(Continued, Pt 2 of 2.)
On the Diamatics of the Objective and the Subjective in the Course of Revealing the Causes of the Restoration of Capitalism in the USSR
The question may arise, are the subjective and objective identical? Diamatics answers in the affirmative. For mentally healthy people, reasoning about an object always, in the end, leads to the comprehension of the essence of the object under study. Subjectively formulated truths, from the point of view of the degree of their adequacy to the object of reflection, are identical to the objective content of the subject of research and, at the same time, are opposite to it, since thought, no matter how accurate it is, remains a thought about the object, but not the object itself. Another question is what is adequatethinking, as an inalienable PROPERTY of a person, objectively transforms the subject himself, puts him in a different relationship with the outside world, nevertheless, figuratively speaking, thought is a form of ordering atoms or electrons (this is especially clear in magnetic media), but not the generation of atoms from the very thought.
In Soviet schools and universities for knowledge that is not identical to objective reality, they firmly and reasonably put deuces. In democratic market conditions, especially with the introduction of the Unified State Examination, positive test scores, in a significant number of cases, are given for bribes. In these cases, market educators generally do not pay attention to where the answer comes from: from the bible, wikipedia, or a textbook.
Objective factors, as you know, do not depend on consciousness, but consciousness, even adequate consciousness , depends on the content of objective social being and does not include anything that would not be contained in objective reality. We note, in passing, that only that consciousness can be adequate, the carriers of which do not try to explain the problems of being from the standpoint of delusion, incl. Einsteinianism, i.e. Machism in physics and, denying each other, branches of theology. Many planets, as shown by space research, do without signs of the presence of human forms of consciousness. And nothing. And human consciousness exists only due to the property of matter to reflect all forms of its own being, and, for now, consciousness manifests itself clearlyonly in strictly defined, primarily terrestrial conditions of the existence of matter. The most that the world scientific community is counting on is the presence of at least mold on Mars. And will be extremely satisfied with this discovery.
The objective and the subjective are in an inseparable unity and, naturally, a struggle, the essence of which can only be understood diamatically. Consciousness will look funny if all information about the material world is emasculated from it. It turns out the inner world is infinitely poorer than that of a deaf-deaf-mute newborn. The development of deaf-deaf-dumb human individuals has so far occurred only due to the accumulation of information about the surrounding material world, which entered their consciousness through the organs of touch. The diversity of the material world predetermines the richness of emotions and knowledge, tasks and functions, connections and relationships that arise in human society.
The thesis about the primacy of matter and the secondary nature of consciousness in isolation from considering them as an identity , as a form of unity of opposites, is absolutely fruitless. This formulation works only as a password for anyone who wants to enter the hallway of dialectical materialism. However, having passed the "gates" of science, delving into its expanses, it is just as useless and dangerous to trump this password as it is to wave a purchased diploma, offering your services as, for example, the chief engineer at Fokushima-1.
Each of the factors of social development plays its role within the framework of cause-and-effect relationships. Objective factors are uncompromising and, therefore, the history of mankind, developing sinusoidally within the framework of privately owned historical epochs, from one extreme to another , in the integral result, is progressively progressive , although, due to mass ignorance, it is predominantly dramatic. Subjective factors, first of all, knowledge, slowly moving from ignorance and delusion to the truth, doom the process of practical development of society, figuratively speaking, to the "great waves of Kondratiev". In the era of the dominance of the principle of private property, the townsfolk, at times, have mastered and are mastered by completely idiotic religious, economic and political "ideas". Carrying them out, the masses of people moved quite rapidly and are moving in a direction chosen at random by the will of the majority of incompetent voters, deputies and presidents and, only having entered the swamp up to their throats, change the vector of movement, becoming under the banner of another religious fanatic, like Moses, or a religious demagogue, like Gapon, with the same "success". Those. sinusoidal, and in many cases, suicidal type of development of modern society, as a special kind of matter, endowed with a relatively more developed reflection potential compared to other forms of matter, but using this potential for only a few percent of its capabilities, is only a special case of natural wave processes , which form the basis of the forms of movement of the de- intellectualized layers of the universe.
Nevertheless, the social fluctuations of past historical epochs (from extremely reactionary social forms to relatively progressive ones) prove the presence of an active force (creative or inhibitory) in the subjective factor, its ability, in some cases, to optimize events (in terms of the pace of development of progressive changes) , and in other cases, hinder the development of society, keeping it within the framework of reactionary tendencies.
In geographic latitudes in which for millions of years no shifts in the intellectual development of upright mammals have been observed, within the same millions of years there has been no social development, although everyday work with the use of tools has taken place and is taking place. A person is not able to invent a new tool of labor before he discovers for his consciousness new properties of the material world around him and sees in these properties a hint that allows using the properties of matter to increase labor productivity. By raising labor productivity through new tools of labor, changing the volume and improving the quality of manufactured products, a person is looking for new forms of social, including economic relations. But not before the initial foggyideas about the necessity and possibility of these relations.
All this allows us to conclude that the development of matter gives rise to consciousness, and consciousness brings the objective material forces of society , its productive forces, into new, consciously synthesized forms of movement. But any deviations of public consciousness from the objective laws of the motion of matter itself doom the decisions made and the actions carried out to a disastrous result. In turn, the objectively tragic lessons of human history force the public consciousness to reconsider its previous decisions and, most importantly, not only avoid repeating them or look for unprincipled “other” solutions, but also more and more purposefully seek solutions that contain logic ., Euclidean conscientious. Today, in the movement of a part of the Russian electorate, the path of the political movement "from Putin" ... to nowhere is clearly outlined. But the majority of participants in the swamp movement do not notice this absurdity, just as the participants in the symbolic meeting on Poklonnaya Hill do not notice the rottenness of their arguments.
Many productive solutions have already been found by the classics of Marxism-Leninism, victoriously tested, first of all, by Lenin and Stalin. But now these theoretical, ingeniously formulated "recipes for victory" and descriptions of victorious experience are gathering dust on the bookshelves. The slaves of the meeting and economic forms of resistance today absolutely do not have enough time to fulfill the order of the classics, which says that since communism has become a science, it must be treated like a science, i.e. study and develop it. As a result, we are witnessing a catastrophic decline in theoretical culture among the so-called modern leaders of the communist movement. Now we see Zyuganov at the belt of the Virgin, then Ampilov, who asked for a speech after Zhirinovsky on the rostrum of the Liberal Democratic Party, then Udaltsov in the second rows of the presidium of the rally,
Thus, in identifying the main reason for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, communists need to reveal subjective factors, i.e. YOUR GUILT , which led to such a sad consequence. Of course, tsarism was also to blame for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, which did not allow capitalism to develop sufficiently, which Lenin repeatedly complained about. Of course, an even greater merit in the restoration of capitalism in the USSR belongs to the oligarchs of the whole world, who fought against the USSR throughout the 70 years of its existence. But the fact is that the world oligarchy is a factor that was equally present in history , equally influenced eventsand at 17, and at 21, and at 37, and at 41, and at 45, and at 57 years of the twentieth century. The oligarchs constantly used ALL their forces to destroy the USSR, but for 70 years they could not do it.
Therefore, if, even the enemies of communism, they certainly admit that the USSR arose, grew stronger, won many victories, then this means that all the necessary OBJECTIVE prerequisites for the October Revolution (the level of development of the means of production, the degree of their concentration and centralization in Russia) already by 1917 reached the REQUIRED value of maturity and, being connected with the SUBJECTIVE factors of the revolutionary situation (the absolutely SUFFICIENT military combat training of workers and peasants, received by them in the trenches of the First World War, the personal COMPETENCE of Lenin and his inner circle in matters of theory and practice of putting Marxism into practice) , gave a scientifically predicted result. If there had been no maturity of objective factors, then neither the October political coup would have succeeded, nor the victory over the White Guards and foreign interventionists,
But if the USSR, after several decades of triumphant victories in all areas of human activity (from ballet and chess, to hydrogen weapons and peaceful space exploration), nevertheless collapsed, then it is natural to assume that the restoration of capitalism took place due to a subjective factor. Diamatically speaking, the objective reason for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR is subjective .
Only a complete moron can argue from the rostrum of the swamp-tahrir Maidan that the objective material and technical and scientific and technological conditions of the late 80s in the USSR were significantly worse than in 1917 or 1941, when the imperialist countries tested socialism on strength from the outside by the most savage, terrorist, fascist methods. Before Khrushchev came to power, there was no branch of knowledge, no types of material production in which world imperialism, taken together, would have a tangible superiority over the USSR. For many, especially basic productions and technologies, the USSR, even in the Brezhnev era, has already come out on top in the world. Moreover, the planned system of production and distribution of products, the planned system of expanded reproduction of society, built by Stalin, forced the capitalist world to coordinate their efforts in an attempt to keep up with the pace and directions of development of the USSR. The USSR clearly lagged behind the West in only two industries - pornography and the production of bourgeois "luxury" cars for the oligarchs. The crises that now do not let go of the world market economy are generated, first of all, by the fact that the planned, full-industry, scientifically organized reproduction collapsed.society in the USSR, and along with this, the development guidelines for all “civilized markets” based on the principles of private property, i.e. on the personal stupidity of the oligarchs and, therefore, who do not have any socially, culturally and historically significant landmarks. Again, the only planned and predictable market for many years has become the "market" of means of mass and sophisticated destruction of people. Atomic and immoral.
Economism as a specific historical reason for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR
In her study, Arkhangelskaya did not take into account that the search for the cause of the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, a Marxist must carry out from the standpoint of the UNITY of the three components of Marxism, and not from the standpoint, even the most sophisticated, econometrics, with a dogmatic interpretation of the formula about the primacy of the basis and the secondary superstructure.
Marxism arose from the need for scientific understanding of the most general, objective lawsdevelopment of SOCIETY and, consequently, the laws of development of the class struggle. In turn, the class struggle is the highest form of politics. Before the Great October Revolution, history was shaped by the struggle of slave owners against primitive communism, feudal lords against slave owners, capitalists against feudal lords. For the first time, the class of hired slaves, direct producers of material and spiritual values, entered the arena of political struggle as a force capable of solving its own problems and satisfying the needs of its own development. Prior to this, the struggle of the oppressed classes was always utilized by the exploiters in the interests of robbing the masses, who directly sacrificed themselves to the revolution and received nothing from this participation, except for even greater poverty and humiliation, as is happening today in the countries of the Arab world. Arkhangelsk,“politics cannot but have primacy over economics, to forget this means to forget the ABC of Marxism” that “politics is a concentrated expression of economics . ” She looked in the economy for the reasons for the degradation of the policy of the CPSU.
The main issue of politics, as you know, is the question of power. But for a Marxist, the question of power stands on a plane opposite to the bourgeois formulation of the question of power. Proryv has more than once drawn the attention of its readers to the fact that the political power of the working class resembles power in general only in some of its outward attributes. This "similarity" is akin to the one that can be found in two identical missiles, if you "forget" that one will launch a scientific satellite into orbit, and the other will carry nuclear warheads. Power, as an institution of peremptory forceful dictate, is necessary for the class of exploiters to perpetuatehis dominance. European and American oligarchs have been using the power of the police and the military on an unprecedented scale for several years in a row to protect laws that allow raising the retirement age, cutting jobs, increasing tuition fees, but in modern democratic literature, if violence is considered, then, of course, 80 years ago and only in the form of "Stalinist repressions". Any beating of demonstrators or strikers in Athens, Paris, London, Rome, Lisbon, New York is presented by the democratic media as medical actions that have nothing to do with the forcible retention of power by tyrants, incomparably more bloodthirsty than Hitler, but at the same time, more cunning to get the crowd to fight the police and not themselves.
Power to the working class, i.e. forceful influence on the minority removed from power is necessary only in order to RELEASE society from the power of one subject over many people FOREVER . The misunderstanding of this diamatics by modern proletarians is simply crying out. They do not understand that the oligarchs exist exactly to the extent that the police manage to keep by force the bulk of the people from seizing enterprises, from expropriating by the proletarians the values created by the proletarians themselves. Communism saves society from civil wars, and market democracy, as all the experience of Western civilization shows, FORCE HOLDS SOCIETY IN THE STATE OF CONTINUOUS CIVIL WAR.
Consequently, in revealing the reasons for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, it is absolutely insufficient to state certain economic facts and decisions of the CPSU in the field of economics, which is very often and unreasonably called economic policy. That was the practice of "random poke", not connected with the scientific understanding of the needs of the class struggle in the new historical conditions. It is a great sin to attribute Khrushchev, Kosygin, Andropov, Gorbachev, Ligachev, Yakovlev to the number of people who have mastered the scientific method of thinking. It was the democracy of the elections in the party that brought a pack of incompetent majority to power in the CPSU. Suffice it to recall that two-thirds voted for the transfer of the USSR to a market economy at the 28th Congress of the CPSUdelegates to the highest body of party power. How could the grave-diggers of communism penetrate the congress, except by the will of the majority in the party organizations.
Therefore, in order to answer the question about the reason for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, it is important to find out what happened to the institution of political power in the USSR, for what reasons the CPSU, for the first time in the history of mankind, connected all reproductive processes with science, which had an unprecedented influence on all economic processes in the country and in the world, sometimes identified with the “dictatorship of the proletariat” itself, “suddenly” lost all influence on the citizens of the USSR, on the Armed Forces of the USSR, on the KGB, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and turned out to be abolished, judged by Yeltsinoid defectors.
They may object, they say, but Lenin spoke of the economy as the most interesting policy and “therefore”, they say, regardless of the historical tasks that arise before political movements, the formulation invariably works: the economy (matter) is primary, the superstructure (ideology, politics) - secondary.
Meanwhile, for Lenin, the economy turned into the most interesting politics ONLY after the working class removed the entrepreneurs and all its "dissident" henchmen from any authority. And before the revolution, Lenin spoke about the economy, first of all, as a form of decay of the capitalist community, and that it was precisely this decay, i.e. monopolization of the market by oligarchs, i.e. the concentration of production, the huge masses of proletarians in the factories, with properly staged agitation, allows the working class to carry out a political revolution, without which it is impossible to begin to eliminate the "furunculosis" and "gangrene" of imperialism, and even more so, to build a healthy society.
But even after the implementation of the political upheaval, the diamatics of strategic and tactical tasks, goals and means of their achievement remained unchanged. “Communism, ” Lenin wrote, “ is SOVIET POWER plus the electrification of all countries . ” As we see, it is not the electrification of the whole country plus Soviet power, but political certainty, the political stability of Soviet power as a guarantee of electrification. In the new historical conditions, the development of the political systemdictatorship of the working class, i.e. the elimination of the institution of the power of entrepreneurs over people was achieved by combining the Soviet form of "power" with the most important type of resource to which the Nepmen would not have the slightest managerial access at all. Such is the diamatics of politics and economics in the era of building communism: without weakening the restrictive functions in relation to the obsolete elements of the economy, aim "authority" at solving the problems of SCIENTIFIC organization of energy supply for the entire complex of expanded reproduction of society .
Why is it that today all the anti-communist inhabitants and even the "middle class" groan from the extortion of housing and communal services and the steady rise in prices, especially for electricity and motor fuel? And because one of the main resources of civilization - energy carriers - are privatized and monopolized, i.e. the oligarchs occupied, usurped all forms of energy and, like the Central Asian beys who monopolized water, excluded people from free access to all types of energy carriers. Therefore, all ordinary car owners, all owners of household appliances based on electricity, kerosene, oil, gas, coal pay for the moral ugliness, financial psychopathy of energy kings.
In passing, it should be noted that the historical practice of the last century has particularly convincingly proved that the market solution of energy problems in a market democracy leads, neither less nor more, to ... environmental disasters, and to such "little things" as ... world wars for dominance over energy sources.
The modern market police and army, blockheadly, guards precisely this state of affairs, in which the energy carriers of the planet belong to several dozen upright people, and any effective resources have been taken away from the state.restrictive or distributive functions in relation to the oligarchs. In America, for example, all 46 presidents, especially Republicans, are brought to the White House with the help of campaign funds. Money, especially for "Republican" candidates, is allocated by large magnates, primarily weapons and energy. American voters, with their usual stupidity, prefer to vote for a candidate with a large campaign fund. It seems to them that the size of the fund is proportional to the applicant's talents, and not to his complaisance towards the main donors. It is clear that, having "bet" on a certain candidate, the oligarchs, firstly, expect from him, like from a racehorse, the utmost diligence, and, secondly, since they consider the president to be smarter than a horse, they expect targeted tangible services from him, and not just piss. If it turned out that the president was not accommodating enough, he was shot. So, for example, in the USA 6 presidents were shot, two were only wounded, two were "impeached".
Studying the Leninist theoretical heritage and the political practice of the Stalin era, we see that among the tasks facing the party in building communism , the issues of bringing Soviet power to the most effective scientific and organizational level have always been in the first place. This was achieved by raising the level of scientific training, first of all, of party cadres at all levels in order to increase the quality of managerial actions in solving the problem of fundamentally changing the nature of production relations in the country, which, in turn, is unattainable without raising the means of production.to a competitive level. As you know, both incompetent members of the party and the conscious "communist bastard" in the days of Lenin and Stalin were treated especially strictly and uncompromisingly. In Stalin's time, for example, a candidate member of the party could serve in this capacity for several years, until he proved that both professionally and ideologically and politically, he had become a skilled and authoritative worker, or dropped out of the list of candidates for the party. In the CPSU, and even more so in the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the RCWP, the candidate experience has become an empty formality of having the recommendation of two comrades. No change in the qualitative parameters of the personality is required.
Therefore, recognizing the practical value and validity of the Marxist conclusion about the primacy of politics over the economy in the era of transition from capitalism to communism, it is impossible not to recognize that scientific theory cannot but have primacy over political practice ., and to forget this means to understand nothing at all in Marxism, even for the sake of which it was created and confirmed by practice for many decades. It would seem that it would be enough to ask the question: is it possible to build communism in the absence of the theory of building communism, and even more so, the complete ignorance of this theory by the communists, in order to agree with the conclusion of the classics that the objective course of development of the productive forces of society on the basis of market anarchy has put mankind before a dilemma: either society continues to develop, replacing the INTEREST of the oligarchs with SCIENCE , or the Earth will become depopulated again.
In the theory of Marxism, it has been proved that in systems built on the principle of the domination of private property, objective ones, i.e. without the participation of science, spontaneously formed economic factors that give rise to forms of political and ideological institutions and relations. But it could not be otherwise in an era when scientific thinking was not only poorly developed in general, but the church sent scientists to the stake for showing a penchant for scientific thinking. uneducatedpeople entered into economic relations without understanding their essence and development prospects. This is how one should understand the words of Marx, written under classical capitalism, that in the process of production of living conditions, people enter into production, economic relations independent of their consciousness. What other relations, except for the unconscious ones, can the proletarians enter into when they put their finger to the place of painting in the money sheet? On a spontaneously rooted basis, scientifically unformed, violent and only violent political systems and institutions arose (this has been the case in all ages in which the embryos or remnants of private property relations were observed). Due to the practical absence of scientific public consciousness, all European social revolutions were carried out on a spontaneously formed economic basis.
However, due to the fact that capitalist production, driven by competition, more than any previous socio-economic formation depended on the development of science, scientific character gradually covered all aspects of society, including social science, which, combined with the scientific methodology of thinking, first gave rise to socialist direction of thought, and then the highest form of scientific study of class society - the theory of building communism. Figuratively speaking, capitalism itself, harnessing the "horse" of science ahead of the "cart" of the development of the means of production, creates a precedent for the primacy of science in relation to the development of productive forces. It is no coincidence that "Capital", so far, as the most scientific of all scientific works born by social scientists, was published under capitalism forfifty years before the October political upheaval in Russia, thus proving that, not in the original philosophical plan, but in a concrete historical one, the formula about the primacy of social being and the secondary nature of social consciousness turns into its opposite, in strict accordance with materialist dialectics. The scientific idea cannot but be primary in relation to the politics of the working class, first of all, in the order of the historical sequence of events. In turn, without the primacy of a restrictive policy in relation to private owners, it is impossible to build the basis of communism.
This has to be considered proven by the practice of the collapse of the USSR, since it was precisely the DECISIONS of the CPSU that REANIMATED THE CLASS OF PRIVATE OWNERS OF THE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS IN THE USSR .
It is easy to see that with the diamatic approach, no contradiction arises between the original formula of the theory of knowledge about the primacy of matter and the secondary nature of consciousness and the formula about the primacy of political and secondary economic tasks in the period of transition from capitalism to communism. If the consciousness of communists contains the diamatically correct, i.e. scientific understanding of the objective socio-economic tasks to be solved, then, only in this case, politics will be an uncompromising form of implementing the objective laws of building communism, contained both in objective social reality and in the minds of the party members.
These are, in brief, the main "standards" of the diamatic approach to the "spiral" of logic and practice, ideology, politics and economics at the stage of building a communist society in the conditions of a capitalist encirclement and the dominance of petty-bourgeois remnants in the minds of millions of inhabitants, when they are submissive, like "zombies", today they follow their "voodoo" to rallies that lead them to a further increase in unemployment, homelessness, homelessness, inflation, prostitution, corruption and other chronic ailments of market democracy. Hamsters and banderlogs still do not understand that the more market democracy, the stronger the whole spectrum of tragedy and ugliness manifests itself.
Thus, in order to develop an answer to the question posed by Arkhangelskaya about the specific reasons for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, it is necessary to identify, first of all, THEORETICAL causes of the POLITICAL crisis of the Soviet system, which entailed ECONOMIC transformations of a capitalist nature. With a different approach, the facts of economic life look like "fell from the sky."
If you look into any of the versions of the textbooks on the history of the CPSU, you cannot fail to notice that the word economism has disappeared from the chapters devoted to the post-October period.. Those. the idea prevailed in the party that economism as an opportunist current of thought had exhausted itself with the establishment of Soviet power and the beginning of the “Red Guard attack” on capital, as a result of which all the main means of production and circulation were legally, i.e. formally, have become socialized. The idea has formed that since there are no longer large capitalists in the country, since the opportunity for economic strikes by workers disappears, this means that this form of opportunism cannot exist. Moreover, from the context of the post-October works of the bulk of Soviet theorists, it follows that the most dangerous enemy of communism is the capitalists of the West, i.e. direct anti-communists, and opportunism in the USSR is impossible, since there are no internal capitalists, and therefore there is no one to agree with. Those. any factionalism is no longer opportunism,
For some time, the illusion lived in the minds of part of the party masses that the principle of democratic centralism helps to turn on the "collective mind of the party", find a solution that suits everyone and, thus, preserve the unity of the party. This approach, disavowing the teaching of Marxism on the irreconcilability of ideologies, flourished again in the CPSU after Khrushchev's seizure of internal party power, and was brought to complete absurdity by Gorbachev. Confirmation of the ingrained peacefulness towards opportunism are the compromise names of the parties of the European countries of "people's democracy", for example, the Socialist United Party of Germany, the Polish United Workers' Party, the Union of Communists of Yugoslavia, the Hungarian Workers' Party (Imre Nagy), the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party (Janos Kadar), etc. .P. That is why in these countries capitalism was restored earlier,
The current deplorable state of the communist movement in the world leaves no room for doubt about the destructive role played by democracy and theoretical pluralism both in the fate of any communist party and in prolonging the tyranny of imperialism on Earth.
It must be understood that the victory of the October Revolution marked not only a victory over capitalism, but also over ORGANIZED economism, as the most harmful ideological trend in the communist movement. Economism and its bearers were practically put to shame. But, strictly speaking, economism is the cornerstone of opportunism. Opportunism, i.e. there is no Menshevism without Economism.
As is known, at first the Mensheviks proceeded from the premise of introducing a scientific ideology into the working-class movement, then they advocated the development of only economic forms of resistance, then they fought uncompromisingly against the “premature” October political upheaval. And if we proceed from all that is known about the level of ambition of the Menshevik leaders, their commercialism, intrigue, it becomes clear that the defeat in the fight against the Bolsheviks embittered and mobilized the Mensheviks for a new round of struggle against the Bolsheviks. They entered into their last and decisive battle with Bolshevism with all their fury, not disdaining anything, even terrorism. In many outlying Russian provinces, during the years of the civil war and intervention, the Mensheviks generally merged with the local bourgeoisie and nationalist-religious movements, with foreign interventionists,
Depending on the content of the political struggle in each period they experienced, the same Mensheviks first called themselves "Left Communists" (and entered into the most unprincipled associations with the "Right" and "Left" Socialist-Revolutionaries), then established an "Industrial Party", then, turned into into the “right opposition”, allying with the European fascists, they finally called themselves “Trotskyists” and, thereby, generally disowned any specific content in the name of their faction, disguising both their economism in politics and agnosticism in philosophy. It can be said about Marxism that in essence it is a dialectical materialism applied to all spheres of public life, and Trotskyism does not have its own philosophical basis, since Trotsky did not create anything deep, voluminous, meaningful, systemic in this respect. He was always and in everything momentary.
Those. Not only did the Mensheviks try to facilitate their ideological struggle with the Bolshevik wing of the party by frequently changing their names, but also, by inventing more and more meaningless names for themselves, they made it difficult for the Bolsheviks to expose the essence of the next tactical move of the Mensheviks.
However, if we analyze the most stable part of the Mensheviks' ideological platform, the content of their invariably repeated positions in practice, then it is easy to notice the same ECONOMISM , i.e. formal "resistance" to capitalism on the field and on terms provided by internal and external capitalism itself.
It seemed that it was terrible that some word had fallen out of political use. However, the fact is that words in the mind of a person designate real phenomena, form adequate images, moods and entail a strictly defined behavior of subjects. In the absence of a word denoting an object or phenomenon in memory, a person is likened to a blind man who cannot have a decision in his brain, for example, to bypass the pit, since the brain does not have specific ideas about the terrain, although, in fact, the pit is on the way of the blind man may exist. If a word falls out of everyday life, then there is nothing to identify the phenomenon, which complicates the organizationstruggle with the phenomenon itself. As for Stalin, he repeatedly pointed out that the enemy with whom, for one reason or another, they stopped fighting is especially dangerous.
As the further practice of the CPSU showed, Trotskyism, having suffered, in the time of Stalin, a complete defeat on the front of openly organized factionalForms of struggle against the building of communism, turned within the course of thought within the system of party education, within academic institutions, into a kind of secret clan, where it was not necessary to join formally. It was important to justify and preserve under socialism all the concepts and attributes of capitalism, such as: socialist money, moreover with a portrait of Lenin, but similar to “katenki”, socialist goods, socialist prices, the socialist law of value, the socialist market, etc. . "soft-boiled boots." Moreover, some of the CPSU professors even sincerely believed that by developing the problems of cost accounting under socialism and improving the pricing mechanism in the USSR, they, thereby, bring the victory of communism closer.
In other words, economism is not so much the sum of theoretical views on the path of building communism using everything on which imperialism exists and rots, but rather the result of a deep defect in the thinking of a person who has not mastered diamatics to the extent necessary for a communist. In the CPSU of the Gorbachev era, there were practically no scientists left who were at least somewhat tolerably versed in diamatics. The absence of diamatic thinking in the mind of a person condemns him to an extremely primitive perception of the cause-and-effect relationships of social life, and therefore, the most that such a person can claim, regardless of the party card, is vulgar materialism, which is the methodological basis of economism of any edition. .
In short, economism is a product of ignorance spiced with immorality, for without moral licentiousness, the market will lose its attractiveness, especially for the capitalists themselves .
Conclusion
Thus, the main reason for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, as elsewhere where it was revived, is ECONOMISM, but not the one that provoked the proletarians into hundreds of years of strike struggle, but the one that was forced to accept the liquidation of capitalism, seemed to have exhausted itself, but it was introduced into the ranks of the CPSU(b) by former Mensheviks, carriers of incurable methodological ignorance and immorality. As they write in their memoirs, for example, Gorbachev and Yakovlev, they hated the idea of communism all their lives, but made a career in the CPSU, went upstairs, only to destroy the USSR, restoring capitalism.
The last work on the theme of the purposeful, conscious construction of communism in the USSR was Stalin's work "The Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR."
“... I think, ” Stalin wrote, “that it is necessary to discard some other concepts taken from Marx's Capital, where Marx analyzed capitalism, and artificially glued to our socialist relations. I mean, among other things, such concepts as "necessary" and "surplus" labour, "necessary" and "surplus" product, "necessary" and "surplus" labor time... I think that our economists should do away with this discrepancy between the old concepts and the new state of affairs in our socialist country, replacing the old concepts with new ones corresponding to the new situation. We could tolerate this discrepancy up to a certain time, but now the time has come when we must finally eliminate this discrepancy.
But appealing to economists with such proposals is like asking a drug addict to stop injecting himself or telling an idiot to stop smiling all the time.
The power and opportunism of the economist clan in the CPSU is evidenced by the fact that after Stalin's death, none of his proposals was reflected in the new textbook Political Economy, published in 1954 under the editorship of Academician Ostrovitianov. Academicians explained their theoretical weakness and cowardice by loyalty to Marxism. Taking advantage of the intellectual timidity and laziness of a significant number of party functionaries of that time, including Khrushchev himself, everything that Marx wrote under capitalism and about capitalism was rewritten in a section devoted to socialism, but to all categories of capitalism it was added, as mentioned above, the word socialist. Guided by this theory, the Soviet society, the further, the more surprised. "For some reason"
The word economist, in the USSR of the “perestroika” period, turned into an elitist one, and the phrase “prominent Soviet economist” replaced the word Marxist from everyday life. But, the glory of objective reality, sociological surveys show that today's, even thirty-year-old Russians know nothing and, naturally, do not remember either academician Voznesensky, or Ostrovityanov, or Inozemtsev, or Rumyantsev, Abalkin, Aganbegyan, professors Bunich, Zaslavskaya , Shmelev, Piyasheva, the Lisichkin brothers, Popov, Shatalin, Gaidar ... Their books have long been thrown into the dustbins, and by the most consistent supporters of a market economy. "The Moor has done his job ...", the Moor will sink into oblivion.
Sadly, but in modern parties with communist names, supporters of economism again prevail. They are once again trailing behind the proletarian movement, assenting to it in everything, flirting with the unsqueamish trade union leaders. In the event of a new decisive political victory of the working class, these mental castrati in a friendly crowd, due to the defects of democratic centralism, will again drag each other into the leadership and again ... N.O. Arkhangelskaya will have to write about the very "reasons" for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, which she has already written about.
There is an opportunity and a need to break this vicious circle. How to do it? Proryv writes about this in almost every issue. We wish you Victory on this path, our dear readers.
January - February 2012
http://proriv.ru/articles.shtml/podguzov?cccp_32
Google Translator