1920-30년대 소비에트 체제의 관리에 관한 논쟁

Abstract

This article reviews current academic debates about the management of the Soviet system held in 1920-30s. The nature of the debate that took place immediately after Russian socialist revolution went beyond its time and place. By reviewing the thoughts of Vladimir Lenin, Iosif Stalin, Alexander Borganov, Nikolay Buharin and Alexei Gastev, this article will shed some light on the nature of the debate. In terms of analytic method, I investigate two mechanisms, the management mechanism and self-organizing mechanism, as key factors for the stability and development of the system. Any public body can be considered as a system containing two mechanisms - management and self-organization - together form a single mechanism of its adaptation and development. The core of the debate about the management of Soviet state results in the correlation of self-organization. During the formation period of Soviet state and the period of war, communism had been exhibited as an extreme imbalance of the system. To stabilize the state of the system, the management mechanism was adapted to the system. The management mechanism has been understood primarily as the homeostasis machinery, the mechanism to reduce the level of disorder of the system. When new economy policy was installed, there was a conflict between the subject attempting to extend managing power and the object attempting to extend self-organizational power. After industrialization and collectivization policy had been executed, the term of ‘управление’ was interpreted as ‘scientific control of social system to promote the welfare of the people’. The meaning of this term was acknowledged as the totalitarian nature, denying the self-organizational power of the system. Meanwhile, the controversy about national management was linked with Lenin's successor and to political, factional issues. Thus, the nature of the dispute included the features political struggle, and went far from the academic and political discourse.