|
|
STALIN IS COMMUNISM-STALIN IS HUMANITY
I. STALIN IS COMMUNISM. The world bourgeoisie is not only declaring communism to be dead but also blaming Stalin for what is happening in the USSR today. Obviously, they and their comrades in the USSR do not like Stalin no more than Trotsky and Bukharin liked him. This is all very understandable: Stalin means building of communism and communism means the destruction of capitalism. Even the best technique of production by itself cannot build socialism. It needs to be used for communist aims. Bourgeoisie cannot do this. Only the proletariat, because of its communist aims can fully utilise the capacity of the available technique. That is how it was in the USSR under Stalin. Proletariat of the USSR assumed power in a country where the technique of production was relatively backward. But proletarian power through its communist aim is able to utilise productive forces to its full potential. This coupled with the untold sacrifices of the proletariat of the USSR, has produced "miracles". By 1936, the USSR has already built socialism and was headed towards communism! Just before the death of Stalin our motherland was the second industrial power in the world, had the largest scale of agriculture and the best technique of production in the world. The USSR had the most developed factory techniques in the whole wide world. The world was already talking about the fully automated piston factory that was built in the USSR in 1949 and more, a computer factory - the precursors of the micro-chips, second in the world, the first in Europe was also built in the USSR by 1952. Fully automated factories and computers, even before they were made up of micro-chips, at the service of the proletarian power.... All of these, coupled with the Stalin Plan of Transformation of Nature clearly points to this: that the year J.V. Stalin has died coincides with clear signs of fully communist society. When Stalin died, communist society was on the verge of realisation in the USSR, it was clearly kicking in her mother’s womb.
1. SO-CALLED BACKWARDNESS OF THE TECHNOLOGY OF PRODUCTION IN THE U.S.S.R. This is nothing but a lie that is being put forward by the imperialist bourgeoisie and the traitors to the U.S.S.R. to achieve their political aim of belittling communism in the eyes of the world proletariat and demoralising the Soviet peoples. The U.S.S.R. had the best factory technique in the whole world by the time Stalin has died. Let us read an example of this from an ardent opponent of communism, Dr. A. D. Booth; ".. A spectacular example of a modern automatic factory, which is often quoted is the Russian piston factory completed in 1951. In this the raw material, in the form of ingots, is received and melted under controlled conditions. A completely automatic process then produces castings, which are 'fettled' (that is, the risers and the pouring spout are removed). These castings are heat treated and automatically tested for hardness, imperfect members being rejected; they are then machined, gauged for weight, and tin-plated. Lastly a completely automatic inspection grades the finished products into size (this is important because the output of a factory of this type will not be completely perfect and it is therefore convenient to produce a range of sizes which can be used as replacement for engines in various states of wear) and finally the whole operation of protective coating, wrapping and packing the castings into crates is performed in an automatic manner. Here again, as in the case of early windmills, the components start at the top of the building and work their way steadily to the bottom to emerge as finished products and it is a nice commentary on progress that the most recent and the earliest of our automatic processes resemble one another so closely." Andrew D. Booth, D.Sc., Ph.D. Automation and Computing. P. 18. Staples Press. London. 1958
And from a sort of a socialist, Dr. S. Lilley: "...But the two most complete examples of automation (that I know of) are both in the U.S.S.R. In one of them, aluminium ingots are fed in at one end of the line, and at the other end there emerge every day 3,500 fully finished car pistons, wrapped and packed. In the other, the greater part of the process of making ball and roller bearings is done automatically. The latter is to be found at the Kaganovitch First State Ball-bearing Factory in Moscow, a factory with a very progressive technical policy.... ...... The piston plant started work in I950 a remarkably early date in the history of automation. Since it is probably still the most completely automatic plant in the world, it will be worthwhile to describe it in some detail. The process of converting aluminium ingots into packed pistons is completely automatic with only two exceptions. At the start of the process, in the I950 model, a labourer loaded the ingots on to a conveyor. But a second plant, which came into operation in I954 or I955, eliminates that piece of work; the ingots are now tipped into a hopper, from which they are automatically loaded on to the conveyor. That leaves only one manual operation, namely a visual inspection of the castings for flaws. The details of the process may be followed from Figures 1 and 3, while Figure 2 shows part of the line. .... ... The paradox looks even more startling when we recall that the piston plant started work in I950. The work of designing and building it must have been done in the last two or three years of the nineteen forties—that is to say, at a time when even transfer machines were known only theoretically in Britain and even in America they were only just beginning to be seriously developed.... ..... But they knew that in a few years' time, after a great effort of reconstruction, they would be able to put far larger resources into automating industry on a large scale. And so they decided to plan ahead for that time. They would spend the next few years gaining experience, so that when they were ready they could go ahead with automation at the maximum possible speed. Mere building of transfer machines would give only very limited experience. A modest programme on those lines would continue, but the main emphasis was to be on a project, useful in itself of course, which would give them wide experience in automation techniques. And so they decided to aim at the completely automatic manufacture of car pistons, precisely because it was complicated and difficult, because that one project would force them to master the automation of practically every basic process in engineering production." (Automation and Social Progress. S. Lilley. London. Lawrence & Wishart. 1957. P. 43-51)
Further, let us read from the pages of the " Political Economy ", the preparations of which book is discussed by Stalin in his "Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R.", and which came out just after his death. " The highest stage of mechanisation is the automation of production, which is the use of self-regulating automatic machines. Closely connected with automation is the system of telemechanics, which is the remote management and control of working machines. Where the entire complex of machinery covering a production process as a whole is self-regulated, there is an automatic system of machinery. An automatic system of machinery carries out all the production processes required for the working up of raw material into finished product, without direct human interference, and only requires supervision by the worker." ( Political Economy, 1957, Lawrence & Wishart, London. P 504 ) " All-round automation of production means a higher level of development of large-scale machine production and constitutes a characteristic feature of material production basis of communism. It leads to the replacement of unskilled labour by skilled, and provides the technical basis for finally abolishing the essential distinctions between mental and physical labour. The transition from partial automation of production processes to an automatic system of machines ensures an enormous increase in the productivity of labour. The creation of enterprises with complete complex mechanisation and automatic production lines of machine tools, as well as of automatic factories is among the achievements of the Soviet engineering industry. The automation of already-operating hydro-electric stations has been carried out in the U.S S R. Hydro-electric stations under construction are all to be automatically operated. The control of many power stations is exercised from a distance by means of telemechanisms. In metallurgical enterprises newly devised rolling-mills, tube-mills and blooming-mills which are mechanised with automatic controls are in use. Automatic control of locks is being introduced in hydro-technical installations. Automatic factories for the production of concrete have been built, in which the automation of production embraces all processes, beginning with the feeding-in and weighing of the raw materials and ending with the emergence of the finished concrete. If, at the present time, automation of labour processes is no more than a herald of the new technical basis of communism, in time this great achievement of science and technique will be introduced into all branches of production. " (ibid. P 742-743) Furthermore. Let us read from "the Report by N. A. Bulganin to the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U.": "One of the most important and urgent tasks of the instrument-making industry is to satisfy the needs of science and production for sufficient quantities of rapid computation machines, which are a new means of automating mathematical computation and production processes. The radio engineering industry must pay particular attention to developing high-quality semi-conductor instruments, which in many cases are effective substitutes for radio valves. Semi-conductor instruments are of much smaller size and weight than radio valves, and increase the reliability of radio apparatus, computation machines and other appliances. .... The next and higher stage after mechanisation, in the process of technical development, is automation. The essence of automation is that the production is carried out with a minimum expenditure of physical labour; the worker is freed from heavy labour and his duties are chiefly regulation. Thanks to automation, one worker, or a few workers, can tend a large number of machines. Automation changes the nature of the worker's labour, and the more extensively it is introduced the more will his labour approximate to that of the technician and the engineer. Large-scale automation opens up prospects for an unprecedented increase in the labour productivity, and, under socialism, makes for a rise in the cultural and technical standards of the working people. In addition, it leads to better quality and lower cost of production; furthermore, it brings greater reliability and continuity in production. The control of operations in atomic installations, and also in a number of the chemical and other industries where the work cannot be regulated directly by the personnel, is possible only with the help of automation. The results of automation may be seen from the example of Dnieper hydro-electric station, whose nine hydro-turbines with a total capacity of 650,000 kilowatts, and a number of other machines, are serviced by shifts of only six operatives. At the Ordjonikidze cascade in Uzbekistan, two or three operatives control four hydro-electric stations from a single panel. The economic effect of automation in engineering works is high. Our up-to-date automatic production lines make it possible to reduce the number of workers to between one-fifth and one tenth of what it was and to curtail working time in processing to the same extent. Automation must be widely employed in all industries. This task confronts the heavy, light and food industries alike. Automatic computing machines, which can themselves determine the most advantageous regime of production process and maintain it, and also establish and control quality assignments, must play a particularly important role in carrying automation. The development of automation is thus of great importance to our country. The Ministries and departments are not yet paying proper attention to it, however. The draft directives set the task of introducing automation in industry on a large scale, of proceeding more rapidly from the automation of machines and operations to the automation of factory departments and technological processes, and the construction of fully automated plants, which will make for an incalculable rise in labour productivity." Report by N. I. Bulganin to the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U. Soviet News Booklet No. 5. London, March 1956. Need we say anymore!
1.1 APPLICATION OF TECHNIQUE UNDER CAPITALISM AND SOCIALISM "The importance of the basic economic law of capitalism consists, among other things, in the circumstance that, since it determines all the major phenomena in the development of the capitalist mode of production, its booms and crises, its victories and defeats, its merits and demerits—the whole process of its contradictory development—it enables us to understand and explain them. Here is one of many "striking" examples. We are all acquainted with facts from the history and practice of capitalism illustrative of the rapid development of technology under capitalism, when the capitalists appear as the standard-bearers of the most advanced techniques, as revolutionaries in the development of the technique of production. But we are also familiar with facts of a different kind, illustrative of a halt in technical development under capitalism, when the capitalists appear as reactionaries in the development of new techniques and not infrequently resort to hand labour. How is this howling contradiction to be explained? It can only be explained by the basic economic law of modern capitalism, that is, by the necessity of obtaining the maximum profit. Capitalism is in favour of new techniques when they promise it the highest profit. Capitalism is against new techniques, and for resort to hand labour, when the new technique do not promise the highest profit. That is how matters stand with the basic economic law of modern capitalism. Is there a basic economic law of socialism? Yes, there is. What are the essential features and requirements of this law? The essential features and requirements of the basic law of socialism might be formulated roughly in this way: the securing of the maximum satisfaction of the constantly rising material and cultural requirements of the whole of society through the continuous expansion and perfection of socialist production on the basis of higher techniques. Consequently: instead of maximum profits—maximum satisfaction of the material and cultural requirements of society; instead of development of production with breaks in continuity from boom to crisis and from crisis to boom—unbroken expansion of production; instead of periodic breaks in technical development, accompanied by destruction of the productive forces of society—an unbroken process of perfecting production on the basis of higher techniques." J. S T A L I N. ECONOMIC PROBLEMS OF Socialism IN THE U.S.S.R. (P. 44-45) FOREIGN LANGUAGES PUBLISHING HOUSE. MOSCOW 1952
2. STALIN PLAN OF TRANSFORMATION OF NATURE " A Plan for Planting Shelter Belts, Introducing Travopolye Crop Rotation and Digging Ponds and Reservoirs for the Purpose of Ensuring High and Stable Crop Yields in the Steppe and Wooded- Steppe Districts of the European Part of the U.S.S.R. " promulgated on October 24, 1948. (V. Safonov. Land in Bloom. P 495. Foreign Languages Publishing House. Moskow 1951.) "Irrigation and shelter belt planting are important factors in the continued development of agriculture. Already before the war, many large irrigation systems, equipped with modern machinery, were built and existing systems overhauled. The result was a 50 per cent increase in effective irrigated area in the Central Asian Republics and other parts of the U.S.S.R., and this enabled us to accomplish so momentous a task as substantially increasing cotton output. Work was likewise begun on the planting of shelter belts. The construction of irrigation canals and shelter-belt planting were launched on an even bigger scale after the war. Large irrigation systems are now under construction in the Transcaucasian Republics, and in the next few years, when they are completed, the effective irrigated area here will be increased by 50 per cent and more. In 1947 work was begun on the irrigation of the highly fertile but drought-affected areas in the central black-earth zone—the Kursk, Orel, Voronezh and Tambov regions—the aim being to attain stable harvests of grain, industrial and other crops. In 1948 extensive work was started on the planting of large national forest shelter belts in the steppe and forest-steppe areas of the European part of the U.S.S.R., of shelter belts in collective and state farms, and on the construction of ponds and reservoirs. In the past three and a half years, the collective farms, state farms and forestries have afforestated 2.6 million hectares and have built over 12,000 ponds and reservoirs. In excessive humidity areas, primarily Byelorussia and the Baltic Republics, extensive work is now in progress, as before the war, for the draining of marshes and bogland. Construction of the huge hydropower plants and irrigation systems on the Volga, the Don, the Dnieper and the Amu Darya and the commissioning of the Lenin Volga-Don Shipping Canal open up immense prospects for agricultural development. These power plants and water systems will irrigate over 6 million hectares and supply water and sectional irrigation to grazing land on another 22 million hectares. Vast opportunities are thus created for the electrification of agriculture, for the introduction of electrical ploughing, electrical-powered combines and other electrical agricultural machinery. Large-scale construction of irrigation canals goes hand in hand with the introduction of a new system of irrigation. Under it, the irrigated plots are much larger, the field irrigation ditches are more rationally arranged, and the number of permanent irrigation canals in the fields reduced, their place being taken by temporary canals. This makes it possible more fully to utilise irrigated areas and irrigation water, and creates better conditions for the mechanisation of irrigated agriculture. The completion of these broad irrigation schemes, the planting of shelter belts and the draining of bog-land, are raising our agriculture to a higher plane, and our country will be guaranteed, once and for all, against any fortuities of the weather. (Applause) The task now is to complete the irrigation, shelter-belt and drainage projects in the appointed time, and Party, Soviet and economic organisations must concentrate special attention on this. " ( G. Malenkov. Report To The Nineteenth Party Congress on The Work of The Central Committee of The C.P.S.U.(B.). October 5, 1952 P. 72-73. Foreign Languages Publishing House. Moscow 1952) Plant trees to form forest shelter belts to prevent the land from scorching winds; control rivers’ flow to stop flooding and built reservoirs for irrigation; preserve and further develop the structure of soil in conjunction with crop rotation as the main means of fertilisation, using minimal amount of chemical fertilisers that can be fruitfully utilised by crops; further develop the species of crops through a program of cross breading, selective breeding, conditioning. Specialised agriculture to be restricted and mixed agriculture to be promoted combined with husbandry which shall provide natural fertilisers; electrical machinery to be utilised, the latest the technique can make available to be utilised within this context, etc., etc. Any Environmentalist or Green friend of the earth who close their eyes to this, the Stalin Plan of Transformation of Nature, is nothing but a bourgeois windbag. Stalin Plan of Transformation of Nature coupled with an industrial base able to provide all the industrial needs of this plan. Such were the conditions of agriculture. It is this plan that has been thrown overboard and replaced with the virgin lands program of Khrushchev and later by specialist agriculture of Brezhnev both of which relied on chemical fertilisers and total negation of natures requirements- let alone the requirements of socialist economy.
3. TURNING POINTS OF HISTORY. At critical moments in history all is forced to chose between the horns of a dilemma: either this/ or that; it is impossible to say neither this/ nor that, but both. The necessity to chose either this, or that path of development gives rise to a sharpening of class struggle. All the turning points in the history are a witness to a sharpening of class struggle, which bring forth the proponents of the paths to be chosen. When the urban-bourgeoisie was being eliminated in the USSR, Trotskyism reared itself in defence of the urban-bourgeoisie; when rural bourgeoisie was being eliminated in the USSR Bukharinism reared itself in defence of rural-bourgeoisie and they all had their connections with the world bourgeoisie. The years around Stalin's death coincides with the appearance of embryos of a fully matured communist society in technique of production. This could not but demand important changes in the economic, social and political life of the society, i.e.; USSR was at another cross-roads, at another turning point of its history. The very basis of social life is its economy; the very content of the political life and struggle is the economic life of society. Therefore the sharpest, clearest and by the nature of the subject matter the empirical examples of the class-struggle this historic turn in the life of USSR has brought about can be observed in Stalin's "Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR ". Either this, or that. A line has to be chosen. Proponents of these lines have to come forward and do come forward. Struggle and only struggle decides as to whom, as to what line shall succeed. Either, Stalin's Plan of Transition to Communism as put forward by him in " The Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R." or, the plan of those opposed to this plan who have already came forward and got a trashing from Stalin.
4. SOCIALISM FAILS WHEN THE LEADER DIES? It is not that revisionists assumed power when Stalin died, it is that a turning point in history was in the making when he died. Coincidence of these two is something accidental, not a necessity. Would the results been otherwise had Stalin not died? Possible. But then, everything is possible. What was unavoidable was the struggle to choose a line. It could be that Stalin was assassinated as part of this struggle. Listen to one of them who claim to love Stalin. "Among other things, Mikoyan spoke about Mao and compared him with Stalin, saying: "The only difference between Mao Zedong and Stalin is that Mao does not cut off the heads of his opponents, while Stalin did. That is why we could not oppose Stalin," continued this revisionist. "At one time, together with Khrushchev we had considered organising a pokushenie * against him, but we gave up the idea because we were afraid that the people and the party would not understand" *assassination attempt (Russian in the original) Enver Hoxha. The Khrushchevites, Memoirs. P. 389. Workers Publishing House. London. Some Communists are like this one? They can share opinions with those who even dare think of assassinating their leader, and keep this information to themselves, while the traitor gets on with the destruction of socialism. This is not the issue here though. What matter is that the need for change in the USSR be comprehended; that we were but a few years away from Communism be comprehended; that the proponents of opposing lines showed themselves, be comprehended. Therefore, what matter is, that the class struggle had to be continued till the bitter end, be comprehended. Therefore, what matter is that, all the traitors to our motherland and therefore to humanity be hated without exception and absolutely!
II- TROTSKYISM AND BUHARINISM IS THE RESTORATION OF CAPITALISM
1. PLAN OF RESTORATION OF CAPITALISM OF TROTSKIETS OF 1930’S AND PRESENT FACTS OF TROTSKIET RESTORATION OF CAPITALISM IN THE U.S.S.R. Before we move to study the restoration of capitalism in the U.S.S.R. we must see what sort of a restoration has come about? Was this foreseen in the past? Below, A and B will show that the trials of traitors in the past have brought out into the open their plan of restoration of capitalism in the U.S.S.R. The reader will easily see that it is this plan that has been put into practise today. Further down, C will show to the reader that Trotskyites have always aimed to transform the economy of our motherland into an appendage of the world imperialist bourgeois economy. Reader will also see that it is also this plan that has now been achieved. The traitors who restored capitalism in the U.S.S.R. were Trotskyite traitors to the motherland. It is not Stalin’s plan that has been applied ever since his death, but of Trotsky and Bukharin! A) REPORT TO THE SEVENTEENTH PARTY CONGRESS ON THE WORK OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE C.P.S.U. (B), January 26, 1934, J.V. Stalin, Works, July 1930-January 1934, V.13, p. 370, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow 1955, Reprinted by Red Star Press Ltd. III. THE PARTY
We have always said that the "Lefts" are in fact Rights who mask their Rightness by Left phrases. Now, the "Lefts" themselves confirm the correctness of our statement. Take last year 's issues of the Trotskyite Bulletin. What do Messieurs the Trotskyites demand, what do they write about, in what does their "Left" programme find expression? They demand: the dissolution of the state farms, on the grounds that they do not Pay; the dissolution of the majority of the collective farms, on the grounds that they are fictitious; the abandonment of the policy of eliminating the kulaks; reversion to the policy of concessions, and the leasing to concessionaires of a number of our industrial enterprises, on the ground that they do not pay. There you have the programme of these contemptible cowards and capitulators-their counter-revolutionary programme of restoring capitalism in the U.S.S.R.! B) REPORT AND SPEECH IN REPLY TO DEBATE AT THE PLENUM OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE C.P.S.U. (B) March 3-5, 1937, DEFECTS IN PARTY WORK AND MEASURES FOR LIQUIDATING TROTSKYITE AND OTHER DOUBLE-DEALERS, J.V. Stalin, Works, 1934-1940, V.14, p.249-253, Pravda, 29 March 1937, Reprinted by Red Star Press Ltd, 1978, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow 1954.
III. PRESENT DAY TROTSKYISMAt the trial in 1937, Pyatakov, Radek and Sokolnikov took a different line. They did not deny that the Trotskyites and Zinovievites had a political platform. They admitted that they had a definite political platform, admitted it and unfolded it in their evidence. But they unfolded it not in order to call upon the working class, to call upon the people, to support the Trotskyite platform, but in order to curse and brand it as an anti-people and anti-proletarian platform. The restoration of capitalism, the liquidation of the collective farms and state farms, the restoration of the system of exploitation, alliance with the fascist forces of Germany and Japan to bring nearer the war against the Soviet Union, the fight for war and against the policy of peace, the territorial dismemberment of the Soviet Union in which the Ukraine was to be surrendered to the Germans and the Maritime Region to the Japanese, preparation for the military defeat of the Soviet Union in the event of an attack on her by hostile states and, as a means of achieving these aims, wrecking, diversion, individual acts of terrorism against the leaders of the Soviet government, espionage on behalf of the Japano-German fascist forces-such was the political platform of present-day Trotskyism unfolded by Pyatakov, Radek and Sokolnikov. Naturally the Trotskyites could not but hide such a platform from the people, from the working class. And they hid it not only from the working class, but also from the rank-and-file Trotskyites, and not only from the rank-and-file Trotskyites, but even from the leading Trotskyite group consisting of a small clique of thirty or forty people. When Radek and Pyatakov demanded from Trotsky permission to convene a small conference of thirty or forty Trotskyites for the purpose of informing them about the character of this platform, Trotsky forbade them on the ground that it was inexpedient to tell even a small clique of Trotskyites about the real character of this platform, for such an "operation" might cause a split.
C) INEVITABLE CONTROL OF THE WORLD MARKET. Let us read from V. M. Molotov's report to the XVII. Party Congress about another one of Trotsky’s prophesies which has become a reality: "This brings to mind Lenin's slogan, "To overtake and surpass the technically and economically advanced countries." We are still far from having realised this slogan. But we shall make considerable progress in this respect during the Second Five-Year Plan. The theses state that by the end of the Second Five-Year Plan the U. S. S. R. ought to occupy first place in Europe in technical development. It must be conceded that the task is immense and that this criterion is of extreme importance to us. We do not undertake to overtake and surpass technically and economically the advanced capitalist countries in every respect during the Second-Five Year Plan. However, the theses state that in a number of branches of economy we can and ought to overtake and surpass the technical and economic development of the advanced capitalist countries. It is clear that here too the application of the international criterion is of great political and enormous practical importance. ...... On the other hand, we must not fail to mention the manner in which the Trotskyites presented this question. Trotsky's line, which was permeated by disbelief in the possibility of victory for socialism in the U. S. S. R. embodied also in this sphere quite a different, an anti-Bolshevik meaning. I shall illustrate this point by quoting a passage from what Trotsky said at the Seventh Plenum of the E.C.C.I. in December 1926: "The rate of development is a decisive factor, as we are not the only ones on this globe. The isolated socialist state exists so far only in the fantasies of journalists and authors of resolutions. In reality our socialist state is always, directly or indirectly under the relative control of the world market. This is the crux of the matter. The rate of development is not arbitrary. It is fixed by world development in general because, in the final analysis, world economy controls every one of its parts, even if that part is under proletarian dictatorship and is building socialist economy." (Our emphasis—V. M.) Thus Trotsky, already at that time emphasised that our Soviet economy is "under the control" of the world market. As early as 1926 there was a fundamental discrepancy in Trotsky's formulation; the contrast between Soviet economy and the economy of the capitalist countries was glossed over in a purely Menshevik way. In his pamphlet Towards Socialism or Capitalism Trotsky wrote in 1925: "The more we become involved in the system of international division of labour the more directly and immediately such elements of our domestic economy as prices and quality of commodities become dependent upon the corresponding elements of the world market" In that Trotsky went so far as to say that the prices of our commodities "become dependent upon the corresponding elements of the world market" which plainly meant that when there are crises in capitalist countries, prices in the U.S.S.R. must fall and vice versa. It suffices to mention this line of argument to show the obvious absurdity of it especially under the conditions that prevail today. Finally, in the same pamphlet Trotsky wrote: "But the situation radically changes with the rapid growth of exports and imports. We are becoming a component part of the world market, although that part is in a very special class by itself. This means that the universal factors of the world market, in refracted and modified form, must find reflection in one way or another in our economy. The given economic phase is always best expressed in the way the market buys and sells. We are entering the world market both as buyers and sellers. Thus we are affected to a greater or lesser extent by the commercial and industrial ebb and flow of the world market." And further: "Our independence of the fluctuation of the world market is disappearing. All the main processes of our economy are not only making contact with the corresponding processes but are to a greater or less extent affected by the operation of the laws governing capitalist development, including the vagaries of the market. " Thus Trotsky, even at that early date, advance the idea of our being affected by the action of the laws of capitalist development, including the fluctuations of the market; advanced the idea of the U. S. S. R. being dependent upon the "ebb and flow" of the world market. Notwithstanding the slippery and tricky character of these formulations, the Menshevik tendency of Trotsky's writings was already quite clear even then. His desire to obliterate the fundamental difference between world capitalist economy and socialist economy in the U. S. S. R. stands out boldly in all of his arguments. Trotsky's profound prophecies concerning the dependence of our economy on the "ebb and flow" of world capitalist economy sound especially ridiculous and stupid now, in view of the crisis in the capitalist countries and the gigantic economic progress in the Soviet Union. The political meaning of Trotsky's formulation lies, of course, in his petty-bourgeois capitulation before imperialism, in his philistine disbelief in the victory of socialism in the U. S. S. R., which he regarded as a hopeless case, as something without a leg to stand on. That is now the political basis of Trotskyism. Well, let Trotsky take care of his business. We shall take care of ours, with unshaken belief in the victory of our cause, in the triumph of socialism." THE XVII. CONFERENCE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION - THE SECOND FIVE-YEAR PLAN by V. M. Molotov (CO-OPERATIVE PUBLISHING SOCIETY OF FOREIGN WORKERS IN THE USSR. MOSCOW 1932.)
The Trotskyites are still defending these rotten theories so much so that they consider the late collapse of the USSR to be the result of capitalism’s pressures in line with above views: " The structural crises of capitalism are now revealed in mass unemployment and large areas of social and political breakdown. But capitalism's globalisation and its relative expansion brought tremendous pressure- economic, political and military- on the economy and society of 'socialism in one country', the Soviet Union. Together with the resistance of Stalinism of the working class in the USSR and eastern Europe, this brought the collapse of the main pillar of continued capitalist rule in the world since the 1920's, Stalinism." Workers Press Saturday 18 March 1995. p 4. Towards a New Workers' Party by WRP Secretary Cliff Slaughter Leaving aside the most obvious distortion of the rulers of USSR being Stalinist, rather than Trotskyites, these views are another formulation of the above views of Trotsky. Here it is clearly formulated that the crises of capitalism has affected socialism so much that it brought about its collapse. Isn't it lovely? The fact of the matter is that, Trotskyism and Bukharinism leads to the collapse of a socialist country even when it was the technologically most developed country in the world in 1953. It took them 40 years to finish it off and they still cannot make it a proper part of the world market.
2. BACKWARD AND REACTIONARY NATURE OF TROTSKYISM For Trotskyism the whole Soviet experience is one of negativity. To the extend that they look into this experience, their approach boils down to a simple determination: how can I negate this experience, how can I rubbish this experience. As such, Trotskyism is an extremely backward theory, for our theory is based on the study of the life, the experience of the proletariat. It is the summation of this experience. Yet, Trotskyism is utterly incapable of making use of this experience. They do not know how to determine a type of economy, and not even the basic economic law of socialism, let alone all other economic laws that came into operation under socialism. Any group of people, who live in the past, cannot follow the developments of science, further more, take it into their head that no such development is possible, is a sect. Rather like a religious sect. That is what the present day Trotskyite movement is. It has long since became and is a reactionary, anti-communist sect. Their approach to the Soviet experience is a simple proof of this simple fact. Khruschevites, Maoists, Hoxhaists, Castroists, Kim ill Sungists, Ho Chi-minists etc. are all infected with Trotskyism and Buharinism. They, quite like their Trotskyite comrades are adamant in not learning from this experience and not using its lessons in their practise. But, in a world divided into proletarians and bourgeoisie, there is no third way, other than the Blairite third way. Another proof of the backward and reactionary nature of Trotskyism and its sister ideologies, dependant on the present conditions of the proletariat, is their approach to micro-chips. Just as many a supporter of the theory of “people’s war” can not see a “people’s war” when it is being waged in practise, and starts to rubbish it, all the so-called communist tendencies who blame Stalin of bureaucracy, can not see the absolute demise of bureaucracy when it is looking at them in the face, and starts to rubbish it. I have in mind the computerisation of the society, i.e., communism. The important thing is that, we have been able to bring into light the essential things about micro-chips, and its role in the fight against bureaucracy thanks to Stalinism. Only those who have Marxism can handle what is new in the movement, in the life of the proletariat. 3. TECHNICAL BACKWARDNESS OF THE U.S.S.R. AND THE NEW TROTSKITES "Consequently, according to Khrushchev, the Soviet Union was going over to "a higher phase of communism", at a time when, in reality, that country was still backward in industry and agriculture and its markets were empty. "The Soviet Union was going over to the phase of communism" only in the declarations of the Khrushchvites, because the reality testified to the opposite......" Enver Hoxha. The Khrushchevites, Memoirs. P. 340. Workers Publishing House. London. With friends like these, who needs enemies. This traitor has supported and applied all the policies of his comrade Khrushchev, policies, which made it impossible for the USSR to pass into full automation, to communism. And yet he blames the industrial basis of our motherland instead of his and his comrades' traitorous policies. As is well known, Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev never believed U.S.S.R. could build socialism without the support of the technically developed capitalist countries. At least they existed when U.S.S.R. was technically backward. This one distorts the facts of technical superiority of our motherland, which was achieved thanks to communism.
4. WHERE THERE IS A WILL, THERE, THERE IS A WAY By 1953, it was not Germany or other European countries but USSR that had the most developed technology in the world. It was not Germany or other European countries that had the most industry but USSR. Nor was it the only socialist country. In other words all the excuses of the Trotskyites were thrown overboard by factual developments, and socialism was built too. Not that it mattered for these enemies of socialism. They did carry on finding excuses to defend imperialism and oppose USSR. Where there is a will, there, there is a way.
III. ON THE QUESTION OF DEGENERATION AND WITHERING AWAY OF THE COMMUNIST STATE
1. THE SOVIET STATE Let us read from Comrade Stalin about the state of the Soviet state in 1939. “Since the October Revolution, our Socialist state has passed through two main phases in its development. The first phase was the period from the October Revolution to the elimination of the exploiting classes. The principal task in that period was to suppress the resistance of the overthrown classes, to organize the defence of the country against the attack of the interventionists, to restore industry and agriculture, and to prepare the conditions for the elimination of the capitalist elements. Accordingly, in this period our state performed two main functions. The first function was to suppress the overthrown classes inside the country. In this respect our state bore a superficial resemblance to previous states, whose functions had also been to suppress recalcitrants, with the fundamental difference, however, that our state suppressed the exploiting minority in the interests of the labouring majority, while previous states had suppressed the exploited majority in the interests of the exploiting minority. The second function was to defend the country from foreign attack. In this respect it likewise bore a superficial resemblance to previous states, which also undertook the armed defence of their countries, with the fundamental difference, however, that our state defended from foreign attack the gains of the labouring majority, while previous states in such cases defended the wealth and privileges of the exploiting minority. Our state had yet a third function: this was the work of economic organization and cultural education performed by our state bodies with the purpose of developing the infant shoots of the new, Socialist economic system and re-educating the people in the spirit of Socialism. But this new function did not attain any considerable development in that period. The second phase was the period from the elimination of the capitalist elements in town and country to the complete victory of the Socialist economic system and the adoption of the new Constitution. The principal task in this period was to establish the Socialist economic system all over the country and to eliminate the last remnants of the capitalist elements, to bring about a cultural revolution, and to form a thoroughly modern army for the defence of the country. And the functions of our Socialist state changed accordingly. The function of military suppression inside the country ceased, died away; for exploitation had been abolished, there were no more exploiters left, and so there was no one to suppress. In place of this function of suppression the state acquired the function of protecting Socialist property from thieves and pilferers of the peoples property. The function of defending the country from foreign attack fully remained; consequently, the Red Army and the Navy also fully remained, as did the punitive organs and the intelligence service, which are indispensable for the detection and punishment of the spies, assassins and wreckers sent into our country by foreign espionage services. The function of the economic organization and cultural education by the state organs also remained, and was developed to the full. Now the main task of our state inside the country is the work of peaceful economic organization and cultural education. As for our army, punitive organs, and intelligence service, their edge is no longer turned to the inside of the country but to the outside, against external enemies. As you see, we now have an entirely new, Socialist state, one without precedent in history and differing considerably in form and functions from the Socialist state of the first phase. But development cannot stop there. We are going ahead, towards communism. Will our state remain in the period of Communism also? Yes, it will, unless the capitalist encirclement is not liquidated, and unless the danger of foreign military attack has disappeared. Naturally, of course, the forms of our state will again change in conformity with the change in the situation at home and abroad. No, it will not remain and will atrophy if the capitalist encirclement is liquidated and a Socialist encirclement takes place. That is how the question stands with regard to the Socialist state.” J. V. Stalin, REPORT ON THE WORK OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE TO THE EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE C.P.S.U. (B.), Delivered March 10, 1939, Problems of Leninism, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1945, p. 631-638Therefore the basic functions of the soviet state at its second stage of development, the stage after the Stalin Constitution were 1. The function of military suppression inside the country: This has ceased, died away. In place of this function of suppression the state acquired the function of protecting Socialist property from thieves and pilferers of the people’s property. 2. The function of defending the country from foreign attack: This fully remained. Consequently, the Red Army and the Navy also fully remained, as did the punitive organs and the intelligence service, which were indispensable for the detection and punishment of the spies, assassins and wreckers sent into the Soviet country by foreign espionage services, but their edge was no longer turned to the inside of the country but to the outside, against external enemies. 3. The function of the economic organization and cultural education by the state organs: also remained, and was developed to the full. The main task of the Soviet state inside the country was the work of peaceful economic organization and cultural education.
2. THE SOVIET STATE AND BUREAUCRACY-DEGENERATION We have to start our study with the following quote from Stalin: “In 1917, when we were forging ahead, towards October, we imagined that we would have a Commune, a free association of working people, that we would put an end to bureaucracy in government institutions, and that it would be possible, if not in the immediate period, then within two or three short periods, to transform the state into a free association of working people. Practice has shown, however, that this is still an ideal which is a long way off, that to rid the state of the elements of bureaucracy, to transform Soviet society into a free association of working people, the people must have a high level of culture, peace conditions must be fully guaranteed all around us so as to remove the necessity of maintaining a large standing army, which entails heavy expenditure and cumbersome administrative departments, the very existence of which leaves its impress upon all the other state institutions. Our state apparatus is bureaucratic to a considerable degree, and it will remain so for a long time to come…” Stalin, THE PARTY'S TASKS- December 2, 1923 V5. p.368-9 Reader will take note of the date of the quote. It is particularly important that Trotskyites take note of the date. From the study of the soviet experience we see that;
Therefore, to transform Soviet society into a free association of working people, the people must have a high level of culture, that is the desire, the ability and the capability to administer the state; peace conditions must be fully guaranteed all around us so as to remove the necessity of maintaining a large standing army. Only thus can we get rid of the state. In other words, only thus can we get rid of, wither away, the first and second functions of the state, transforming the third function from a function of the state into a normal, everyday function of the society, and thus get rid of, wither away, the state.
3. METHODS OF GETTING RID OF THE SOVIET STATE AND THUS OF GETTING RID OF THE BUREAUCRACY-DEGENERATION Let us take a look at the conditions to get rid of the state and see how we can achieve these conditions.
Is this something that we can achieve by our own affords, in one country. The answer to that question is yes. 1/A- Building the technological and economic basses of communism as the essential means of achieving a high level of culture by the masses. Building socialism, i.e., building a powerful industry and getting rid of the bourgeoisie in all aspects of economic life is not enough to achieve this result. We must also create the conditions to pass to the formula, "to each according to his needs," passing through a number of stages of economic and cultural re-education of society, in the course of which work must be transformed in the eyes of society from only a means of supporting life/ into life's prime want, and social property into the sacred and inviolable basis of the existence of society. In other words, we must create the conditions for communism. For this, at least three main preliminary conditions have to be satisfied. 1. It is necessary, in the first place, to ensure a continuous expansion of all social production, with a relatively higher rate of expansion of the production of means of production. 2. It is necessary, in the second place, to transform all forms of group property into public property, and, thus replace commodity circulation by a system of products-exchange, under which the central government, or some other social-economic centre, might control the whole product of social production in the interests of society. 3. It is necessary, in the third place, to ensure such a cultural advancement of society as will secure for all members of society the all-round development of their physical and mental abilities, so that the members of society may be in a position to receive an education sufficient to enable them to be active agents of social development, and in a position freely to choose their occupations and not be tied all their lives, owing to the existing division of labour, to some one occupation. What is required for this? For this, it is necessary first of all, to shorten the working day at least to six and subsequently to five hours. This is needed in order that the members of society might have the necessary free time to receive an all round education. It is necessary further, to introduce universal compulsory polytechnic education, which is required in order that the members of society might be able freely to choose their occupation and not be tied to some one occupation all their live. It is likewise necessary that housing conditions, and that real wages of workers and employees should be suitable for a society of plenty. People who have never been a communist, but have been lucky enough to read few pages of Lenin and/or Stalin, while being fully taken in by Mao and/or Enver, refer to the method of organising criticism from below, of organising mass control from below, of raising the culture of masses as methods of getting rid of bureaucracy, without further ado. The fact of the matter is that, to achieve a high level of culture by the masses, a level of culture that enables them to participate fully in running the affairs of state, a high level of production, and the economic conditions for communism-common property in all spheres of social activity- must be achieved. For otherwise, they will not have the time and the means to develop their culture, and thus participate fully in administering the state. Therefore, the main line running throughout the policy of Bolshevism is to achieve an independent industry that is capable of providing for the agriculture as well as for its own development, thus making it possible to transform all property into social property of all people, thus making it possible to provide plenty for the masses, thus providing all that is needed to achieve a high level of culture by masses. We can see from our studies that the Soviets were at the verge of achieving all this, especially with their achievement of fully automated factories and the computer which as we know enables us to fully and easily automate all production, and by organising product-exchange with collective-farms to prepare their transformation into state-farms. Today we can clearly and easily say that we can achieve all these by creating an industrialised country of proletarian dictatorship that has completed is electrification and computerisation. The years of Stalin’s death coincides with the years when the Soviets were marching to achieve these in a short space of time! 1/B- Using all the available means to develop the culture of the masses, i.e. their faculty and ability to administer the country, to administer economy, to administer industry, to administer the whole state. Under capitalism, the working class is not able to train in its sons the knowledge and faculty of government, and become able to do so only after coming to power. Therefore, every means capable of promoting the development of the cultural powers of the working class, every means capable of facilitating the development in the working class of the faculty and ability to administer the country and industry—every such means must be utilised to the full. Until the end of the first five year plan, we have been obliged to "exercise economy in all things, even in schools" in order to "save, to restore heavy industry " (Lenin). Only then, we have been able to restore heavy industry and begun developing it further. And only then, the time has arrived to set about fully achieving universal, compulsory elementary education. Until this time we could not provide for the working class even the universal elementary education. And literacy which is provided through elementary education is the basis of all culture, if it is to become a high level of culture. Be it before achieving universal elementary education, be it after, one of the means of raising the cultural level of workers, has been the mass organisation of workers. Trade unions, Soviets, people’s courts, mass meetings, committees of all sorts. These have all served as schools of administration, means of raising the cultural powers of masses. One other method that was used was the building of factories and farms that use high level of technology, and work in such environment. These also serve to raise the cultural level of masses. Another method is the famous method of criticism-self criticism. This method was used not only to raise the cultural level of the masses but also to help weed out the bureaucratic and degenerate elements from all walks of life, including the Party. All of these methods are used not because they represent an excellence in the material and cultural conditions of the country, but because there is a short coming in the material, and thus cultural conditions of the country and these methods have to be used as methods which are available and necessary to raise the cultural level of the masses and to weed out the bureaucratic and degenerate elements. These methods, by nature, are contradictory and rely for their usefulness or otherwise precisely on these contradictions. On the one hand criticism is there to raise the cultural level of the masses, to use their knowledge and experience in this process to overcome the shortcomings of the work of the apparatus; to clear away the bureaucratised and degenerated elements; on the other hand this very process can be utilised by our enemies to demoralise the party and state apparatus, to damage their organisational capabilities and to destroy the standing of our leaders. On the one hand to build factories and to work in the factories raise the cultural level of the workers, on the other hand working conditions of long hours and heavy work restrict their ability and opportunity to govern the state. On the one hand all the mass organisations and committees are, for the masses, the means of learning how to govern; on the other hand our enemies can infiltrate these organisations and engage in disruptive activities, etc., etc., 2. To achieve peaceful conditions around our country, and thus to get rid of the need to armed forces, intelligence services etc. In this sphere, the proletariat in power contributes by setting an example to the proletarians of other countries, helping them learn from its own example, not just by its political and when needed by its military achievements, but most importantly by its economic achievements; and of course, by helping them directly to the extend that it can. In other words it helps the proletarians in its periphery to achieve power; contributes to peace in its periphery. But and in the final analysis, this is not a condition that can be achieved by only our own forces-by the forces of the proletariat in power. It requires the contribution of all the world proletarians. It requires the condition of socialist-communist encirclement of imperialist countries!
4. THE SOVIET STATE AND BUREAUCRACY-DEGENERATION SHORT CONCLUSIONS
5. COMPUTERISATION AND THE SOVIET STATE Had the incremental destruction of Soviet economy and communal morality of the Soviet people, and thus the restoration of capitalism by Trotskyite-Buharinite traitors to the motherland not been successful; and had we a Soviet Union that lived in line with the requirements of comrade Stalin, of socialist economy and morality, the Soviet country would have completed the electrification and computerisation of the country, and the Soviet state would begun to wither away through its direct democratic stage. The perfect form of direct democracy requires the fulfilment of the following.
This is the essential content of direct democracy. Soviet state will take such a form, the Soviet citizens will start to administer the state, and when this becomes a normal and voluntarily accepted work of the citizens, the state would begin to wither away-when and also we are surrounded by peace conditions, i.e. when the imperialist encirclement is replaced by socialist-communist encirclement.
Now, in the future, that is how we will do it! Only the children of comrade Stalin can put an end to the bureaucratisation and degeneration in the Soviet state, Khrushchevites who are the continuers of Trotskyites and Buharinites can only lead to its degeneration. Khrushchevism is the Trotskyism and Buharinism of the period of our state when all the exploiting classes have been demolished; when our state was about to enter the third stage of its development, at which the sources of all the possibilities and conditions of bureaucratisation and degeneration would be dried up; conditions for the masses to control the state from below, continuously and directly would be created. Contrary to all the previous battles, this time they had one. The results of their victory is obvious to all.
6. SOME REFERANCES ON BEUROCRACY
6.1. STALIN ON BEUROCRACY Let us read just a few of what has been said by comrade Stalin: “1- THE PART'S TASKS- December 2, 1923 - V5. p.368-9 ....... THE CAUSES OF THE DEFECTS The first cause is that our Party organisations have not yet rid themselves, or have still not altogether rid themselves, of certain survivals of the war period, a period that has passed, but has left in the minds of our responsible workers vestiges of the military regime in the Party. I think that these survivals find expression in the view that our Party is not an independently acting organism, not an independently acting, militant organisation of the proletariat, but something in the nature of a system of institutions, something in the nature of a complex of institutions in which there are officials of lower rank and officials of higher rank. That, comrades, is a profoundly mistaken view that has nothing in common with Marxism; that view is a survival that we have inherited from the war period, when we militarised the Party, when the question of the independent activity of the mass of the Party membership had necessarily to be shifted into the background and military orders were of decisive importance. I do not remember that this view was ever definitely expressed; nevertheless, it, or elements of it, still influences our work. Comrades, we must combat such views with all our might, for they are a very real danger and create favourable conditions for the distortion in practice of the essentially correct line of our Party. The second cause is that our state apparatus, which is bureaucratic to a considerable degree, exerts a certain amount of pressure on the Party and the Party workers. In 1917, when we were forging ahead, towards October, we imagined that we would have a Commune, a free association of working people, that we would put an end to bureaucracy in government institutions, and that it would be possible, if not in the immediate period, then within two or three short periods, to transform the state into a free association of working people. Practice has shown, however, that this is still an ideal which is a long way off, that to rid the state of the elements of bureaucracy, to transform Soviet society into a free association of working people, the people must have a high level of culture, peace conditions must be fully guaranteed all around us so as to remove the necessity of maintaining a large standing army, which entails heavy expenditure and cumbersome administrative departments, the very existence of which leaves its impress upon all the other state institutions. Our state apparatus is bureaucratic to a considerable degree, and it will remain so for a long time to come. Our Party comrades work in this apparatus, and the situation—I might say the atmosphere—in this bureaucratic apparatus is such that it helps to bureaucratise our Party workers and our Party organisations.” “5- THE RESULTS OF THE THIRTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE R.C.P.(B.)-June 17, 1924 - V6. p. 260-270 .... QUESTIONS OF THE EDUCATION AND RE-EDUCATION OF THE WORKING MASSES One of the essential tasks confronting the Party in the epoch of the dictatorship of the proletariat is to re-educate the older generations and educate the new generations in the spirit of the proletarian dictatorship and socialism. The old habits and customs, traditions and prejudices inherited from the old society are most dangerous enemies of socialism. They—these traditions and habits—have a firm grip over millions of working people; at times they engulf whole strata of the proletariat; at times they present a great danger to the very existence of the proletarian dictatorship. That is why the struggle against these traditions and habits, their absolute eradication in all spheres of our activity, and, lastly, the education of the younger generations in the spirit of proletarian socialism, represent immediate tasks for our Party without the accomplishment of which socialism cannot triumph. Work to improve the state apparatus, work in the countryside, work among women toilers and among the youth—these are the principal spheres of the Party activity in the fulfilment of these tasks.
“13- THE FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE C.P.S.U.(B.)-December 2-19, 1927 -V.10, p.327-331 d) The state apparatus and the struggle against bureaucracy. So much is being said about bureaucracy that there is no need to dilate on it. That elements of bureaucracy exist in our state, co-operative and Party apparatus, there can be no doubt. That it is necessary to combat the elements of bureaucracy, and that this task will confront us all the time, as long as we have state power, as long as the state exists, is also a fact. But one must know how far one can go. To carry the struggle against bureaucracy in the state apparatus to the point of destroying the state apparatus, of discrediting the state apparatus, of attempts to break it up—that means going against Leninism, means forgetting that our apparatus is a Soviet apparatus, which is a state apparatus of a higher type than any other state apparatus in the world. Wherein lies the strength of our state apparatus? In that it links the state power with the millions of workers and peasants through the Soviets. In that the Soviets are schools of administration for tens and hundreds of thousands of workers and peasants. In that the state apparatus does not fence itself off from the masses of the people, but merges with them through an incalculable number of mass organisations, all sorts of commissions, committees, conferences, delegate meetings, etc., which encompass the Soviets and in this way buttress the organs of government. Wherein lies the weakness of our state apparatus? In the existence within it of elements of bureaucracy, which spoil and distort its work. In order to eliminate bureaucracy from it—and this cannot be done in one or two years—we must systematically improve the state apparatus, bring it closer to the masses, reinvigorate it by bringing in new people loyal to the cause of the working class, remodel it in the spirit of communism, but not break it up or discredit it. Lenin was a thousand times right when he said: "Without an 'apparatus' we would have perished long ago. If we do not wage a systematic and stubborn struggle to improve the apparatus we shall perish before we have created the base for socialism." I shall not dilate on those defects in our state apparatus that are glaring enough as it is. I have in mind, primarily, "Mother Red Tape." I have at hand a heap of materials on the matter of red tape, exposing the criminal negligence of a number of judicial, administrative, insurance, co-operative and other organisations. ....... The Party's task is, in fighting against bureaucracy and for the improvement of the state apparatus, to extirpate with a red-hot iron such outrageous things in our practical work as those I have just spoken about. e) Concerning Lenin's slogan about the cultural revolution. The surest remedy for bureaucracy is raising the cultural level of the workers and peasants. One can curse and denounce bureaucracy in the state apparatus, one can stigmatise and pillory bureaucracy in our practical work, but unless the masses of the workers reach a certain level of culture, which create the possibility, the desire, the ability to control the state apparatus from below, by the masses of the workers themselves, bureaucracy will continue to exist in spite of everything. Therefore, the cultural development of the working class and of the masses of the working peasantry, not only the development of literacy, although literacy is the basis of all culture, but primarily the cultivation of the ability to take part in the administration of the country, is the chief lever for improving the state and every other apparatus. This is the sense and significance of Lenin's slogan about the cultural revolution. Here is what Lenin said about this in March 1922, before the opening of the Eleventh Congress of our Party, in his letter to the Central Committee addressed to Comrade Molotov: "The chief thing we lack is culture, ability to administer....Economically and politically NEP fully ensures us the possibility of laying the foundation of socialist economy. It is 'only' a matter of the cultural forces of the proletariat and of its vanguard." These words of Lenin's must not be forgotten, comrades (Voices "Quite right !") Hence the Party's task: to exert greater efforts to raise the cultural level of the working class and of the working strata of the peasantry.”
6.2. PROBLEMS OF BEAUROCRATISATION IN THE COMINTERN PROGRAM "..Thus, in so far as they promote from their ranks leaders in the work of construction, drawn into this work of construction broad sections of the proletariat and aim at combating bureaucracy, which inevitably arises as a result of the operation of class influences alien to the proletariat and of the inadequate cultural development of the masses, the trade unions become the backbone of the proletarian economic and State organisations as a whole. (p. 35. ) Only to the extent that the proletariat promotes from its own ranks a body of men and women capable of occupying the key positions of socialist construction, only to the extent that this body grows, and draws increasing numbers of the working class into the process of revolutionary-cultural transformation and gradually obliterates the line that divides the proletariat into an "advanced" and a "backward" section will the guarantees be created for successful socialist construction and against bureaucratic decay and class degeneracy. ( P. 38. ) .. The steady attraction of the masses into the process of socialist construction, the constant renovation of the entire State, economic, trade union and Party apparatus with men and women fresh from the ranks of the proletariat, the systematic training in the higher educational establishments and at special courses of workers generally and young workers in particular as new socialist experts in all branches of construction- all these together serve as one of the principle guarantees against the bureaucratic ossification or social degeneration of the stratum of the proletariat directly engaged in administration. ( P. 47. )
6.3. ONCE AGAIN TROTSKY LEADS THE WAY BY DECADES- OR TROTSKIETE THEORIES OF BUREAUCRATISATION OF THE SOVIET STATE. The danger of bureaucratisation, the danger of degeneration, these are already taken up by Stalin and the Comintern program. Those who know these know these dangers and what gives rise to these dangers, therefore work to destroy the reasons that give rise to these possibilities;( division of proletariat into advanced and backward sections- inability of the masses to take active part in political life due to their need to work long hours, due to cultural backwardness- division of forms of ownership and necessity for commodity circulation etc.). But it is otherwise with Trotsky. What he propose make it impossible for the proletariat to destroy these reasons of possible degeneration and bureaucratisation: the need to follow world prices and unavoidability of crises in the USSR if there are crises in capitalist world; call to collectivisation when conditions are not ripe, attack collectivisation that is being carried out when they are; demand bureaucratic control of T.U.s; declare the building of socialism in the U.S.S.R. impossible and engage in sabotage and spying for imperial powers to insure that it is impossible. And yet, he declares that this possibility of bureaucratisation and degeneration has already became a reality, and that because of this U.S.S.R. is about to collapse. U.S.S.R. does not collapse, in spite of these prophesies it does not collapse. Nay more, develops by leaps and bounds and builds socialism. But no worries. He and his gang certainly works to bring that about. And now that they did bring this possibility into reality, Stalin can be blamed. Fine theory this. Exactly same as his permanent revolution, which foresaw the struggle of proletariat against the bourgeois nation before Lenin's April thesis-forget the man’s opposition to Lenin’s theory of bourgeois democratic revolution under the hegemony of the proletariat until 1917. We are to forget that Khrushchev applied not Stalin’s policy but that of Trotsky! Trotsky’s plans were put into practice by the Trotskyites in the USSR. We know of these plans since 1930s! We are going to teach the humanity of this fact. For what has been done by the Trotskyites is a crime against humanity!
IV. RESTORATION OF CAPITALISM IN THE USSR AND SOME THEORIES OF RESTORATION OF THE ENEMIES OF MARXISM
1. TO DEFEND STALIN AND COMMUNISM. Certain traitors like the " old man of Austrian Marxist-Leninist Party " cry that they did not know about the attacks upon Stalin at the 20th Congress. Their leaders lied to them. Everything was kept secret from them, etc. To these, the defence of Stalin is to put names to him, not the defence of his policies. For, these policies were openly being changed, discarded. They had no objections to these changes. They can watch and indeed support policies opposed to Stalin's and yet they can also defend Stalin? They are capable opportunists indeed. By the way, Khrushchev who called Stalin names had also praised him. In this, in criticising and praising Stalin, there is not much difference amongst the so-called defenders and opponents of Stalin. (See, " History of the USSR. " revised version, as well as the documents of CPC and ALP.) How could one defend Stalin and Communism after Stalin? This could only be done by defending and putting into practice Stalin's plan of building Communism. This means the defence of Stalin's " Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R. "; The Fifth Five Year Plan that was formulated when Stalin was alive and the deviation from which is a crime against the Soviet Law, a crime against the Motherland. By defending the views of the 19th Congress which was the last one attended by Stalin; and the " Stalin Plan of Transforming Nature " which again was a Soviet Law deviation from which is a crime against the Motherland. Without defending all of these neigh more, by watching quietly the negation of these and furthermore, by defending the very negation of these in theory and practice, Stalin and the building of communism can not be defended. Those who stand on such positions and claim to support Stalin and the building of Communism are liars. Politically speaking, they are revisionists who have participated in the revision of the Stalin's Program; they are the traitors who are opposed to the line of Stalin, i.e., to Communism. The only certain criterion of a policy's class content is the determination of the classes its economic policies serve. The very content, the very essence of a political struggle is the economic struggle of classes. That is, a policy that does not defend the economic needs of the proletariat is not a proletarian policy. All the polemics produced by such a political line on proletariat, proletarian revolution, proletarian dictatorship, socialism, communism etc., in spite of their appearances, in spite of their rhetoric and because their very content does not defend the economic needs of the proletariat, does not defend its aim of communism are not the defence of proletarian policies. Those who trample underfoot the economic needs of the proletariat and rely on such bourgeois economic policies, by shouting high and laud in political matters in the name of the proletariat, in the name of communism can only cheat the ignorant masses and those who are willing to be cheated. Furthermore, they are the enemy within, and therefore, more dangerous. In the U.S.S.R., the policies that have begun to be put into practice under Malenkov and Khrushchev are known as the negation of Stalin's line formulated in the above mentioned works, or rather are said to be known as such. For, a wide range of political cheats who have reduced the defence of Stalin to the defence of his personality and to political rhetoric claim that CPC and ALP and their followers were communist and defenders of Stalin and thus were not revisionist traitors. This is an empty claim or rather a claim filled with bourgeois content. The defenders of these views have to prove that after Stalin CPC and ALP have opposed and exposed the economic policies that were the negation of the Laws of our Motherland, the negation of Stalin’s Plan of Building Communism. They cannot do so. " Exactly opposite " is known to be the truth. And more. The traitorous practices of Malenkov and Khrushchev have been glorified by these parties, these theories and practices have been accepted and put into practice by these parties or their own traitorous theories pushed forward and put into practice. And all of these are not to be found in " secrete speeches " but in open documents of the parties. These traitors, in spite of all their apparent oppositions to each other, in essence, in their enmity to the proletariat's aim of communism are one and the same. These traitors, CPC, ALP, Malenkov, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and their followers are the bastards of Trotsky who praise the Party and its leaders while in practice are engaged in digging their grave in collaboration with the world bourgeoisie.
1.1. THE WORK OF THE TRAITORS. Plan is law. It can only be changed under exceptional circumstances. He who brakes the law is a traitor to the socialist motherland. No sooner than Stalin died these traitors have changed the plan. The fifth five year plan(1951-55) and the Stalin Plan of Transformation of Nature has been changed at the beginning of August 1953. Malenkov came up with the plan of increasing the production of consumer goods, Khrushchev followed up with the opening up of the virgin lands. Huge increases in the light industry, agricultural implements, chemical industry; followed up by fancy plans on transportation, house building, and of course, militarisation. Destruction of price mechanism, wages policy, planning apparatus; negation of national profitability by enterprise profitability, increase in money supply, devaluation of the Ruble with price increases, selling of the MTSs to the collective farms, indebtedness of the same, transformation of their means of production into commodities; begging for funds from imperialists.... Until the total dislocation of economic, political and social life of the U.S.S.R.. The results are for all to see. Just as Trotsky has declared: Soviet economy which is a part of the capitalist world economy and therefore incapable of escaping its crises. Victory to you, shame to us, barbaric consequences to humanity including you and us, we are happy to remind you. For it will be you lot who will cry with fright while we fight.
1.1.A- STALIN ON TRAITORS " REPORT AND SPEECH IN REPLY TO DEBATE AT THE PLENUM OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE C.P.S.U. " 3 - 5 March 1937 DEFECTS IN PARTY WORK AND MEASURES FOR LIQUIDATING TROTSKYITE AND OTHER DOUBLE-DEALERS Comrades, from the reports and the debates on these reports heard at this Plenum it is evident that we are dealing with the following three main facts. First, the wrecking, diversionist and espionage work of the agents of foreign countries, among whom a rather active role was played by the Trotskyites, affected more or less all, or nearly all, our organisations- economic, administrative and Party. Second, the agents of foreign countries, among them the Trotskyites, not only penetrated into our lower organisations, but also into a number of responsible positions. Third, some of our leading comrades, at the centre and in the districts, not only failed to discern the real face of these wreckers, diversionists, spies and assassins, but proved to be so careless, complacent and naive that not infrequently they themselves helped to promote agents of foreign powers to responsible positions Such are the three incontrovertible facts which naturally emerge from the reports and the debates on these reports. .......... How are we to explain the fact that our Party comrades, notwithstanding their experience in the struggle against anti-Soviet elements, notwithstanding the numerous warning signals and warning signs, proved to be politically short-sighted in face of the wrecking, espionage and diversionist work of the enemies of the people? Perhaps our Party comrades have deteriorated, have become less class-conscious and less disciplined? No, of course not! Perhaps they have begun to degenerate? Again, of course not! There are no grounds whatever for such an assumption. What is the matter then? Whence this heedlessness, carelessness, complacency, blindness? The matter is that our comrades, carried away by economic campaigns and by colossal successes on the front of economic construction, simply forgot about certain very important facts which Bolsheviks have no right to forget. They forgot about the main fact in the international position of the U.S.S.R. and failed to notice two very important facts which have direct relation to the present-day wreckers, spies, diversionists and assassins who are concealing themselves behind Party membership cards and disguising themselves as Bolsheviks. ........ It must be explained that economic successes, their stability and duration wholly and entirely depend on the successes of Party organisational and Party political work, that without this, economic successes may prove to have been built on sand. 4) We must remember and never forget that the capitalist encirclement is the main fact which determines the international position of the Soviet Union. We must remember and never forget that as long as the capitalist encirclement exists there will be wreckers, diversionists, spies terrorists, sent to the Soviet Union by the intelligence services of foreign states; this must be borne in mind and a struggle must be waged against those comrades who underestimate the significance of the capitalist encirclement, who underestimate the strength and significance of wrecking. It must be explained to our Party comrades that no economic successes, no matter how great, can annul the capitalist encirclement and the consequences arising from it. The necessary measures must be taken to enable our comrades, both Party and non-Party Bolsheviks, to become familiar with the aims and objects, with the practice and technique of the wrecking, diversionist and espionage work of the foreign intelligence services. 5) It must be explained to our Party comrades that the Trotskyites, who are the active elements in the diversionist, wrecking and espionage work of the foreign intelligence services, have long ceased to be a political trend in the working class, that they have long ceased to serve any ideal compatible with the interests of the working class, that they have become a gang of wreckers, diversionists, spies, assassins, without principles and ideals, working in the pay of foreign intelligence services. It must be explained that in the struggle against present-day Trotskyism, not the old methods, the methods of discussion must be used, but new methods, uprooting and smashing methods. 6 ) We must explain to our Party comrades the difference between the present-day wreckers and the wreckers of the Shakhti period; we must explain that whereas the wreckers of the Shakhti period deceived our people in the sphere of technique, taking advantage of their technical backwardness, the present-day wreckers, with Party cards in their possession, deceive our people by taking advantage of the political confidence shown towards them as Party members, by taking advantage of the political carelessness of our people. ......... That is why the old slogan on the mastery of technique must now be supplemented by the new slogan on the mastery of Bolshevism, the political training of cadres and the abandonment of our political carelessness. 7) We must smash and cast aside the rotten theory that with every advance we make the class struggle here must subside, the more successes we achieve the tamer will the class enemy become. This is not only a rotten theory but a dangerous one, for it lulls our people, leads them into a trap, and enables the class enemy to recuperate for the struggle against the Soviet government. On the contrary, the further forward we advance the greater the successes we achieve, the greater will be the fury of the remnants of the defeated exploiting classes, the more ready will they be to resort to sharper forms of struggle, the more will they seek to harm the Soviet state, and the more will they clutch at the most desperate means of struggle as the last resort of the doomed. It must be borne in mind that the remnants of the defeated classes in the U.S.S.R. do not stand alone. They have the direct support of our enemies beyond the frontiers of the U.S.S.R. It would be a mistake to think that the sphere of the class struggle is limited to the frontiers of the U.S.S.R. One end of the class struggle operates within the frontiers of the U.S.S.R. but its other end stretches across the frontiers of the bourgeois states surrounding us. The remnants of the defeated classes cannot but be aware of this. And precisely because they are aware of it, they will continue their desperate sorties. This is what history teaches us. This is what Leninism teaches us. We must remember all this and be on the alert. 8) We must smash and cast aside another rotten theory to the effect that a person who is not always engaged in wrecking and who even occasionally shows successes in his work cannot be a wrecker. This strange theory exposes the naiveté of its authors. No wrecker will engage in wrecking all the time if he wants to avoid being exposed in the shortest possible time. On the contrary, the real wrecker must from time to time show successes in his work, for this is his only means of preservation as a wrecker, of winning the confidence of people and of continuing his wrecking work. I think that this question is clear and requires no further explanation. 9) We must smash and cast aside the third rotten theory to the effect that the systematic fulfilment of the economic plans nullifies wrecking and its consequences. Such a theory can only have one purpose, namely to tickle the self-esteem of our department officials, to lull them and to weaken their struggle against wrecking. ........ Fourthly, the wreckers usually time the main part of their wrecking work not for peace time, but for the eve of war, or for war itself. Suppose we lulled ourselves with this rotten "systematic fulfilment of economic plans" theory and did not touch wreckers. Do the authors of this rotten theory appreciate what an enormous amount of harm the wreckers would do to our country in case of war if we allowed them to remain within the body of our national economy, sheltered by the rotten "systematic fulfilment of economic plans" theory? Is it not clear that this "systematic fulfilment of economic plans" theory is a theory which is advantageous to the wreckers? 10) We must smash and cast aside the fifth rotten theory to the effect that the Stakhanov movement is the principal means for the liquidation of wrecking. This theory has been invented in order, amidst the noisy chatter about the Stakhanovites and Stakhanov movement, to parry the blow against wreckers. ......... 11) We must smash and cast aside the fifth rotten theory to the effect that the Trotskyite wreckers have no more reserves, that they are mustering their last cadres. This is not true, comrades. Only naive people could invent such a theory. The Trotskyite wreckers have their reserves. These consist first of all of the remnants of the defeated exploiting classes in the U.S.S.R. They consist of a whole number of groups and organisations beyond the frontiers of the U.S.S.R. which are hostile to the Soviet Union.
Take, for example, the Trotskyite counter-revolutionary forth International, two-thirds of which is made up of spies and diversionist agents. Is not this a reserve? Is it not clear that this international of spies will provide forces for the spying and wrecking work of the Trotskyites? Or take, for example, the group of that rascal, Scheflo, in Norway who provided a haven for the arch-spy Trotsky and helped him to harm the Soviet Union. Is not this group a reserve? Who can deny that this counter-revolutionary group will continue to render services to the Trotskyite spies and wreckers? Or take, for example, the group of another rascal like Scheflo, the Souvarine group in France. Is not this a reserve? Can it be denied that this group of rascals will also help the Trotskyites in their espionage and wrecking work against the Soviet Union? Those ladies and gentlemen from Germany, the Ruth Fischers, Maslovs, and Urbahns who have sold themselves body and soul to the fascists - are they not reserves for the espionage and wrecking work of the Trotskyites? Or take, for example, the well-known gang of writers in America headed by the well-known crook Eastman, all these pen pirates who live by slandering the working class of the Soviet Union - are they not reserves for Trotskyism? No, the rotten theory that the Trotskyite are mustering their last forces must be cast aside. P 241-269. Red Star Press Ltd. 1978 )
2. THEORISTS OF POSSIBILITIES Trotskyite traitors have gone into, in detail, all the real and imaginary possibilities of degeneration of communism; racked their brains as to how to amplify these possibilities and thereby turn them into realities and even built theoretical models of degenerate communism and declared these to be the reality of the U.S.S.R.. Such theories of possibilities faced by a real building of socialism and communism had to be and therefore were very adaptable to changes. For, as their possibilities of degeneration are smashed to the ground they have to find reasons for their destruction and dig still deeper into the new conditions to find new and even more minute possibilities to work upon. Theories, of course, are valid if they are proven in reality. Faced with the successful building of socialism and communism, preachers of these theories are forced into practical opposition to this successful building of socialism and communism: in practice they have to become saboteurs, wreckers of what we built and the spies of the world bourgeoisie. And as they are routed as spies, saboteurs and wreckers, they become outright double dealers. It is as such that although they have been putting their bourgeois traitorous line into practice since the death of Stalin, they have not come out owning up to it and as their theories and practices are giving their disgusting fruits they blame it on Stalin with the full and whole hearted co-operation of the world bourgeoisie, their masters without whom they, the rotten petty- bourgeois, bureaucratic slime could not have survived. All the theories of "social imperialism" of CPC and PLA have their roots in these theories and are nothing but a further development of these theories.
3. THEORIES OF NEW BOURGEOISIE CPC began talking of new bourgeoisie, its existence during Stalin's time and therefore after Stalin's death, no sooner than Stalin died. These people were not talking of the new bourgeoisie of NEP period. They were talking of the new bourgeoisie that exists after socialism has been built. These people can not even imagine a socialism that shall not create and therefore have no bourgeoisie. All this makes sense for their socialism for this can not but create new bourgeoisie; for this socialism will not destroy the petty bourgeoisie and the commodity production. And these petty bourgeois socialists try to pretend that Stalin's socialism is the same as theirs. Not for nothing these and Albanians have praised the destruction of Stalin's economic policies and adopted them in their own way. Not for nothing they attack Stalin with bureaucratism , not staging a cultural revolution etc., etc.. Not for nothing they raise huge cries concerning the names given to Stalin while do not open their mouth in defence of his policies. Not for nothing they love talking about war, proletarian dictatorship, peoples state, parliamentarian road etc., while watching with pleasure the devastation of socialism in practice and partaking in it. Theories of the existence of bourgeoisie under socialism which goes hand in hand with the theories of building socialism without first building an industrial base for it which are further developed with what is called the theories of Cultural Revolution which has to be waged periodically and in perpetual succession to get rid of the bourgeoisie that inevitably rears its head, are the theories of the petty bourgeois socialists. These have served as another prong of attack on Stalin's line after Stalin's death and the fact that the defenders of this socialism were pretending to defend Stalin's name, his person, his past contributions made them only more of a traitorous tendency in the movement. They have been and are the rear guard of Khrushchev.
4. THEORIES OF SOCIAL IMPERIALISM The more "radical" section of Trotskyism has produced this theory on the basis of Trotsky's declaration that U.S.S.R. is run by Stalinist bureaucracy. Yet, Trotsky himself oppose this and in his attempts to find a possible explanation for the real developments of the U.S.S.R. comes up with many a different th |