What is uneconomic under capitalism does not become economic under socialism.

Mark Jones markjones011 at tiscali.co.uk
Fri Dec 13 17:25:17 MST 2002


Lou Paulsen makes some very important points for example abut capitalist
"cheating" and I agree with this. I also agree with the irrationality and
parasitism of much of so-called "service industries". These costs of
commoditisation did not apply to socialist states like the USSR, which in
the arena where it chose to compete: defence and the military--it was
extraordinarily and unexpectedly successful, just because it did not have so
many overheads as capitalist states do and was able to accomplish
dramatically more with much less input. I don't this in any way contradicts
my point that the USSR was inefficient as an economic competitor, rather
than military competitor. In fact, I think the problem was not that the USSR
had too many social priorities but too few: it got trapped into an
inevitably unsuccessful economic competition with the capitalist world,
instead of doing what it did best, namely, mobilise the masses in the
militant and armed defence of the revolution. This is probably another way
of saying that what really did the USSR in was revisionism and making
peaceful coexistence the central (and defeatist) plank of its policy,
instead of just a short-term tactic in an ongoing war, as Lenin first
envisaged it.

Mark


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list