compelled to trans*ress their/urisdiction to /ustify their e1istence. &hey buy materials and equipment not needed intheir o(n branch of industry and sell to plants of other branches. &hey become+ in asense+ ordinary dealers.'1C&he reports that consistently appear in the Russian Pressare only a surface picture of idle plants or factories (orkin* far under capacity+ (hile*oods and ra(materials circulate throu*hout the country(ithout anyapparentdestination ... other+ undoubtedly+ than a profitable buyer. &he incidents are notorious+frequently embracin* some of the most important industrial pro/ects of the Stalinistre*ime. An e1ample cited by Bienstock is (orth quotin* in full7 '6n Crd >une+ 1CB+the%ouncil ofPeople's%ommissarsissuedadecreeconcentratin*saleofferrousmetals in a ne( Board. Some si1 months later+ the head of this board+ S. @oliko'+complainedabout Hindi'idualisticmethodsHofprocurin*metals. Metals(eresentfrom one end of the Union to the other (ithout reason or plan. 6ften lar*e quantities(ere brou*ht from the Urals or ;ri'oi Ro* #Ukraine$ to Mosco( as a stora*e andsupply centre+ only to retrace a portion of the ori*inal route to *et to a consumer.'1F,o( often8 ,o( 'lar*e' (ere the quantities8 @oliko'+ apparently+ did not say. But likethe daily 'sprees' to Mosco( #and only to Mosco(8$ there is *ood reason to belie'ethat such'infractions' areenormous4 inouropinion+ decisi'e. ,arrySch(art3+ fore1ample+ recentlyreportedinthe%.&.#imesthat complaintsintheRussianPressindicate one5third #another third$ of the secretaries of collecti'e farms in the Ukraine(eretrans*ressin*theri*htsofcollecti'efarmmembersin''iolation' ofthela(.De(man+ a*ain+ reports char*es in Pravdathat 'heaps' of 'e*etables and fruits (erespoilin* on rail(ay platforms of the South 2estern+ Dorth %aucasian+ Mosco(5;ie'+&ashkent+Askhabadand&urkestan5Siberianlinesin1FA.At thesametime+ it isindicated+ the periodical 'olshevi claimed that () per cent. of rail(ay stock (as idleand an e'en hi*her proportion (as the case for motor transportI&hrou*hout+ profit rei*ns supreme. '&he*o'ernment ...' (rites Ju*o(+ 'fi1es thefactory price for some item at E" roubles+ 'i3.+ 1F roubles production costs+ E roublesplanned profit+ and F roubles #E" per cent.$ turno'er ta1. 0f plant mana*ement reducesthe cost from 1F to+say+ 1" roubles+ the profit becomes G roubles+ of (hich E areplanned profit and F Habo'e the PlanH.'1! )rom this it follo(s7 '&he desire to increaseprofits has become a real incenti'e to more responsible+ acti'e+ and carefulmana*ement.'1GJu*o(pro'ides us(ithe1amples fromhea'yindustry7 '0ncoalminin*+ for each per cent. of reduction of real cost of production belo( planned cost+the mana*er+ assistant mana*er+ chief and assistant en*ineers *et a bonus of 1! percent. of monthly salary. 0n iron and steel industry+ the fi*ure is 1" per cent.)urthermore+ for each per cent. of o'erfulfilment of planned output+ the bonus for acoal5mine mana*er and his immediate assistants is F per cent. of salary. 0n iron andsteel+ bonusesfore1traoutput arecalculatedpro*ressi'ely.0fpi*5ironproductione1ceeds Plan by ! per cent.+ the monthly salaries of a section head+ assistant sectionhead+ en*ineer and electrical en*ineer are raised 1" per cent.+ for each per cent. ofe1cess output. 0f the production e1cess is 1" per cent.+ the bonus for each per cent. ofe1cess output is 1! per cent. of monthly salary+ etc. ... Do less important is the effectof plant profits on mana*erial influence+ presti*e and po(er.'1A&hedistinctionbet(eenmana*ers andcapitalists or bet(eenbonuses andprofitsseems to be blurred bythe information at our disposal. :oes it mean+ as the'mana*erial theory'implies+ that all capitalists become mana*ers4 that profits+ in thesocially5si*nificant sense of the term+ become mere bonuses8Actually+ this is onlya pseudo5problem. Bet(eenthe e1tremes of anindustrialmana*er in a small+ circumscribed shoe5factoryand a People's %ommissar+ thedistinctionis quiteclear. 0t is necessarythat the'spectrum' of Russianindustrialauthority be 'ie(ed under the aspect of qualitati'e differences rather than similaritiesthat blend one shade of control into another. 0f the premises of competition+disproportions+ direct a*reements+ etc.+ are *ranted+ (e need only compare thehistorical effect of Stalinist society (ith those produced in kno(n capitalist sectors ofthe(orld. Shouldtheycoincide+ theostensible'chain' of authoritythat /uridicalfiction reduces to the common denominator of 'mana*er're*uiresthe assumption ofdifferentiationbet(eenmana*ers andcapitalists. &he presence of specific socialforces andtheir effects summons+ as it (ere+ therulin*class andits capitalisticcharacter . concealed #at most only to economic theoreticians$ by the impersonalityof the systemand the anonymityof the re*ime .into real life. Deither thepropa*anda of the apolo*ists nor the 'intentions' of their leaders canalter suchindispensable distinctions.Russia and the Retrogression of CapitalismAt first *lance+ a comparison bet(een Russia and trends in (orld capitalism presentsmany di'er*encies. Amon* these+ the most conspicuous are7)irst+ the decline in the standard of li'in* +on an international scale. Stalinistpropa*anda+ ontheother hand+ celebrates asteadyriseinthe(ell5bein*of theRussianmasses. &hecomparison+ (earereminded+ must bemadebet(eenpre5re'olutionaryandcontemporaryRussiarather thanbet(eenRussiaandad'ancedcapitalist states. 6nce this criterion is adopted+ (e are assured+ there can be 'no doubt'that the material conditions of the people ha'e impro'ed steadily.Second+ since imperialism is characteri3ed by the e1port of capital+ Russia cannot be'ie(edasanimperialist state. &his+ oncestated+ oftenseems tosuffice. Russiane1pansionisascribedtomilitarye1i*encies+ thefearof(ar+thedesiretospread'communism'+ etc. . but not to imperialism in the scientific sense of the term.)inally+ all accounts of Russia ne'er cease to point to the continual+ 'unprecedented'*ro(thof industryat atime(henthetendencyelse(herehaslon*beento(ardindustrial contraction. &heendlesspane*yrics+ at least+ indicatemountin*+ s(ollenstatistics in e'ery field of production. 9ach fi'e year plan is completed in four years+and e'ery plan is made to mark a milestone o'er earlier conditions. &his has e'enimpressed opponents of the re*ime . so (e are told by friends of the re*ime.By separatin* crass fact from pure fiction and qualitati'e analysis from the blindin*storm of meanin*less statistics+ a second *lance discloses basic similarities bet(eenRussia and (orld capitalism.1. #he standard of living in Russia. Do( on this question+ there are sound reasons forbelie'in* that if the material conditions of the masses ha'e sho(n a steadyimpro'ement+ Russia is a strikin* e1ception to the trends in (orld capitalism. 0n aneconomy based on competition+ only a cold5blooded selection by destruction operates.&o e1ist+ in effect+ means to sur'i'e4 and to sur'i'e means to absorb ri'al capitals. &he'ideal' of bour*eois 'enterprise' is full control o'er the producti'e process and market.&hisalone+ thesystemdictates+ canassuresur'i'al+ andpro'idethesecurityandstability (hich all elements of the system continually endea'our to achie'e. 0n time+the elements of the systemchan*e their character. Dumerous capitalists aretransformed into a handful of lar*e capitalists+ commandin* (hole branches ofindustry+ national monopolies and international cartels. &he *ro(th of monopolies andcartels only ser'es to intensify the de*ree of ri'alry and instability. ,u*e masses ofcapital+ formerly controlled by many indi'iduals+ are no( pitted a*ainst each other bya fe( monopolists. &he system must increase its demands upon all the means at itsdisposal4 demands+ in turn+ (hich are al(ays insufficient to meet the *ro(in*dimensions of the stru**le. Reforms+ permissible in an earlier conte1t+ are (ithdra(n4e1ploitation is intensified4 li'in* standards are depressed.6ddly enou*h+ the Stalinist re*ime has maintained a statistical conspiracy a*ainst theapprehensionof facts concernin*thestandardof li'in*inRussia. :espitemuchofficial propa*anda+ photo*raphy and *uided tours of pre5(ar 'inta*e+ (e are a(areof noofficial indices tracin*the material conditions of the people inany(aycomparable to the information pro'ided by most+ if not all+ capitalist countries. So faras direct analysis admits+ the economic position of the masses is shrouded in mystery4cast in 'a*ue proportionate accounts and classified into statistically5uselesscate*ories. &he indirect analysis of Russian data+ ho(e'er+ is of remarkable interest.6n the basis of ,ubbard's data comparin* the a'era*e food consumption of Petro*radte1tile families durin* %3arist days (ith later periods+ Peter Meyer has demonstratedthat bet(een 1E and 1CA the a'era*e standard of li'in* declined to CF per cent.belo( pre5re'olutionary days. &he same analysis sho(s an increase of !F per cent.from the Re'olution to 1E.1BMaterial in %olin %lark's studies of Russian statistics sho( a decrease of around E"percent. infoodconsumptionperheadbet(een11Cand1CF.12hate'erthedifferences bet(een both analyses+ the depth of the do(n(ard trend is unmistakable.&o brin* matters as much up to date as is possible+ @era Micheles :ean obser'es .a*ain+ on the basis of an indirect analysis of Russian nominal(a*es #I$ . that 'if1CBistakenasa1""+ theinde1ofincreaseinnominal (a*esis1G!and1A!+dependin*onthe cate*ories of (ork. 6(in*tothecontinuance of hi*hprices+ho(e'er+ and to 'arious curbs recently K1FA . M.S.L placed on indi'idual purchasesreal (a*es ha'e actually under*one a sharp decline.'E"Recent Press reports from Russia indicate that the re*ime has placed the monetarypolicyonthe-oldStandard+ accompaniedby'drastic' pricereductions. 2emustconfessthatonthebasisofpre'ious'pricereduction' policies+ (e'ie(thislatest'achie'ement'(ith considerable scepticism. 6n 1Gth September+ 1F!+ for e1ample+thepricestructure(as also o'erhauled.Miss:eanobser'es7 '&he price of certainessential rationed*oods(eresharplyraisedonana'era*eof1B"per cent. o'erpre'ious prices .(ith the effectof further drainin*off money in circulation.Bycontrast+ prices of unrationed *oods in commercial *o'ernment stores (ere reducedby C" to !! per cent. 2hile the up(ard re'ision of prices of rationed *oods and thedo(n(ard re'ision of unrationed *oods (ere intended to close the *ap bet(een thet(o sets of prices Kan incredible e1planation by the re*imeI 5 M.S.L the *ap remainssubstantial.HE10t is reasonable to question if the *ap is bein* closed by lo(erin* orraisin* the price of commodities (ithin the purchasin* ran*e of the masses. &hus+ on1Ath >uly+ 1FB+ the Stalinist *o'ernment announced a 1" to E" per cent. reduction ofprices in state stores. &he reduction (as confined to such items as bicycles+phono*raphs+ (atches+ ca'iar+ Mosk'ich automobiles+ huntin* *uns+ cameras+perfumes+ cosmetics+ sto'es and ... beer and 'odka.EE0n the infamous currency 'reform' of :ecember+ 1FA+ prices remained essentially thesame as before e1cept for bread and a fe( staple items. 2. Bedell Smith notes that thetremendous hardships imposed by the production norms established for 1!" led tosuchdemorali3ationthat the-o'ernment hadtochan*e'its productionplans toincrease the amount of consumer *oods a'ailable for purchases. ... &hese measures*raduallyimpro'edthe productionsituationtothe point (here the -o'ernmentfinally felt able to act drastically to lo(er the purchasin* po(er of the So'iet peoplein order to reduce the *eneral demand for consumers' *oods and relie'e the pressureon li*ht industry. &he currency reform undertaken in :ecember+ 1FA+ accomplishedthis. &hee1istin*rublecurrency(asdeclaredobsolete(ithout (arnin*andne(currency(asissuedthat (ase1chan*edat therateofonene(rublefortenoldrubles. Statebonds(erede'aluatedbyt(othirds. Bankdeposits+ ho(e'er+ (eree1chan*eableatequal'alue+ butonlyuptoC+"""rubles(ithasmallerreturnonlar*er amounts. )ood rationin* (as remo'ed at the same time.'&he farmers (ere (iped out+ as their money (as not in banks but in state bonds andcurrency. &o pay ta1es and meet current e1penses+ they sold food+ so that for a briefperiodimmediatelyafter themonetarychan*ethere(as afloodof foodincitymarkets for the first time in years. &his lasted only a short time+ and thereafter theindustrial (orkers found that an e'en more drastic form of rationin* actually e1isted+as only a limited quantity of each kind of food (as sold to one person.'EC &he same'rationin*' apparently did not apply+ so far as (e kno(+ in the commercial *o'ernmentstores caterin* to the Stalinist millionaires+ (here (hite bread (as easily obtainable atA.! times the'alueofthe sametype of bread'for sale' inre*ularstores.But is itnecessarytoenter intotheincomedifferentialsof aneconomy(hichbountifullypro'ides for the fe( (ho are pri'ile*ed (ith truly astronomical incomes8E.Imperialism and the e!port of capital.0n this connection+ there has been so muchmisunderstandin*+ that a number of *eneral remarks are in order.&he course of capitalist de'elopment e'okes many contradictions that shape and *i'eit form. Since competition requires the steady replacement of labour by machinery+ atleast t(o simultaneous effects are e'ident. &he rate of profit declines and millions aredepri'edof employment. As the internal market contracts+ the entire producti'eprocess tends to follo( in its (ake.Attempts to compensate for this contraction turn the bour*eoisie to the internationalmarket particularly the super5profits of colonial trade and industry. 0t is apparent+ ofcourse+ that capitalism al(ays endea'oured to reap these imperial profits. &he (ealthderi'ed from colonial e1ploitation (as a prerequisite for the primiti'e accumulationthat launchedcapitalist de'elopment inthe modernera. &he point tobe made+ho(e'er+ is that (hen the internal market contracts+ imperialism comes into its o(n asan imperati'e force+ an absolute precondition for the 'ery life of the system. )or a(hile+ imperialism yields a spurt to the economy+ e1tendin* the limits of the internalmarket and pro'idin* ne( bases for industrial e1pansion. But in time this en*endersfurther contradictions7 theobstacleof ne(+ ri'al imperialisms andof entrenchedpredecessors4 increasin* e1haustion due to frequent conflicts+ etc.0n its 'classic' period+ imperialism (as characteri3ed by the e1port of capital.EF &his+perhaps+ morethanthepaeansof;iplin*+ encoura*edmanyliberal economiststobelie'e that the '(hite man's burden' could only mean the full industrial de'elopmentof the colonial (orld. Actually+ capital e1port (as in'ariably one5sided+ calculated notto de'elop a competitor but so to upset abori*inal social relations that dependence+rather than independence+ (as emphasi3ed. &he effect of imperialism+ therefore+ hasal(ays been to create so much misery and discontent+ that national uprisin*s #of onede*ree or another$ continually follo( in its (ake. As the contradictions of capitalistimperialismcon'er*e intoa*eneral crisis+ the e1port of capital is subordinatedentirely to the needs of colonial re*imentation+ policin* and control. A sort of Romanparasitism pre'ails. All the material and spiritual sources of resistance are numbed byplanned star'ation and terror. Masses of population created by the capitalist mode ofproduction are reduced+ ensla'ed or e1terminated. 0ndustrial acti'ity is rendered moreandmoreone5sidedanddependent+ or .inmanycases .comes toa'irtualstandstill.Manycolonies ha'elon*sincetra'elledpart of theroadtothis ne(barbarism.0ndeed+ the prototype of contemporary ensla'ement and e1ploitation (as nurtured for*enerations on the continents of Asia+ Africa+ South America and in the archipela*oesofthe6rient.Butthecolonialcountries donotstand alone.Under the hei*htenedconditions of present5day ri'alry and instability+ e'en the industrially5ad'ancednations of 9urope face oppression and reduction to a colonial status. 9urope en/oysthe 'special status' (herein her stabili3ation in'ol'es no less than the physicaldestruction of much of her industry. &hus+ the '0ron ,eel' -erman capitalism preparedfor 9urope no( descends upon -ermany. 0ndustries are destroyed+ millions bombedout and permanently uprooted. &he country is dismembered and occupied by forei*nimperialist armies. &he'loser' of thelast (ar+ ho(e'er+ is onlytheharbin*er ofconditions that a(ait nearly all the ''ictors' of to5day. 9astern 9urope already sharesthefateof -ermany4 9n*land+ )rance+ Bel*ium.all pro*ressi'elybecometheeconomic and political instruments of American policy. &he economic one5sidednessanddependencythat areimposedonthe colonial(orlde'entually face theearliercolonial oppressorsthemsel'es. &heinternational market+ liketheinternal market+contracts4 all social e1istence threatens to shri'el and decline.E!0tisinthis milieu.thatis+under theconditionsandpossibilities created by thesecond2orld2ar.that Russiadefinitelyembarkeduponanimperialist course.0nitially+ this tookformincollaboration(ithfascist -ermany+ 0f the sei3ureofterritory from )inland+ Poland and Rumania is often e1cused by military 'e1pediency'+further ne*otiations (ith the Da3is concernin* the hinterlands of Asia lea'e absolutelyno doubt as to the imperialist character of Russian e1pansion. Ribbentrop'sappreciation of Russian 'natural spheres of influence' is 'ery concise7'&he focal points in the territorial aspiration of the So'iet Union (ould presumably becentredsouthof theterritoryof theSo'iet Unioninthedirectionof the0ndian6cean.'EG&o5day+ the imperialist acti'ities of the Stalinist re*ime occur+ as is the case (ith therest of 9urope+ under the shado( cast by the polari3ed+ concentrated po(er of theUnited States. Beside this 'American colossus'+ ri'alry must *enerally find circuitousroutes7 infiltrate into (eak positions4 operate in the cre'ices and around the frin*es ofAmerican control. &he phenomenal pri'ile*es allocated to Russia+ ho(e'er+ aree1plicable only in terms of the political limitations of the United States. &he Stalinistre*ime lar*ely holds those positions (here the need for the naked application of forceplacesthebour*eois5democracyoftheUnitedStatesatacurrentdisad'anta*e.&oemploy the more precise formulation of 9rnst Mander7 '&he secret of the situation+ asof America's (eakness+ consists inRussiaha'in*become her most reliableandindispensable policeman in 9urope and Asia. 0t is predominantly from this that Russiaderi'es her 'astoundin*' stren*thintheha**lin*(ithother Po(ers .noothercountrycanbeentrusted(iththeruthlesspolicefunctiononcetheStalinre*imecollapses.'EA0neffect+ theStalinist re*ime complements andis+ for thepresent+indispensable to American imperialism. As in 1C+ Stalinism remains a preconditionfor (orld reaction and retro*ression4 in the first case+ precipitatin* 2orld 2ar 00+ andto5day+ assumin* the functions of ,itler durin* the thirties.0n this conte1t+ (here e1pansion *oes hand5in5hand (ith total parasitism dictated byri'alry and sur'i'al+ (here the dismemberment and e1ploitation of ad'ancedcapitalist countries makes its appearance+ the e1port of e1cess capital resourcesbecomes an ancillary feature of imperialism.C. #he growth of Russian industry. 0f Russian industrial de'elopment means anythin*+it refers first and foremost to armaments industries. Much the same can be said for theentire capitalist (orld. &he armament industry is+ to5day+ the lubricant of the entiresystem and *ro(in*ly e1tends o'er consumer *oods production precisely because it+alone+ can co5e1ist (ith a fallin* standard of li'in*. -uns+ tanks+ aircraft . (eaponsof all kind . e1plode in (aste. &hey require only the inter'ention of the state as apurchaser. &he state+ on the other hand+ becomes a buyer by 'irtue of the re'enue ite1actsfromthesystemasa(hole4principally+bymilkin*themassesdryintruepublican fashion. 0n the United States+ this essentially takes the form of ta1ation4 in9n*land+ rationin*and(a*efi1in*4 finally+inRussiaand-ermany+nakedpolicesuper'isiono'ertheli'in*standardsofthepeople. &hepo'ertyofthemassesis'planned' . and this+ by far+ is the ma/or function of plannin*.As *reater recourse is had to direct measures+ the more armaments are required tokeep the masses in sub/u*ation. &hese operations occur on a (orld scale7 occupationarmies+ arms for docile elements abroad+ etc. &o be sure+ profits too requiredistribution#a*ain7 'plannin*'$ tosustainthestateas theessential a*ent for+ andmarket of+ the system. 0n this rule+ the state frequently appears as the disciplinarian ofcontendin* bour*eois blocs. Althou*h by no means the most desirable situation forelements accustomed to a laisse35faire economy+ choices cease to e1ist. &he systemmust be sustained as a (hole.:espitethefact that theStalinist re*imecame'eryclosetodefeat in1F15FE+ itcomparedonly(ith-ermanyas aproducer of armaments durin*pre5(ar years.Bet(een 1CF5C+ Russian armament e1penditure (as t(ice that of 9n*land. '0t seemslikely+' (rites Prof. A. >. Bro(n+ '... that the So'iet Union spent at least as much onmilitary purposesin thefi'e years or so beforeshe(as attackedas-ermany hadspent inthe correspondin* period leadin* uptoher a**ressiona*ainst Poland.-ermany's t(o5year lead in this race+ ho(e'er+ *a'e her a formidable ad'anta*e4 atthe time of her attack on the USSR her military e1penditure (as probably still at leastt(ice that of Russia thou*h not all of it . perhaps little more than t(o thirds+ couldbe applied on the eastern front. ... 2hate'er the mar*in of error in the calculation+ it isclear that thereal cost of militarypreparationtotheSo'iet Union(as+ likethesubsequent burden(hichit boreinbattlecasualties+ thehea'iest carriedbyanynation.'EBBy e1amination of mere surface facts+ economists /ud*e that e1penditures onarmaments comprised G per cent. of Russian national income in 1CF4 1E per cent. in1CA4 E! per cent. shortly before the -erman in'asion4 and . accordin* to recentestimates in +ife ma*a3ine . E! per cent. to5day.E &hese assumptions are much toocordial. 2e submit that the Russian economy+ from the 'ery lo*ic of the system+ isorientedasa(holeto(ardarmament production4 that proportions+ estimatesandstatistical /u**lin* are entirely meanin*less. &his situation *estates in capitalistde'elopment itself .e'en in such bastions of industry as the United States.Armament production is the life fluid of the bour*eois mode of production+ the co5efficient of all industrial output+ the one dollar that keeps the other three+ four+ fi'e orten in motion. 0n Russia+ ho(e'er+ such determinations are already fruitless.Armaments are the absolute foundation of the economy itself4 the Moloch to (hich allresources are deli'ered . the sacrificial altar of all industrial de'elopment.0t becomes absurd+ from this standpoint+ to re*ard the inde1 of Russian production asanyhopeful si*nof pro*ressi'epossibilities. Steel+ inRussia+ means*unsorthemeans for makin* *uns. 0f supporters of the Stalin re*ime hope that perhaps #and not(ithout a re'olution a*ainst the re*ime$ the Russian people can be induced to usebayonets for butterin* bread+ then it may be supposed that they (ill d(ell in cities oftanks+ (ear the drab *rey of the army uniform and use helmets for toilet bo(ls. ...The Slave State:urin*thedepths of theeconomiccrisis+ almost t(odecadesa*o+ letters totheAmerican Press opined that the unemployed should be placed on unsea(orthy raftsandset adrift. 0nprinciple+ thesu**estion(asnot ori*inal.Althou*hrequiredby-ermanfascismtenyearslater#efficiencyoftendictatin*crematoria$+ it (aslon*anticipated in the sla'e labour camps of Stalinist Russia.C")or more than a quartercentury+ Russian capitalism has follo(ed the relentless lo*ic inherent in contemporary(orldde'elopment. &hrou*hcountless pur*es+ 'liquidations' and'collecti'i3ation'dri'es+ it has literally appropriated the bodies of millions of men+ (omen and children(hom the contractin* system can no lon*er support on the basis of anythin* remotelyresemblin* a free labour market. =ike chained *an*s on ancient latifundia+ they areplacedto(orkinthebleak hells ofSiberia+inmines andon (astes(here lifeisscarcely maintainable and quickly passes out of e1istence. )rom the %aspian Sea tothe Solo'ietsky 0slands on the 2hite Sea+ hopeless masses of human bein*s+ li'in*anddyin*underunbearableconditions+ arede'ouredbythecampsystem. 2holeareas like the *old5minin* re*ion of ;olyma+ are entirely 'populated' by chattel sla'es+comprisin*e'eryprofessionand'ocation+ occupyin*campsonthedimensionsofcities #Ma*adan+ for e1ample$+ ser'iced+ maintained and rene(ed by the system. &hela( of population under moribund capitalism dictates that millions+ pushed outsidesociety by the *eneral contraction+ must be (orked to death.But the indi'idual merely perpetuates the species (hich+ locust5like+ slo(ly consumesall before it. )or each (ho perishes+ t(o appear. Sla'e (orkers recruit sla'etechnicians4thetechniciansrecruit sla'een*ineers4these+ inturn+ arefollo(edby*uards+ factories and more camps. &he ne( mode of labour reproduces itself not onlyfrom the inner crisis of capitalism+ but from the di'ision of labour in modern industry.0t recreates the entire /uridical+ political and economic fabric .adaptin* allinstitutions to its needs and+ by *i'in* rise to its o(n qualitati'e forms+ threatens tone*ate the capitalist mode of production itself.Sla'e labour already *erminates in e'ery phase of the Russian economy. &he internalpassport+ the (ork5book+ countless labour re*ulations ran*in* from '/ob lateness'to'sabota*e'+ compulsory'ocational trainin*+ etc.+ etc. .all reduce the industrial(orker to a capti'e of his specific /ob.C16n the 'collecti'e' farms+ practically e'erypretence is cast to the (inds. Ju*o( makes the follo(in* si*nificant obser'ation ofthe Russian kolkho3 system7'Producti'e machinery+ (ith the e1ception of small tools+ belon*s as alreadymentioned to the *o'ernment+ (hich+ by a*reement+ (orks the land and har'ests forthe kolkho3es. =abour is furnished by the kolkho3+ (hich+ in addition+ is obli*ed toassi*n a specified percenta*e of its manpo(er to certain compulsory tasks #road (ork+transportation+ fellin* timber+ etc.$ and to (ork in urban factories.'CE%enturies a*o+ capitalismtook formin mediae'al 9urope. By de'elopin* theinstruments of production+ the possibility (as poised for a historic solution to (antand e1ploitation. 2ith the first 2orld 2ar+ the cur'e of capitalist de'elopment took ado(n(ard turn4 and here+ history has reached the hei*hts of irony. Alon*side the mostremarkable technolo*ical achie'ements+ undreamed of ad'ances in electronics+ ser'o5mechanisms+ turbo5en*ines and nuclear physics #in a (ord+ all the means of li*htenin*human labour$ reappear the institutions+ (ant+ and e1ploitation of the past+ infinitelyintensified. =iterally7 moribund capitalism *enerates its o(n ne*ation in the forms ofa dark+ barbaric past+ (hen the material bases of mankind lay at the threshold of pre5history. &hesystemcon'er*esto(ardstabilityontheshamblesof(holecultures.0ndustry+ as it (ere+ 'thri'es' in laboratories surrounded by a desert of human a*onyand hun*er+ only to achie'e florescence in ... armaments. All the in*enuity of mankind. from science+ communications and technolo*y to the products of the printin* pressand the paint5brush . conspire to suck e'ery isolated or remote community into therisin*sla'e state. 0ndeed+ as compared(iththe Stalinist re*ime+ (hichcanbeconsidered no more than a mirror of relentless de'elopments in 9urope and America#if authentic democratic forces fail to inter'ene$+ the particularness of pastmediae'alism (ill appear as a 'eritable ha'en for the human spirit.ECrd >une+ 1!".#e!t taen from here. 1.Althou*h %3arist Russia ranked far behind the 2est industrially+ theconcentration of Russian industry e1ceeded the United States' durin*correspondin* periods. 0n 11" for e1ample+ enterprises employin* !""(orkers or more comprised !C per cent. of the number of (orkers in industry+as compared (ith CC per cent. in the United States. :urin* the first decade ofthecentury+suchconcernsincreasedfromFG.Apercent. to!C.!percent.+(hilefactories employin*upto!"(orkers+ andothers from!"to!""+declined from 1F.C percent. to 11.G per cent.+ and from C per cent. to CF percent. respecti'ely.&hespecific(ei*ht oflar*erenterprisessho(ed*reater*ains bet(een 1"1 and 11". 9nterprises employin* o'er !"" (orkers/umped from C.! per cent. to ! per cent. of Russian industry. &hose ran*in* upto !" (orkers dropped from A".! per cent. to G!.A per cent. Monopolies definitely appeared in the career of Russian industry as early asthe 'ei*hties #the su*ar industry$+ althou*h precedents had been established bylife insurance companies about a decade earlier. After the turn of the century+A" to A! per cent. of all sheet metal (orks (ere in the hands of a metallur*icalmonopoly7 'Prodamet'. By 1"B 'Prodamet' held a do3en of the ma/ormetallur*ical plants in its *rasp+ ha'in* e1panded in the meantime into manymetal products. Alon*(iththe'&ruboprada3ha' syndicate #pipes$ andthe'Prodarud' syndicate #ores$+ nearly all of south Russian metallur*y (asmonopoli3ed in less than ten years.Monopolies spread all o'er the country and to all branches of industry andtransport.&he'%ommitteeofUral6reandMetalPlants' syndicatedB"percent. of roofin* iron. )arm machinery concerns combined in 1"A to re*ulateat least AE per cent. of many a*ricultural implements. Dinety5fi'e per cent. ofrail(aycars (ere producedbythe 'Prod'a*on' syndicate in1"A+ tobematched by " per cent. of locomoti'e production from another syndicate. &he'Med' syndicate controlled A percent. of copper production #11C$4 'Produ*ul'#1"G$ accounted for A! per cent. of southern coal output4 a petroleumsyndicate encompassed G! per cent oil production+ etc. Monopolies appearedin li*ht industry as (ell as hea'y industry4 in commerce as (ell as transport.Althou*h many Russian syndicates (ere interlocked (ith+ and often controlledby+ forei*n capital+ there can be no question that the %3arist re*ime (as thema/or support of industrial monopoly. Russian petroleum combines leaned on+and (ere aided enormously by+ the state in competiti'e stru**les (ithStandard 6il. 0n the person of Bun*e+ @yshne*radsky and 2itte+ the*o'ernment consciously abetted the de'elopment and concentration ofindustry. ,ea'y orders+ for all practical purposes+ formed so many subsidies toe'ery branch of metallur*y. %orrespondin*ly+ direct inter'ention by the stateformed a conspicuous part of Russian economic operations. Alcoholicbe'era*es (ere a near5monopoly of the re*ime. &he *o'ernment o(ned andprocessed the output of many mines in Siberia+ the Altai and the Urals. Stateacti'ity (as felt in communications #rail(ay and tele*raph$+ credit #the ma/orbankin* concerns (ere o(ned by the state$+ forestry+ lar*e5scale a*riculture+etc. Bythe time of the Re'olution+ the state and the bour*eoisie (ereinterlinked in e'ery phase of industry. E. &he remarks of =enin+ in this connection+ are of interest7 '2e are no lon*erattemptin* to break up the old social economic order+ (ith its trade+ its smallscale economy and pri'ate initiati'e+ its capitalism+ but (e are no( tryin* tore'i'e trade+ pri'ate enterprise and capitalism+ at the same time *radually andcautiouslysub/ectin*themtostate re*ulation/ust as far as theyre'i'e.'#=enin+ Pravda, Ath Do'ember+ 1E1.$ C.Daturally+ this also applies to Britain+ (here the =abour Party presents itsnationali3ation pro*ramme as a step to(ard social pro*ress. &his pro*ramme+there can be no question+ abets the introduction of many totalitarian features+first adopted in Russia. F. Do less a fi*ure than Stalin *i'es us a picture . rather on the microscopicle'el . of the cliques and blocs formed by Russian officials. &hus7'Most frequently (orkers are selected not accordin* to ob/ecti'e criteria+ butaccordin* to accidental+ sub/ecti'e+ narro(and pro'incial criteria. Mostfrequently so5called acquaintances are chosen+ personal friends+ fello(to(nsmen+people (ho ha'e personal de'otion+masters of eulo*ies to theirpatrons+ irrespecti'e of (hether they are suitable from a political and business5likestandpoint.... &ake+fore1ample+%omradesMir3oyanand @aino'. &heformer is secretary of the re*ional Party or*ani3ation in ;a3akstan4 the latter issecretary of the Jarosla' re*ional Party or*ani3ation. &hese people are not themost back(ard (orkers in our midst. And ho( do they select (orkers8'&he former dra**ed alon* (ith him from A3erbai/an and the Urals+ (here heformerly (orked+ in ;a3akstan thirty or forty of his Ho(nH people+ and placedthem in responsible positions in ;a3akstan.'&helatter dra**edalon*(ithhimfromthe :onbas+ (here heformerly(orked+ to Jarosla' a do3en or so of his Ho(nH people also+ and also placedthem in responsible positions. %onsequently+ %omrade Miro3oyan has his o(ncre(. %omrade @aino' also has his.'#>. Stalin+,astering 'olshevism,1FGedition+ p. CB$. !.Bienstock+ Sch(ar3andJu*o(+,anagement inRussianIndustryand-griculture, ed. by )eiler and Marshak+ 61ford Uni'ersity Press+ D.J.+ 1FF+p. N0N. G. 0bid.+ p. 1!. A. =. Mei3enber*+ .n the /conomic Plan, in Planned /conomy, 1C+ Do. 1"+p. 1E. #uly+ 1FB+ a Russian (orker must (orkt(o and one5third hours to purchase a bottle of beer. EC. %.&. #imes, 1Fth Do'ember+ 1F. EF.&he emphasis placedonthe e1port of capital+ indiscussions aroundimperialism+ has often been at the e1pense of other features of equal . and+under present circumstances+ *reater . importance4 'i3.+ industrialconcentration+ monopoly+ the re5di'ision of the (orld+ etc. E!. &he process+ to be sure+ is une'en and combined. Repressions be*un in thecolonies are taken up in 9urope+ only to e1tend from Russia and the Balkansback to %hina+ 0ndonesia and Africa+ EG. Memorandum of the )inal %on'ersations Bet(een Reich )orei*n Minister'on Ribbentrop and %hairman of the %ouncil of People's %ommissars of theU.S.S.R. and PeoplePs %ommissar for )orei*n Affairs+ ,err Moloto'+ on 1CthDo'ember+ 1F"+ from %a$i20oviet Relations,1C5F1 #-erman Archi'es$ p.E!+ U.S. :epartment of State. EA.ContemporaryIssues,@ol. 1+ Do. 1+ '%oncernin*-ermanyand2orld:e'elopment'+ by 9rnst Mander. EB. A.>. Bro(n+ -pplied /conomics, Rinehart and %o.+ 1FB+ pp. C1 and CG. E. +ife, EAth )ebruary+ 1!". C". Sla'e labour (as undoubtedly intended as a permanent feature of -ermanfascism. 0t is not throu*hre*ardfor+ but indisre*ardof+ theinterests of-erman capitalism that the 'surplus' population of 9ast -ermany is permittedtoe1ist #atAlliedsufferance$'only' as... astar'in*massofrefu*ees.&hedestruction of F+"""+""" >e(s comprises no more than the form of selectin*F+"""+""" human bein*s (ho had to perish under capitalism. &he list (as laterto include7 -ypsies+ Poles+ Russians+ Ukrainians+ etc. C1.&hese features+ of course+ e1tend to areas under Russian occupation. Mr.Mac%ormac of the%.&. #imes#1th >une+ 1!"$+ for e1ample+ reportsoffhandedly7'=ikeRussiathesatellites no(aree1perimentin*(ithprisonlabour as asolutiontotheir difficulties. De(le*al codes arebein*adoptedafter theSo'ietmodeltopro'idefortheHreformHofcertainclassesofprisonersbysentencin* them to labour for one month to t(o years at Hreduced (a*esH.' CE. B.+ S.+ and J.+ etc.+ p. 1CG.