Marxism-Leninism and State Capitalism

[Kill all the fetuses!]

I've encountered a claim that the USSR was a state capitalist country many times and it makes perfect sense to me - state bureaucrats substituted itself for capitalist class, social relations of capitalist economy haven't really been changed etc. etc. But when it comes to Marxist-Leninists rebutting that claim, I have never heard anything better than mere dismissal of that or some weird and obscure claims about revisionism...

Needless to say, such rebuttal is absolutely useless for someone who is trying to learn the position of Marxist-Leninists regarding the USSR state.

Having said that, could someone, preferably Marxist-Leninist, give an explicit account as to why they don't agree with the characterization of the USSR as a state capitalist country and how do they tend to view the USSR and why?

[Remus Bleys]

I don't really view the ussr as State capitalist because the state is an expression of class forms, rather it was capitalism developing in an already imperialist world, so no choice but state industrialization. However, my opposition to the term is really just an opposition to acting like a state can exist without a class or that russian developing capitalism, whilst somewhat unique, was somehow majorly different than other "capitalisms." So o guess I sometimes use the term state capitalism, but rather because I'm lazy and thats what the rest of the left communists do.
also you left out trots

[Brotto Rühle]

I've encountered a claim that the USSR was a state capitalist country many times and it makes perfect sense to me - state bureaucrats substituted itself for capitalist class, social relations of capitalist economy haven't really been changed etc. etc. But when it comes to Marxist-Leninists rebutting that claim, I have never heard anything better than mere dismissal of that or some weird and obscure claims about revisionism...The problem with the Stalinists dismissal of the claims is that they will either agree with you on the points of the domination of society by the law of value, the existence of commodity production, wage labour, etc. but tell you that these fit perfectly well in the "socialist stage" of society, or they will deny that all of these things existed and just ignore the reality.

[Ember Catching]

The Soviet Union retained capitalist conditions of production (and was ultimately characterized by a generalized production of surplus-value) — the same will be true of every revolutionary proletarian dictatorship to come, until such time as all mercantile forms are abolished after a period of economic reorganization which destroys the valorization process and transforms all able individuals into industrial producers. How this even elicits controversy is beyond me.

There is no shortage of entirely valid reasons to resolutely oppose the ultimately divergent direction of the USSR and all its affiliated states and parties, but, in and of itself, the supremacy of capitalist production on the ground post-October just isn't one of them.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

The problem with the Stalinists dismissal of the claims is that they will either agree with you on the points of the domination of society by the law of value, the existence of commodity production, wage labour, etc. but tell you that these fit perfectly well in the "socialist stage" of society, or they will deny that all of these things existed and just ignore the reality.

Could you please explain what does the bolded part mean exactly? I mean, I've read the Capital, but I am not sure what does your statement mean in the context of the USSR.

[reb]

Could you please explain what does the bolded part mean exactly? I mean, I've read the Capital, but I am not sure what does your statement mean in the context of the USSR.

It means that society was dominated by the need to extract surplus value from the direct producers.

[Broviet Union]

Wasn't the point of the USSR as a socialist state to extract surplus value from workers in order to construct capital? Essentially, they engaged in 90 years of state directed "accumulation of capital" and called it socialism. Considering how vile that process has always been, I am not surprised the workers hated the socialist states.

[Slavic]

Wasn't the point of the USSR as a socialist state to extract surplus value from workers in order to construct capital? Essentially, they engaged in 90 years of state directed "accumulation of capital" and called it socialism. Considering how vile that process has always been, I am not surprised the workers hated the socialist states.

State that extracts surplus value
State that creates capital with extracted surplus value
State Capital

State Capitalism