ABSTRACT
The re-evaluation of collective farms is best seen as part of a broader reassessment of political-economic strategy currently taking place in the socialist countries and, indeed, among socialists in the advanced economies of the West. At the heart of the split was the clash between the Bukharinist 'market socialist' vision and the Stalinist 'administrative planning' vision of the long path of transition, the possible characteristics of little practical interest for the real-world tasks of shaping political-economic strategy in the poor or the advanced economies. Bukharin did not question the Bolsheviks' post-revolutionary monopoly of political power. The Stalinist politico-economic structure not only is undemocratic, but also prevents rapid growth of popular living standards from which long-term demands from below for political reform might emerge. In an unreformed Stalinist political economy with its unity of economics and politics, relatively slow growth of mass living standards, and international isolation, it is hard for such a mass movement to emerge.
