The Novosibirsk Regional Committee of the RCWP (Russian Communist Workers Party) in its statement “WHAT WOULD COMRADE STALIN SAY?” announced its withdrawal from the initiative group on the installation of the monument to I.V. Stalin in the territory of the city of Novosibirsk, motivating it with the fact that “it is impossible to erect a monument in the territory of those who forbade it to be placed in a public space”.
In this regard, I consider it necessary to make some explanations, especially since among our supporters not everyone correctly understands the decision taken by the initiative group to erect a monument in the territory of the CPRF regional committee and around this decision dirty political speculations begin.
The initiative group, including its leader, the author of these lines, from the very beginning of our campaign, advocated the installation of the monument to I.V. Stalin in the historically significant part of the city or near the objects of military glory.
Also, none of us had any illusions about the Communist Party Regional Committee (CPRF) and its first secretary A.E.Loktya, who, as the results of the struggle showed, pursued a compromise policy of consensus with the liberals. Therefore, the mayor’s office of the city of Novosibirsk is under the personal signature of the mayor, A.E. Loktya refused to agree on the monument to I.V. Stalin in public space.
What to do in this current political situation? Comrades from the CPRF do not give an answer to this question. They offer solutions that are devoid of common sense. For example, in their one more previous statement, they proposed “to postpone the monument until the revolution” ...
Seriously? Stalin’s bust, donated to the people, “put aside” at home or in the basement on Potaninskaya? And where to “postpone” a 2-ton granite pedestal? A rhetorical question. In essence, this is tantamount to the destruction of the monument to the Generalissimo. Frankly, nothing more wild and absurd can think of. We, representatives of the AUCPB, realize and feel our responsibility towards people and for the cause that we have been entrusted with and which we must complete.
That's all.
The declaration of withdrawal from the initiative group, adopted by the regional committee of the RCWP, is illogical. Fairly laying the entire responsibility for the situation on the local leadership of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the representatives of the RCWP decided for some reason to break the coalition with another Communist Party - the AUCPB ... Is the “obscene” world with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation opposed? We are also against it, but the interests of the cause for which we are fighting sometimes require it.
A revolution, Lenin would say, is not being done in “white gloves”. Shouldn't you get down to business? But in any serious case there is a risk.
Representatives of the RCWP are clearly inconsistent in their decisions. So, mentioning in his statement about the many questionable steps of the mayor A.E.Loktya, it was not said that the "red" city hall banned mass protest actions against pension reform at all central sites of the city, and at the same time, gave the green light to the CPRF. Accidentally forgotten? Representatives of the RCWP were the initiators of the creation of a coalition - under the auspices of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, which carried out actions "for show" - in many ways, quite simply, it merged a wave of popular indignation "(from the statement of the Central Committee of the RCWP).
It should be noted that representatives of the RCWP continue to successfully work actively in this coalition hand in hand with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and under its leadership as junior partners.
As we see, the local leadership of the RCWP rushes from one extreme to another, from the arms of opportunists and compromisers into the arms of a revolutionary phrase.
At a meeting of the City Council's artistic council in November 2018, when Mr. Lozhkin read out the refusal to approve the installation of the monument to Stalin, those present at the meeting Rudnitsky, Golodyaev and Co. gave him an ovation. Is it not clear that if you accept the proposal of the EIF, the liberals will applaud even louder? Who? .. After all, they sought and are trying to ensure that a monument to Stalin does not appear at all.
Most of all makes a fuss (“it’s better to bury the monument in the ground”, etc.) one of the local leaders of the EIF, who out of more than a hundred pickets to raise funds, took part in only one and paid only 300 rubles, demanding the only number out of a thousand donated funds, return them back. It is necessary to remind this figure: the right to criticize is necessary.
The RCF proposal, in essence, is a setup. In fact, during the campaign we collected about half a million rubles, and people will ask a reasonable question: where is the monument, and where is the money? What to answer? ..
When last year Mr. Lozhkin proposed Efremovsky Square (backyards in the Leninsky District), the local leaders of the RCWP urged us to immediately agree. We did not hurry and sought the center of the city. And if they immediately agreed, would they agree? I do not think. And actually, why is horseradish sweeter rarer?
The devil is not so terrible as he is painted. The territory of the CPRF regional committee has a number of indisputable advantages. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation has assumed obligations for the improvement of the site, which will require more than one hundred thousand rubles. Around the territory will be installed around the clock video surveillance. In the case of acts of vandalism, the risk of which should not be underestimated, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation will restore the monument at its own expense.
We have never ruled out the option of a private territory. The question is not in the territory of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation or not, but in the fact that the monument to Generalissimo I.V. Stalin has no place in a private courtyard. The statement of the RCWP “rrr-revolutionary” states that “if the installation of the monument helps the opportunists hide their real face, then it is not needed and even harmful.” Probably, they will hide it, but not to hide the truth for a long time.
The goal of our campaign was initially not to expose the Communist Party's conciliation, they did this work for themselves, and in the first place we had - the struggle for the good name of the leader, perpetuating his memory, enlightening our young people, bringing the historical truth to people.
Installation of a monument to the leader of the Soviet state, the architect of socialism, the creator of the Great Victory I.V. Stalin, even in the territory of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, will undoubtedly have a serious agitation and propaganda influence on the masses and especially on the young people who are now stupefied. So the game is worth the candle.
What would Stalin say? I think he would say that we are doing the right thing. We must look at things with simple eyes. We, the Bolsheviks, are not going to get up in the “beautiful” position of pure hurray revolutionaries, disclaiming all responsibility for the fate of the monument to I.V. Stalin. But to do our duty to the people.
A.V. Denisyuk
08.02.2019
