6 DECEMBER 1935, Page 7

EVOLVING RUSSIA : II. COMMUNISM BY STAGES

By WALTER DURANTY IS the U.S.S.R. reverting to bourgeois habits and methods, and, if so, what is the social and political significance of this change ? • In last week's article I mentioned some of the develop. ments which appear to indicate such a return ; for instance, the restoration of officers' rank in the Army, the 'insistence upon discipline and obedience in schools, • factories and business enterpriseS, the revival of parental authority, the establishment of piece-work and graduated wage-scales; and the introduction of jazz dancing, elegant clothes and cosmetics, which formerly were con- demned as bourgeois luxuries.

One of the errors that foreigners are apt to mace about the U.S.S.R. is to believe that because the Bolsheviks are Communists the Soviet regime is therefore equivalent to Communism. As a matter of fact, the Bolsheviks themselves have no delusions on the subject. They arc well aware that. Communism—which indeed is their ultimate goal—does not yet exist in the U.S.S.R. Their leader, Stalin, whose authority is more absolute and unquestioned than that of any Tsar in Russian history, has stated definitely that the present 'system is an inter- mediary stage, which he describes as Socialism, but which it might be more comprehensible to term State-Capi- talism. There is a sharp difference between the principles of Socialism (or State-Capitalism) and those of Corn- numism. Socialism rests upon the basis of " greater reward for greater service," which is the watchword of the U.S.S.R. today;` whereas Communism depends upon the formula of Marx " from each according to his capacity, to each according to his needs." The former presupposes a sliding wage-scale and different rates of payment ; • ivhcreas the latter assumes that money is abolished and that everyone gets what he or she is worth. This is a further instance of the distinction to which I referred in ray first article between Marxism or Bolshevisni as a theory and the practical job of its application as a form of government. observers of the Another error into which many foreign' U.S.S.R. fall is the belief that somehow or other that country is 'boUnd to revert to Capitalism, or at least to something like Capitalism. The N.E.P. period introduced by Lenin in 1921 for reasons of necessity and expediency contributed largely to mislead the rest of the world in this respect. Although Lenin said expressly that his " N.E.P. retreat " was no more than a temporary measure, an example of muter pour mieux sauter, it was generally believed outside Russia that N.E.P. meant the abandon- ment of Communist theories as a practical working policy. Subsequent events showed the fallacy of this view, but it is still difficult for the average Englishman or other foreigner to realise the two truths, without which no com- prehension of the U.S.S.R. is possible : to wit, first that its regime is fundamentally, genuinely and, one might almost say, fanatically, Socialist in character ; and second, that the Socialism of today is regarded by the Bolsh•Aik leaders as the preparation and prelude for the Communism of tomorrow.

I think that the root of the bewilderment of foreigners with regard to the U.S.S.R. and of the mistakes that they have made in gauging its policies lies in the fact that Marxism (or Bolshevism) was a theoretical and somewhat nebulous doctrine rather than a practical system of government, and that its application inevitably required a whole series of compromises and modifications. Trotsky, fOr instance, broke his head- in the attempt to champion what he is pleased to call ".pure" Marxism against the stone wall of practical politics. Stalin and his supporters, on the other hand, said sagaciously, " Rome was not built in a day, and it is ridiculous to suppose that pure' Marxism, or 100 per cent. Communism, can be rapidly established in a backward, ignorant and largely unin- dustrial country." Nevertheless—and this is the key to an understanding of new Russia—Stalin and the present Bolshevik leaders are no less faithful to the ideals of Marxism than was Lenin, or for that matter Trotsky himself, but they have found out by practical experience that they must proceed by a slow and gradual process of policy and education rather than attempt to soar over Mount Everest in a single leap.

This political diagnosis, however correct, may seem remote from the manifestations of " reversion to bourgeois methods," to which I referred before. In reality, however, there is a close connexion between the two. If one accepts the thesis that the Bolsheviks are trying to make a Socialist system work in practice today, as a prelude to Communism later, it follows logically that an important condition of Socialism's success should be its ability to produce results ; or, in other words, to give satisfaction and incentive to the Russian people. After all, the most important and most immediate task for Lenin and his successors was to train, educate, drill, discipline, enlighten and improve—all these words arc equally true—a nation of slaves ; to teach the ignorant, to give manhood to the cowardly, to put backbone and self-reliance into a mass that was supine and cowed by centuries of oppression. This the Bolsheviks are trying to do and arc doing. Their methods do not commend themselves to Englishmen or Americans or Western Europeans ; but Russia is far more akin spiritually to Asia than to Western Europe, and there is an immense abyss between the customs and thought- ways of Clapham and those of Novy Sibirsk. On the other hand, there remains truth in the ancient Roman formula of " bread and circuses " as a means of popular government. Coercion, although it may be more natural and acceptable to an Asiatic-minded people than to Westerners, cannot be maintained indefinitely. There must be corresponding advantages, and in the case of the U.S.S.R. these advantages undoubtedly exist. The first and greatest is Education, both intellectual and utilitarian, which has been given to—indeed, is being forced upon— every citizen of the U.S.S.R. regardless of age, sex, creed or colour. It is no exaggeration to say that the whole country is at school, and, what is more, it is learning. There are also material advantages. As the Russian people learns to make machines and use machines, it must inevitably begin to get benefit from machines. Until a few years ago the energy and efforts of the nation were concentrated so desperately upon the double aim of simultaneously industrialising a backward country— that is to say, of developing its natural resources according to the methods of modern science, technique and efficiency —and of socialising not only that infant industry, but also a backward and recalcitrant peasantry which clung with obstinacy to its obsolete methods and to its long- denied desire for individual ownership of land, that there was little opportunity for relaxation or leisure or comfort or enjoyment. The prodigious capital investment involved and the sheer physical difficulties of this double struggle imposed upon the Russian people hardships such as no other white nation has ever borne in peace-time. Finally, however, two years ago, the battle was won. Agriculture was socialised and the capital investment began to give returns. There were, in short, fruits of endeavour beginning to ripen, and the Russian people was eager enough to gather them and thirsty to suck their juice.

Let me pause for a moment and translate these some- what turgid, long-winded and metaphorical sentences into terms of everyday life. What they mean is that the Russian people, after sweating to build metallurgic plants on the barren steppes, in order that the said plants may produce machines which in turn produce consumption goods, is now beginning to get consumption goods ; to get bicycles, and later motor-cars, to get silk stockings and clothes from its rayon factories, to get boots and cosmetics, to get homes and furniture and household goods ; to get also better food and wages—in short, to emerge from the period of stark struggle towards comfort and satisfaction and the enjoyment of fruits. In the old days ten per cent. or less of the people of Russia enjoyed the fruits of 'life at the expense of the misery and degradation of the remaining ninety per cent. It was only natural, therefore, when the majority rose and defeated the privileged minority, that . the priVileges which the latter had enjoyed should be regarded as unjustified and even wicked. Jazz music, silk stockings, motor-cars, apartments • and modern plumbing became taboo as stigmata of the oppressing class which had been swept away. But when gradually and strenuously the mass of the nation began to find that such " bourgeois luxuries " were being produced in sufficient quantities to be at the disposal of anyone who worked hard enough to deserve them, there carne'a change of feeling. They were no longer the stigmata Of oppression but the rewards of worthy effort, which, however, does not necessarily imply a political change in Bolshevik conceptions or represent a re-establishment of class distinctions and social ranking.

[Mr. Duranty's third and final article will be on " Class and Ratik."]