Abstract
Certain crucial assumptions underpinned Strachey’s shifting position in the period from the writing of Revolution by Reason to the publication of A National Policy. Most important was the belief that, at least in the short run, capitalism had been or could be stabilised and its major evils considerably mitigated. Thus Strachey in that period assumed that with the application of appropriate economic policies sufficient vitality could be restored to capitalism to provide the time and political space necessary to effect a relatively gradual and peaceful reformist transition to socialism. However by late 1931, it is quite clear that this assumption had been abandoned. In a parliamentary speech in October of that year Strachey stated emphatically that there was now ‘no possibility of stability’ under capitalism and that ‘all … efforts … to get back to capitalist stability [would] prove absolutely futile ’. ‘There is no firm ground … Neither the export trade nor any other trade in this country will ever revive so long as we have a capitalist system here and in the rest of the world.’1 This being so, ‘in an era of economic failure and contraction there can be no future for political movements based upon the hypothesis of rapid economic growth and expansion’.2
One clearly feels that had there been any possibility of preserving the bourgeois system, healthy and progressive, Strachey would not have been for changing it but inasmuch as he sees the impossibility of so preserving it and the impossibility of it being progressive he courageously … takes his stand with the class that can alone save civilisation …
Dimitriv Mirsky, The Intelligentsia of Great Britain, 1935
We lived in a miserable and disintegrating world which nothing that was taught in the universities at the time helped us to understand. But Strachey explained and illuminated it all. He took the powerful seductive apparatus of Marxist analysis and in simple convincing language applied it to the contemporary scene. Under his brilliant pen all became clear; most of us became Marxists … we thought we now understood everything.
Rita Hinden, Socialist Commentary, 1956
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
J. Strachey, The Menace of Fascism, London, Gollancz, 1933.
W. A. Lewis, Economic Survey, 1918–39, London, Allen and Unwin, 1981, p. 61;
B. W. E. Alford, Depression and Recovery, British economic growth 1918–39, London, Macmillan, 1976, p. 29;
P. E. Hart, Studies on Profit, Business Saving and Investment in the UK, 2 vols, London, Allen and Unwin, 1968, Vol. 2, p. 226.
B. R. Mitchell and P. Deane, Abstract of British Historical Statistics, University of Cambridge, Department of Applied Economics, Monographs, 17, 1971.
J. Strachey, ‘Gradualism is bankrupt, where does the ILP stand?’, NL, 2 October 1931, 8, my emphasis.
J. Strachey, ‘Look at the news’, Daily Worker, 5 December 1935.
R. Fox, ‘Review of The Coming Struggle for Power’, Daily Worker, 6 January 1933, 4.
J. Strachey, The Coming Struggle for Power, London, Gollancz, 1932, p. 11.
J. Strachey, The Nature of Capitalist Crisis, London, Gollancz, 1935, pp. 240–42.
Ibid p. 264; unlike writers like Paul Sweezy and Maurice Dobb he did not believe that ‘these factors made it impossible to draw any firm conclusions about the long-run tendency of the rate of profit’, see J. E. King and M. C. Howard, ’Marxian economists and the great depression’, History of Political Economy, 22, 1990, 93.
J. Strachey, ‘Capitalist economics answered’, Daily Worker, 13 October 1937, 7.
J. Strachey, ‘On the New Deal’, Daily Worker, 24 July 1933, 3.
J. Strachey, ‘Roosevelt’s slave plan’, Daily Worker, 24 August 1933; this was of course the position of many on the non-communist left, see
H. Pelling, America and the British Left from Bright to Bevan, A. and C. Black, 1956, pp. 141–2.
J. Strachey, ‘The education of a communist’, Left Review, 1, 1934, 68.
J. Strachey, ‘The intelligentsia adrift’, Daily Worker, 20 June 1934, 4; Strachey neglected to mention that many non-communist writers had also despaired of the gradualist road, see e.g.
H. Laski, ‘Some implications of the crisis’, Political Quarterly, 2, 1931, 466–69.
J. Strachey, ‘Compensate or confiscate’, Daily Worker, 14 July 1937, 2.
J. Strachey, The Theory and Practice of Socialism, London, Gollancz, 1936, p. 153.
J. Strachey, ‘Who fights for democracy?’, Daily Worker, 11 December 1936, 4.
J. Strachey, ‘Fascism in Britain, Mosley not the only way’, Daily Worker, 30 June 1932, 6.
J. Strachey, ’A New Statesman pamphlet’, Left Review, 2, 1935, 53.
J. Strachey, The Corning Struggle for Power, p. 262; see also J. Strachey, Hope in America, New York, Harper, 1938, p. 6.
D. Manuilski, Report to the 11th plenum of the Executive Committee for the Communist International, in D. Beetham, Marxists in the Face of Fascism, Totowa, Barnes and Noble, 1984, p. 157.
F. Brockway, Socialism over Sixty Years, the life of Jowett of Bradford, London, Allen and Unwin, 1946, p. 310.
J. Strachey, ‘Look at the news’, Daily Worker, 21 November 1935, 3.
J. Strachey, ‘Look at the news’, Daily Worker, 3 December 1935, 3.
G. D. H. Cole, What Marx Really Meant, London, Gollancz, 1934, p. 301.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1993 Noel Thompson
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thompson, N. (1993). The Theory and Practice of Communism, 1931–36. In: John Strachey. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230377486_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230377486_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-38919-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-37748-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)