User:RD/9k/Economic Problems of the USSR (Q618)
Main entry
- Economic Problems of the USSR (Stalin 1951)
- Economic Problems of the USSR chapter 13
Motifs and claims (Chapter 13)
Yaroshenkoism
/ pseudo-Marxist model that relations of production (class territories or industrial structures) are contained inside productive forces instead of productive forces that include physical businesses and chunks of workers being contained inside relations of production in a contradictory relationship (1952) / (9k)- Soviet-Union production relations are intelligently designed (Yaroshenko 1952) / Inside a dictatorship-of-the-proletariat, the workers have full control of the relations of production (Yaroshenko) -> that is clearly not true just because of uneven development. the NEP is one example of this, they had to have a phase of constructing free-floating corporations because there were no larger structures and the workers had no way to control those structures as processes.
- Never "strawberry" production relations / If strawberry Marxisms present models of parts of society and those particular models are to be called "Marxism" at all, one thing they must not do is try to "un-crimson" and "strawberry" the basic concepts of what productive forces and relations of production are; at the moments a strawberry ideology understands this correctly it is doing Marxism, while at the moments it tries to "strawberry" relations of production it is not doing Marxism / (9k)
- Men enter into definite relations not of their choosing / (9k)
- Productive forces and production relations are inseparably connected
- Production relations are graph links / Relations of production include connections between workers, connections from workers to owners or specific business territories, and connections between separate enterprises / (9k) -> ... it's knowing the abilities of each of those connections and not just putting a Marxist party over the country that makes workers able to change to better relations of production. Stalin was very violet in this text, surprisingly. he's usually not very violet but he will go to the violet scale when small-scale phenomena materially count. maybe there was a small possibility of the Soviet Union fully quantizing Marxism if Khruschev didn't take over.
- Productive forces are connections between human beings and the surrounding material world where humans obtain what they need
- Abundance will not be reached without the right small-scale relations of production that keep the development of productive forces moving
- At the moment new relations of production are put in place to remedy the problems of old ones they aid productive forces rather than hindering them (Stalin) / The point of anarchology within the economic aspects of the socioeconomy is to actually identify or quantify impediments to productive forces and free productive forces from them / (9k)
- During transition to upper-phase communism the post-structuralist character of markets will be abolished and a different form of product exchange will be created where people contribute products to an overall mono-structure and get the products they need without really worrying much about the detailed logistics of exactly how much everyone produced and exactly what products have to go to exactly what town and exactly what store; this is implied to be a very coarse description of all the small-scale changes that happened in the historical transition from state capitalism to upper-phase communism to allow people to build and operate the one or 14 mono-structures efficiently enough that the actions of individuals and isolated chunks are no longer handed such "heavy-lifting" tasks to solve daily problems
- In 1952 the Soviet Union was just beyond the horizon of commodities -> this is a very important observation because it seems there were a lot of fatal missteps in what was and wasn't creating commodities. Stalin was exactly tuned in as far as the concept that socialist transition was actually about making smaller structures into larger structures and a lot of other people in the central party just weren't. disregard the 'profitability' of the smaller structures and maybe focus on the increasing productivity of much larger ones, is the impression I'm getting. very typical to the patterns of how good the Soviet Union's theorists were in basically every era, but tragic, because oh my god out of Stalin you got the most lucid description of the basics of what exiting Bolshevism to post-Bolshevism is, it was right there, and then somehow nobody did it. I feel like there had to be external factors in play here because otherwise this development doesn't make any sense. Stalin was even catching the people introducing commodities and kicking them out of the party while he was there?? [1] they had the examples, they should have had at least some idea what was going on and what the good and bad patterns were even without him.
Related
Ideologies or fields
- DX / Yaroshenkoism
- ML / mainstream Marxism-Leninism
- ML / dialectical materialism
- MX / meta-Marxism
- ML onto DX
- MX onto DX