In
its last few issues, Weekly Worker, has been addressing the issue of
different interpretations of what socialism and communism means. Nick
Rodgers in two articles highlighted the conflicting application of
those words by Marx and by Lenin. Jack Conrad disputed Rodgers'
understanding of the two terms and in doing so cited Comrade Adam
Buick as an example of another mistaken analysis.
Adam
has answered him.
State capitalism
Despite
what Jack Conrad writes, I have never claimed that Lenin innovated
when he called post-capitalist society ‘socialism’ (‘The twophases of communism’, August 15). This was standard practice
amongst first-generation Marxists and, in fact, shows that for them
the words ‘socialism’ and ‘communism’ were interchangeable.
Lenin’s
‘innovation’ was to see ‘socialism’ starting at the beginning
of the period Marx envisaged when the working class would be using
its control of political power to transform capitalist society into
‘communist society’ (or, the same thing, ‘socialist society’):
ie, a period during which socialism (or communism) had yet to be
established.
Lenin
further ‘innovated’ by extending this period into what Marx had
called the “first phase of communist society”. As a result he has
the state and the wages system continuing to survive into
socialism/communism. As he put it in State
and revolution,
in this phase “all citizens are transformed into hired employees of
the state” (chapter 5, section 3). In other articles from the same
period Lenin frequently confused state capitalism and socialism in
this way, as all Leninists have done ever since.
I
see that Jack and the CPGB follow Lenin here, defining socialism as
“the rule of the working class”, whereas socialism means the
disappearance
of all classes, including the working class. For you, as for him,
‘socialism’ starts when the working class win political power,
not when the means of production have become the common property of
society under democratic control - by which time the state, money,
wages, profits, banks, etc will have disappeared.
Jack
also talks of a “transitional society”, whereas Marx had written
only of a “political transition period”, not a new form
of society. For more on this, see the article I wrote decades ago on
‘The myth of the transitional
society’(https://bataillesocialiste.wordpress.com/english-pages/1975-the-myth-of-the-transitional-society-buick).
It
only remains to add that, given the tremendous development of the
forces of production since Marx’s day, capitalism can now be
transformed into socialism/communism fairly quickly - and that
exchanging quotes from Marx settles only the academic, historical
question of what Marx thought, not what should be done today.
Adam
Buick
Socialist Party of Great Britain
Socialist Party of Great Britain
No comments:
Post a Comment