I think it’s reductive to claim soviet administrators formed a cohesive and distinct class, without justifying this. They gained their incomes from wages, and alongside the rest of the working classes were interested in continued collectivization of production and distribution. The problem wasn’t “Stalinism,” but instead the reforms under Khrushchev that facilitated the growth of a private economy that was not acknowledged by the state the way it is in China, Cuba, Vietnam, etc, which led to the growth of bourgeois classes after Stalin.
I think it’s reductive to claim soviet administrators formed a cohesive and distinct class, without justifying this. They gained their incomes from wages, and alongside the rest of the working classes were interested in continued collectivization of production and distribution. The problem wasn’t “Stalinism,” but instead the reforms under Khrushchev that facilitated the growth of a private economy that was not acknowledged by the state the way it is in China, Cuba, Vietnam, etc, which led to the growth of bourgeois classes after Stalin.