[p. 128]
Australia
October 29, 1953
Editor: Fourth International
Dear Comrade:
It was very distressing to see in the March-April issue of the Fourth International an example of confusion unparalleled perhaps in Marxist thought since 1939, as was manifested in two contributions — Editorial Note, Letter from M. Stein. All over the world, particularly in Australia, and America the lights are going out and yet in this period of gloom a young person looks to find strength in men whose intellect he has already regarded as of the first order.
For the last few months I have followed the SWP debate which is concerned, fundamentally, no matter what the side issues, in the basic question of our time — the role of the Soviet Union. Most of what was written was laughable, but now after reading the issue of Fourth International in which the debate is reflected in the three-cornered contentions of George Clarke, Morris Stein and the Editor, I do not feel like laughing any more.
Leon Trotsky died in 1940 — 13 years ago. A new generation, of which I am a member, has arisen since who will build socialism on a world scale. This new generation most probably can't even remember when Leon Trotsky" was alive. We cannot remember for we were hardly born the days of the Moscow Trials, the days of the Popular Front and the United Front. We have only a very dim recollection of the Second World War and the only period we know is the period since the war and the only thing we're really conscious of is that the final showdown between the old and the new orders — capitalism and socialism, will occur before we are middle-aged.
To prove and to base an argument on the quotation of a man who died 12 years ago — no matter how brilliant the man, how profoundly correct his ideas, without any resort to the world since 1945 does not satisfy us. Leon Trotsky wrote for a particular period and for a particular set of circumstances. As Marxists we accept as a fundamental principle that absolute truths do not exist but that truth is determined by a definite time, place and circumstances. And what may be true at 12 o'clock at Sydney in time of a depression may not be true at 5 o'clock in New York in a period of boom. Twelve years is a long time, particularly in this century and the period of 1933-41 is not the same as the period 1945-53. You condemn the Stalinist cult of leader worship,-and yet you practice the very same thing. Instead of blindly accepting every statement of Trotsky's as the absolute truth, let us understand the methods by which he arrived at his conclusions and let us relate Trotsky's analyses to the present day situation.
Both you, editor, and M. Stein have scored G. Clarke for negating some of the particular points of Trotsky's analysis. Beware that you do not stifle the development of One who is trying to resolve today's problems in the light of the present day situation.
Whether you realize it or not, by blindly taking a statement wrenched out of context to prove your point that the Soviet Union cannot be defined as a socialized economy, you have come to an impasse, for if fundamentally the S.U. does not possess a socialized economy nor fundamentally a capitalist economy, or a feudalist economy or a slave economy, it must have an economy which is none of these, an economy which is part socialistic, part capitalistic — in fact, most probably something like state capitalism, or a managerial society, and now we're back to John Strachey of the New Statesman or Burnham of Science and Style.
The first Marxist book I read was In Defense of Marxism and the one thing I learnt was to look at the class basis of a society in an analysis of that society. In the Soviet Union I see the great truth of the means of production, distribution and exchange controlled and scientifically planned by a bureaucracy which is, however, in the last analysis thrown up from, dependent for its very existence upon, and its historical mission determined by the Russian people and the Russian proletariat.
I wonder if you read the articles you print in the Fourth International before you go to press, for I don't think you would have written so much nonsense and sought refuge in so many quotations if you had read and under-stootl the first article in the March-April issue — that by Pablo on the Post War "New Course." This article is written by a man who uses the very minimum of quotations from a period never to return, but instead proves his argument by constant reference to the world in which the new generation is developing. Pablo shows that as the productivity of the Soviet Union under a planned and controlled economy rises more and more, the common Russian person begins to inevitably receive his share in this increased productivity, although due to bureaucracy, by no means his fair share. Nevertheless his standard is rising and as this standard of living rises, the very conditions which determined the need of the bureaucracy are being done away with. Thus the base of the bureaucracy is being slowly undermined. Now there are Trotskyists, who may call themselves that, who perhaps have never heard the name of Trotsky and within the Russian C.P., within the Russian bureaucracy there are men and women who are changing with the changed conditions. And it will be these men and women who will lead the struggle for democracy within the Soviet Union.
[p. 129]
Morris Stein states that "the Soviet bureaucracy will not give up its position without a fight." But what is the position of the bureaucracy? A position determined by them? No, it is a position determined by the Russian proletariat and the international proletariat. As the Russian people's position, which is determined by the economic system under which they live, so the bureaucracy's position alters, and those in the bureaucracy who cannot bring themselves into line are dropped by the wayside — like Stalin's influence and Beria.
Pablo shows that the bureaucracy is making concessions to the Russian people, that from within the bureaucracy shall arise the elements that will cause its abolition. There shall never be the violent upheaval in the abolition of the bureaucracy as there was in the abolition of capitalism, and when it comes down to quibbling about the degree of violence by which this political revolution will take place — well, as far as I am concerned, there are far greater problems in the world than that to be solved.
Since the war Pablo has given brilliant analyses of the changing world situation. Like all the great truths, like Dalton's Atomic Theory and Heraclitus' theory of state of change, Pablo's analyses are profoundly simple. Yet in America you seem to not really understand the bureaucracy and you seem determined to bring in every complexity and side issue imaginable.
Surely Pablo has meant that the final fundamental struggle between socialism and capitalism is imminent — it will happen before I am middle-aged. In this struggle the world will be polarized into two main camps — those who are fighters for the destruction of the capitalist system and the building of socialism, and those who will fight to retain socialism. Russian bureaucracy, although it will try every dirty means it knows to prevent itself from being involved in the Third World War will be affected by the process of polarisation and will, along with the rest of the world be forced to determine whether it will completely sell out to capitalism or will support the fight for socialism.. Because Russian bureaucracy is not in a strong position to sell out anything really important, not China, not Malaya, not Indochina, not Russian people, and because of its class basis and because it has preserved the nationalized economy in Russia through a catastrophic war, Pablo says it will take the side for socialism.
Ask yourself one question, as Pablo once asked me: "Is your main aim the destruction of capitalism?" If it is, then we support and encourage any force including the Stalinists that will destroy this foul system.
Let us get the question of Stalinism in perspective — try to see the world as this new generation sees it; delegating the before-war days to the background. Do not hide behind quotations which were only meant to be used at a particular time and period, and for God's sake, in this most important period of man's history, don't waste time, energy and paper on questions that have been solved, but instead reserve that time, that energy and that paper to plan the destruction of capitalism.
Yours fraternally,
Win Brad Jr.