Writer against ‘new class’ is merely: old-style re ERE it not for ex-Com- munists, big business would be hard put to find authors of “best sellers” dedi- cated to a passionate defence of capitalism. That, at least, is the thought that occurs to one on reading the latest in the overworked series of “ex- posures” of communism. Of this one, Milovan Dijilas’ The New Class: An Analysis of the Communist System, much is expected presumably: after all) was not the author a member of the Tito leader- ship, one of the initiators of “national communism,’ and- one who now forswears com- munism of any or all vari- ties”? “ The expectation is cruelly let down. In place of the ad- vertised . “inside stuff,” in place of any facts whatever, ~ one gets only a dull and repe- titive re-hash of the “free en- terpriser’s” caricature of com- munism — in the most ab- stract, unsubstantiated and dogmatic form. (For example, the only single, solitary al- leged “fact” about inequali- ties of income in the USSR is in a quote from a Paris Whiteguard relating to wages —in 1935!). core First, Djilas repudiates Marxism, In its claim to pro- vide a_ science of social change, enabling man_ to transform society, “are hidden the seeds of its despotism.” The claim of the Communists to leadership in this trans- formation on the basis of their understanding of the science of social change is “the ma- jor error of their system.” That they know the laws of - social development is “an il- lusion.” No such laws were ‘discovered by Marx: the most he did- was to “clarify some social laws” relating to “early industrial capitalism.” As against the bumbling ef- _forts of Marx (who is present- ed as something of an ignor- amus), there is but one “im- mutable law” (which, it, is inferred, has been discovered by Djilas) —that human soc- ieties “strive to increase and perfect production.” 3 Gone are social ~ systems (artificial creations of the Communists), the class strug- gle, the state: instead, there is just “production.” (The use to which this seemingly harmless abstraction is put by the author will be apparent shortly.) Then, having blown away their ideological foundation, Jeadership by the Commu- MILOVAN DJILAS An assist for Dulles nists is consigned to limbo — on two grounds, one of which is almost original. Not only is_ it asserted that Commu- nists have a boundless “pow- -er-lust”; but it is claimed that by taking power, the Com- munist party becomes a “new class in society — its mem- bers béing the aetual owners of the collective property of the state. This is a lulu. It is Djilas’s addition to the dogmas of Dulles. “It seems unusual that a political party could be the beginning of a new class,’ concedes the author with disarming candor, buts; there. sit. is...