Lenin sets out the details of the process he has described by reference to actual data. The data he sets out illustrating the process by which capitalism developed, in Russia, via a differentiation of the peasantry, is that previously discussed in “New Economic Developments in Peasant Life”. As I've already discussed that data in the previous posts, I do not propose to discuss it here. It is only necessary to note that this process of differentiation of the peasantry, itself resulting from commodity production and competition, leads to the development of a small group of capitalist producers, and, at the same time, a large group of dispossessed producers, who must become wage workers. By contrast, the Nardoniks have no objective explanation.
“It is represented as a sort of “accident”; its emergence is attributed either to “we took the wrong road”.., or to ‘implantation” by the authorities. Why do “the masses become impoverished”? This again is not answered by the diagram, and in place of an answer the Narodniks dispose of the matter with sentimental phrases about a ‘Time-hallowed system,” deviation from the true path, and similar nonsense which the celebrated “subjective method in sociology” is so good at inventing.” (p 107)
This idea of there being some “natural path” of development is again one confronted in the literature on development as presented in the theories of the Stalinists, Third Worldists, and other “anti-imperialists”, as is the notion of “implantation”, except the implantation is portrayed as the work of imperialist powers rather than the “authorities”.
“The inability to explain capitalism, and preference for utopias instead of a study and elucidation of reality, lead to a denial of the significance and strength of capitalism.” (p 107-8)
In fact, as Trotsky points out, in relation to Mexico's Second Six Year Plan, in order for capitalism, including state capital, to develop, capital is required, and it is precisely that which developing economies lack. As Lenin has described, capitalism can develop slowly, based on internal resources, and the expansion of the market, as a result of the increasing social division of labour, but the key to more rapid industrialisation and capital accumulation is precisely the more rapid growth of Department I (c), and that requires more technological development. That, again, developing economies lack, whilst advanced economies possess it in abundance. It is no accident that, in the joint venture agreements that China has entered into with western multinationals, a part of the agreement involves technology transfer to the Chinese companies. It is the same thing that Lenin attempted to achieve via similar joint ventures, in the 1920's, such as that entered into with Armand Hammer of Occidental Petroleum.
As Trotsky put it,
“This government participation would have the advantage of educating native technical and administrative personnel in collaboration with the best engineers and organisers of other countries. The period fixed in the contract before the optional buying out of the enterprise would create the necessary confidence among capital investors. The rate of industrialisation would be accelerated...
Despite all these advantages the industrial reconstruction of the country was begun with the granting of concessions. Lenin accorded great importance to these concessions for the economic development of the country and for the technical and administrative education of Soviet personnel. There has been no socialist revolution in Mexico. The international situation does not even allow for the cancellation of the public debt. The country we repeat is poor. Under such conditions it would be almost suicidal to close the doors to foreign capital. To construct state capitalism, capital is necessary.”
(On Mexico's Second Six Year Plan)
No comments:
Post a Comment