The Scylla and Charybdis

MY COMMENTS ON the future of Socialism are divided into three parts. The first deals with Sovietism, or Marxist Socialism modified by the Russian tradition, and its offsprings around the world. The second has to do with various hues of social democracy, from the vaguely Gramscian Marxist variety to the welfare state of mixed origins. The third deals with one reason why some form of Socialism may seem attractive to the Western political and intellectual elites, and why socialism may experience a revival some time in the future. For most Americans, Marxist socialism transcends the concept of nationality. In some formulations of the problems of Socialism the word “nationalism” rarely appears. Yet in practice, Socialism has invariably been linked to nationalism. In Russia, Marxist Socialism was made to serve the interests of the Russian empire (but not those of ordinary Russians). In reaction to the growth of Russian nationalism, other nationalisms were also inflamed. The debacle of Sovietism which is now occurring has no less to do with the ripening of nationalist sentiments than it has with the failing consumer economy. Marxist Socialism made its appearance in the form of Sovietism, which is a way of governing based on Marxist doctrine but remolded to suit the Russian social and political habits. Just as the democratic forms of government have developed in accordance with local traditions, so is Marxist Socialism a blend of futuristic ideas and local custom. This is a more important aspect of Sovietism than most American observers have cared to acknowledge. Sovietism has been like a monstrous designer dress bought by a woman who showed a taste for such a dress. The designer can certainly be blamed; but it was the person who bought the garment who actually put it into circulation. Marxist socialism became permeated with Russian nationalism, just as the “national socialism” of Hitler acquired a distinctly German flavor. The designs and goals of those who made the October Revolution might have been different, but the pull of Russian history was overwhelming, and the Revolution soon acquired nationalistic leanings. After World War I1 Russian became the lingua franca of Marxist socialism the world over. Whether patriotic Russians like it or not, Russia acquired world prominence thanks to Marxist socialism and not thanks to Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. There exist few scholarly studies detailing and separating these two aspects of Soviet reality.’ Much more often, scholars disregard the first and pretend that what has been going on in Russiaand her contiguous colonies is attributable only to the wrongheaded ideas of Karl Marx and his disciples, and it could have happened in countries not bordering on Russia. As time went on and the Soviet empire’s influence grew and became more complex, the web of causality was torn and twisted beyond recognition. However, going backwards, one always finds, as a starting point, the Russian