Home > Work > Political and Social Writings: 1946-55 - From the Critique of Bureaucracy to the Positive Content of Socialism v. 1
1 " Equally false is the conception of the Russian regime as a regime of "State capitalism." This theory serves to conceal the inability of the theory's supporters to study a new phenomenon without having recourse to well-known formulas, and usually rests upon deplorable confusions (as with Georges Munis, who identifies any form of exploitation with capitalism). In fact, adherents to this theory are obliged to acknowledge that, aside from the traits common to every exploitative society, Russian society exhibits none of capitalism's characteristics (complete elimination of crises, lack of any objective determination of the rate of surplus value, lack of any law of wages, absence of any law of value, distribution of profit to the bureaucrats in accordance with their positions and not according to property titles). The quarrel would revert accordingly to a mere dispute over terminology if the falsity and the superficial character of the theory of "State capitalism" were not established by highly significant facts. Some of these facts are (a) the instauration and stabilization of this regime (which normally ought to have been the product of an overdevelopment of capitalism) not in the advanced countries (the United States, Germany, England) but in a backward country; (b) the absence of almost any connection between today's bureaucrats and former capitalists; (c) the way in which the bureaucracy came to power; and (d) the Russian policy in the glacis, a policy of assimilation that in its first phase totally dispossessed the capitalists (which would be absurd if the regime to be set up were State capitalism). Moreover, the "logic" of their ideas pushes the adherents of this theory toward theoretically and politically stupid conclusions, like their correlation [assimilation] of Stalinist parties with the fascist parties. "
― Cornelius Castoriadis , Political and Social Writings: 1946-55 - From the Critique of Bureaucracy to the Positive Content of Socialism v. 1
2 " The initial result of this dynamic, quite clearly, is a rapid development of the traits of concentration within American imperialism. The simultaneously political and economic control over other countries exercised by U. S. finance capital; the increasing role of the American State in the establishment of this control; the direct stranglehold over German, Japanese, and Italian capital; the acceleration of vertical and horizontal concentration imposed by the need to control and regulate more and more completely its sources of raw materials and its domestic as well as foreign markets; the expansion of its military apparatus, the likelihood of "total" war, and a war economy; the need for increased exploitation of the working class imposed by the falling rate of profit — all these factors drive the American economy beyond capitalism "run by the monopolies" (just as these monopolies went beyond the stage of competitive capitalism) in order to arrive at the stage of a universal monopoly that is identical with the State. A new crisis of overproduction -more acute even than the present crisis- but, above all, war, will signal an extraordinary acceleration of this process. "
3 " The transformation of competitive capitalism into monopoly capitalism altered the character of the economic links between capitalist countries and their colonies. Monopolies require a well-ordered market with stable sources of raw materials and stable outlets. The colonies therefore became integrated into this general tendency toward market "rationalization," which monopolies try to achieve for their outlets and for the sources of their raw materials. The colonies became above all a field for the investment of overabundant capital from the home countries, which is now exported on an increasing scale from these metropolitan countries to their colonies and to backward countries in general. In these areas the high rate of profit, tied to the very cheap labor costs that prevail there, allows capital to exploit labor to a much greater extent. "
4 " The concentration of capital and technical developments necessitate ever larger investments. These requirements can only be met through increased exploitation of the proletariat. But this very exploitation soon comes up against an insurmountable obstacle, namely, the fall in the productivity of labor when labor is overexploited. From this stage on there is only one solution possible for the exploiters, whether bourgeois or bureaucrats: external expansion through the annexation of the capital, the raw materials, and even the proletariat of their opponent. This is merely the supreme expression of the fundamental tendency of concentrated capital, the tendency to expand not merely in relation to its own absolute size but in accordance with its dominant position in the worldwide relation of forces. Today this means the appropriation not merely of a larger share of the profits but of all the profits. One can appropriate all the profits for oneself, however, only if one appropriates all the conditions and sources of profit, in other words, if one secures domination over the entire world economy. "
5 " The clear conclusion from the foregoing was that the goal, the true content of socialism, was neither economic growth nor maximum consumption nor the expansion of free (empty) time as such, but the restoration, rather the instauration for the first time in history, of people's domination over their activities and therefore over their primary activity, work; that socialism was concerned not only with the so-called grand affairs of society but with the transformation of every aspect of life and in particular with the transformation of daily life, "the foremost of important matters." There is no domain in life in which the oppressive nature of the capitalist organization of society is not expressed, none in which the latter might have developed a "neutral" rationality, none that could have remained untouched. "