One of the Communist Party's most important intellectuals, Maurice Dobb has written a letter to Labour Iionthly,which was published in the January issue, in which he criticises Palme Dutt's assessment of the 22nd Congress, Dobb is a long-time Party member and is the author of many studies of political economy and numerous articles in the Communist Party press. ‘there has been little overt effect on the British Comminist Party by the events of the 22nd Congress and the SinorRussian dispute, but it seems likely that letter is a symptom of a deep crisis, as it comes to_t surface may not be so spectacular as the 1956 -1957 Communist Party crisis bu ave greater long-term effect. The lettor readss
‘May a wee David make so bold as to toss a pebble in the direction of Goliath(though NOT with a sling, and certainly not aimed at the tomple!})? Bui: there seem to be two respects in which the 'llotes of the Month! for December, in their summing-up of the 22nd Congress, are inadequate to the point of boing misleading,
"Firstly, the impression is given (p.550 esp.) that the fact that ‘emergency powers were distorted and misused! (a mild enough phrase to apply to the crimes of the Beria-regime ) was due to personal quirks of Stalin's character and to the 'unique authority! that he came to enjoy from his ‘outstanding ability and record of achievement'; while there is no mention of the fact that Stalin made major political errors (from 1934 onwards) or of what these errors were. This omission would be less surprising in a commentary that mado no pretence of being a high-powered political summing-up. 1s has beon frequently emphasised since the 20th Congress, Stalin's major political error in this context from which so much else flowed, was his theory that the class struggle became inten— sified in the degree to which socialism was boing constructed. It was this which was used to justify the intensified use (instead of relaxation) of omergency powers after 1934. To appreciato this is, surely, essential ABC for any full political understanding of what occurred? As wo now know, there were other political errors as wells for example in agriculture and also in the realm of theory where (as described by Ilyichov at the 22nd Congress) the notion of a single 'God of theory' led to stultification of Marxist theory especially in the social scioncesfor a whole period, (It was not accidental that for decades we had no works on political economy, philospphy or history of any worthwhile significance - Tlyichov, ) Recognition of this latter point could perhaps be creditted, however, to the paragraph, 'A Great Revival', on p.552 of Notes of the Month! (it was necessary to break through the straitjacket and rigidity derived from the conditions of the preceding period'),
"Secondly, a rather curious attempt is made to draw a distinction between regular trial procedure and 'specialprocedures!, and to attribute the injustices exposed ONLY to the latter. One can see that such a distinction might be a comforting one for ourselves if it were valid. But I suggest that the distinction has little or no validity, and if intended as an excuse is too lame to sound convincing to more than a handful. Take, for example, the case of Rudzutak, mentioned by Khrushchov at the 20th Congress. This case was heard before the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court, similarly to other trials where the public were admitted; at the trial Rudzutak withdrew the ‘confession! he had previously made but was nonetheless executed within less than an hour. The references made by Khrushchov to 'the practice of mass repression! in the 1935-8 period, applied 'first against the Trotskyites, Zinovievites, Dukharinites, long since politically defeated by the Party, and subsequently also against many honest Communists', leave no doubt, I think, that the accusations of CRIMINAL activities (as distinct from political errors) made at the public trials wore as faked as those levelled at Rudzutak, Postyshev, Kossicr, ‘iikhe, Krylenko, Bubnov, etc. Otherwise why bracket thom all together as part of the same 'practice of mass repression!? (Later, in connection with the same period, there is explicit reference to 'fabricatad COURT CAS:3S' in which accused were charged with preparing . ‘terrorist acts',)
"These points are emphasised — and I believe are IMPORTANT to emphasise frankly and openly - not just to revive old discussion of 1956-7, but because the 'battle for the new against the old! (of which the 'Notes of the Month! go on to speak) is NOT a matter concern only to the Soviet Unions; and a realistic understanding of tho past period is an essential part of such a battle. As , R.P.D. well says, "the clearing of the old is the condition for the advance of the new'. (all emphasis as per original: 3d.)