Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Non-Capitalist Development: An Historical Outline

POST REPLY
Soviet cogitations: 723
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 23 Jan 2016, 12:15
https://archive.org/details/NonCapitali ... calOutline

Scanned by me.

Quote:
INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1. THE MARXIST-LENINIST CONCEPTION OF NON-CAPITALIST DEVELOPMENT. THE THEORETICAL STATEMENT OF THE QUESTION.
The Fabrications of the Imperialists and the Unscientific Views of the Opportunists
The Founders of Marxism on the Non-Capitalist Way
Lenin's Elaboration of the Conception of Non-Capitalist Development
The Creative Development of the Leninist Conception of Non-Capitalist Development and Its Application in Practice
Chapter 2. THE EXPERIENCE IN NON-CAPITALIST DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOVIET CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS AND MONGOLIA
The Soviet Central Asian Republics' Level of Socio-Economic Development Prior to the Beginning of the Non-Capitalist Stage of Development
Great October Opened Up the Non-Capitalist Road of Development
Abolition of Colonialism and Feudalism
Development of Various Forms of Cooperation
The Cultural Revolution—an Integral Part of Non-Capitalist Development
The Socialist Reconstruction of Agriculture and Socialist Industrialisation
Living Embodiment of Socialism
Chapter 3. THE FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF STATES WITH A SOCIALIST ORIENTATION—THE NEW PHASE OF THE ANTI-IMPERIALIST REVOLUTION
The Character of National Liberation Revolutions Today
The Crisis of Capitalism and Its Historical Doom
Basic Content of the Socialist Orientation
Recent Experience of Economic Changes Along Non-Capitalist Lines
CHAPTER 4. THE MOTIVE FORCES OF SOCIALIST ORIENTATION. NON-CAPITALIST DEVELOPMENT—A FORM OF CLASS STRUGGLE FOR SOCIALISM
On the Role of the Working Class
The Peasantry and Socialism
The Intelligentsia, the National Bourgeoisie and Other Social Strata
National Democracy and Scientific Socialism
a) The Attitude of Marxist-Leninists Towards Nationalism
b) The Attitude of Marxist-Leninists to Religion
c) The Attitude of Marxist-Leninists to Private Property
d) Attitude of Marxist-Leninists Towards Freedom of the Individual
The Unity of Progressive Forces—the Guarantee of Victory for the Socialist Orientation
Chapter 5. THE NON-CAPITALIST WAY OF DEVELOPMENT AND THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE TWO SYSTEMS
The Reactionary Essence of the Concept of "Two Superpowers"
Neo-Colonialism, the Enemy of the Socialist Orientation
World Socialism—a Powerful Support for Non-Capitalist Development
a) The Economic and Technical Assistance of the Soviet Union and Other Socialist Countries
b) The Foreign Trade of the Socialist Countries—an Important Factor in the Progress of the Developing Countries
c) Socialist Integration and the Struggle of the Newly Independent Countries for Socialism
Chapter 6. SOME ASPECTS OF THE IDEOLOGICAL STRUGGLE FOR THE WAYS OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEWLY INDEPENDENT COUNTRIES
Non-Proletarian Conceptions of Socialism and the Content of Imperialism's Ideological Subversion
The Hegemonic Nature of Maoism
Marxist-Leninist Assessment of the Non-Proletarian Conceptions of Socialism. The Brilliant Example of the Evolution of the Views of Gamal Abdel Nasser
CONCLUSION
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1004
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Member
Post 08 Feb 2016, 11:22
Do you have any (non-Albanian) books which show the Russian view of the development (probably regression to you) in SFRY?
Soviet cogitations: 723
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 08 Feb 2016, 21:02
To my knowledge the Soviets didn't put out any English-language books on Yugoslavia. Even in Russian the amount of books on the country published after 1955 were mostly restricted to WWII and earlier periods. On one hand, the Soviet revisionists were praising Yugoslavia as a "socialist" country and Tito as a hero, but on the other they didn't want to endorse Titoite "workers' self-management" or the views of the Yugoslav revisionists on the role of the vanguard in society, etc., thus they generally didn't write at length on the economic and social system in that country, which they had to present as being "socialist" anyway.

There are plenty of English-language Soviet articles published under Stalin which gladly discussed the actual economic and social system of Yugoslavia though, but I doubt you'd care to read them.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1004
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Member
Post 08 Feb 2016, 23:48
Isn't it a BIT suspicious how your favourites, the Soviets, were only interested in WW2 and nothing more contemporary? That was probably because they were free to choose any subject to study they wanted... Much like in another highly developed nation which name I am forbidden to utter so I don't get banned again. I'm talking about a nation so highly developed that even decades after the demise of their socialism the achievements of socialism are so prevalent that there's no need for any further development there.
Soviet cogitations: 723
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 09 Feb 2016, 03:15
I already explained that with the coming to power of revisionism in the USSR, Soviet authors were no longer free to write about contemporary Yugoslavia. They had to praise it to the skies as a "socialist" country. As I'm sure you're aware, the USSR of the 1960s-80s was not socialist. As Hoxha noted, "Soviet society turned bourgeois down to its tiniest pores, capitalism was restored in all fields." After the 20th Congress of the CPSU, in which Stalin was slandered (including the principled stand Stalin took towards Yugoslavia), the Soviet revisionists did all in their power to rehabilitate Titoism. At the same time the USSR became a social-imperialist power, contending with US imperialism for the conquest of the globe and abandoning the policy of proletarian internationalism practiced under Lenin and Stalin.

Under Stalin the CPSU and fraternal parties saw that the Titoites were not socialists but social-fascists, and frequently reported on contemporary events in that country. Case in point, from 1950: http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/a ... latest.htm

The Soviet revisionists, by contrast, said they merely had "disagreements" with their Yugoslav counterparts, but that Yugoslavia was nonetheless a socialist country, that Tito was a heroic personality, that Yugoslavia's foreign policy was against imperialism, etc.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1004
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Member
Post 09 Feb 2016, 22:07
It's ludicrous to claim that USSR after Stalin wasn't a socialist country. You may call it revisionism or whatever, but the fact is (sorry, facts are obviously your worst enemy) that the system in USSR since late 1920s could only be called STATE CAPITALISM. Stalin bastardized everything that the theoreticians before him theorized. If you claim it was nevertheless socialism under Stalin, then it was socialism all the way until 1992. Sorry, bro.
Soviet cogitations: 723
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 12 Feb 2016, 06:41
EdvardK wrote:
It's ludicrous to claim that USSR after Stalin wasn't a socialist country. You may call it revisionism or whatever, but the fact is (sorry, facts are obviously your worst enemy) that the system in USSR since late 1920s could only be called STATE CAPITALISM. Stalin bastardized everything that the theoreticians before him theorized. If you claim it was nevertheless socialism under Stalin, then it was socialism all the way until 1992. Sorry, bro.
The economic "reforms" the Soviet revisionists carried out, some of them literally months after Stalin's death, resulted in the restoration of capitalism under a "socialist" signboard.

Not only economic changes, but also theoretical changes were carried out. Thus at the 20th Congress, along with the denigration of Stalin, the revisionists proclaimed that it was possible to achieve socialism without revolution and even without the leading role of the working-class, that peaceful coexistence was the main line of Soviet foreign policy (replacing proletarian internationalism), etc. At the 22nd Congress in 1961 the revisionists declared that the dictatorship of the proletariat had "outlived its historical mission" and that the USSR had become a "state of the whole people" (in blatant contradiction to Marxism) and the CPSU a "party of the whole people" (i.e. no longer the vanguard of the Soviet working-class.) All sorts of other revisionist theories were spread as well, both in those years and in subsequent decades.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1004
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Member
Post 08 Mar 2016, 00:29
Basically, for you, time stopped on March 5th 1953 and nothing good ever came after that. Not even Hoxha?
Soviet cogitations: 723
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 13 Mar 2016, 01:02
EdvardK wrote:
Basically, for you, time stopped on March 5th 1953 and nothing good ever came after that. Not even Hoxha?
In terms of socialist construction in the USSR, Stalin's death did indeed mark its cessation. The Soviet revisionists then proceeded to remove "Stalinist" leaders in Eastern Europe like Chervenkov and Rákosi. They tried to remove Hoxha as well, without success.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1004
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Member
Post 26 Mar 2016, 19:54
We probably agree that Xhoxa was worse for Albania than a Yucatan-size meteorite hit would have been if it hit Tirana in 1945.
Soviet cogitations: 723
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 28 Mar 2016, 15:36
EdvardK wrote:
We probably agree that Xhoxa was worse for Albania than a Yucatan-size meteorite hit would have been if it hit Tirana in 1945.
I don't think a meteorite would have been capable of eradicating feudalism, blood feuds, illiteracy, or any of the other ills that affected the country in 1945.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1004
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Member
Post 28 Apr 2016, 23:40
If was a figure of speech.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.