>It was that particular form of the capitalist state that I call
>'authoritarian welfare', a modernising form of the state in those
>countries that didn't go through a bourgeois revolution, a state
>that is unavoidably temporary once its tasks are accomplished. I
>think Stalin was a great man for this reason only, that he was
>brutal, determined, unscrupulous and cunning enough to force march a
>massive country through the stage of capitalist development in
>double quick time. Unfortunately, despite his M-L theory, this does
>not lead to socialism, but from one stage of capitalism to another.
If such a country has not yet gone through a bourgeois revolution, how can this logically be described as a transition "from one stage of capitalism to another"? If it isn't capitalist to start with, but feudal, then it seems more accurate to describe this as a transition from feudalism to capitalism.
Bil Bartlett Bracknell Tas