- Email: [email protected]
The Relationship Between Economics and Politics in The Bureaucratic Model of Socialism
Economic Analysis and Policy
15
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMICS AND POLITICS IN THE BUREAUCRATIC MODEL OF SOCIALISM Roots and Origin of the System of Bureaucratic SociaHsm
Every doctrine has its own philosophical foundation and every aspect of it has a close relationship to philosophy. The bureaucratic model of socialist society as developed in Ihe Soviet Union has been based on the movement inagurated by Marx and Engels in philosophy - above all the philosophy of history - sociology, and economics and further developed by Lenin and Stalin.
According 10 Marx. the development of society is determined by and consists of the continual opposition and struggle between two classes. This struggle makes up the essence and comprises the content of llistory. The mass of working population is kept in subjection by the idle but dominant class with the help of the state which is the political expression of the dominant class. The institution of the state, reOecting the political, philosophical, legal, religious and other views of the society, is in its existence and development determined by the economic structure of the society and above all by the sum·total of the production relations which constitute its economic basis. I Marx and Engels, as historical materialists, rCCClgnised the socio-political primacy of economic structure. Production relations are, according to them, independent of human will and they have originated historically in correspondence with a definite stage in the evolution of the productive forces. In a certain phase of development of the productive forces, they are inevitably replaced by new ones in the process of social revolution. With transformation of the economic basis, the whole superstructure is more or less rapidly overthrown. Marx claimed that capitalism is the terminal phase of private production relations, and in the ncar future would yield place to communism. In the very last phase of the capitalist epoch the workers will gain control of the state, establish the dictatorship of the proletariat, abolish the state and conduct society to the higher communistic stage of evolution which ends the era of historical evolution. During Ihe process of transformation from the lower 10 the higher socio-economic formation preceding the socialist revolution, the economic and cultural victory of the rising dominant class preceded its political victory. Out wilh the proletariat, Lenin said, it was the other way round. It had to seize political power in order to get economic power into its hands. And bUilding up of socialist culture presupposes the seizure of state political power. By logic such as this Lenin justified the l.
The basis is the sum-tolal or Ihe produclion rel:lIions prev;.Lllin~ in ;1 ):iven suciety. These rel;ltilJlls e(lrrespond to thc existing Icvel or the productivc rorces. The hasis cn~cnders ;1 corrcspondilllt superstructure :lnd determincs its development. The superstructure mcans Ihe poBlic:ll, philosophical, juridical, artistil;. religious and olher yil'ws ur suciety and tht: institutiun:; whirh cnrrespond to them.
Economic Analysis and Policy
16
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
dklatorship of the proletariat,2 When contemplating such a transformation, a distinction must be made between the malerial transformation in the economic conditions of produ~tion, which is effected in strict confonnity with the reign of natural law, and the ideological form of transformation in the superstructure which is conditioned by material changes but where human beings become aware of this conflict and ~arry on the stmggle. In accordance with the above reasoning lhe Marxist doctrine views the history of mankind as a dialectic and objective mass process independent of the individual will. J The Russians, however, were not capable of carrying out Marxist ideas of socialism and communism. They were "en masse" too uncultured and too perverted by Tsarism to understand and apply the Marxist views of communism as the final stage of a long historical process of the development of human society. The critics of the Soviet system quite often reproach the communist leaders for the initiation of Tsarist methods. But the question arises, has not the form of the absolute dictatorship of the Communist party been rather a natural growth since every form of government is more or less the result of the cultural and social standard of the society and also the reflection of its economic basis? What Lenin and other bolsheviks introduced into political and economic practice was a system of primitive socialism under the control of a primitive state which arose out of anarchical elements that had broken away from a likewise primitive Tsarisl bureaucratic centralism. From the very beginning, partly because of the given Russian socio-economic and cultural environment, and partly because of the personality of Lenin, the Party's policy did nol reflect the interests of Ihe whole people or even the proletariat but safeguarded Ihe interests of the Party. Under Lenin's leadership the Party divorced itself from the founding principle of the 1st International that "the liberation of the working class must be the doing of this class alone".4 Instead the elitist Party became the "vanguard of the proletariat" with the exclusive right to expound and defend the interests 2.
Lenin's pamphlet all the Dicwtorship of rile Proletariat (1920) became a source for Ihe theoretical juslification of violence, The ruling class in the feudal and bourgeois state, according 10 Lenin, oppressed bul did 1101 destroy the proletariat, because il could 1I0t live withoul it, but the dictalorship of Ihe proletariat can destroy Ihe exploiters. Lenin argued Ihat the dictatorship or the proletariat was a higher Iype or governmenl because it was one whk:h worked for the benefit or the great m:ijorily or people, whereas in previouslY existing stales the opposite had always been true.
J.
From the notion or the determinism or nature and or history, Marx deduced the unfreedf')m or the individual will. M:ux SIlYS "it is nul the consciousness 0r human heings which determines their existence, hut cOrlversly il is their social existence which determines their cOrlsciousne!\s", Thu!\ for the Mandun theory of socialism based on positivist hislori!\ffi only masses have their import· ance, whereas the individual is a negligible 4UalHity.
4.
1st International, knuwn as the Internatinnlll Workingmt"n's Association' founded (1864) hy Marx, hUI wlf.~ weakened hy a dispute hetween M:HX. I.iakurnn, and was dissolved (1876),
Economic Analysis and Policy
17
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
of the proletarhlt and working class. In contrast with the accepted ideology based on the "absolutc" negation of the burgeois state, the Party became rapidly identified with the state "of a new type". The consolidation of the political power togcther with the nationalization of all means of production which in turn, under specific Russian circumstances, necessitated centratization of economic decisions led to the immense growth of bureaucracy. The bureaucracy, an unavoidable product of the cumulation of power, changed this cumulation into a definite systcm. Thus a lack of system at the beginning and countless improvisation by inexperienced revolutionariesturned-bureaucrats produced bureaucratic socialism. Characteristic Features of Bureaucratic Sodalism Politically the bureaucratic model of socialism is a rigidly centralized state ruled by a single party, with the rest of society controlled by a bureaucracy. The Party itself is very selective and limited in membership.s Lenin's view of the Party as a "devoted band which would carry out. the revolution and protect its achievements" still prevails. From the beginning of his leadership ~nin had declared that he did not want a "mass party" in which opportunism would thrive and discipline be hard to maintain. Careful selection and continual revision of membership are not among the least important causes of the long life of the system. For the orthodox Marxist-Leninist, it remains a scandal that the policy of conflicts should be transformed on the Party platform and so caUed revisionism should continue to find a place within the Party, that it should be tolerated there and be able to maintain its place. 6 The system demands of rank-and-fUc mcmbers, not independent reactions to central decisions, but only obedient fulfilmcnt of tasks imposed on them. It has been recognized by the S. Social structure 10 % country
USSR
Poland Rumania Czechoslovakia Hungary Bulgaria Total
Popu· lalion millions
2.7 3' 21
" 10.5 8.' 335.0
Party members millions 14.6
2.3 2.2 1.2 0.7 0.7 21.7
%
White collar workers
5.' 6.6 10.5
8.5 6.6 8.2
'5 '3 31 67 32 2'
Blue collar Peasants workers
'0 '0
••
23 38 '0
IS
17 2. 10 30 26
6.4
Source: Svedec'vi. Vol. XII, No. 46(1973, p. 192. 6.
The (erm revisionism has hcen used to describe "devilltions" within Marxism. One of the most imporlant, known:tS Ihe "classical revisionism" was founded by Bernstein (1850-1')32) and taken up by Austrian Marxisis and by Dogdanuv (1873-1928). It rejected Engels' philosophy anti replaced it by other sySlCms. It alsu relinquished the concept of violent revolution and was prepared (0 replace il wilh parliamentary action. Today'! revisionism also rejecls Engels' philosophy. hUI relics on Ihe philosophy of "younger" Marl(. Fore· rUllner.; were Lahriola (1843-1909) and lukat.'S. The "!lI:(~M:lrxism" tuuk shape around 1955 in Eastern European countries wilh m:ukcdly Weslern culture.
Economic Analysis and Policy
18
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
founders of the system that IlOnw byrocraricllS could be permanently .:orrupted either by a bribe or fear. The non-existence of democracy both inside and outside the Party stifles any criticism which could otherwise start a thorough redress of the bureaucratic and sectarian methods in the Party itself and of its policies. The political platform of the Party is transmitted through the government administration, economic institutions, and other organizations. It is not a difficult task when all ministers as well as a majority of members of Parliament and all other more important bureaucrats, technocrats, trade unionists and intellectuals are Party members, and many of them also members of either the Central Committee or Politburo. This vertical system of links between the power centre - Politburo - and the other bodies of Party, State and Society implies an hierarchic structure of political and economic power and the sanctification of a single interest - defined and promoted by the power centre - which is at the same time identified with the interest of the majority of people. Economically bureaucratic socialism accounts for a non-market centrally planned system based on the collective (state) ownership of the means of production. The means of production are formally in the ownership of the whole people but in reality they are in a collective ownership of the Party's bureaucrats. The bureaucracy indirectly exercises ownership changing the meaning of ownership to the privilege to administer and control. From this universal monopoly over production the bureaucracy also derives an exclusive political position which excludes any form of control or opposition. This system logically implies concentration of all economic decisions in the hands of a central organ, the hierarchy of plans, and vertical system of relations between various parts of the economic administration, Such a structure is particularly well-suited to ensure the allocation of economy's resources on politically determined priorities. A centrally prescribed plan is thus the backbone of all, not only economic, activity. The plan for implementation is imposed upon economic units and the general public via the organs of the Party, government, and other organizations and institutions. The economic system resembles a single, huge enterprise managed by the Party oligarchy. This monopolistic power of the Party has been theoretically defended by the principle of the unity of power and ownership.7 The enterprises are legally and administratively subordinate to the 7.
"Socialist ownership unites the aClions of people in 8 unified economy wilh unified leadership". . . . "SocialiSI ownership of Ihe means of production requires Ihal society should guide Ihe entire development of production, and Ihis is done through the slale. And Ihe more social~1 ownership develops, the more important becomes slate guidance of Ihe economy ... " ... _ "The gUiding and organising force of the socialist slllle is (he Marxist-Leninist Party: II directs Ihe work of all stale orlans and mllss organislltions uf the working people, it mobilises workers, peasants and intellectuals alike for Ihe fulfilment of economic and polilical lasks, educates the masses and imbues them with communist consciousness." See, for example, P. Nikitin, FWldumetiruls of Politicol t:c:orlOmy, (MIIY 19S9). pp. 234 and 240.
Economic Analysis and Policy
19
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
apparatus of governmcnt and are at the same time considered as the lowest rung of the ladder of government. This bureaucratic economic order naturally rules Ollt the fUllctioning of the market and on the other hemd necessitates the management of t!le economy by administrative decrees. Ideologically bureaucratic socialism represents a system of teachings based on the Marxist-Leninist doctrine and defending the vested interests of the Party. This ideology is presented as de facto thoughts of the working class itself. No public polemics with the holders of the unofficial views is allowed, presumably from the fear that people might become affected and rigid controls and censorship are imposed over the whole range of culture with particular allcntion to literature and art as "important agents of the ideological and cultural rebirth and socialist education of the masses".8 For in such system the monopoly of power is fell to constitute a monopoly of truth and a monopoly of the right ideas in all matters. It logically leads in to credo quia absurdum - understanding through faith - which is at the end destructive of all social and economic life. In the absence of the freedom to publicly express differing opinions and of political activities outside the Party, the connicting interests arising from the different interests of the stratified society tend to accumulate and to lead in time to a crisis affecting thc entire system. The Crisis of Bureaucratic Socialism. In the 19505 the first features of economic crisis started to appear accentuated by crises in the political and ideological spheres. The symptoms of economic crisis became evident as a slowing down of economic growth, an increase in economic imbalance, a decline of efficiency, technological stagnation and prog{l~s~ive inflalion. 9 8.
Accordingly, the publishing industries and book distribution systems become II State monopoly. All libraries ar~ placed under a State control. Writen and othcr creative artists are impressed into professional unions controlled entirely by the Party members. The Party's policy in the fields of literature and art is concerned with three tasks: (i) 10 eradicate those manifestalions of the past which can interfere with the Party's indoctrination, (ii) to produce new literature having the proper Communist ideological message, and (iii) to check the innux of undesirable books from abroad. For discussion of these aspects, see, for c:C3mple, J.G. Whelan, Aspecls o{ Intellectual Ferme"t and Disselll ill Czeclloslollakia (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1969).
9.
Compound Annual Rates of Incn:ase of National Income and Incremental Capital Output Ratio in Selected Countries ICOR related to PrOductive tnvestment
National Income Country 195(}-55
1955-60
196Q.65
195Q.55
1955-60
196Q.65
USSR
11.3
BUlgaria CZfK.hoslovakla E. Germany Hungary Poland Rumania
12.2
1.60 1.62 2.27
2.76 3.37 10_83
13.9
7.0
B.3 B.' 1.B 3.5 '.7 5.9 B.7
1.20 1.78 1.84
B.3 B.B
9.' 9.7 7.1 7.0 B.5 B.B
B.O 11.4
-
-
3.17 2.05
2.18 2.61
-
-
-
4.43 3.38
-
Sou rec: T.F.J. RihiJ. Til(' N.au/.f lind COlIseqlllmces of tile II uxus/ Cri.fis in Has/enl t;urupe (MillleoJo(rarh.lJlliv~rsiIYof Yurk, 1968).
Economic Analysis and Policy
20
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
TIle greatest deficiency of bureaucratic socialism is that it lacks a market mechanism which would provide for lhe continuous confrontation of individual, group and gencml interest in every sphere. The market is theoretically the only basis known throughout human history for determin. ing equivalence and equality, and the only basis for political democracy and for the autonomy of the individual in aU spheres - economic, political, legal and civic. The basic cause of the stagnation and crisis of the model is the fact that it negated the market in the economic, as well as the sociological and political, senses. "Market spontaneity and socialism are incompatible and mutually exclusive." I 0 A markel presupposes a horizontal relationship between participants who act as free agents in civic and legal senses. A market also requires strong individualism and free initiative on the parts of individuals since in the absence of this, society cannot attain a normal political and social condition. If one man decides for another and directs him, the danger arises for that all his abilities will not find full scope and if the power centre decides for the whole nation and directs it, the loses incurred in all spheres of the human activity must be innumerable. I I In the absence of the market there is always a danger that people may personalize their working situations and behave towards their economic partners not as impersonal links in a functioning system but as unpredictable individuals, acting according to their moods, sympathies and power. Whenever the function of the market, with its relations of equality or equivalence, has been eliminated or weakened, democracy has disappeared too, regardless of the wishes of the people. In practice, however, democracy signifies a tolerable inequality, a least - and progressively lessening through the innumerable clashes of interests - common multiple of inequality. In political terms, the denial of market relations means ignoring the conflicts of interests ensuing from the very essence of a socialist economy. A commodity economy continually produces lwo kinds of material interests: general and partial. The general material interests results from the collective ownership of the means of production which establishes de jure an economic equality amongst all members of society, but de facto a right for the bureaucracy to exercise this ownership. The partial material interests result from the social division of labour thaI creates conditions of inequality amongst the members of society. Differ· ences in partial interests and contradiction in general interest have a tendency to assert themselves in the political as well as the economic 10.
1'. Nikltin, op. cit.. p. 235.
II.
See, ror example, (NeblJn, 1970).
H..
Selucky, Czechoslovakia:
17le Pian
"11wt 1'/./;'
Economic Analysis and Policy
21
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
fields. 12 Their confrontation is indeed the essence of democracy and their fulfilment and regulation is the content of politics to the extent that, in a given society, democracy and political life condition one another. The consequences of the non-market theory of the economy has even more complex ramifications. Having eliminated all scope for the confrontation of interests in the economy, the power centre has no reason to allow any to remain in politics. This glaring contrast between the dictatorial practice and the theory of socialism is a constant source for the creation of opposition to centraJist bureaucracy. The question arises, are there no countervailing advantages in this type of socialist system? Certainly there are. It affords everyone the elementary social certainty of employment, even if his performance fails to satisfy the demands and needs of an employer. The old method of curing the crisis situation consisted of personal changes in the leadership and moderate reforms of the system without touching the principles. "The political philosophy of the statesmen of this period was based on scapegoats - capitalists, kulaks, Jews, and intellectuals - and Hungarian sausage".13 The politics of "sausage realism" economic bribery - is successful as long as there is something whose price can be reduced, and if a politician is unable to reduce prices it has fatal consequences for his career. 14 Economic efficiency suffers under this "realism" and a country is inevitably heading towards economic collapse. There is no open mass political opposition but the failure of the economic structure may be sufficient to bring about a state of insecurity and to undermine the foundations of the regime. As soon as the people find that the cause of economic stagnation is in the system itself, a true crisis situation arises. Those above are 110 longer capable of ruling by the old methods, those below are no longer willing to be so ruled. The damage the bureaucratic model causes does not onJy affect 12.
II is a remarkable Characleristic of Ihe developmem of the Bolshevik Parly that almost all the early leaders of th~ Party (Trotsky. Zinoviev. Kamenev. Rakowsky. Tomsky. Buchsrin, Rykov, etc.) found themselves opposing Ih~ leading line wilhin the course of a dectlde. Some Bolsheviks guessed al Ihe rool cause of the conSlllnl formalion of opposition groups wilhin the party. There were groups wilh various economic interests in Itussia, bu t only OIlC legal party. This was essentially the party of the faclory proletariat, but was obliged to proteci lhe interests of the olher groups, too. The par1ial inlcreslS found supporters inside the Party and its unity suffered. To rcnu:dy Ihis situation, it was suggested thai the Party should abandon the monopoly position in politics and permit the lawful existence of moderate socialisl parties, on condition that they supported Ihe soviet government. Dul this suggeslion was condemned as a very dangerous heresy. Contradiction in general interest was revealed more explosively in open revolts of people against the bureaucracy (Hungary, Poland, Berlin, Czechoslovakia, and again POland).
13.
I. Svilak, "With Vllur 1·lead Againsl the Wall", Student, No. IS, AIHil 10, Prague, 1968.
1"1.
For example, GUlIlulka et al. ill Poland, 1970.
Economic Analysis and Policy
22
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
el'onomk and political spheres direclly. but also indirel'fly via deformalion of the pe~onal life of every single individual under it. An individual is made into a tool, a means, an object or the ruling elite in the process of the fulfilment of the economic or political goals which become the "all· pervasive moral nOnll and the objective of all ethical effort".ls This system tends to strip individuals of their individuality and sclf·respect. The individual is deprived of his freedom of choice in economics, politics, and cui lure and the power centre arrogates to itself a monopoly of decision and command.
TIle disintegration of individual living under bureaucratic socialislll may take three dimensions: it may stifle the man's belief in the purpose of ltis productive activity, it may break up the natural uniLy of production and consumption,I6 and it may frustrate his desire for self·fulfilment. An individual realising that he has no innuence whatever, begins to draw the distinction between US and THEM which becomes a permanent aspect of this type of society. This environment naturally drives people into apathy and escapism. 17 Apathy is the usual symptom of the fact that the individuals do not share the "common" interest with the regime. Such people, living theoretically in a collective environment, nee outside office hours into their personal hideouts, into an internal emigration. The system, however, does 110t stop at organising economic and political activities, but it also attempts organising Ihe personal life of the individuals. The "cult of privacy" and the avoidance of public life and public functions is the object of strong criticism by the Party and the State. 18 According to Marx, alienation is essentially a condition which Illan suffers when he ceases to be the master of the fruits of his own labour. Since the means of production have been vesled in workers through state ownership, the Party's ideologists maintain a fiction that alienation cannot therefore exist in a socialist counlry. In spite of this official denial which hides the contradiction in general interest, all kinds of alienation exist under bureaucratic socialism producing social schizophrenia alllong those who must live under it with IS. 16.
I. Gadourek, Moral Problems i,1 a Soviet Sateltite State, (CFIE: Groningen, 1963), p. 10. The cenlral plan with ils impersonal logic is inserted belween producer (homo faber) and consumer (homo consumens).
17.
Flourishing alcoholism in these societies is an indicalion lhllt nlllny find the social reality too difficult to face and lry to escape into Ihe realm of unreillity. For discussion of this aspecI see, ror example, I. Gadourek, op. (:il., p. 68.
18.
II is no accident that this problem ha~ been alwuys dealt with by the governments of toUlitarian countries. The Germans Illlvc even invented for this problem the horrible and self-contradktory flame of "'rcizcitgestaltung that lileraJly lranslated means: the shaping of the use mOlde of the people's free lime. In Ihis conlext, the shorter working hours hecomes a suhject of Ihe Party's deep conce,". Three possible ways were sugge~lcd how 10 make people spend their newly acquired "leisure": (i) the factories wilt organize (;()urse$ in f)rder 10 give the personnel adequate lechnic .. 1 Iruilling, (ii) workers should panicipalc more lIclively in lhe polilical and I>uhlic Iit'll, (iii) the Plirly should hestow much care ()/I heller possibilities f}f organized recreation. See. for eXllmplt:. B. Kuhler in Rudt! Provo, I'raKUc. N'lVcmher 16. 1')60.
Economic Analysis and Policy
23
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
all the detrimental effects for the functioning of the system. Conclusions.
The principles of the bureaucratic model of socialism still survive in Communist countries but the crisis of the whole system has been gradually spreading from country to country. The bureaucratic model proved to be not only inefficient but also inept to absorb into an economic system the latest advances in science and technology, Many aHempts have been carried oul" by means of economic reforms, to revive the system. The regime has not been overtly opposed to alterations, but it has resisted the slightest attempt which may loosen its administrative monopoly. Selfpreservation has motivated the bureaucracy to subvert all reform attempts from the very beginning. 19 It seems to be absolutely necessary, if economic and social progress is to succeed, that the existing model of socialism be replaced by a qualitatively new system providing incentives for the free development of the progressive forces of the society, which would in turn guarantee the execution of profound structural changes in economic, political and culturallife. 2o The qualitative changes in the orthodox power structure must be executed from outside the Party and this cannot be done unless the proponents of the !lew system are supported by mounting maSS disenchantment with bureaucratic socialism. When, how smooth and how gradual the process of transformation will be will depend upon many factors of internal and external values, amongst which the economic agents might be of major importance.
University of Queensland Department of Economics
Tomas l.F. Rilla
19.
One of the tasks of the Seven-Year Phln of the Soviet Union in 1<)65 was 10 replace the central iSSlIlIIlce of directives by economic stimuli and thus devolve decision-making authority to lower levels in the economic hierarchy_ Insteud the hureaucratizatioll of economic lifc has greatty extended. After remaining essentially stable in numbers for a decade, employment in stILle administratiOIl grcw each year during 1964-70, for a tOlal increase of some 516,000, or 38 per cent. Sec, for example,
20.
Up till now Lih~HnHlllism and similar reforms havc l;lvoked only (;ompetition he tween the hureauna(;y and !he !eclmocracy for the right !o exercise collective ownership, without suggesting 11 solulion to qutlliltllive slrUClllrtll problems of Ihe .\ocialis! economy.
15
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMICS AND POLITICS IN THE BUREAUCRATIC MODEL OF SOCIALISM Roots and Origin of the System of Bureaucratic SociaHsm
Every doctrine has its own philosophical foundation and every aspect of it has a close relationship to philosophy. The bureaucratic model of socialist society as developed in Ihe Soviet Union has been based on the movement inagurated by Marx and Engels in philosophy - above all the philosophy of history - sociology, and economics and further developed by Lenin and Stalin.
According 10 Marx. the development of society is determined by and consists of the continual opposition and struggle between two classes. This struggle makes up the essence and comprises the content of llistory. The mass of working population is kept in subjection by the idle but dominant class with the help of the state which is the political expression of the dominant class. The institution of the state, reOecting the political, philosophical, legal, religious and other views of the society, is in its existence and development determined by the economic structure of the society and above all by the sum·total of the production relations which constitute its economic basis. I Marx and Engels, as historical materialists, rCCClgnised the socio-political primacy of economic structure. Production relations are, according to them, independent of human will and they have originated historically in correspondence with a definite stage in the evolution of the productive forces. In a certain phase of development of the productive forces, they are inevitably replaced by new ones in the process of social revolution. With transformation of the economic basis, the whole superstructure is more or less rapidly overthrown. Marx claimed that capitalism is the terminal phase of private production relations, and in the ncar future would yield place to communism. In the very last phase of the capitalist epoch the workers will gain control of the state, establish the dictatorship of the proletariat, abolish the state and conduct society to the higher communistic stage of evolution which ends the era of historical evolution. During Ihe process of transformation from the lower 10 the higher socio-economic formation preceding the socialist revolution, the economic and cultural victory of the rising dominant class preceded its political victory. Out wilh the proletariat, Lenin said, it was the other way round. It had to seize political power in order to get economic power into its hands. And bUilding up of socialist culture presupposes the seizure of state political power. By logic such as this Lenin justified the l.
The basis is the sum-tolal or Ihe produclion rel:lIions prev;.Lllin~ in ;1 ):iven suciety. These rel;ltilJlls e(lrrespond to thc existing Icvel or the productivc rorces. The hasis cn~cnders ;1 corrcspondilllt superstructure :lnd determincs its development. The superstructure mcans Ihe poBlic:ll, philosophical, juridical, artistil;. religious and olher yil'ws ur suciety and tht: institutiun:; whirh cnrrespond to them.
Economic Analysis and Policy
16
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
dklatorship of the proletariat,2 When contemplating such a transformation, a distinction must be made between the malerial transformation in the economic conditions of produ~tion, which is effected in strict confonnity with the reign of natural law, and the ideological form of transformation in the superstructure which is conditioned by material changes but where human beings become aware of this conflict and ~arry on the stmggle. In accordance with the above reasoning lhe Marxist doctrine views the history of mankind as a dialectic and objective mass process independent of the individual will. J The Russians, however, were not capable of carrying out Marxist ideas of socialism and communism. They were "en masse" too uncultured and too perverted by Tsarism to understand and apply the Marxist views of communism as the final stage of a long historical process of the development of human society. The critics of the Soviet system quite often reproach the communist leaders for the initiation of Tsarist methods. But the question arises, has not the form of the absolute dictatorship of the Communist party been rather a natural growth since every form of government is more or less the result of the cultural and social standard of the society and also the reflection of its economic basis? What Lenin and other bolsheviks introduced into political and economic practice was a system of primitive socialism under the control of a primitive state which arose out of anarchical elements that had broken away from a likewise primitive Tsarisl bureaucratic centralism. From the very beginning, partly because of the given Russian socio-economic and cultural environment, and partly because of the personality of Lenin, the Party's policy did nol reflect the interests of Ihe whole people or even the proletariat but safeguarded Ihe interests of the Party. Under Lenin's leadership the Party divorced itself from the founding principle of the 1st International that "the liberation of the working class must be the doing of this class alone".4 Instead the elitist Party became the "vanguard of the proletariat" with the exclusive right to expound and defend the interests 2.
Lenin's pamphlet all the Dicwtorship of rile Proletariat (1920) became a source for Ihe theoretical juslification of violence, The ruling class in the feudal and bourgeois state, according 10 Lenin, oppressed bul did 1101 destroy the proletariat, because il could 1I0t live withoul it, but the dictalorship of Ihe proletariat can destroy Ihe exploiters. Lenin argued Ihat the dictatorship or the proletariat was a higher Iype or governmenl because it was one whk:h worked for the benefit or the great m:ijorily or people, whereas in previouslY existing stales the opposite had always been true.
J.
From the notion or the determinism or nature and or history, Marx deduced the unfreedf')m or the individual will. M:ux SIlYS "it is nul the consciousness 0r human heings which determines their existence, hut cOrlversly il is their social existence which determines their cOrlsciousne!\s", Thu!\ for the Mandun theory of socialism based on positivist hislori!\ffi only masses have their import· ance, whereas the individual is a negligible 4UalHity.
4.
1st International, knuwn as the Internatinnlll Workingmt"n's Association' founded (1864) hy Marx, hUI wlf.~ weakened hy a dispute hetween M:HX. I.iakurnn, and was dissolved (1876),
Economic Analysis and Policy
17
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
of the proletarhlt and working class. In contrast with the accepted ideology based on the "absolutc" negation of the burgeois state, the Party became rapidly identified with the state "of a new type". The consolidation of the political power togcther with the nationalization of all means of production which in turn, under specific Russian circumstances, necessitated centratization of economic decisions led to the immense growth of bureaucracy. The bureaucracy, an unavoidable product of the cumulation of power, changed this cumulation into a definite systcm. Thus a lack of system at the beginning and countless improvisation by inexperienced revolutionariesturned-bureaucrats produced bureaucratic socialism. Characteristic Features of Bureaucratic Sodalism Politically the bureaucratic model of socialism is a rigidly centralized state ruled by a single party, with the rest of society controlled by a bureaucracy. The Party itself is very selective and limited in membership.s Lenin's view of the Party as a "devoted band which would carry out. the revolution and protect its achievements" still prevails. From the beginning of his leadership ~nin had declared that he did not want a "mass party" in which opportunism would thrive and discipline be hard to maintain. Careful selection and continual revision of membership are not among the least important causes of the long life of the system. For the orthodox Marxist-Leninist, it remains a scandal that the policy of conflicts should be transformed on the Party platform and so caUed revisionism should continue to find a place within the Party, that it should be tolerated there and be able to maintain its place. 6 The system demands of rank-and-fUc mcmbers, not independent reactions to central decisions, but only obedient fulfilmcnt of tasks imposed on them. It has been recognized by the S. Social structure 10 % country
USSR
Poland Rumania Czechoslovakia Hungary Bulgaria Total
Popu· lalion millions
2.7 3' 21
" 10.5 8.' 335.0
Party members millions 14.6
2.3 2.2 1.2 0.7 0.7 21.7
%
White collar workers
5.' 6.6 10.5
8.5 6.6 8.2
'5 '3 31 67 32 2'
Blue collar Peasants workers
'0 '0
••
23 38 '0
IS
17 2. 10 30 26
6.4
Source: Svedec'vi. Vol. XII, No. 46(1973, p. 192. 6.
The (erm revisionism has hcen used to describe "devilltions" within Marxism. One of the most imporlant, known:tS Ihe "classical revisionism" was founded by Bernstein (1850-1')32) and taken up by Austrian Marxisis and by Dogdanuv (1873-1928). It rejected Engels' philosophy anti replaced it by other sySlCms. It alsu relinquished the concept of violent revolution and was prepared (0 replace il wilh parliamentary action. Today'! revisionism also rejecls Engels' philosophy. hUI relics on Ihe philosophy of "younger" Marl(. Fore· rUllner.; were Lahriola (1843-1909) and lukat.'S. The "!lI:(~M:lrxism" tuuk shape around 1955 in Eastern European countries wilh m:ukcdly Weslern culture.
Economic Analysis and Policy
18
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
founders of the system that IlOnw byrocraricllS could be permanently .:orrupted either by a bribe or fear. The non-existence of democracy both inside and outside the Party stifles any criticism which could otherwise start a thorough redress of the bureaucratic and sectarian methods in the Party itself and of its policies. The political platform of the Party is transmitted through the government administration, economic institutions, and other organizations. It is not a difficult task when all ministers as well as a majority of members of Parliament and all other more important bureaucrats, technocrats, trade unionists and intellectuals are Party members, and many of them also members of either the Central Committee or Politburo. This vertical system of links between the power centre - Politburo - and the other bodies of Party, State and Society implies an hierarchic structure of political and economic power and the sanctification of a single interest - defined and promoted by the power centre - which is at the same time identified with the interest of the majority of people. Economically bureaucratic socialism accounts for a non-market centrally planned system based on the collective (state) ownership of the means of production. The means of production are formally in the ownership of the whole people but in reality they are in a collective ownership of the Party's bureaucrats. The bureaucracy indirectly exercises ownership changing the meaning of ownership to the privilege to administer and control. From this universal monopoly over production the bureaucracy also derives an exclusive political position which excludes any form of control or opposition. This system logically implies concentration of all economic decisions in the hands of a central organ, the hierarchy of plans, and vertical system of relations between various parts of the economic administration, Such a structure is particularly well-suited to ensure the allocation of economy's resources on politically determined priorities. A centrally prescribed plan is thus the backbone of all, not only economic, activity. The plan for implementation is imposed upon economic units and the general public via the organs of the Party, government, and other organizations and institutions. The economic system resembles a single, huge enterprise managed by the Party oligarchy. This monopolistic power of the Party has been theoretically defended by the principle of the unity of power and ownership.7 The enterprises are legally and administratively subordinate to the 7.
"Socialist ownership unites the aClions of people in 8 unified economy wilh unified leadership". . . . "SocialiSI ownership of Ihe means of production requires Ihal society should guide Ihe entire development of production, and Ihis is done through the slale. And Ihe more social~1 ownership develops, the more important becomes slate guidance of Ihe economy ... " ... _ "The gUiding and organising force of the socialist slllle is (he Marxist-Leninist Party: II directs Ihe work of all stale orlans and mllss organislltions uf the working people, it mobilises workers, peasants and intellectuals alike for Ihe fulfilment of economic and polilical lasks, educates the masses and imbues them with communist consciousness." See, for example, P. Nikitin, FWldumetiruls of Politicol t:c:orlOmy, (MIIY 19S9). pp. 234 and 240.
Economic Analysis and Policy
19
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
apparatus of governmcnt and are at the same time considered as the lowest rung of the ladder of government. This bureaucratic economic order naturally rules Ollt the fUllctioning of the market and on the other hemd necessitates the management of t!le economy by administrative decrees. Ideologically bureaucratic socialism represents a system of teachings based on the Marxist-Leninist doctrine and defending the vested interests of the Party. This ideology is presented as de facto thoughts of the working class itself. No public polemics with the holders of the unofficial views is allowed, presumably from the fear that people might become affected and rigid controls and censorship are imposed over the whole range of culture with particular allcntion to literature and art as "important agents of the ideological and cultural rebirth and socialist education of the masses".8 For in such system the monopoly of power is fell to constitute a monopoly of truth and a monopoly of the right ideas in all matters. It logically leads in to credo quia absurdum - understanding through faith - which is at the end destructive of all social and economic life. In the absence of the freedom to publicly express differing opinions and of political activities outside the Party, the connicting interests arising from the different interests of the stratified society tend to accumulate and to lead in time to a crisis affecting thc entire system. The Crisis of Bureaucratic Socialism. In the 19505 the first features of economic crisis started to appear accentuated by crises in the political and ideological spheres. The symptoms of economic crisis became evident as a slowing down of economic growth, an increase in economic imbalance, a decline of efficiency, technological stagnation and prog{l~s~ive inflalion. 9 8.
Accordingly, the publishing industries and book distribution systems become II State monopoly. All libraries ar~ placed under a State control. Writen and othcr creative artists are impressed into professional unions controlled entirely by the Party members. The Party's policy in the fields of literature and art is concerned with three tasks: (i) 10 eradicate those manifestalions of the past which can interfere with the Party's indoctrination, (ii) to produce new literature having the proper Communist ideological message, and (iii) to check the innux of undesirable books from abroad. For discussion of these aspects, see, for c:C3mple, J.G. Whelan, Aspecls o{ Intellectual Ferme"t and Disselll ill Czeclloslollakia (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1969).
9.
Compound Annual Rates of Incn:ase of National Income and Incremental Capital Output Ratio in Selected Countries ICOR related to PrOductive tnvestment
National Income Country 195(}-55
1955-60
196Q.65
195Q.55
1955-60
196Q.65
USSR
11.3
BUlgaria CZfK.hoslovakla E. Germany Hungary Poland Rumania
12.2
1.60 1.62 2.27
2.76 3.37 10_83
13.9
7.0
B.3 B.' 1.B 3.5 '.7 5.9 B.7
1.20 1.78 1.84
B.3 B.B
9.' 9.7 7.1 7.0 B.5 B.B
B.O 11.4
-
-
3.17 2.05
2.18 2.61
-
-
-
4.43 3.38
-
Sou rec: T.F.J. RihiJ. Til(' N.au/.f lind COlIseqlllmces of tile II uxus/ Cri.fis in Has/enl t;urupe (MillleoJo(rarh.lJlliv~rsiIYof Yurk, 1968).
Economic Analysis and Policy
20
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
TIle greatest deficiency of bureaucratic socialism is that it lacks a market mechanism which would provide for lhe continuous confrontation of individual, group and gencml interest in every sphere. The market is theoretically the only basis known throughout human history for determin. ing equivalence and equality, and the only basis for political democracy and for the autonomy of the individual in aU spheres - economic, political, legal and civic. The basic cause of the stagnation and crisis of the model is the fact that it negated the market in the economic, as well as the sociological and political, senses. "Market spontaneity and socialism are incompatible and mutually exclusive." I 0 A markel presupposes a horizontal relationship between participants who act as free agents in civic and legal senses. A market also requires strong individualism and free initiative on the parts of individuals since in the absence of this, society cannot attain a normal political and social condition. If one man decides for another and directs him, the danger arises for that all his abilities will not find full scope and if the power centre decides for the whole nation and directs it, the loses incurred in all spheres of the human activity must be innumerable. I I In the absence of the market there is always a danger that people may personalize their working situations and behave towards their economic partners not as impersonal links in a functioning system but as unpredictable individuals, acting according to their moods, sympathies and power. Whenever the function of the market, with its relations of equality or equivalence, has been eliminated or weakened, democracy has disappeared too, regardless of the wishes of the people. In practice, however, democracy signifies a tolerable inequality, a least - and progressively lessening through the innumerable clashes of interests - common multiple of inequality. In political terms, the denial of market relations means ignoring the conflicts of interests ensuing from the very essence of a socialist economy. A commodity economy continually produces lwo kinds of material interests: general and partial. The general material interests results from the collective ownership of the means of production which establishes de jure an economic equality amongst all members of society, but de facto a right for the bureaucracy to exercise this ownership. The partial material interests result from the social division of labour thaI creates conditions of inequality amongst the members of society. Differ· ences in partial interests and contradiction in general interest have a tendency to assert themselves in the political as well as the economic 10.
1'. Nikltin, op. cit.. p. 235.
II.
See, ror example, (NeblJn, 1970).
H..
Selucky, Czechoslovakia:
17le Pian
"11wt 1'/./;'
Economic Analysis and Policy
21
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
fields. 12 Their confrontation is indeed the essence of democracy and their fulfilment and regulation is the content of politics to the extent that, in a given society, democracy and political life condition one another. The consequences of the non-market theory of the economy has even more complex ramifications. Having eliminated all scope for the confrontation of interests in the economy, the power centre has no reason to allow any to remain in politics. This glaring contrast between the dictatorial practice and the theory of socialism is a constant source for the creation of opposition to centraJist bureaucracy. The question arises, are there no countervailing advantages in this type of socialist system? Certainly there are. It affords everyone the elementary social certainty of employment, even if his performance fails to satisfy the demands and needs of an employer. The old method of curing the crisis situation consisted of personal changes in the leadership and moderate reforms of the system without touching the principles. "The political philosophy of the statesmen of this period was based on scapegoats - capitalists, kulaks, Jews, and intellectuals - and Hungarian sausage".13 The politics of "sausage realism" economic bribery - is successful as long as there is something whose price can be reduced, and if a politician is unable to reduce prices it has fatal consequences for his career. 14 Economic efficiency suffers under this "realism" and a country is inevitably heading towards economic collapse. There is no open mass political opposition but the failure of the economic structure may be sufficient to bring about a state of insecurity and to undermine the foundations of the regime. As soon as the people find that the cause of economic stagnation is in the system itself, a true crisis situation arises. Those above are 110 longer capable of ruling by the old methods, those below are no longer willing to be so ruled. The damage the bureaucratic model causes does not onJy affect 12.
II is a remarkable Characleristic of Ihe developmem of the Bolshevik Parly that almost all the early leaders of th~ Party (Trotsky. Zinoviev. Kamenev. Rakowsky. Tomsky. Buchsrin, Rykov, etc.) found themselves opposing Ih~ leading line wilhin the course of a dectlde. Some Bolsheviks guessed al Ihe rool cause of the conSlllnl formalion of opposition groups wilhin the party. There were groups wilh various economic interests in Itussia, bu t only OIlC legal party. This was essentially the party of the faclory proletariat, but was obliged to proteci lhe interests of the olher groups, too. The par1ial inlcreslS found supporters inside the Party and its unity suffered. To rcnu:dy Ihis situation, it was suggested thai the Party should abandon the monopoly position in politics and permit the lawful existence of moderate socialisl parties, on condition that they supported Ihe soviet government. Dul this suggeslion was condemned as a very dangerous heresy. Contradiction in general interest was revealed more explosively in open revolts of people against the bureaucracy (Hungary, Poland, Berlin, Czechoslovakia, and again POland).
13.
I. Svilak, "With Vllur 1·lead Againsl the Wall", Student, No. IS, AIHil 10, Prague, 1968.
1"1.
For example, GUlIlulka et al. ill Poland, 1970.
Economic Analysis and Policy
22
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
el'onomk and political spheres direclly. but also indirel'fly via deformalion of the pe~onal life of every single individual under it. An individual is made into a tool, a means, an object or the ruling elite in the process of the fulfilment of the economic or political goals which become the "all· pervasive moral nOnll and the objective of all ethical effort".ls This system tends to strip individuals of their individuality and sclf·respect. The individual is deprived of his freedom of choice in economics, politics, and cui lure and the power centre arrogates to itself a monopoly of decision and command.
TIle disintegration of individual living under bureaucratic socialislll may take three dimensions: it may stifle the man's belief in the purpose of ltis productive activity, it may break up the natural uniLy of production and consumption,I6 and it may frustrate his desire for self·fulfilment. An individual realising that he has no innuence whatever, begins to draw the distinction between US and THEM which becomes a permanent aspect of this type of society. This environment naturally drives people into apathy and escapism. 17 Apathy is the usual symptom of the fact that the individuals do not share the "common" interest with the regime. Such people, living theoretically in a collective environment, nee outside office hours into their personal hideouts, into an internal emigration. The system, however, does 110t stop at organising economic and political activities, but it also attempts organising Ihe personal life of the individuals. The "cult of privacy" and the avoidance of public life and public functions is the object of strong criticism by the Party and the State. 18 According to Marx, alienation is essentially a condition which Illan suffers when he ceases to be the master of the fruits of his own labour. Since the means of production have been vesled in workers through state ownership, the Party's ideologists maintain a fiction that alienation cannot therefore exist in a socialist counlry. In spite of this official denial which hides the contradiction in general interest, all kinds of alienation exist under bureaucratic socialism producing social schizophrenia alllong those who must live under it with IS. 16.
I. Gadourek, Moral Problems i,1 a Soviet Sateltite State, (CFIE: Groningen, 1963), p. 10. The cenlral plan with ils impersonal logic is inserted belween producer (homo faber) and consumer (homo consumens).
17.
Flourishing alcoholism in these societies is an indicalion lhllt nlllny find the social reality too difficult to face and lry to escape into Ihe realm of unreillity. For discussion of this aspecI see, ror example, I. Gadourek, op. (:il., p. 68.
18.
II is no accident that this problem ha~ been alwuys dealt with by the governments of toUlitarian countries. The Germans Illlvc even invented for this problem the horrible and self-contradktory flame of "'rcizcitgestaltung that lileraJly lranslated means: the shaping of the use mOlde of the people's free lime. In Ihis conlext, the shorter working hours hecomes a suhject of Ihe Party's deep conce,". Three possible ways were sugge~lcd how 10 make people spend their newly acquired "leisure": (i) the factories wilt organize (;()urse$ in f)rder 10 give the personnel adequate lechnic .. 1 Iruilling, (ii) workers should panicipalc more lIclively in lhe polilical and I>uhlic Iit'll, (iii) the Plirly should hestow much care ()/I heller possibilities f}f organized recreation. See. for eXllmplt:. B. Kuhler in Rudt! Provo, I'raKUc. N'lVcmher 16. 1')60.
Economic Analysis and Policy
23
Vol. 05 No. 01, March 1974
all the detrimental effects for the functioning of the system. Conclusions.
The principles of the bureaucratic model of socialism still survive in Communist countries but the crisis of the whole system has been gradually spreading from country to country. The bureaucratic model proved to be not only inefficient but also inept to absorb into an economic system the latest advances in science and technology, Many aHempts have been carried oul" by means of economic reforms, to revive the system. The regime has not been overtly opposed to alterations, but it has resisted the slightest attempt which may loosen its administrative monopoly. Selfpreservation has motivated the bureaucracy to subvert all reform attempts from the very beginning. 19 It seems to be absolutely necessary, if economic and social progress is to succeed, that the existing model of socialism be replaced by a qualitatively new system providing incentives for the free development of the progressive forces of the society, which would in turn guarantee the execution of profound structural changes in economic, political and culturallife. 2o The qualitative changes in the orthodox power structure must be executed from outside the Party and this cannot be done unless the proponents of the !lew system are supported by mounting maSS disenchantment with bureaucratic socialism. When, how smooth and how gradual the process of transformation will be will depend upon many factors of internal and external values, amongst which the economic agents might be of major importance.
University of Queensland Department of Economics
Tomas l.F. Rilla
19.
One of the tasks of the Seven-Year Phln of the Soviet Union in 1<)65 was 10 replace the central iSSlIlIIlce of directives by economic stimuli and thus devolve decision-making authority to lower levels in the economic hierarchy_ Insteud the hureaucratizatioll of economic lifc has greatty extended. After remaining essentially stable in numbers for a decade, employment in stILle administratiOIl grcw each year during 1964-70, for a tOlal increase of some 516,000, or 38 per cent. Sec, for example,
20.
Up till now Lih~HnHlllism and similar reforms havc l;lvoked only (;ompetition he tween the hureauna(;y and !he !eclmocracy for the right !o exercise collective ownership, without suggesting 11 solulion to qutlliltllive slrUClllrtll problems of Ihe .\ocialis! economy.