Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 16:20:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu> Subject: Re: Soviet Science Louis Proyect: For those interested in the subject of science in the former USSR, I want to strongly recommend the work of Loren Graham. His titles include: Science in Russia and the Soviet Union, Cambridge, 1993 Science and the Soviet Social Order, Harvard, 1990 Science, Philosophy and Human Behavior in the Soviet Union, Columbia, 1987 Science and Philosophy in the Soviet Union, Vintage, 1974 Soviet Academy of Sciences and the Communist Party 1927-1932, Princeton, 1967 In addition, Graham wrote "The Ghost of the Executed Engineer" about the civil engineer Palchinksy who put forward an industrial development model that differed radically from Stalin's. I wrote something about this most fascinating book and posted it to this list a while back. I'll re-post it below for anybody who wants to get a feel for the types of issues Graham is examining: ---------------------------------------------------------- Peter Palchinsky was a civil engineer who joined the Communist Party shortly after the 1917 revolution. In the 1920's he developed an approach to industrialization that differed radically from Stalin's. Palchinsky was enthusiastic about planning. He believed that the Soviet Union opened up possibilities for the planning of industry that were impossible under Tsarism. He thought that engineers could play a major role in the growth of socialism. He hoped that engineers could be as important to the construction of socialism as financiers were to the development of capitalism. Palchinsky argued against the type of gigantic enterprises that were beginning to capture Stalin's rather limited imagination. He noted that middle-sized and small enterprises often have advantages over large ones. For one thing, workers at smaller factories are usually able to grasp the final goals more easily. He believed that the single most important factor in engineering decisions was human beings themselves. Successful industrialization and high productivity were not possible without highly trained workers and adequate provision for their social and economic needs. His differences with Stalin's pyramid-building approach erupted over the Great Dneiper Dam project, one of the most fabled 5-year plan projects. Palchinsky made the following critiques. The project didn't take into account the huge distances between the dam and the targeted sites. As a consequence, there would be huge transmission costs and declines in efficiency. Also, the project didn't take into account the damage resulting floods would cause to surrounding farms situated in lowlands. Some 10,000 villagers had to flee their homes. As the project fell behind schedule and overran costs, the workers' needs were more and more neglected. The workers suffered under freezing conditions, living in cramped tents and barracks without adequate sanitary facilities. TB, typhus, and smallpox spread throughout the worker's quarters. Palchinsky argued forcefully against projects such as these and offered a more rational, humane and less ideologically driven approach. In other words, he stressed sound engineering and planning methods. He helped to organize a study group dedicated to his principles. Palchinsky and other engineers who opposed Stalin's bureaucratic system allied themselves to some extent with Bukharin and Rykov who had often defended engineers and their approach to industrial planning. Stalin cracked down on the Bukharin opposition around the same time as he attacked dissident engineers and had Palchinsky arrested in 1928. Palchinsky died behind bars 2 years later. His criticisms of Stalinism anticipated many of the failures of Soviet industrialization. The Chernobyl disaster in particular could be attributable to the same type of bureaucratic myopia that afflicted the Dneiper dam project. Could the Soviet Union have evolved and progressed with an industrialization model more akin to Palchinsky's? I believe so. In any case, it is a mistake to draw an equation between Stalin's 5-year plans and the term "planned socialism". The loss of Palchinsky and the political opposition he identified with constitute one of the great "what if's" in history. We have no way of knowing what the Soviet Union would have looked like without their suppression. In the meantime, I strongly urge members of this list to take a second look at Soviet history and to consider what impact an approach similar to Palchinsky's would have made. For the whole story on Palchinksy, I recommend Loren Graham's "The Ghost of the Executed Engineer: Technology and the Fall of the Soviet Union", Harvard Press, 1993. ------------------------------------------------------- On Mon, 10 Apr 1995, Ron Press wrote: > Hi I Agree with Ralph about discussions in Soviet Science. I have > a book published in 1968 , Progress Publishers, Moscow, > > Philosophical Problems of Elementary-Particle Physics. > > A remarkable book which is exceptionally free from any imposed > ideological straightjacket. > > >>>>>>>>> From: Ralph Dumain <rdumain-AT-igc.apc.org> Subject: > MARXISM & MATH REFERENCES 2 > <<<<<<<<<<<< > > Ron Press > > I was taught that freedom is the recognition of necessity. This > solves no problems but then do all problems have solutions? Or is > it the lack of solutions that keeps the wheels turning? > > > --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > > > --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005