A.J.
19th September 2006, 16:36
Now this is some good shit.....
J.V. STALIN AND SOCIALISM
A.M. Chernyak, Russian Communist Workers Party (RCWP)
Not one head of the USSR has ever been subjected to such attacks and
such a hounding from the bourgeois mass media as J.V. Stalin and of
course, V.I. Lenin. If bourgeois criticism of Khrushchev, Brezhnev and other
former leaders was good-natured, one may even say friendly in
character, then against J.V. Stalin as well as against V.I. Lenin it always was
and is meant to destroy. And it is understandable why. If, under the
leadership of V.I. Lenin the power of the bourgeoisie in Russia was
overthrown and Soviet power, that is, the power of the workers was
established, then after he died, when J.V. Stalin stood at the helm of the
country, the bourgeoisie in our country came to an end. Stalin not only
liquidated inside the USSR private property and the bourgeoisie as a class,
but also washed out of the country using an iron broom, all kinds of
crooks, shrewd businessmen, speculators and swindlers who had sponged off
the people. Figuratively speaking, J.V. Stalin ridded our country of
the spirit of the bourgeoisie. Under his leadership a completely new
society was built inside the USSR, based on new principles, with a new
culture, new morals and a new ideology. This was socialism of the
proletarian type, a society of labour, where everything belonged to the people
of labour, since they were the masters of their own country and all of
its wealth. The bourgeoisie of all countries cannot forgive J.V. Stalin
for this. What had been achieved in the USSR was far too dangerous for
the capitalist countries, since the workers of these countries could
follow the example of our country (the USSR). This is why they did not
allow us to live peacefully and build our own future. Attempting to
undermine from within if only to slow down the flow of socialist
construction, the enemies sent spies, saboteurs, economic saboteurs into our
country, supported the “fifth column” created out of the defeated classes,
which arranged conspiracies, terrorist acts, poisoned drinking wells and
set fire to grain storehouses (granaries). The young Soviet state was
compelled to defend itself. It was here, that this defence of socialism
from internal and external enemies was used by western special services
relying on fabrications by Trotsky, Khrushchev, Solzhenitsen and other
renegades, for whipping up and fabricating the myth about the so-called
“Stalin repressions” or the “Great Terror”. This myth became the main
weapon for anti-communists in their information war against socialism
and communist parties.
Unfortunately, the theorists of present-day communist parties up to now
have not worked out antidotes against this poison and have not deeply
and convincingly enough, exposed this lie. As a rule, communists
defending J.V. Stalin from attacks do not deny that repressions took place,
but only lower the number of those who were repressed, claiming that
there were not 40 million people repressed like Solzhenitsen and the
bourgeois press maintain, but only 642 thousand during the period of 33 years
(from 1921 until 1954). Those same communists admit that there were
repressions and dance to the tune of the democrats. The word “repressions”
is understood to be the arrest of innocent people, that is, crimes
carried out by the authorities, evil deeds against innocent people. But
J.V. Stalin was never an evildoer and did not occupy himself with
arresting honest people, like opponents of socialism claim. J.V. Stalin was
guided in all of his actions by the interests of the defence of Soviet
power and socialism, and demanded with this, an observance of socialist
legality. In particular, the material of the January Plenary meeting of
the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik) (CC
ACP(B) of 1938, and the decree of the Sovnarkom of the USSR and the CC
ACP(B) from 17th November 1938 testify this.
The Civil War in our country did not end in 1920 as is written in
history textbooks, but continued in another hidden form throughout the whole
period of building socialism and continues up to now. Therefore those
642 thousand enemies of peoples’ power, having died in the flow of the
class struggle in the USSR should be added to those who died in the
years of the Civil War on the side of the Whites. They all came out against
the power of the workers and peasants and got what they deserved.
The small number of Soviet people had in that period unjustifiably
suffered was not due to the conscience J.V. Stalin, but due to the
Trotskyites and careerists who had penetrated the organs of security and the
party. In 1938 many had already been exposed and were severely punished.
The purges inside the army, which were carried out in 1937-1939, the
arrest of military chiefs involved in Tukhachevsky’s conspiracy, the
dismissal of politically unreliable or politically unstable and incompetent
elements from the army, and their replacement by young commanders who
were decisive and devoted to the party and cause, did not weaken the
army, like the “democrats” try to make us believe, (and this lie is
repeated by several “communists”), but on the contrary, they strengthened and
reinforced it. Even our opponents noticed this at that time.
For example, Goebbels explains the collapse of Hitler” troops in his
diaries, by putting it down to this pre-war reforming of the Red Army
(now called “repressions” inside the Army). Indeed, it was those people
such Zhukov, Rokossovsky, Chernyakhovsky, Vasilyevsky, Valyutin and
thousands of other generals entering the divisions and corps that took the
war to the victory of the USSR. And the “democrats” try to instill in
our minds that it was because of the repressions in the army that there
was nobody left to command it, and that if the Uboreviches, Yakirs and
Korks had commanded the troops, then they would have quickly triumphed
in the war, they say. But simple logic suggests to us that in this case
we would have lost the war, since inside the army would have turned up
not just General Vlasov (who was not purged in time), but ten of
General Vlasov’s ilk. The liquidation of the “fifth column” in the USSR
during the pre-war period in a surprising way influenced the moral climate
in society. There wasn’t the fear that the democrats instill into the
population today. On the contrary, an atmosphere of joyful spirits,
enthusiasm, a common uplift and labour inspiration dominated. Newsreels of
those years recorded buoyant laughter on the faces of Soviet people who
were certain of their future and knowing what they wanted. The 1930-s
were the years of youth of the Soviet country, the years of inspiration
of the work of our people in the name of a common goal. Every communist
should know this and defend those years from slander, and not agree
with those who paint a dark picture of them. One can quote many a
statement with kind words directed towards the 1930-s from those who lived and
worked at that time. Here is what Marshal G.K. Zhukov writes about them
in his memoirs: “Each period of peace has its own specific features,
its own colour and its own charm. But I would like to say a kind word
about the pre-war period (in the USSR- translator), in that it was notable
for the unique, distinctive uplift in mood, optimism, and a kind of
inspiration and at the same time, efficiency, modesty and simplicity of
the people. We had started to live well, very well indeed!” (G.K. Zhukov,
“Reminiscences and thoughts” (Vospominaniya I razmyishleniya), m. 1970,
p.196 (in Russian). History testifies that inside all the former
socialist countries, counter-revolution was started by attacks against J.V.
Stalin. That was how it was in Czechoslovakia during the “Prague spring”
in 1968 when Dubcek was leader of the communist party there. It was the
same with us here when at the head of the CPSU stood our own Dubcek,
that is, Gorbachev. We remember how on one autumn day in 1987 the whole
mass media suddenly began whipping up grim anti-Stalin hysteria inside
the country. This was the start of a war, the start of
counter-revolution in the USSR, the liquidation of the socialist system and the
restoration of criminal, colonial capitalism. These are truths, which do not
need a lot of explaining or clarification.
More complicated and difficult to explain is the question as to reason
why a section of the communists (or people calling themselves
communists) up to now does not except J.V. Stalin but stands on Khrushchevite or
more exactly, Trotskyite positions. Why does the position of a leader
of one of the communist parties, A.A. Prigarin on the question about
Stalin, coincides with the position of the “democrats”, and that from the
leadership of the RCWP (Russian Communist Workers Party), A.V.
Kryuchkov and V.A. Tyulkin, you very rarely hear a commendable word towards
J.V. Stalin and the Stalin epoch? The fact that people have been duped by
anti-communist propaganda and that the “democrats” have made a
scarecrow out of Stalin and with it, are frightening the philistines, is
obvious. But communists and more so the leaders of the communists should know
the laws of social development, the laws of class struggle, and not
give in to the untruths of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois opportunist
propaganda. Khrushchev was not the first of the leaders of the communist
party who openly spoke out against J.V. Stalin and who contrasted Lenin
with Stalin. Trotsky was the first. Khrushchev only armed himself with
Trotsky’s main thesis about Stalin allegedly deforming socialism in the
USSR and that the main struggle against Stalin was the return to
“Leninist democratic socialism”. Therefore the key to understanding why, after
Stalin had died, the CPSU crawled down to Trotskyite right-opportunist
positions, and towards understanding the present-day disorder, one has
to search in the period of the 1920-s, in the years of the struggle
against Trotskyism. After Lenin had died, the communist party headed by
Stalin was not homogeneous and monolithic. Around 10% of the communists
were newcomers from other petty-bourgeois parties: Mensheviks,
anarchists, SR-s (Socialist Revolutionaries) etc. Trotsky himself, along with
his supporters only entered the Bolshevik party after the February
Revolution in 1917. And he did not enter it because he had suddenly started
seeing the light and had become a Bolshevik; no – he remained as he was
before this – a Menshevik. He entered the Bolshevik party because he
could see that the Bolsheviks were coming to power, and he hoped that by
entering the party of his former opponents he would be able to
undermine it from within and transfer it over onto Menshevik petty-bourgeois
positions. The Trotskyites and newcomers from other parties alien to the
Bolsheviks, although having in the past been revolutionaries, expressed
the interests of the petty-bourgeoisie and were guided in their
struggle, not by the aim of building a socialist society, but by the ideals of
petty-bourgeois democracy. It needs to be born in mind that
pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary Russia was a peasant, a petty-bourgeois
country and therefore petty-bourgeois ideas weighed down heavily on the
party, penetrated the party, and therefore communists often became
carriers of these ideas, perhaps not even realising it themselves. The same
is happening today; it is sometimes hard to differentiate a communist
with petty-bourgeois views from that of a communist defending
proletarian aims. Lenin back in those days noted the danger of the
petty-bourgeoisie as being the bitterest enemies of communism, since they hourly and
each minute generate capitalism. And in this light it needs to be
understood that the bitter struggle waged by J.V. Stalin and his supporters
against Trotskyism in the 1920-s was a struggle against the
petty-bourgeoisie, for socialism. This was a struggle of two lines inside the
party – proletarian and petty bourgeois. Members of the Politburo and the
Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik) (ACP(B))
were divided into two groups. J.V Stalin’s group supported by the
absolute majority in the party and working class and expressing the
proletarian line inside the party, led the country towards socialism. Trotsky’s
group, around which all opposition forces rallied and which had the
support of a section of the intelligentsia and students, expressed the
petty-bourgeois tendency in the party and came out against the building of
socialism and stood for the continuation of NEP (New Economic Policy)
and market relations. This dividing line, which appeared in the 1920-s,
exists today throughout the communist movement as a whole. The petty
bourgeoisie cannot exist without private property and is always dreaming
of creating that kind of society where private property and communists
will peacefully coexist side by side. Isn’t this what G.A. Zyuganov the
leader of the CPRF (Communist Party of the Russian Federation) wants
when he proclaims the peaceful coexistence of all from of property and
all classes? And what about A.A. Prigarin who publicly denounces Stalin
and Brezhnev-type socialism and calls for some other kind of “new”
socialism? What kind of new socialism? What is the novelty? All these
“socialisms”, be they devised by communist Kurashvili or social-“democrat”
Fyodorov or multimillionaire Brintsalov are nothing other than that same
capitalism, only slightly touched up with democratic and socialist
phraseology. The greatness of Stalin consists in that in the 1920-30-s he
defeated the petty bourgeois opposition, and for the first time in world
history, built true proletarian socialism inside the USSR. He brought
into practice the ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin and built a society,
which the oppressed classes had been dreaming about for thousands of
years, a society, which the socialist-utopists had been dreaming of but
did not know how to build, and a society, which workers of oppressed
countries of today are dreaming about. One needs to note that V.I. Lenin in
the last years of his life strenuously searched for a way out of NEP
towards a society without commodities, but he did not live to see
socialism. J.V Stalin, relying on the ideas conveyed by V.I. Lenin, in his
last articles and also on his own knowledge and willpower, built a
society, which historians are today calling “pure” socialism, compared to the
“dirty”, vulgarized socialism of Khrushchev and Brezhnev. J.V. Stalin’s
contributions to the working out of the theoretical conception of
socialism and its embodiment in practice were so great, that his name is
directly linked to socialism. If we say the words of V.V. Mayakovsky, then
we can say: “When we say Lenin, we mean the Party and when we say
Stalin, we mean socialism.” Socialism in our country went through two
periods: the proletarian period from 1929 until 1956 (including the years of
building socialism), when the dictatorship of the proletariat was being
exercised and at the head of the country stood the Bolshevik party,
having been guided by the Marxist-Leninist theory, and the second period
from 1956 until 1985 – petty bourgeois consumer socialism, when at the
head of country stood the Khrushchev-Brezhnevite CPSU having crossed
over onto the position of right- opportunism. That catastrophe, which took
place in our country – the counter-revolution and the defeat of
socialism- was not due to a fault in socialism itself or its bankruptcy, like
our class enemies are trying to prove. The tragedy occurred as a result
of the Khrushchev-Brezhnevite leadership, having deviated from that
policy, which J.V. Stalin had led the country with and torn themselves
away from Marxism, rejecting the dictatorship of the proletariat and
classes in general, and the class struggle in particular. Several theorists
(the group calling itself the “Leninists”) maintain today that with the
building of socialism in 1936, the need for a dictatorship of the
proletariat was no longer relevant since, they say, there was longer a
proletariat but a working class and that there was an ideology common to
everyone. This is completely wrong. It is true that with the building of a
socialist society, all classes and strata of the population go over
onto the position of the working class, and they have a common proletarian
ideology. But the working class itself continues to remain the main,
root class and continues to dictate its will. The dictatorship of the
proletariat or workers’ rule is implemented.
The rejection of this in the Khrushchev-Brezhnev period led to
disorganization in the economy as well as ideology and towards the rising up of
anti-socialist forces of the so-called “fifth column”, gradually taking
power.
Today when the communist movement in the country is divided, and the
separate communist parties are not in a condition to organize and raise
the workers up to the struggle against the anti-peoples regime, many are
coming out in favour of unifying and forming a single Marxist-Leninist
party. Is such unification possible? Yes, it is possible. It needs to
be a unification based on a programme and Party rules free from
opportunistic ideas, and which will fulfill all the demands of Marxist-Leninist
theory, including the placing the end goal of the revival of socialism.
Not one of the communist parties of the Roskomsoyuz (Russian Communist
Union) today has such a programme and rules. The programme of the RCWP
for example, presents a mishmash of Marxist, Trotskyite and
anarcho-syndicalist ideas. Besides this, it contains slander against J.V. Stalin,
which causes outrage among rank and file members of the RCWP. Other
parties in the Roskomsoyuz in general renounce our socialist past and are
therefore renegades. They are trying to invent something new. But there
is no need to reinvent the wheel; we had socialism and we want it back.
In order to achieve this, the counter-revolution in inside the country
has to be crushed and power taken. How this is to be done is already a
special topic of conversation.
The only communist party, which on questions of theory commands the
heights and where the draft political programme answers to the
above-indicated demands, is the ACPB (the All-Union Communist Party of
Bolsheviks). Therefore we need to unify around this party the members of other
parties who accept the party political Programme and Party Rules of the
ACPB. Only in this way will we be able to form a militant mass
Marxist-Leninist party, able to lead the struggle of the working class and all
the people, who to a large extent have remained Soviet, towards
liberation. Again, as always in difficult periods of history, communists and
workers must unite around the names of V.I. Lenin and J.V. Stalin, around
a true revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party in order to carry out a
successful struggle for driving the occupiers -“democrats” out of our
country, for the revival of Soviet power and the socialist system. Again
like in the years of struggle against fascism, we have to go into battle
under the slogan “For the Motherland - For Stalin!”
J.V. Stalin and the experience of building socialism in our country was
and always will be our ideological weaponry. They inspire us and
instill belief in victory.
J.V. STALIN AND SOCIALISM
A.M. Chernyak, Russian Communist Workers Party (RCWP)
Not one head of the USSR has ever been subjected to such attacks and
such a hounding from the bourgeois mass media as J.V. Stalin and of
course, V.I. Lenin. If bourgeois criticism of Khrushchev, Brezhnev and other
former leaders was good-natured, one may even say friendly in
character, then against J.V. Stalin as well as against V.I. Lenin it always was
and is meant to destroy. And it is understandable why. If, under the
leadership of V.I. Lenin the power of the bourgeoisie in Russia was
overthrown and Soviet power, that is, the power of the workers was
established, then after he died, when J.V. Stalin stood at the helm of the
country, the bourgeoisie in our country came to an end. Stalin not only
liquidated inside the USSR private property and the bourgeoisie as a class,
but also washed out of the country using an iron broom, all kinds of
crooks, shrewd businessmen, speculators and swindlers who had sponged off
the people. Figuratively speaking, J.V. Stalin ridded our country of
the spirit of the bourgeoisie. Under his leadership a completely new
society was built inside the USSR, based on new principles, with a new
culture, new morals and a new ideology. This was socialism of the
proletarian type, a society of labour, where everything belonged to the people
of labour, since they were the masters of their own country and all of
its wealth. The bourgeoisie of all countries cannot forgive J.V. Stalin
for this. What had been achieved in the USSR was far too dangerous for
the capitalist countries, since the workers of these countries could
follow the example of our country (the USSR). This is why they did not
allow us to live peacefully and build our own future. Attempting to
undermine from within if only to slow down the flow of socialist
construction, the enemies sent spies, saboteurs, economic saboteurs into our
country, supported the “fifth column” created out of the defeated classes,
which arranged conspiracies, terrorist acts, poisoned drinking wells and
set fire to grain storehouses (granaries). The young Soviet state was
compelled to defend itself. It was here, that this defence of socialism
from internal and external enemies was used by western special services
relying on fabrications by Trotsky, Khrushchev, Solzhenitsen and other
renegades, for whipping up and fabricating the myth about the so-called
“Stalin repressions” or the “Great Terror”. This myth became the main
weapon for anti-communists in their information war against socialism
and communist parties.
Unfortunately, the theorists of present-day communist parties up to now
have not worked out antidotes against this poison and have not deeply
and convincingly enough, exposed this lie. As a rule, communists
defending J.V. Stalin from attacks do not deny that repressions took place,
but only lower the number of those who were repressed, claiming that
there were not 40 million people repressed like Solzhenitsen and the
bourgeois press maintain, but only 642 thousand during the period of 33 years
(from 1921 until 1954). Those same communists admit that there were
repressions and dance to the tune of the democrats. The word “repressions”
is understood to be the arrest of innocent people, that is, crimes
carried out by the authorities, evil deeds against innocent people. But
J.V. Stalin was never an evildoer and did not occupy himself with
arresting honest people, like opponents of socialism claim. J.V. Stalin was
guided in all of his actions by the interests of the defence of Soviet
power and socialism, and demanded with this, an observance of socialist
legality. In particular, the material of the January Plenary meeting of
the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik) (CC
ACP(B) of 1938, and the decree of the Sovnarkom of the USSR and the CC
ACP(B) from 17th November 1938 testify this.
The Civil War in our country did not end in 1920 as is written in
history textbooks, but continued in another hidden form throughout the whole
period of building socialism and continues up to now. Therefore those
642 thousand enemies of peoples’ power, having died in the flow of the
class struggle in the USSR should be added to those who died in the
years of the Civil War on the side of the Whites. They all came out against
the power of the workers and peasants and got what they deserved.
The small number of Soviet people had in that period unjustifiably
suffered was not due to the conscience J.V. Stalin, but due to the
Trotskyites and careerists who had penetrated the organs of security and the
party. In 1938 many had already been exposed and were severely punished.
The purges inside the army, which were carried out in 1937-1939, the
arrest of military chiefs involved in Tukhachevsky’s conspiracy, the
dismissal of politically unreliable or politically unstable and incompetent
elements from the army, and their replacement by young commanders who
were decisive and devoted to the party and cause, did not weaken the
army, like the “democrats” try to make us believe, (and this lie is
repeated by several “communists”), but on the contrary, they strengthened and
reinforced it. Even our opponents noticed this at that time.
For example, Goebbels explains the collapse of Hitler” troops in his
diaries, by putting it down to this pre-war reforming of the Red Army
(now called “repressions” inside the Army). Indeed, it was those people
such Zhukov, Rokossovsky, Chernyakhovsky, Vasilyevsky, Valyutin and
thousands of other generals entering the divisions and corps that took the
war to the victory of the USSR. And the “democrats” try to instill in
our minds that it was because of the repressions in the army that there
was nobody left to command it, and that if the Uboreviches, Yakirs and
Korks had commanded the troops, then they would have quickly triumphed
in the war, they say. But simple logic suggests to us that in this case
we would have lost the war, since inside the army would have turned up
not just General Vlasov (who was not purged in time), but ten of
General Vlasov’s ilk. The liquidation of the “fifth column” in the USSR
during the pre-war period in a surprising way influenced the moral climate
in society. There wasn’t the fear that the democrats instill into the
population today. On the contrary, an atmosphere of joyful spirits,
enthusiasm, a common uplift and labour inspiration dominated. Newsreels of
those years recorded buoyant laughter on the faces of Soviet people who
were certain of their future and knowing what they wanted. The 1930-s
were the years of youth of the Soviet country, the years of inspiration
of the work of our people in the name of a common goal. Every communist
should know this and defend those years from slander, and not agree
with those who paint a dark picture of them. One can quote many a
statement with kind words directed towards the 1930-s from those who lived and
worked at that time. Here is what Marshal G.K. Zhukov writes about them
in his memoirs: “Each period of peace has its own specific features,
its own colour and its own charm. But I would like to say a kind word
about the pre-war period (in the USSR- translator), in that it was notable
for the unique, distinctive uplift in mood, optimism, and a kind of
inspiration and at the same time, efficiency, modesty and simplicity of
the people. We had started to live well, very well indeed!” (G.K. Zhukov,
“Reminiscences and thoughts” (Vospominaniya I razmyishleniya), m. 1970,
p.196 (in Russian). History testifies that inside all the former
socialist countries, counter-revolution was started by attacks against J.V.
Stalin. That was how it was in Czechoslovakia during the “Prague spring”
in 1968 when Dubcek was leader of the communist party there. It was the
same with us here when at the head of the CPSU stood our own Dubcek,
that is, Gorbachev. We remember how on one autumn day in 1987 the whole
mass media suddenly began whipping up grim anti-Stalin hysteria inside
the country. This was the start of a war, the start of
counter-revolution in the USSR, the liquidation of the socialist system and the
restoration of criminal, colonial capitalism. These are truths, which do not
need a lot of explaining or clarification.
More complicated and difficult to explain is the question as to reason
why a section of the communists (or people calling themselves
communists) up to now does not except J.V. Stalin but stands on Khrushchevite or
more exactly, Trotskyite positions. Why does the position of a leader
of one of the communist parties, A.A. Prigarin on the question about
Stalin, coincides with the position of the “democrats”, and that from the
leadership of the RCWP (Russian Communist Workers Party), A.V.
Kryuchkov and V.A. Tyulkin, you very rarely hear a commendable word towards
J.V. Stalin and the Stalin epoch? The fact that people have been duped by
anti-communist propaganda and that the “democrats” have made a
scarecrow out of Stalin and with it, are frightening the philistines, is
obvious. But communists and more so the leaders of the communists should know
the laws of social development, the laws of class struggle, and not
give in to the untruths of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois opportunist
propaganda. Khrushchev was not the first of the leaders of the communist
party who openly spoke out against J.V. Stalin and who contrasted Lenin
with Stalin. Trotsky was the first. Khrushchev only armed himself with
Trotsky’s main thesis about Stalin allegedly deforming socialism in the
USSR and that the main struggle against Stalin was the return to
“Leninist democratic socialism”. Therefore the key to understanding why, after
Stalin had died, the CPSU crawled down to Trotskyite right-opportunist
positions, and towards understanding the present-day disorder, one has
to search in the period of the 1920-s, in the years of the struggle
against Trotskyism. After Lenin had died, the communist party headed by
Stalin was not homogeneous and monolithic. Around 10% of the communists
were newcomers from other petty-bourgeois parties: Mensheviks,
anarchists, SR-s (Socialist Revolutionaries) etc. Trotsky himself, along with
his supporters only entered the Bolshevik party after the February
Revolution in 1917. And he did not enter it because he had suddenly started
seeing the light and had become a Bolshevik; no – he remained as he was
before this – a Menshevik. He entered the Bolshevik party because he
could see that the Bolsheviks were coming to power, and he hoped that by
entering the party of his former opponents he would be able to
undermine it from within and transfer it over onto Menshevik petty-bourgeois
positions. The Trotskyites and newcomers from other parties alien to the
Bolsheviks, although having in the past been revolutionaries, expressed
the interests of the petty-bourgeoisie and were guided in their
struggle, not by the aim of building a socialist society, but by the ideals of
petty-bourgeois democracy. It needs to be born in mind that
pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary Russia was a peasant, a petty-bourgeois
country and therefore petty-bourgeois ideas weighed down heavily on the
party, penetrated the party, and therefore communists often became
carriers of these ideas, perhaps not even realising it themselves. The same
is happening today; it is sometimes hard to differentiate a communist
with petty-bourgeois views from that of a communist defending
proletarian aims. Lenin back in those days noted the danger of the
petty-bourgeoisie as being the bitterest enemies of communism, since they hourly and
each minute generate capitalism. And in this light it needs to be
understood that the bitter struggle waged by J.V. Stalin and his supporters
against Trotskyism in the 1920-s was a struggle against the
petty-bourgeoisie, for socialism. This was a struggle of two lines inside the
party – proletarian and petty bourgeois. Members of the Politburo and the
Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik) (ACP(B))
were divided into two groups. J.V Stalin’s group supported by the
absolute majority in the party and working class and expressing the
proletarian line inside the party, led the country towards socialism. Trotsky’s
group, around which all opposition forces rallied and which had the
support of a section of the intelligentsia and students, expressed the
petty-bourgeois tendency in the party and came out against the building of
socialism and stood for the continuation of NEP (New Economic Policy)
and market relations. This dividing line, which appeared in the 1920-s,
exists today throughout the communist movement as a whole. The petty
bourgeoisie cannot exist without private property and is always dreaming
of creating that kind of society where private property and communists
will peacefully coexist side by side. Isn’t this what G.A. Zyuganov the
leader of the CPRF (Communist Party of the Russian Federation) wants
when he proclaims the peaceful coexistence of all from of property and
all classes? And what about A.A. Prigarin who publicly denounces Stalin
and Brezhnev-type socialism and calls for some other kind of “new”
socialism? What kind of new socialism? What is the novelty? All these
“socialisms”, be they devised by communist Kurashvili or social-“democrat”
Fyodorov or multimillionaire Brintsalov are nothing other than that same
capitalism, only slightly touched up with democratic and socialist
phraseology. The greatness of Stalin consists in that in the 1920-30-s he
defeated the petty bourgeois opposition, and for the first time in world
history, built true proletarian socialism inside the USSR. He brought
into practice the ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin and built a society,
which the oppressed classes had been dreaming about for thousands of
years, a society, which the socialist-utopists had been dreaming of but
did not know how to build, and a society, which workers of oppressed
countries of today are dreaming about. One needs to note that V.I. Lenin in
the last years of his life strenuously searched for a way out of NEP
towards a society without commodities, but he did not live to see
socialism. J.V Stalin, relying on the ideas conveyed by V.I. Lenin, in his
last articles and also on his own knowledge and willpower, built a
society, which historians are today calling “pure” socialism, compared to the
“dirty”, vulgarized socialism of Khrushchev and Brezhnev. J.V. Stalin’s
contributions to the working out of the theoretical conception of
socialism and its embodiment in practice were so great, that his name is
directly linked to socialism. If we say the words of V.V. Mayakovsky, then
we can say: “When we say Lenin, we mean the Party and when we say
Stalin, we mean socialism.” Socialism in our country went through two
periods: the proletarian period from 1929 until 1956 (including the years of
building socialism), when the dictatorship of the proletariat was being
exercised and at the head of the country stood the Bolshevik party,
having been guided by the Marxist-Leninist theory, and the second period
from 1956 until 1985 – petty bourgeois consumer socialism, when at the
head of country stood the Khrushchev-Brezhnevite CPSU having crossed
over onto the position of right- opportunism. That catastrophe, which took
place in our country – the counter-revolution and the defeat of
socialism- was not due to a fault in socialism itself or its bankruptcy, like
our class enemies are trying to prove. The tragedy occurred as a result
of the Khrushchev-Brezhnevite leadership, having deviated from that
policy, which J.V. Stalin had led the country with and torn themselves
away from Marxism, rejecting the dictatorship of the proletariat and
classes in general, and the class struggle in particular. Several theorists
(the group calling itself the “Leninists”) maintain today that with the
building of socialism in 1936, the need for a dictatorship of the
proletariat was no longer relevant since, they say, there was longer a
proletariat but a working class and that there was an ideology common to
everyone. This is completely wrong. It is true that with the building of a
socialist society, all classes and strata of the population go over
onto the position of the working class, and they have a common proletarian
ideology. But the working class itself continues to remain the main,
root class and continues to dictate its will. The dictatorship of the
proletariat or workers’ rule is implemented.
The rejection of this in the Khrushchev-Brezhnev period led to
disorganization in the economy as well as ideology and towards the rising up of
anti-socialist forces of the so-called “fifth column”, gradually taking
power.
Today when the communist movement in the country is divided, and the
separate communist parties are not in a condition to organize and raise
the workers up to the struggle against the anti-peoples regime, many are
coming out in favour of unifying and forming a single Marxist-Leninist
party. Is such unification possible? Yes, it is possible. It needs to
be a unification based on a programme and Party rules free from
opportunistic ideas, and which will fulfill all the demands of Marxist-Leninist
theory, including the placing the end goal of the revival of socialism.
Not one of the communist parties of the Roskomsoyuz (Russian Communist
Union) today has such a programme and rules. The programme of the RCWP
for example, presents a mishmash of Marxist, Trotskyite and
anarcho-syndicalist ideas. Besides this, it contains slander against J.V. Stalin,
which causes outrage among rank and file members of the RCWP. Other
parties in the Roskomsoyuz in general renounce our socialist past and are
therefore renegades. They are trying to invent something new. But there
is no need to reinvent the wheel; we had socialism and we want it back.
In order to achieve this, the counter-revolution in inside the country
has to be crushed and power taken. How this is to be done is already a
special topic of conversation.
The only communist party, which on questions of theory commands the
heights and where the draft political programme answers to the
above-indicated demands, is the ACPB (the All-Union Communist Party of
Bolsheviks). Therefore we need to unify around this party the members of other
parties who accept the party political Programme and Party Rules of the
ACPB. Only in this way will we be able to form a militant mass
Marxist-Leninist party, able to lead the struggle of the working class and all
the people, who to a large extent have remained Soviet, towards
liberation. Again, as always in difficult periods of history, communists and
workers must unite around the names of V.I. Lenin and J.V. Stalin, around
a true revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party in order to carry out a
successful struggle for driving the occupiers -“democrats” out of our
country, for the revival of Soviet power and the socialist system. Again
like in the years of struggle against fascism, we have to go into battle
under the slogan “For the Motherland - For Stalin!”
J.V. Stalin and the experience of building socialism in our country was
and always will be our ideological weaponry. They inspire us and
instill belief in victory.