The Collapse of 'Communism' in the USSR
By Doug Lorimer
New Course Publications
43 pp. $2.50
Reviewed by Sean Malloy
"Socialism can never work" is the conclusion promoted by mainstream ideologues in the wake of Stalinism's collapse.
But then, they have always argued that socialism cannot work. The establishment has always deliberately identified Stalinism and socialism to undermine support for the latter.
Many on the left now argue that the way in which the Russian revolution was organised and established led inevitably to Stalinism. Therefore, they conclude, the type of socialism envisaged by the Bolsheviks is not possible.
Others propose that the Soviet Union had nothing to do with socialism after Stalin took power; they see the bureaucracy as a capitalist class which competed with Western imperialism in the form of the arms race. To them, the collapse of Stalinism is just a change in the composition of the ruling class.
There are even a few who say that the Soviet Union of old was socialism, almost approaching communism, that the horror of Stalin's repression is just an imperialist lie and that Gorbachev is an imperialist agent who "white-anted" the CPSU.
However, a broad section of the left in Australia and around the world is discussing and re-examining the Soviet Union as it was and as it is now, in an attempt to learn from the events of the last few years.
This booklet is a valuable contribution to that discussion, looking at the Soviet Union from the origins of Stalinism to the August '91 coup and addressing distorted history and conclusions presented by mainstream academics and media.
Doug Lorimer examines historical events in the Soviet Union that have become points of debate for the left: the rise of bureaucracy, the rise of Stalinism, the Kronstadt rebellion, the New Economic Policy, perestroika, the August 19 coup.
The notion of Leninism leading to Stalinism is rejected by Lorimer, who argues that neither the organisational methods of the Bolsheviks nor the steps they took to defend the Soviet Union in 1918-21 helped the growth of bureaucratisation or the development of Stalinism.
Lorimer explains this by detailing the development of the bureaucracy and the difference between the existence of bureaucracy and the development of Stalinism. He counterposes Bolshevik policies and actions, in Lenin's time, to Stalin's policies and actions.
Assessing the Gorbachev period, Lorimer notes that the reforms provided an opportunity for Soviet people to re-enter political life and tackle the bureaucracy, but "the actual way the reform process was implemented did not lead to the establishment of popular control over, and involvement in, administration and management".
He later writes that "The main reason for the failure of perestroika was that the Gorbachev leadership continued to rely on the Communist Party to be the driving force of the democratisation process, rather than promoting the independent self-organisation of the Soviet masses. The problem with such an approach was that the CPSU was not only thoroughly bureaucratic, it was the linchpin of the whole system of bureaucratic rule."
Lorimer concludes that, on balance, the collapse of Stalinism is a step forward for the socialist movement. "In the long run, it removes the major obstacle to the building of genuine revolutionary socialist mass parties."