Russia today

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Sep 26, 2022 3:30 pm

Gorbachev and freedom
No. 9/73.IX.2022

On August 30, a man who was hated by the entire Russian people and millions more people of the former USSR died. On September 3, the body of the former Soviet leader, who outdid the ancient Herostratus, was interred. Although the Kremlin stated that the mourning events would not have a state character, in fact it was the funeral of an honored statesman - the guard of honor accompanied the motorcade, the coffin was lowered into the ground to the anthem, after which the guard fired a triple volley of weapons.

The color of the liberal opposition crowd came to say goodbye to his former benefactor: paid and free spies, provocateurs and simply misanthropes. The editor-in-chief of Novaya Gazeta led the funeral procession, carrying a portrait of the deceased in his arms. Chubais' brother arrived at the event, complaining that the authorities had specially given little time for farewell. There was also such a figure as Rachinsky, the chairman of Memorial, an organization officially recognized as a foreign agent, or, more simply, a network of agents of influence.

A US embassy car was seen at the entrance to the cemetery. The head of the diplomatic mission, Sullivan, had previously attended the farewell. Also at the cemetery was an adviser to Ronald Reagan, Suzanne Massey.

Yavlinsky, who was also present, told reporters with surprise: “Mikhail Sergeevich had absolutely unlimited power - and he did not steal anything!” For him, this is amazing philanthropy, bordering on idiocy - to have power and not have a bribe from it! Judas sold Christ for 30 pieces of silver, Gorbachev betrayed an entire country and people for free. Judas repented and strangled himself, Gorbachev did not repent and died at a ripe old age, regretting only that he did not have time to complete perestroika ...

In addition to the leaders of the demshiza and their curators from the American embassy, ​​there was a handful of urban lunatics who came to say goodbye to the "greatest historical figure" and "great man" (as these alternatively gifted people put it). They laid flowers on a granite slab. Above, above the rest, a wreath in the colors of the Russian flag with a black ribbon and the inscription: "Thank you for freedom."

It was for her, freedom, that all those present thanked the deceased. The fact that the result of this “freedom” caused more damage to the country than the invasion of the fascist hordes in 1941 did not, obviously, bother the mourners. And, by the way, the war that is now going on between the once fraternal republics, like all wars and conflicts on the territory of the former USSR, is the result of this “freedom”…

What kind of "freedom" is this? The latest philosophical dictionary gives the following definition of freedom in general:

"The universal culture of the subjective series, fixing the possibility of activity and behavior in the absence of external goal-setting."

Translating from philosophical into human language: "Freedom is what I want, then I turn back." True, the author of the dictionary entry in the middle of the text makes a clarification that

“The absence of external goal-setting is not yet a guarantor of true freedom, because it does not remove the binding of activity by the conditions of its flow.”

But he did not develop this idea in any way, but went to highlight the views of the medieval scholastic John Duns Scotus, which, in the author's opinion, are very important in elucidating the issue of freedom. The article about freedom consists of almost a thousand words, but does not contain any scientific explanation.

And here is another definition of freedom that I accidentally came across on the Internet:

“Freedom is the state of a person in which he himself determines how to act, regardless of many factors, other people's opinions, stereotypes and the environment.”

By and large, the same idea is expressed here, but more elegantly, without the need for translation from Russian into Russian. It turns out that the one who acts as he pleases, without regard to external factors, is considered free. The definition is clearly deficient, because, for example, a drunkard easily falls under it: he behaves as he wants, “without external goal-setting”, he doesn’t give a damn about other people’s opinions, and when he drinks heavily, then on objective reality (“the sea is knee-deep "). Nevertheless, such a definition is very attractive to the layman, and in his reasoning he operates with precisely this understanding of freedom - I will act as I want, and do not dare interfere with me in this. Hence the popularity of all sorts of "spiritual practices" and "trainings", when a person inspires himself, that all you have to do is “allow yourself” to be rich, and money will rain down on your head. And if the average person is reluctantly forced to recognize the laws of nature, then the average person categorically does not want to recognize the social laws discovered by Marxism and perceives it as an encroachment on his freedom.

So, bourgeois-philistine thought defines freedom through action without "external goal-setting" - a person does only what he wants. But you still have to decide what to do, make a choice. Thus, we get the formula: freedom = choice. If you can make a choice, you are free, and if you do not have a choice, then you are not free. Well, choice, through the efforts of all advertisers, is identified mainly with goods, with consumption.

Now it’s clear why, when anti-Soviet people talk about lack of freedom in the USSR, they first of all remember “queues for sausage” and the lack of toilet paper. Gorbachev liked to talk about how he assembled a Central Committee commission under the leadership of Kapitonov to solve the problems of the "deficiency" of female claws. Well, now stores are littered with pantyhose and other junk, but, firstly, finding a really good, high-quality, safe product among the “abundance” of the market is an extremely difficult task. Secondly, the working masses simply do not have enough money, the people live from their wages, saving on everything ... However, the people themselves have long appreciated Gorbachev's freedom.

The scientific solution of the question of freedom must proceed from the epistemological recognition of the primacy of objective reality and the secondary nature of the will and consciousness of man. If the mind of a person is secondary in relation to the material world around him, then it is obvious that he cannot but obey its laws. Following the objective laws of nature and society we call necessity.

The anti-scientific, idealistic approach opposes freedom and external necessity, declaring the latter unfreedom. This is not true. Freedom is a conscious necessity. What does it mean? Man, being unable to penetrate the secrets of nature, is a slave to the unknown necessity of its objective circumstances. Having learned the objective laws of the motion of inanimate matter, a person learns to organize his activity in such a way as to turn them for his own good or reduce their destructive impact, thereby becoming freer. Thus, it turns out that the deeper the essence of various natural phenomena is known, the more productive is the production practice of a person. In addition to nature, free will is limited by society itself - the laws of development of the social form of matter and the way it is organized, that is, those objectively necessary connections between people that arise in the process of reproduction of the very life of society at a given stage of development. The layman does not like the word "public law", it seems to him that they are trying to drive his unique personality into certain limits, similar to how the state limits him with legal laws. Although in fact his personality is only generated by the action of objective social laws, both universal, such as the need for collective labor and reproduction, and specific laws of social formation.

The problem is that the objective laws of capitalism (capital, wage labor, exploitation) operate because people enter into production relations unconsciously, spontaneously, without understanding their essence. As soon as a person starts doing it consciously, i.e. not spontaneously, then their sphere of action will narrow and in the end society will overcome the abomination of capitalism. But the realization that capitalist production relations are deceit, oppression, squalor, chaos and war is not enough. What is needed is a constructive, creation of conditions for the formation of more perfect production relations based on accurate consideration of all factors of production activity and the needs of social development. When all such conditions are created, the sphere of production relations of communism will objectively expand to the scale of the whole society.

Thus, freedom is, in the apt expression of Engels, the ability to make decisions with knowledge of the matter.

If you look at freedom from a scientific point of view, it is clear how absurd the statements about the abstract freedom that Gorbachev supposedly gave the people. The “freedom” that perestroika has given is only the “freedom” to exploit a person as an entrepreneur. That's why the liberals praise him, that's why they mourn this "outstanding reformer." With these, everything is clear. But journalists of federal channels, all sorts of political and public figures, knowing full well that the majority of the people consider "Humpbacked" an unequivocal traitor, are trying their best to portray him as an "ambiguous personality." It would seem, why try to wash a black dog? A dog whose shit the Putin government has to clean up now, including the conflict with Ukraine. But no, they wash it, but with what diligence! I won’t be surprised if some Gorbachev Center is opened soon,

It seems to me that the most significant, so to speak, the most “convex” statement of the vice-speaker of the Federation Council Kosachev, he unashamedly asserts:

“The departure of Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev is a tragedy for the country and for all those of us whose lives he managed to change for the better. That's right - for the better, despite the collapse of the USSR and huge trials for its former citizens. Yes, in the days of the Soviet Union there were many great achievements, among them, first of all, Victory and Space. But if these victories were systemic, then thanks to the people, and not to the system of Soviet power. Gorbachev blazed a path that our people could not have otherwise traveled in the last three and a half decades - a difficult path, but, unlike the previous 70 years, finally in the right direction. And for all the inconsistency of the results, Gorbachev deserves respect, and he deserves to be remembered. Everlasting memory".

He said, almost in plain text, for which Gorbachev eternal memory - for destroying communism , turning the country in the "right direction", i.e. restored capitalism. And thanks him on behalf of the oligarchy, "whose life he managed to change for the better." Oligarchs are generally ungrateful creatures by nature, but this is a special case. That is why the mental lackeys of capital are trying so hard: journalists, TV presenters, and so on.

In general, to say that Gorbachev destroyed the USSR, socialism (the lower phase of communism) is wrong. One person and even a group of conspirators is not capable of breaking such a huge mass as the Union was. It's funny to think about it. The USSR was destroyed by the general degradation of the theory and practice of communism, expressed in the rebirth of the top of the CPSU. It was a process of class struggle in which the working class of the USSR suffered a temporary defeat.

Our Left blockheads interpret the collapse of the USSR in a Trotskyist vein: that the bureaucracy, without people's control, has turned into a class of exploiters and wanted to restore capitalism. Those. the focus shifts to the notorious "privileges of the nomenklatura", where democracy is seen as a cure or prevention against the degeneration of "bureaucrats". The left diligently bypasses the historical fact that, EXACTLY USING DEMOCRACY , Gorbachev's people destroyed communism. I had a separate article , where the question was sorted out, does party democracy protect against bureaucracy, in it I pointed out:

“The assertion that the leadership of the party snickered to such an extent that the members of the Central Committee did not need socialism and they wanted to become capitalists is erroneous and does not correspond to historical facts. How many people from the Central Committee became oligarchs? Chubais and Gaidar, like the last philanthropists, handed out state property right and left, instead of appropriating all of it for themselves, and Gorbachev even went to advertise pizza.

If they were guided not by their anti-communist convictions, but by purely mercantile interests, then they would be interested in preserving "developed socialism." Market reforms were beneficial primarily to the underground guild workers and speculators - the underground bourgeoisie, and not to the bureaucrats.

Of course, the greed of Soviet officials and Komsomol leaders took place and played a role in the restoration of capitalism. But it was not the middle stratum of the party members who removed the CPSU from power, destroyed the USSR and restored capitalism. This rotten layer only allowed it to be done, did nothing, and then betrayed the Soviet people.

It would be superficial to say that the restoration of capitalism in the USSR occurred only because of the betrayal of the top of the party. This is only a consequence, and the real reason lies in the fundamental Marxist incompetence of the members of the CPSU in matters of the practical construction of communism. After Stalin's death, with the help of apparatus intrigues and the levers of democratic centralism, the leadership was seized by hard-core opportunists and demagogues. After the obliging fool Khrushchev and the illiterate Brezhnev, the party was headed by frank enemies who, as they later confessed in their memoirs, went to the party with the goal of “destroy the damned Bolshevism from within.” By that time, the mindless CPSU had completely mired in opportunism, so the market reforms did not arouse the necessary protest. The means for opportunistic disintegration was not bureaucracy in itself, not privileges,

Of course, in 1985 there were people in the party who immediately saw through Gorbachev with his “new thinking”. But under conditions of democentralism, they were powerless. The overwhelming majority of the congress delegates supported the course towards "socialism with a human face", supported the path to the restoration of capitalism, like millions of ordinary people with party cards. They may object: “A communist must be able to convince the masses!” People who argue in this manner forget that the Bolsheviks, as a matter of fact, were never in the majority and were forced to constantly waste their time and energy on persuading not even the masses, but a few congress delegates, exposing the tricks of the opportunists. If the scientific nature of the position had the ability to win the minds of its impeccable rightness, then immediately after the mass distribution of the “Manifesto of the Communist Party”, capitalism would fall. But capitalism is still holding on

So, the reason for the decay of the CPSU is that its ranks - especially the leadership - by the 1980s. were littered with frankly non-Marxist and anti-Marxist cadres. Only outcasts and outright dissidents were not accepted into the party. The opportunist idea prevailed that the more members could be recruited into the party, the more "popular" it would be. As a result, we get the formula: mass ignorance of the party activists + democracy, when opportunists and renegades vote for each other, = decay and death of the party, and with it the proletarian state .

And this is the task that the Communists face today in full growth: to build a party on such principles that such characters as Gorbachev, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES , could reach the leading positions and in general penetrate into the party. After all, Gorbachev was not some kind of Mephistopheles, diabolically disguised as a communist. If you read and listen to what Gorbachev was saying during perestroika and after, it will become clear that he is a banal idiot who did not know Marxism even at the level of quotation. Actually, he was promoted as a business executive, as "the owner of Stavropol."

It is precisely democentralism, and specifically the principle of sufficient recognition of the program, work in the party cell and a couple of recommendations, that serves as the master key with which opportunists and careerists, money-grubbers and scoundrels, enemies and spies unlock the doors of the leading bodies of the party. And as long as this master key works, as long as any bastard can creep into the leadership, there can be no talk of the victory of communism in a single country, not to mention the world. Conscious proletarians are asking the left: “Where is the guarantee that the new Gorbachevs won’t ruin everything to hell?” And our left is essentially NOTHINGto object to this, in addition to the standard mantras about democracy and control from below. Can these naive arguments about “control by the masses from below” be taken seriously? This very control did not stop Gorbachev, on the contrary, the masses willingly supported him. Just like before, the party masses supported Khrushchev's blockhead with his "catch up and overtake."

In an article dedicated to the 60th anniversary of Stalin, A. Shcherbakov wrote:

“The CPSU(b) is a monolithic party, a fortress party, the doors of which are opened only for the most deserving people who give themselves entirely to the cause of the party and the working class, and from which everyone who proves unworthy of bearing the high title of communist is thrown out.”

Today, these words about a fortress party should sound more true than ever. But by what criteria to determine the most worthy people? Historical practice has made its clarifications. One cannot be accepted into the party for military and labor feats alone, for being a “good person”. It is necessary to take only those who have enriched their heads with Marxist science, i.e. the criterion for admission to the party should be competence in Marxism. If all members of the party are competent, then the Gorbachevs and Yeltsins will not have a chance to get into such a party, just as there is no chance for a loser to win the Mathematics Olympiad. This does not mean that in order to join the party it will be necessary to pass an exam in Marxism, this is a formalist approach, on which, among other things, the CPSU burned out. Marxist competence is not determined by examinations, but by real practice. What is the practice? Propaganda, campaigning and organizational work. The editors of Proryv and Proryvist proved the effectiveness of this approach through their practice. Among the authors of the magazine and newspaper there was not a single one who would demonstrate a brilliant understanding of Marxism, its creative development, and then suddenly turned out to be an opportunist. The opportunists in the work of publications were always disguised, and their removal took place instantly.

The leftists, ardent admirers of democracy, accuse us that we, scientific centralists, want to turn the party into an authoritarian sect, where everyone obeys the "infallible leader" and no one has the right to vote. These are just ridiculous ideas. The sect is built on FAITH , and we propose to build a party on KNOWLEDGE. In the NC party, discipline does not tolerate either faith or animal motives, such as fear and self-interest, because its members REALIZE AND RECOGNIZEthat the decisions of leaders, leadership are competent. At the same time, only those who have actually proved their competence and won authority with their personal moral and ethical qualities become leaders of the party. The leftists are indignant that we are repelling the masses with “etatism”. One might think that with their ostentatious "democratism" the leftists have strongly attracted the masses to themselves ... Here, the members of the RPR are almost persuading the factory proletarians to join their "workers' party", promising the right to a decisive vote.

No, only that political force can win influence among the masses today, which proves that it KNOWS how to lead the working people to prosperity, and is really capable of doing it.

Thus, the future party should be built on the principles of precisely scientific, and not democratic centralism, so that ALL members of the party are precisely communists, and not mimic the townsfolk, then Khrushchev and Gorbachev will not have a single chance for revival.

R. Ogienko
26/09/2022

https://prorivists.org/73_gorb/

Google Translator

Bolding added.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Sep 27, 2022 1:05 pm

On the question of a new era
No. 5/69, V.2022

On February 24, when the start of the special operation was announced, Russia, and with it the whole world, crossed a historical milestone. Some naive citizens still believe that Russia and Ukraine will conclude some kind of "Minsk-3" and everything will return to normal. Will not come back. Too many contradictions have accumulated between American and Russian imperialism (and we are well aware that military operations in Ukraine are a struggle against the US and NATO). Putin hoped to agree with the "Western partners" that they would be "friends" against China in exchange for the recognition of Russia's sphere of influence in Eastern Europe. Did not work out. Concluding a truce with the Kyiv regime now means not only admitting one's military defeat, but also renouncing claims to influence in Eastern Europe. But this is not enough. The US imperialists have already started the flywheel of sanctions, forcing their satellites to literally cut themselves to the quick, cutting off economic ties with the “criminal” Russian Federation. And, apparently, this flywheel will not stop until the competitor of the USA - Russia - is finally broken.

The Russian oligarchy apparently did not support the idea of ​​a military solution to the conflict, fearing sanctions and international isolation. But Putin managed to convince the oligarchy that the operation would go quickly: Russian troops would enter Ukraine with lightning speed, surround Kyiv, Zelensky would flee like Yanukovych, Medvedchuk or some other “pro-Russian” oligarch would come to power, and it would all be over. The West, of course, will react to this, introduce some sanctions, but they will not be so painful (in the end, the winners are not judged) and they can be compensated for by fresh production - Ukraine. I guess the situation looked something like this. But then it became clear to everyone :A special operation is a long time and there is no way back. At the end of March, our oligarchs did not yet understand this, they thought that they could play everything back, pretend that there was no special operation - this is how I explain Medinsky's bleating about "substantial progress in the negotiation process." But these bleatings irritated the proletarian masses, who consider the denazification of Ukraine a just and necessary thing, and perceive any negotiations with the Kyiv junta as nothing more than a betrayal. Now, as they say, either the chest is in crosses, or the head is in the bushes. The defeat of the RF Armed Forces in Ukraine may be fraught with political destabilization. That is why the termination of the special operation and the return to the former "status quo" is no longer possible.

So, the world has reached a new historical milestone, you can call it a new era. What is this era? You can answer: the era of exacerbation of inter-imperialist contradictions, threatening to develop into a world slaughter. Indeed, the military conflict in Ukraine is a consequence of the accumulated contradictions between the old predator, the United States, and the young predator, the Russian Federation. But there is one detail, if it is not taken into account, then it is impossible to adequately assess the entire course of events. The confrontation between Ukraine and the Russian Federation is in reality the confrontation between NATO and the Russian Federation, but this is just an episode of the global and irreconcilable struggle between the United States and China. Indeed, the Russian Federation cannot be perceived by the US imperialists as the main opponent due to its economic weakness and technological backwardness. China is what the United States sees as the "enemy of the civilized world," i.e., its main competitor.

As you know, many of our leftists believe that the United States and China are two equivalent imperialist predators, grappling with each other, like the Entente and the Triple Alliance. We, the breakthroughists, consider this position to be erroneous. In our materials, we prove that China is a socialist state. Why socialist? Because in China the dictatorship of the proletariat represented by the leadership of the Communist Party. If we take the leftist theses about bourgeois power in the PRC as true, then we will have to admit that we are dealing with a special breed of capitalists who feel the need to diligently pass themselves off as communists. Or maybe it's a matter of a special Chinese proletariat, which has managed to develop immunity to bourgeois propaganda, which forces local capitalists to mimic the Reds so diligently? How did the leftists, the witnesses of "Chinese imperialism", able to explain the fact that in the People's Republic of China Marxism is promoted at the state level, a whole institution of Marxism is functioning, historical films are being made that emphasize the leading role of the Communist Party? In honor of the 200th anniversary of Marx, they even released an animated series, clearly aimed at teenagers, where the exploitative essence of capital is exposed. Although, of course, there are Trotskyist holy fools who do not see any contradiction in this and claim that anti-capitalist propaganda contributes to the preservation of ... the capitalist dictatorship of the CPC! In addition to the dictatorship of the proletariat, China has a powerful public sector operating on a planned basis. It's funny that in the Western liberal publications there are claims that in fact China has fake capitalism, because private corporations are controlled by the state and the CCP. That awkward occasion

So, to call the confrontation between the US and the PRC imperialistic is to make a gross mistake. In contrast to the beginning of the 20th century, there is a powerful socialist state in the world, China. In addition, there are still small socialist countries and countries oriented towards communism: North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Venezuela. That is why the parallels with 1914, which the well-known left-wing blogger is so fond of drawing, recently stunned with the statement that “there is not a single proletarian state in the world for which the workers would be worth fighting for,” are inappropriate. It's a lie! There is such a state and not one! However, the struggle of US imperialism against China is incomparable with the struggle against the USSR, primarily because the CCP does not demonstrate its desire to become the bulwark of the revolution, the homeland of all proletarians.

A caustic opponent may say: what about the CPC, if it expresses the interests of the proletarians, contributes to their infection with philistinism, nationalism and other abominations? Here the mistake lies in the fact that the opponent identifies the interests of the proletarian with the "interests" of building communism. He argues as follows: if communism saves the proletarian from wage slavery, provides him with all the necessary cultural and material benefits, then he must definitely be for communism, and if he is against it, then bourgeois propagandists simply fooled him. In reality, there is no such interest in “building communism”. This issue was discussed in detail in a separate article. In short, interest is an unbridled instinct. Communist society, on the other hand, is the opposite of the dictates of instincts. The interest of the proletarian is to profitably sell his labor power. A person must overcome his proletarianism in himself, rise above material interests, in order to become a true builder of communism, that is, a society based on a scientific worldview. The CCP expresses the interests of the proletariat in the sense that it subordinates the overall development of the economy to the gradual satisfaction of the needs of the broad masses, and not to the hedonism of a handful of oligarchs. The CCP adheres to the most general provisions of Marxism, which is why Deng Xiaoping's "perestroika" did not develop into Gorbachev's "catastrophe".

Trotskyists demand that socialism (the lower phase of communism) be ideal and sterile, like a textbook, and if there are some flaws in it, then they instantly declare it “deformed”, “mutant” - in short, wrong. But socialism is not something static, frozen, it is a process of fierce struggle between the old exploitative relations and the new communist ones. And NEP in China is part of this struggle. While the CCP's positions on a number of issues cannot be considered consistently Marxist, we have no grounds to accuse the Party of betraying the working class, just as there are no grounds to deny China "socialistism", albeit with certain reservations.

Returning to the main theme, one should ask: what is the essence of the new era? I believe that it would be correct to formulate it this way: the new era is the era of the collapse of liberal-democratic (petty-bourgeois) illusions. The razor of sanctions cuts not only Russian, but also Western inhabitants. The standard of living drops sharply. So, for example, according to media reports , the number of Americans living from paycheck to paycheck has grown to 64%. The cost of gasoline in the US breaks records. What can we say about Europe, which is directly suffering from the sanctions war unleashed by Washington. As is usually the case under capitalism, the main reason for the deterioration of the life of the Western inhabitants is connected with the greed of the capitalists, their eternal desire to cash in on socio-political turmoil.

At the same time, the deterioration of life is accompanied by unprecedented repressions that the authorities unleash against their citizens, especially in Eastern Europe. So, in Latvia, a real terror was staged against “dissident” citizens who “dare” to sympathize with the Russian Federation and not support the Kyiv junta. A young Latvian, who on May 9 came to the monument to the liberators of Riga with the flag of the Russian Federation, faces a prison term. The police grab people on the streets for the colors of their clothes that match the Eref flag. The Latvian authorities are openly calling for denunciations of social media users “supporting Russia’s attack on Ukraine.” In Finland, citizens are prohibited from speaking out against the country's accession to NATO, they are intimidated at work, branded as "Putin's agents." It's so easy and simple, with one click, the state takes away from citizens their "natural rights", formally remaining within the framework of bourgeois democracy. And all because, legally, the state is omnipotent, the citizen has no inviolable rights, and even the right of private property, sacred to capitalism, is regularly violated in relation to the petty and middle bourgeoisie, and sometimes even individual oligarchs: we can observe how Western countries easily take away foreign property and assets of Russian billionaires. And now the cries will be heaped about the "authoritarian rashka", where "they are imprisoned for likes and reposts", they cannot cause anything but irony. Now, for "dissent" they are imprisoned not only in "Rashka", but also in states that are listed as democratic in the lists of human rights offices. One of the pillars of liberal ideology - freedom of speech and thought - is collapsing right before our eyes. And it's just wonderful. Of course, all this was in the 20th century: McCarthyism, Thatcherism, Reaganism - but that was a long time ago and liberals could sculpt excuses that the institutions of democracy in those days were still imperfect and, in general, to fight the "Bolshevik plague" one had to make sacrifices. Now these excuses won't work. Although Putin is drawn on caricatures with Soviet symbols, everyone really understands that the Russian Federation is the same capitalist country as the United States, and the confrontation between them is competitive and market, not ideological. Unfortunately, the confrontation between the United States and China cannot be considered ideological in the strict sense of the word, the reason I have already outlined above - the CPC does not pretend to be a stronghold of the revolution and in foreign policy acts mainly as a market entity.

Unfortunately, instead of using the opportunities for propaganda provided by imperialism today, our leftists do not even think of using them. The special operation in Ukraine clearly revealed the complete ideological inconsistency of the “stars” of the left YouTube: Semin draws demagogic parallels with 1914, Rudoy calls for trade unionism when asked “what to do”. And almost all the leftists in a pacifist ecstasy merged with the bulk, declaring guardians of everyone who has a positive attitude towards the extermination of Ukrainians by the Russian army. This means that our so-called left movement will continue to degrade and marginalize.

Imperialism is rapidly approaching a new redistribution of the world, which, as you know, is accompanied by the mass extermination of the townsfolk infected with bourgeois patriotism = nationalism. But this is not a reason to fall into hysteria, alarmism and despondency. This only goes to show that communists and sympathizers need to mobilize their forces, not to waste them on fruitless actionism or trade unionism, but to fight for communism. What does it mean to fight for communism? This means, first of all, to enrich your head with at least the treasury of Marxist thought - the works of Marx - Engels - Lenin - Stalin . Then apply this knowledge in practice.Practice is not any body movement, but a conscious activity aimed at achieving a specific goal - the victory of communism. Only those actions that bring communism closer can be considered Marxist practice, for example: writing scientific articles that expose bourgeois lies and reveal a particle of Truth. When a sufficient number of Marxists have accumulated, who have proved their competence by their practice, it will be possible to announce the creation of the Party of Scientific Centralism (PSC), because in modern conditions only the PNC is capable of uniting the proletarian masses into a revolutionary subject known as the "working class". And this class, under the leadership of the PNC, will finally turn the page of history and open a new era of the triumph of communism.

R. Ogienko
28/05/2022

https://prorivists.org/69_newera/

I like these folks, not only do they demand seriousness from communists but they can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Thu Sep 29, 2022 2:27 pm

Putin and the socialist revolution
No. 01/53, I.2021

Image

2020 turned out to be a difficult year for the country: a pandemonium with pseudo-quarantine measures, when officials are trying to disperse people home for “self-isolation”, and in fact leaving to the mercy of fate without a livelihood, a sharp rise in prices for consumer goods, which continues despite Putin’s demands to curb speculators. And in this difficult and turbulent time, one pro-government "analyst" Rogers brought us good news! It turns out - we didn’t even notice in the confusion - in Russia, without any wars, repressions and upheavals, a socialist revolution took place and soon we will all live well!

As Rogers informs us, at the meeting of the State Council, Prime Minister Mishustin presented the Unified Plan, which includes a number of national projects and state programs. During the preparation of the Unified Plan, 25 interdepartmental working groups were formed, which included several hundred people from almost all ministries and departments.

Not only is a specific action plan described and deployed for each process, responsible executors have also been appointed. It is on this point that Rogers draws our attention, although he does not specify what exactly the responsibility of the leader who failed the plan will be expressed in.

The ultimate goal of the Plan is "improving the standard of living of people, creating a comfortable environment for development." And in order to control the execution of the Plan, an Information Management System will be created, which "will allow you to follow the development of events almost online and intervene at any stage to prevent deviations from the Plan."

“Now I’ll try to translate it from Russian into Russian,” says Rogers. - In fact, a single system of economic management is being introduced in the country - the State Planning Commission. It is planned to allocate 39 trillion rubles ($520 billion) for the implementation of the three-year Plan. And all this is controlled online in real time, both costs and execution.”

And asks readers:

"You still don't understand? This is a REVOLUTION! This is a SOCIALIST REVOLUTION! What's there? Sanctions? Forget! Will not give Russia foreign investment? No need for a gift! Turn off your antediluvian SWIFT, we have our analogues for a long time! We now have the State Planning Commission and state investments, we don’t need anyone else (except for the Chinese comrades). If you have read up to this point and then just sit in a chair, then you simply cannot imagine what a breakthrough it will be over the next three years.

And reassuring us:

Three years from now, it will be a different country in many ways…”

In the comments, of course, there were many skeptics and those of little faith who tried to denigrate this good news: they say, with all these "sycophants and thieves, builders of huge palaces and summer cottages, it is simply impossible to solve these problems."

But let's, however, be fair: then the government was "liberal", headed by Medvedev, nicknamed "iPhone", and now we have a different government, "patriotic", and it is led by a new person - Mishustin, yes what a person! Vaughn, he led the International Computer Club, attracted advanced technologies to the country!

Skeptical people in the comments under the text of Rogers recalled that back in 2008, a program for the long-term development of Russia was adopted just up to 2020, and all of it successfully failed. It was planned that Russia would enter the top five world leaders in terms of GDP, and as a result, Russia was in sixth place. They promised that the real income of the population would be 70% higher compared to 2012, but in reality, the income of the population, starting from the 14th year, only fell. They assured that the number of the poor would decrease from 13.4% in 2007 to 6-7%, and as a result, Rosstat recorded 12.7% of the poor. The concept of long-term development provided for the redistribution of the budget system in favor of spending on the development of "human potential" - from 8.6% of GDP in 2007 to 11-11.7% of GDP in 2020. In particular, spending on health care was to increase from 3 .6% of GDP to 5–5.5%, for education — from 4 to 5-6% of GDP. The fact that the goals remained unfulfilled was recently reminded by the ultra-liberal Kudrin:

“We are still at a level lower than we were 11 years ago.”

Why did everything end so badly? The same pro-government experts and officials usually say something like the concept was written at a time when they proceeded from completely different economic, geopolitical, and social prerequisites. Say, against the backdrop of the crisis and sanctions, the situation has completely changed. In other words: the plan did not work because the crisis and sanctions got in the way. Indeed, who could have imagined that in 2014, in connection with the annexation of Crimea, the United States would unleash a sanctions war against Russia? Well, it was impossible to foresee the next crisis of the capitalist system, regularly shaking the world! But maybe now, taking into account past mistakes, also with Gosplan and online control, a new plan to improve the life of the people will finally come true?

No, it won’t come true, and the point here is not even that the plan will be implemented by “lickers and thieves, builders of huge palaces and summer cottages,” as one of the commentators put it, there is a much more serious problem in Russia than “lickers and thieves "These are the oligarchs.

Among our people, the "oligarch" is identified with a thief and a swindler - a man who plundered the country and should be in prison, but because of corruption he walks free. The oligarchs are opposed by Western tycoons who have "achieved everything themselves", in particular such a "pusher of progress" as Elon Musk. However, from a scientific point of view, there is absolutely no difference between the conditional Elon Musk and some Russian Abramovich.

Who is an oligarch? It is a bipedal erectus whose purpose of existence is the endless accumulation of economic assets. Money, money and more money - that's all that interests the oligarch. At some point, every oligarch accumulates such a gigantic amount of money in his hands that he simply does not know what to do with it - like George Soros, for example, which he writes about in his book with the remarkable title "The Crisis of World Capitalism". But this does not stop the oligarchs, they continue with their former fanaticism the senseless accumulation of wealth. Not outstanding personalities become oligarchs, as all sorts of manuals for beginner entrepreneurs and personal growth trainings teach, on the contrary, faded and even worthless personalities become oligarchs, because the only way for them to “declare themselves” is to buy an island or build the longest yacht. This is about psychology, and from an economic point of view, an oligarch is the owner of large, oligarchic property, which makes it possible to easily buy a parliamentary faction or a couple of governors with giblets.

So. Even if Putin succeeds in mobilizing enough competent and interested in the development of the country personnel to carry out the "Unified Plan" and enough resources are thrown, the oligarchs will not allow this plan to be realized, at least in the main, because it is contrary to their interests. If at the same level of productionthe real economic situation of the population will begin to grow, then the profits of the oligarchs will begin to fall, such is the law of nature - if it arrives somewhere, then it decreases somewhere. But the oligarchs have concentrated in their hands a huge share of the money supply - the combined wealth of the 200 richest Russians is more than 29.5 trillion rubles, which is more than the annual income of the state of the Russian Federation. How many financial assets do they have? If anything, they will simply begin to sabotage government decisions.

Let's take Venezuela as an example. The socialists came to power there and took decisive steps to redistribute national incomes in favor of the working masses. In response to this, the “native” capitalists staged a real economic blockade against their own people, who actively support the Maduro government. In 2017, for example, Protinal Proagro, which received millions of dollars from the Venezuelan government to invest in food production, buried over 100 million chickens alive to create a shortage of this important food. Also, the Venezuelan oligarchs are inciting insane inflation, of course, making it look like the Maduro government is to blame. In October, prices increased by 1400% since the beginning of the year. And there is not the slightest doubt that

Thus, as long as there are oligarchs in the Russian Federation, there can be no systemic increase in the welfare of the population . But if the oligarchs can be neutralized in some magical way, even in this case the situation will not change radically, because medium and small entrepreneurs will remain, i.e. failed oligarchs.

Another misconception is that, they say, there is an oligarch - a dishonest monopolist who usurped the market with the help of collusion and bribing corrupt officials, and there is an "entrepreneur" - this is an honest business person, to whom society should be grateful for his organizational work. In fact, an entrepreneur, businessman or capitalist (call it what you want) is an oligarch "in development", i.e. a parasite and a parasite that has not yet fully realized its potential, but is actively striving for it. Of course, this may seem wild to someone, he will remember some uncle Vanya, who runs his own shop, often replacing the seller behind the counter, and will be amazed: “Is he a parasite? Is he a world eater? No, here the author writes some nonsense. But after all, newborn tiger cubs look cute and harmless, but then they grow into ferocious predators. Undoubtedly, just as in nature not every tiger cub lives to adulthood, so not every uncle Vanya succeeds in becoming medium and large capitalists. But here it is important to understand the very essence: capital is born from labor ... someone else's labor. The capitalist lives by appropriating the unpaid share of the labor of his workers, by paying them conditionally 100 rubles, while the value of the goods or services they produce is 120 rubles. This is not to mention the fact that it is far from a fact that the employee will receive the 100 rubles that he is promised - he can be fined for being 5 minutes late, or for not cleaning the workplace, or for staying too long in the toilet ... There are many options. But the capitalist rips off not only his employees, but also buyers, clients, shamelessly inflating prices for goods and services, especially in situations that are critical for the country and people. You don’t have to look far for an example: before the start of the pandemic, the mask cost 10 rubles, and at its peak it jumped to ... unlimited amounts. Would you try to find such a “philanthropist” who, at the peak of the pandemic, would sell you a fresh mask for 10 rubles!

We live in a market state, but what is a market? This is a permanent war, i.e. competition, all against all. Each person, being hired, selling a product or opening "his own business", becomes a market participant, and therefore, someone's competitor, i.e. natural enemy, almost like in wildlife. The market is anarchy. No matter how ingenious business plans are drawn up, in fact, each capitalist determines "by eye" how much to produce this or that product, and it often turns out that he "a little" miscalculated. This results in a crisis of overproduction. Partially, market anarchy is weakened by monopolies and state regulation, but the greed of the capitalists, especially the oligarchs, cannot be curbed.

“Capital avoids noise and scolding and has a timid nature. This is true, but it is not the whole truth. Capital is afraid of no profit or too little profit, just as nature is afraid of the void. But once sufficient profits are available, capital becomes bold. Provide 10 percent and capital is ready for any use, at 20 percent it becomes lively, at 50 percent it is positively ready to break its head, at 100 percent it defies all human laws, at 300 percent there is no crime that it would not risk, even under pain of the gallows. If noise and scolding are profitable, capital will contribute to both. Proof: smuggling and the slave trade" - Thomas Joseph Dunning (January 12, 1799 - December 23, 1873), British trade unionist and publicist.

Well, in modern realities, crises are no longer so much a product of the elements, but rather a deliberate collapse of the economy by a handful of uncrowned emperors of the Earth, oligarchic aristocrats. “To whom the war is, to whom the mother is dear” - this also applies to crises.

Therefore, let Putin succeed in curbing the oligarchs, but what will he do with tens of thousands of medium, small and petty capitalists? How will he force them to work for the good of the motherland, the whole society, stepping on the throat of his song: “Money, money”?

China can be cited as an example. But, firstly , it is the state that holds in its hands the main levers of managing the economy, which is why it dictates its own rules of the game to the Chinese Nepmen, and not vice versa. Secondly , in China, the Communist Party is in power, which sets the ultimate goal of building communism, and this is a key point. It is the CCP that determines the policy of the state and has all the levers to control it.

Mr. Rogers can stir up his flock as much as he likes with tales of "revolution from above." However, the establishment of a new, progressive and just system is possible only through the overthrow of the power of capital , the destruction of the old apparatus of violence that serves to protect the rich from the poor. Only in the case of replacing private property with public property is it possible to provide EVERYONEman all the material conditions for the development of his personality. Within the framework of monopoly capitalism, it is theoretically possible to organize the State Planning Commission (and some oligarchs even come up with similar initiatives themselves), but it will only serve the interests of the ruling class of capitalists, or rather its most “fat” representatives. And the people, as they lived ascetically, will continue to live. And to overthrow the power of capital, a PARTY is needed , which will transform the masses of working people from a subordinate class into a revolutionary class, which will take power, having accomplished a real, and not Rogerian, socialist revolution.

R. Ogienko
01/01/2021

https://prorivists.org/53_antirogers/

Google Translator.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Oct 01, 2022 1:58 pm

Long, hard, hard work
No. 3/67, III.2022

Recent events in the country and in the world have finally stirred up the apolitical consciousness of the proletarian masses. The connection between everyday life and politics, that is, the class struggle in all its diverse and multi-level manifestations, is now more acute than ever.

The editorial office of the newspaper began to receive letters with words of support and requests to clarify this or that issue much more often. The rapid pace of the historical process prompts people to comprehend its laws and, consequently, prompts them to turn to the theory of Marxism-Leninism. At the same time , the influence of various left-wing, near-left and conspiracy ideologies, which confirmed their anti-scientific nature as false predictions, is weakening.

However, the whirlpool of political events diverts the attention of the public from the essential and fundamental to the external and superficial, even if the analysis tries to rely on the well-known conclusions of Marxist science. From the point of view of the primary tasks of forming Marxist cadres, we lack theoretical depth in propaganda; in our readership, the connection between the methodological foundation of Marxism and the political assessment of certain processes and events is weakly and unstable. For the most part, there is intuitiveness and trust in the authority of the publication.

The growth of the newspaper's supporters, taking into account the development and depth of the scientific and theoretical position of the breakthroughs as a whole, is an indicator of the success of propaganda efforts, but this is not enough in the light of the objective tasks of personnel forging. And if until the twenties, which will obviously mark an era of large-scale and rapid changes, we insisted on the slogan of Marxist self-education as a general one, now it is acquiring even more acute significance. We call on all readers to mobilize their efforts as much as possible in the direction of mastering the Marxist-Leninist theory, the history of the communist movement and studying the theory of scientific centralism. Now more than ever, offensiveness is needed not in disputes, discussions and polemics on current events, but in thoughtful reading of the classics and the corpus of key materials of the Breakthrough.

The fact is that the moment is not far off when the foam of political chatter will come to naught, exposing everything that is essential, fundamental, theoretically deep. And we must have not only software developments about the present and future of society, which, of course, is being done, but also a close-knit team of propagandist theorists, skillful agitators and talented organizers. People who, without the pursuit of false relevance, brightness of forecasts and originality, personify a reliable stronghold of communist work. Only behind such cadres will the proletariat be ready to take the decisive turns in history.

The team of authors that has formed around the Proryv journal is already not only an example of the practical implementation of the principles of scientific centralism, but also a successful fusion of wisdom, experience, youth and enthusiasm. Without any artificial methods, we managed to unite all generations and ages under the banner of scientific centralism, creating the ground for the complementarity of employees and the continuity of the organization. This is a kind of potential for internal growth, which can and should be revealed through improving the quality of discipline, education and self-education.

The fulfillment of the program for the expansion of our team depends primarily on the independent maturation of the comrades who support the position of the publication. The editors, for their part, provide all the necessary support and assistance on the path to becoming solid breakthroughs.

The editors have already noted a decrease in the frequency of publication of articles in recent years, caused by some everyday difficulties of leading authors. However, at the same time, we note that the internal theoretical and organizational work of the collective is not weakening, it is being carried out with the same effort, the number of authors and supporters is growing, materials are becoming more and more widely circulated among the proletarian environment. Readers are waiting for new achievements and breakthroughs of the newspaper in the field of theory and practice of Marxism-Leninism. The decrease in external activity does not reflect the quality of our work. The spiteful opportunists can relax.

A communist is a person who has devoted his life to the struggle for the future, knowing exactly what and how to do, because he is guided by science. Our tread is unshakable, and overcoming difficulties only hardens the organization. Ahead, obviously, the country and the world are waiting for storms and hardships, in which revolutionary talents will be quickly cut. Panic, despondency and whimpering are completely incompatible with the title of communist. The atmosphere of political anxiety only increases the combat readiness and spirit of the communist.

The Russian bourgeois state and our bourgeois society are evolving from liberal to state capitalism. In the conditions of sharp confrontation with Western imperialism, various liberal evil spirits are being purged, the role of the bourgeois state in the economy is increasing, and a friendly attitude towards the socialist countries is growing. All this testifies to the improvement of the atmosphere and conditions for our propaganda. Despite the screeching of leftist elements, political circumstances still favor the productivity of our work. It is a crime to miss this chance.

Here and there revolutionary situations arise around the world, but there are no truly communist parties capable of organizing the proletariat into a working (working) class to take power. The bankruptcy of democratic centralism is still not acknowledged by the majority of the left, which is mired in the opportunism of tailism.

In short, we are in for a long, hard, hard work under rapidly changing circumstances.

REVISION
19/03/2022

https://prorivists.org/67_work/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Oct 04, 2022 2:50 pm

Is a strong unified left movement needed?
No. 7/23, VII.2018

Image

A stupid one whistles, but a smart one understands

Since the mid-1990s, the idea of ​​uniting the left forces has not lost popularity in Russia. Do not count the number of projects, appeals, initiatives.

There are not so many steiers like Baranov in this business, mostly young supporters of communism, who not so long ago got acquainted with the swamp of the left movement, rush about with this idea. It can be said that lamenting the absence of a strong unified left movement is a completely logical primary thought of a person who, not being Marxist and historically prepared, learns about the left discord, the diversity of opinions and organizations. Completely logical primary ... philistine thought.

Why philistine? Because only the layman operates with the speculative, exclaiming - let's, they say, brothers, attack the common enemy! And it doesn't matter: who? how? And what is the ultimate goal of this enterprise? Therefore, it is not surprising that when the champions of this logic come to the point, their projects are blown away like leaky balloons.

A person who is quite proficient in searching the Internet knows many examples of a single strong left movement in other countries. For example, the leftists of France act as a united cohesive front, raising significant masses to fight since the time of ... the Paris Commune. How much benefit for the cause of communism did this completely united, strong and united left movement bring?

There are also reverse examples, when a strong united left movement brought "people's presidents" to power, for example, in Latin America. But what good is this Latin American experience for us in Russia? We have leftists, no matter how we scold them, but still they set goals farther than Allende and Chavez. Our people will still be more literate and will not be so easily carried away by revolutionary phrases and bright charismatics. Our political situation is completely different from that of Latin America. And why copy something that has either shown its inconsistency, or is hustling on the spot around demagogy about non-Marxist socialism? All more or less serious left-wing organizations in Russia recognize Marxism as a guiding ideology, which means that, at least formally, they set the goal of building communism. It is unlikely that the masses in Russia will respond, for example, toChavez's program , which, in terms of depth and propaganda sound, does not differ much from what Mironov, Zyuganov, and even Putin preach.

Can we assume that the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks in 1917 was carried out, among other things, as a result of the presence of a strong unified leftist movement in the Russian Empire? Didn't the Bolsheviks fight hard and consistently against a really strong, very united left movement, welded together from the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, who seized, in particular, the Soviets? And how did the Bolsheviks treat the Trudoviks in the Duma? Some will object, they say, this is “later”, and “at first” Lenin was building a single party with the Mensheviks and, in general, with all the leftists. It is not true, Lenin tried to subordinate as many revolutionaries and activists as possible to the developed scientific program, but to subordinate exclusively on his, Leninist, scientific-centralist , conditions. Lenin taughtcomplete irreconcilability of ideology and complete independence of the party . Therefore, molding Lenin as a supporter of a single strong left movement is not very smart. Lenin was a supporter of the unity of a strong Bolshevik party and, for that matter, the weakness of the rest of the left movement. Lenin kicked the Mensheviks, Trotskyists, Socialist-Revolutionaries so that they scolded him with the last words, allegedly he fought not against the "common enemy" - tsarism, but against them, the leftists. Doesn't it remind you of anything? All these loudmouths about the "common enemy" deny the strategic necessity, repeatedly proven and repeatedly defended by the classics of Marxism , of isolating opportunism from the labor movement as the mainconditions for the victory of the working class. For them, it doesn’t seem to matter where to lead people, even to the slaughter, but the main thing is to lead. Absolutely irresponsible and stupid position.

It is naive childishness to imagine competition between various organizations and political platforms as a squabbling struggle between individuals and communities driven by selfishness and vanity. Squabbles, swagger, posturing in protest and revolution, unfortunately, are commonplace, but reducing the ideological struggle in the communist movement entirely to these phenomena is an obvious mistake. How would you order us, breakthroughs, to unite, for example, with the RPR, which is entirely engaged in inciting economic resistance, while we consider it necessary to do the exact opposite - propaganda of the dead end of this resistance?

In other words, neophytes often do not understand that the ideological struggle is a form of class struggle and that it proceeds according to its own objective laws. Just the opposite is terrible, when unprincipled unity prevails, which may serve as the first sign that the working-class movement is advancing in the wake of bourgeois politics.

So, for example, the remarks of the left-wing blogger and writer Zavatskaya are surprising:

"There is no representative of the left who does not regret the split of the communist movement."

It's not true, we are. Only a brainless person can regret that such "titans" of provocateurism, double-dealing or Trotskyism as Udaltsov, Razvozzhaev, Mitina, Popov, Novikov, Ferberov, Batov, Biets, Tarasov, Gagina, Balaev and others are not "fighting" with him , including this whole gang of left-wing bloggers, which Zavatskaya herself represents.

Further more. Zawatskaya, in typical neophyte fashion, points out that all leftists have a common goal. Maybe all leftists like Zawatskaya have a common goal, but Marxists cannot have a common goal with anti-Marxists - Trotskyists, nationalists, anarchists, economists and syndicalists, who make up 99% of the payroll of the left movement.

Zavatskaya rhetorically asks:

"Why can't we unite against the common enemy we have."

Any sane person will ask a counter question: with whom, in fact, to unite? What exactly can these people, including Zavatskaya? Well, let's say they don't suit us as party members, they don't meet the requirements of scientific centralism, but they are even completely useless from the point of view of solving tactical local problems.

So, RKRP and Rot Front are so mediocre that they cannot properly collect the necessary documents to register their sharaga. Udaltsov, a young orange revolutionary, took money from Targamadze under the hood of the security forces. Moron! mediocrity! How else can you say? Even without taking into account the political stupidity of this enterprise. Mitina, in general, is only capable of trading her face at all sorts of protocol conferences. Khabarova in the form of Joan of Arc feeds the primitive ideas of the Communist Party. Zavatskaya herself is infected with the spirit of actionism and does not understand that when left-wing activists, without the support of the masses, on their own, picket the NATO base, this is a disgrace, and not “ in short, it was fun .” Popov is building an organization in which every decision must be made by the majority of industrial workers. Well, and so on.

Of course, among the left there are sane people, talented individuals, sincere fighters. But there are no leaders, and, most importantly, few Marxists. The Left, for the most part, do not own Marxism, therefore, no matter what organizational forms they dress up, they are a bunch of poorly motivated party Protestants.

Apart from Proryv and our newspaper, we do not know of strong Marxist publications whose editorial staff would have authority at least among their readers. From time to time, different “projects” appear, either “Icebreaker”, then “Herald of the Storm”, then Lenin Crew, then “Politshturm”, then “Spinoza”, which pee something, and the reader reads something. And that's it. The RCWP, the AUCPB publish regular press, but it is absolutely impossible to read it - one decent article in fifteen at best. So if these leftists are incapable of even organizing a normal Marxist newspaper, then what is the use of uniting with them? For the sake of "circle work"? There is no use in a circle-type organization as long as it is unable to set up a regular Marxist publication.

The unhealthy desire to unite with opportunists of all stripes, as a rule, strikes the opportunists themselves. Unification projectophiles are for the most part limited people who want to mix everything and everyone into an indefinite mess. As Engels wrote:

“We must not allow ourselves to be confused by cries of unification. It is precisely those who are most fond of this slogan who are the main instigators of discord ... These unification fanatics are either limited people who want to mix everything and everything into an indefinite mess, which only needs to settle down a little so that the various elements dumped into a common cauldron, came into an even sharper contradiction among themselves ...; or they are people who want unconsciously ... or consciously to falsify the movement.

Sectarianism
The most "severe" sin in the left movement is considered sectarianism. None of the leftists wants to be considered and called a sectarian. The main theorist of the modern concept of political sectarianism is ... Trotsky:

“They are based on the rejection of the struggle for partial and transitional demands, that is, for the elementary interests and needs of the working masses, as they are. Preparation for revolution means for the sectarians to convince themselves of the advantages of socialism. They propose turning their backs on the "old" trade unions, i.e., tens of millions of organized workers, as if the masses could live outside the conditions of a real class struggle! They remain indifferent to the internal struggles in the reformist organizations, as if one could win over the masses without intervening in this struggle! They refuse to make a practical distinction between bourgeois democracy and fascism, as if the masses could not feel this difference at every step! Sectarians are able to distinguish only two colors: red and black. In order not to lead yourself into temptation, they simplify reality... They are unable to find access to the masses and therefore willingly accuse the masses of being unable to rise to revolutionary ideas... These fruitless politicians do not need a bridge in the form of transitional demands at all, because they are not going to cross over to the other side. They are marking time, content to repeat the same skinny abstractions. Political events are for them an occasion for comment, not for action. Since sectarians, like all sorts of muddlers and miracle-workers in general, receive snaps from reality at every step, they live in a state of perpetual irritation, continually complain about the “regime” and “methods,” and wallow in petty intrigues. In their own circles they usually set up a regime of despotism. The political prostration of sectarianism merely complements, like a shadow, the prostration of opportunism,

True, the classics also used the word "sectarianism", but only as a synonym for isolation from the masses. Basically, this term in the collected works of, for example, Lenin is mentioned in the course of ridiculing the accusations of sectarianism thrown at him by his opponents, including the main "anti-sectarian" Trotsky.

Separation from the masses, generally speaking, was previously understood as an unwillingness to conduct mass propaganda in the truest sense of the word: to produce and distribute printed materials and agitate people. Today, there is practically no left that does not want to make itself known as loudly as possible, to spread their ideas, no matter how miserable they may be, or even the name and symbolism. Quite the contrary, the left is trying too hard to please the public, rushing like mad after anyone showing even the slightest interest, ready to transform Capital into comics, make stupid videos, write on idiotic topics, answer stupid questions, if only the followers put “likes” . In short, sheer tailism, not sectarianism.

Separation from the masses is also understood as the absence of influence in the proletarian and intelligentsia milieu. But the lack of influence can be the reason for sectarianism, that is, the unwillingness to conduct propaganda and agitation in these environments, and maybe also the reason for the unscientific nature of the theoretical position itself, which does not find firm adherents. And one more thing: the lack of influence can be the cause of an objective situation, when only long-term painstaking personnel work in the conditions of the defeat of communism and the retreat of the communist movement can reverse the negative trend of weakness and disorganization of the working class. But the loudmouths about sectarianism do not think about such things at all, in their eyes, since there is no iron tread of millions of columns of the proletariat, then the problem is in sectarianism. If only everything was that simple.

Usually, the accusers of sectarianism themselves have never carried out propaganda among the "popular masses", so it seems to them a very clever and even brilliant idea to write in a simpler way, print out more and distribute more actively. And it's in the hat. In fact, it has already been written hundreds of times easier than ever, and tens of thousands of copies have been printed, and handed out everywhere. This is first. And secondly, party work is not Vesti Nedeli, but systemic propaganda of the scientific worldview , which recruits and educates revolutionaries, which gains authority among the masses. Therefore, the main thing in propaganda is not the accessibility of the presentation, but scientific character, relevance and efficiency.Our accusers, of course, do not know how to write scientifically themselves, so they are eager to be simpler and exploit imaginary relevance and false efficiency.

How can you call our newspaper sectarian if it is published on the Internet, that is, it is available to each of the 75 million people in the Russian Federation who use the Internet every day? How can the authors of the newspaper be considered sectarians when they all try to analyze with scientific precision the pressing issues of the socio-political, economic and spiritual development of mankind?

Leaderism
The second most important charge is leaderism. Complains , for example, bashful distributor of our materials:

“Today, among the left, you will not meet anyone, so everyone considers themselves almost a “guru of Marxism”, experts and leaders, like Lenin. And all others are treated as "lower" beings who do not understand the "true" essence of things.

Now every more or less significant representative of the left movement is primarily engaged in the promotion of his exorbitantly swollen image, the growth of popularity and fame. It has become fashionable to create dozens, hundreds and thousands of Internet communities focused on the leader's principles of their founders.

We fully agree when specific claims of opportunism are made against specific individuals, but the claim that someone considers himself right and propagates his ideas looks very strange. What about someone who considers himself quite knowledgeable in some matters? Yes, it is difficult to attribute Khabarov, and Andreev, and Popov, and Ogorodnikov, and Tyulkin, and Semin, and Shilov to the gurus of Marxism, although some of them tipped themselves into experts, but this does not mean that the "guru of Marxism" is not maybe at all. Were Lenin and Stalin "Guru of Marxism"? Were Lenin and Stalin leaders? Is it right to look up to them, to educate leaders, including self-education?

Our newspaper is deeply convinced of the correctness of the theoretical position of the editorial board of the Proryv magazine, deeply convinced of the correctness of its main employee, V.A. Podguzov. For us, therefore, Podguzov is a kind of guru of Marxism. We recognize the outstanding role of Podguzov in the development of modern communist theory and, consequently, his scientific and organizational authority.

The logic of the objector is reduced to the negation of authorities. And this anarchist childishness has already set the teeth on edge.

There is nothing strange in the fact that around the most theoretically savvy people their supporters, circles and organizations are formed. Moreover, there is nothing strange in the fact that different theoreticians of Marxism compete with each other, argue and fight on key issues of developing a strategy and tactics of revolutionary struggle. The period of having five to ten different political platforms will inevitably pass, but most likely only from the moment when a truly scientific platform and program is developed by someone, which in practice will begin to prove its worth. At the same time, the process of fermentation and boiling of the left movement will begin to create clumps of opportunists against Bolshevism, the unprincipled left will run to unite against real communists as the influence of the latter grows. If there is no victorious theory, then fermentation will continue,

We naturally believe that it is the breakthroughs who will create the Party of Scientific Centralism and thus organize the proletarian masses into the working class to establish its political dictatorship. However, not excluding the possibility and even welcoming the movement of someone "parallel course" to the same objective truths. And, of course, we will not experience feelings of inconvenience, misunderstanding or annoyance from the fact that the people of Tyulkin, priests, Balaev, Khabarovsk, Sorkin and others adhere to a similar approach towards themselves. This is completely logical and strictly corresponds to the law of irreconcilability of ideology.

How can one “get used to it” if we disagree on fundamental issues?

Practice
Strange as it may seem, the main sin of the guardians of the left unity lies in their misunderstanding of the foundations of Marxist philosophy. Society exists objectively, is a special form of matter and is knowable. Therefore, science, that is, Marxism, which operates with objective truths about the class struggle in concrete historical conditions, must lie at the basis of communist policy. Moreover, the very goal of the communist movement must be stated through theoretical analysis and concretely. There cannot be several correct answers to these questions, just as there cannot be several truths on one occasion. These answers, correct and incorrect, are developed by various theorists of Marxism, based on the theory and practice of the past, applying their worldview to the surrounding reality. These are fundamental software things, concentrated expression of the whole theory. No one should give up on them, and rarely does anyone actually do it. Thus, each politically mature group or organization has its own ideas about the strategy and tactics of the development of the labor movement and the revolution, naturally considering everyone else to be opportunists. So it is, the truth is one for every occasion, and there are an infinite number of errors. The question is fundamentally only whether at least someone has achieved objective truth or whether everyone is mistaken in general. and the delusions are endless. The question is fundamentally only whether at least someone has achieved objective truth or whether everyone is mistaken in general. and the delusions are endless. The question is fundamentally only whether at least someone has achieved objective truth or whether everyone is mistaken in general.

The guardians consciously or unconsciously take the position of Udaltsovism, the essence of which is the “development of protest”, including through rallies, economism and the unification of the swan, cancer and pike. This is justified, as a rule, by references to practice, they say, theory is theory, but in practice something like that.

What is practice? Practice is those specific actions that will give the desired result. What is a theory? This is a system of general conclusions about the essential causes that give rise to phenomena. Theory and practice are opposites that are identical . What is the theory, what is the practice.

Revolutionary theory is an integral part of revolutionary practice .

Any meaningful human action is always preceded by an act of thinking, that is, an act of reflecting the objective universe of one quality or another. This is how this act of thinking is connected with action, including the result, so any theory is connected with practice, that is, an inseparable, obligatory connection.

Practice should be understood as exclusively goal-oriented and goal-achieving practice as a practice that is carried out in accordance with a general and universal theory. The specific details of the activity, being mastered, enrich the theory with real specifics, making the theory true. In this sense, truth is always concrete, since it is verified by effective and only effective practice. Practice tests the consistency of the general and general theory.

The history of mankind proves that the most effective practice was born on the basis of a perfect theory. Approaching the practical implementation of the theory, performers have to solve a huge range of tasks that are not directly included in this particular theory, since it was opposed by an objective, each time new, changed reality. But as soon as the practice ends with a victorious result, humanity receives a reliable tool for moving along the path of progress, since now the theory has been confirmed by practice on the basis of the current, concrete reality. Consequently, the whole diamatic essence of the interaction between theory and practice lies in their inseparability. They are impossible without each other. But practice must be spoken of as a higher entity than subjective theory, because practice,

Therefore, the gossips of "practitioners" do not have any common sense, they are simply ignorant. Isn't the establishment and publication of a newspaper a practice? Let the "practitioners" set up and set up a Marxist press at the level of our publication, and then we'll talk about practice. In the meantime, "practitioners" only at rallies trample on shoes and distribute toilet papers with a primitive content at the entrance factories.

Our practice, based on our theory, is basically the following. The general strategy of struggle is the organization of the proletarian masses into a working class in order to seize political power. Strategy is the concentrated expression of Marxist theory. The tactics of struggle is an integral part of the strategy , the implementation of the strategy at a given particular moment in time. Tactics proceeds from taking into account the available means and the class alignment of forces in given concrete conditions.

Today, therefore, it is necessary to educate the backbone of propagandist theorists, the commissars of communism, who will develop a network of printed publications with the propaganda of Marxism, the strongholds of the party. There is only one factor for such personnel forging - the development of the theory of Marxism, that is, its purification from opportunism and further victories in the theoretical form of the class struggle in the form of answers to questions about the reasons for the defeat of the CPSU, about the plan for building communism, and so on. On the other hand, all interested and supporters should show a certain persistence in self-education.

The party we are building is not a mutual aid union or a legal clinic, as some believe. It is impossible to earn political authority with life hacks and legal advice. We are faced with the task of earning, first of all, scientific authority . Communists must become the political vanguard , that is, they must strictly fulfill their functions.

Therefore, we are working to ensure that young and not only people come and stand with us on a par, work in a newspaper and a magazine. The unifying factor is the ideological position expressed in the articles and the publishing process itself. Communication between people, both communists and supporters and sympathizers, is carried out through the propaganda word. Of course, personal contacts are also possible, but this is an insignificant element, while printing is the basis of the foundations.

This is the revolutionary practice at this particular historical moment. A potential element or prerequisite for communism in today's capitalist reality is a person who has mastered Marxism to a sufficient degree, who systematically conducts propaganda and engages in self-education with unrelenting pressure. A relatively realized element or prerequisite of communism is an organization of like-minded Marxists, gaining influence among the advanced proletarians in the form of growing scientific authority. Implemented elementor the premise of communism is a stable bond between the party and sympathetic groups of proletarians in the form of organization into a class. The scaling up of this state constitutes the essence of the revolutionary process and at the same time represents a growth in the organization and consciousness of the working class.

The degree of consciousness and organization of the working class is the very force of action, and the degree of organization of the exploiting class is the force of counteraction, the ratios of which determine the limits of stability of the social form of matter called capitalism. The quantitative parameter of the strength of the working class is concrete people who own Marxism and act in accordance with its provisions, taking into account the situation. From a certain moment, their activity appears in the form of a party of the vanguard type, which establishes a strong connection with the masses.

Conclusion
A strong united left movement is an opportunist unity in the first place . Marxism teaches compromise and tactical alliances in politics, but Marxism denies the unity of the left, a common goal, and so on. At the moment, in order to create a need for compromises, or even more so for a tactical alliance, a strong influential party is needed. But compromises and tactical alliances must be strictly justified and dictated by the conditions for the development of the communist struggle.

Left Unity screamers are basically mentally lazy Protestants who are unwilling to work for communism, as history demands.

A. Redin
25/07/2018

https://prorivists.org/leftfronts/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Oct 10, 2022 3:01 pm

About the organization
No. 10/74.X.2022

The events taking place in the world penetrate more and more deeply into every corner of society. Even the most closed in their small-town world people begin to feel like a part of something bigger. They begin to feel that it affects their lives more. Not noticing the previously indirect influence, now they feel the direct one. As soon as something sounded on the TV, the consequences are already visible through the window. The wheel is shaking. Clay feet cannot bear his mortal body. No matter how you put patches of bright and colorful materials on it, the current roof, standing on a rotten foundation, cannot be repaired. You can't fix a hole in a wall by hanging a huge plasma TV on it. But in order not to create a wrong association, a colossus with feet of clay is not capitalism itself (since it is still a serious, strong and strong enemy), but the little world that the townsfolk mentally built,

As Comrade Ya. Dubov noted in his work, there is no such house to hide.

Social networks, channels, groups, blogs, etc. become guides in the search for truth. A bunch of different incoherent facts, clipped quotes, torn phrases, etc. pours from the gadget into the eyes, but this huge flow of information does not give answers. Even religious organizations do not have time to adapt to the situation and direct the flock in the right direction. They reassure, talking about "yesterday", but the flock is already trembling from "today". The information avalanche is full of crazy ideas, notes, etc. You scroll, you read, you jump from channel to channel, and no one ever talks about the reason for everything that happens. Nobody even hints. Individuals, nations, races - anyone is to blame, but not ... he. Capital.

At the word “capital”, no one will reproduce in their heads a crisis, war, famine ... Someone will present the association of this word with a bunch of banknotes, someone will imagine a thick book with a “bearded uncle” on the cover, but few people imagine capital as a relationship between people. You go to the stock exchange - capital is to blame, you collect money for treatment - capital is to blame, you go to kill the same untreated and unemployed two-legged - capital is to blame.

If you are reading an article in this newspaper, then most likely you have already gone some way in search of the truth. And if you have already read a number of articles from newspapers and magazines, then you are already on the way to understanding the reasons for what is happening.

If you are just starting to get acquainted with Marxism, browsing left-wing websites, watching various kinds of left-wing bloggers, then you probably also encountered a bunch of “everything and everything”. And in all this heap, there are no answers that are really deeply attached to reality. And, probably, you often hear the phrase “we need to organize”. This phrase is like a commandment of holy scripture. One gets the feeling that as soon as this need is fulfilled, a happy life will come.

The illusion begins to take shape that you just need to get together at once - and everything will work out right away. Or rent a large building, write the internal rules of the organizational order, taking into account modern specifics, bring people into this building - and here it is: "There is such a party ...". But alas… Every year we hear: “we need to organize ourselves”.

In the newspaper you can find a scientific answer to this question, it runs like a red thread through almost all articles. Organization is personnel. Personnel in the Stalinist sense. Frames are everything! Marxist cadres for a healthy party. Personnel, relations within which, no longer determines the capital. Relations that determine the struggle with capital. It should be like the stem cells of an organism, with a large scope of knowledge, in order to replace any narrowly focused position if necessary without loss of quality. Each element of the organization performs a common task. To perform this task as required, it is necessary to have competence in this field, theoretical and practical training. That is why the party must consist of cadres with a wide range of knowledge. This is why narrow-minded specialization is bad. How to organize yourself in modern conditions and turn into the cell that is necessary for a healthy organism? And the newspaper answers this question. Another thing is that the answer does not suit many. But the classics of Marxism have long warned that science is not a wide highway. But there are people who are trying to come up with a "light option", but this is just complacency. An example of a “light option” and its consequences was shown to us by Gorbachev, who recently left this world. He and his admirers were looking for easy ways and ended up in the camp of the enemy. An example of a “light option” and its consequences was shown to us by Gorbachev, who recently left this world. He and his admirers were looking for easy ways and ended up in the camp of the enemy. An example of a “light option” and its consequences was shown to us by Gorbachev, who recently left this world. He and his admirers were looking for easy ways and ended up in the camp of the enemy.

A household example: in the family, only mom understands cooking, the phone rang (urgently mom is on the phone), she passes the stirrer to her husband, asks to look at the pot on the stove, when she returns she sees a scalded man, burnt dishes and, accordingly, no breakfast for the whole family.

Or imagine such an example. The bus driver became ill and could not continue driving. But each passenger of this bus has the knowledge and ability to drive the bus. In this case, the bus will continue to move.

If we say that there will be thousands of Lenins in the party, then who will do the rough work?

These Lenins will do everything that the party needs. There is no hard work for a communist. There is an understanding of a common goal. And if there is a division of labor in the party, it is only for the clear achievement of the set goals, and not for an incentive to compete for higher places. It is difficult to imagine this practically in the capitalist basis, since the principle of existence “all against all” operates in it, and the division of labor also serves as an incentive. Everyone sees the picture: the higher the position, the fewer responsibilities and the easier it is to evade responsibility. And many want to climb into an easy chair, where you can sit and watch the swarming of the unworthy and enjoy life. But that doesn't work. They will have to tremble forever - as if other applicants for warm places would not throw them out of there.

Now remember going out with friends to the forest. No relationships based on capital. If you are already experienced in these trips, then you know that everyone takes on the task that needs to be done: someone for the fire, someone for the tent, someone for preparing the territory and frying barbecue, etc. And if someone knows the matter better than others, he, with the tacit consent of the others, gets to work. You will not have thoughts in your head how to substitute, how to get around, how to do less and eat more. You are busy with a common cause.

The word "organization" is translated from ancient Greek as "instrument", which fits very well into our understanding of building a party. It's easier and more understandable. Since the word organization pulls on itself many different associations that distract from the essence of the matter. And with the word "tool" it becomes clearer.

The tools are different. No matter what kind of specialist you are, you can’t build an entire house with one ax. You can, of course, but the result will be better when you have the right tool, the right place and time. What kind of tool is now and what it is needed for - it shines through all the articles of the newspaper. At this stage, this tool is self-education, necessary for the formation of the core of the party. After the implementation of the task with the help of this tool, it will be possible to strengthen others, depending on the situation. For example, imagine how you would react if something yells to paint the walls in a house that doesn't have a foundation yet. And if you have not yet figured out the issue, if you still do not know that the house also does not have a foundation, then it may seem to you that someone unreasonably accused a person of being a “fool” for painting the walls. And if you think so, then read and understand.

So, to summarize: to form the core of the party, trained cadres are needed, the tool for forming cadres is self-education, the inclusion of a newspaper and a magazine in the work.

When you read Capital (especially when you are tired after work), it seems that there is a repetition of the same position that you have already mastered. But after reading Capital, and also after reading the attacks on Capital by the "critics", the whole picture of Marx's painstaking work opens before you. Such work that so far no loopholes have been found to get through any gap and cast doubt on the truths proven by Capital. This is the greatest example of the dialectical method. The method of conscientious creative thinking. A method that must be assimilated by those who have chosen the path of struggle for communism.

If everyone understands everything, and everything is so well proven, then why is there no organization based on the theses of scientific centralism? Why is time wasted on empty articles and videos? On actions to provoke the authorities to aggression? It seems strange. And someone, after all, goes to different bloggers, tells them about the “Breakthrough”, about the “tools” offered there, but in response either a smile or the stigma of “sectarians” ....

But some answers to the reasons for such behavior have already been described by one wonderful writer. Therefore, comrade, after reading the PNC in Breakthrough, I recommend that you study the following works: “What to do?”, “One step forward, two steps back”, “Childhood disease of “leftism” in communism.” After studying these works, reinforce your perception by studying the “History of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks” short course, and it will become clear to you what kind of organization the communists need.

All that is required in the current circumstances is to increase your level of knowledge, to conduct competent propaganda on modern material.

F. Negtsid
9/10/2022

https://prorivists.org/74_org/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Oct 11, 2022 3:31 pm

About raising children
№ 8/72.VIII.2022

The Soviet system of education was based on the social equality of Soviet citizens. This was a condition for effective public education through kindergartens, schools, circles, camps, etc. And in the 90s, all this collapsed. Formally, everything was the same, but in fact, a kindergarten or school of the 2000s was no longer equal to the analogue of the 80s. Different environment, different goals, different personnel, different contingent. If we take into account that even these social institutions - kindergarten, circles, camps - have become accessible to not everyone, then we will see that it is categorically impossible to compare the attitude of parents towards children directly. The parent of the 80s was confident in school, and the parent of the 90s, and even more so of the USE era, is no longer confident at all.

Plus, in the 90s, the safety of the child in society sank sharply. If in the 70s it was possible to be sure that the child would safely reach the school on the other side of the city, and if he got lost, then they would help him, then in the 90s crime, alcoholism and drug addiction, psychopathization and sexual violence went off scale and began to really threaten children . Therefore, this function was taken over by the parents. A child by the hand up to 13-14 years old is taken to school, and this is normal. My child actually ran into a teenage extortionist gang on their way to the pool. In the USSR, this was an emergency on a regional scale, in the 2000s it was the norm. I had to personally catch and beat the idiots - the police did not work.

Further. Now we have a generation of parents born in the 80s - early 90s, who went through all the chthonic horror of perestroika and collapse in childhood. It was mostly meager and not replete with either proteins or sweets food, cheap clothes of poor quality, the inability to buy toys and sharply manifested inequality. When my daughter asks for sausages for breakfast instead of healthy milk porridge, I remember that at her age I saw sausage once a month as a delicacy, and I can’t refuse. Parents are trying to give their children what they themselves did not receive in childhood, it is difficult to blame for this and it is impossible to stop or slow it down, especially by talking.

Concerning entry into adulthood. In the USSR, entry meant labor, which was held in high esteem and the only legal way of a social lift. Under bourgeois conditions, labor is automatically equal to EXPLOITATION. What parent would willingly sell their child into slavery to a bastard entrepreneur? What parent will give it to the bourgeois state, which will easily burn it in a tank in the name of another Abramovich yacht? To reproach parents for delaying the child's meeting with slavery and the army is directly bourgeois propaganda.

Makarenko repeatedly wrote that it is not the parent who educates, but the environment educates. The ability of parents to create an environment is minimal. They can only react secondarily to the environment in a very narrow corridor of solutions. Therefore, it is necessary to start from the environment, that is, from the REVOLUTION, restoring social equality, the system of public education, providing an adequate level of security and standard of living, and then you can demand something from your parents. Bourgeois society, on the other hand, cannot really create even a stable family environment, given that 50-70% of marriages break up, mainly for economic reasons.

... From the point of view of Marxists, a good parent is one who fights for communism, because he understands that only in conditions without commodity-money relations can a worthy person be brought up. But at the same time, the communist will not reproach the proletarian for the “airbag” that parents are trying to give their children under capitalism in conditions when the revolution is still far away. This is a form of spontaneous resistance to capitalism, which wants to exploit the proletarian to the maximum, and the proletarian tries to dodge.

I. Bortnik
19/08/2022

In contact withFacebookLivejournalTwitterSkypeWhatsAppTelegram
On parenting : One comment
Volume
19/08/2022 AT 22:13
Thanks.

Honest articles that contrast the difference between USSR and bourgeois Russia are extremely valuable for young people like me.

«To reproach parents for delaying the child’s meeting with slavery and the army is directly bourgeois propaganda.»

«The communist will not reproach the proletarian for the “airbag” that parents are trying to give their children under capitalism in conditions when the revolution is still far away. This is a form of spontaneous resistance to capitalism, which wants to exploit the proletarian to the maximum, and the proletarian tries to dodge.»

I hadn’t thought of this angle. In the USA, we are bombarded by bourgeois propagandist of every stripe to start internships and job training for children as soon as possible. I am not a parent, but I have seen the pressure and the self-blaming when a parent compares herself and her child with other parents and their children. It was very painful for me to try to console a parent’s sobbing during her mental breakdown. The comparison between proletarian parents between middle-class parents is especially traumatic for proletarian parents. The proletarian parent believes that she has ruined her child. =(

Of course, bourgeois psychologists talk about self-acceptance and so forth. The reality is that poor people are considered failures in bourgeois society. In effect, bourgeois psychologists are telling people to accept that they are failures and don’t be so hard on themselves. Their “analysis” is may help in consoling some, but is missing the point.

Just accept it! But how can a parent just accept their own failure to bring up a child? How can a parent ever accept that her child is considered a failure, and by extension, her as well? It is extremely traumatic for a parent. In reality, It is not even the question of accepting a harsh reality because bringing up a child is a social responsibility. Furthermore, raising children cannot be done by proletarians who are already busy raising capitalists of all stripes who refuse to work like proper adults!

For Marxists, we are saying that private property relations and the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie ultimately ensures the poverty of the many. The bourgeoisie controls money creation, production, income, living conditions, education, universities, news media, culture and so forth to ensure maximum physical and mental domination to continue the extraction of surplus value. The situation is this: (A) The powerful bourgeoisie promote itself as being successful, then anyone who is not a bourgeoisie is automatically a failure in some ways. No amount of sophisticated mental gymnastics psychologists can teach is able to counter the overwhelming bourgeois cultural reality of our societies. (B) Under capitalism, the majority will always be poor and often unemployed. Therefore, one can see that mental illnesses and depression are INEVITABLE within capitalist society! QED!

Until psychologists become Marxists, all they do will just be fixing the symptoms and not the disease. And no, nobody really believes that a homeless person or a person on governmental assistance is as successful as Jeff Bezos. Don’t be silly..

When you think about it, it’s not even the bourgeoisie that is doing the self-promoting, but unconscious proletariat (who may be well paid, so the truth is harder to see) who do that for the bourgeoisie. They are just like the idiot scientists who invented the atom bombs for the United States government, so that the US bourgeoisie could drop the bombs onto the Japanese people when Japan was already surrendering, in order to nuclear blackmail the USSR. To this day, science professors still promote science as a good in itself without deeper analysis or any qualification. Sure, an endeavor to find the truth is good. However, when your society is controlled by the psychopathic bourgeoisie, then science is easily twisted into something darker. My professors’ inability to think or act two steps ahead is also the result of capitalism. After all, creating thoughtful, courageous. principled, farsighted, holistic, and decisive leaders who are able to look at reality and organize people towards a new way of life does NOT help the bourgeoisie’s extraction of surplus value! In capitalism, representatives (of capital) are fine, but not leaders. We don’t want leaders!

Some people mature faster. Some people mature slower. Some people want to choose another profession after a while. All people are distracted by endless stream of brainless entertainment, which slow down their mental development. In capitalism, none of this is considered for the majority because capital only cares for profits, which is always made at the expense of the majority, as Marx showed. In communism, everyone, no matter their differences, can be a confident and truly free member of society working for a better living standard of all. not rather the market or the bourgeoisie like it. Only a communist society can raise children properly. Practically, having family and children has now become a middle-class privilege in the US. Let the shameless white-haired professors keep defending capitalism!

One of the reasons why proletarian parents and children are even listening to these clueless middle class professors is the same reason of their misery—culture under capitalism which places money as an indicator of success. The professor has a position and has been given the privilege to reproduce so he must know something. Lets be fair: yes, he may know proper grammar and even some half-truths here and there but he has nowhere near an adequate comprehension of what needs to be done. In fact, he is more likely to work against communism during every single waking moment.

All the privileged middle-class nonsense about early training and so forth within capitalist society ultimately amounts to trying to find the best seats on the sinking Titanic of capitalism. Proletarian parents listen to the middle-class parents’ “solutions” that are physically not possible for them: How can a private school educate all children? How can a laboratory let all high school children do volunteer work for them? Would middle class parents be honest about these opportunities in the first place? What happen to the child who didn’t get the opportunity? One of my students once told me that education should be limited so his own education can be valued more highly! Middle class parents can’t see the bigger picture (much less acting against it), and they have reasons to keep society unequal out of narrow-mindedness and naked cynicism! Even when proletarians are all educated, we will have saturated the market. Congratulations. Now we get college professors who have to work three jobs to survive! Now you get scientific researchers who have to rely on governmental assistance! Working harder and smarter will only exacerbate the saturation of the market, but as long as one is a narrow-minded «genius» then I guess capitalism is just fine.

However, Importantly, the middle-class/petite-bourgeois “solution” here is diametrically opposed to actions that are scientifically appropriate for social development (ie revolution and creation of an equal society).

The situation is this: On the sinking Titanic, bankers, speculators, insurers, stockbrokers, corrupt proletarians, corrupt trade unionists, liberals, conservatives, rabid conservatives, social democrats, Trotskyists and open fascists, selfish and ignorant petite bourgeoisie, proprietors of gambling, investors of real estate, bourgeois politicians for all stripes, priests of all religions, bourgeois professors of all stripes, stock market parasites big and small, bourgeoisie big and small, landlords big and small, and all their hangers-on and menials all struggle for the best seats within the sinking Titanic. Every single group has their own silly idealistic “theories” and narrow “truths” to justify their own selfish existence and way of life. All these groups are often against the other groups, but they always ultimately sustain themselves at the expense of the oppressed peoples of the world. All these groups pay lip service to the fantastical ideas of freedom, fraternity, and democracy while, in practice, they support the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the private property relations that bourgeois governments guard, since private property relations is their very lifeblood. In contrast, the solution for honest people everywhere in the world wherever they are forced to work, as Lenin et al showed, is that under the leadership of a Marxist party together the oppressed masses, the Titanic CAN be steered clear of the iceberg and towards a scientific organization of human society!

Unlike all those groups mentioned before, Marxism offers a real way forward. The road requires a titanic physical and mental struggle as well as endless self-improvement, but it is the only road to happiness for all!

REPLY

https://prorivists.org/72_children/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Wed Oct 19, 2022 2:59 pm

Defeat or victory?
No. 10/74.X.2022

Looking for opportunists

In the Russian left environment, the question of the attitude of the communists towards the NWO in Ukraine is still acute. The dispute usually revolves around one question: should the communists support the bourgeois government in the fight against fascism, or, conversely, want the defeat of their bourgeois government?

One wing, the brightest representative of which is M.V. Popov, insists on supporting the bourgeois government in the fight against the so-called. "American fascism for export". The professor even comes out in defense of bourgeois democracy, which, in his opinion, although it is only a form of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, under which it is nevertheless easier for the communists to wage a class struggle than under fascism. It's funny that we have some Trotskyists who, since 2014, have been opposing Russia's actions against Ukraine with the same argument, only as a fascist state that tramples on the bourgeois democracy established after the coup in Ukraine, they see the Russian Federation!

The other wing, whose main mouthpiece is Semin, advocates that "the communists want their government to be defeated." He declared the armed conflict in Ukraine, firstly, a tragedy and madness that must be stopped, and secondly, imperialist in nature, and therefore Semin, shaking the 26th volume of Lenin’s works and calling his opponents Kautskyites, calls on the audience to “awaken and wishing defeat for his government.

Tellingly, there is a rational grain in both positions on the issue. And "fascism for export" must be fought, and yes, the imperialist war is going on, and, indeed, the interests of the proletariat in this war are not defended, but trampled ... But all this is particular, strokes scattered across a canvas woven from theoretical and practical impotence and the uncertainty of the left. So both camps are right and both are wrong.

All these arguments are devoid of one important thing - they do not try to lead the reasoner to a decision, to the theoretical development of a method for a successful class struggle in the current conditions . The desire to carry out the revolution is the main criterion by which it is necessary to determine who is an opportunist and who is not!

Therefore, I will not join here in the argument about which of the parties to the conflict is more or less reactionary; I want to look at what is happening from a more practical point of view. While we are deciding whom we should support in this war, we forget to ask ourselves, who is “we” in general, how and why can “we” support or not support someone? Is “we” the proletariat, or the party, or the communist international? Quite often I see how people ask propagandists: “What is the use of this chatter, what are we going to do?”, And in response they receive only a mocking reinforcement of the comment, they say, look at all what nonsense they write to us! As I understand it, “we” are the proletariat of the whole world, no more, no less. Semin speaks directly about this, summarizing the hour and a half (!) video with the words:

“But still, I really hope, I believe in our common awakening ... I believe that the Russian and Ukrainian peoples, the working people will understand where their real enemies are!”

This is how a communist of the 21st century acts on the eve of a world war - he denounces capitalists, social chauvinists, opportunists on his YouTube channel and waits for an “awakening of the masses” in response. It is waiting for ordinary workers from the armies of the warring countries to hear enough of Marxist truths on their smartphones, to see clearly, climb out of the trenches, embrace and turn their bayonets against the bourgeoisie... This is how journalism will change the world!

But can the people awaken and can the "awakened people" oppose anything to American financial capital armed with intercontinental missiles, military bases around the world, satellites, technological and information dominance of the Internet, science, first-class organization in many areas? Is it necessary to poke around in the 26th volume of Lenin in search of analogies with today, or is it time to learn how to write such volumes ourselves? Is it possible to wait until the trade union of couriers or car factory workers becomes an organized working class in the conditions of bourgeois democracy saved by the bourgeois government from American “fascism for export” (or from Russian imperialism, at worst)?

Awakening or awakening?

We all know that the proletariat is a revolutionary class, that revolutionary spirit is embedded in it, but we just can’t feel it for 30 years now in the countries of the former USSR and much longer in the countries of the so-called. "golden billion". The hired worker massively demonstrates indifference and distrust of communist ideals, caring mainly about his own material well-being and the speedy exit from the state of the hired worker. For some reason, the revolutionary proletariat does not see its great destiny and wants to quickly part with its place of honor in the system of division of labor. An exploiter, a speculator, a beggar on the Internet, or, at worst, a manager close to the exploiter and receiving handouts from him - these are the places that the proletarian in its mass aspires to in the 21st century. Capital does its best to perpetuate this habit,

“The proletariat is a disunited, jelly-like mass that “boils”, above all, when the market situation deteriorates sharply, and “cools down” when it improves, while the bourgeoisie, on the contrary, is politically organized with the help of its state and its parties, perfectly is aware of its interests and maintains its dominance. This is the essence of the “under-class” nature of the proletarians” (“ On the relationship between the concepts of the proletariat and the working class ”).

The proletariat, firstly , has a bourgeois consciousness, and secondlyalways follows the path of least resistance. The propagandists of “the rotten nature of man and the naturalness of inequality” are right in some ways: indeed, not all people are the same in terms of having a conscience, courage, not all are equally smart and not all are equally active. Of course, wealth is not a universal measure of the ability of an individual - in this, adherents of the naturalness of the market are deeply mistaken. Conscience, for example, is a serious obstacle to the acquisition of material well-being in a capitalist society, and laziness, stupidity, cowardice, on the contrary, are not obstacles in life as a whole. Courage, physical strength, quick wits can be advantages, but are not necessary for achieving capitalist success. Any weakling, any vegetable, stupid, physically and mentally ill person can be rich, can own capital and increase it, if it has good starting conditions or has become useful to someone already rich, fit into the market situation. Evidence here can be the obvious depressing physical and mental parameters of many of the world's oligarchs, "artists" and "musicians", increasingly reminiscent of freak circus performers and at the same time having large fortunes. However, it is impossible to deny that any associations of people that are successful in their activities are led by enthusiasts, people with an active life position, “passionaries”. It is not necessary to understand these qualities as necessarily positive - for example, the leader of a criminal group or a terrorist organization is also always active and motivated, can be very brave, strong and healthy physically, can be quick-witted, but his goals are directed against humanity, which means that

The proletariat is not revolutionary in itself. Revolutionary is the working class , formed from the proletarians by the vanguard Marxist party. However, the proletariat is the basis,from which the Marxists themselves arise and the revolutionary class is formed. The intellectual, organizational vanguard arises from enthusiasts, "passionaries" burning with the idea of ​​the liberation of the working people. The first task of communists is to be such enthusiasts themselves, leaders of the liberation movement, the second task is to seek out, isolate, form potential leaders, commissars from the masses of the people, recruit them to their side so that they cannot be intercepted by bourgeois deceivers who drug their hotheads with ideas of national patriotism , "correct capitalism", bourgeois democracy, monarchy and the like. The proletariat, as I said above, always follows the path of least resistance, but this path of least resistance is cut through by enthusiasts, leaders, and the only question is

The proletarian who embarked on the path of struggle for communism begins to think and act as a revolutionary, in the opposite way from the logic of the proletarian. Instead of the goal of bargaining for higher wages, he aims to win state power and build a communist society.

There will be no awakening, and the fire of the world revolution will not flare up by itself. The workers of all countries will not become brothers, the slaves will not throw off their chains, the Russian and the Ukrainian will not go together against their bourgeoisie. To make a revolution is not to write poetry, there are few heartfelt speeches here. Any spontaneous revolt is immediately saddled by political prostitutes of "offended" oligarchic groups, who traditionally cooperate with foreign intelligence services. So, through the change of governments, the change of owners of the main industries, modern wars are won, countries are captured and turned into colonies, allies are acquired for future wars. Increasing the education and class awareness of the masses through exhortations, correct predictions of a dark future, calls to "read books" is impossible. The success of the communist revolution depends entirely on the organization, on the party of the working class, from its scientific and theoretical training, from its internal stability and fidelity to the chosen course, from its theoretical and practical activity, from the timeliness of its actions. Regrettable as it may be for the poets and romanticizers of the revolution, the sacred “people” is able to act productively only on command, it is waiting for the leader, waiting to be organized and shown the way for him, explaining and proving why this particular road must be followed. To shift responsibility from oneself to the people, being a Marxist, to wait for the working people to “come to their senses” or “wake up”, instead of working to create a competent command center to organize this people to fight at the moment when the people realize that they have been betrayed and deceived when he is looking for someone to follow, this is no less harm than opportunism.

Objectives of the parties to the war

What today's left has succeeded in is in denouncing the bourgeoisie and the bourgeois states. A lot has already been said about the causes of the military conflict in Ukraine, so here, in order to understand my argumentation in the future, I will only briefly go over this topic, adding my own considerations to the facts already described by other leftists.

Firstly , the open intervention in the civil war in Ukraine, on the one hand by the Russian Federation, and on the other by the NATO bloc, has become at this stage one of the episodes of the policy of American imperialism to maintain world hegemony. And its main opponent on the world stage remains socialist China. The victory or defeat of the bourgeois Russian Federation in the conflict is not indifferent to the final configuration of forces.

Secondly, the armed conflict became an act of clash between Russian and Western capitals in Europe. The Ukrainian government that was established after the coup in 2014 has prioritized the interests of those Ukrainian exporters who would benefit the most from free trade with Europe. The most important products for such exports are oil, gas and non-ferrous metals, which are available in abundance on the territory of Ukraine. The development of deposits requires investments and loans, and all this was offered to Ukraine by the American state and American companies at the same time, in 2014. In addition, it is beneficial for both Ukrainian and American companies to knock out a competitor represented by Russia from the market, and Ukraine, which hosts a significant part of the Russian export infrastructure and manufacturing enterprises important for key export industries (right now Russian capitalists have large property in Ukraine), can cause serious problems for Russian capital. However, in order to receive coveted American loans and investments, as well as to introduce measures against Russian capital (which, in turn, also wants to absorb Ukrainian industry), Ukrainian compradors need political and military protection from Russia, which only NATO can provide them. The price that Ukraine will have to pay for receiving investments, loans and joining NATO, apparently, is the return of Crimea and Donbass by military means and the transfer of Crimea and other territories to the United States for the formation of military bases.

The goal of the United States, in addition to eliminating a competitor in the field of oil and gas exports to Europe represented by Russia (including for subordinating the EU) and seizing fields in Ukraine, is also the destruction of a potential military ally of China represented by the Russian Federation, an obstacle to the implementation of the Chinese project "One Belt and one way", the establishment in Russia of a government loyal to the United States and the transfer of Russian capital to compradors, the collapse of the country into several independent states to ensure that a large territory cannot be used for military and political purposes, the voluntary destruction by the new government (governments) of Russia of its own nuclear weapons, the weakening of the army, pursuing a policy of reconciliation with the West. At the same time, the US is trying to create conditions for the flight of capital from Europe to the US.

The first goal of the Russian NMD is to protect against American aggression by retaining and acquiring militarily important territories, in particular the Crimea and areas that create a land connection between the Russian Federation and it. Crimea is important to Russia for many reasons. Firstly, the Black Sea Fleet is needed to protect Russian pipelines and cargo in the Black Sea, secondly, to protect the interests of its capital in the Mediterranean Sea, and thirdly, the loss of Crimea to NATO means, in fact, a US base on the Black Sea coast , with which American and British troops can safely attack the Russian Federation without worrying that they will be cut off from supplies. Aircraft carriers, ships of the US Marine Corps Expeditionary Force - it will be possible to bring any military vessel there and bring everything you need in the shortest possible time. Why would they attack the Russian Federation? For example,

The second goal is to bring the Ukrainian government to a negotiated state, that is, force coercion or create grounds for replacing politicians in power with those loyal to the Russian Federation. Russian capital is not ready to lose either its property in Ukraine or its export infrastructure, but apparently it cannot seize the entire territory by force. Most likely, the “positive” result is the annexation of the militarily and economically important territories of the eastern part of Ukraine to the Russian Federation and a truce without a final peace for many years.

China is expanding into the European market, and it needs the Russian Federation as a loyal partner for building routes to Europe. In addition, the Russian Federation can become an important military ally of China to deter the United States in the future, but for this it must maintain its political course, territory, nuclear weapons, space program, military-industrial complex, army and navy, military presence in different parts of the planet. You can say as much as you like that there is no socialism in China, that it is pursuing an imperialist policy, and the Communists should not rely on China, but even if you accept this point of view, then the course of China in the future depends on the Communists in Russia. If a working-class dictatorship is established in Russia—so important to China in opposing US hegemony—that is comparable in economic and military strength to the advanced countries, then the CPC will have to reckon with the policy of its ally and support Russia. Otherwise, you will have to give up positions and take the side of the United States, exposing yourself to robbery by American capital.

Defense of the socialist fatherland

Everyone has heard about the fact that modern war is a war of technology. Now that the war of the 21st century in Europe has become a reality, we can even see it with our own eyes. A huge number of armored vehicles, MLRS, artillery, drones, missile systems, aviation, space satellites and constant threats of the use of nuclear weapons from both sides. The Russian army now operates all the remaining and even modernized Soviet legacy, including weapons, military bases and factories, scientific institutes and design bureaus.

When modern communists start talking about “the defeat of their government”, it becomes scary in earnest. The defeat of the Russian government in the war now, most likely, will lead to a political crisis, in which the political prostitutes in the service of the United States, who have been waiting for years for it, will immediately take part, along with the current Russian compradors and the “deprived”, former Russian oligarchs who have long wanted revenge. The re-privatization of the country with a greater participation of foreign companies than in the 90s, its division into several components, the civil war between which will last for several years, the destruction of nuclear weapons and demilitarization - Khodorkovsky, Navalny, Milov speak openly about all this, former American politicians and experts. "Demonopolization of the Russian economy", "Russia does not need large territories,

What can YouTube communists do, who, as the same Semin wrote, have “no popularity, no organization, no party, no labor movement, no support for the military,” if the military base in Crimea is handed over to the needs of the American army, and in the Russian Federation "Maidan" will begin? It is this scenario that is the “defeat in the war” of the Russian Federation (unless, of course, we believe that the Ukrainians, who did not prevent either the Euromaidan, or the ATO, or the creation of national battalions, suddenly “wake up” and turn their bayonets against their bourgeois, like the Americans, Polish and English mercenaries). Well, we will throw the remnants of the Soviet military-industrial complex, the nuclear shield and the military presence into the fire of the "revolution"? In this case, we will not only be no better, but worse than the degenerate reformers-privatizers who ruined and sold out the USSR .

No, it will not be enough for the communists of the 21st century to “awaken” some part of the proletariat, the revolution in Russia cannot be made and resist only by the efforts of the people's militia. We need a working-class dictatorship state, armed to the teeth, steadfastly defending the interests of working people on the world stage, a strong state that has absorbed all the achievements of all Russian history, including the achievements of collapsed Russian socialism and the achievements of the newest Russian capitalism. We cannot lightly scatter weapons and territories, industries and specialists, the working population of these territories, for the sake of whose liberation we are conducting our activities. We must immediately begin to defend our socialist fatherland, and not when it is already too late.

Here one can say that, they say, a Marxist cannot justify bloodshed in the imperialist war by "defending the fatherland." Yes, it cannot, but I do not justify the bloodshed and do not call for solidarity with the ruling class and assistance to it in waging war. Today's left needs to understand that their talk and good wishes don't stop wars. No matter how much you shout, no matter how much you chew, no matter how much you shoot videos and write articles, the bloodshed will not stop! And what real action can the left take? Any left-wing rallies, marches, pickets will simply be used for the purposes of not left-wing "organizations" at all, but real organizations, serious ones. And we will again see the shameful unity of the left and the fascists under the leadership of the “democrats”, as it already happened on Bolotnaya in 2011. Since we cannot influence the bloodshed now and since we know that only the abolition of classes can stop the bloodshed in the future, it means that we must prepare for this future, we must treat today's bloodshed with equanimity, look for ways in it to develop the organization, to prepare the revolution, and correctly assess future threats. And we suggest not to interfere with the Russian bourgeoisie to destroy the Ukrainian fascists and overthrow the pro-American regime.

It is more important for us that the victory of the Russian Federation does not put any new obstacles in the way of the communists of Russia or Ukraine. Russian society today has a wide range of political delusions, from the monarchist to the left. The Soviet past, the growing sympathy for communism, the intermediate, indefinite, sugary "humanistic" official rhetoric has not yet allowed him to slide into fascism. Even the Russian bourgeois state is forced to try on red clothes, because it arose on the basis of socialist achievements and continues to stand on it. It cannot be said that the Russian bourgeoisie is less predatory or more human than the American, Ukrainian or any other bourgeoisie. The Russian bourgeoisie has simply found itself in the most precarious position of its existence, and its state cannot yet afford to openly persecute the communists, how does the Ukrainian ruling class. I am sure that this position will be shaky for a long time to come, because the goals and capabilities of the Russian bourgeoisie are increasingly diverging as imperialist competition grows throughout the world. She saws the branch she sits on and can't stop doing it.

Dialectics of the Russian bourgeoisie

The Russian bourgeoisie is a sad but striking example of the very dialectics that it despises. Its entire existence is a contradiction to itself, a negation of itself. It was born as a comprador, colonial bourgeoisie, but almost immediately began trying to become an imperialist bourgeoisie .. She wants to trade with the West, to be part of the Western world, but at the same time she is forced to compete and conflict with it. She wants to be relaxed, bohemian, windy and at the same time must be collected, mobilized, disciplined. What makes it richer and stronger also brings its end closer. She lives and dies at the same moment, like everything else in nature. The defeat of the Russian bourgeoisie is possible with different scenarios for the development of events in Ukraine before and after the end of hostilities. And we, the Communists, today should not “wish the government to lose”, but prepare for defeat, for the disintegration and disintegration of the Russian bourgeoisie. Already now we see that not only the proletariat can be badly organized, but also the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie has no theory, no specific goal,

Feeling for the weak points of the bourgeoisie and its state and demonstrative strikes on these points—this is the most important part of waging the class struggle. Obviously, the Russian bourgeoisie has enough of these places. She herself gave up her independence, which she is now reclaiming, sold it for dollars. She herself got rid of machine tool building, electronics, science; she herself deprived herself of territories, weapons, army rear. She even deprived herself of a significant part of the capital during the acquisition of this very capital. Privatizers from the 1990s have not disappeared. All the owners, members of the board of companies, many politicians have been inherited from those times. It was they who destroyed the industry themselves, and for years they have been unable to cope with "import substitution", which is so important for protecting their own capital! Today, contradictions are growing within the Russian ruling class and centrifugal forces are becoming more active. It is difficult to choose between the comprador model of exploitation and the sovereign one! Fight or trade, tighten your belt and develop production, or send everything to hell, sell your homeland and go to where the soul and heart are, over the hill? And if we develop, then what to do with the crisis, what and how to teach, heal, build? What and where is it nice to live now?

This inconsistency of the bourgeoisie is already obvious to everyone: liberals, patriots, monarchists, Zyuganovites, Platoshkinites and all other sorts of inhabitants. However, not possessing dialectical thinking, the layman cannot understand how the rising of the empire from its knees and the petty sale of the Motherland coexists within the framework of one state and why the double-headed eagle of Russian capitalism has not yet broken. He does not see that venality gives rise to property that must be protected from the same "partners" who made this property legal and liquid; that the semi-colonial comprador, having felt the strength, is now rushing into the high society, wants to take a place among his masters, but all he is capable of is selling the resources of his country, which means that he is forced to trade with the enemy, fawn over him, play his rules, to desire his favor.

Devoted Russian patriotism

From the very beginning, the SVO in Ukraine has evoked mixed feelings among patriots. The vague goals of the special operation, the endless "gestures of goodwill", "planned waste" make even the most confident statesmen shrug their shoulders. Now that mobilization has been announced, it turned out that there are not enough shoes, sleeping bags, tourniquets, body armor, and medicines. They are going to the army for their money; Telegram channels of military correspondents collect donations for Chinese quadrocopters, equipment, vehicles for the front; military pensioners with combat experience, reserve officers and other military men who have been blogging on military topics since peacetime, rushed to help with the preparation of the mobilized, organize PMP and combat training courses for civilians. War becomes a matter of people, public. Feeling of danger, catastrophe, the proximity of the world war has become a unifying factor for the disparate mass of Russians. But at the same time, there are doubts among people: will there be a victory and will the people get this victory? Why is our business and our government behaving so strangely, why are they keeping quiet, why are they not fighting obvious enemies within the country, why are they behaving so hesitantly at the front?

It is interesting to observe how people manage to walk next to the answer to their question, step on it, stumble over it, but not see it point-blank. Strelkov already blames the Abramovichs, and even the Tsargrad channel began to poke at some oligarchs, and not just at Lenin. The problem is that our monarchist patriots, despite their Soviet education, continue to judge politics at the level of magically conscious dark people who visit a fortune-teller and charge water in front of the TV. They keep trying to identify traitors to the people with Jews, Greeks, foreign intelligence agents, say that they "have no faith", or, at best, simply declare them fools. "Russian patriots", closing their eyes, ears, screaming and stamping their feet, do not want to hear, do not want to believe thatany, the most Russian, fair-haired and blue-eyed person can become a ghoul, a cannibal and, of course, a traitor to his people, as soon as he makes capitalist profit his goal, as soon as he finds an excuse for himself to take away surplus value, as soon as he voluntarily gives up the distribution of products, created by the joint efforts of all the people at the mercy of the market and speculators. Is Strelkov able to fit in his head the idea that even an elementary lease of a purchased plot of land is already, firstly, a betrayal of his people, secondly, a crime against humanity, and thirdly, the cause of wars? That private ownership of land and enrichment with the help of it is the beginning of all wars in human history, and therefore the cause of death and suffering of his, Strelkov, relatives? In general, any unearned income is anti-people in its root, even from a national point of view - after all, even if this income is possible not at the expense of the working people of the country, but at the expense of the colony, it ultimately leads to war, to the dead, to tragedies among the people, among the nation!

Perhaps Mr. Strelkov himself is going to live on the rent received from owning land, is going to become a lord, or maybe the gentlemen from the Tsargrad Canal themselves hope to have a hundred or two slaves and that is why they hate the Communists so much and want to establish a monarchy in Russia; if so, then they are not patriots, but simply failed yet, but already morally ready traitors to the Russian people. However, the patriotic and even somewhat chauvinistic masses of working people in Russia often do not have formalized and conscious claims to receive ownership of capital, land and exploitation of other similar working people. They continue to see themselves as working people, and their chauvinism most often consists of a vague and vague desire to include the lost territories of the USSR in Russia in order to have geographical advantages for the defense of the country,

We Communists must clearly answer the questions of the patriotic proletarian . Today this should become an important topic of our propaganda! Of course, I do not call on communists to agitate outright fascists, because, as a rule, a fascist is a kind of maniac who takes pleasure in the suffering of another creature, and talking about politics with him is a useless exercise. By “patriotic and even somewhat chauvinistic working people” I mean the average Russian citizen who is set up to “defend the Motherland”, who accepts the special operation as a necessity and, on the whole, agrees with the course declared by the government.

We must show and prove to the patriot that patriotism and private ownership of land and means of production are incompatible , and we will be completely frank with him, because this is the truth. We must convince him that all his efforts will be in vain as long as he lives in a bourgeois state, that war, poverty, empty and meaningless work will return to his life over and over again, and that only conscientious action will save him and his compatriots. the study of Marxism and participation in our organization, which aims to create a truly people's state of the dictatorship of the working class, and then the world revolution.

If you start talking with the layman about the correct social structure and state power, then, whether he is a liberal, monarchist, centrist, socialist, or anyone else in his views, all his decisions will be designed to answer one question: how to put good, honest people in charge of the country? of people? A liberal will say that democracy will give us good people, because, firstly, they will often change, which means that the authorities will not have time to “spoil” them; secondly, people will first elect them on the basis of promises, and then re-elect them based on the results of their activities, besides, the president can be impeached, in extreme cases, civil society will express dissatisfaction on the street, which means that there will be some kind of “natural selection” that will leave in power only good people. The monarchist will probably say

We will answer him that, instead of relying on the conscious choice of a “good manager” by a crowd of people of various qualities, skills, competencies, talents and vices, or even more so on God’s help in this completely earthly issue, it is necessary to determine scientifically what it is "a good, honest man in public administration." And quite honestly, without exaggeration, we will say and prove that a good, honest person who cares about the people is a communist and only a communist, because he has a specially developed scientific worldview, with the goal of achieving prosperity for mankind through social labor, a fair distribution of the products of this labor and continuous improvement of the tools of this work to make it easier and more effective. That is, if we are looking for a specially educated specialist in the field of effective management of human society in order to achieve a happy life for this society, then this is a communist. And the criterion by which we distinguish a good person from a bad one will also be scientific and completely verifiable: we will first check the competence of this person, that is, his knowledge and understanding of the Marxist worldview and acceptance of it, and in the process of work we will tirelessly monitor whether action to the goals that this very worldview sets before the builder of communism. Can our party rot and be reborn? No, it cannot, because our party of scientific centralism will consist of like-minded people who have voluntarily, independently and qualitatively learned Marxism, tested by joint theoretical and practical work, and all at once it cannot be filled with traitors. Will our party become an elitist structure, remote from the people, carrying out a totalitarian dictatorship in its own selfish interests? No, it won't. The party will be recruited and composed of working people, and its doors will be open to all; the only obstacle on the way to it will be the requirement of serious self-education and compliance with the given level of scientific and theoretical training, but this education will be available (already available) to everyone equally. So the party of scientific centralism will not be deprived of control by the working people, but will not be subject to decay due to the participation of careerists, latent anti-communists and other rabble in it.

What will we do about the war? It was not the communists who started it, but if we have to finish it, then we could not be satisfied with making peace with today's Ukrainian bourgeois state. We recognize the right of the people of Ukraine to self-determination, but we consider today's Ukrainian state to be a militant, fascist, puppet state in the hands of US imperialism and perceive it as a threat. Moreover, we do not accept any bourgeois state on the territory of Ukraine, just as we do not recognize the Ukrainian oligarchs' right to private ownership of land and means of production. If the communists have to end the war within the framework of a new state of the dictatorship of the working class on the territory of Russia, then our goal will be the dismantling of the Ukrainian bourgeois state, the support of the Ukrainian communists and the Ukrainian working class, promoting the communist revolution there. Thus, if the war is inevitable, we will win it, by force or in any other way available. We rely on the working people of the whole world, we represent their interests and we will welcome the power of the working people in any country, including Ukraine. We have no proprietary, selfish interests; our army and diplomacy will not serve the interests of the oligarchs, whether they are compradors or "ours" - there will be no oligarchs themselves, just as there will be no commercial use of Russian or any other land under our control - it will not be possible to buy, sell, lease, it will be enough for everything the people really need - for housing for every family, for factories, hospitals, parks, museums, cinemas, etc. Our rear will not be plundered, because if there are bastards in our state, those who decide to take advantage of their position for their own perverse, fetishistic gain - they will be exposed and punished up to and including physical elimination, in accordance with socialist, that is, popular, and not bourgeois, legality. Our industry will always be ready to defend our conquests, and the people will be trained in all the necessary skills, because we rely only on ourselves, on our mind and on our labor. The worker will not be forced to take out a loan to buy the necessary things, and the government will not shrug, they say, “there is no money, but prices have risen,” because market speculators will not determine the prices of goods and products, and the very concept of “goods” time will fade into the past. Prior to the revolution all over the world, market speculation will affect our state only when importing those goods and technologies,

This is how our propaganda and agitation should be built today. Of course, such talk will not succeed in "awakening the masses", but we do not set ourselves such a goal. Our task, as I said above, is in the conditions of the rapidly approaching revolutionary situation to attract to our organization (first to the newspaper, and then to the party) the most intelligent, active, conscientious, sympathetic to the people's grief, those who have a heartache for people, those who want to protect and save their fellow men without feeling sorry for themselves. Soldiers, officers, employees of government agencies, defense enterprises, engineers, programmers, builders, teachers, doctors, rescuers, firefighters, scientists - these are the people we need today as supporters. We don’t “rock boats”, we don’t hold “Maidans”, we don’t need aggressive teenagers and provocateurs, we don’t need screamers and romantics, "Standing for a free individual." We are not interested in a coup d'etat and a simple change of persons in power, we are interested in the exercise of power, that is, direct management, planning, production, development, and the establishment of processes in the interests of the working population. Therefore, we have nowhere else to look for supporters today, except in the ranks of patriotically inclined working people, who are ready even to give their lives for the security and peaceful life of the people.

About “Leninists” and “Non-Leninists”

Recently I saw a newspaper reader remark that the breakouts are not Leninists, because they "support the special operation." Who are these Leninists and do they really have to oppose any military action?

Let's take an example. This article can quickly become outdated, and the provisions regarding communist propaganda during the NWO may change following the change in the state of affairs at the front, in society, in the politics of different countries. If, for example, a serious communist organization appears in Ukraine that can convince the soldiers not to go on the attack, or even more so take power, if at the same time in Germany, Poland or the United States, the communists or other forces disrupt the supply of weapons, the dispatch of mercenaries or other support for Ukraine in the conflict, then we will have to campaign for a cessation of hostilities. If there are communist parties in the main countries participating in the conflict that can have a real impact on the actions of the armies and the rear, and we can coordinate our actions with them, then we will have to reject any possibility of participation of workers in the conflict, frustrating all the plans of "our" and world capital. And then it will be Leninist. Now everything is different, now to protect your right to create an organization, take advantage of the current situation to create and develop this very organization, learn Marxism, save the remnants of the Soviet army and industry, stop the aggression of the world hegemon, make supporters of patriotic working people, resist puppet Ukrainian fascism to try to become the locomotive of the world revolution here in Russia—that's what is now Leninist. The Leninists are not those who try to copy Lenin's every move, to imitate him. Leninists are those who use Lenin's method of thinking, analyze the current situation,

L. Dryomin 19/10/2022

https://prorivists.org/74_win/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Oct 24, 2022 3:12 pm

Analysis of the political views of the population of Latvia: prospects for anti-fascist resistance
No. 10/74.X.2022

Introduction
This work is devoted to the study of the growing contradictions in the Latvian society in connection with the global crisis of overproduction and the prospect of an armed conflict in the Baltic States between detachments of Western and Russian capital. In particular, there is much in common between Latvia and Ukraine in terms of the Americans using these “sovereign” territories to strengthen NATO, weaken the EU and the Russian Federation, ensure record profits for the American military-industrial complex, improve psychological methods of influencing public consciousness in an anti-Russian vein and incite ethnic hatred. What the Russians faced in Ukraine after 2014: the actual ban on their native language, the creation of school and university benefits in a nationalist, anti-Soviet spirit, open terror against the Communists, the defeat of the opposition part of the population in their rights, — passed the run-in in the Baltic States. Both Russians and Ukrainians will see in the description of the political atmosphere in Latvia their own parties and political leaders, engaged in imitation of vigorous activity for the benefit of the people, but in fact, serving the interests of the ruling class.

The Marxist analysis of the bourgeois dictatorship in Latvia is a typical picture of how the power of capital manipulates any society, ultimately promoting the interests of the big bourgeoisie.

The class composition of the population
According to official data in 2019, 910 thousand people are registered in the country participating in labor relations (which includes all those who have left to live abroad). Of which 50% is concentrated in Riga.

From this number:

1) 245 thousand people - in the manufacturing industry, construction and transport;

2) 220 thousand people - in agriculture and forestry, in fisheries;

3) 85 thousand - in trade and services;

4) 70 thousand - lower-level workers in education and health care;

5) 65 thousand - in public utilities.

The class composition of the population is divided as follows:

4% - the middle and big bourgeoisie - the main owners of the means of production;

8% - petty bourgeoisie and "self-employed";

88% - the proletariat, of which 24% - factory workers, 27% - the rest of the proletariat; 37% - officials, employees, intellectuals, army, police, prosecutor's office, courts.

The proletariat of the manufacturing industry is concentrated mainly in small enterprises with up to nine employees - 9104 enterprises, from 250 people and more - 60 enterprises throughout the country. The total number of enterprises, respectively, is 10940.

At the same time, I would especially like to emphasize that the views of the proletariat (both Latvian and Russian) are mainly petty-bourgeois, and an insignificant part adheres to socialist or communist views. There is no self-organization and advanced consciousness, which Russian workers-philes love to talk about so much. Yes, there are degraded trade unions in certain industries, but all their work boils down to squabbling with the government over wages, helping to get soft loans, episodic rallies in the amount of as many as 100-200 people and threatening strikes if their demands are not met. Usually, the authorities pay off either handouts or promises to increase wages in the future, especially to "state employees" - doctors, teachers or policemen - and everything calms down safely until the next time. A vivid example of this is the September threats from the trade unions of teachers and doctors, which ended in zilch. At the same time, it cannot be denied that both wage workers and the petty bourgeoisie are not fighting for some kind of radical improvement in the standard of living. The constant lies of politicians and the drop in living standards have already got everyone - both Latvians and Russians. But everyone sees the way of change exclusively in bourgeois elections and they are waiting for new "honest" faces in politics. The fact that the same Latvians have been participating in endless elections for 30 years in an exceptionally “favorable political-national atmosphere” and still consider themselves deceived does not help either them or the Russian speakers in understanding the viciousness of democracy. so the petty bourgeoisie does not carry out a struggle for some kind of radical improvement in the standard of living. The constant lies of politicians and the drop in living standards have already got everyone - both Latvians and Russians. But everyone sees the way of change exclusively in bourgeois elections and they are waiting for new "honest" faces in politics. The fact that the same Latvians have been participating in endless elections for 30 years in an exceptionally “favorable political-national atmosphere” and still consider themselves deceived does not help either them or the Russian speakers in understanding the viciousness of democracy. so the petty bourgeoisie does not carry out a struggle for some kind of radical improvement in the standard of living. The constant lies of politicians and the drop in living standards have already got everyone - both Latvians and Russians. But everyone sees the way of change exclusively in bourgeois elections and they are waiting for new "honest" faces in politics. The fact that the same Latvians have been participating in endless elections for 30 years in an exceptionally “favorable political-national atmosphere” and still consider themselves deceived does not help either them or the Russian speakers in understanding the viciousness of democracy.

The political views of the population of Latvia are shown below by national and regional breakdown, since these factors, unfortunately, prevail over class divisions. National and small-town thinking dominates the minds of the proletariat.

Political views of the Latvian part of society
Latvia consists of four regions - Vidzeme, Kurzeme, Zemgale and Latgale.

The largest number of Latvians live in Vidzeme and Kurzeme, while there are more Russians in Latgale and the country's capital, Riga. Vidzeme region occupies the central part and north-east of Latvia, while Kurzeme is a historical region in the western part of Latvia. Zemgale is also the central and southern part of the country. Russian-speakers mainly live in large cities of the country (Riga, Daugavpils, Rezekne, Jelgava, Liepaja, Ventspils, that is, cities where large industrial enterprises were concentrated in Soviet times), with the exception of the eastern region of Latgale, where they also inhabit the countryside . In Kurzeme, the Russian-speaking population is compactly concentrated in the two main cities of the region - Liepaja and Ventspils. The number of Russian-speaking residents in Liepaja is 30%, in Ventspils - 30%, in Jelgava (Zemgale) - about 25%, in Riga (Vidzeme) - 50%,

916,594 or 59.43% of citizens with the right to vote took part in the elections on 01.10.22 to the 14th Seimas. Of these, 26,189 are abroad (at the same time, according to official data, about 200 thousand people moved to the EU countries and about 20 thousand leave the country every year).

Seven parties entered the country's parliament. Six nationalist:

1) Jaunā VIENOTĪBA ("New Unity") - 26 seats: party of pro-American compradors;

2) Zaļo un Zemnieku savienība ("Union of Greens and Peasants") - 16 seats: the party of big Latvian capital;

3) APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija ("Joint List - Latvian Green Party, Latvian Union of Regions, Liepaja Party") - 15 seats: a hodgepodge of former politicians and officials, therefore, a large party, average local and, for sure, foreign capital.

4) PROGRESĪVIE ("Progressives") - 10 seats: the party of pro-American compradors;

5) LATVIJA PIRMAJĀ VIETĀ (“Latvia is the first”) - 9 seats: center-left petty-bourgeois party;

6) Nacionālā apvienība Visu Latvijai! - Tēvzemei ​​un Brīvībai / LNNK ("National Alliance "All Latvia!" - "Fatherland and Freedom / LNNK"") - 13 seats: Nazi Party.

And it stands apart:

7) Social Democratic Party Politiskā partija “Stabilitātei!” ("For stability!") - 11 seats: bourgeois party.

It is interesting to note the following. In the Riga electoral district, 298,568 or 52.82% of eligible citizens voted, and two clear leaders emerged - New Unity and For Stability! The distribution of votes clearly had national characteristics: areas populated predominantly by Latvians voted for the current ruling New Unity party, and for the conditionally pro-Russian party For Stability! where mostly Russians live.

The pro-Russian, but in fact the party of businessmen "Consent Center", which for 11 years from 2009 to 2020 controlled the capital of the country, Riga, and was the largest opposition party in parliament (where its presence reached 30%), fell down with a roar, failing to pass even 5% parliamentary barrier. This happened after the corruption scandals associated with the plundering of the city's budget and the flight from criminal prosecution to Brussels as a member of the European Parliament and the surrender of accomplices of a copy of the Ukrainian Yanukovych at minimal wages - party leader Nil Ushakov.

The liberal-social-democratic pro-Russian party "Russian Union of Latvia" - the party of anti-Soviet romantics - repeated its "powerful" success of the last parliamentary elections and gained 3.5%, also eventually being overboard.

As mentioned above, the new party “For Stability!”, the founder of which is a former member of the “Consent Center” party (it will be discussed below), expelled from it in 2019, Alexei Roslikov, entered the parliament. An ambitious young man with the habits of a swindler, with a hung tongue and honeyed speeches on general topics that all kinds of idealists are so greedy for, with the slogans " For freedom of choice and the right to make decisions in one's own country!" We are bringing a completely new policy to Latvia, showing a new quality of public administration and new ways of communicating with people .”

Roslikov is followed by a heap of murky corruption cases at his former place of political work, and it is possible that he is acting under the control of the Latvian special services, who have accumulated compromising evidence on him, pulling him into a full-fledged criminal case, using his idealist party members in the dark.

The highest turnout was traditionally in the Vidzeme constituency, where 262,616 or 66.27% of eligible citizens voted.

In the Kurzeme electoral district, 114,986 or 63.86% of eligible citizens voted, with an overwhelming majority of nationalist and Nazi parties Jaunā VIENOTĪBA - 16.44%, Zaļo un Zemnieku savienība - 21.10%, Nacionālā apvienība "Visu Latvijai!" - "Tēvzemei ​​un Brīvībai/LNNK" - 10.25%, APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija - 22.05%.

The situation is similar in the Zemgale constituency - 129,173 or 62.72% of citizens with the right to vote: Jaunā VIENOTĪBA - 18.75%, Zaļo un Zemnieku savienība - 19.55%, Nacionālā apvienība "Visu Latvijai!"-"Tēvzemei ​​un Brīvībai /LNNK" - 12.16%, APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija - 12.42%.

The lowest voter turnout, again traditionally, was in the Latgale constituency, which is predominantly populated by Russians and Latgalians (not to be confused with Latvians), - 111,331 or 57.14% of eligible voters: "Consent Center" - 11, 47%, "For stability!" - 18.56%. Separately, there is the RSL party, which managed to squeeze out its passing 7%.

Here the success of the "Consent Center" party is due to the firm position of the local mayor of Daugavpils, who, unlike his Riga trading partners, shows character, in particular, sabotages the government's order to demolish Soviet monuments in the city in every possible way.

The ruling New Unity party took only 6.97% in the region, while the Nazis from All Latvia! - 5.78%.

The turnout in the elections to the 14th Saeima was higher than in the elections to the 13th Saeima held in 2018, in which 844,925 or 54.6% of eligible citizens took part, and higher than in the elections in 12 th Seimas, in which 58.85% of citizens with the right to vote took part.

The result of voting citizens shows that a huge number of the population (in fact, 40% or about 600 thousand people) ignore the elections or are not allowed to vote, as well as an additional 180 thousand Russians with the status of non-citizens.

Questions why, what national and social status of these people remain open. One can only make an assumption that, with the exception of the marginal layer of both nationalities, all the rest do not see the point in running along this rake, which does not fundamentally change anything in people's lives.

It is also interesting to note that in 2012 a national referendum was held in Latvia on the recognition of the Russian language as the second state language. It was an unprecedented step on the part of Russian Latvians to radically change their status and, in fact, legalize education in their native language. The Latvian authorities carried out a large-scale campaign to counter this initiative, all Latvian media were launched to mobilize the Latvian part of the population under the nationalist slogans “Russians are coming!”. The voting results were as follows: 273,347 voters voted in favor of the amendments to the Constitution (most likely the entire Russian electoral potential, with the exception of non-citizens), and 821,722 voters voted against the adoption of amendments to the Constitution (most likely, mostly Latvians).

1,098,921 (71%) voters who participated in the voting were included in the lists of voters who voted. However, according to the Register of Residents of the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs, on the day of the referendum, February 18, 2012, 1,545,004 Latvian citizens were registered with the right to vote.

That is, we have about 450,000 people who did not vote. One can only guess about the reasons, but, with the exception of, again, marginal strata, it can be assumed that a significant part of the Latvians considered it possible not to participate in this chauvinistic Latvian frenzy of reprisals against their neighbors, who, in any case, legally could not win, because. the number of “yes” votes received was to be no less than 772,502, or half of the number of all citizens with the right to vote.

Riga accounted for half of the country's total votes for the Russian language, and the southeastern region of Latgale was the only one of the four where the total number of those who voted for the Russian language exceeded the number of votes against those who voted against (55% vs. 44%). The capital of the region, the city of Daugavpils, generally showed an excellent result in support of the issue of the Russian language - 85% versus 15%.

Among the Latvian part of society (the estimated number of which today, together with children and the elderly, is about 1 million 200 thousand people), the following main views on politics in the country can be distinguished.

Nationalist - these views are held by the vast majority of Latvians, especially those from cities with a predominantly Latvian population or villages. This part of society is very sensitive to the Latvian culture, language, traditions, art and national symbols. They see in their preservation one of the most important tasks of the state and, accordingly, the provision of government to representatives of the Latvian nationality, because only representatives of the titular nation are allegedly interested in preserving the values ​​of the Latvian people and are able to lead Latvia to economic well-being.

In turn, if one part of Latvian nationalists adheres to moderate nationalist views and can confine themselves to worrying about the Latvian language and its defense with certain small concessions to national minorities, then the other part (about 15%) professes open fascist (Nazi) views (1), which directed at the largest national minority in Latvia - Russians (2). This category of Latvians does not consider just the right of Russian citizens to preserve their culture, language, symbols in the national Latvian state (3) and considers it necessary to fully assimilate them with the Latvian society by recognizing the primacy of the Latvian national culture (4) and language (5) in all areas social activities, and they are ready to tolerate the number of Russians in their Latvian society in the amount

A mandatory attribute of Russian assimilation in the understanding of all Latvian nationalists (6) is the recognition of the USSR as a criminal state that brought only suffering to the Latvian people.

Often, Latvian nationalists also adhere to conservative views, which is manifested in adherence to traditional values: the traditional model of the family as a union of a man and a woman, traditional methods of raising children, Christian values, disapproval of immigration, as this is a threat to national identity and creates competition for jobs for Latvians . Recently, due to the growing economic crisis, among this category of the Latvian population, the number of dissatisfied with the economic situation in the country and the huge jump in prices for food, energy, services, the reasons for which they see the dependence of the Republic of Latvia on Russia, the policy pursued by the Russian authorities, has increased. and the Soviet legacy, which hinders its development to the level of advanced European countries.

In this part, the Latvian nationalists are a mirror image of the Russian national chauvinists, who blame the poor economic situation in the country ... The United States sees the reasons for the weakness of the Russian Federation in the subordinate role of Russian capitalism, the insufficiently imperial policy of the Russian authorities and the Soviet legacy of the communists.

Among the older generations of Latvian nationalists, there is also an opinion that the culprits of the economic crisis and other problems in the country are representatives of the Latvian emigration (“trimdy”) or their descendants who returned to Latvia. Trimda representatives live mainly in Europe, North America and Australia, most of them left Latvia either voluntarily, stained by cooperation with the Nazis, or in fear of the communists as part of the retreating units of the Latvian Legion during World War II. This category includes the President of Latvia (from 1999 to 2007) Vaira Vike-Freiberga, who lived and was a citizen of Canada; the current prime minister of Latvia, Krisjanis Karins, who has dual citizenship (Latvian and American), as well as the current president of the country, Egils Levits, who, until his return to Latvia in 1992, had permanently resided in Germany. By the way, all of them were brought up from childhood in an atmosphere of bestial Russophobia and anti-Sovietism. These Latvian nationalists are sure that such politicians are not part of the people and are not interested in protecting their national interests, since, in fact, they were not elected, but appointed by the Western allies and, accordingly, primarily serve the interests of the West. This position is also shared by Latvians, who do not adhere to nationalist views. In the political field, this confrontation is not so noticeable. Most of the skirmishes take place on social networks, where nationalists are outraged and surprised by the repeated success of the ruling party, led by Prime Minister Krisjanis Karins, who, in their opinion, has led the country to an economic crisis over the past four years. Karins' supporters, for their part, echo the official propaganda that the price hike is a tax to prevent war. The attitude of both groups to Russia, to the Ukrainian events and the Russian question in Latvia as a whole is very similar.

Liberal - the values ​​of the liberal ideology are shared mainly by the Latvian youth. These people actively stand up for the observance of human rights and freedoms, freedom of speech, equality of all before the law and freedom of entrepreneurship. Latvian liberal youth has a positive attitude towards the West, Western values, considers the United States as a certain standard, which Latvia should strive for in order to achieve prosperity. They welcome Latvia's membership in NATO, the EU and are the bearers of extreme anti-communism. Following liberal values ​​also gets along well with Latvian nationalism, which confirms the assertion that sooner or later liberals always merge in their anti-Sovietism with the fascist public, which has much more in common with it than contradictions.

At the same time, liberals, in contrast to the first category of Latvian conservatives, are much more willing to respond positively to new social movements in the West, in particular, such as the recognition of same-sex marriages, LGBT rights, and others. They see the development of such currents in Latvia as progressive. On this basis, conflicts arise between Latvian liberals and adherents of conservative views, despite the same attitude towards the national question. The nationalists in this duet, in principle, play the first violin. The bulk of the liberals live in Riga.

Pro-Soviet- part of the Latvian population, sympathetic or nostalgic for Soviet times. According to various subjective estimates, their number can be about 15-20% of the population. This category includes mainly Latvians of older generations who worked to strengthen and protect Soviet power, as well as their descendants. Supporters of the USSR can also be found in mixed families. Usually among this part of the Latvians, the attitude towards Russia is also positive. It is very difficult to say to what extent the figure indicated above is correct, since publicly giving positive assessments of the Soviet era in the Latvian environment is bad manners with the automatic labeling of a national traitor on a person. And the psychological barrier here is the topic of repressions and deportations, of course, of completely “innocent” people, where, in addition, for denying the criminality of such acts, you can easily get a criminal article. It can be assumed that 15-20% is the total number of Latvians who are sympathetic to the Soviet era and those moderate nationalists who can cooperate under certain conditions.

Apolitical is a part of society that does not take part in elections, because they do not see any prospects in this for changing the situation in the country for the better. This is usually associated with a negative attitude towards the authorities in general due to the lack of success in the social sphere in Latvia during all the years of independence. The number of Latvians indifferent to politics has increased after the most severe restrictions during the pandemic, followed by mass layoffs, bankruptcies of small businesses, bans on visiting certain stores, doctors when refusing vaccination. In general, this category is indifferent to elections and politics, and dreams of leaving the country as soon as possible.

The presence of only about 20% of potentially negotiable Latvians does not automatically make 80% irreconcilable. As already mentioned, there are about 15% of obviously pro-Nazi radical Latvians (maximum 20%). The remaining 60% will meekly go with the flow and obey the force in whose hands the power of state power will be. Yes, they will courageously keep figs in their pockets, but obediently obey the laws.

In any case, the vast majority of Latvians are strongly outraged by today's life and their "elites" no less than Russians, who, in turn, simply hate the authorities for obvious reasons. And these sentiments should be used when working with people, offering them an alternative plan of action for overcoming the economic crisis and the war, for which the crazed authorities are clearly preparing the population.

In the context of the political views of the Latvian population, it is interesting to mention the unique region of Latvia - Latgale. The Latgale region in the east borders on the Russian Federation, in the southeast with Belarus and in the south with Lithuania, being the poorest in the country. Given the multinational composition of the inhabitants of Latgale, there is no need to encounter local nationalism here. Talk about promoting “Latvianness” (“here is Latvia, which means everything must be in Latvian”) by visiting and local activists has long ceased. He responds to nationalistic appeals with questions of a pragmatic nature: what will this give us? how will it improve our lives? But what about those who are not Latvian?

Here it is important to understand that, for example, if you call a Latgalian (a representative of a local historical ethnic group on the territory of Latgale and not only) a Latvian, this will be perceived as an insult. This is excusable only to a person "from outside", a stranger. Although formally in Latvia such a nationality and even a language are not recognized (and in Russia, for example, they are). Latgalians call Latvians a historical ethnic group from other parts of Latvia - Vidzeme, Kurzeme, Zemgale. And they dislike them because of their contemptuous attitude towards themselves. In Latgale, different ethnic groups often live intermingled; in fact, there are no national enclaves. Old Believer villages could be an exception to this rule, but they have already disappeared due to demographic and social problems. This state of affairs develops comprehensive integration - people have the experience of communicating and living side by side with people of different nationalities. Despite the obvious understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of various national groups that are represented in Latgale, no one has any ideas about their own superiority. The wave of national patriotism of Latvians and those who sympathize with them in Latgale in the 90s quickly crashed against the harsh reality - the illusion of general instant prosperity under the leadership of the Latvian "elite" (leaders of the "People's Front") did not materialize. No matter how sad, but people in Latgale are united by pessimism and acute social problems. The wave of national patriotism of Latvians and those who sympathize with them in Latgale in the 90s quickly crashed against the harsh reality - the illusion of general instant prosperity under the leadership of the Latvian "elite" (leaders of the "People's Front") did not materialize. No matter how sad, but people in Latgale are united by pessimism and acute social problems. The wave of national patriotism of Latvians and those who sympathize with them in Latgale in the 90s quickly crashed against the harsh reality - the illusion of general instant prosperity under the leadership of the Latvian "elite" (leaders of the "People's Front") did not materialize. No matter how sad, but people in Latgale are united by pessimism and acute social problems.

Traditionally, Latgale has the lowest turnout in elections and referendums, although more than half of the region's population has the right to vote. People react negatively to calls to vote. This is facilitated, among other things, by scandals with the purchase of votes, distrust of their count, personal experience when a person voted for a candidate, but he was not elected or was removed from power or the party for which they voted remained in opposition. The results of the popular choice always run counter to the state agenda - the people vote for what the state media urges to oppose. The “Consent Center” always wins in parliamentary elections, the positions of the “Russian Union of Latvia” are also strong. For example, in the last elections to the 13th Saeima in 2018, both of these parties in total won votes in Daugavpils (the capital of the region) - 75% (RLL - 24% and CA - 52%).

In self-government elections, as a rule, local influential rich people vote, regardless of which party they represent. This rule in a single self-government can work in parliamentary elections as well. The local population is minimally interested in politics, because there is a firm belief that nothing can be changed by voting, that none of the politicians keeps their word and does not care about the needs of people, that everyone is deceiving and only cares about their pockets, and there is no one to vote for - there are no competent managers. Russian parties are popular because of the language / nationality issue and oppositional orientation. The negative attitude towards politicians is primarily due to social problems - poverty, lack of opportunity to find work in one's area, mass emigration, inaccessible or poor infrastructure, as well as ignoring the interests of the local population by politicians and the rapid enrichment of the latter. In the political preferences of those who participate in the voting, the hope for new faces prevails. There is an opinion among the people that a strong hand is needed, which will bring order, removing the current powers that be from power, building a more equitable redistribution of resources, solving the social and infrastructural problems of Latgale. The lower the social status of a person, the more radical his views will be. Sharp dissatisfaction with top-level politicians is also expressed by people forced to work abroad.

Everyone is dissatisfied with the increase in prices, and the vast majority of the inhabitants of Latgale blame the political situation (ignoring economic benefits, unfriendly policy towards Russia, sanctions), politicians and officials in Riga for this. Dissatisfaction is also fueled by the fact that for some goods (fuel, coal, food) and services (medicine, education) prices in Latgale have always been higher than in other regions of Latvia, and the quality is lower, plus there were also problems with their accessibility. It is not in vain that residents of the border regions are happy to go to Russia or Belarus for shopping. People also go to Belarus for medical services. This helps many to make ends meet, without having to go to work outside their native areas. Against this background, all the restrictions of the Latvian side on the transportation of products are accepted with hostility,

The inhabitants of Latgale are mostly indifferent to historical issues, since their region has not taken an active part in the historical events of the last half century. Rather, history happened to them, they passively accepted political changes that worsened their social position. A huge disappointment were the promises of a better life before the "restoration of independence" of Latvia, many associated their hopes for a cloudless future with them, did not orient themselves in the ongoing processes and were left with nothing. Privatization set back the development of the region for decades and left the inhabitants with firm convictions that the former economic indicators could never be achieved. People also do not experience any special interest in the analysis of the political past, since this is a direct road to an unpleasant realization, including one's own mistakes. Such an analysis can even lead to a conflict between the participants in the discussion, since there is still no complete understanding of the processes that took place. The historical memory of the USSR is fading away with the old generation, giving way to persistent negative stereotypes that are promoted through the media and the education system. Therefore, you can often hear about the bad things in the USSR - young people do not know anything, or repeat the knowledge they have gained about the terrible USSR at school, and the old people remember their problems in the USSR first of all and only secondarily the positive. This seems natural to them in the current situation - why remember the past if it does not help to live in the current realities, but rather harms, especially now, when you can even get an article for a positive review of the USSR. .

Views of the Russian-speaking part of society
The worldview of the Russian-speaking population of Latvia (about 600,000 people) was formed mostly during the perestroika period, and it was also strongly influenced by the market capitalist environment in which people have been living for the past 30 years.

During Gorbachev's perestroika, and speaking in essence, during preparations for the counter-revolutionary anti-Soviet coup, which was being prepared in Moscow by the Soviet party nomenklatura and the KGB, relying on the anti-Soviet strata of the population in all national republics, the Russian-speaking population of Latvia found itself alone in front of the rapidly gaining strength local nationalism, covered up by local party apparatchiks and people from the committee. Outright anti-Soviet lies poured out of Russian-language newspapers, which are still echoing to this day, and the Russian-speaking creative intelligentsia, who actively created such propaganda, boast about it today.

Russian-speaking workers and engineers tried spontaneously to resist this pressure by organizing the Interfront in 1989 as a counterbalance to the nationalist Popular Front. He united all active supporters of keeping Latvia within the Soviet Union. Its members spoke in support of the CPSU and for the protection of the Russian-speaking population of the republic. Its leaders were Colonel of the Reserve Igor Lopatin and the former director of the plant Anatoly Alekseev.

Here it is important to delve a little into the history of the creation and work of the IF in order to understand what we are dealing with today. Excerpt from the article :

“The Interfront lasted less than three years: from January 1989 to September 1991. He did not enjoy broad support from either the Kremlin or the official party structures in Riga. In the conditions of the rapid dismantling of the Soviet system, the Latvian “communists” preferred the NFL to the Interfront. The International Front criticized the local "communists", while the Latvian Popular Front praised them for "active participation in the adoption of vital laws and regulations of the republic" In Moscow, members of Interfront also did not find serious support.”

According to the charter of the International Front of Working People, its tasks, in addition to active participation in the processes of perestroika, were: raising the living standards of the inhabitants of the republic, protecting their social interests, free development of all nations and nationalities of Soviet Latvia, strengthening the friendship of peoples, raising the economy, combating manifestations of Stalinism, chauvinism and nationalism, raising the political, legal and ecological culture of all inhabitants of Latvia and their national identity, expanding socialist democracy and glasnost.

Actually, the positions of the International and Popular Fronts diverged in relation to the leading role of the CPSU and the federal principles of the structure of the USSR. They also saw differently the status of the state language and the position of the Soviet army on the territory of the republic. Nevertheless till now IF - the most hated organization for the Latvian politicians. In their mouths, the very word "interfronte" has become a common swearword against other parties. And the “return of Interfront” is a political horror story.

Former members of the IF are not given access to state secrets. And if they were in it after January 13, 1991, then such non-citizens are deprived of the opportunity to naturalize, and citizens - to be elected to the Seimas and local authorities.

If the Popular Front was created by Latvian cultural figures and members of creative unions, then the International Front is the brainchild of the Russian technical intelligentsia, of which there were many in the Latvian SSR.

And this is not only the world famous RKIIGA, but also the Central Research Institute of Automated Control Systems for Civil Aviation, the Research Institute of Radioisotope Instrumentation, the research and production associations Alfa, Kommutator, VEF, Radiotekhnika, RAF. Enterprises of Jelgava, Daugavpils, Ventspils. It's not hard to see why they don't exist anymore.

It is no coincidence that readers of Latvian newspapers were indignant in their letters: why did not a single writer speak at the Interfront congress? No musician? The Union of Composers was especially indignant, having heard at the congress the assertion that in the Latvian Conservatory education can only be mastered in the Latvian language.

“Already from the moment the conservatory was founded in 1919, there was an opportunity for gifted youth of any nationality to study,” the composers said.

And besides, they called Belaichuk's proposal not to indicate nationality in official documents absurd.

Oddly enough, the Latvian communists treated the IF so-so (this is just understandable if you understand the question of who a communist is and what this audience was like in Gorbachev's time). Arnolds Klaucens, the former first secretary of the Riga city committee of the Communist Party of Latvia, recalls this in his memoirs:

“As a member of the bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Latvia, I can testify that the initiative to form the IF did not come from the Central Committee, the secretaries of the Central Committee, the departments of the apparatus did not prepare any documents on this issue. Moreover, the general atmosphere in the Central Committee of the party was more favorable to the NFL than to the IF. It is no coincidence that A. Gorbunov, a member of the bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Latvia, chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Latvian SSR, spoke at the founding congress of Interfront, and not the first secretary of the Central Committee, J. Vagris, who also took part in the work of the congress.

Claucens writes:

“Despite the fact that from the very beginning of its appearance, the IF proclaimed the need to strengthen the leading role of the CPSU in society and, unlike the PFL, did not claim to seize power in the republic, the attitude of the secretaries of the Central Committee towards the Interfront cannot be called comradely, rather cold. Moreover, some of them from the very beginning took a critical, and soon openly unfriendly, even hostile position. The secretaries of the Central Committee did not perceive Interfront as an assistant and political partner in the struggle to preserve and strengthen the leading role of the CPSU in society. At the same time, the Central Committee of the Communist Party interacted with the Popular Front more closely and systematically, primarily through J. Peters, a member of the Central Committee and a member of the Duma of the NFL. Members of the Central Committee not only appeared at rallies and other NFL events, but also spoke at them.

I must say that Arnold Petrovich himself, no matter what he writes now, at the plenum of the Riga City Committee of the Communist Party of Latvia on April 13, 1989, said:

“Interfront is also associated with a new phenomenon in our life, such as strikes ... They can only be assessed as a manifestation of extreme extremism, alien to our socialist state. This is not the way. He brings with him great material losses, uncertainty about the future. And therefore, those who call for a strike will not find support from us.”

But the NFL, on the contrary, praised for "active participation in the adoption of vital laws and regulations of the republic."

What did Interfront do that scared everyone so much and that some still cannot get rid of this fear?

For example, he published the newspaper "Unity", reading of which in public transport could lead to a serious confrontation with the surrounding Latvians. He released a fifteen-minute weekly program "Rakurs" on the Latvian radio, which was subjected to the most severe censorship. Not only were fragments cut out of it, but even after it, a well-known announcer, in a well-trained voice, refuted what was said.

Already on January 9, 1989, the leaders of Interfront at a press conference announced their readiness to cooperate with the NFL, "in order to find joint ways to solve problems, including on the issues of consolidating the people of Latvia."

And on January 18, the newspaper Padomju Jaunatne published an open letter from Dainis Ivans, chairman of the Popular Front of Latvia, who rejected the possibility of cooperation between the NFL and Interfront, because "Interfront's activities are directed against the rights of the Latvian nation."

In the elections of people's deputies of the USSR in March 1989, representatives of the IF and the KPL received votes in only eight of the 42 constituencies. Belaichuk, Klaucens and Viktor Alksnis became deputies, who announced fraud in the creation of constituencies.

Well, on March 18, 1990, Interfront took part in the elections to the Supreme Soviet of the LSSR, the best results were obtained in Riga. His supporters, including Alksnis, won in 23 of the city's 60 districts. But the Popular Front as a whole received more votes. Which affected the results of the main vote - on the independence of Latvia.

In addition, the IF held rallies, the first one on February 23, 1989 in Riga against the law on the state language. A thousandth procession passed through the city center to the monument to the Liberators. But the law on the state Latvian language was adopted on May 5th.

In the same place, at the session of the Supreme Council of the Latvian SSR, Minister of Culture Raimonds Pauls said from the rostrum that the cultural inhabitants of Latvia authorized him to demand that the Supreme Council recognize the activities of the leaders of Interfront Igor Lopatin and Anatoly Alekseev as undesirable for Latvia, and he would ask the Russian Federation to allow them register in the Pytalovsky district of the Pskov region.

In April, the IF announced a general strike, this call was unanimously condemned by the Duma of the Popular Front, the Bureau of the Central Committee of the CPL and the Bureau of the Riga City Party Committee. The strike did not work.

Thus, on December 15, 1990, the III Congress of Interfront adopted an appeal to the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR with a request to consider the issue of introducing presidential rule in Latvia. But Gorbachev did not respond.

The largest rally of Interfront supporters took place on January 15, 1991 at the SKA stadium in Riga. Approximately ten thousand people attended. On the same day, the Supreme Council of the Republic of Latvia adopted a resolution on the restoration of the rights of citizens of the Republic of Latvia and the basic rules for naturalization.

In August 1991, the IF supported the State Emergency Committee as "the only measure that can stop and return the development of society to civilized forms of life, stop the catastrophe of the state and the disaster of the Soviet people," the IF executive committee said in a statement. Of course, on September 10, 1991, by decision of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Latvia, the International Front of the Workers of the Latvian SSR was banned. The formal reason is the support of the State Emergency Committee.

There is no reliable data on the number of Interfront, since membership in it was not fixed. In 1989, the number of 300 thousand people was called, later all participants in the rallies were counted as interfront members.

After the organization was banned, the fate of its leaders was different. Igor Lopatin, Chairman of the Council of the IF, created the Union of Communists of Latvia, despite the fact that the Communist Party was banned. In an interview of that period, he expressed the hope that the difficulties of the beginning of wild capitalism would mobilize the masses for the struggle. But he didn't wait. He left for Moscow, where he died.

The chairman of the presidium of the IF, Anatoly Alekseev, as the heir to the merchant family of the Mochalkins, after denationalization and restitution, turned out to be a large homeowner.

Such, in brief, is the tragic history of the International Front of the Working People of the Latvian SSR.

It can be argued that the position of this public organization was losing in advance, just then no one expected it. But the party leadership, to whom they swore allegiance and pushed for decisive action, turned away from them, both at the level of Moscow and Riga.

Former First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Lithuania Janis Vagris was awarded the Order of the Three Stars in 2010 for "merits in gaining independence" for a reason.

Interfront was subjected to unprecedented persecution in the Latvian media at that time. Cartoons, articles, television plots. At the demonstration on November 7, 1989, the slogan "Interfront - Internazis" was carried, the corresponding poster could be seen at the exhibition.

Unfortunately, the IF revealed all the problems that were typical for the Communist Party in general and for communists in particular of the Gorbachev period, which was even more clearly demonstrated by the story of the GKChP.

Local communists loyal to Soviet power did not understand that the top party leadership was deliberately leading the state to destruction and the country to collapse. That the Popular Fronts that grow like mushrooms after the rain in the national republics are not stupid amateur performances, but a deliberate counter-revolutionary diversion of the leading party organs for the broad unification of all anti-Soviet strata in the localities, which they used as a lever for changing power, just like the Bolsheviks did in 1917 with local Soviets, only to crush the bourgeoisie.

The late Soviet Latvian communists, who remained relatively loyal to the end, showed short-sightedness, indecision, and an inability to come out with an open exposure of enemy agents in the highest strata of the party. They didn’t want to or were afraid, but they couldn’t organize the workers’ collectives and military units of the SA for armed resistance and the arrest of traitors among the Soviet and party leadership, editors and journalists of anti-Soviet newspapers, the arrest of the leaders of the NFL, the merciless suppression of the resistance of the nationalists. Instead, they showed cowardice, tried to negotiate with the NFL and reach out to Moscow, although it was obvious that the nationalists were not going to make any concessions.

These philistine petty-bourgeois vacillations, shifting from foot to foot, fear of confrontation are characteristic both of the late Soviet period and of the last 30 years.

After the defeat of Soviet power in Latvia, the Russian-speaking population adapted to the new conditions as best they could. Latvian nationalists, unlike their Ukrainian counterparts, immediately got down to business - limiting the political and economic rights of the Russian-speaking population, introduced the institution of non-citizenship, a system of linguistic repression in work, everyday life, and rapidly carried out de-Sovietization and de-Russification of the public sphere. All this was superimposed on the total destruction of industry, since it was important for the Latvian nationalists to eliminate large work collectives as potential sources of problems in the future. The minority of the Russian-speaking population that voted for the independence of Latvia ended up with nothing, because, contrary to the generous promises made on the eve of the collapse of Soviet power, that citizenship would be granted to everyone at will, yesterday's party national officials and today's respectable bourgeois politicians immediately forgot about this and passed a law on granting citizenship only to the descendants of those who were Latvian citizens before 1940. Immediately weeding out 700 thousand people (giving them the status of non-citizens) from the 2.8 million population of the republic at the time of 1991. Thus, the Russian-speaking population has received a good lesson in pragmatic relations and a steady inoculation to everything that the Latvian authorities declare. The Russian-speaking lovers of independence who are still alive today do not forget to complain to this day in the spirit of shareholders-shareholders of financial pyramids, how the Latvians deceived them insidiously.

Separately, I would like to emphasize that the 30-year-old confrontation between the authorities and Russians living in Latvia has much deeper foundations than state propaganda is trying to present, reducing everything to the knowledge and use of the Latvian language.

The most radical Latvian nationalists (Nazis in their views in essence), who are much more frank than their so-called liberal, more cunning colleagues, say:

“We are not interested in your knowledge of the Latvian language. We are interested in you knowing your place.”

That is, those who want to live in this state must support the domestic and foreign policy of this state in all areas: Russophobia, anti-Sovietism, nationalism, adhere to pro-NATO and Western European views on the past, present and future. Moreover, wishes to leave kindly, if you do not agree with such a policy, are generously distributed not only towards the Russian-speaking population, but also towards dissenting Latvians.

I would like to emphasize once again: among Latvian nationalists, ANY Russians are second-class people, they were, are and will be. This is very clearly manifested especially now, when the Russian opposition has poured into Latvia and, despite all its assurances of loyalty to the host regime, has received a warning for trying to be liberal in matters of internal Latvian politics. Therefore, the fate of this liberal Russian opposition, which has settled in Latvia, is sad. These idiots don't know where they are yet.

And there are a lot of such revelations, starting with the classic public dehumanization of Russians (the famous phrase of Seimas deputy Edwin Shnore “about Russian lice”) and ending with private promises to carry out a cleansing operation - all this does not prevent nationalists from loudly declaring Russian fascism, and positioning themselves as “fighters against fascism” .

On the other hand, it cannot be argued that there is no such schizophrenia in the substitution of concepts among the Russian-speaking Latvian public or Russian bourgeois-patriots who vulgarly equate white and red Latvians, between communists and Nazis, between the USSR and the Russian Federation, and reduce the essence of fascism to ... "a manifestation of cruelty" or a list of signs, on the basis of which fascism can be seen in general on every street pole.

In general, the views of the Russian-speaking population of Latvia are very similar in structure to the views of Russians or residents of Donbass.

It is an eclectic mix of Soviet and bourgeois patriotism, idealism, petty-bourgeois illusions and faith in the coming of a mighty hero who will solve all their problems for them. A certain part adheres to anti-Soviet views, fiercely hating both Latvians and communists - equating the red Latvian riflemen and nationalist Latvians, swaying in their rhetoric towards imperial Russian social chauvinism with endless reminders to Latvians that Peter I bought the lands of Livonia from the Swedes .

The vast majority of Russian speakers, who are sympathetic to the Soviet period, are completely uncritical about the bourgeois Russian Federation, endowing it with invented or real qualities that, in their opinion, allow people to qualitatively change their lives for the better. There is a small part that has chosen the path of complete adaptation to Latvian nationalism and assimilation. They are aggressive towards both the Soviet past and modern Russia as such.

The problems that worry people are generally the same as the problems that worry Russians, with the exception, of course, of the language issue and the list of officially permitted holidays. And so, of course, it’s funny when you meet two mutually exclusive statements, where a Russian-speaking resident of Latvia paints a beautiful present in the Russian Federation and a comment by a Russian who believes that a person’s dream of freedom of speech, entrepreneurship and justice is embodied in the Baltic states. You read them and you are surprised: in form, it seems, two different people, but in content - the same petty-bourgeois philistine, living in his petty-bourgeois idealistic fantasies.

Covid-hysteria finally showed (when suddenly, for a short time, it was allowed to broadcast messages about the epidemiological danger in stores, including in Russian, spitting on the heart-rending squeals of on-duty Latvian national patriots) that nationalism in the country is deliberately fomented primarily by the authorities , which, although formally, adopted laws prohibiting the promotion of any nationalism, but in practice, Latvian nationalism is encouraged in every possible way in all its possible manifestations, hiding behind the ideology of state policy. But if the interests of 60% of the population were clearly and clearly declared by the bourgeoisie through the state apparatus and dozens of political Latvian parties, then the interests of 40% (of which only 25% have the right to vote) at different times tried to saddle two parties - the liberal-democratic ZAPCHEL (today RSL) and the bourgeois-centrist "Consent Center". If the former ran for 30 years in defense of the democratic rights of the Russian-speakers (at various times getting into the country's parliament, then into the Riga (or other Latvian city with a significant number of Russian population) Duma), then the latter tried to play in the business field of interests of both Russians and Latvians, flirting with the latter on the basis of business relations.

Brief description of the activities of the "Consent Center":

— 11 years of control over Riga with all its financial flows in 2009-2020;

- the largest opposition party in parliament, regularly receiving its 25% of the seats, for which for many years the majority of Russian voters cast their votes and against which all Latvian parties actively grouped, each time receiving a parliamentary majority and pushing the Central Council into opposition;

- monopolization on May 9 - turning it from a day of mobilization and propaganda into an unspoken day of advertising for Nil Ushakov (now the former mayor of Riga and leader of the CA party);

- Simultaneous flirting with Moscow and with Brussels/Washington;

- development of financial flows around Riga and the port of Riga by placing its people in the most profitable places and providing orders to numerous businessmen who sponsored the party. In fact, for the time being, there was some temporary parity between the Latvian parties that controlled financial flows at the country level, and the Central Council, which tried its best to be its own for the Latvians, pumping out money through corruption schemes in Riga, and for the sake of the “cute” mayor Ushakov additional points from the Latvian voters even changed his Russian wife to a Latvian one. What kind of sacrifices will you make for the sake of your career. I believe that such personnel will be very useful in the future in the Russian political field.

As a result: corruption cases, criminal prosecution, rallies in support of Ushakov, the surrender of accomplices and an escape from the term in Brussels as a member of the European Parliament. A new criminal case forces Ushakov to be active today, as his parliamentary immunity will soon end.

And as a logical result of all this conciliatory mercantile policy - 4.8% in the elections on 01.10.22. The largest party in its time simply did not pass the 5% barrier.

Ushakov's main accomplice - Urbanovich - in the absence of the leader, took over the reins of the party management, all the time he sat quietly with fellow party members in the country's parliament, actively advocating the current agenda to condemn the aggression of the Russian Federation and calling for calmly accepting the fact of the demolition of the Victory monument:

“The party will not call on its voters to oppose the demolition of the monument to the Liberators of Riga. After all, the decision to demolish is now a law adopted by Parliament, you can’t violate laws. We will try to convince people to calmly endure this situation.”

In the face of the CA, in fact, the unprincipled physiognomy of the Ukrainian "Party of Regions" is clearly guessed, which is not surprising on the whole. The task of such parties in the bourgeois system is one - to parasitize on some segment of the population, to parasitize on certain moods in order to push their business interests in political circles, but with the obligatory preservation of the bourgeois system itself, and hence with the preservation of all the ulcers it generates.

(Concluded in following post.)
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Oct 24, 2022 3:20 pm

(Continued from previous post.)

Brief description of the activities of the Russian Union of Latvia (RLL):

RSL is reminiscent of Russian liberals - people without brains, fighting for social justice in their understanding, for social "freedom" in general.

Their highest achievement was achieved in 2002, when they won 25% of the seats in the country's parliament. But they gradually lost their influence on the Russian-speaking voters, whose votes were taken over by the "Consent Center". Already in the elections in 2010, the RSL did not pass to the parliament, and the elections to the Seimas in 2014, in 2018 and in 2022 showed results of 1.58%, 3.2%, 3.5%, respectively.

The main focus of the RSL was on noisy and senseless one-time protests against the policy of de-Russification of education and annual processions in honor of the memory of SS legionnaires. All these endless walks with placards around the Ministry of Education of Latvia to protect Russian education or running around in striped camp uniforms at the nationalist processions organized by the RSL in 2004-2016 naturally led to nothing. The only significant relative success was with the RSL in 2004, when there were mass rallies to protect Russian schools from being transferred to the Latvian language of instruction, but these rallies were handed over ... by the Russian embassy in Riga (which sought to build business cooperation with Latvian politicians) and the parties came to a compromise according to the 60/40 formula - 60% of the subjects were studied in Latvian and 40% in Russian.

Suggestions to the RSL to promote the movement through trade union work or work with children were ignored by the latter. The issues of strikes were not worked out. Everywhere and everywhere the Russian intelligentsia, which forms the backbone of the RSL, clings to the strict observance of bourgeois law, believing that only legal methods can change the system.

RSL can be called a “radical” format in the Baltic style at minimum wages. A lot of screeching, zero wool. But even this screeching Latvians manage to demonize so much that this summer they raised the question of how to ban RSL by legal means.

Since May of this year, when the authorities made the final decision to demolish the monument to Soviet soldiers in Riga, and the CA, as usual, distanced itself from the problem, the RSL twice (in May and August) applied for permission to hold a rally and twice was refused, after which he proudly promised his supporters to continue the struggle in ... filing a petition to Brussels and creating an electronic copy of the monument to preserve memory.

If the “Consent Center” can be called a party of petty shopkeepers, then the RSL is a party of liberals, leading its supporters from defeat to defeat. People go to protest rallies, achieve nothing, become disillusioned with the movement, and the weak give up.

In essence, these two organizations are a REFLECTION of the consciousness that exists among the Russian-speaking population of Latvia - a wide palette of idealists, a handful of activists and a huge mass of petty-bourgeois, clinging to their penny business.

All the women who kissed the leader of the CA party Ushakov and stood up for their idol for the last 10 years are painfully reminiscent of the same Russian women who kissed Yeltsin's hands in the 90s or threatened to marry Putin/Nemtsov/Navalny in the 2000s and 10s. This similarity emphasizes the fact that the manipulation of people in any country follows the same patterns, and in the minds of people there is sheer idealism and idolism. What is the class consciousness there? A maximum of something from Freud, purchases in stock stores and some simple solution in the form of "come an epic hero and make us happy."

At the same time, practice has shown that the Russian-speaking population is CAPABLE of spontaneous mobilization when issues important to them are raised. In particular, using the relatively liberal legislation at that time, public figure Vladimir Linderman (National Bolsheviks in his views, who has behind him a rich trail of criminal cases for political reasons and at the time of this writing has already been in the Riga Central Prison for two months, accused of supporting Russia in Ukraine and incitement of nationalism sucked from the finger) with his comrades, as a private initiative, managed in 2012 to launch the process of collecting signatures to initiate a referendum on the status of the Russian language in Latvia. When, to the surprise of the authorities, they quickly collected signatures at the first and then the second stage, necessary to launch a referendum, financed by the state. It was then that the authorities became alarmed, launching the entire state machine at full capacity to mobilize the Latvian electorate under the conditional slogan “Occupiers are coming again! Let's protect our Latvia!”, and the “Consent Center” was forced to publicly support the issue of the Russian language, so as not to lose its part of the voters. Yes, the Russians then formally lost with a score of 25% vs 75% (and this is taking into account the fact that non-citizens could not vote), especially since it was not possible to win purely mathematically, but ... they demonstrated the possibility of a quick and complete mobilization of people in the presence and the "Consent Center" was forced to publicly support the issue of the Russian language, so as not to lose its part of the voters.

About democratic terror

In Latvia, until 2022, everything was “fine” with the suppression of dissent. Information regularly surfaced about how administrative pressure was exerted on people working in the public sector who express a different, different from the official, opinion. But basically, everything was limited to dismissals or threats of dismissal from work, and only in rare exceptions did it come to criminal prosecution.

The Russian-Ukrainian conflict changed everything.

Since February 2022, unprecedented terror against dissidents has been introduced in Latvia. All Russian websites and TV are disabled. Local media (primarily Russian-language) are under the control of special services. Social networks are carefully checked for disloyal comments or posts, and Latvian patriots enthusiastically knock on the manifestation of disloyalty to the police. New articles have been urgently introduced into the legislation, allowing criminal cases to be initiated against persons who openly speak from a point of view that differs from the official point of view on ongoing political and social events.

StratCom agents are actively working in social networks, trying to manipulate public opinion in the interests of the ruling regime. As part of the implementation of the concept of "soft power" by NATO leadership, on August 20, 2015, the NATO Center of Excellence in the field of strategic communications (strategic propaganda) (NATO StratCom CoE) was opened in Riga.

The main purpose of this structure is the exchange of experience and coordination of the activities of NATO structures involved in information and psychological operations, public diplomacy and public relations. In addition, the center trains specialists in the field of strategic communications, conducts various kinds of research work to summarize the experience of information campaigns and develop new forms and methods of psychological impact on target audiences. The NATO Center of Excellence operates in close cooperation with the Tallinn NATO Cyber ​​Defense Center of Excellence (CCDCOE).

The main tasks of the center:

– study and analysis of the information environment, determination of topics and forms of impact on a specific target audience;

- the formation in the countries that are part of the zone of interests of NATO, a radical opposition from population groups subject to manipulation;

- organization of PR activities (formation of a positive attitude towards the policy of the bloc);

– consultations on modern trends in the development of the information space;

- assistance to ongoing research in the field of the use of information impact technologies for military purposes;

—development of ways and methods to counter the information and propaganda activities of states that are not part of the Euro-Atlantic structures.

In other words, they are engaged in information propaganda and counter-propaganda, that is, what the Russian Federation is facing today in Ukraine - with the local structure of the 72nd Center for Information and Psychological Operations.

The most interesting thing is that one of the components of the work of such centers is the exposure and cultivation of "Stalinist/Soviet crimes."

And here they merge with ... the Russian authorities and the Russian bourgeois-patriots "non-hamat", with whom a detailed discussion took place on Shakhnazarov's page, where both the author and the commentators angrily branded the runaway pro-Western liberals, sighing recalled the philosophical steamship that left Russia in 1922 year with the best people on board, and scolded the practice of Stalinism.

So draw conclusions about what the policy of the Russian bourgeoisie leads to sit on two chairs: one chair - Victory in the Second World War, and the other chair - anti-Soviet tales of the perestroika era.

As of September 2022, Article 74.1 of the Criminal Code is widely applied in Latvia: public glorification and justification of genocide, crimes against humanity, peace and war crimes, including the genocide committed by the USSR. For political reasons, 125 criminal and 290 administrative cases were initiated. To understand the scale of what is happening, this would be tantamount to initiating in the Russian Federation over the past six months more than 4.5 million criminal and administrative cases for expressing disloyalty to the government. And if in Russia they are brought to justice only in connection with the dissemination of false or discrediting information about the Armed Forces, then in Latvia they are rowing everyone in a row for any open sympathy for Russia.

All these facts do not cancel the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie that exists in Russia, it only indicates that the regime in Latvia is rapidly slipping into open terror, which is inherent in fascist regimes. Where the highest officials of the state openly call for reprisals against the disloyal part of the population. Moreover, it must be understood that the fascist superstructure of Latvia primarily serves the interests of Western imperialist capital.

Yes, today in Latvia they don't kill people yet, as in Ukraine. Yes, today in Latvia dissenters are not tortured yet, and flying punitive detachments are not rushing around the country. But that's for now. The authorities are threatening terror, and representatives of the lower classes of the Latvian Nazism, in anticipation of blood, defiantly click their teeth, waiting for a go-ahead from above. All this suggests that the Latvian authorities and their patrons are afraid of civil confrontation within the country and scenarios similar to the uprising of Donbass.

The conclusion suggests itself that the Russian communists and their sympathizers should not complain about "unbearable working conditions", but, looking at reality dialectically, organize the party's personnel asset. The Russian communists must take advantage of the moment so that tomorrow, when really important things begin, they will not find themselves, like their comrades in the Ukraine or the Baltic states, without a competent leading staff and without contact with the masses.

About the monument
Those who do not understand the situation in the Baltic states believe that the demolition of the monument is a consequence of the RF SVO in Ukraine. However, nationalists have been sharpening their teeth on the monument since the 90s. The SVO served only as a convenient excuse, and the fate of the monument was obvious 10 years ago. The situation with the already destroyed monument to Soviet soldiers in Riga clearly showed the main problem: it's not about the monument, but about people for whom this monument and Victory Day are significant symbols.

The day, which people spontaneously used for many years as a legal way of demonstrating disobedience to the authorities, protesting against the Latvian policy of Russophobia, assimilation, “building Latvia” and wiping their feet since 1991 about everything that is dear to at least 40% of the country's population. And enough hatred has accumulated over these 30 years. Starting with constant cynical insults from politicians, emphasizing the status in this country, which suddenly became a stranger, mocking language inspections at workplaces, restriction of civil rights, gradual squeezing out and prohibition of the use of the Russian language in children's and school education of Russian children, when a Russian teacher explains a lesson to 20 Russian children in Latvian, which naturally leads to a low quality of education. And ending with a complete failure in the economic development of the country,

Local analysts are trying to explain all this by the regular elections to the Latvian parliament and the desire of the authorities to at least somehow show success. But I think that by this act the Latvian authorities are trying to cement the economic and political relations in the country that have developed since 1991, and show the Russian Balts a place in their so-called Latvian world. Against the backdrop of the deepest economic crisis and the special incitement of Latvian Nazism by the authorities, this will only lead to increased mutual hatred and civil war. This option, in principle, should suit both the real owners of the territory - the Americans, who organized another hot conflict on the border with the Russian Federation - and the local elites, who will thereby relieve themselves of all responsibility for social obligations to the sharply impoverished population.

People today are intimidated by official terror, no one expects anything good from the future. Yes, the monument could not be defended. But the events of May 9-10, 2022 again clearly showed that Russians and sympathetic Latvians are capable of spontaneous self-organization, when, in response to the actions of the authorities to “clean up” the flowers laid on May 9 at the monument to Soviet Liberators with a tractor, people rushed to bring new flowers, filling up the monument is more than ever, which infuriated the authorities, who gave the go-ahead for arrests.

Along with the comments of those rejoicing at the demolition of the “symbol of occupation” and, in fact, signing both themselves and those around them to all the delights of an inevitable civil war, there are also sound arguments of Latvians that it is unacceptable to increase enmity between people in the current economic and political situation.

The Russians, in their mass, are simply furious with what happened, and this should also be used, directing their anger in a constructive direction with a reserve for the future.

Let both Latvians and Russians go again to the elections on October 1 and, as usual, achieve nothing. All this will be covered in winter by astronomical bills for heating, water, light and food. And here - before the elections, during and after them - it is important to explain to the working people of both nationalities at least the basics of Marxism, namely the following.

The essence of any government, the essence of any elections, the essence of this state and officials, the essence of the so-called "bourgeois democracy" in general, the essence of the mechanism of state repression, the essence of class dictatorship, both under capitalism and under socialism. That behind the façade of bourgeois democracy is always hidden the real power of big capital in the form of a dictatorship. It is important to explain howto the vacillating Latvians, whose thinking abilities have not yet been destroyed by nationalism, and to the actively pro-Russian Latvians, that the existing regime, no matter what politicians talk about sovereignty, language and national pride, is built with the sole purpose of serving American imperialism. That the real reason for their rapidly deteriorating situation is not badly chosen politicians, not the insidious machinations of Moscow or Washington, but the essence of the very system of market relations, in which a sharp social stratification of people inevitably occurs, the gradual impoverishment of the majority and the enrichment of an insignificant minority through exploitation, that the destruction of education , medicine, the collapse of public transport in rural areas, the rise in prices for goods and services, the wild incomes of politicians, bankers, big officials and cadaverous scavengers in the form of insolvency administrators and bailiffs against the backdrop of a rapidly declining income of wage labor and small businesses is the norm under capitalism, and not the managerial mistakes of politicians who were thoughtlessly chosen by voters. And just as any entrepreneur is interested in the maximum withdrawal of surplus value created by hired labor, so is it in relations between capitalist countries: economically more powerful states are interested in squeezing as much of the results of other people's labor, that is, wealth, from their subordinate countries.

It is also important to convey to the Russian-speaking Latvians, who still live in their rosy, uncritical idealistic perception of the Russian Federation, that changing the roof from American imperialism to Russian capitalism will not remove the main problems that have tortured all people. Yes, the Russian Federation can offer cheap energy resources, some social elevators and write-offs of loans. But capitalist Russia (like any capitalist country) in any case will remain a hostage to market relations with all the charms - market monopolization, inflation, unemployment, chaos of overproduction, super-exploitation, debt load, etc.

Explain to both sides that any power, including democratic, is a dictatorship, that is, the power of one class or another, which dictates its will to the whole society as a whole through the state apparatus of violence and protection of the economic interests of the ruling class. Where the state is not a source of power and not some kind of arbiter, located above society, but is a tool, an instrument of power, where power should be understood as the imposition of one’s will, and political power is the public imposition of the will of the ruling class, provided by the force of coercion, the system professionally organized violence. Where the system can easily repress a particular representative of this class for one reason or another, but the interests of the entire class are strictly observed (1). Where management is not power, but a mechanism for maintaining the power of the ruling class, where officials are only engaged in SERVICE (distribution) of the surplus product created by social labor in the interests of the ruling class, receiving certain preferences as payment for their labor. The "elite" of this or that state is the most powerful representative of the ruling class. Under capitalism, these are bourgeois billionaires, politicians and high-ranking officials. In the conditions of the first phase of communism, relatively speaking, these are the leaders of the Communist Party, the most worthy workers and peasants, including those who have become managers.

The interests of the "elite" do not hang in the air, but are connected by thousands of threads with the dominant economic relations. The "elite" MANAGES the dictatorship in the interests of the ruling class and itself as an integral part of this class. Dictatorship is carried out by the Apparatusruling class. For example, they detain, arrest, investigate, judge, pronounce sentences, imprison and execute not the "elites" themselves, but hired officials and employees. It is not the "elite" who is engaged in class lawmaking, but hired specialists in the field of law, and so on. The "elite" simply breaks out to the top of this entire social pyramid (at the expense of capital) and carries out its management function within the framework of the tasks of general class domination. In Latvia, these tasks are linked with the interests of American and European imperialism, while the Latvian bourgeoisie is a comprador.

The above is nothing new for the Communists. But the overwhelming majority of the townsfolk live in their invented idealistic petty-bourgeois world, where it is enough to go to put a tick for the next honest candidate once every four years, and the correctness of the decisions made by officials is controlled by supervisory authorities and an “independent” constitutional court. Where repression under bourgeois democracy is not repression, but "the protection of statehood and punishment for anti-state actions or positive discrimination." What kind of mental somersaults will the petty-bourgeois hamster go to in order to protect his cozy capitalist little world, not realizing to the last that he is already naked and barefoot through the fault of big capital.

The thinking of the layman, regardless of who it is - a Latvian or a Russian, is arranged in a completely different way than that of the communists. Instead of studying the society in which you live, understanding economic REGULARITIES , according to which any society develops, identifying cause-and-effect relationships between economic social and production relations and the policy pursued in a particular state, learning to understand the essence of the state, power, officials and politicians, this average character answers all important questions: " WE NEED A LEADER WHO WILL SOLVE ALL THE PROBLEMS ".

And depending on his political preferences, he skips to look for these leaders among the Ulmanis, Putins or other, of course, very honest people.

The working masses must first be explained how the world in which they live and from which they have become brutalized, the opposition of class interests, really works. And only THEN raise it somewhere, explaining that power is not taken in elections, but with the help of the class struggle, which takes all kinds of forms, and its highest stage - the revolution. Not a Maidan, when only signs change, but a radical transformation of socio-economic relations, a change from the dictatorship of capital to the dictatorship of labor and science.

First you need to prove that the enemies of both Latvians and Russians are nationalists on both sides, market lovers, entrepreneurs, regardless of their language, and the current ruling regime, which deliberately, criminally plays them off and, first of all, exposes ... Latvians themselves to the threat of destruction in the impending war for foreign interests. It is precisely to the conscious Latvians who, not afraid of public opinion, walked along with the Russians with flowers to the monument on May 9 and 10, who were not afraid to write “What are you doing ?!” Nazis will have to be the first to muzzle the nationalist Latvians, who, in their bestial hatred of the Russians, create the preconditions for a bloody slaughter.

Prospects for confrontation

Given that Latvia is in the NATO bloc, the situation here is different from what is happening in Ukraine. The chances of a direct clash, given the far from brilliant economic, and hence the military capabilities of the bourgeois Russian Federation, with the Americans are small, but they still should not be ruled out. Also, provocations from the regime are not ruled out, when some local House of Trade Unions is arranged with the mass death of people who “self-destructed”. Then an uncontrolled chain reaction can occur. Under such a scenario of the development of the situation, Latgale, as the most pro-Russian region with a convenient geographical position, will most likely become the center of resistance. Moreover, a similar analysis of the development of events has already been worked out by the NATO special services, which released a film in 2016 that plays out the Donbass scenario on Latgale soil.

It is important how people will be ready and organized for real resistance. Calculations show that the mobilization reserve of the Russian-speaking population gives a figure of up to 100 thousand people, but in reality this number will most likely be several times less - about 10-15 thousand. An analysis of the so-called "pro-Russian" legal political organizations shows their complete control by the Latvian regime or political impotence. In this situation, first of all, an organizing force is needed, which will be able to put together a combat-ready monolith from petty-bourgeois jelly in a few years. But this requires knowledge, personnel and time. And all this in conditions of police terror. The only external force on which the Russian-speaking resistance can rely, if it matures, is, alas, only the political bourgeois regime in the Russian Federation.

The regime in Latvia will continue to slide further into fascism, combining open terror tactics with chatter about respecting bourgeois democratic electoral and judicial procedures. The benefit of experience to be hypocritical to this public is not to occupy. What are their arguments about Russian fascism worth when the swastika and Nazi rhetoric, so dearly loved by Latvian nationalists, simply screams in the statements of Latvian politicians and public figures, where they threaten reprisal against the disloyal part of society, saying “Latvia is for Latvians” (2), and probe public opinion through wild initiatives such as the collection of signatures for the confiscation of property from persons convicted of supporting the war and the “genocide in Ukraine”. That is, they follow such a familiar path of squeezing property, as happened with the Germans, who massively left Latvia before the Second World War, and with the Jews,

At the beginning of 2022, the Armed Forces of the Republic of Lithuania consisted of an eight thousand contract army and 12 thousand people of voluntary territorial defense (Zemesardze). After the beginning of the events in Ukraine, a new recruitment into the army was announced, but it is known from open sources that increased propaganda had an effect in the amount of ... 100 people who signed a contract for military service.

In fact, we have about 20 thousand people (not counting NATO employees from the analogue of the Ukrainian TsIPSO) of the police, the Security Service, who are ready to take up arms to fight the "Russian orcs" on a voluntary basis and solve the Russian issue in a fundamental way, using the "grandfather's experience "with Jews and communist and Soviet activists in the period 1941-1944.

An analysis of the fighting in Ukraine apparently led to the fact that the ruling class announced the brilliant idea of ​​introducing compulsory conscription in order to bring the size of the army to 50,000 in five years, prepared for military operations in the event of mobilization. But the authorities were faced with the results of a deplorable demographic situation, which showed that a maximum of 8-9 thousand people fall under the age conscription from 18 to 27 years old, of which 3-4 thousand are Russian citizens and Russian non-citizens (do not laugh, there was a statement that they plan to to take into the army and non-citizens, despite the fact that the latter are affected in the rights to participate in the political life of the country), which the authorities a priori consider unreliable. At the same time, according to statistics, out of 20 thousand people who annually emigrate from the country in search of a better life, 60% are young people under 35 years old. That is, the situation with conscripts from the authorities is even worse. Of course, they are betting that they will catch people abroad in order to force them to repay their “debt to the Motherland, which must be defended by any” (hello Russian national patriots), but will they have enough resources to search and, most importantly, how perfect a coercive mechanism to force people to return to Latvia, taking into account the liberal laws of the EU for the protection of human rights?

What solution can they come up with in such a situation? Judging by the statements, rely on older people and ... Ukrainian refugees, of whom there are currently about 40 thousand living in Latvia, since among them there are a lot of brutalized nationalists who openly call in the center of Riga for reprisals against the enemies of the nation to the approving pat of the Latvians.

In parallel, since 2013, exercises have been actively conducted to train the army to conduct hostilities with ... its own population, practicing tactics and methods for suppressing separatists.

There are no organizations in the political field of Latvia that could offer anti-fascist residents a cardinal plan for overcoming the crisis. Such an organization needs to be created so that it can organize training of personnel, publish Marxist literature (including in Latvian) and offer people an alternative plan of what to do today and, most importantly, tomorrow, when the contradictions in society and in the world will go to the next round. tension.

There must be a well-developed algorithm of actions at the moment when those who have been forcibly trained will be massively called up to mobilization points on the eve of the war, and organize corridors for them to leave the country.

Communist propaganda should be carried out among the Russian-speaking population and the non-nationalistic Latvian part in order to explain the reasons for their rapidly deteriorating economic situation and offer them an alternative plan for economic and political transformation. Working with the Latvian part is especially important here, because, due to its natural obstinacy, a conscious Latvian communist is more valuable than a dozen Russians nostalgic for the Soviet Union with their eternal emotional shying from side to side. And it is the Latvian communists who will become that support in further work with the Latvian part of society, which is now stricken with the poison of nationalism.

Training of the most competent communist cadres of regional organizations. Moreover, they should not be numerous, since they will not pull the conspiracy and will be easily opened by punitive authorities.

The main emphasis for working with spontaneous anti-fascists, apparently, should be considered an explanation of the essence of fascism, that fascism is the HIGHEST degree of evolution of monopoly capital, which is ready to commit any crime for the sake of personal profit, hiding behind a national, religious or other issue.

Categorically suppress the incitement of nationalist sentiments in the Russian environment. Explain that this is a dead end, since nationalism always evolves into fascism. That the only effective remedy against nationalism and fascism is Marxism, class consciousness, internationalism and Soviet power, which severely punishes any nationalists. To bring to the consciousness of the townsfolk that a prerequisite for the elimination of fascist regimes is the deliverance by the workers of petty-bourgeois illusions about democracy, elections, market justice, the bourgeois understanding of the motherland and the concept of the essence of the state as an apparatus of violence of the ruling class.

Explain that the only force capable of organizing people, forging a steel proletarian fist from petty-bourgeois jelly and breaking the neck of fascism and nationalism, are the communists and the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. That the only force that can nip fascism in the bud is Soviet power and the dictatorship of the working class.

That is, we are faced with what the communists of the late Soviet period and post-Soviet communists could not cope with - the class illiteracy of the masses, their lack of understanding of what a real society under the rule of capital is.

It will be easier to understand why people do something at all, the worse the situation gets. But first there must be a plan for an alternative future. For example, we do not participate in the meat grinder that NATO will poke us into, but in the context of the unfolding of the conflict, we do this and that.

And further options - we will take power in the area, put 10% of the reservists on the run and cover them and their families, etc. And what will they get as a result.

The communists must offer a smarter way than the Westernophiles or the Russians - in particular, they will have to prove that sticking to capitalist Russia is no less risky in the long run, because for capital any people are a one-time resource. That the capitalist Russian Federation is a situational and temporary ally. In addition, any capital, in principle, is insane. And whether the Russian or the Latvian "elite" is banally at risk of losing, because the ruling class thinks about profit more than anything else. Profit will loomed on the horizon (that is, the opportunity to negotiate with partners on their own terms), capital will betray the interests of workers without hesitation.

Summary:

Without communists, the Russian-speaking population of Latvia, at best, will repeat the fate of the Russian population in the Donbass, which, being stuffed with petty-bourgeois idealism, rushed to fight against Ukrainian Nazism, completely not understanding what exactly it was fighting for, replacing knowledge with chatter about the soul, "the heart will tell" and about greatness "Russian world". Although this struggle is fair, it is not enough.

The Latvian part of society will take the simplest path - it will confidently drift into the fascist regime, demanding a strong dictatorial hand in the spirit of the first Republic, when the grass was greener, and the pigs were rounder, and the girls were rosier. The most frostbitten Nazis will arrange terror against dissidents - both Russians and their own Latvians. Liberal and more moderate Latvians (the so-called "centrists") will watch with approval or with partial condemnation, but, most importantly, they will silently observe what is happening. For sure, militants from Ukraine who have gained combat experience will also appear in the country, with all the ensuing consequences for both sides.

Ya. Aleinikov , R. Galante
24/10/2022

https://prorivists.org/74_latvia/

Google Translator

(This piece required considerable editing, largely but not entirely due to a propensity of GT to repeat blocks of text(this happens most often with Russian...hmm...). But there was also a section that appeared to be notes but the text had no indication thereof. )
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply