The Observation of Karl Kautsky - apt or inappropriate?

[Communist Mutant From Outer Space]

"Foreign tourists in Russia stand in silent amazement before the gigantic enterprises created there, as they stand before the pyramids, for example. Only seldom does the thought occur to them what enslavement, what lowering of human self-esteem was connected with the construction of those gigantic establishments."

Is this observation from Kautsky an evaluation based on his own biased Marxist tendency, or could be it be said to be, somewhat, objectively true? Not just in relation to these monuments, but in relation to the treatment of Soviet workers in general. Was it a worker's paradise or a slaver's delight? Are these monuments aptly compared to the pyramids (in that they were built through slave labour), or is this a gross exaggeration based on Kautsky's own dogmatism?

Personally it would seem to me that he is at least partially right but I an unfamiliar with much of the history of the time. I would like a critical evaluation of the viewpoint expressed in this quotation, if you please.

[RedKobra]

He's right to an extent but frankly I find it hard to take any criticism from Kautsky seriously given his record. I think the phrase is "All mouth and no trousers".

[tuwix]

I would like a critical evaluation of the viewpoint expressed in this quotation, if you please.

It's rather metaphor than actual assessment. From Marx's perspective wage system is slavery and in Soviet Russia it has never ceased to exist. But almost all industry built there was in environment of great enthusiasm evoked by propaganda. In classic capitalism industry was built for clod profit, but in state capitalism countries much of it was built on enthusiasm evoked by mass propaganda.

[Ricemilk]

Historians believe the Pyramids were not built by slave labor, but by honored specialists with nearby burial places of relative prestige.

[Emmett Till]

"Foreign tourists in Russia stand in silent amazement before the gigantic enterprises created there, as they stand before the pyramids, for example. Only seldom does the thought occur to them what enslavement, what lowering of human self-esteem was connected with the construction of those gigantic establishments."

Is this observation from Kautsky an evaluation based on his own biased Marxist tendency, or could be it be said to be, somewhat, objectively true? Not just in relation to these monuments, but in relation to the treatment of Soviet workers in general. Was it a worker's paradise or a slaver's delight? Are these monuments aptly compared to the pyramids (in that they were built through slave labour), or is this a gross exaggeration based on Kautsky's own dogmatism?

Personally it would seem to me that he is at least partially right but I an unfamiliar with much of the history of the time. I would like a critical evaluation of the viewpoint expressed in this quotation, if you please.

Only a mutant from outer space should accept renegade Kautsky's slanders against the USSR as accurate.

Whatever else one might say about Stalinist superindustrialization and the sacrifices imposed by the bureaucracy on rank and file workers, the results were something to be proud of, unlike those useless pyramids which just glorified Pharaohs. Extremely useful stuff, as was demonstrated in WWII. Go to Russia and take a ride on the Moscow subway and you'll see what I mean.

"Lowering of human self-esteem"? If anything, the reverse problem, with Stakhanovism and "labor heroes" getting sometimes undeserved acclaim. Whatever else one might say about the USSR, there has never been a society in which being a factory worker gave you more moral credibility. Under Brezhnev, a solid majority of the Politburo including Brezhnev himself were former factory workers. "Archie Bunker socialism" perhaps with a rotten labor aristocracy in charge, but not exactly what Kautsky was talking about.

[Luís Henrique]

"Foreign tourists in Russia stand in silent amazement before the gigantic enterprises created there, as they stand before the pyramids, for example. Only seldom does the thought occur to them what enslavement, what lowering of human self-esteem was connected with the construction of those gigantic establishments."

Is this observation from Kautsky an evaluation based on his own biased Marxist tendency, or could be it be said to be, somewhat, objectively true? Not just in relation to these monuments, but in relation to the treatment of Soviet workers in general. Was it a worker's paradise or a slaver's delight? Are these monuments aptly compared to the pyramids (in that they were built through slave labour), or is this a gross exaggeration based on Kautsky's own dogmatism?

Personally it would seem to me that he is at least partially right but I an unfamiliar with much of the history of the time. I would like a critical evaluation of the viewpoint expressed in this quotation, if you please.

It would depend on when that was said. Russia was not the same in 1935 as it was in 1925.

Luís Henrique

[Sibotic]

"Foreign tourists in Russia stand in silent amazement before the gigantic enterprises created there, as they stand before the pyramids, for example. Only seldom does the thought occur to them what enslavement, what lowering of human self-esteem was connected with the construction of those gigantic establishments."
To be fair, although this might be a translation issue, Kautsky does seem to locate the slavery in the Russian situation while the pyramids are mentioned mostly to illustrate the amazement of tourists or so on, with the connotations about the pyramids seemingly being kept deliberately muted. In that sense the comparison of Russian monuments with the pyramids, which are 'past-tense' as it were, is a fairly poignant reflection on the view that the Russians weren't necessarily likely to pull through due to what they were and did.

They do seem to be discussing something akin to a 'spectacle' in that what is appreciated by others and put forward is merely a fairly generic, acceptable appearance, and that this attempt to put on a show is likewise connected with a lowered self-esteem on the part of the Russia that was previously known for its socialists. (It was apparently to be met with an unthinking 'acceptance' which disregards their production, and which is a shallow silence.) As the foreigners might have been identified in Russia with 'capitalism,' the attempt by Russia to put on a public face which, to Kautsky at least, seemed too much akin to that which capital admires, seemed questionable to him and a new start might have been needed rather than simply relying on Russia to get through somehow. The overall sense is that while Russia is something slightly foreign to the rest of the world, mostly, nonetheless they were perhaps not far enough a break from that 'normality' and hence Kautsky may compare them to the pyramids. You would at least say that it might be a view from a communist, if not necessarily 'the view,' nonetheless a valid one in that sense.

[The Idler]

"Foreign tourists in Russia stand in silent amazement before the gigantic enterprises created there, as they stand before the pyramids, for example. Only seldom does the thought occur to them what enslavement, what lowering of human self-esteem was connected with the construction of those gigantic establishments."

Is this observation from Kautsky an evaluation based on his own biased Marxist tendency, or could be it be said to be, somewhat, objectively true? Not just in relation to these monuments, but in relation to the treatment of Soviet workers in general. Was it a worker's paradise or a slaver's delight? Are these monuments aptly compared to the pyramids (in that they were built through slave labour), or is this a gross exaggeration based on Kautsky's own dogmatism?

Personally it would seem to me that he is at least partially right but I an unfamiliar with much of the history of the time. I would like a critical evaluation of the viewpoint expressed in this quotation, if you please.
Wage slavery is slavery. The average workers’ wage in Moscow in 1924-5 was 44 roubles for industrial workers and 66 for all workers.

[Emmett Till]

Wage slavery is slavery. The average workers’ wage in Moscow in 1924-5 was 44 roubles for industrial workers and 66 for all workers.

Can't build socialism in one country you know. As of 1924-25 the situation of workers in Moscow was vastly better than before the Revolution. Free health care, free rent, living in the seized apartments of capitalists instead of the filthy shacks before the Revolution, and wages adjusted for inflation in fact rather higher than before the Revolution.

But it was no workers paradise, only a Stalinist would have that kind of delusion.

[The Idler]

I'm a Marxist so I support the abolition of the wages system not what bourgeoisie of any stripe are benevolent enough to dole out to us plebs.