Preface

The subordination of the relations of production to the forces of production was a persistent strand of thinking in the Soviet Union. Most pronounced in this understanding was the work of A.A. Bogdanov in his writings on Tektology. Bukharin was profoundly influenced by his ideas. In the context of socialist industrialisation, the development of directive centralised planning and the construction of the collective farms of the poor and middle peasantry the Soviet leadership found it imperative to come to terms with right wing philosophy and political economy whose proponents bitterly fought against the construction of socialism. The Bogdanov-Bukharinist trend was temporarily defeated in the 1930s.

But after the economic discussions in November 1951 on the draft political economy textbook, Stalin pointed out that Yaroshenko followed the notions of Bogdanov and Bukharin in downplaying the role of the relations of production. This was particularly troublesome when the party was tackling the questions related to the transition to communism. The critique of the Yaroshenko ideological tendency is evident in Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR.

The notions of Yaroshenko were to be revived after March, 1953. The initial freezing of the relations of production of Soviet society, the end of the programme for the transition to communist society, the rapid introduction of market relations, involving the commodification of the instruments and means of production, are all evidence of this.

Yaroshenko was brought in by Khrushchev to play a role in the 20th Congress of the CPSU though this in itself was not a crucial question. More important was the all-pervasive dissemination of the views of Yaroshenko in the CPSU and the Soviet state. It is no exaggeration to say that Yaroshenkoism and with it Bogdanovism and Bukharinism replaced Marxism-Leninism as the dominant ideology of the CPSU and the Soviet Union. The elimination of the advance of social relations in the Soviet Union in the spirit of Yaroshenko are evident in the speeches of Khrushchev, Brezhnev and the other leaders until the end of the Soviet state. The views of Yaroshenko also stand at the centre of the contemporary communist movement in Russia.

Khrushchev gave his active support to the Yaroshenko ideology as did Mao in his work on political economy, Critique of Soviet Economics. Mao and Khrushchev as is known opposed the views of Stalin which were hostile to the commodification of the instruments and means of production as advocated by Notkin, Venzher and Sanina. The concurrence of Khrushchev and Mao on the creation of a market economy is evident. After March 1953 moreover the CPC balked at converting the democratic dictatorship established in 1949 to the dictatorship of the proletariat in People’s China, and in terms of social relations it incorporated the former kulaks, the former landlords into the rural people’s communes and the national bourgeoisie in the urban people’s communes. It is instructive to note that the people’s communes were not founded upon social property but in fact retained the form of group property which contained the former social property of the Machine Tractor Stations in addition to the private property of the middle bourgeoisie. Mao went back on his commitment in People’s Democratic Dictatorship to nationalise the properties of the national bourgeoisie. The criticism of Stalin by Mao and his support for the ideology of Yaroshenko had this as its context.

Yaroshenko survived the fall of the Soviet Union and continued to hold on to his views.

The document below reveals some details of the struggle against the views of Yaroshenko after the publication of Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR.

Vijay Singh.

To

The Members of the Bureau of the Presidium of the Central Committee regarding the new letter from Comrade Yaroshenko to the Central Committee dated 20 December, 1952

In December 1952, Comrade Yaroshenko sent a new statement to the members of the Presidium of the Central Committee. In this statement he denies having made any errors in his previous speeches. He asserts that Comrade Stalin, in his letter about the mistakes of Comrade Yaroshenko distorted his views, and requests that the editors of Pravda publish his statement about the same.

However, along with this statement to the Central Committee there is another statement by Com. Yaroshenko dated 31st May, 1952, of a completely contradictory content to the Central Committee. Comrade Yaroshenko in this statement, in connection with Comrade Stalin’s letter about the mistakes of Com. Yaroshenko, wrote that “on questions of political economy he made a number of crude mistakes”, and that from Com. Stalin’s letter he “realised how much my (i.e. Com. Yaroshenko’s) theoretical positions are wrong, shallow and truly childishly naive.

Here is the text of this statement by Comrade Yaroshenko

To the General Secretary of the CC AUCP(b)
Com. Stalin Iosef Vissarionovich

Dear Iosef Vissarionovich,

In my address to you on questions of the theory of political economy, I made a number of very crude mistakes. Despite my incompetence in matters of theory of political economy and knowledge of the classic works of Marxism, I had the audacity to define the subject of political economy and the basic economic law of socialism, and of course I could not say anything sensible. More than that I lost my sense of reality so much that I dared to oppose my point of view on these issues to your point of view.

I did not have the necessary sophistication even to correctly formulate the problems. I was arrogant and tactless, in connection with which I ask you to accept my sincerest apologies.

Thinking about these actions of mine, I don’t find any excuse for myself.

From your criticism, I saw how my “theoretical” assumptions are wrong, shallow and truly childishly naive. I strongly reject them. True, my statements at the discussions, appeals to the Central Committee of the Party and to you personally, Iosif Vissarionovich, came from my most sincere desire to help the party’s cause. There were no other considerations. Only now, from your criticism, I realised how little knowledge do I have and how deeply mistaken I was on questions of the political economy of socialism.

I request you, dear Iosif Vissarionovich, to give me one more opportunity to rectify my mistakes while still being a member of the party through honest work.

For all my 33 years in the party, I have always fought to the best of my ability for the general line of the party, was never ever a member of any opposition and anti-party groupings and honestly worked in any area where the party put me.

Yaroshenko L.D.
31.5.1952

We have thus two completely opposite statements of the same party member on the same question.

Since these statements negate each other and are completely inconsistent for one single person to make, it is obvious that one of them is a false statement, calculated to deceive the party.

The matter is complicated by the fact that Yaroshenko’s letter dated 20th December, 1952 was sent to the Central Committee not before the 19th Congress but after the 19th Congress of the party, after the Congress had approved the main propositions of Comrade Stalin’s work “The Fundamental Problems of Socialism,” and consequently, it also approved Comrade Stalin’s letter “about the mistakes of Comrade Yaroskenko.” It turns out that in his letter to the members of the Presidium of the Central Committee dated 20th December, 1952, comrade Yaroshenko opposes the well-known decision of the Congress on the work of Comrade Stalin, and, moreover, he appeals against this decision of the 19th Congress not to the new congress, which can only cancel the decision of the 19th Party Congress, but to the Presidium of the Central Committee which can in no way cancel the decisions of the Congress, but only carry them out. Therefore, the letter from Comrade Yaroshenko dated December 20, 1952 represents, in essence, the call of one of the party members to violate the well-known decision of the 19th Party Congress.

A truly active member of the Party, who considers himself to be a son of the Party, would not dare to put himself in such a stupid and idiotic position. and if Comrade Yaroshenko decided on this quixotic step, then this can only be explained by the fact that he had long ago ceased to feel like a member of the party, a son of our great mother – the Party.

As for the essence of the theoretical propositions put forward in Comrade Yaroshenko’s essay of December 20, 1952, these propositions are just as far from Marxism-Leninism as are the “concepts” of all degenerates like Bukharin, Bogdanov, Trotsky and others.

Comrade Shepilov’s letter, which is sent along with Comrade Yaroshenko’s letter, gives a correct assessment of Comrade Yaroshenko’s new anti-Marxist mistakes.

I propose to create a Commission of the Bureau of the Presidium of the Central Committee consisting of Comrades Malenkov, Khrushchev, Shepilov, Shkiryatov and Suslov, instructing it to hear the explanations of Comrade Yaroshenko and submit a draft of the appropriate resolution.

I.V. Stalin
10th January 1953

RGASPI F. 558, Op. 11. D. 1273, LL. 31-34.
Translated from the Russian by Tahir Asghar.

Click here to return to the April 2023 index.