[[link removed]]

BORIS KAGARLITSKY’S ‘THE LONG RETREAT’  
[[link removed]]


 

Dmitry Pozhidaev
November 23, 2024
Links
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Capitalism, crisis and the left’s challenge _

, Pluto Press

 

_The Long Retreat: Strategies to Reverse the Decline of the Left_
[[link removed]]
By Boris Kagarlitsky
Published by Pluto Press

Boris Kagarlitsky, a prominent leftist thinker, political prisoner and
fierce critic of neoliberal capitalism, has consistently offered a
critical lens on global capitalism and Russia’s position within it.
His latest work, _The Long Retreat: Strategies to Reverse the Decline
of the Left_ (Pluto Press, 2024), emerges at a moment of acute crisis
for both global and Russian capitalism, compounded by the war in
Ukraine — a conflict Kagarlitsky has resolutely opposed. Imprisoned
for his anti-war stance, Kagarlitsky remains committed to his
homeland, as his recent public refusal
[[link removed]]
to participate in potential prisoner exchanges with the West
testifies. His book is a timely, sobering and, paradoxically, hopeful
examination of capitalism’s decline and the left’s prospects for
renewal.

I write this review from the vantage point of someone who has been in
regular contact with the author over the past few months of his
incarceration. As we work on joint research projects, most of our
conversations revolve around the themes explored in the book: the
deepening crisis of contemporary capitalism, its different
manifestations domestically and internationally, unequal relations
between the capitalist core and the periphery, and, inevitably, the
new forms of social and economic organisation that may replace
capitalism in the future.

The crisis of capitalism: A system imploding

At its core, _The Long Retreat_ situates contemporary struggles within
the context of a deepening systemic crisis of capitalism, which
Kagarlitsky identifies as beginning in the 1980s and ’90s. This era
marked the rise of neoliberalism, with its dismantling of welfare
systems, privatisation of public assets, and destruction of organised
labour. These policies, initially hailed as modernising reforms, were,
as Kagarlitsky notes, “a desperate attempt to stave off collapse by
sacrificing social stability.”

Kagarlitsky traces the roots of this crisis to the exhaustion of the
post-war welfare state. From the 1940s to the ’70s, this model had
temporarily stabilised capitalism by balancing class compromise, union
strength and reduced inequality. Yet globalisation, technological
shifts and diminishing profit margins ultimately undermined this
framework. Neoliberalism emerged as a reactionary response,
prioritising profitability over social cohesion. This restructuring
was not confined to the West. It extended its grip globally, shaping
the trajectories of former socialist states, including Russia, as they
transitioned to market economies.

Kagarlitsky’s analysis challenges the conventional narrative that
democracy and capitalism are intrinsically linked, as argued by such
scholars as Torben Iversen and David Soskice (2019)
[[link removed]]
and Martin Wolf (2023)
[[link removed]].
Kagarlitsky objects, saying that “…the bourgeoisie has never had
any need of democracy; its social interests consist in the formation
of a law-governed state with independent judges, reliable information,
guarantees that contracts will be observed, clear legislation, a
disciplined and predictable bureaucracy, and secure property
rights.” He highlights the efficiency of autocratic regimes, such as
China, in delivering these key components of capitalism (a phenomenon
largely ignored by the champions of the umbilical link between
capitalism and democracy). For him, “The belief in democracy as a
necessary companion to capitalism is a dangerous illusion, blinding us
to the realities of autocratic capitalism’s successes.”

Kagarlitsky highlights the hollowing out of Western democracy, which
is progressively transforming into “a façade embellishing the ugly
edifice of the corporate state.” Kagarlitsky argues that weakening
ties between citizens and political parties, coupled with the
diminished capacity for grassroots organisation, have eroded
meaningful political engagement. Traditional roles such as organisers
and ideologues have been replaced by media-savvy spin doctors who
prioritise superficial messaging over substantive discourse. Attempts
to foster meaningful public discussions are increasingly seen as
disruptions to a system that prioritises commercial interests,
predictability and the minimization of risks, stifling any debates
that challenge societal stability or the status quo.

Dialectics of decline and renewal

A central strength of _The Long Retreat_ is Kagarlitsky’s
application of Marxist dialectics to contemporary issues. He
consistently examines the contradictions between appearance and
substance, production and consumption, and crisis and opportunity. For
example, in his critique of neoliberalism, Kagarlitsky highlights how
financialisation appeared to resolve capitalism’s consumption crisis
by enabling households to borrow extensively. In reality, this shift
merely postponed the contradictions, deepening systemic instability as
financial obligations replaced workplace exploitation as the dominant
form of oppression.

Kagarlitsky’s analysis of the Green New Deal offers another example
of his dialectical method. While some capitalists embrace green
technologies as a solution to ecological and economic crises,
Kagarlitsky argues that their primary motivation lies in countering
declining capitalist profits.

He demonstrates the dialectical interconnectedness between capitalism
and socialism. Thus, Kagarlitsky argues that capitalism owes its most
attractive features — such as social protections and democratic
rights — not to its intrinsic vitality, but to competition with
socialism and pressure from labour movements led by strong trade
unions and visionary left structures. “Capitalism’s finest
hours,” he writes, “were forged not in isolation but in response
to the challenge posed by socialism.”

The left in retreat: A movement in crisis

If capitalism is faltering, why has the left not been able to mount a
meaningful challenge? Kagarlitsky does not shy away from hard truths.
He argues the left has become disconnected from its roots in the
working class, prioritising political correctness, identity politics
and cultural debates over bread-and-butter economic issues.

Kagarlitsky recognises that defence of the rights of minorities is an
indissoluble part of the modern democratic order, but the essence is
the right of these minorities along with the majority to be free from
persecution and discrimination. It is not an entitlement to special
rights and privileges, which grant these minorities particular
advantages. Kagarlitsky argues that positive discrimination, on which
a section of the left insists, is not just in contradiction to
democracy but, like other neoliberal reforms, is an instrument serving
to destroy it. This leads to a disastrous outcome when “the majority
disappears, to be replaced by a mass of minorities who need to be
protected, no longer from the majority but from one another.”

Take the Canadian trucker protests of 2022 analysed in the book. While
mainstream media outlets painted the protesters as reactionary,
Kagarlitsky argues the real failure lay with the left. Instead of
engaging with these workers and their legitimate grievances, the left
dismissed them outright. This, he says, reflects a broader tendency to
socialise with elites rather than organise among the working class.

The same conclusion is perfectly applicable to the outcome of the 2024
US elections, which Kagarlitsky analyses in a recent interview
[[link removed]]. “In 2016, both the liberal
establishment and liberal left received a very serious lesson,”
Kagarlitsky observes. “But they did not learn from it. Worse, they
doubled down on implementing principles of political correctness
against the backdrop of dismantling the welfare state and pursuing
market reforms.” This abandonment of working-class interests has
created fertile ground for right-wing populism, which channels anger
not at capitalism but at scapegoats like immigrants and minorities.

Russia’s crisis: A case study in neoliberal collapse

Kagarlitsky’s critique of capitalism is uniquely informed by his
decades of research on Russian society and politics. He views Russian
capitalism not as a deviation from the global norm but as a direct
product of neoliberal restructuring. After the collapse of the Soviet
Union, the remnants of the decayed and degraded Soviet social and
political structures, along with the practices that characterised
them, became combined in their own organic fashion with the
relationships and practices peculiar to late capitalism (Jameson, 1991
[[link removed]]).
In his earlier works, such as Empire of the Periphery
[[link removed]]
and Restoration in Russia
[[link removed]],
he argued that Russia’s trajectory reflects the broader trends of
capitalism’s peripheralisation. In _The Long Retreat_, he expands on
this, situating Russia’s ongoing challenges within the broader
systemic crisis of global capitalism.

For Kagarlitsky, the war in Ukraine is yet another manifestation of
the ongoing crisis in the global capitalist system, where economic
imbalances and competition for scarce resources drive states towards
militarisation and aggression. Kagarlitsky argues that developments
occurring in Vladimir Putin’s Russia — marked by steadily rising
state expenditures on coercive institutions, an increase in personnel
within these structures, and their growing involvement in various
aspects of life — are not an outlier but rather a pronounced example
of a broader trend. Moreover, as has often been the case in Russian
history, these processes stand out as a particularly striking or
extreme expression of this general pattern.

Kagarlitsky argues that the driving forces of the conflict in Ukraine
are primarily corporate and economic, stemming from structural issues
within the neoliberal capitalist system. According to Kagarlitsky,
both Russian and Western elites have vested interests in securing
profitable sectors of Ukraine’s economy, such as grain production
and remnants of Soviet infrastructure, which make Ukraine a site of
economic competition rather than ideological confrontation. Far from
acting on ideological whims, the Russian ruling class is pursuing
material interests through territorial expansion.

The neoliberal reforms of the 1990s, Kagarlitsky asserts, created an
elite class that views power solely as a vehicle for personal
enrichment. “The key to this paradox,” he writes, “lies in the
fact that power is viewed solely as a technical resource … to gain
access to an unlimited amount of money.” This instrumental view of
governance has compounded Russia’s social and economic fragility,
especially in the wake of the war in Ukraine. Sanctions, economic
isolation and structural stagnation have intensified the
contradictions of Russian capitalism.

Negative convergence: The worst of both worlds

Kagarlitsky introduces a striking concept to describe post-socialist
states: negative convergence. When socialism collapsed, these nations
were promised prosperity through integration into global capitalism.
What they got instead was the worst of both systems: social
protections and collective ownership were dismantled, but the promised
democratic and economic benefits of capitalism never materialised.

A former East German once remarked, “Now we know that everything
Communist propaganda told us about socialism was a lie, but everything
it told us about capitalism was true.” This anecdote captures the
disillusionment of millions in the former Socialist world, so vividly
described by Kagarlitsky, who saw their societies transformed into
peripheral capitalist economies, marked by inequality and
exploitation.

Russia epitomises this trajectory. The post-Soviet transition
dismantled public systems, eroded labour rights and exacerbated
inequality, replicating the worst features of early capitalism.
Kagarlitsky critiques this process as a failure of both domestic and
international elites, who prioritised short-term profit over
sustainable development. His analysis underscores the
interconnectedness of global and national crises, highlighting how
neoliberal policies in one region can reverberate globally.

Kagarlitsky sees Russia’s ruling elite as a product of
neoliberalism’s global crisis. Far from being an aberration, Russian
capitalism reflects the same patterns of corruption and inequality
found elsewhere — only intensified by its authoritarian veneer.

Opportunities amid crisis

Despite his grim diagnosis, Kagarlitsky remains optimistic about the
potential for systemic change. In his opinion, the deepening crisis of
ruling class hegemony creates new opportunities for the left. As more
people become disenchanted with the existing system that had earlier
suited them well enough, the need for a new social bloc uniting
diverse social groups emerges more clearly. Kagarlitsky argues that
political unity under the conditions of a heterogeneous society
inevitably takes on the form of a coalition, even if in technical
terms the representatives of various social groups and currents can be
kept within the framework of a single party.

He identifies crises as moments of rupture that expose capitalism’s
contradictions and create openings for alternative models. For
example, he highlights how technological advancements could empower
workers and facilitate democratic planning, provided they are
harnessed to challenge capitalist alienation.

But Kagarlitsky warns against quick fixes like Universal Basic Income
(UBI). He sees UBI as a band-aid solution designed to stabilise
capitalism rather than transform it. Similarly, while he is
sympathetic to Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), he acknowledges its
limitations, particularly its failure to address capitalism’s
structural contradictions. “The real obstacle,” he writes, “is
not a lack of ideas or political will but the entrenched interests of
capital, which resist any meaningful reform.”

One of Kagarlitsky’s most innovative discussions centres on the
politics of time and leisure. He revisits Karl Marx’s concept of the
“economy of time,” arguing that modern technologies could enable a
reimagining of work and leisure. However, he warns that without
structural change, increased leisure risks being commodified,
reinforcing consumerism rather than liberating individuals. “Modern
technological conditions,” he writes, “make it possible to
undermine the monopoly of the ruling classes on managerial power …
to make the bourgeoisie unnecessary to the reproduction of the
economy.”

Kagarlitsky’s analysis of the war in Ukraine
[[link removed]]
is particularly compelling. He views the conflict not as an
ideological or geopolitical aberration but as a systemic outcome of
neoliberalism’s contradictions. The war, he argues, reflects the
declining hegemony of Western capitalism and the reconfiguration of
global power dynamics.

Kagarlitsky is sceptical about the prospects of Russia's economic
“de-linking” from the West as conceptualised by Samir Amin (1990)
[[link removed]]. While the
war and sanctions have forced some degree of import substitution and
capital retention, these measures remain superficial without a broader
shift in class power and systemic priorities. True transformation, he
argues, would require mobilising resources for public investment in
education, healthcare and regional development — a far cry from the
current regime’s agenda.

Yet Kagarlitsky sees potential for change amid the turmoil. Drawing on
Lenin’s analysis of World War I, he suggests that wars often “tear
apart the veil of illusions” surrounding capitalism, exposing its
contradictions and creating openings for radical change. While
critical of Russian elites, Kagarlitsky identifies opportunities for
grassroots movement to push for systemic reforms. He argues that
societal fragmentation creates opportunities for organised and
strategically focused groups to emerge as new centres of power. “In
a context where society lacks cohesion and direction,” he writes,
“a group that demonstrates unity, organisation, and clarity of
purpose can leverage the crisis to gain disproportionate influence.”
Incidentally, some representatives of the Ukrainian left (Ishchenko,
2024
[[link removed]];
Kyselov, 2024
[[link removed]])
believe that this war also offers a glimpse of hope for systemic
socio-economic reforms in Ukraine that could benefit future
generations.

A call to action

Throughout _The Long Retreat_, Kagarlitsky emphasises the
inseparability of theory and practice. His critical analysis extends
to the realm of practice beyond the moralistic solutions disconnected
from class realities by contemporary critics of capitalism, such as
Paul Collier
[[link removed]]
and Martin Wolf
[[link removed]].
For Kagarlitsky, socialism is not a distant utopia but a practical
necessity. He advocates for creating “institutional enclaves of
socialism” within the capitalist system — initiatives that reclaim
public ownership, democratise credit and empower local communities.
Drawing on the lessons of Yugoslav self-management, he emphasises the
importance of balancing worker control with strategic economic
planning. These initiatives, he argues, can serve as foundations for
broader systemic transformation.

Kagarlitsky’s personal commitment to these ideals is evident in his
recent statement on his imprisonment. Refusing to participate in
potential prisoner exchanges, he declared
[[link removed]],
“If staying means being in prison, then I will stay in prison. After
all, imprisonment is a normal professional risk for a left-wing
politician or social scientist in Russia.” This unwavering
dedication underscores the stakes of his analysis and the urgency of
his call to action.

The Long Retreat is more than a critique of capitalism’s decline —
it is a blueprint for renewal. Kagarlitsky challenges the left to move
beyond lamentation and engage in strategies that respond to the crises
and opportunities of our time. By integrating historical analysis,
dialectical critique, and a pragmatic vision for action, the book
offers a roadmap for reclaiming the future.

* socialism
[[link removed]]
* Russia
[[link removed]]
* Left Politics
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]