Document number 2 submitted by me for debate in Socialist Unity on Workers' States

Reply to Redbedhead and Alfie


Redbedhead falsely asserts that I forgot the necessity of extending World Socialist Revolution as a key part of Permanent Revolution. It is ABC of Revolutionary Marxism that you cannot build Socialism in one country. The political counter-revolution of Stalinism was a reflection of Imperialist pressures on an isolated workers’ state. Imperialism also building up a Bourgeois class from 1990 in Russia by gaining the most out of Stalinism’s implosion is another proof you cannot build Socialism in one country. This Bourgeois class was subordinate to the Bureaucracy. That is why they utilised layers of Bureaucrats concillationist to them as an intermediate stage back to Capitalism. If the Capitalists could rule directly for themselves they would have dumped those Bureaucrats at another stage of Capitalist restoration.


Redbedhead confuses intervention by a Bourgeois state to salvage Capitalist firms; concessions made to the workers (NHS); and those societies where Capitalism has been overthrown. This author (Redbedhead) suggests that the NHS is an inter-Capitalist dispute. Then he goes on to talk about it being a battle over profitability. Do you defend the NHS against privatisation? It is a major gain for British workers because it contains in embryo a post-Capitalist society despite its distortion by the Law of Value. Trotsky argued in the Revolution Betrayed that when workplaces/industries are nationalised in a Capitalist society it strengthens the workers who work there. He argued Capital tries to limit those concessions except for when they are bailing out Capitalist firms because the workers are in a stronger position to challenge Capitalism. That is why Trotsky dismissed State Capitalism as impossibility not only due to Capitalist competition via the Law of Value but because workers would have just one enemy: - the State.


The dual crisis in Russia from 1990 of extreme Bureaucratic pillage and Capitalist inroads (especially from 1992 to 2000) which set back Russia for decades. Redbedhead in dismissing inter-Bureaucratic struggles and workers resistance to this dual crisis as inter-Capitalist ends up with an abstentionist position. As Trotsky said when writing In Defence of Marxism workers will not make new gains unless they defend present ones. Trotskyists seize the chances from more resources going into nationalised industries and social/public services in order to strengthen workers confidence to begin a fight which culminates in Political Revolution with social consequences. There are two examples of this I cited in my previous post.


There is a close co-relation between what happens in the workers’ states in relation to Imperialist countries and semi-Colonies. Despite the crimes of Stalinism millions of workers within the Imperialist countries looked to the Soviet Union as an alternative society to Capitalism due to a depression from 1929 to 1939. From the late 1940s with a boom in the major Imperialist countries Stalinist crimes played into the Liberal Bourgeois hands of salvaging Capitalism. At the same time millions of workers within these Imperialist countries knew about social gains of these workers’ states. Within the semi-Colonies the extension of Socialist revolutions into China; Indochina; Cuba and Nicaragua showed what could be achieved once Capitalism is overthrown.


There was enormous potential with the beginning of incipient Political Revolutions in Eastern Europe in 1989 but due to concillationist elements to Imperialism winning out, dual problems I referred to in Russia apply to Eastern Europe. The ex-GDR and Kosovo are Capitalist states because socialised property relations can only be re-established by overthrowing those Bourgeois states. Except for those two regions Capitalism has not been restored because the Stalinist Bureaucracies still rule Eastern Europe and ex-Soviet states.


Due to millions of workers within the Imperialist countries not understanding Bureaucracies in workers’ states when the Soviet Union broke up is one main reason why the Liberal Bourgeois ideological offensive that Capitalism had been restored in 1992. It was this ideological confusion which played into Blairism’s hands in Britain The majority of middle class layers in these countries made a major impressionistic mistake that Capitalism had destroyed Russia for a whole period.
By the late 1990s section of the middle class fearing a major world Capitalist depression arising from a collapse of the Tiger economies in 1997. There was also a rejection by these layers of Capitalist inroads into the workers’ states. By 1999 the anti-Globalisation movement attacked changes towards a market economy in Eastern Europe and ex-Soviet states. In the same year there was NATO’s bombing of FRY which many middle class elements feared would lead to World War 3. This on top of a financial crisis in 1998 caused intermediate layers within the Russian Bureaucracy to salvage Russia as a workers’ state.


By the Russian Bureaucracy stopping American Imperialism’s attempts at world domination such as opposing America’s bombing of Iraq in December 1998 and the rise of China as a major power shows clearly the Third World masses what is necessary to end Imperialist super-exploitation of their countries. America’s war in Iraq weakened them further. The depression within Western Europe and America through credit debt. Capitalism is so weak now there are beginnings of mass upheavals against effects of their crisis. This Capitalist crisis combined with the decay of Eastern European and Russian Stalinism is the objective basis for an eventual resurgence of Trotskyism.


Alfie defends not recognising Stalinism’s crimes in China. Due to Stalinist policies the 1925-27 Chinese revolution was crushed. After the Chinese Maoists ziz-zaged mainly between Ultra-Left adventurism and Opportunism. Despite of this in areas the Chinese CP’s militia ruled there were some gains for at least certain lower class peasants. Maoism only overthrows Capitalism because they would not make a deal with them. It was World War 2 with Japanese Imperialism being driven out of China and inflation which led to the Maoists overthrowing Chaing-Kai-Shek. This shows that objective circumstances in very unique situations within semi-Colonies can despite a counter-revolutionary leadership can lead a Socialist revolution out of self-preservation.


There were terrible Stalinist crimes in China such as tens of millions who died due to the Great Leap Forward policy. The Cultural Revolution weakened China culturally with great pieces of Art being destroyed. In order to confuse Liberal Bourgeois elements claim falsely that Deng broke from Maoism. Deng won out because the Bureaucracy could only go forward by trading which has been skilfully used to transform China into one of the major workshops of the world.


During the 1980s and 1990s sections of China’s Bureaucracy allowed certain Capitalist firms bad conditions for the workers working in those factories. Trotskyists oppose this as treachery because if the Bureaucracy was overthrown it would not be necessary to make those concessions to Capitalism by workers re-clawing billions of Yuan from Bureaucratic pillage. Trotsky attacked what he called “the friends of the USSR” who did not look at real contradictions in that country. If the Political revolution does not occur in a medium to long-term China will go through a similar 1991-Soviet-type crisis. Undoubtedly the Chinese Bureaucracy has leant from this but is subject to same objective laws.


Comment by Anthony Brain