tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post115468202777594929..comments2023-10-25T12:49:50.074+01:00Comments on The Old Socialist Unity Blog - we have moved: Have things got worse in Russia?ANhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155742064262981662006-08-16T16:27:00.000+01:002006-08-16T16:27:00.000+01:00At the risk of being tedius, you seem to be arguin...At the risk of being tedius, you seem to be arguing contradictory things here. My questions about Iraq and Cuba was not facetious, there were superficial similarities between pre-sanctions iraq and Cuba. i am just trying to find out what you actually think.<BR/><BR/>If you say that we need to compare the poverty level now with the poverty level in soviet era, then you sem to be still disputing that overall living standards have fallen.<BR/><BR/>But then you admit there has been social collapse.<BR/><BR/>It is a sleight of hand to say that this was about whether "the Soviet system was an improvement on Western-style capitalism". You quesried whether life had got woorse in the former USSR. Well for most people is has, but for some reason you won't acceppt that fact, which is atested to allmost universallly.<BR/><BR/>increasing average income is neither here nor there in answering the contention, becasue <BR/>i) income inequality has vastly increased<BR/>ii) any figues relating to the Russian economy will not take into account the near complate social collapse in parts of the Ukraine, Moldava, and the Turkic republics, that in the USSR had comparable standard of living with much of russia itself.<BR/><BR/>the qestion is not about better or worse, but whter it was fundmantally different or the same.<BR/><BR/>Obvioulsy there were huge differences between various Comecon countries depending on their government, so Romania was god awful, but the DDR was progressive in many respects.ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155740603462068902006-08-16T16:03:00.000+01:002006-08-16T16:03:00.000+01:00Oh give over. Now you're just putting words into m...Oh give over. Now you're just putting words into my mouth. I never said that and you know it.<BR/><BR/>Really, I'm fed up with this whole issue. It started simply because I questioned the assumption at the heart of a statement in a previous posting here (so long ago I've forgotten what about) that the Soviet system was an improvement on Western-style capitalism. I remain unconvinced. Anyone can point to figures showing that there was a social crisis following the collapse of a regime. By that argument you could make a semi-plausible case for the Tsarist regime being better than the Bolshevik one! A slightly long term view is needed, and recent statistics point to a sharp recovery - according to Wikipedia the average salary has increased by a quarter in the past year. And your 18% below the poverty line makes no difference if not compared to the poverty line percentage back in Soviet times.Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155568248899701272006-08-14T16:10:00.000+01:002006-08-14T16:10:00.000+01:00so to rephrase the questuion there is no differenc...so to rephrase the questuion there is no difference between the Ciuban government and Saddam Hussein's?ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155567657149197882006-08-14T16:00:00.000+01:002006-08-14T16:00:00.000+01:00No, I'm not. Mind you Saddam Hussein had the best ...No, I'm not. Mind you Saddam Hussein had the best welfare system in the Middle East prior to the sanctions, so I've been told by Iraqi activists, and I'd never call his regime a progressive one.Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155338419778822082006-08-12T00:20:00.000+01:002006-08-12T00:20:00.000+01:00redaspie - when you say "for that reason and that ...redaspie - when you say "for that reason and that reason alone it deserves some support"<BR/><BR/>You are syaing that the social system in Cuba is not better than the social system in Haiti, or Columbia?ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155336257665963972006-08-11T23:44:00.000+01:002006-08-11T23:44:00.000+01:00"you see your explanation actualy explains nothing..."you see your explanation actualy explains nothing about how the USSR worked, what the causes of its colapse were, nor indeed proviade any guidence on whetehr socialists today should for example defend the Cuban system from capitalist restoration or not."<BR/><BR/>Well, actually I don't think any analysis of whether the Soviet Union was state capitalist or not provides any guidance for whether Cuba should be supported anyway. They're just two completely different situations. The USSR was an imperialist power that subjugated half of Europe for nigh on fifty years. Cuba is a country in Latin America standing up against US dominance - for that reason and that reason alone it deserves some support.Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155317670817433842006-08-11T18:34:00.000+01:002006-08-11T18:34:00.000+01:00Yes, I agree, about degenerated and deformed worke...Yes, I agree, about degenerated and deformed workers states being in transition.<BR/><BR/>Pardon my bias, but state capitalism always struck me as sloppy and opportunistic thinking to say the least.Louisefeministahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08279991897445225597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155315982583309282006-08-11T18:06:00.000+01:002006-08-11T18:06:00.000+01:00Yeah, and it alos doesn't get over the fact that a...Yeah, and it alos doesn't get over the fact that a deformed/degenerate wrkers state is a society in transition.<BR/><BR/>But the very simplicity of the term "state capitalism" causes a different problem, thta comrades think they understand it when they don'tANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155313936317625322006-08-11T17:32:00.000+01:002006-08-11T17:32:00.000+01:00"But where he does have a point is that the names ..."But where he does have a point is that the names are not actually very heplful in describing the content of the theories."<BR/><BR/>I take your point on that especially as I think that deformed workers state, for example, isn't very helpful in explaining the political situation in Cuba.Louisefeministahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08279991897445225597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155313416499889462006-08-11T17:23:00.000+01:002006-08-11T17:23:00.000+01:00Over the issue of jargon, I think Redaspie both ha...Over the issue of jargon, I think Redaspie both has and hasn't got a point.<BR/><BR/>he is wrong to say that the specialised intellectual deiscipline of marxism should not develop its own specialised vocabulary. There are competing theories, it is correct they have names, and we are quite justifieds in using that vocabulary in debate<BR/><BR/>(although that does sometimes cause problems for someone like me who thinks all the theories are inadequate)<BR/><BR/>But where he does have a point is that the names are not actually very heplful in describing the content of the theories.<BR/><BR/>So for example the theoruy ogf a degenerated workerrs state, was a concpet much more easy to get accross at the time of mass communist parties who popularised the idea that the USSR was actaully a workers state.<BR/><BR/>Probably a better description would be a "bureacratised society in transition between capitalism and socialism.". I think Mandel does use a formulation similar to this in some writings.ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155312769934502002006-08-11T17:12:00.000+01:002006-08-11T17:12:00.000+01:00Redaspie:"and the profits thereof"Re USSR: Where w...Redaspie:"and the profits thereof"<BR/>Re USSR: Where were the profits..?<BR/><BR/>I don't understand why using so-called jargon ("state capitalism", "degenerated workers state" and so on) is unhelpful. In my opinion, it is opposite. In layperson's terms, what made the USSR tick? <BR/><BR/>Capitalism restoration in the USSR was a retrograde step. There were shockwaves across the left when it collapsed.<BR/><BR/>That's why what happened in USSR can provide guidance to the situation in Cuba. <BR/><BR/>Of course Cuba has to be defended against capitalist restoration. Control has to be wrested away from the bureaucracy yet the social gains kept (free health care provision and so on)Louisefeministahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08279991897445225597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155242329312909782006-08-10T21:38:00.000+01:002006-08-10T21:38:00.000+01:00In the former USSR itself (different in say Hungar...In the former USSR itself (different in say Hungary) the old nomenklatura have not ended up as the oners, in fact I believe none of the 11 billlionnaires who own nearly all of russia today were leading members of the CPSU.<BR/><BR/>the terminology ay be old hat, and inaccurate even, but it is technical shorthand for underlyinging analyses of how the economy and society worked.<BR/><BR/>you see your explanation actualy explains nothing about how the USSR worked, what the causes of its colapse were, nor indeed proviade any guidence on whetehr socialists today should for example defend the Cuban system from capitalist restoration or not.ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155238784238172882006-08-10T20:39:00.000+01:002006-08-10T20:39:00.000+01:00(Bloody hell, posted this yesterday, haloscan ate ...(Bloody hell, posted this yesterday, haloscan ate it up. Let's start again...)<BR/><BR/>This is the reason why I dislike debates of this nature, because they usually end up trading bit of jargon like 'bureaucratic collectivism' and 'deformed workers' state'. This is probably the reason why the LCR in France stopped talking about the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' in its literature.<BR/><BR/>In layman's terms, then, my view is this. Under Soviet communism, the means of production etc were owned and controlled by the state, who then had a monopoly over the exploitation of the workers, and the profits thereof. With the collapse of the USSR, and the introduction of shock therapy, control of the economy passed to private profiteers (who were frequently members of the old nomenklatura I'm led to believe) and they took over the exploitation of the workers. Whether you want to call that a shift in the mode of exploitation, or a 'step sideways' is entirely up to you.Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155129938655509882006-08-09T14:25:00.000+01:002006-08-09T14:25:00.000+01:00The terminology:as just "a shift in the mode of ex...The terminology:<BR/><BR/>as just "a shift in the mode of exploitation", has been used by the AWL, who believe there has been a shift from bureaucratic collectivism to capitalism (with a sub-text that that is an improvement?)<BR/><BR/>the expression a "step sideways", has been used by the SWP (specifically Chris Harman)- implying no fundamental change in the mode of exploitation.<BR/><BR/>Are you saying that you think there was a shift in the mode of exploitation, or aren't you?ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155129443248881112006-08-09T14:17:00.000+01:002006-08-09T14:17:00.000+01:00No, I was paraphrasing the last line of *your* pos...No, I was paraphrasing the last line of *your* post. I believe the phrase you use was 'a shift in the mode of exploitation' and disputed this.Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155044951201042472006-08-08T14:49:00.000+01:002006-08-08T14:49:00.000+01:00Redaspie - what you said was: " I seem to remember...Redaspie - what you said was: " I seem to remember people queueing up in their hundreds for rotten sausages in the Soviet era. To what extent things have actually gotten worse in the USSR since the collapse of 'Communism' is I think something of a matter of debate."<BR/>"<BR/><BR/>This whole post was to demonstrate that things have in fact got worse, and that is not a question for debate. That is not defending the USSR, that is simply correcting your factual inaccuracy that it was debatable whether or not things had "got worse".<BR/><BR/>Unless you Are in fact disputing that a disastrous social collapse is "worse"?<BR/><BR/>And you seem to be in a bit of a muddle - if you think it has been a shift from one form of exploitation to another, which you say you think it was - then doesn't that contradict the idea that it was previoulsy a capitalist form of exploitation? (That point of mine was directed against the bureucratic collectivists of the AWL - not the state cap argument)ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1155043087612694192006-08-08T14:18:00.000+01:002006-08-08T14:18:00.000+01:00Erm, no, actually you're not just correcting my 'f...Erm, no, actually you're not just correcting my 'factual inaccuries', you are trying to defend the USSR. I note the last sentence of your post on the subject. Your argument is clearly that the collapse of the USSR made things worse, and that that collapse was not a 'sideways shift' from one form of exploitation to another (which I think it was). I'm no USSR expert, but I'm under no illusions that it was any kind of 'workers state', deformed or otherwise.Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154989311289205422006-08-07T23:21:00.000+01:002006-08-07T23:21:00.000+01:00Reaspie - it is absurd to suggest that just becasu...Reaspie - it is absurd to suggest that just becasue i am correcting your factiual inaccuracies about the USSR, that i am a defender of that system or of the corrupt bureucratic rule of the CPSU.<BR/><BR/>My undersatding is that economic strikes were not that uncommon.ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154987197997185012006-08-07T22:46:00.000+01:002006-08-07T22:46:00.000+01:00Well I don't think there were that many strikes to...Well I don't think there were that many strikes to start off with. I suppose you're going to use that as a reason to start talking about how the reason for this was because the workers were so happy and contented under good old Uncle Joe?Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154895844913576772006-08-06T21:24:00.000+01:002006-08-06T21:24:00.000+01:00Redaspie - I challenge you to find a credible acco...Redaspie - I challenge you to find a credible account of strikers being shot in the USSR in recent decades. ;o)<BR/><BR/>I also wnder whether in Russia itself there is meaningful increase in real democratic control, as there is a highly censored and controlled press, and economic power is very tightly controlled by 11 billionnaires, who are not even acocuntable to Putin.ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154856404449574772006-08-06T10:26:00.000+01:002006-08-06T10:26:00.000+01:00I am not defending the soviet union, I am attackin...I am not defending the soviet union, I am attacking marketisation....don't worry there isn't a split between the Tankies and the post-modern euros in the GPEW, we are all for ecology, peace, social justice and grassroots democracy...Derek Wallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05462511891409913195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154773477640525942006-08-05T11:24:00.000+01:002006-08-05T11:24:00.000+01:00Wha? A Green Party member defending the USSR? What...Wha? A Green Party member defending the USSR? What gives? <BR/><BR/>Anyway, the argument that the Soviet Union should have been supported because its collapse led to social crisis is not much of an argument. That could be equally applied to *any* political system. In fact, the danger of social collapse might actually be an argument against socialist revolution!Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154728804187477532006-08-04T23:00:00.000+01:002006-08-04T23:00:00.000+01:00I think this was from the Economist in 2004....the...I think this was from the Economist in 2004....there is no doubt that the collapse of Soviet Union was a catastrophe, I was no fan of the Soveit Union, human rights are dire as well, Putin is after all an ex-KGB ban,mostNGOs are being banned,etc.<BR/><BR/>I don't think this is a debate,the Results are obvious, high prices will be raising gnp but I think Chelsea rather then Moscow will benefit.<BR/><BR/><BR/>In the former Soviet Union the creation of a market economy has led to catastrophe. In an article subtitled ‘Russia appears to be committing suicide’, the Economist (2 October) notes that since 1989 the countries population has plunged by several million and is projected to fall from 147 million today to 120 million in 2030. Declining fertility, violence, sexually transmitted diseases, tuberculosis and alcoholism are just symptoms ‘of the long, dark night of the Russian soul ushered in by the disorienting collapse of communism’.Derek Wallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05462511891409913195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154716605951359212006-08-04T19:36:00.000+01:002006-08-04T19:36:00.000+01:00Actually I've just realised that my phrase 'get wo...Actually I've just realised that my phrase 'get worse' might be interpreted in different ways. There's certainly a good deal more political freedom in Russia than there was under the Soviet Union. I mean, for instance, workers who go on strike don't face being shot by the security forces in usual circumstances.Redaspiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12453413163248568650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21995284.post-1154705494547628552006-08-04T16:31:00.000+01:002006-08-04T16:31:00.000+01:00and Redaspie, do you then conceed by saying "Thing...and Redaspie, do you then conceed by saying "Things falling apart in the way they did in the USSR often does lead to chaos."<BR/><BR/>that your original point was wrong that "To what extent things have actually gotten worse in the USSR since the collapse of 'Communism' is I think something of a matter of debate."<BR/><BR/>Even within an unamobiguously capitalist context such as the closure of MG Rover socialists oppose the disruption and impact on people's lives. So even in that context all socialists should be opposed to the wholsesale dismantling of the economy and social fabric of the USSR.ANhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05901425044840795347noreply@blogger.com