Marxism and the Theory of Long Waves¶

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument¶

Alan Woods argues that Nikolai Kondratiev's theory of "long waves" — 50-year economic cycles of alternating upswing and downswing — lacks any scientific or theoretical basis and is fundamentally incompatible with Marxism. The central thesis is that while distinct historical periods in capitalist development undoubtedly exist, they do not possess a cyclical, self-generating character. They are not driven by an internal economic mechanism analogous to the trade cycle, but are shaped by a complex interplay of economic and non-economic factors — wars, revolutions, political defeats, strategic calculations, and even accidents.

Woods contends that Kondratiev's formalism — his statistical method of selecting data to fit a pre-determined hypothesis — is the antithesis of the Marxist dialectical method. Trotsky's 1923 essay The Curve of Capitalist Development provides the correct alternative: history moves through irregular, qualitatively distinct periods determined by the totality of social relations, not through mechanically repeating waves. The political stakes are high: if Kondratiev were correct, capitalism could continue indefinitely, and the working class would merely have to wait passively for the next upswing. Marxism insists, by contrast, that the fate of society is decided by the class struggle and the subjective factor — organisation, consciousness, and leadership.

Theoretical Grounding¶

The article grounds itself in the classical Marxist tradition of historical materialism as articulated by Marx and Engels, particularly Engels's letters on historical materialism (to Bloch, Schmidt, and others). Woods draws heavily on Engels's insistence that the economic is "the ultimately determining element" but never the only determining one, and that the superstructure — politics, ideology, war, religion — reacts back upon the base. This is the theoretical foundation for rejecting economic reductionism.

The analysis sits within the Trotskyist tradition's emphasis on the subjective factor and the critique of mechanical materialism. Trotsky's Curve of Capitalist Development is the central theoretical reference point. Woods also draws on Ted Grant's Will There Be a Slump? for the analysis of the post-war boom, and on Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism for understanding the pre-1914 period. The article explicitly positions itself against Ernest Mandel's attempt to synthesise Trotsky and Kondratiev in Late Capitalism, which Woods treats as an eclectic capitulation to bourgeois fashion.

The key Marxist concepts deployed are: the trade cycle (the normal boom-slump cycle explained by Marx in Capital); the tendency of the rate of profit to fall (mentioned but not elaborated in depth); the distinction between the economic base and superstructure; and the dialectical relation between objective conditions and the subjective factor. Woods is careful to argue that the falling rate of profit is a tendency that can be counteracted for whole periods, not an absolute law.

Conjunctural Relevance¶

The article was written in 2000, at the peak of the dot-com boom, and is explicitly addressed to that conjuncture. Woods identifies the following features of the moment:

A US-centred boom driven by information technology, with soaring stock markets and widespread talk of a "New Economic Paradigm" — which he dismisses as an illusion comparable to the 1920s.
The revival of Kondratiev's theories among bourgeois economists seeking to prove that capitalism can expand indefinitely.
The persistence of mass unemployment even in booms (1 million in Britain, 10% in Germany and France, over 20% in Spain), contrasting sharply with the full employment of the post-war upswing.
The collapse of Stalinism, which Woods argues has removed a major obstacle to the development of revolutionary Marxism and opened new possibilities for the left.
The rise of "left reformist" governments in Europe (the article references the period of the 1970s and early 1980s, but the argument applies to the broader trend).
The growing inequality, debt, and precarious employment beneath the surface of the boom.

Woods predicts that the present boom will end in a serious slump, ushering in a period of convulsive crisis and renewed class struggle. He draws explicit parallels with the 1920s boom that preceded the Great Depression.

Where the Argument Continues¶

The article is itself a continuation of a broader body of work within the In Defence of Marxism corpus. Key connections include:

Ted Grant, Will There Be a Slump? — The analysis of the post-war upswing and its eventual exhaustion, which Woods treats as the correct Marxist alternative to Kondratiev.
Alan Woods, The Class Struggle and the Economic Cycle — Referenced directly, this develops the argument that productivity growth in the present boom is concentrated in information technology and comes at the expense of the working class.
Alan Woods, The Forgotten Revolution — The analysis of the Hungarian revolution of 1919, used to illustrate the role of the subjective factor.
Trotsky, The Lessons of October — The key text on the subjective factor and the role of leadership.
Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed — The analysis of Stalinism's degeneration, which Woods argues has been confirmed by the collapse of the USSR.

The article also points forward to the need for a renewed Marxist movement capable of providing revolutionary leadership in the coming period of crisis. This is not developed in detail here but is the strategic conclusion of the argument.

Connections¶

Trotsky, The Curve of Capitalist Development — The essential companion text, providing the dialectical alternative to Kondratiev.
Engels, letters on historical materialism (to Bloch, Schmidt, etc.) — The theoretical foundation for rejecting economic reductionism.
Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism — For understanding the pre-1914 period and the contradictions of imperialism.
Marx, Capital, Volumes I-III — For the theory of the trade cycle and the tendency of the rate of profit to fall.
Ernest Mandel, Late Capitalism — The text Woods is polemicising against; reading it alongside this article clarifies the stakes of the debate.
George Garvy, Kondratiev's Theory of Long Cycles — The statistical critique that Woods relies on heavily.
Angus Maddison, Phases of Economic Development — Cited for the empirical argument that transitions between phases are determined by "historical accident or system shock."

Key Quotes¶

"Trotsky never accepted Kondratiev's theory of long waves. On the contrary, he explained in some detail that the existence of such waves — in the sense meant by Kondratiev — was impossible. It was impossible to predict the precise character of different epochs or their frequency."
"The difference between Kondratiev's term 'cycle' and Trotsky's 'periods' is not at all a linguistic quibble, but a fundamental difference between two incompatible ways of interpreting history, economics and the class struggle."
"The capitalist system has no 'natural equilibrium'. It moves chaotically through a series of crises, wars and revolutions which cannot be predicted in advance with any accuracy because the system itself is not a linear but a chaotic system."
"The great advantage of formalistic theories is that they relieve one of the need to think. Mandel used Kondratiev's thesis in order to explain away the long post-war upswing in capitalism. Likewise, he used it to 'explain' the subsequent crisis that began in 1973-74."
"The central issue is the nature of the post-war upswing. Did it represent a new period of capitalist rebirth? Or perhaps proof that capitalism is fated to swing eternally backwards and forwards between prosperity and depression till the end of the world? Or was this just a temporary respite, preparing the way for new and more terrible declines?"
"The prolongation of this death-agony actually threatens to undermine human culture and civilisation, or even the future of humanity itself. The existence of technology which can pose a threat to the existence of our species... in the hands of irresponsible multinationals... all these phenomena, when taken together, are posing a question-mark not just over the future of a given socio-economic system which has outlived itself, but over the future of our planet."