The "problem" with Stalin's economic model is that it requires energetic
participation rather than routine rote following the "letter of the plan"
--- The end of "faith" in the "promise of socialism" due to Stalin's crimes
against the Soviet people meant that workers and managers and party
members, etc. did not believe that they were living in a workers' and
peasants' state --- but in a country dominated by top leaders of the party
with virtually nothing but cosmetic bottom up "participation" --- it was
the end of idealism that was the main "fruit" of Stalinism --- not the
creaky model which worked when the goal was producing steel but not when
the goal was producing furniture, televisions, restaurant meals, etc.

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 4:01 PM Vladimiro Giacche' <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I wonder if the right answer couldn’t be “both hypotheses are right ”.
> That is: Stalin’s economic model was at first very effective: so effective
> that it enabled the most impressive economic catching up in the world
> history; but in the following phase the same model wasn’t apt to guarantee
> anymore an adequate growth
>
>


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#7607): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/7607
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/81598391/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES &amp; NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly &amp; permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to