Next: The Party elections
Up: The struggle against
Previous: Regularly purge the
To finish with bureaucracy, the leadership began a struggle for
democracy within the Party.
It is on this basis of difficulties in applying the instructions during
the purification campaign that on December 17, 1934, the Central
Committee focused for the first time on more fundamental problems. It
criticized `bureaucratic methods of leadership', where essential
questions are treated by small groups of cadres without any
participation from the base.
On March 29, 1935,
Zhdanov
passed a resolution in Leningrad,
criticizing certain leaders for neglecting education work and only doing
economic tasks. Ideological tasks disappeared in paperwork and
bureaucracy. The resolution underscored that the leaders must know the
qualities and capacities of their subordinates. Evaluation reports of
their work were needed, as were closer contacts between leaders and cadres
and a political line of promoting new cadres.
.
Ibid.
, p. 99.
On May 4, Stalin spoke about this subject. He condemned
`(T)he outrageous attitude towards people, towards cadres, towards workers,
which we not infrequently observe in practice. The slogan ``Cadres
decide everything'' demands that our leaders should display the most solicitous
attitude towards our workers, ``little'' and ``big,'' assisting them when
they need support, encouraging them when they show their first successes,
promoting them, and so forth. Yet in practice we meet in a number of
cases with a soulless, bureaucratic, and positively outrageous attitude
towards workers.'
.
Stalin, Address to the Graduates of the Red Army Academies.
Leninism,
p. 364.
Arch Getty,
in his brilliant study, Origins of the great purges,
makes the following comment.
`The party had become bureaucratic, economic, mechanical, and
administrative to an intolerable degree. Stalin and other leaders at
the center perceived this as an ossification, a breakdown, and a
perversion of the party's function. Local party and government leaders
were no longer political leaders but economic administrators. They
resisted political control from both above and below and did not want to
be bothered with ideology, education, political mass campaigns, or the
individual rights and careers of party members. The logical extension
of this process would have been the conversion of the party apparatus
into a network of locally despotic economic administrations. The
evidence shows that Stalin,
Zhdanov,
and others preferred to revive the
educational and agitational functions of the party, to reduce the
absolute authority of local satraps, and to encourage certain forms of
rank-and-file leadership.'
.
Getty,
op. cit.
, p. 105.
Next: The Party elections
Up: The struggle against
Previous: Regularly purge the
Fri Aug 25 09:03:42 PDT 1995