********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.

The Stalinist economies were subject to severe anarchy of production, as has 
been noted by 
all serious economists who studied the Soviet economy, no matter what their 
general point of 
view, provided they weren't hacks. It was manifested in a number of features of 
the economy, 
noted even by the Soviet authorities themselves, and yet repeated over and over 
again, year 
after year. For example, there was -- aside from enterprises fioghting among 
themselves to 
get the resources that they were supposedly entitled to in the plan, and even 
having special 
executives whose job was to conduct this fight  -- dolgostroi ("slow-build"), 
which was the 
phenomenon that it took longer and longer, as the years went on, for Soviet 
projects to be finished. The planning authorities cried and lamented and beat 
their breasts 
about this year after year, and yet continued to specify plans that put forward 
an unrealizable 
amount of construction. This wasn't a failure in the technical ability to plan, 
or else it would 
have been solved in a few years. Instead it got worse over the years. It 
stemmed from the 
very nature of the economy, and no doubt contributed to the prolonged 
stagnation that the 
Soviet economy eventually fell into.

The difference among serious students of these economies is why did this 
anarchy exist. In 
my view, it's because they were state-capitalist economies, not socialist 
economies and not 
transitional economies. It was a sign the economy was run by a new bourgeoisie, 
and it 
occurred because the individual and small-group interests of the different 
members of the 
ruling bourgeoisie conflicted, and these interests had priority, in the way the 
Soviet economy 
actually worked, over the general interests of the ruling bourgeoisie as a 
whole, to say 
nothing of the economy as a whole or the population as a whole.

See "The anarchy of production under the veneer of Soviet revisioinist 
at http://www.communistvoice.org/12cSovAnarchy.html

Louis Proyect wrote:
> https://peoplesdemocracy.in/2018/0701_pd/why-didn%E2%80%99t-socialism-have-over-production-crises
> _________________________________________________________

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 

Reply via email to