--- On Tue, 10/6/09, Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> wrote:


From: Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]>
Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] New Economic Policy [CU755]
To: "YCLSA EOM Forum" <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, October 6, 2009, 1:45 PM






[CU for Wednesday, 7 October 2009]

To read Lenin’s writings and speeches on the “New Economic Policy” (NEP) is to 
discover a process of comprehensive unpacking, and assessment, of factors and 
variables that are quite similar to those in play in South Africa at the 
present time. The NEP followed the “War Communism” that had been in effect 
during the Civil War in Russia after the Great October Revolution of 1917. 
[Picture: Lenin in Red Square, Moscow, 25 May 1919]

The NEP was not a substitute for industrial development. Early in our main 
document The Tax in Kind (1921) (linked below), Lenin emphasises:

“Socialism is inconceivable without large-scale capitalist engineering based on 
the latest discoveries of modern science. It is inconceivable without planned 
state organisation which keeps tens of millions of people to the strictest 
observance of a unified standard in production and distribution... At the same 
time socialism is inconceivable unless the proletariat is the ruler of the 
state.”- The Tax in Kind

Later, he sums up:

“The tax in kind is a transition from War Communism to a regular socialist 
exchange of products. The extreme ruin rendered more acute by the crop failure 
in 1920 has made this transition urgently necessary owing to the fact that it 
was impossible to restore large-scale industry rapidly. Hence, the first thing 
to do is to improve the condition of the peasants. The means are the tax in 
kind, the development of exchange between agriculture and industry, and the 
development of small industry. Exchange is freedom of trade; it is capitalism.” 
- The Tax in Kind

The whole document is worth reading and re-reading. It is clear that what Lenin 
is doing is ordering priorities and synthesising all of the factors in play. 
There is no crude dichotomy here that would cancel out the small-scale 
producers in favour of the large ones. On the contrary, the “development of 
exchange” between small and large is seen by Lenin as the “means”, both to 
improve the condition of the peasants, and to restore large-scale industry 
rapidly.

In the Soviet Union, a false dichotomy did subsequently develop between the 
small and the large, and it may have weakened that country and helped to set it 
up for the collapse that occurred. In China, on the contrary, the most 
scrupulous attention was paid to those peasants and petty-bourgeois who formed 
the (once-overwhelming and still-existing) majority of the population; but not 
at the expense of large-scale industrial planning and development. China has 
survived, and prospered.

Even if this is a rough and general assessment, yet it can serve the purpose of 
dramatising the problem that confronts the SACP Special National Congress in 
Polokwane in December, when it comes to discuss “Industrial Strategy” and 
“Rural Development”. Are these things separate? Are they contradictory? Or are 
they one?

There is in fact no choice. We must have it all: both large and small. We must 
also recognise the inter-relationship between the small-scale enterprises, that 
can activate large masses of our people, and the large-scale enterprises, that 
need the same people as providers of goods and services, and as a market. 
Industrial Strategy and Rural Development must be a unity.

The second linked item, the short speech to the Moscow Soviet in 1922, gives 
more of the background and history of the NEP. The third, on the Role and 
Function of Trade Unions under the NEP, speaks unequivocally of “the duty of 
the trade unions to protect the interests of the working people” but needs 
careful reading to the end, so that the crucial component of the working class 
is not altogether left out of the calculation between large and small business. 
Historically, it is the formation and the growth of the proletariat that will 
be determinant, because class struggle is the motor of history, and because the 
proletariat is the gravedigger of capitalism.

Click on these links:

The Tax in Kind, Lenin (14724 words)

Plenary Session Of Moscow Soviet, Speech re NEP (3513 words)

Lenin, Role and Functions of the TUs under NEP (4353 words)

-- 
Blog at: http://domza.blogspot.com/
Communist University web site at: http://amadlandawonye.wikispaces.com/
Subscribe for free e-mail updates at: 
http://groups.google.com/group/Communist-University/ 
Library of documents (CU "CD") at: http://cu.domza.net/
[email protected]





      
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this 
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at 
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, 
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You 
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put 
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this 
address (repeat): [email protected] .
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to