Mailvox: no industry, no Marx

Padraig swings wildly and misses:

VD, you’re full of shit. Leninism was hardly peasant/agrarian socialism, and you know it. Both Russia and China went through massive spurts of industrialization, and for both regimes industrialization was seen as the goal. It was the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot who depopulated their cities for the farms. As far as Socialism being Fascism, where are you getting that from? What Fascist nation has EVER not liquidated it’s socialists?

The mere fact that Russia and China had to go through industrialization at all is the primary reason why one has to distinguish Leninism and Maoism from Marxism. Marx’s socialism was predicated on a natural and unavoidable evolution from a mature industrialized capitalist society into a socialist one; this obviously did not apply to two very backward, pre-industrial agrarian societies like Russia and China. Therefore, both men were forced to pursue creative means of interpreting Marx and modifying his principles in order to fit the square theoretical pegs into the round holes of reality.

I will admit that characterizing Maoism as anti-industrial is a poor choice of adjectives. The fact that the Great Leap Forward was a great leap backward in which the Chinese economy grew so fast that 30 million people starved and production levels plummeted to pre-1958 levels does not change the fact that industrialization was one of its twin goals. Perhaps I should have said “national pre-industrial agrarian socialism”. In any case, it was Mao’s decision to emphasize agricultural growth in order to catch up with the rate of China’s industrial growth that was the essence of the Great Leap Forward and is a complete departure from Marx’s focus on industrial production.

That last question is particularly funny. What Communist nation has ever not liquidated its socialists? I don’t seem to recall reading about how Trotsky retired to his dacha on the Black Sea.