The Development of National Corporate One Party Fascism

Following the Revolution in Russia of 1917 and the dispossession of the feudal/capitalist classes, the Revolutionary Social Democrats (Communist) firstly tried to build it as a national, transitional socialist revolution which would be part of the international movement for the future SOCIETY of communism.

In accord with the contention of Marx that, ‘The proletariat of each country must, of course, first of all settle matters with its own bourgeoisie.’ Lenin, in his time, took the view that, ‘Socialism is possible in several countries or even in one country alone.‘ and both Stalin and Trotsky, the future contenders in becoming the Leader, from the vantage point of its Central Committee, of what had been the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, publicly agreed with him.

In the class society of Capitalism and the class society of Socialism, political and organisational centralism is established to ensure discipline and security. Any democracy will reflect in principle, although not necessarily in practice, class interests through the Party and, also, through the State.

At this point, it is essential to remember that Marx did not envisage a Socialism in which the Revolutionary Party and the Revolutionary State would be one and the same. Of course, objective conditions can arise which may make that necessary, but it should not become a permanent feature of the socialist transition to COMMUNIST SOCIETY.

[ In this, the Historical dominance of the Military in any State has to be recognised ]

[ In England, the Warrior Queens – Elizabeth the First – Victoria – Elizabeth the Second ]

It not being unusual at that time, both Stalin and Trotsky supported the practice of Democratic Capitalist Centralism in the Party rather than Democratic Socialist Centralism and, consequently, expected their supporters to follow their lead.

After the death of Lenin, it was Stalin who became the leader of the first, national state of Socialism. However, his first act was to launch his Lenin Enrolment which brought thousands of recruits into his Party as full members with vote rather than probationary members without vote. This not only dramatically increased its size but, also and more importantly, its political character, away from a party of politically advanced workers that had long been envisaged, firstly by Marx and then by Lenin.

Most Revolutionary Social Democrats at this time took the view that the six imperial states of capitalism in West Europe were in the midst of a worldwide political and economic crisis and they accordingly adopted positions concerning strategy that were in response to that. In general, they did not fully realise that these six imperialist states, through their colonial exploitation, had the means to be far more resilient than had been supposed.

On the international front, the faction led by Trotsky repeated his advocacy of an oppositional strategy for bypassing the first period of settling matters with the capitalist class nationally as envisaged by Marx. The alternative advocated by Trotsky was for driving directly to the international democracy of the later period of the transitional state of socialism.

On the international front, the ruling faction led by Stalin, in his capacity as the leader of the Soviet socialist state in Russia, initially pursued Lenin’s strategy of ‘Socialism in one country alone‘, derived from ‘firstly the national’ of Marx. It was also during this period that the parties of evolutionary Social Democracy, that is, those for reforms within Imperialism, were characterised by the Communists as parties of ‘Social-Fascism’. In essence, the theory of this asserted that, by acting on behalf of the governmental political establishment in the two-party system of capitalist democracy, they were opening the door to the rising national, corporate one party fascisms in West Europe.

However, already being the prime, political  targets of Fascist thugs on the streets, the Communist, revolutionary Social Democrats incorrectly, but understandably perhaps, looked upon all the members of reformist Social Democratic Parties, in general, as Social-Fascists. 

National Social Fascism
1934 – 1945

Stalin had initially argued that, if the revolution was to be defended, industry would have to surpass that of the prewar levels within ten years but, after National, Corporate One Party Fascism had gained political power in the German imperial state, Stalin persuaded firstly the Party and then the Soviet State to support a revisionist strategy for, not just Socialism in one country, but for ‘Communism in one country’.

The theoretical elaborations expressed in the very brief slogan of ‘social fascism’ were archived and the strategy for ‘The People’s Front Against Fascism and War’ was adopted by the Third International, the Comintern, and confirmed at its seventh congress in 1935.

Following the German, Barbarossa invasion of the Soviet Union with 240 Divisions in 1941, that War and the Inter-Imperial War that had begun in 1939, were conflated into a, tactically convenient, ‘War Against Fascism’, aimed at maintaining the tenuous unity which had been agreed between the Soviet Union and its Imperial Allies.

However, the Soviet Union actually fought its defence against the fascism of German imperialism as a Great Patriotic War, the primary concern of which, despite it also being objectively at the same time a defence of the first socialist state, was the survival of the Soviet Union.

Subsequently, in the middle of that War, the Third International was dissolved, reaffirming the long-standing deference of its various national leaders in West Europe to the leadership of Stalin and the Soviet Union and this effectively denied the possibility of questioning the u-turn that had been taken on the theory of Social Fascism.

At the end of the two wars, in 1945, Stalin pursued his revision of both Marxism and Leninism with the continuation of his strategy for the building of communism in one country, on the assumption that the international situation was favourable for that.

Notably, this particular revisionist strategy was undertaken under successive leaderships which included Stalin, Krushchev, Brezhnev, Gorbachev and Yeltsin in an economic competition with the United States that, with the expected, political and economic collapse of the imperialist states failing to materialise, continued, even after Stalin, as a war of attrition for over three decades.

This fusion of the Revolutionary Party and the Revolutionary State had become permanent and the confusion created within its bureaucracy, exacerbated by the new Imperial Sanctions Cold War against the Soviet Union, ultimately led to its disintegration.

Next Page




Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s