Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:48:04.721Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comparative View of Democratic Centralism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Klaus von Beyme
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

THE VAGUE AND CONTRADICTORY FORMULA OF ‘DEMOCRATIC centralism’ has never been understood as a static device independent of historical circumstances. Though it has been dogmatized, despite the opposition of other non-revisionist tendencies in the international labour movement such as Rosa Luxemburg and the Worker's Opposition in Russia during the 9th Party Congress in 1920, the formula always had to be reinterpreted according to the needs of different phases of class struggle. In every phase of development, the relation between the components ‘democracy‘ and ‘centralism‘ has been defined in a different way.3 Since the 3rd Party Congress centralism was considered to be the basic organizational principle of the party, whereas democracy had to be adapted to the changing circumstances and to the political conditions of different countries. Certainly Lenin was right in arguing in his pamphlet Chto delat (1902) that, under the circumstances of tsarist autocratic rule, ‘democratism’ within the party would have been ‘an empty and dangerous game’. Also the Menshevik leaders - in spite of their controversies with Lenin - still admitted at that time that a centralized and disciplined party organization was of the highest importance. Thus Schapiro is probably right when he sees little difference between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks on the question of democratic centralism at the time of the conflict in Iskra.

Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , 01 July 1975 , pp. 259 - 277
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Rosa Luxemburg, Die russische Revolution, ed. by O. K. Flechtheim, Frankfurt/M., 1963, p. 28.

2 See Osinsky, V. in Daniels, R. V., ed., A Documentary History of Communism, New York, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 187 Google Scholar ff.

3 Hamel, H., Das sowjetische Herrschaftsprinzip des demokratischen Zentralismus in der Wirtschaftsordnung Mitteldeutschlands, Berlin, 1966, p. 21 Google Scholar.

4 Meyer, A. G., Leninism, New York, 1965, Chapter 5, pp. 92 Google Scholar ff.

5 Schapiro, L., The Communist Party of the Soviet Union, London, 1959 Google Scholar, Ch. 3.

6 Rigby, T. H., Communist Party Membership in the VSSR 1917–1967, Princeton, 1968, p. 91 Google Scholar.

7 English text in, Nogee, J. L., ed., Man, State and Society in the Soviet Union, London, 1972, p. 98 Google Scholar.

8 Studenikin et al., Lehrbuch des sowjetischen Verwaltungsrechts (German edition, Berlin, 1954, p. 94; Galette, A., ‘Der “Demokratische Zentralismus” als Strukturprinzip der Verwaltung im kommunistisch beherrschten Teil Deutschlands’, Jahrbuch für Ostrecht, vol. 1960, 1st issue (41–67), p. 43 Google Scholar.

9 H.‐O. Leng, Die allgemeine Wahl im bolschewistischen Staat, Meisenheim/Glan, 1973. P. 232.

10 See Baila, B., Kaderverwaltung. Versuch einer Idealtypisierung der ‘Bürokratie’ sowjetisch‐volksdemokratischen Typs, Stuttgart, 1972, p. 166 Google Scholar.

11 See Soviet criticisms Skilling, against G., the author of this paper and others in Marchenko, M. H., Politicheskaya organizatsiya sovetskogo obshchestva i yeyo burzhuaznyye fal’sifikatory, Moscow, 1973, p. 104 Google Scholar.

12 Westen, K., Die Kommunistische Partei der Sowjetunion und der Sowjetstaat. Eine verfassungsrechtliche Untersuchung, Cologne, 1968, p. 152 Google Scholar.

13 Lane, D., Kolankiewicz, G., eds, Social Groups in Polish Society, London, 1973, P. 253 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Leninskoye ucheniye o demokratii i zakonosti i yego znacheniye dlya sovremennosti, Moscow 1973, pp. 66 ff.; Zawadzki, S., Państwo socjalistyczne i istota demokracji, Warsaw, 1968, pp. 66 Google Scholar ff.

15 M. P. Shendrik, Obshchenarodnoye gosudarstvo—novyy etap v razvitii sotsialisticheskoy gosudarstvennosti, L’vov, 1970, pp. 82 ff.; Kositsyn, A. P.: Sotsialisticheskoye gosudarstvo, Moscow, 1970, pp. 394 Google Scholar ff.

16 Gerschberg, S. R., Lenins Kampf für den demokratischen Zentralismus im Wirtschaftsaujbau. Sowjetwissenschaft, Gesellschaftswiss. Beiträge, 1957, p. 1463 Google Scholar.

17 Lenin, Sochineniya, vol. 32, pp. 245 ff.

18 Marx‐Engels, Werke, vol. 18, p. 306.

19 See Kazemzadeh, F., ‘Demokratischer Zentralismus’, in Kernig, C. D., ed., Sowjetsystem und Demokratische Gesellschaft, Freiburg, 1966, vol. 1 (col. 1158–1165 Google Scholar) col. 1161.

20 K. von Beyme, ‘Federal Theory and Party Reality in the Soviet Union’, Public Policy, 1964, pp. 395–412.

21 Mao Tse‐Tung, ‘On coalition government’, Selected Works, vol. IV, p. 272.

22 Der X. Parteitag der Kommunistischen Partei Chinas, Peking, 1973, p. 77.

23 Schurmann, F., Ideology and Organization in Communist China, Berkeley—Los Angeles, 1966, pp. 278, 291Google Scholar.

24 Ibid., p. 87.

25 Karol, K. S., Guerrillas in Power, London, 1971, p. 531 Google Scholar.

26 Chirkin, B. E., Fortny sotsialisticheskogo gosudarstva, Moscow, 1973, pp. 229 Google Scholar ff.

27 Dumont, R., Cuba—est‐il socialiste? Paris, 1970, p. 30 Google Scholar; Bernardo, R. M., The Theory of Moral Incentives in Cuba. Alabama, 1971, p. 16 Google Scholar.

28 Libermann, E. G., Ekonomicheskiye metody povysheniya effektivnosti obshchestvennogo proizvodstva, Moscow, 1970 Google Scholar, Ch. 2.

29 R. Damus, Entscheidungsstrukturen und Funktionsprobleme in der DDR‐Wirtschaft, Frankfurt/M., 1973, p. 226.

30 See Milenkovich, D. ed., Plan and Market in Yugoslav Economic Thought, New Haven—London, 1971, pp. 125 Google Scholar ff.

31 Vasilev, V. I., Demokraticheskiy tsentralizm v sisteme sovetov, Moscow 1973, p. 19 Google Scholar.

32 I. A. Azovkin, Sovetskoye gosudarstvo i pravo, 1973, Nr. 12 (137–139), p. 139.

33 Golembiewski, R. T., Organization, Men and Power, New York, 1967, p. 21 Google Scholar.

34 Naschold, F., Organisation und Demokratie, Stuttgart, 1969, p. 31 Google Scholar.

35 For a comparative view on this see Ritter, T., Eingabenarbeit—Grundsätze and Erfahrungen, Berlin, 1972, pp. 36 Google Scholar ff.; On mass petitions as a substitute for ‘shotgun pressure’ in the Soviet Union see von Beyme, K., Interessengruppen in der Demokratie, Munich, 1974, p. 82, 21Google Scholar.

36 Klaus, G., Kybernetik—eine neue Universalphilosophie der Gesellschaft?, Berlin, 1973, P. 79 Google Scholar.

37 Etzioni, A., The Active Society, New York, 1968, p. 521 Google Scholar.

38 Skilling, G., ed., Interest Groups in Soviet Politics, Princeton, 1971, p. 3 Google Scholar ff.; von Beyme, K., ‘Gesellschaftliche Organisationen und Interessenpluralismus in der Sowjetunion’, in Loewenthal, R., Meissner, B. eds, Sowjetische Innenpolitik, Stuttgart, 1968, pp. 39–48 Google Scholar.

39 Th. J. Lowi, ‘American Business. Case Studies and Political Theory’, World Politics, 1963/64, (677–715), p. 690 f.

40 Shtraks, G. M., Sotsial’noye edinstvo i protivorechiya sotsialisticheskogo obshchestva, Moscow, 1966, p. 103 Google Scholar.

41 M. P. Shendrik, op. cit., p. 82.

42 Kuczynski, J., ‘Gesellschaftliche Widersprüche’, in Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 1972, pp. 1269–79Google Scholar; Criticism by an orthodox: Stiehler, G., ‘Bemerkungen zu Problemen der Dialektik und des Determinismus’, ibidem, 1973, p. 348 Google Scholar.

43 This will be done in greater detail in my forthcoming book, Ökonomie und Politik im Sozialismus, Munich, 1975.

44 Perhaps it is due to the sophistication of Alex Inkeles as a specialist in Soviet affairs, that the book by Inkeles and Smith, D. H. (Becoming Modem, Cambridge/Mass. 1974, p. 299 Google Scholar f.) is very careful about generalizing on modern socialist man.

45 Sceptical for capitalist societies: Dye, R., Politics, Economics and the Public, Chicago, 1966, p. 293 Google Scholar; Fry, B. R., Winters, R. F., ‘The Politics of Redistribution’, American Political Science Review, 1970, Nr. 2 (508–522), p. 509. Google Scholar

46 Supek, R., Bosnjak, B. eds., Jugoslawien denkt anders, Vienna, 1971, pp. 193 Google Scholar ff.

47 Kalecki, M., Zarys teorii wzrostu gospodarki socjalisticznej, Warsaw, 1963, pp. 51 Google Scholar ff.; Goldmann, J., Kouba, K., Economie Growth in Czechoslovakia, Prague, 1969, p. 41 Google Scholar.

48 Figures in Hutchings, R. ‘Fluctuation and Interaction in Estimates of Soviet Budget Expenditure’, Osteuropa Wirtschaft, 1973, Nr. 1 (57–79), p. 62.Google Scholar

49 In Die 15. Tagung des Zentralkomitees der SED, Berlin, 1971, p. 38.

50 Sergiyev, A. V., Predvideniye v politike, Moscow 1974, p. 84 Google Scholar. Trapeznikov, S., ‘Stroitel’stvo kommunizma i gorizonty nauki’, Pravda, 5 01 1973 Google Scholar; see also Göttner, R., Fischer, P.: Was soll, was kann Prognostik, Leipzig, 1973; p. 104 Google Scholar.

51 On conflicts about the classifications of welfare institutions see Rakitsky, B. V.: Obshchestvennyye fondy potrebleniya kak ekonomicheskaya kategoriya, Moscow, 1966 Google Scholar.

52 Gendin, A. M., ‘Effekt Edipa i metodologicheskiye problemy sotsial’nogo prognozirovaniya’, Voprosy flosofii, 1970, Nr. 5, pp. 80–9Google Scholar.

53 This article is based on a paper given at the workshop on communist states of the joint session of the ECDR at the London School of Economics, April 1975.