The future of Stalinism¶
Core Argument¶
This chapter argues that Stalinism, despite its recent exposure as a reactionary force among advanced workers, remains a serious and growing factor within the British working class, particularly among its more backward and newly radicalised strata. The core narrative thrust is that the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) is gaining support not because of its own merits, but because of the reflected prestige of the Red Army’s victories over Nazism and the lingering association of the Soviet Union with the October Revolution. The party appeals to the “vilest and most jingoistic sentiments” of these backward sections, yet even some of the best elements within it cling to Stalinism in the desperate hope that its policy will change.
The chapter makes several key claims. First, it asserts that only workers who have directly experienced the Stalinists’ “cynical strike-breaking role” have been effectively inoculated against them. Second, it argues that the Stalinists are “far more subtle and clever than the trade union bureaucrats” at cloaking betrayal in revolutionary-sounding phrases. Third, it predicts that a significant section of the petit bourgeoisie will be attracted to Stalinism during the initial stages of the coming revolutionary wave, but that this support will be temporary, lasting only until the masses realise their error in identifying Stalinism with Bolshevism. The chapter also claims that the CPGB’s new, looser structure, while intended to broaden its base, has paradoxically weakened the bureaucracy’s control over the membership, making these new recruits “raw material for politics” akin to the youthful Labour Party members of the past.
The historical context is the period of the Second World War, with the Red Army’s victories providing a powerful propaganda tool for the CPGB. The theoretical context is the Marxist distinction between genuine Bolshevism and its Stalinist degeneration. The chapter’s central polemic is against the CPGB leadership, which it denounces as “puppets at King Street” whose policy is determined not by the needs of international socialism or the British working class, but by the “reactionary Moscow bureaucracy.” It warns that this right-wing policy could suddenly lurch into “ultra left adventures” if a diplomatic clash occurs between Moscow and British imperialism, but that in any event the CPGB is incapable of revolutionary leadership and can only lead workers to “ill-prepared adventures and capitulations.” The chapter concludes by prescribing patient theoretical education to win over the best CP members to genuine Bolshevism.