50 Years Ago: The Reason for the Show Trials in Russia (1987)

The 50 Years Ago column from the June 1987 issue of the Socialist Standard

The Moscow correspondent of the Economist (February 27th, 1937) provides the answer to the question why did the Russian Government need the recent trials? It had to explain the breakdown of the grandiose five-year plans. This breakdown made it necessary to fend scapegoats, since no dictatorship ever dare let the population know that the dictator and his advisers may themselves have pushed their plans to a point where they became top-heavy and unworkable. Only, now that scapegoats have been found, is the population being told how badly some of the plans have worked:

Now that veteran Bolsheviks have confessed to deliberate sabotage in several major industries, the Government permits its people to learn of distressing conditions hitherto kept From them. Sabotage explains everything; revelation of gross inefficiency need not cast discredit upon central planning, which without some such explanation, might come into disrepute.

Official newspapers now reveal that conditions are most unsatisfactory on the railways. and in the non ferrous metal and chemical industries. Plants were designed hastily without an adequate knowledge of raw material resources. Capital was invested in the "least advantageous fields and those which presented the greatest difficulties for exploitation." For example, where lead and zinc ores were found together, only one or the other was utilised, Plans for new factories were altered locally, which resulted, according to one official newspaper, "in complete irresponsibility and confusion."

[From an article, The Reason for the Russian Trial, in the Socialist Standard June 1937.]

Reflections. (1906)

From the June 1906 issue of the Socialist Standard

A letter in Justice from one whose identity is hidden, reads, “I am one of about 12 Socialists who have decided to study Socialism. We all favour the S.D.F. programme and want to start an S.D.F. Branch here.” Twelve “Socialists” who haven’t studied Socialism want to join the S.D.F. When those twelve “Socialists have studied Socialism and have discovered that they are Socialists, they will not want to join the S.D.F. They will want to join a Socialist Party. At present, as they have not studied Socialism, they cannot claim to be Socialists. Nevertheless, they may, without incongruity join the S.D.F., because the S.D.F. isn’t a Socialist organisation.

o o o

In addition to this, “one of twelve,” there appears to be quite a number of other members of the S.D.F. who want to study Socialism. They write asking for economic classes. Evidently they are unaware that conductors of economic classes are far from persona grata with the S.D.F. leaders. At least one conductor has been expelled the organisation for no greater crime.

o o o

Does any one know what has become of the Justice crusade against motor-cars ? There was a time only a few short months ago, when readers of that Journal were urged to walk the roads with loaded pistols in one pocket and bags of calthrops in the other. The calthrops were to spread in the path of the rushing motor. If this did not have the effect of bursting the tyres, the pistol was to be used. If the shot missed the tyre and hit the occupant, so much the better. Since the advent of the red car and her ladyship, however, pistols and calthrops and even tin-tacks are, apparently, taboo ; which may, of course, be only a coincidence, although if political action reflects economic conditions (Socialists who have not studied Socialism may not understand this) there may be something more in it.

o o o

Somebody must have told Justice I was to refer to the foregoing, or it must have been conveyed to Clerkenwell by some telepathic process. Anyhow, it had hardly been written when our contemporary erupted in the same place again. From which it may be inferred that the notorious red motor has followed the “mere drawerful of jewels” to the sale room. If it hasn’t her ladyship must proceed with caution. Otherwise it may occur that she will drive unwittingly into a trap laid by the wily S.D.Fers, out under the inspiration of Mr. Quelch, to treat all motorists in the Swiss fashion (which we understand to be something drastic). Imagine the excitement if, while touring with, say, Bill Thorne, the Countess was to be potted by her own comrades !

o o o

Mention of Bill reminds me that since the day when he achieved fame by making his debut as M.P. at St. Stephens in a very large hat of the uncompromising “Alpine or Trilby” variety, he has dropped almost completely out of sight. This need not necessarily be reckoned against him for unrighteousness. Bill is a big man, and it must have meant a real effort on his part to obscure himself. Moreover, he may have profited by the horrible examples which some of his fellow members of the “Labour” Party in their endeavours to impress their statesmanship upon the House, have succeeded in making of themselves. However that may be, I am sure he has disappointed many of his friends, who expected him to do great things as the only M.P. the S.D.F. can allege connection with. And really the acquisition of a large hat and a readiness to write advertisements for books on the hire purchase system, are not much to show as the result of several months labours.

o o o

This advertisement writing, by the way, does not appear to be regarded favourably by the Labour Leader. The organ of the l.L.P. waxes indignant with those “Labour” members who have lent their photographs and their strong approbation to the firm who are widely advertising the sale of books by easy payments. The Labour Leader does not approve of such action and expresses its disapproval in no mild manner. We fear, however, the Labour Members assailed will not be greatly impressed, seeing that the Labour Leader has itself accepted advertisements from the same firm for the same set of books (as well as from other firms for other commodities), and seeing that its columns have for months contained a puff for a certain musical instrument from Mr. Keir Hardie. The I.L.P. organ should shew cause why the Labour Leader paper may augment its income by advertisements and why the “Labour” leader person may not do the same thing for the same reason. And it must shew wherein a musical instrument puff by Keir Hardie differs from a book puff by Will Thorne. If it does not, Mr. Thorne may fairly dismiss its criticism as, to put it, mildly cant.

o o o

This question of how to raise the financial wind seems, on the surface, to strike “Labour” journals and leaders in different ways. I say on the surface because it is fairly clear that at bottom there is no difference at all. Justice for example is quite frankly unconcerned as to the source of its income. “Get it,” it says, “honestly if you can, of course—but get it.” And Justice is far from satisfied with the success of its endeavours up to the present. The £500 realised by the sale of the Countess’s jewels was very nice and very welcome. But a donation of £1,000 would be better. Justice is sure that the S.D.F. can give better value for the money than any other organisation afloat; which may or may not be true. At any rate, its S.D.F. will have to manage better than they did at Camborne, if they want to inspire persons with thousands of pounds to spare, to donate large sums to its treasury. Large sums are never given without conditions, and when the donor requires those conditions to be kept dark it is unpleasant, to say the least of it, to discover that the recipient of the largess does not possess “political aptitude” sufficient to keep inquisitive noses from scenting the game.

Observer.

Blogger's Notes:

• "Evidently they are unaware that conductors of economic classes are far from persona grata with the S.D.F. leaders. At least one conductor has been expelled the organisation for no greater crime. . . " This is a reference to Jack Fitzgerald, a founder member of the SPGB, who was expelled from the SDF for, amongst others, holding economic classes.
• "Since the advent of the red car and her ladyship . . . " is a reference to the Countess of Warwick who had recently joined the SDF, and was quite the celebrity catch for the SDF at the time.

From the WSPUS Radio Series: Alienated Men (1972)

From issue number 2 (1972) of The Western Socialist

Have you happened to have heard the term alienation? It Is being kicked around a bit these days, especially by psychologists and philosophers. They tell us that modern man suffers from alienation — a feeling of not belonging, that one is a lost soul who is going through the motions of living with little, if any, consciousness. And among the theories on the cause of alienation we are told that the automated and computerized society of our times is responsible.

Well, no doubt there is some truth to this but the philosophers and behavior analysts of our times seem to be largely unaware of the fact that more than a century ago Karl Marx made use of the word and, in fact, explained it in terms that make it much easier to understand. Marx saw society as divided basically into two economic classes—owners, or capitalists, and workers. Now those who owned the factories, mines and workshops, the land and all that is in and on it, were not lost souls in the sense in which we speak in those times any more than they are today. It was the working class that was alienated — alienated, as Marx explained, from the product of their toil. The workers in those times, as today, were completely divorced from ownership and a consequent feeling of interest in the commodities which they were producing. They sold their mental and physical energies to those who owned the means and instruments of production and distribution and once the agreement was made those energies and the product of their toll was owned — as today — by those who bought the labor power — the capitalist class. In fact, Marx remarked that the workers had become mere appendages of the machines and if he could see the extent to which this machine-appendage relationship has grown in the plants of our times he would roll over in his grave.

For the feeling of alienation on the part of those who produce but do not own can only have been magnified in direct proportion to the intensification of industry in the last century and, particularly, in the period since World War II. True, there are a multitude of small businesses of all sorts in America today. Including small farms. But the mainstream of production is carried on in gigantic mechanized farms and in factories such as are found in auto, steel, copper, rubber, petroleum, and chemical industries — plants that herd thousands of workers under one roof to operate the machinery from production line to office. Can there be any feeling other than alienation among those who do the work in conditions such as these?

As a specific example that has hit the front pages of the newspapers and the TV documentaries, look at the case of General Motors vs. the United Auto Workers Union in the affair of the new Vega plant In Lordstown. Ohio. G.M. estimates that it has lost the production of some $45-million worth of Vega automobiles and Chevrolet trucks because of what it calls sabotage on the part of the workers. The workers contend that they can no longer keep up with the belt. They attribute the increasing number of faulty cars and trucks to the mad greed of the Company to speed-up the process and cut down on the costs of labor.

To whatever extent both sides are right in this argument there should be no argument that the workers understand more than sub-consciously that they are mere appendages of the machinery, completely divorced from any reason for interest in the finished product. And if anybody wishes to research the advantages of a job on an assembly line — at whatever wage — let him try picking up and putting down an ash tray, for example, for eight hours! Then imagine the guy or gal on the line doing one precision task at the same time trying to keep up with a steadily moving belt.

The way to eliminate alienation is to abolish commodity production. In a system of world socialism, where the earth and all that is in and on it belong to all mankind, alienation becomes involvement.

“Social Peace” in France. (1908)

From the September 1908 issue of the Socialist Standard

Another example of the harmony existing in the present social order is provided by the recent disturbances in and around Paris. In spite of statements to the contrary, and wilful blinking of the facts, the Socialists’ contention that there exists in society a class struggle—a state of war between capitalists and workers—is borne out daily by our own experience as wage workers, and by passing events recorded (or suppressed) by the newspapers.

In and around Paris on the first of May, 1906, strikes were declared in many industries : the eight hour work-day being the principal demand. These resulted mostly in victory for the masters. However, the workers in the building trades, particularly the labourers, the masons and bricklayers, did not lose heart, but have kept up an unremitting battle for better conditions by means of other methods than big strike movements. They practised a continual harassing of the contractors, striking in detail without notice, practising “Sabotage” until, indeed, they have gained, piecemeal, some useful concessions.

This “sabotage” is worthy of some attention. Many French workers, finding the carefully prepared strike so often a failure, and the matching of Labour’s centimes against Capital’s gold louis such a long and painful process, have taken to this form of “passive resistance.” For instance, the masons and labourers would strike a certain yard or building and be quickly replaced by a fresh gang of their comrades, who would proceed to “make mistakes” in the measurements of the work, or would develop a tired feeling so that the work would not get finished, and generally “raise Cain,” thus proving very expensive strike breakers, get discharged, be replaced by yet another set of “hands,” who would “help” the employer in the same way. This would go on until the latter found it would pay him best to concede the men’s demands. Of course it is very unkind of the saboteurs, but it seems more intelligent than starving on strike for three or six months. The contractors, becoming vexed at these attentions, played a little card of their own, and in April declared a lockout, which, had it continued would quickly have involved 200,000 men. However, the employers found it more paying to open the yards again after a few days, and until recently things jogged along in much the old style.

Now we gather that a strike has been on for some time in the sand-pit district of Draveil, some eight miles from Paris, and that there have been some encounters between the police and military and the strikers—begun, doubtless, in the usual way, either by a striker punching a strike-breaker or vice versa, or, as is often the case, by some act of police provocation.

The Building Trades Federation now declared a 24 hours general strike as a protest against the repressive measures of the Government, and a large body (five to ten thousand it is reported) of strikers went out to the strike district to demonstrate in favour of their comrades, the sandpit labourers. The forces of wholesale slaughter were let loose upon the demonstrating workmen, with the result that many were injured upon both sides and several of our fellow workers were killed.

The English papers, as usual, served their masters well by reporting the affair in such manner as to prejudice, as much as possible, British workmen against their French brothers. Divide and rule is the masters’ motto, and indeed, in the Press they have a powerful means of keeping the workers fighting one another instead of uniting to fight the common enemy —the masters.

The Government’s next step was to arrest eight prominent members of the General Confederation of Labour (C.G.T.), this being followed by the declaration of a 24 hours general strike, which, owing to the numerically weak membership of the C.G.T., was rather an exhibition of weakness, although several newspapers could not be brought out and others were published under great difficulties. When later, the electrical workers struck for a short while, the military engineers were quickly at hand to replace them.

Now these stirring events arise directly from the efforts of working men to improve their lot and the endeavours of the masters to retain their privileges. Further, such events are not confined to Paris or to France, for this country has its Peterloo, Featherstone, and Belfast, America has its Colorado arid Homestead, and so on throughout the capitalist world.

The game of profits versus wages is seen to break out into barricades and sabring and shooting; the class struggle cries aloud for recognition. It is irrepressible because the workers are robbed, and are beginning to know it. Here then is generated the energy essential to the overthrow of King Capital. Here his undesirability is perceived by the worker, and the desire to get rid of him is bred.

As to the French workers, recent events show that they as well as other workers need to get control of the armed forces in order that these may no longer be used against them : the road to this control lies through Parliament. The workers must get behind the guns: to march up to their muzzles—the practical outcome of the “direct action” favoured by so many French workers and trade unionists—is simply suicide.

John H. Halls

The Reason for the Russian Trial (1937)

From the June 1937 issue of the Socialist Standard

The Moscow correspondent of the Economist (February 27th, 1937) provides the answer to the question why did the Russian Government need the recent trials? It had to explain the breakdown of the grandiose five-year plans. This breakdown made it necessary to find scapegoats, since no dictatorship ever dare let the population know that the dictator and his advisers may themselves have pushed their plans to a point where they became top-heavy and unworkable. Only, now that scapegoats have been found, is the population being told how badly some of the plans have worked : —

    Now that veteran Bolsheviks have confessed to deliberate sabotage. in several major industries, the Government permits its people to learn of distressing conditions hitherto kept from them. Sabotage explains everything; revelation of gross inefficiency need not cast discredit upon central planning, which, without some such explanation, might come into disrepute.
   Official newspapers now reveal that conditions are most unsatisfactory on the railways, and in the non-ferous metal and chemical industries. Plants were designed hastily without an adequate knowledge of raw material resources. Capital was invested in the “least advantageous fields and those which presented the greatest difficulties for exploitation." For example, where lead and zinc ores were found together, only one or the other was utilised. Plans for new factories were altered locally, which resulted, according to one official newspaper, “ in complete irresponsibility and confusion."
    In the chemical industry “plants frequently were designed with too large or too small capacities, in unsuitable places, for the production of an unnecessary assortment of goods, etc. Often plants were built at places where there was little ore." Funds were withheld from plants under construction, which often resulted in the suspension of building operations. Designs were altered after much of the construction work had been completed, which necessitated the demolition of finished buildings and their reconstruction. At the Krasno-Uralsk Combinat the metallurgical section was built with no provision for the use of bye-products.
    All this, and much more, is now recorded in the official newspapers, and charged to Trotskyism. Whatever the cause may be, it is obvious that there has been terrific waste of capital funds and effort, and that thorough reorganisation of whole industries will be necessary. The official view is that reorganisation will be easy now that the wreckers in high places have been removed.

Now what becomes of the everlasting boasting by the British Communists of the marvellous success of the five-year plans? Whatever explanation they choose to offer for the breakdown, it now becomes obvious that their former boastings of success were not based on fact, but on the propaganda of the Russian Government, which excluded the truth about industrial inefficiency.

P. S.