Organ of Alliance Marxist-Leninist (North America)
                                Volume 1, Issue 3; March 2003 $1.00

A L L I A N C E ! ,A Revolutionary Communist Monthly

         First Chief Architect of Capitalist Restoration - Nikita S. Khruschev (1894-1971)

    This recurrent question usually receives one of two answers:
    Either that the state became capitalist at the death of Stalin in 1953;
    at the accession to power of Gorbachov.

    Alliance rejects both of these ?answers?,
    The first as being mechanical and veering to the ?great man theory? of history;
    the second as being naïve ? or opportunistic - in the extreme.

We will outline our views, in the form of an open reply to a reader who objected to our formulation as follows:

Continued page twenty

                    Khruschev 1962                        Leonid Brezhnev (1906-1982)
  (Soviet revisionist Head state 1955-1964)    (Revisionist First Secretary CPSU (1964-1982)

     We appreciate frank criticism, and are prepared to examine it closely ? and prepared to honestly give self-criticism where we are wrong. However, we cannot agree with your current critique.     Immediately we may argue that NONE of the items listed as ?proofs? of your view numbered as1-5 ? ?demand? that the change of the character of the state from socialist to revisionist-capitalist ? had to have taken place. At this stage ? we will not focus on this line of rebuttal. We will simply state our view, that all these items ? are political rather than economic ? questions. By and large, as far as Marxist-Leninists view it, it is economics that dictate the nature of the society. Thus all your points 1-5 ? have no bearing on the question of the economic base of the society. Except potentially, for your point (4), namely: ?Why the new emphasis in economic policies away from supporting heavy industries??     If this is not of itself a defining characteristic marking socialism - What in that case are the defining characteristics? In the Marxist-Leninist Classes adopted by the Communist League, The NCMLU (UK); and Alliance many years ago ? and originally written by Bland - the following definitions are given:     The relevant questions to determine the defining characteristics, then SHOULD become ? ?When did the state of the USSR shift production away from ?central planning?; And; ?When did private ownership of the means of production occur??

    Firstly, let us examine the question of not WHEN revisionism took hold of the reins of power, but,
    When it could turn the state socialism into a state that was unequivocally capitalist.

    Bland?s ?Restoration Of Capitalism In the Soviet Union? (London 1980) (See  discusses this.

    In his Introduction, Bland talks of the first three phases of the attempt to defeat socialism in the USSR. He there discusses the ?intermediate? period of the Khrushchev regime, that was needed for the ?preparatory measures? that the ?embryonic capitalists? had to undertake to initiate the ?economic reforms?.

    It is these ?economic reforms?, that formed the actual restoration of capitalism.  Already, in his first detailed analysis of this period, Bland had pointed out that it was the Lieberman ?economic reforms? that had subverted the motive forces for production ? into the profit motives:

    Later on, Bland elaborated on the fourth phase ? the intermediate phase ? of the restoration of capital: Continued on page twenty-one

           Lazar M.Kagonovich (1893-1991)            Alexei Kosygin (1904-1980)
            Bolshevik close to Stalin                                Soviet revisionist Premier - close to Brezhnev

    Bland writes further on in the same book, that they were designed to disrupt central planning. Alliance - considers Central Planning as a constituent part of socialism. Yet the ?economic reforms? intended to do away with this:     So the elimination of ?Central Planning? ? a key part of socialism came long after even 1956!

    Secondly, what about the profit regulator as the motive force of production?

    Again according to Bland this was far later than Khrushchev?s accession to power:

    Finally, under socialism, and under Stalin ? the State was the owner of major land, resources and means of production ? or property.

    Bland points out in Chapter 6, that this was:

    However, Bland goes on to point out that under Khrushchev, and after the economic reforms? ? this no longer applied:     Any calm consideration of the economic characteristics of the state after the death of Stalin ? cannot come to the conclusion that the restoration of capital took place before1961.
The transitional period following Stalin?s death was associated with political events that were designed to pave the way to force through the economic changes.
continued on page twenty-three

State Economic Planning Council 1936

You allege that we in ?Alliance? not only ignore ?stubborn facts?  - but have adopted a Maoist perspective, as follows:     In reply, it would appear to us, that the ?stubborn facts? supports our interpretation. We should say in passing, that the disagreement between the Maoists and ourselves should not be at issue for you comrade G. In fact we find it a little sad that you think it is a pertinent point to make at all. But then, it is right also that none of us can be too careful.

    In that spirit ? we will try to show you, that by elevating your points about the political points made in 1-3 & 5 ? you are in fact following an ultra-leftist ? Maoist line. For the Maoist error in ?socialist? economics, involves the same problem that inadvertently you are making.
Namely, elevating the political relationships to a precedence over the economic relationships.

    Thus in April 25, 1956, Mao made a major speech entitled, ?On The Ten Major Relationships?  There Mao clearly states that there were supposed ?economic errors made by Stalin?: One of the most fundamental errors, according to Mao, was the relationship between heavy and light industry. Thus here Mao openly agrees with many bourgeois economists in a critique of Stalin:
      In a series of speeches and talks, Mao critiqued heavily Stalin?s Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR?, emphasizing that Stalin ?walked on one leg? by ignoring politics:     According to Mao, it is political aspects ? most prominently ? ?Stalin?s distrust of the peasantry? ? that explain alleged ?failures? of the socialist economy in the USSR:
Continued on page twenty-four.
      Now, we do not intend to offer here, a full critique of Maoist economics. This is not the time nor the place to do that.
    What we simply wish to highlight is that it is very easy to adopt the posture ?J?accuse!? ? without a due consideration of the full facts, or of the history of the organization and individual. Put simply ? to drive home the parallels between your view and those of Mao (?politics first?! ? in deciding the class character of a state) ? would be wrong.

    We know you are not a Maoist. Surely ? you know that we are not Maoists!?