--- excerpt from ---

Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 23:08:52 +0100
Subject: LL9804475 MWG: Reply to Klo McKinsey, part 2

*          *          *

Klo also writes:  I also have some questions I would like you to answer
regarding your personal views.

OK.  Ill try to answer these in a much briefer manner than the
questions above.


-- (a) Would you allow bourgeois parties 
to run candidates, distribute literature, 
appear on the media etc., if you were 
making policy for a socialist state?

[Technical Note: In the following answers, I will consider socialist
state synonymous with dictatorship of the proletariat]

If by bourgeois parties you mean political parties that advocate
capitalist restoration and a return of power to the bourgeoisie -- HELL
NO!  Under the dictatorship of the proletariat, only parties that would
defend the workers state against (or, at the minimum, refuse to
support) imperialist intervention and internal counterrevolution would
be allowed to operate freely.

I would take the Bolsheviks approach to such parties:  Until such time
as they advocate or foment counterrevolution, let them operate -- but
never for one second think that they will remain that way.  Always
anticipate that they will, under the blows of the class struggle, move
toward advocating counterrevolution.  But wait until such tendencies are
clear in the eyes of the working masses.


-- (b) Would you allow private ownership of the 
means of production, distribution and exchange 
and, if so, to what degree?

In general, this would depend on the concrete dynamics of the
development of the proletarian dictatorship.  To break it down
specifically, would you allow private ownership of the means of
production?

No.  The point of the transition period between capitalism and communism
(the dictatorship of the proletariat) is not to solidify capitalist
property relations, but to destroy them.  This means that the means of
production must be nationalized under workers control.  Anything less
only retards the development toward socialism.  This point is generally
immutable.

Would you allow private ownership of the means of ... distribution and
exchange and, if so, to what degree?

For this, I would turn to Lenins comments on concessions during the
period of the N.E.P.:

"Is it not dangerous to invite the capitalists, does it not imply a
development of capitalism? Yes, it does imply a development of
capitalism, but this is not dangerous, because power will still be in
the hands of the workers and peasants, and the landowners and the
capitalists will not be getting back their property. A concession is
something in the nature of a contract of lease. The capitalist becomes,
for a specified period, the lessee of a certain part of state property
under a contract, but he does not become the owner. The state remains
the owner.  

The Soviet government will see to it that the capitalist lessee abides
by the terms of the contract, that the contract is to our advantage, and
that, as a result, the condition of the workers and peasants is
improved.  On these terms the development of capitalism is not
dangerous, and the workers and peasants stand to gain by obtaining a
larger quantity of products. (Concessions and the Development of
Capitalism, Collected Works, Vol. 32 [International, 1977].)


-- (c) How would the leaders of a socialist system be 
selected, if your program were instituted?  How do you 
stand with respect to Lenin's democratic centralism?

In reality, these are two different questions -- the first related to a
workers state, and the second to the revolutionary party of the
proletarian vanguard.

For the first question, I would take as my example the early Soviet
republic: elections from local and regional soviets (workers and
soldiers councils) to a national congress of soviets.  That congress
would elect an executive committee, and from that, the various
secretaries of different departments.  Specific national circumstances
may require certain nuancial differences, but the general model would be
the same.

As for the second, as Bolshevik-Leninists we stand squarely on the
Marxist and dialectical basis of democratic centralism as developed by
Lenin and the Bolsheviks through its experiences.  This means that we
adhere to Lenins conception of democratic centralism -- full freedom
of criticism, full unity in action -- as outlined in What Is To Be
Done? and his letters to the C.C. of the RSDLP (b) on the party of the
new type.

In order to have democratic centralism, both elements must be allowed to
exist.  You cannot have one without the other, or else you fail at
both.  As with Lenin, we reject attempting to substitute one for the
other (monolithism on one side and ultrademocracy on the other).  We
also recognize that the emphasis that a Bolshevik party places on one
aspect of democratic centralism depends on material conditions (e.g.,
illegality, civil war, etc.).  We stand by the Cominterns Theses on
the Organizational Structure of the Communist Parties: Its Methods and
Content of Their Work, passed at the Third World Congress.


-- (d) What guidelines would you institute regarding 
the distribution of anti-socialist writings, books, 
periodicals, magazines, etc. and what rules would you 
institute regarding public speaking?

In terms of writings, books, periodicals, magazines, etc., of
counterrevolutionary (i.e., capitalist restorationist) forces in the
period of the proletarian dictatorship, they obviously would be
suppressed.  The same would also apply to public speaking.

As for historical writings, etc., they would best be left to gather
dust on the shelves of the libraries and museums of the socialist
society.

As Bolsheviks, we are not fetishists over democracy.  We recognize
that democracy has a class nature, and thus an inate inequality.  We
fight for workers democracy -- socialist democracy -- as opposed to the
bourgeois-liberal democracy which was the standard-bearer for
counterrevolution in the USSR and Eastern Europe in 1986-1991.

Jim Paris
-- 
Marxist Workers' Group        | Ph#: (313) 535-7161
P.O. Box 19221                | Fax: (313) 535-4212
Detroit MI 48219-0221         | MWG@marxistworker.nu
UNITED STATES                 | http://www.marxistworker.nu/