60
LESZEK KOLAKOWSKI
to overcome this have produced rhetorics of nationalism and of or–
der and productivity, around which loose factions congregate. Na–
tionalist slogans are of little value, however, for the essential ques–
tion - real national sovereignty - is by the very nature of things
insoluble. Slogans about order and productivity would be effective if
they could develop a workable "technocratic" program. But such a
program means the primacy of production and technology over poli–
tics; it can thus be achieved only if the ruling apparatus sacrifices
some of its power - again, the price would be the partial disposses–
sion of the ruling class. Weare dealing here with yet another con–
tradiction of the system, namely, that between technology and poli–
tics. Although this brings to mind Marx's descriptions of capitalism,
the contradiction has never been so evident as in the system which
was to have done away with it. But technological advance (not lim–
ited to military techniques) and even an increase in consumption
(despite certain political advantages the ruling class can derive from
widespread poverty and a shortage of goods) are, for a number of
reasons, in the interests of the ruling class. At the same time, popular
expectations are raised, because the flow of information can never
be stopped completely, by a comparison with life in highly developed
countries; so, even when conditions are improving, popular dissatis–
faction may increase sharply, and it is never possible to foresee at
which point it will become explosive. Hence the rulers are caught
in
the contradiction between expanding the economy and retaining their
power.
If,
however, this contradiction cannot be resolved, it does not
mean, as Isaac Deutscher seemed to expect, that the socialist system
will "become more and more democratic" under the impact of tech–
nology. The contradiction between technology and the political sys–
tem can
be
the source of progress only when it takes the form of social
conflict: a conflict between the class maintaining the mechanism of
exploitation and the working class allied with the intelligentsia as
a whole.
The above contradictions are compounded by yet another con–
tradiction involving the countries within the Soviet empire. The rul–
ing apparatus in the satellite has a vested interest in maintaining its
dependence on the Soviet Union as a guarantee of its own position,
but, at the same time, it is interested in weakening that dependence
