Re: [Marxism] Bureaucracy and Revolutions (part a)

[nada <dwaltersMIA@xxxxxxxxx>]

I would like to note some of the many, many reasons I believe Waistline 
is wrong on the Lenin's comment on electrification communism.

First the source:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/feb/x02.htm

Written as the civil was winding down a bit and a month before the big 
debates at the 10th Party Congress. What is to done after the civil war 
was won, was on everyone's mind.

Let's see what others said about this. From J. Stalin in 1928 *during* 
the industrialization deate:

"Your question might at first sight appear to be correct. Actually, it 
will not stand the slightest criticism. It should be easy to understand 
that when Lenin says that "Soviet power plus electrification is 
communism," he does not mean by this that there will be any kind of 
political power under communism, nor does he mean that if we have 
seriously set about electrifying the country we have thereby already 
achieved communism.

"What did Lenin mean to say when making this statement? In my opinion, 
all he meant to say was that Soviet power alone is not enough for the 
advance towards communism, that in order to advance towards communism 
the Soviet power must electrify the country and transfer the entire 
national economy to large-scale production, and that the Soviet power is 
prepared to take this course in order to arrive at communism. Lenin's 
dictum implies nothing more than the readiness of the Soviet power to 
advance towards communism through electrification."

Full:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1928/12/28.htm

I'm not one to quote Stalin willy-nilly, but when the guys was right, we 
was right. Stalin correctly contextualizes the issue, pointing out, 
ahead of our discussion here, why Waistline's literalism is wrong.

In a contemporary and hindsight look-see backwards to this statement, 
Lenin's comments were amazingly accurate. There would be no industrial 
development without electrification, at least not one that advances in 
efficiency, density of source, application of increased production. That 
is the absolute prerequisite for the communism is the expansion of the 
productive forces as  Waistline correctly quotes Marx in noting.

Every advancement in human culture (the organization of 
religion/education, agricultural surpluses and distribution, 
transportation, production, science, engineering and technology to apply 
it all) was brought about as a result of an increase in the productive 
methods, most notably, the increasing use of energy by ever more 
quantities per capita, in ever more efficient means, with ever more 
denser forms (i.e.: from 'renewables' like cow dung and charcoal made 
for cutting down forests to high octane gasoline).

I think Lenin understand this. That it wasn't merely a light-bulb used 
to light up a workers house, but at every step of the way energy, 
specifically electrical energy, was the most important material basis in 
order to advance the productive forces and lay the material foundation 
for abundance, that is, communism.

David

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu