Two Angles Of New Class Theorists

Two Angles Of New Class Theorists

Marxists might not admit, because to do so would be to contradict Marx, but the rise of bureaucracy as technically trained and specialised group began to be interpreted as a ‘new class’. On the one hand are ‘global new class theorists, and on the other hand are socialist thinkers. 

Check ou Systems Approach

Among the prominent global new class theorists’ are Laurat, Rizzi, Burnaham etc. Rizzi was one of) the first to argue that bureaucracy owned property as much as the capitalists had. It owned it as it exploited the proletariat and drew off the surplus value which the latter produced not individually but collectively, en block. Rizzi admits that this is a different manner of ownership from bourgeois ownership, but it is ownership nevertheless. He describes bureaucracy that rules Russia as a class, and it dominates all domains of society. He maintains that “the bureaucratic regime of the USSR has, first sacrificed the Communist Party and the Third International, then the Red Army itself. Tasks of this magnitude cannot be done by “cliques’ or ‘staffs’ or ‘clerks’ but only by classes.

The second category of ‘new class’ theorists is of the dissidents within the Communist states. The most important of them was ‘Milovan Djilas’. Djilas began to write on bureaucracy and bureaucratism as part of the Yugoslav critique of the Soviet Union after the Cominform split of 1948 and the Rajik trial of 1949. He argued that the dictatorship of the proletariat could develop in one of two ways-either towards its own disappearance or in the direction of strengthening and transformation of bureaucracy into a privileged caste which lives at the expense of society as a whole. He described the Soviet bureaucracy as having all the attributes of the traditional ruling classes i.e., exclusive control over production and distribution, grabbing of larger share of surplus for itself and lived at the expense of the producers. Yet he said that bureaucracy was only a caste, not a class, since it did not own the means of production.

Later, however he became more explicit. For him, the ruling bureaucracy was political leadership and all the other strata were subordinate to it. Regarding the ownership of property, he said….. property constitutes the use, enjoyment, and disposition of material goods. The communist political bureaucracy uses, enjoys and disposes of national property…… The new class obtains its power, privileges, ideology, and its customs form one specific form of ownership-collective ownership in which the class administers and distributes in the name of nation and society.

Other supporters of the ‘new class’ theory are Max Sbachtman (USA), Jacek Kuron and Karol Modzelewski (Poland) and Svetozar, Stojamlovic (Yugoslavia). They all agree that October Revolution was a workers revolution, but it has been betrayed. Bureaucratic degeneration led to the installation of a new ruling class.

Difference between the Two Angles

Global New Class Theorists

1. It claims to identify and explain a worldwide phenomenon.
2. Industrial managers and similar functionaries were succeeding the ruling class.
3. New Class is the phenomenon of the developed world as a successor to advanced capitalism.

Socialist New Class Theorists

1. It has more restrained and realistic ambitions.
2. The new class is based on the political bureaucracy which forms around the Communist Party.
3. It sees new class as a means of bringing rapid Industrialization to the less developed areas of the world.