Central Planning (Albert/Hahnel + markets)

Greg Schofield g_schofield at dingoblue.net.au
Sat Jan 19 16:50:45 PST 2002


Chuck0:

"Yes, especially for the millions who starved to death. Or the millions who were executed."

"This isn't rocket science. What's amazing is that there are still a few people willing to put positive spin on this nastiness."

I think you miss the important point that Dennis was making.

I am very much opposed to the reified and festishized idea of central planning which the left still uses to solve all problems even though left intellectuals have for the most part broken from the fixation.

In this I tend to use the phrase of the "proletariat directing its own exploitation in its own interest". A concept which can habour markets as well as planning (central or otherwise). Dennis makes the point that when planning is given a social direction - in this case the war against fascism, and correctly typified this as a war economy (this was the model that was used by Stalin well before 1941- and also that promoted by Trotsky much earlier) the effects can be profound - as was the case in the old USSR within the context's Dennis has raised.

On the nastier side of this very little of the executions and slave labour (with the exception of some developments in Siberia) had much to do with the Central Planning (they fitted in but were not necessary to it). State repression in general had its own logic which in turn was supported and helped by authoritarian central economic plans.

The power of planning, of people consciously working towards a conscious end, is indeed a powerful thing and a real bonus to any proletarian form of socialism. That is the point that Dennis was making as I read his comment.

There are caveats, planning which exceeds what can be consciously controled leads to disaster (often sparking an endless round of crisis planning which makes the original problems worse). That is where markets and "free" production comes in and different modes of direction.

Deifying Planning and deifying Markets are not solutions. I assume this is our common point of reference.

Greg Schofield Perth Australia

--- Message Received --- From: Chuck0 <chuck at tao.ca> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 16:43:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Central Planning (Albert/Hahnel + markets)

Dennis Robert Redmond wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Chuck0 wrote:
>
> > As far as Soviet centralized planning goes, I think we all understand
> > that it was a massive failure.
>
> Nyet, comrade. What was call Soviet planning was simply a war economy
> imposed on the place by sheer necessity, nothing more, and it was thanks
> to that war economy that Europe was freed of Fascism. Soviet CP also
> helped jumpstart the Chinese and Vietnamese revolutions, and created
> breathing room for the Euro/Asian developmental states to run silicon
> socialisms underneath the US Empire's radar. Mighty achievements, these.

Yes, especially for the millions who starved to death. Or the millions who were executed.

This isn't rocket science. What's amazing is that there are still a few people willing to put positive spin on this nastiness.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list