Many replies are possible to Professor Selucky's essay. The easiest and the least interesting is ... more Many replies are possible to Professor Selucky's essay. The easiest and the least interesting is to refute the argument that Marx was in favour of decentral ised, self-governing communes, without any form of centralised control. The clearest refutation of Selucky's thesis and of his own quotation is to read the 1. Hal Draper led.
Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory, Jan 2, 2014
This is a short article in two parts, discussing some theoretical issues around the present crisi... more This is a short article in two parts, discussing some theoretical issues around the present crisis. It tries to avoid repeating points made in earlier articles. The first part discusses why the capitalist class will not invest, in the context of a declining capitalism, and clears the ground for a forthcoming article on the long-term effects of the end of the Cold War on capitalism, arguing that decline has been hastened. The second part discusses the falling rate of profit, broadly rejecting it as an explanation of the current depression.
Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory, Mar 1, 1973
... SUMMARY I should like now to give a synopsis of what I am trying to say in order that the the... more ... SUMMARY I should like now to give a synopsis of what I am trying to say in order that the theory should not get lost in the woods of detail. I take the view which I explain at some length later that the Soviet Union is neither state-capitalist nor workers' state. ...
Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory, Aug 1, 2008
1968 occurred at a nodal point in the political economy of postwar capitalism. The old forces con... more 1968 occurred at a nodal point in the political economy of postwar capitalism. The old forces controlling and disciplining the workforce and the economy were less and less effective. The younger generation rejected the authority of Stalinism and social democracy, being less scarred by fascism, the depression and the Second World War. They openly turned against both capitalism and Stalinism. Their aims—to achieve a genuine socialist society—were clear but their means of getting there were not. The revolutionaries of 1968 were not able to achieve common ground between those from Stalinist countries and those from the West, in large part because neither had a sufficient understanding of Stalinism itself, let alone capitalism. Because of the strength of Stalinism, there was never any hope of overthrowing capitalism in France or Stalinism in Czechoslovakia, but 1968 changed the course of history nonetheless. The change of the strategy of capital towards finance capital is an indirect tribute to 1968 and its sequel in the 1970s.
Hillel Ticktin has been one of the most controversial figures in Soviet studies for 25 years. His... more Hillel Ticktin has been one of the most controversial figures in Soviet studies for 25 years. His assertions that the Soviet economy was hopelessly inefficient, that the ruble was a sham, and that the elite was desperate once sounded outrageous. Ticktin consistently argued that perestroika would fail. In his view the USSR was and remained inherently Stalinist. It might lurch back and forth between reformist and reactionary leadership factions but, the system could not evolve, nor could it be restructured. Ultimately, it could only disintegrate, and when it did, the workers would hold the balance. This collection of essays offers a thorough sample of his views.
The annual Critique Conference was held, as announced, at Student Central, the former ULU, in Mal... more The annual Critique Conference was held, as announced, at Student Central, the former ULU, in Malet Street London on 14 May 2016. Savas Matsas, Hillel Ticktin, Raquel Varela and Yassamine Mather spoke at the conference. The theme was on War and Capitalism in the context of the anniversary of the Russian Revolution in 1917. There was also a Critique panel at the annual Left Forum in New York, at which Michael Hudson and Hillel Ticktin spoke, and Suzi Weissman chaired the meeting. The theme was on the present stage of the global crisis. There was a substantial attendance at both meetings.
We are in a capitalism, which is both declining, and in transition. The different laws involved i... more We are in a capitalism, which is both declining, and in transition. The different laws involved induce confusion and failure for those fighting the system. Thus far, there is no strategy to deal with capital in any sphere for trade unions. Unions argue for concessions within the system. The result when the instruments of battle, strikes, goslows etc. have success always lead to incorporation or ultimate defeat because capital cannot function without profits and rising productivity. If a Trade Union or Workers' Collective or Council win a battle, they lose the war when the firm closes down. (Two years ago, in Scotland, the firm Ineos, the largest bulk chemicals firm in the world, announced it was closing its enterprise in Scotland when the workers struck. The trade union then retreated.) There is no way around the problem within capitalism. The withdrawal of the full employment economy plus a permanent depression makes impossible any successful strategy within the system. On the other side, that of capital, the ideology, of permanent austerity, is a resuscitation of commodity fetishism, buttressed by the complexity and confusion of the present. The contemporary British election is a good illustration of this point: the major parties accept austerity and effectively lie about reality, fully supported by all the media. The problem for us is that we live in an historical void, which is worse in some parts of the world than others. In the former Soviet countries and Eastern Europe, it is worse because most people there are living in a system, which cannot return to a full capitalism, while in no sense having been socialist. Everywhere there is confusion and fear and the ruling class today is using fear of the future as a means of control. Whenever a system is dying and new social system comes into being there is a period of uncertainty, an equilibrium between the old and the new and an increasing rule by a bureaucracy. The latter operates to establish certainty within uncertainty and fear in place of disorder. It establishes rules for the purpose, which appear rational but brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk
We have to begin these Notes with the sad news of Istvan Meszaros's passing asway. Istvan was... more We have to begin these Notes with the sad news of Istvan Meszaros's passing asway. Istvan was a member of the Critique editorial board for many years and contributed to it, though not for the last 15 or so years. An obituary will follow in a later issue.
Ernest Mandel has answered my remarks on worker-state theorists with two rebuttals. His first is ... more Ernest Mandel has answered my remarks on worker-state theorists with two rebuttals. His first is that I have failed to provide any proof that he sees the USSR as socialist; his second is that I claim incorrectly that the worker-state position does not offer a theory of development. He has used the occasion to update his views on these states and extends an invitation to refute him empirically. I accept his challenge.
The last Critique Notes discussed the continuing capitalist crisis in terms of the effect of Brex... more The last Critique Notes discussed the continuing capitalist crisis in terms of the effect of Brexit. The issue has widened. It is becoming clearer that the process of the UK leaving the EU is both a symptom and a part of a turn in the immediate crisis of capitalism. These notes are considerations on the political situation today. (For a short account of my view of more general changes in contemporary political economy see my article, The Period of Transition, in the Weekly Worker.) The Group of Twenty countries meeting, the IMF, the European Bank, and the President of the European Council, and various editorials, have made clear that the ruling class is worried. They have got the point that the population is discontented with high real unemployment and low wages, in sharp contrast with an apparently very wealthy ruling class. The situation is not immediately threatening. However, the demonstrations in France against the labour laws, the elections in Portugal and Spain and the USA, and the rise of the new leadership in the Labour Party in the UK all show a shift to the left. The growth of the far right in France and Germany has the same roots, at least in part. Brexit in the UK is regarded by the ruling class as part of the same phenomenon of a discontented working class finding there is no established way out of their troubles. The ruling class has responded by calling for a U-turn, in form, if not in substance. In the UK it has taken the Brexit message seriously. The Prime Minister has proclaimed a new era without calling it such. Permanent austerity is at an end, the budget deficit will be allowed to rise and infrastructure spending will be substantial. Lawrence Summers has been writing articles for some time proving this clear point—that government expenditure will raise the level of employment and so the total of wages and salaries plus profits. Tax receipts will therefore rise. One does not need Keynesian economics to know something even an unsophisticated ruler would know, of course, but Summers has the prestige to get the argument further
We need to note that a member of the editorial board, Paddy O’Donnell, died on Sunday 3 April. He... more We need to note that a member of the editorial board, Paddy O’Donnell, died on Sunday 3 April. He had written for Critique, organised at least one Critique Conference, and played an important role on the Editorial Board, particularly in the earlier years. An obituary will appear in a later issue. Anthony Eastwood, who was close to Critique, attended conferences and gave a substantial donation many years ago, died a few months ago. Tanya Frisby, who greatly helped and facilitated the development of Critique in its early years, died in Glasgow on Saturday 16 April.
A new doctrine was implicitly and explicitly proclaimed—that US governments had the right to inva... more A new doctrine was implicitly and explicitly proclaimed—that US governments had the right to invade any country judged either a threat to the United States or a danger to its citizens. Whereas the British government justified the invasion on the grounds that Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime constituted an imminent threat to the UK, the US government justified its actions on the grounds that it was saving the lives of Iraqi citizens who might otherwise be killed, tortured or imprisoned, as part of a more general war on terrorism. It is clear that these justifications were little more than that. They were not the real reasons that the United States invaded Iraq. This article tries to deal with those issues.
This chapter discusses the relations between Trotsky and the Trotskyist movement and their relati... more This chapter discusses the relations between Trotsky and the Trotskyist movement and their relationship, in turn, with the wider socialist movement. In this process, I discuss the nature of the far left and its prospects. The discussion is theoretical and not historical.
We are in a new economic and political period with the election of the Democratic Party in the US... more We are in a new economic and political period with the election of the Democratic Party in the USA led by the Biden faction. Sanders, the left opposition alternative candidate in the Democratic Party obviously felt the necessity to give way. Clearly there is no question of socialism, the centre-right of the Democratic Party is the party of 'sensible capitalists'. When Jamie Dimon the head of JPMorgan-Chase Bank can support its present line, and he is not the only banker, two things are clear. First that the concessions are probably going to be real, and secondly that there is a limit to what is to be offered. The situation of the global economy is defined in the first instance by the election in the USA and the covid-19 virus in the first instance. In the second instance US policy appears to be governed by three immediate imperatives: Internally by the programme of the Democratic party to raise taxes on the wealthy, raise incomes of the majority, in particular raise the minimum wage to $15 or thereabouts and thirdly decrease the percentage of unemployed. At the same time Biden wants to get the approval of the Republican party for these reforms. It is clear that there has been a limited revival of trade unions, and a number of members of the cabinet are in their favour. This amounts to a reversal of the policy since Reagan-Thatcher from 1980 onwards. As the economic system has been stagnating since 2008, the injection of the proposed $1.9 trillion adds to the overall impression of the possibility of real change. However, if Biden insists on getting Republican approval the reforms will take more time and be substantially below what was initially proposed as above. In effect, they will fail relatively quickly. On the other hand, if there is no compromise, it could lead to further reforms as workers organise to implement and extend the reforms. This is the simple projection with which we are presented. If the optimistic scenario becomes real, the momentum might carry it considerably further not least because it will enable a more generous international policy. There are already loud extended noises about continuing the Trump anti-Chinese policy. As the Chinese industrial economy is 60-80% private enterprise, justification largely based on the indoctrination of the Uighurs looks limited. There is no question of the undemocratic nature of the Chinese polity but other undemocratic countries,
Many replies are possible to Professor Selucky's essay. The easiest and the least interesting is ... more Many replies are possible to Professor Selucky's essay. The easiest and the least interesting is to refute the argument that Marx was in favour of decentral ised, self-governing communes, without any form of centralised control. The clearest refutation of Selucky's thesis and of his own quotation is to read the 1. Hal Draper led.
Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory, Jan 2, 2014
This is a short article in two parts, discussing some theoretical issues around the present crisi... more This is a short article in two parts, discussing some theoretical issues around the present crisis. It tries to avoid repeating points made in earlier articles. The first part discusses why the capitalist class will not invest, in the context of a declining capitalism, and clears the ground for a forthcoming article on the long-term effects of the end of the Cold War on capitalism, arguing that decline has been hastened. The second part discusses the falling rate of profit, broadly rejecting it as an explanation of the current depression.
Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory, Mar 1, 1973
... SUMMARY I should like now to give a synopsis of what I am trying to say in order that the the... more ... SUMMARY I should like now to give a synopsis of what I am trying to say in order that the theory should not get lost in the woods of detail. I take the view which I explain at some length later that the Soviet Union is neither state-capitalist nor workers' state. ...
Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory, Aug 1, 2008
1968 occurred at a nodal point in the political economy of postwar capitalism. The old forces con... more 1968 occurred at a nodal point in the political economy of postwar capitalism. The old forces controlling and disciplining the workforce and the economy were less and less effective. The younger generation rejected the authority of Stalinism and social democracy, being less scarred by fascism, the depression and the Second World War. They openly turned against both capitalism and Stalinism. Their aims—to achieve a genuine socialist society—were clear but their means of getting there were not. The revolutionaries of 1968 were not able to achieve common ground between those from Stalinist countries and those from the West, in large part because neither had a sufficient understanding of Stalinism itself, let alone capitalism. Because of the strength of Stalinism, there was never any hope of overthrowing capitalism in France or Stalinism in Czechoslovakia, but 1968 changed the course of history nonetheless. The change of the strategy of capital towards finance capital is an indirect tribute to 1968 and its sequel in the 1970s.
Hillel Ticktin has been one of the most controversial figures in Soviet studies for 25 years. His... more Hillel Ticktin has been one of the most controversial figures in Soviet studies for 25 years. His assertions that the Soviet economy was hopelessly inefficient, that the ruble was a sham, and that the elite was desperate once sounded outrageous. Ticktin consistently argued that perestroika would fail. In his view the USSR was and remained inherently Stalinist. It might lurch back and forth between reformist and reactionary leadership factions but, the system could not evolve, nor could it be restructured. Ultimately, it could only disintegrate, and when it did, the workers would hold the balance. This collection of essays offers a thorough sample of his views.
The annual Critique Conference was held, as announced, at Student Central, the former ULU, in Mal... more The annual Critique Conference was held, as announced, at Student Central, the former ULU, in Malet Street London on 14 May 2016. Savas Matsas, Hillel Ticktin, Raquel Varela and Yassamine Mather spoke at the conference. The theme was on War and Capitalism in the context of the anniversary of the Russian Revolution in 1917. There was also a Critique panel at the annual Left Forum in New York, at which Michael Hudson and Hillel Ticktin spoke, and Suzi Weissman chaired the meeting. The theme was on the present stage of the global crisis. There was a substantial attendance at both meetings.
We are in a capitalism, which is both declining, and in transition. The different laws involved i... more We are in a capitalism, which is both declining, and in transition. The different laws involved induce confusion and failure for those fighting the system. Thus far, there is no strategy to deal with capital in any sphere for trade unions. Unions argue for concessions within the system. The result when the instruments of battle, strikes, goslows etc. have success always lead to incorporation or ultimate defeat because capital cannot function without profits and rising productivity. If a Trade Union or Workers' Collective or Council win a battle, they lose the war when the firm closes down. (Two years ago, in Scotland, the firm Ineos, the largest bulk chemicals firm in the world, announced it was closing its enterprise in Scotland when the workers struck. The trade union then retreated.) There is no way around the problem within capitalism. The withdrawal of the full employment economy plus a permanent depression makes impossible any successful strategy within the system. On the other side, that of capital, the ideology, of permanent austerity, is a resuscitation of commodity fetishism, buttressed by the complexity and confusion of the present. The contemporary British election is a good illustration of this point: the major parties accept austerity and effectively lie about reality, fully supported by all the media. The problem for us is that we live in an historical void, which is worse in some parts of the world than others. In the former Soviet countries and Eastern Europe, it is worse because most people there are living in a system, which cannot return to a full capitalism, while in no sense having been socialist. Everywhere there is confusion and fear and the ruling class today is using fear of the future as a means of control. Whenever a system is dying and new social system comes into being there is a period of uncertainty, an equilibrium between the old and the new and an increasing rule by a bureaucracy. The latter operates to establish certainty within uncertainty and fear in place of disorder. It establishes rules for the purpose, which appear rational but brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk
We have to begin these Notes with the sad news of Istvan Meszaros's passing asway. Istvan was... more We have to begin these Notes with the sad news of Istvan Meszaros's passing asway. Istvan was a member of the Critique editorial board for many years and contributed to it, though not for the last 15 or so years. An obituary will follow in a later issue.
Ernest Mandel has answered my remarks on worker-state theorists with two rebuttals. His first is ... more Ernest Mandel has answered my remarks on worker-state theorists with two rebuttals. His first is that I have failed to provide any proof that he sees the USSR as socialist; his second is that I claim incorrectly that the worker-state position does not offer a theory of development. He has used the occasion to update his views on these states and extends an invitation to refute him empirically. I accept his challenge.
The last Critique Notes discussed the continuing capitalist crisis in terms of the effect of Brex... more The last Critique Notes discussed the continuing capitalist crisis in terms of the effect of Brexit. The issue has widened. It is becoming clearer that the process of the UK leaving the EU is both a symptom and a part of a turn in the immediate crisis of capitalism. These notes are considerations on the political situation today. (For a short account of my view of more general changes in contemporary political economy see my article, The Period of Transition, in the Weekly Worker.) The Group of Twenty countries meeting, the IMF, the European Bank, and the President of the European Council, and various editorials, have made clear that the ruling class is worried. They have got the point that the population is discontented with high real unemployment and low wages, in sharp contrast with an apparently very wealthy ruling class. The situation is not immediately threatening. However, the demonstrations in France against the labour laws, the elections in Portugal and Spain and the USA, and the rise of the new leadership in the Labour Party in the UK all show a shift to the left. The growth of the far right in France and Germany has the same roots, at least in part. Brexit in the UK is regarded by the ruling class as part of the same phenomenon of a discontented working class finding there is no established way out of their troubles. The ruling class has responded by calling for a U-turn, in form, if not in substance. In the UK it has taken the Brexit message seriously. The Prime Minister has proclaimed a new era without calling it such. Permanent austerity is at an end, the budget deficit will be allowed to rise and infrastructure spending will be substantial. Lawrence Summers has been writing articles for some time proving this clear point—that government expenditure will raise the level of employment and so the total of wages and salaries plus profits. Tax receipts will therefore rise. One does not need Keynesian economics to know something even an unsophisticated ruler would know, of course, but Summers has the prestige to get the argument further
We need to note that a member of the editorial board, Paddy O’Donnell, died on Sunday 3 April. He... more We need to note that a member of the editorial board, Paddy O’Donnell, died on Sunday 3 April. He had written for Critique, organised at least one Critique Conference, and played an important role on the Editorial Board, particularly in the earlier years. An obituary will appear in a later issue. Anthony Eastwood, who was close to Critique, attended conferences and gave a substantial donation many years ago, died a few months ago. Tanya Frisby, who greatly helped and facilitated the development of Critique in its early years, died in Glasgow on Saturday 16 April.
A new doctrine was implicitly and explicitly proclaimed—that US governments had the right to inva... more A new doctrine was implicitly and explicitly proclaimed—that US governments had the right to invade any country judged either a threat to the United States or a danger to its citizens. Whereas the British government justified the invasion on the grounds that Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime constituted an imminent threat to the UK, the US government justified its actions on the grounds that it was saving the lives of Iraqi citizens who might otherwise be killed, tortured or imprisoned, as part of a more general war on terrorism. It is clear that these justifications were little more than that. They were not the real reasons that the United States invaded Iraq. This article tries to deal with those issues.
This chapter discusses the relations between Trotsky and the Trotskyist movement and their relati... more This chapter discusses the relations between Trotsky and the Trotskyist movement and their relationship, in turn, with the wider socialist movement. In this process, I discuss the nature of the far left and its prospects. The discussion is theoretical and not historical.
We are in a new economic and political period with the election of the Democratic Party in the US... more We are in a new economic and political period with the election of the Democratic Party in the USA led by the Biden faction. Sanders, the left opposition alternative candidate in the Democratic Party obviously felt the necessity to give way. Clearly there is no question of socialism, the centre-right of the Democratic Party is the party of 'sensible capitalists'. When Jamie Dimon the head of JPMorgan-Chase Bank can support its present line, and he is not the only banker, two things are clear. First that the concessions are probably going to be real, and secondly that there is a limit to what is to be offered. The situation of the global economy is defined in the first instance by the election in the USA and the covid-19 virus in the first instance. In the second instance US policy appears to be governed by three immediate imperatives: Internally by the programme of the Democratic party to raise taxes on the wealthy, raise incomes of the majority, in particular raise the minimum wage to $15 or thereabouts and thirdly decrease the percentage of unemployed. At the same time Biden wants to get the approval of the Republican party for these reforms. It is clear that there has been a limited revival of trade unions, and a number of members of the cabinet are in their favour. This amounts to a reversal of the policy since Reagan-Thatcher from 1980 onwards. As the economic system has been stagnating since 2008, the injection of the proposed $1.9 trillion adds to the overall impression of the possibility of real change. However, if Biden insists on getting Republican approval the reforms will take more time and be substantially below what was initially proposed as above. In effect, they will fail relatively quickly. On the other hand, if there is no compromise, it could lead to further reforms as workers organise to implement and extend the reforms. This is the simple projection with which we are presented. If the optimistic scenario becomes real, the momentum might carry it considerably further not least because it will enable a more generous international policy. There are already loud extended noises about continuing the Trump anti-Chinese policy. As the Chinese industrial economy is 60-80% private enterprise, justification largely based on the indoctrination of the Uighurs looks limited. There is no question of the undemocratic nature of the Chinese polity but other undemocratic countries,
Uploads
Papers by Hillel Ticktin