1920년대 사회주의 건설에 대한 부하린적 대안의 문제

Abstract

The Bukharin alternative on the construction of socialism became one of the interesting problems in the middle of 1980s. This was due to the perestroika initiated by Soviet leader M. Gorbachev. Many placed their focus on the relationship between NEP and perestroika. And naturally, Bukharin attracted attention of many historians because he was the most able theoretician of the NEP.

But particular concern must be paid to the fact that Bukharin was one of the Bolshevik leaders. The Bolshevik leaders dreamed of an utopia which could jump over capitalism and liberalism. They also dreamed of the liberation of the proletariat. Their super-reason tried to construct a new civilization cal1ed socialism. In fact, their efforts resulted in the construction of a totalitarian

society which was no better than tsarist Russia.

Bukharin was one victim of this new totalitarian society and a1so he was responsible to the formation of this society. Certainly he was the most open-minded among the Bolshevik leaders. His alternative could have led Soviet society to more humane democratic civil society. His alternative could reduce the cost to the minimum which was necessary for the transition to civil society. But he did not abandon Bolshevik discourse which had tendency to restrict civil liberty. Also as being marxist, he could not totally surrender to Stalins totalitarian thoughts. But as much as Soviet mentality fitted with Stalins thoughts, Bukharins defeat was predictable. The defeat of Bukharin alternative meant the loss of good chance of constructing socialism via civil peace. This dismissed also the possibility of integration of Soviet socialism to modern civilization.