Rethinking "Stalinism"

The term "Stalinism" has come to express the ideological movement Stalin took orthodox Marxism-Leninism in the decades of his reign over the Soviet Union. However, this term is not exactly neutral and brings along with it a series of biased, subjective, and shameful mistruths regarding the prevailing ideological codes throughout the USSR during Stalin's tenure. The objective here is to reconsider this notion of "Stalinism" and its historical role within Marxism-Leninism.
Originally the term Stalinist was not used as a pejorative political slang nor was it synonymous with totalitarian governance. The term was first coined by Lazar Kaganovich, confidente and administrator under Stalin. It was used to indicate the advancements made by Stalin in applying Marxism-Leninism in real life and the process of transformation the Soviet Union was undergoing towards successfully achieving socialism. It should be noted that Stalin himself never used the term, and in fact found it quite distasteful. He always considered himself a Marxist-Leninist and referred to himself as a "pupil of Lenin."

It wasn't until later on, after the fall and exile of Leon Trotsky, that the term began to be used to symbolize a repressive, totalitarian regime headed by an egomaniacal murderous tyrant. Trotsky and his followers took it upon themselves to use the mainstream media to slander the development of socialism in the Soviet Union and went to great efforts to portray Stalin as an incompetent and malignant man with a chip on his shoulder.

Since then, much has been written on Stalinism as an ideological betrayal of both Marx and Lenin. However, such hasty generalizations without consideration of the facts distort the reality of what "Stalinism" really is. In terms of ideology, was Stalin distinct from either Marx or Lenin? Closer investigation reveals this is not the case, and in fact, the mythology surrounding both Stalin and Stalinism reveal more about those who try to discredit the man and his work.

The characterization of Stalinism that has gained notoriety throughout the West and amongst revisionist socialists details the use of state wide oppression for the accumulation of power by Stalin himself. Many deduce (without evidence) that Stalin did nothing more than try to consolidate his role as an omnipotent political figure within the Soviet Union. However one may want to look at the rise of Stalin's political career within the Bolshevik party and the Soviet state such a view ignores the basis for understanding why Stalin acted as he did. To best understand Stalin's rise one must consider his devotion to Marxism-Leninism, socialism, and the future Soviet people.

Investigating the principles of a Stalinist ideology means filtering through anti-communist, Trotskyite, revisionist, and ultra-left propaganda. Upon doing this we see a sense of continuity between Stalin and the works of Lenin, in particular. As noted previously, Stalinism should not be considered separate from Marx or Lenin; but rather as an advancement.

The continuity argument suggests that Stalinism itself does not really exist, but only refers to certain principles combined with traditional or orthodox Marxism-Leninism. Stalin himself was an avid reader and author, and made some significant contributions to Marxist-Leninist theory throughout his lifetime. One of his first major works in terms of theory was a detailed analysis of the "National Question" of Russia and how the Soviets were best to solve this problem. In Marxism and the National Question, Stalin discussed the groundwork for Soviet policy regarding the multitude of ethnic minorities spread throughout the vast Russian empire. The work itself received great attention amidst his colleagues, and even gained praise from Lenin himself. This theory (which is quite detailed and very well written) is only one of the theoretical contributions Stalin made to Marxism-Leninism.

The second major contribution attributed to Stalin was the notion that socialism in one country is possible. For a more detailed explanation of this concept, please refer to my article on the subject. The idea was not originally Stalin's himself, which he acknowledges, but he laid out one of the most comprehensive explanations for how this would occur in a theoretical manner and then proceeded to implement his ideas. The notion rests upon the fact that the early Soviet Union could no longer wait for proletarian revolution to spread throughout Europe, and thus should begin establishing socialism within its borders while at the same time contributing to the spread of revolution. This was a revolutionary concept that created a wide split into factionalism within the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). It was on these grounds that the political rivalry between Stalin and Trotsky (and his left faction) escalated.

The third major contribution credited to Stalin was the idea of the aggravation of class-struggle under socialism. Many contemporary communists/socialists believed the onset of socialism would lessen the intensity of class-antagonisms; however, Stalin noted that as the bourgeoisie loses its control over the means of production and the state their efforts become more drastic and desperate and thus state power (as a tool for class-oppression) is necessary in combating their efforts to remove the proletariat. This concept would later be revised by Mao Tse-Tong who claimed that class-antagonisms existed within the Communist Party itself which justified extreme measures for the protection of the revolution.

Another staple of Stalinism is the focus on heavy industry production and collectivization of agriculture. This however should not be confused with the ideology of Stalinism though; rather, it represents socialism in practice. The need for heavy industry over consumer goods was out of necessity for modernization and preparation for the inevitable war with the imperialist powers of Europe. Likewise, collectivization of agriculture was not new to Stalin either - in fact was seen to a lesser extent with Lenin's War Communism policies.

When we look beyond the political epitaph that the term Stalinism has become, then we approach a more objective and unbiased examination of what really was taking place. From my examination we should note that Stalinism itself is not distinct from Marxism-Leninism, but a more advanced development of its ideological precepts. Second, the idea that Stalinism itself is a betrayal of socialism or Marxism-Leninism is perpetuated by opportunistic revisionists and Left-Communists who spent their efforts spreading propaganda against the peoples of the Soviet Union and their leaders.