FOR BOLSHEVISM No 1(70) JANUARY 2009

WORKERS OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!

FOR BOLSHEVISM

INSIDE THE COMMUNIST AND WORKERS’ MOVEMENT

AUCPB - ВКПБ


No 1(70) JANUARY 2009


To the Chairman of the State Council and Council of Ministers of the republic of Cuba
Supreme Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Cuba
Comrade Raul Castro
Member of Parliament of the Republic of Cuba, Legendary Commandant Comrade Fidel Castro
Havana, the Republic of Cuba

Deeply respected COMRADES Raul Castro and Fidel Castro!
In the name of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (CC AUCPB) and from myself personally, I warmly congratulate YOU and in your name the heroic Cuban people on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary since the victory of the Cuban Revolution.
You, a great revolutionary in modern times brought about a long time dream of the Cuban people of freedom and independence, cast off by armed force the yoke of neo-colonial imperialist slavery of the USA and began the building on the Island of Freedom, of a new life, having united all the revolutionary forces and patriotic strata of the people, and achieved unity of the nation in the struggle for the construction of socialism in Cuba under the very nose of the empire of evil – the USA.

The words of Fidel Castro that “….for the victory of the revolution, unity in itself in not important, but principles laid down its basis, that form in which it is brought about, and those patriotic ideas which inspireit” – have become the slogan for action not just when overthrowing the Batista regime, but also for in the future – when building a new society.
The Cuban Revolution, which had begun 50 years ago continues today because imperialism has not accepted its defeat in Cuba, not come to terms with the existence of socialism on the Island of Freedom, because the example of the victorious Cuban Revolution has become completely infectious for the countries of Latin America which today have begun the construction of their own independent states.
In 1961, (16th April) in Cuba the socialist character of the Cuban Revolution was proclaimed. Despite the most brutal embargo on part of the USA, the constant acts of diversion, the landing of counter-revolutionary bandits onto Cuba with the aim of organising sabotage, diversions, terror and others, the Republic of Cuba is firmly building socialism. The Cuban Revolution continues.
The Soviet people always and felt and still do feel love for the people of Cuba, participated in socialist construction in Cuba – until the wrecking of the USSR on the strength of the counter-revolution that took place in the USSR. We, members of the AUCPB constantly take part in the organisation and carrying out of various acts in support of Cuba and with the demand for the release of the glorious Cuban Five heroes, languishing in US jails.
The whole world is inspired by the selfless international aid of Cuba to developing countries in the training of specialists of the highest qualification for them and in the sending of their own specialists – doctors, teachers and engineers into the countries of Africa, assisting them in rising up their own cultural development.
Neither the criminal policy of the YSA in relation to the Island of Freedom, nor the worst natural disaster of recent times, bringing untold damage to the country have been able to alter the flow of the victorious Cuban Revolution.
Long expectations on part of the USA that Cuba will change its course of development have been doomed to failure, about which Fidel Castro excellently spoke of – that “…will shall always go only forward….Let noone even dream that we will go along the path to capitalism or to private ownership over the means of production”.
Socialist Cuba occupies an important place in the anti-imperialist struggle of the peoples of the world. For the people of Latin America, Cuba always was and remains a beacon of revolutionary action, inspiring the peoples of the world to struggle against imperialism, especially US imperialism as the human-hating, and a beacon for the triumph of the ideals of socialism on planet Earth.
On the famous date marking the occasion of the 50th Anniversary since the victory of the Cuban Revolution, we wish the glorious leaders of Cuba – the legendary Commandant Fidel and his closest assistant in everything, Raul, the very best of health for many years in the name of the continuation of the Cuban Revolution and the happiness of the Cuban people. In the address of Fidel Castro and Raul Castro, we wish the Cuban people great new achievements in the name of advancing forward the cause of building socialism and strengthening the anti-imperialist struggle across the world.
The CC AUCPB congratulates the great revolutionaries – Fidel Castro and Raul Castro in their name – the Cuban people on the occasion of the New Year of 2009, and sincerely wishes the implementation of the dream of every citizen of Cuba.
Long Live the Cuban Revolution!
Long Live the Heroic Cuban People!
Long Live the Legendary Cuban Revolutionaries – Fidel and Raul Castro!
Nina Alexandrovna Andreeva
General Secretary of the CC AUCPB
PERESTROIKA IN CUBA….?
(Firm action by the island of Freedom)
Such a headline or something similar lately has been quite often found in the Russian and foreign media when reporting several measures taken by the Cuban government under Raul Castro, who recently replaced his older brother Fidel to the post of Chairman of the State Council and Council of Ministers of Cuba. Among these measures are, the removal of barriers to the population of the island obtaining a number electronic products, the use of mobile phones, access to the Internet at home, the removal of the ban on taking holidays in the country’s largest hotels, previously designated exclusively for serving foreigners, permission for the transfer of unused state land over to private cooperatives, etc. Here the commentaries are given with a certain sensation (what it’s worth, for example, the headline in one of editions of the newspaper “Rossiyskaya Gazeta” “Toasters are permitted”) and the accompanying attempts to make some comparison either with Soviet perestroika or with the reforms in China, and then simply gloating discussions about another ending of socialism in Cuba which allegedly up until now has only being holding on thanks to the charisma of Fidel Castro.
To explain the situation, we asked Extraordinary and Authorized Ambassador of the republic of Cuba in the Republic of Belarus, Omara Medina Kintero. Here are his commentaries.
- Let’s begin with the fact that understanding of “perestroika” used with those changes which we are observing today in Cuba have nothing in common with what we are doing, especially if you remember what happened to the peoples of the former USSR. This name you will not meet in the Cuba media which like the majority of Cuban citizens see nothing sensational in the changes taking place.
Thus, the change in the country’s leadership was called about by a necessity to give to the leader of the Cuban revolution Fidel Castro, the chance to continue to restore his health so that he can further make contributions to the common cause, giving to the Cuban people his vision and thoughts on burning questions of international and domestic life, and they are natural like life itself. Cuban society has long been prepared for such changes. Fidel himself was always a supporter of strengthening socialism in Cuba as a conscious process, in which each successive generation is obliged to contribute, underlying this process in its own historic context, making it each time more just, modernized and responding to those conditions in which the present generation has to live with.
Cuban socialism always was alien to dogma and never copied and will never copy not one of the socialist models, and that is one of the main sources of its vital strength and steadfast existence. We have always acted reasonably, ensuing from real conditions, on the basis of true evaluations.
The Cuban revolution became the first socialist revolution by the door of the citadel of the mightiest capitalist empire in the world and has been able to withstand, despite all the direct and hidden attacks from this empire.
Now we have to continue the process begun by former generations of Cubans with the struggle for freedom and independence from Spanish colonialism and the liberation from the domination of US imperialism carried out in 1959.
Concerning the latest measures taken by the Cuban government in the social and daily spheres, then they have been accepted by the Cuban people as an additional wealth and the chance to raise yet further the quality of life and social guarantees which are already high. Thus, some of the new measures give the Cuban people the chance to use the services of hotels that since the start of the 1990-s, when the Cuban economy was undermined as a result of the destruction of the socialist camp and the lengthy brutal blockade of the island by the USA, were designated exclusively for earning hard currency the country needed.
Other measure connected with the broadening of services in the area of communication and information technology allow a large number of Cubans to obtain access to the Internet at home, which they could earlier only access at work, in learning institutions, research centre or communication divisions in their own area where there is Internet access, and also to use mobile phones.
Without doubt, all the listed measure signify an further improvement in the quality of life of Cubans, but not one of them is not a attribute to vital necessity. All of their main vital necessary benefits are equal to vitally necessary social guarantees the Cuban people gained in 1959. Therefore, today every Cuban family may sleep peacefully without fear of someone throwing them out their housing for non-payment or some other reason, - indeed the majority of Cubans are themselves owners of their own home. The average Cuban can sleep peacefully and therefore every morning his children go to school where they freely receive quality education. The average Cuban knows that if any member of the family suddenly falls ill, the state takes care of that person, and nobody in the clinic will ask before taking measures to cure that person, about who is going to pay for the doctor’s service, whether or not we are talking about a simple cold or a complex heart or kidney transplant, etc, that are carried out in Cuba at the level of the most developed countries of the world. The average Cuban will never live in a state of stress due to illness, that his son or daughter after graduation will be unable to find a job according to their education, or due to a world crisis brought about by finance speculators and finish up unemployed. The average Cuban start from the 1960-s, obtains part of the commodities of vital necessity which his family uses for a month, at stabile fixed prices. He lives in condition of civic guarantees that establish him as a human individual, having fallen asleep at night never hearing from neighbours on the block chilling stories about someone being mugged or murdered. The average Cuban as a rule, is a member of one of the social, cultural, religious or political organisations, where they have all possibilities for self-expression and find sufficient understanding and like-minded views, in order to feel needed and happy. Besides all of this, he is usually sufficiently informed and knows that on our planet there are many countries and places – from the New York Harlem to Palestine and Iraq, - where the majority of people are not only deprived of the chance to use fashionable hotels, beaches and other benefits of civilization because poverty, but also are simply at a daily risk of being subjected to violence or being killed by some kind of “smart” bomb, mortar or missile. In Cuba, we live in an atmosphere of peace and certainty in tomorrow. Therefore, from the above said, the average Cuban will never support any kind “colour revolution” just for the sake of having the chance to sometimes stay at 5-star hotels which in Cuba serve as an important source of obtaining hard currency, and several of them are our national pride.
The fact that there is talk and rumour spread by several media outlets about an impending end to socialism in Cuba, well to re-phrase the unforgettable Mark Twain, I can say that they are grossly exaggerating and have no bearing on reality. This is especially true concerning the media under the control of North American administration. They have so many times being warning people about an impending end to the Cuban revolution and Cuban socialism, that we have lost count. It is like the media with their lie has for a long time being “stewing in its own juice” and from this, they have themselves began believing their own rubbish, transforming themselves not only on the biggest liars, but at the same time into those who have been the deceived the most –thus they want to broadcast what they would like to see, as something that is the truth.
But unfortunately, the given media are not just lying. They still serve the aggressive militarist machine of the Empire and an enabling it achieve its aims. The daily broadcast myths about the advancement of American democracy on the background of bombs being dropped on people’s heads, carried out according to their reports, to introduce this same democracy, they stupefy and blunt public opinion, training minds about something inevitable. It is enough to remember the bombing of sovereign Yugoslavia where at that time I was the ambassador. But it is not long to go until the assertion that those children who died from the bombing had died in the name of “democracy”.
The transnational media, distorting the truth is teaching others “democracy” and is staying quiet about the crimes of the Empire, enabling the penetration into the consciousness of people of the cult of violence, drug use, political prostitution and a culture of decadence.
Fortunately on Earth there always were and will be those will oppose this media genocide. In particular, in accordance with the decision of the head of states of the Movement for non-merging, which Belarus is a member of, adopted at a summit in Havana, to discussion of the given problem will be devoted the 7th session of ministers of information of the countries- participants of the Movement for non-merging, which took place in 2 -4 July 2008 in the Venezuelan island of Margarita.
Spoken to Gennady Ladisev
Photo by Nicolai Petrova, Belta
“7 Days”
THE GREAT STALIN CONSTITUTION:
The difference between elections during the Stalin era, and elections in today’s Russia
On the 30 December 1922 at the I Congress of Soviets of the USSR, by STALIN’S report, the merging of Soviet Republics took place into one single workers’ and peasants’ multi-national state – the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Since the moment of the formation of the USSR and up until the adoption on 5 November of the new Stalin Constitution of the USSR, the Soviet people under the leadership of Stalin had passed along a heroic path of glorious victories, which provided industrialization of the national economy, the transfer of the peasantry over onto the path of major mechanized agriculture, the cultural revolution, progressive science was created, exploitation of man by man was abolished and socialism was constructed in the main. The peoples and nations of the USSR lived in peace and friendship and knew no national hostility.
The Stalin Constitution summed up the path that had been passed, the total of achievements that had been won. It reinforced the socialist system that had been established in the USSR and truly provide political and social-economic rights of the working people. Elections into the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and Soviets at all levels were the most free and democratic in the world.
Today, bourgeois propaganda persistently hammers into the consciousness of people of the world that the Stalin Constitution allegedly, was democratic only in words. In order to show the lies in such assertions, the makeup of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR according to the Stalin Constitution (1936) only needs to be pointed out, and WHO makes up the today’s Russian State Duma (lower house of parliament) (2008).
On 12 December 1937, the first all-people’s elections took place on the basis of the new Stalin Constitution. Here are the election results where into the makeup of the Supreme Soviet entered the following: workers – 247 people, (45.2%), peasants – 130 people (23.8%), office employees and intelligentsia – 169 people (31%).
All deputies of the Supreme Soviet were production workers, peasants, collective farm workers – Stakhanovites (shock workers), the best people, loved by the entire country, and Order carriers. In the number of intelligentsia – there were 8 academicians, professors, the most loved writers and artists. The best people of the country of Soviets were elected to the Supreme Soviet the country of Soviets.
Now we shall look at who is in today’s Federal Assembly (Council of Federations and the State Duma), in the makeup of which there is not one worker or peasant, but is made up of entirely of professional bureaucrats of all ranks, together with millionaires and billionaires.
In February 2008, the magazine “Finance” published a yearly report “Russia’s 500 billionaires. The rating”. The Russian oligarchs are the economic and political elite of the country, having carved up their capital in the period of stealing the national wealth in the 1990-s and multiplying them each year at a colossal rate.
According to the rating data, the number of dollar billionaires in the Russian Federation has grown in one year by almost twice - from 61 to 100 people, multiplying their capital up to 715.3 billion dollars. According to results of 2007, Russian billionaires are not some of the richest people on the planet, and Russia occupies 2nd place in the number of billionaires (USA is 1st place), and Moscow has become billionaire capital of the world, exceeding New York.

Everyone knows the top ten Russian billionaires – Oleg Deripaska (top of the list, owner of “Bazovy element” holding, worth 40 billion dollars), Roman Abramovich ($23 billion), Vladimir Lisin ($22 billion), Mikhail Freedman ($22.2 billion), Alexei Mordashov ($22.1 billion), Vladimir Potanin ($21,5 billion), Mikhail Prokhorov ($21.5 billion), Suleyman Kerimov ($18 billion), Victor Vexelberg ($15.5 billion), Herman Khan ($15 billion).
According to the rating data, 30 billionaires out of the list of 500 are deputies of the highest legislative bodies of the Russia – the State Duma (19 billionaires) and the Federation Council (11). We can assume that there are more millionaires in the State Duma – in the last State Duma, out of 300 members of the “United Russia” block, there were 100 dollar millionaires. It is no wonder that Oleg Deripasks who occupied 1st place among Russian oligarchs and 9th place in the list of the world’s richest people (according to data from “Forbes” magazine), in one of his own past interview with the media, he cynically stated that we need to “cast out all the fairy-tales about democracy, and of someone deciding the outcome of something in a polling booth….The economy, a major competitive business cannot take such a big risk – the free designating of managers of the state apparatus, at random.
There is a big difference – in the makeup of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR under STALIN were workers, peasants and representatives of the working intelligentsia, but in the makeup of today’s elected State Duma of the Russian Federation according to the Yelstinist Constitution which was adopted on the blood of the people after the bloody events in October 1993 – are dollar billionaires and millionaires.
A. KRYLENKO
Thoughts on the subject “COUNTER-REVOLUTION”
On the pages of the newspaper “Sovietskaya Rossiya” a dissussion flared up about the counter-revolution in the Soviet Union. The author Lyubov Pribytkova in her article “Counter-revolution” that was printed in No12 in 2007 and in No1 in 2008, aimed to show the sources of the counter-revolution. She stated that the party CPSU degenerated, diverted itself away from Marxism-Leninism and became revisionist. Many party members turned out to be betrayers. Such a statement angered G.O. Zlatogorov, member of the CPSU since 1943 (then it was called the AUCP (b) and not the CPSU), and who took part in the Great Fatherland War.
In an article “response to “counter-revolution” there followed a threatening shout from G.O.Zlatogorov “….does she have the moral right to pass such a judgment”. Apparently she does. Further on, Zlatogorov writes: “just in one go, she has labeled millions of communists as betrayers who were in the first rows of participators in the transformations which turned the Soviet Union into a mighty power”. Yes, that is true. But that was before the Great Fatherland War.
In the war years, many party members who had taken part in the events of the October revolution in 1917, in the Civil War that followed and in socialist construction that followed, died on the fronts of the Fatherland War. The AUCP(b) lost more than three million of its best sons. This is more than half the members of the party and about one third of Soviet fighters killed in action.
After the war, the party in the type of membership began to change. It was restored by new young cadres. Serious ideological training was required. There was much lacking. There was a shortage of qualified teachers, propagandists, agitators in order to raise the political-educational work among party members and the entire population to a high level.
At this same time, on the field of political training, the Volkogonovs and Yakovlevs became established with their petty bourgeois views and outlooks.
The works of K. Marx, F. Engels, V.I.Lenin were studied selectively according to separate articles and chosen quotes. After the XX congress of the CPSU, they tried in general not to remind people of J.V. Stalin. What emerged were the ideas and thoughts of general secretaries who rejected the decisions and proposed transformations in the party leadership that were adopted at the XIX party congress, which had laid down the start of the activity of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU).
L. Pribytkova was right when she stated that the party towards the XX Congress (1956) was infected with opportunism, started to deviated from class positions and “by the 1980-s the CPSU to large extent had stopped being communist”. Such a conclusion has been confirmed by the entire activity of the Central Committee, secretaries at various levels and the absolute majority of ordinary party members of that time.
There was no outright indignation and protest, when Khrushchev spoke out against J.V. Stalin, having slandered him and undermined with this, the belief itself in the correctness of the policy of socialist construction in the pre-war years.
Active party workers even with military party experience never came out in protest over the dictatorship of the proletariat being abolished in the country. The understanding of the necessity of a dictatorship of the proletariat was, in V.I. Lenin’s words, a litmus paper defining belonging to the communists-Bolsheviks.
The communists from the CPSU easily agreed to live not in a worker-peasant state, but in a petty bourgeois all-people’s state. They agreed for their own party not to be called a party of the working class, but a party of all the people including the petty bourgeois layers of the population. They did not protest against the party nomenclatura that had led from responsibility the leaders of party organisations that had been fined. The party nomenclatura which had played a positive role in the 1920-s and 30-s, had become a party within the party in the 1970-s thinking just about its own personal interests.
And finally, in the Supreme Soviets at various levels were more than 70% communists, but they consented to the Belovezhsky agreement, and voted for the breakup of the USSR they adopted laws “On cooperation”, “On privatization” of the common people’s property. And at the XXVIII congress of the CPSU, the majority of delegates voted in favour of a market policy of development, which meant the capitalization of the country. It turns out that the CPSU by its absolute majority came out in favour of rejecting Soviet power. It adopted a proposal on introducing presidential rule instead of a collective president in the face of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, and the establishment of non-Soviet bourgeois-parliamentary presidential rule, like in the West and in the United States of America.
Only voice which came from Leningrad – the voice of a courageous woman called Nina Alexandrovna Andreeva who openly spoke out in protest against the Gorbachev perestroika. However, after such criticism, all the “loyal Leninists” continued to remain silent.
The class struggle which unfurled in our country divided the CPSU into factions. From out of the members of the party were formed the most heavily numbered “democratic platform” which then became an open enemy of Soviet power and communist ideas. This was a social democratic formation of a pro-Western type which rejected all the achievements of Soviet power.
In the CPSU a “Marxist platform” was formed which came out in favour of a mixed economy, collective private ownership and standing on anarcho-syndicalist positions for the development of the economy. From out of this platform a number of national “communist” parties were formed that rejected class struggle, internationalism and the main ideas of V.I. Lenin and J.V. Stalin. They reject the thesis of K. Marx about the class struggle inevitably leading to a dictatorship of the, that this dictatorship itself is only a transition towards the dictatorship of all classes and towards a society without classes. These parties are in favour of presidential-parliamentary rule. In essence, these are petty-bourgeois parties, although they call themselves “communist” parties. There are two of them in Belarus:
- Party of Communists of Belorus (PKB). It cooperated closely with the bourgeois-nationalist alliances. It does not really accept the ideas of V.I. Lenin and certainly not those of J.V. Stalin. This party looks to the West, comes out against President A.G. Lukashenko, but does not reject the idea of presidential-parliamentary rule. Its policy is – “a civilized market” and “honest entrepreneurship”.
- Communist Party of Belarus (KPB). This party fully supports the internal and foreign policy of the president directed at the capitalization of the country, at the strengthening of private ownership on the means of production.
In these parties, there are members who have had long-term party memberships going back well before Gorbachev came to power. If in the first party, the membership consists mainly of intelligentsia and former lower ranking party functionaries, then in the second party, it is the former middle to higher ranking party functionaries that have the leading role. Analyzing the ideological and practice of these parties, it cannot be said that the members that make up these parties are communists.
Inside the CPSU there was also a group of Bolsheviks that was organized, and that firmly defended and defends the ideas of Lenin-Stalin. After that, like consistent internationalists, the Bolsheviks of the republics of the former USSR united into the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (AUCPB).(It was formed after the banning of the CPSU on 8 November 1991). The AUCPB stands for: the rebirth of worker-peasant Soviet power, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, socialism as a transition period over to a communist society. With this, the communists-Bolsheviks have in mind seven conditions which are necessary to observe when building socialism.
1) The dictatorship of the proletariat (working class).
2) Social ownership over the means of production and main tools of labour.
3) Nationalization of all banks, merging them all into a single state bank.
4) Planned economy run from the centre. Centralized Planned Economy
5) Dominance of Marxist-Leninist ideology.
6) Formation of armed forces, able to defend the socialist state.
7) Merciless suppression of the counter-revolution. These laws were defined by J.V. Stalin in a conversation with Mao in December 1949.
Millions of careerists, opportunists and self-seeking people penetrated the CPSU, who afterwards, having felt that they could not gain anything profitable for themselves, threw away their party membership cards and then start pouring filth onto their own party. Unfortunately, for a long time there were no party purges like there were in the 1920-s and 30-s which would have helped in the party freeing itself from excess ballast. Many of them now state: :But I have kept my party membership card!” And why did they keep their party card? Apparently, it was just in case they needed them again, just like traitor general Vlasov did. When the investigator asked Vlasov as to why he had kept his party card, he replied: “It’s just in case” (I need to use it again). If everything suddenly changed and once again he decides he’ll be a “communist”. Such is the unscrupulous thinking characteristic for many of those people who kept their party documents from the CPSU.
The party gradually became littered up by petty-bourgeois elements which had calmly adopted Gorbachev’s new political policy and thinking, the liquidation of their own party, Soviet power and the breakup of the country.
It is worth, according to G.O. Zlatogorov’s assertion, justifying and praising all the members of the CPSU and especially its Central Committee and Politburo? Of course not. And the authors themselves of the article “Response to “Counter-revolution” are unclear to what category of “communists” from the CPSU they relate themselves to and who he believes himself to be: a Bolshevik or a “modern communist”. I would like to his straight answer.
Our problem is that we, whilst studying the history of the CPSU, historical materialism and other social sciences, we placed little attention to the classics of Marxism-Leninism. Even the authors of the article, G.O. Zlatogorov and Lyubov Prybitkova try after the fact that counter-revolution took place, to search for the reasons for the defeat of socialism starting out from their own world understanding and personal deductions, not turning to the ideas of recognized leaders of the communist movement. This speaks of the fact that the opponents are living in the mood of the 1960-s. One can feel the stuff they learned off by heart from Trotskyite Khruschev and social-democrat Gorbachev, having proposed that people do not study and be guided by the works of the classics of Marxism-Leninism.
K. Marx, V.I. Lenin and J.V. Stalin in their works gave a wealth of material for an understanding of the reasons of a counter-revolution that would occur.
Karl Marx never claimed that history developed in a straight line. He did not negate the possibility of retreats, fast forwards and defeats, launches and falls in revolutionary forces.
V.I. Lenin and J.V. Stalin warned about danger to the young Soviet socialist state, about the possibility of a return to capitalism. They revealed the reasons giving birth to capitalism and pointed out those forces and the environment where bourgeois ideas and bourgeois organisations may be born. V.I. Lenin and J.V. Stalin pointed out the methods of struggle against the ideas and aims of restoring capitalism and destroying socialism.
Speaking with a report on a reexamination of the program and changes in the name of the party at the VII.
Speaking with a report on a reexamination of the program and changes in the name of the party at the VII Extraordinary Congress of the RKP(b) (Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), V.I. Lenin said : “Thinking that we won’t be cast back in time – is utopia”. And further, “We say, that in any time we are cast back, we shall not refrain from using bourgeois parliamentary politics, - if the class, hostile forces drive us to this old position,- we shall fight on the experience gained, towards Soviet power, to a Soviet type of state, a state like that of the Paris Commune”.
At the VIII Congress of Soviets (December 1920), V.I. Lenin put forth the question directly: “Can Russia return to capitalism?” And he replied himself: “Yes it may at this point”. The bourgeoisie, even if overthrown has a lot of strength and advantages. This strength lies in their money, in their connections, in their experience of organizing the running of the country, in military affairs and in the fact that some petty bourgeois layers of the population will be prepared to support a counter-revolutionary coup and follow the bourgeoisie.
V.I. Lenin founded the reason also which could bring about, and now one can say, actually did bring about the defeat of socialism and the liquidation of Soviet power. He said, “Noone can bring us down any more than our own mistakes”. Nobody in the world is able to compromise the revolutionary Marxists, if they do not compromise themselves”.
Its had happened that the leader of the CPSU compromise themselves, stood on the path of social-democracy and betrayal. We, rank and file communists may not agreed with something, but stayed silent, consenting with this, to the revisionist path of Khruschev-Gorbachev. The statement by Andropov, who did not know in what society he or we were living in, did not concern us.
V.I. Lenin’s warning relates to the first years of Soviet power. Can this, after many victories have also blunted our consciousness to the worrying statements by the leader.
J.V. Stalin in later years, like V.I. Lenin saw the danger for Soviet power and warned of this. To question that was put to him in the Sverdlovsky University in Moscow (1924): “Is there a treat to Soviet power?” J.V. Stalin replied: “Yes”. He named the reasons.
Firstly – a loss of communist perspective and the liquidation in connection with this. That is, the liquidation of Soviet power is the consequence of the loss of communist perspective.
Secondly – the ideological degeneration of the party and the betrayal attached to it. And this betrayal is not the cause of the ideological degeneration, like some communists assert, but the consequence of it.
Thirdly – the folding up of the international communist and national-liberation movement and, in connection with this, the growth of nationalism.
We see that J.V. Stalin was right. His prediction came about. We began to lose communist perspective with Khruschev’s statement about “the present generation of Soviet people living under communism”. But 15 – 20 years passed and communism still hadn’t come to pass. We started living worse off. Such a statement as a result, undermined belief in the communist idea.
Was there a degeneration of the party? Yes there was! The rejection of Stalin’s ideas of the transition over to communism, laid out by him in the work “Economic problems in the USSR”, defamation of J.V. Stalin himself, the blackening of the entire period of his leadership in the Soviet country and socialist construction, sowed doubt in the correctness of the Leninist idea on the possibility of building socialism, and after that, the degeneration of many leaders of the party and the state. On the background of this, there appeared traitors like Gorbachev, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze, Bokatin, Yeltsin and others.
By the 1980-s, the national liberation movement had weakened. Many former colonies of aisa and Africa had achieved liberation and had become relatively independent. The former metropolises of Britain, France, Belgium and the USA had the chance to unite their efforts in their struggle against communism, as the main bulwark in the national-liberation struggle. The communist alliance itself had become infected with euro-centrism and social-democratism, especially in Europe. The leading Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) had departed from the ideas of Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin. Its ranks were infected by Khrushchev’s revisionism and the opportunism of Brezhnev and Andropov. Here are the ideological sources of the counter-revolution in the USSR. There is hardly anything surprising in the fact that many former communists are not languishing in prisons, but have become presidents of bourgeois republics. Inside the party there was always a struggle between the proletarian core and petty bourgeois element of separate leaders. Lenin, Stalin, Molotov, Kaganovich and Kirov had to carry out a struggle to start with, against the Mensheviks, Liquidators, Otzovists, leftist communists, deists, workers’ opposition, Trotskyites, Bukharinites, “rightist” and “leftist” deviations.
Curious minds are turning to the history of Bolshevism and in particular, aiming to study and understand the class relations in the 1920-s and 30-s, which pour light on events happening today. A certain interest for us is the development and strengthening of socialist relations in those years and, especially the nature of the various “deviations” that occurred in the party itself. An explanation of the causes for the origination of “leftist” and “rightist” deviations and the consequences of them triumphing for the fate of the Soviet state and its citizens, gives us the key to an understanding of those processes which led towards the liquidation of the CPSU and the defeat of socialism.
In this connection, I want to refer to a speech by J.V. Stalin at a Plenary session of the MK and MKK of the AUCP(B) in October 1928. In his report he asked the question: “Do there exist in our Soviet country, conditions that make it possible to restore capitalism?” And he, himself replied: “Yes, such conditions do exist”. These conditions consist in the fact that “….we still have not pulled out the roots of capitalism. Where are these roots nested? They are nested in the commodity production, in small scale production towns and villages”.
Small-scale production generates, like Lenin pointed out, generates capitalism and the bourgeoisie constantly, every day, every hour, spontaneously and on a mass scale. Stalin emphasized that in order to liquidate small-scale production, many years of educational, ideological work and economic development was required.
Was there a possibility in the Soviet Union not to allow the restoration of capitalism? Stalin answered: “Yes there is….For this it is necessary to strengthen the proletarian dictatorship, strengthening the alliance between the working class and the peasantry, the development of our commanding heights under the cornerstone of industrialization of the country…..the transfer of the entire economy over on a new technical base, mass co-operizing of the peasant economy and raising the size of their harvests, the gradual unifying of individual peasant farms into social collective farms”.
In the speech it was noted that the proletariat does not live inside a vacuum, but in an environment of small production. Bourgeois elements, generated by small-scale production, “surround the proletariat from all sides with petty bourgeois elements, soaked up by it, corrupted by it, constantly bring about set-backs of petty bourgeois characterlessness within the proletariat, scatteredness, individualism, transitions from distractions towards despondency. (Lenin) and well-known wavering and dithering are introduced in such a way, into the proletariat and its party (Stalin)
Now, much was talked about the rightist deviation in the party at the end of the 1920-s. the danger of this consisted in the underestimation of the strengths of the enemies of socialism, the forces of capitalism and the failure to understand the mechanics of class struggle in the conditions of a dictatorship of the proletariat. The danger also consisted in the fact that communists, subjected to the rightist social-democratic, opportunistic deviation, easily made concessions to capitalism, demanded and created the conditions for the enrichment of capitalist elements, spoke out in favour for softening the state monopoly over foreign trade. J.V. Stalin noted, - “….the victory of the rightist deviation in our party, would unleash the forces of capitalism, would undermine the revolutionary positions of the proletariat and increased the chances of a restoration of capitalism in our country. (Stalin). Prophetic words.
The danger of the “leftist” (Trotskyite) deviation consisted in the fact that “it over-estimated the strength of our enemies, the forces of capitalism, and sees only the possibility and construction of socialism by the strengths of our country, falls into despair and has to console itself by prattling on about the end of our party”.(Stalin). Later, when speaking at the Plenary sessions of the CC AUCP (B) in November 1928, February and April 1929, Stalin named the ideological inspirers of the rightist deviation. These were members of the Politburi: Bukharin, Rykov, Tomsky who on the main questions had deviated from the general line of the party. Bukharin spoke in favour of a growth of Kulakism into socialism (small private farmers who employed farm hands). This idea was expounded by him in the book “The way towards socialism”. In it, the author states that not only the kulaks, but also the concessionaries- capitalists will grow into socialism. According to Bukharin, it turns out that capitalist will grow in a dictatorship of the proletariat. But this already not be a proletarian state, but a liberal-bourgeois one. Bukharin proposed the destruction of classes not by way of fierce class struggle which Lenin talked about, but by way of blunting the class struggle and the growth of capitalism into socialism. Bukharin and his supporters aimed to liquidate the regulating role of the state in the market, forcing to open up, like nowadays, complete freedom of private trade. From here comes his slogan! “Get rich”.
What could be the consequences as a result of a victory of the Bukharinite ideas in our party?
Stalin replied: “This would bring about ideological defeat of our party, an unleashing of capitalist elements and an increase in the chances of a restoration of capitalism”, or, as Lenin said: “….a return to capitalism” (Stalin)
Where could the ideological successors of the rightist Bukharinite deviation be? Stalin pointed out that they “are nesting themselves” in our Soviet and economic, cooperative and trade union apparatuses, in the apparatus of our party, and also among the varied elements of the non-proletarian layers of society, among the intelligentsia. With them as one – a section of members from other parties, people acting with Trotskyite views, the splinters of former factions into parties, bankrupt members of the party in state, economic, cooperative and trade union apparatus, littered with bourgeois elements. This was a feeding ground of deviations from the Leninist line. Stalin’s warning about the rightist danger in the party after the ideological defeat of Bukharin, Rykov, Tomsky came about in the future. The Fatherland War, the post-war period of restoration , the struggle against cosmopolitism led away to one side from the that very danger of rightist and leftist deviations which existed in the party.
The arrival to power of the former, but not unmasked Trotskyite Khrushchev attracted behind himself a gradual change in the political course of the Soviet government. They did not remember the danger of these deviations. And they began to appear under the slogan of the struggle against the so-called “personality cult”. Attacking J.V. Stalin, Khrushchev as the main whistleblower and his supporters negated the heroic period of socialist construction. In order for the up and coming generation not to find out about the difficulties and successes of socialist construction, and also about the revealing of leftist Trotskyite and rightist Bukharinite deviations, the Khrushchevites banned the publication and study of the works of J.V. Stalin. All Stalin’s works were taken off the shelves of libraries including the complete works of Stalin of 13 volumes. Khrushchev and his supporters began to break the connection between the town and village, between industry and the collective agriculture economy and liquidated the Machine Tractor Stations (MTS). They weakened the centralized leadership and planned economy, instead of the lowering costs of products, they introduced “profit” as the main criteria of work at enterprises. The main bulwark of Khrushchev and his successors was directed towards the development of commodity-monetary relations which expanded the sphere of activity of the market and weakened control over it. In ideological work, the struggle against party degenerates was weakened. J.V. Stalin was announced as the chief “enemy”, and not anti-socialist elements which had gathered strength in the party, in the state apparatus and amongst the intelligentsia. Thus the aim of struggle was directed not towards the class enemy, but towards the leader of the Soviet socialist state.
It was announced from the heights of the party rostrums that within the country there was no reason and forces for the restoration of capitalism. From here the rejection of the dictatorship of the proletariat followed and the announcement that the Soviet Union was an all-people’s state, and the Communist Party, a party of all the people. On the background of this, several articles in the Party Rules and Soviet Constitution were altered. The principles of cadre selection according to political and activity qualities were thrown out, and also the necessity for strengthening and preserving common-people’s property. All of this led to a spiraling of stealing from the budget, theft, fiddling the books, towards the blooming of personal gain, personal loyalty and drunkenness, towards the appearance of underground production workshops and people with large amounts of valuable items and money stolen from the people.
As a result of rejection of class positions in politics and ideology, there appeared a large number critics of Soviet power and socialism. Among them turncoats and rightist deviationists of the Gorbachev, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze, Volkogonov type and others grew from this, who began to bring to life the idea of “democratic” changes and the market course of development.
In the ideas of the Gorbachevites, in the activity of the democrats, presidents of the former Soviet republics, leaders of the so-called present-day “communist” parties, we see the Bukharinist line of the free market, the price rises, rejection of the monopoly over foreign trade, a call for creating private individual farms and the destruction of collective and state farms, towards the blooming of speculation and entrepreneurship, towards the accumulation of wealth by a handful of oligarchs-capitalists on the backs of pillaging the majority of the population.
Thus Lenin and Stalin’s warning about the possibility of an ideological and organizational defeat of the Communist Party and the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union occurred.
Thus, who is to blame? Is it not us headed by our “leaders” Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov and Gorbachev who allowed the defeat of a socialist state. Having recognized the mistakes that had been made by the leadership of the CPSU, knowing the reasons for the return to capitalism, we must draw conclusions and define the tasks for the near future.
First of all, the successors of the ideas of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin must unify into a single, all-union, organized, highly disciplined Leninist-Stalinist Bolshevik party and deliver a blow to the successors of leftist and rightist deviations, to social-democracy and opportunism. It is necessary to jointly come out and make it the aim to recreate and revitalize workers’ and peasants’ Soviets in the localities, and a Supreme Soviet in the centre, to come out for the forming of the Union of Soviet of Socialist Republics, to train cadres for the future workers’-peasants’ Red Army, to unmask the “Union of Officers” as a “Union of “white” officers, that come out as successors of Denikin, Vlasov, Volkogonov and today’s presidents, to prepare for a general political strike, to form a political headquarters for revolutionary transformations that come out in favour of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. No presidents and their verticals of power, bourgeois parliaments and Dumas will be able to lead the former Soviet republics out of the economic and political crisis. They have done nothing over the past 20 years. They have only allowed NATO near their borders and allowed US military bases to set up on their own territories. They have allowed foreign capital to rob the national wealth and brutally exploit their own people. They have deprived the working people social benefits that were established by Soviet power. They have made the peoples who inhabited the Soviet Union enemies. It is time to put an end with hatred and hostility which was established under the democrats between the republics of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States). Long live the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics!
V.D. Kadet, Candidate for historical sciences, Mogilev
DEAR COMRADES- COMMUNISTS!
DEAR FRIENDS OF OURS ABROAD!
DEAR LIKE-MINDED THINKERS AND COLLEAGUES!
DEAR READERS OF OUR NEWSPAPER!
The Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (CC AUCPB) congratulates all of YOU in the NEW YEAR 2009, and wishes YOU and YOUR dearests,, the very best of health firstly, and also the realizing of your hopes and concerns in such a worrying and troubling time.
The new year of 2009 is a year when on the 21 December we shall mark the 130th birth date of J.V. Stalin – the outstanding statesman and political activist of the XX century, loyal pupil and comrade of V.I. Lenin, the worthy continuer in the cause of the building of the first in history workers’ and peasants’ Socialist state – the multinational union of peoples of equal rights, when friendship, mutual respect and mutual assistance are the main mutual relations in society, when in front of every person a wide choice is open in relation to the future of their activity depending only on ones own natural talents, abilities and gifts.
We declare 2009 a STALINIST YEAR.
We call upon members of the AUCPB to achieve successes in raising the activity of all our party organisations in the propaganda of Bolshevism – modern-day Marxism-Leninism, in the growth of our party membership and the number of like-minded thinkers.
We sincerely wish more indignation and a growth in anti-imperialist forces across the world.
We call for unity of actions of everyone who is fighting imperialism and nationalism all stripes and shades.
Long live our international brotherhood in the struggle for peace, for socialism!
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
CC AUCPB

т.етское общество добилось того, что оно уже осуществило в основном социализм, создала социалисический строй_________Supporters of the AUCPB (All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks) can join online supporters group / discussion forum For BolshevismAUCPB by e-mail at http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/ForBolshevismAUCPB
or email messages of support to: zabolsh@yahoo.co.uk

English language AUCPB website address in UK: http://uk.geocities.com/bolsheviklondon/index.html
Russian AUCPB website address: vkpb.ru
FIGHTING FUND – Comrades and Supporters of the AUCPB and Subscribers to "FOR BOLSHEVISM INSIDE THE COMMUNIST AND WORKERS' MOVEMENT" and other material of the AUCPB, please make a donation towards the further publication of AUCPB material translated into English from Russian by sending donations to our fighting fund account "FOR SOLIDARITY WITH WORKERS OF THE EX-USSR" sort code 30-93-60, Account Number: 02312361 (Lloyds TSB).
Many thanks to all our comrades and supporters for their material support!