Philosophy and decision making

[28350]

How large a role did (or does) Dialectical Materialism or Historical Materialism play in the decision-making of socialist states (eg. USSR, China) and communist parties? In other words, did the countries' respective CPs base their policies on DiaMat and HistoMat, or are said philosophies reserved only for historical analysis?

Thanks!
NB: This is not a question about the validity of Dialectical Materialism. It would be really great if a shitfest did not ensue.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Dialectical Materialism helped ruin them all:

http://anti-dialectics.co.uk/page%2009_02.htm

Section 7, Case Studies.

[A.R.Amistad]

I think Dialectical and/or Historical Materialism would say that people generally don't make policy decisions based on philosophical teachings. They make decisions based on the social conditions of the time, and those social conditions can be understood through the materialist dialectic. I don't think Lenin was thinking so much about the Marxist dialectic when he implemented the NEP; he was thinking about the problem of widespread famine. One can describe what the social situation of the RSFSR was at the time with Dialectical Materialism, such as saying how the proletariat were all but vanquished and replaced almost entirely with peasants. But social problems and necessities are far more obvious and therefore easier to act on then philosophical contradictions.

[bailey_187]

The present leaders of China attempt to justify the return of capital to China on a mechanistic version of historical materialism. They say they need to expand the forces of production for the new (socialist) relations to come about.

[mikelepore]

The pseudo-socialist governments used dialectics as an excuse to be hypocritical. Suppose someone were to point out, "You call it a workers' administration, but you don't actually give the workers any say in anything, and when workers offer suggestions you suppress them." Then they would reply, "But, you see, we are approaching the idea of a workers' administration _dialectically_."

[CartCollector]

That's what I've noticed. According to Rosa's pages, Stalin actually argued that less democracy was more democracy by saying it was dialectical. So dialectics basically creates a philosophical Bizarro World where cats chase dogs and food eats people.

[JazzRemington]

That's what I've noticed. According to Rosa's pages, Stalin actually argued that less democracy was more democracy by saying it was dialectical. So dialectics basically creates a philosophical Bizarro World where cats chase dogs and food eats people.

It's not just dialectics, I can assure you.

[which doctor]

One of the things dialectics teaches you, among many others, is that the means and the ends cannot be separated. Lenin was always drawing on this point throughout his political career, and he was as Lukacs put it, both a theoretician of practice and a practician of theory, so to say dialectical thinking does not influence your decisions is pretty ludicrous.

For a more detailed study of this, read Georg Lukacs' Lenin: A Study on the Unity of His Thought (http://marxists.org/archive/lukacs/works/1924/lenin/index.htm)