Early period analysis

In 1931 he tackled the issue of wether the Soviet economy could be defined as "socialist" in the "Draft programme on the theory of the Soviet economy" published in the Planovoye Khozyaistvo journal.^[8] In the analysis J. Miller does on this panflet, he indicates that the tone, focus, and sources employed by Gatovsky changed between different parts of the draft, being more critical with the first part of it.^[9]

"There is, however, a marked difference of flavour between different parts or aspects of his draft. For the period before I929, he relies on general Marxist theory and Lenin's particular developments of it, and for the struggles in all fields (political, economic and intellectual) before I929, it is noticeable that the analyses he offers, although consistent enough with the rest of his draft, recapitulate the formulations of the period of intense political struggle (inside and outside the party) and hardship, so that in relation to some of his later statements, they appear as descriptive rather than analytical, and the logic is ideological rather than philosophical. This appearance is, however, in part deceptive, for these analyses provide the basic lines of interpretation and analysis for the later period. When Gatovsky comes to his own period, the treatment is fuller and considers more aspects of the situation."

Contemporary period analysis ^[10]

Nevertheless, for Miller, the analysis that Gatovsky makes later on of his own period appears to be more complete.^[9]

"For example, the jargon and uncertainties of current political discussion appear in such headings as 'Kolkhozniki as a real support of agriculture in bolshevik socialist farming'. There are also the statements of economic geralization in Marxist terms, e. 'a new relation of class forces', 'the predominance of the socialist sector in the entire economy'. There is as well a formal dialectical logical analysis which identifies the last stage of NEP as the negative face of the process with the entry into-socialism as the positive face of the same process, and referes to the 'basic moments' of this period and its 'special study. Further headings demand study of the distinction between the concepts of the 'foundation of socialist economy' and the 'completion of socialist economy', and this leads straight on to the 'basic features of the national economic plan for I93I as the plan for completing construction of the foundations of socialist economy'. These points are then all drawn together under the heading 'resolution of the problem of who's to be master in the national economy as a whole'."

Gatovsky continues by enunciating the "regularities" of the economy and the methodological principles of their study. Although considered to be a formal study in dialectical logic, it considers "the proletariat as the chief productive force and exerciser of class hegemony". Then, he proposes what he defines as the basic law of the movement to communism:

"Socialist nationalization of production on the basis of industrialization and the restriction, expulsion, and final dissolution of capitalist elements"

Then, he provides his definition of "political economy in the wide sense":

"The relation of economics and politics, economics and technology, social way of life and conciousness, in conditions of planned economy. Essence and Appearance in planned economy and the process of Defetishization"

The first concept Appearance, would represent in the analysis "the phenomena", the Essence would be the laws of structure and process to which the phenomena obeys, and finally, Defetishization would be he process in which public opinion comes to see the economy for what it really is and represents.^[9] This would play in opposition to "the blind forces of the market" in capitalism. Or what Hegel would call the "customary tenderness to things".^[11]