[PEN-L:14538] Anarchism vs. Marxism-Leninism

[Alexandre Fenelon]

At 17:29 09/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Sam,
>
>>
>>Ha, standard conservative propaganda. How do you know this? Why didn't
>>they become capitalist social democracies? What you are arguing for is
>>social democracy. Judging by its pre-revolutionary economy, Russia would
>>have become another India or Brazil. 90% of the population in 1917 was
>>illiterate. Same with China. Starvation was eliminated and life
>>expectancy rose. No small feat with such a large population and small
>>economy.
>
>
>
I would like to make a question. Where is your source of 90% illiteracy
in Russia before 1917? Orlando Figes in his book ( A people's tragedy-
Russian revolution 1891-1924) states that it was 60%.I wouldn't say
the czarist Russia was India or Brazil. It was a backward country, with
an uneven development. Some sophisticated industries, but more than 80%
of population living in rural areas with a life expectancy of 35 years.
And it had high rates of economic growth from 1900 to 1913. It was only
after 3 years of war against German and more 3 years of Civil war that
the economy (mainly industrial production) decreased to miserable 
levels. The fault of this disaster can be put only in the Bolsheviks,
but their policies (confiscations, war communism) were partially res-
ponsible by economic ruin. The early USSR experience should be used
as justification for a gradual approach in the transition to socialism
(not to mention the need for democracy). I disagree from writers like
Trotsky and E. Hobsbawn who said the Soviet Revolution wouldn't be 
succeded withouth a International Revolution. Some extraordinary 
achievements by USSR (high GNP growth rates from 1929 to 1970), despite
some terrible mistakes of economic policies and the massive destruction
of WWII, would suggest that the results could be even better with
wiser policies (however, "what is if" is not very amenable to scientific
discussion.

                                Alexandre