Vladimir Ryabov
The monetary agiotage of the early 20s of the last century, Lenin met with his work “On the Meaning of Gold Now and after the Complete Victory of Socialism”, in which he clearly spoke about the prospect of gold under communism: “When we win on a global scale, we, I think, will make gold public latrines on the streets of several of the largest cities in the world. This would be the most "fair" and visual-edifying use of gold for those generations who did not forget how ten million people were killed because of gold and crippled thirty million in the "great liberation" war of 1914-1918, in a war to solve the great question of which world is worse, Brest or Versailles ... ”(PSS, 4th ed., vol. 33, p.89).
However, the globalist ideology of the liberals is already turning the public climate on the planet into a gutter, in every way resembling latrines in cities. Even children enter the struggle for cleanliness of modern cities. 16-year-old girl from Sweden Greta Thunberg gave a scientific report at the World Economic Forum in Davos. Greta Thunberg has already become famous for her sedentary single pickets in defense of the environment. Influential politicians began to equate with her political line, including the Pope. And at the 2018 World Economic Forum in Davos, the leading moneybags decided that Greta should be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Big capital, as always, was easier to pay off the Nobel Prize from the annoying fighter for the environment, than to put things in order in the treatment of waste; with emissions into the air; with problems of water consumption and drainage; protection of flora and fauna in most regions of the planet. For this will require significant costs of gold and foreign exchange reserves, which is very heavy for globalists.
Thus, turning to Lenin, life inexorably poses the question: either gold from the oligarchs' vaults will be transferred to the latrines of large cities, which will be ennobled, and the work of the common man will be elevated to moral value, with the result that the economy should be transferred completely to gas , atomic energy or hydroelectric power, or the active role of gold in the economy will turn our lives into continuous retreat. Or, as the leader of the Russian Public Noosphere Academy of Sciences, Professor A.I. Subetto: “Nature in the face of the Biosphere and the planet Earth, as superorganisms, presented to humanity an ultimatum in the form of the first phase of the Global Ecological Holocaust, the processes of which have been developing for over 25 years now with acceleration”.
Of course, gold will disappear only with the extinction of money, that is, with the construction of communism, to which it was necessary to move through trade relations, since it is impossible to take and abolish money as the equivalent of gold by a directive. Lenin then made fun of it in the same work “On the meaning of gold ...”: “It seems strange. Communism and trade ?! Something very much incoherent, absurd, distant. But if you think economically, one from the other is no further than communism from the small peasant, patriarchal farming. We will not let ourselves be controlled by the “socialism of feeling”, the patriarchal mood, which is characterized by an unconscious disregard for trade. It is permissible to use all sorts of economic and transitional forms, and one must be able to use them, once this is necessary, to strengthen the peasantry’s connection with the proletariat, to immediately revive the national economy in a ruined and exhausted country, to boost industry, to facilitate further, wider and deeper measures, such as: electrification. " (VI Lenin. Full. Coll., 4th ed., V.33, p.89, p. 91).
In the language of Lenin, the path to the golden latrine in a big city is through electrification. And it is very easy for modern man to imagine how modern industry easily pours a golden toilet at a temperature above 1000 o C, then polishes it, and plumbing fixes a rich oligarch to such a latrine for personal use. What is happening nowadays is because fat cats are trying to use gold wherever it can be stored as a reserve.
Only here Lenin had in mind the economic base of electrification, due to the labor productivity of which prices will fall and bring them to zero. Then gold will become unnecessary because of its withering away, which will allow it to be used because of its uselessness even in urban latrines. And the ecology in the city will reach the golden heyday, when cleanliness and brilliance of plumbing will become attributes of our life.
However, those political forces that would have to deal with the problem of the death of money, for the most part, die off themselves, since they simply do not understand “broader and deeper measures, such as“ electrification ”. And, perhaps most clearly, this misunderstanding in the communist movement of Russia is reflected in the famous public Litsist and scientist Andrei Fursov. Although A. Fursov himself is not a Communist, nevertheless he rewrites the history of Bolshevism in his own way.
Not understanding the role of Lenin electrification in the economic base of the Soviet country, A. Fursov reduces the role of Stalin to the victory of the bureaucratic system in the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party, at the expense of which Stalin allegedly kept in power. He does not consider the leader of the Soviet people the theoretical successor of Lenin. Fursov sees the victory of socialism in one country as the inevitable floundering of Stalin, who, as his conclusion suggests, had nowhere to go. Therefore, he "drives" Lenin too in Gorki, only because the party bureaucracy is tired of acute Leninist criticism, and Lenin's faceless role suited them very much.
It would hardly be worthwhile for A. Fursov to draw attention to such conclusions if he had not politically expressed the whole discord in the modern communist movement of Russia, concentrating on all his own age spots of the modern era on his own analysis of the causes of party crises of the beginning of the last century, enduring his views The Internet.
First, Stalin was a political theorist, as evidenced by his work “Marxism and the National Question”, the preparation of which allowed him in 1912 to co-opt him from the candidates for membership in the Central Committee of the RSDLP (B) and put him at the head of the Petersburg Party organization. And the holiday celebrated in Soviet times on May 5 as the Day of printing was associated with the release of the first number of the Pravda newspaper in the same year 1912 under his leadership. But best of all, Stalin understood the economic base of Lenin's electrification, by means of which it was necessary to achieve the death of the monetary system and build communism.
On the basis of theoretical developments in the work “Marxism and the National Question” Stalin created the Soviet Union community in the Soviet Union, which turned out to be stronger than German fascism and dominated it throughout the Great Patriotic War. And on the basis of the economic base of electrification, extensive industrialization was carried out in the country, with which the USSR surpassed the power of the industrial machine of almost all of Europe, which worked for Hitler.
At the XVI Congress of the CPSU (b) (1925) in the question "the contradictions between the victor countries", i.e. between England and the United States, Stalin puts the question of oil at the forefront: “For the question of oil is a vital question, for it depends on who has more oil who will command in a future war. It depends on who has more oil, who will be in command of world industry and trade. Oil, after the fleet of advanced countries switches to motor engines, is the vital nerve of the struggle of world states for dominance both during peace and during war. ” Stalin I.V. Cit., V.7, p.278).
The trouble of all critics of Lenin lies in the fact that they can not understand what it is “Electrification of the whole country”? All critics of Lenin electrification are considered at the level of the industry, which has a significant infrastructure of power plants, electrical and thermal networks. And this is all that critics understand in the economic base of electrification. Meanwhile, the economic significance of the “second party program”, as Vladimir Ilyich called it, on the basis of its wording “Communism is Soviet power (the first party program is a note by the author V.R.) plus electrification of the whole country (second party program), gave First People's Commissar of Finance in the government of Lenin, he is the last translator of Marx’s Capital into Russian I.I. Skvortsov-Stepanov, for which he received the highest mark from Lenin in mid-April 1922. In his book "Electrification of the RSFSR in connection with the transition phase of the world economy" Skvortsov-Stepanov showed the leading role of "black gold" in economic development, in which it should take, the role of parity of the main gold in the bank. The book Skvortsova-Stepanova was intended to be understood even by an illiterate population and was in each library. Later, beginning in the 1960s, “scientists” and politicians could not agree with why they were forced to read this book for primary schoolchildren, since, in their opinion, this is lower than their scientific status. They are completely unaware that the Soviet Union was raised economically on this theoretical work by Skvortsov-Stepanov, who became a reference book for the illiterate population of the country, and who learned from it, and understood the need to increase productivity, create a powerful industry with which the Soviet Union survived in World War II, and then first stepped into space.
The book Skvortsova-Stepanova "Electrification of the RSFSR in connection with the transition phase of the world economy" established the framework of the scientific and educational system in the country with which it was to live and develop. Not understanding its meaning then, they cannot understand the importance of science and education today, so that a country can develop at a rapid pace. Hence all the slips and dead ends in education reform. Accordingly, these politicians, together with Andrei Fursov, do not see its leading role as an energy fuel (“black gold”) in the development of an economic base in which energy costs must replace the monetary system. And the “black gold” itself has already been captured by the leading money cats of Russia. Now money has become a deity, which is worshiped to the ground. And the leading economist of Bolshevism, I.I. Skvortsov-Stepanov for political analysts as if and did not exist. In its place, a scandalous figure wanders in N. Bukharin who understands nothing in the dialectic.
Lenin saw his world revolution in electrification. A couple of years before the publication of the work “Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism” on the American example of economics, Lenin talks about electrification as the main meaning of the revolution in the article “4,000 rubles a year and a 6-hour working day”, where he puts labor productivity at the basis of the working class : “The use of machinery in America, thanks to complete political freedom and the absence of feudal landowners, is more developed than anywhere else in the world. In America, in one manufacturing industry, the power of machines is determined, in sum, to be 18 million steam horsepower. And at the same time, a study of all sources of power in the form of a drop in water showed, according to a report on March 14, 1912, that America can immediately, thanks to the transformation of the force of falling water into electricity, get another 60 million horsepower!
The country is immensely rich now and it can immediately triple its wealth, triple the productivity of its social labor, providing these working families with a tolerable, decent human being, high incomes and not excessive working hours, but at 6 hours every day. ” And then the Bolshevik leader says:
“Working with the help of excellent machines, seeing at every step the wonders of technology and the excellent success of labor from organizing large-scale production, the hired slaves of America begin to clearly recognize their tasks and set simple, obvious, immediate requirements: to achieve 4000 rubles of income for each working family and 6 hour working day. "(Ibid, vol.20, pp.52-53). I must say that at that time the dollar was equal to two rubles, so the income of a worker in the United States could reach $ 2,000.
And if this article was published on January 1, 1914, in the year of the beginning of the First World War, then in August 1915 Lenin said “About the slogan of the United States of Europe”, arguing that the Western European bourgeoisie’s aspirations to unite at the expense of the productive forces:
“Compared to the United States of America, Europe as a whole means economic stagnation. On a modern economic basis, i.e. under capitalism, the United States of Europe would mean organizing a reaction to delay the more rapid development of America. Those times when the business of democracy and the business of socialism were connected only with Europe, has passed irrevocably.
The United States of the world (and not Europe) is the state form of unification and freedom of nations that we associate with socialism - until the complete victory of communism leads to the final disappearance of any, including democratic, state. ” (ibid., vol. 21, p.310-311).
Further, the leader proceeds to the conclusion that socialism is victorious in one single country: “As an independent slogan, the United States of the World would be hardly the same slogan, first, because it merges with socialism; secondly, because it could give rise to a misinterpretation about the impossibility of the victory of socialism in one country and about the attitude of such a country to the rest. ”
Then he says: “The unevenness of economic and political development is the unconditional law of capitalism. It follows that the victory of socialism is possible initially in a few or even in one capitalist country taken separately. ”(PSS, vol. 21, p. 311). Then, in the autumn of 1916, in the “Military Program of the Socialist Revolution” Lenin repeated this conclusion, reinforcing it with the impossibility of the simultaneous victory of socialism in all countries. The scientist A. Fursov can familiarize himself with these works of Lenin, which will allow him to stop launching his narrow views on the patriotic and communist movements about the impossibility of the victory of the socialist revolution in one country, far from the real conclusions of Lenin.
Lenin approached the work “Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism” with the conviction that the process of turning capitalism into imperialism was due to the period of transition from the steam engine to the electric machine. Lenin saw the birth of monopolies from the concentration of production using the example of the largest monopolist of Germany, the General Society of Electricity (A.E.G), near which there are 175-200 subsidiaries, with a total capital of about 1.5 billion marks. "In the hands of cartels and trusts, often seven or eight tenths of the entire production of this industry is concentrated." “The cartels agree on the terms of sale, terms of payment, etc. They share the sales area. They determine the quantity of products produced. They set prices. They distribute between from profit-making enterprises, etc. ”(ibid., vol. 22, pp. 192-193). The economic stage of imperialism also centered around electrification, only with its own distribution of profits. The problem of the distribution of profits under socialism had to be solved by Stalin.
Even during the period of the Civil War, Lenin viewed revolution through the prism of labor productivity as an opportunity to get rid of the monetary system, thereby allowing it to die off at the expense of the economic rate on energy costs.
At the Congress of Soviets in December 1920, Lenin would say: “I just wanted to remind you that it is not the first time that we are returning to this nomination of the labor front in the first place. Recall the resolution passed by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on April 29, 1918. It was time when the Brest peace imposed on us cut Russia economically, and we found ourselves put in extremely difficult conditions by an excessively predatory treaty. ... many of the questions that we have to work on now, were put up very definitely, firmly and quite decisively enough in April 1918. Recalling this, we say: repetition is the mother of learning. Without a huge number of repetitions, without some returning back, without checking, without individual corrections, without new tricks, without exertion of forces to convince the rest and unprepared to do in construction it is impossible ”(ibid t.31, p.464-465).
This will be the basis for the development of the revolution in the first years of Soviet power. Lenin's electrification acted not only as a branch in the usual sense, but, above all, as an economic base based on lower energy costs, carried out by the working class, as an advanced method of commodity exchange.
The Stalinist economy worked in a completely different way in the Soviet Union. In the USSR, the fundamentals of Lenin electrification were implemented, which naturally became the continuation of Great October. Electrification is needed to continue the revolution in order to build communism, since it is the main economic base allowing the working class to carry out its self-expansion (Capital) policy. Moreover, the working class, which has taken power into its own hands, cannot exploit by itself with surplus value, turning the policy of the carrot and stick into an absurdity. Therefore, the main means of production, distribution, exchange and consumption under Soviet power can only be a conscious increase in labor productivity. And in his work The Great Initiative, Lenin will declare: "Labor productivity is ultimately the most important, the most important in the victory of the new social system."
Not the rifle in the hands of the worker, but the economic weapon of Lenin electrification in mastering the working class becomes the basis for the development of the revolution in one single country, with the prospect of growing into a world revolution through the victory of the working class in the economic battlefield, and not on the military front of Bonapartism, identified with the name of Trotsky. For behind Trotsky and Parvus stood the leading American bankers who were ready to burn all the revolutionary masses in a military psychosis and make a redivision of the world for their own benefit in this disaster.
But only loners could practice the promotion of the Lenin electrification case. The laboring masses understood it well and moved labor productivity up sharply. But the party bureaucracy was even afraid of this economic base.
Lenin noted this emerging role of singles in the management of the electrification economic base as far back as the “Report on Concessions ...” on April 11, 1921, when it concerned Krasin’s plight. He said that "in this regard, Comrade Krasin has exceptional training," and at the same time added: "... What is most important to us in concessions? Of course, an increase in the number of products on the basis of a series of discussions that the RSFSR delegates abroad, especially Comrade Krasin, conducted abroad with some of the financial kings of modern imperialism. It must be said that we, of course, as you know yourself, the vast majority of communists know from books what capitalism and financial capital are, they may even have written brochures about this, but 99 of the 100 communists cannot talk to business representatives and never learn. In this regard, Comrade Krasin has exceptional training, since in Germany and in Russia he studied both the practical and organizational conditions of the industry. Tov. Krasin was informed of these conditions, and he replied: "In general, it is acceptable." First of all, what is charged to the concessionaire is to improve the position of the workers. ”(Ibid., Vol. 32. p. 281).
This comment concerned the entire party's administration, in which only a few were able to negotiate concessions with Western financial kings and promote the GOELRO plan. And such a policy was required to be constantly strengthened in order to promote the creation of an economic base of electrification and electrification in the home country, transferring the Plan to industrialization. At the same time, such concession negotiations were needed to create an economic base of electricity.
Trying to ignore Lenin's electrification, A. Fursov does not notice the post-war economic leader of the Soviet Union, who was going to replace Stalin. He persistently calls the name of the party leader of Belarus, P.K. Ponomarenko, whom Stalin allegedly prepared for his shift, while back in 1952, at the XIX Congress of the CPSU (B.) G. M. Malenkov, which indicated to the entire Soviet people a future successor. However, Fursov notices such a trifle at the XIX Congress of the CPSU (b) that only Stalin and Malenkov came to the congress in a military uniform, while the other congress delegates were dressed in suits.
However, in order to become a country with a nuclear missile shield, at the beginning there was a decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated May 13, 1946 (which was declassified only in the early 1990s). It was said about the creation of “Special Committee No. 1” in the atomic project, chaired by L.P. Beria, and “Special Committee No. 2” on reactive technology, chaired by G.M. Malenkov, which also became the Committee on the creation of rocket technology. That is, the creation of a nuclear missile shield in the Soviet Union was completely locked on Malenkov and Beria. And they carried this burden on themselves and created such a shield!
Modern researchers of that time, suddenly opening the old archives of Malenkov, state with surprise: “In fact, it seems that this“ forgotten leader of the Soviet Union ”played the most fundamental role in post-war aviation / rocket science.” At the same time, they cannot even imagine that Malenkov played the most fundamental role in the entire economic base of the country, called Lenin electrification, and in the revolutionary movement of the world of that time. And in the economy with his name was associated with the highest labor productivity, spread to Siberia and the North.
But in the economy of Russia destroyed by two wars (World and Civil) there was no means to create electrification of the whole country. Therefore, Lenin in the “Report on concessions ...” declares: “... by and large, the electrification costs are determined at 17 billion rubles in gold, and the work of the first stage can be completed in about a decade ... that will either have to give debt, or a concession. It is necessary to cover this deficit. The plan was developed by the best specialists in relation to the whole republic - from the point of view of the planned development of all industries. First of all, we are talking about fuel and the most economical, rational and perfect use of this fuel used in all major industries. We could not have solved this task if we did not have these concession and debt resources (ibid t.32. P. 285-286).
And in the same report he will add: “We must, on the basis of capitalist relations, prove the acceptability of these conditions for capitalists, the profitability of these conditions for them, and at the same time we must be able to derive benefit for ourselves. Otherwise, any conversation about concessions will be idle talk.
... We must be able, relying on the peculiarities of the capitalist world and using the capitalists' greed for raw materials, to derive such benefits from here in order to strengthen our economic position - oddly enough - among the capitalists. The task seems strange: how can a socialist republic improve its position by relying on capitalism? But we saw it in the war. We won the war not because we were stronger, but because being weaker, we used enmity between capitalist states.
... Every peace treaty with the bourgeois powers has a treaty that records the known points of the war. Similarly, every clause of a concession agreement is a military agreement in the sense that there was a war at each point. And we must be able to put things so that their interests in the war to defend. " (Ibid t.32, p.287, 288, 289).
Lenin’s concessions in this policy acted as an opportunity to receive taxes from concessionaires, which, just, could be launched to purchase power equipment for GOELRO. Therefore, considering today the problem of human space exploration, in the language of Lenin - the “space” front, unlike its economic front, which replaced the civil war front, we need to remember the comparison of the economic front with the civil war fronts: “... we must realize and remember that the war on the economic front will be more difficult and longer; in order to win on this front, it will be necessary to make a greater number of workers and peasants amateur, active and loyal. And this can be done, for which the experience of economic construction acquired by us speaks, because the consciousness of distress, cold, hunger and all sorts of hardships, due to the lack of productive forces, is deeply rooted in mass. We must now pay attention to the fact that from the interests of political and military all agitation and all propaganda
In this regard, aiming at the space plans, I recall another warning of Lenin about strict discipline: “We must ensure that everyone understands that we own Russia, that we, the workers and peasant masses, with our activity, our strict labor discipline, only re-create the old economic conditions of existence and implement a great economic plan. Outside of this, there is no salvation. ”(V.31, p.468) /
The whole paradox of the electrification economic base was that the working class and the peasant masses were willingly included in the process of saving energy, as the main link in electrification, but bureaucracy and managers expressed a completely different mood. In fact, Lenin determined that 99% of the Communists are completely unprepared to negotiate concessions in order to develop domestic electrification. And he mockingly notes that they may even have written brochures about it, but they are not able to talk in a businesslike manner with representatives of finance capital and will never learn. “They will never learn” —this is the sentence of the bureaucracy, which in Stalin’s time will simply be sifted out into position — whether they need the Soviet power or not. Those who did not understand the essence of Lenin electrification were eliminated as unnecessary ballast. It is still among the descendants of those bureaucrats and managers who express impotent anger at Stalin, turning into the destruction of the country, even if the country is no longer socialist.
But in 1922, in the year of the creation of the USSR, the foundations were laid for the development of Lenin electrification, a team of revolutionary scientists was created who dispersed the country before the great breakthrough, after which the power of the Soviet country only increased, and the initiative went to the direct performers on the ground, to the working class . The basis of the Soviet economy build-up will be the Stakhanov method of coal mining, which showed an unprecedented rate of increase in labor productivity. This labor advance provided the Soviet Union with the second largest place in the world among developed countries. And in 1922, the development of the Soviet electrification was assumed by the General Secretary of the RCP (b) I.V. Stalin, head of the State Planning Committee G.M. Krzhizhanovsky, People's Commissar for Foreign Trade LB Krasin, ideologist of Lenin electrification I.I. Skvortsov-Stepanov, who headed the explanatory work on electrification of the whole country, became the chief editor of the newspaper Izvestia
In the same 1922 academician V.I. Vernadsky headed the direction of the development of nuclear energy and laid the foundation for the formation of a future great nuclear power. In time, he will have to transfer the affairs in the atomic project to his student I.S. Kurchatov, who will continue the work of the teacher.
The fact that oil is the backbone of the economy will be quickly understood by the Morgans, the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds. Seeing the tremendous pace of development of the Soviet economy on the eve of the war, and especially during the war with Hitler’s fascism, the US financial oligarchy made an attempt to establish “its own” electrification laws that would work for their economy. To this end, the results of the Bretton Woods Conference, held in 1944 and the agreement adopted at it, easily translated the system of trade relations on a dollar basis, because after World War II, all trade in petroleum products was transferred to dollars for one simple reason: the main owners of oil reserves in the colonies There were American and British firms. This allowed the use of the dollar as the main trading currency, since energy resources belonged mostly to the colonies of the United States and England, but everyone needed oil. The American dollar only had to call itself parity "black gold". The world market thereafter turned out to be so that every purchase of energy resources required dollars, which again came to American banks or were controlled by these banks and tried to display the unshakable strength of a currency equivalent to gold, the value of which was not disputed by anyone. Such an illusion could not exist for a long time. World crises followed, caused by the fact that the Fed in the United States was forced to stimulate economic development at the expense of domestic debt, which acquired the value of trillions of sums and began to manifest itself as financial bubbles in the system of large banks concentrating on this domestic debt.
Most clearly the essence of increasing productivity will be expressed in
Stakhanov method of extraction of coal in the Stalin period. Alexey Stakhanov, in one shift on the night from August 30 to August 31, 1935, in 5 hours and 45 minutes, increased the coal production rate from 7 tons to 102 tons, using the new side-cutting method. And on September 19 of the same year, he set a new record - 227 tons per shift. The initiative of Stakhanov laid the foundation for the mass movement of workers and collective farmers for increasing labor productivity.
Why did other workers and collective farmers massively supported the Stakhanov method of increasing labor productivity, because the new methods were more labor-intensive and took a lot of effort?
The thing is that new production methods have saved a lot of fuel, i.e.energy, and such savings directly affected the price of consumer goods that people bought in stores, because the cost of energy savings was subtracted from the cost of production. The banking system of the country controlled the costs of raw materials and summarized them in monetary terms of the country. It turned out that, through lowering prices, the laboring masses made a profit that increased their purchasing power. Profits in a socialist state, through lowering prices, began to work for the working class and its allies, and the policy of lowering prices drove these prices to zero, to the disappearance of the monetary system, which is the goal of building communism. An example of the lack of money in the ancient community took socialism as an example, since without money there were no classes and class struggle. This goal in the USSR sought and socialism in the Stalin period. Labor productivity became the driving belt of Lenin's electrification, and the end result led to the construction of communism.
And in such a situation, the second party program became necessary. The second program of the party summarized the results of the increase in labor productivity, established the volume of output of additional products, thereby adjusting the State Planning Committee, calculated the cost of the newly identified costs and compared these costs in the country's banking system. However, these calculations have already been made at the Gosplan level, banks acted only as feedback, corrected costs in monetary terms and determined their future realization of profits from the savings of energy resources, metals, etc ...
The electrification of the entire country established a method for calculating the cost of energy resources through their cost of TPP and MTS, i.e. at power plants, where most of the electricity was generated for production and domestic needs (in the city), and at machine and tractor stations (in the countryside), where the costs of energy in agricultural production were taken into account, allowing to calculate the cost of fuel for the production of any product collected from the fields.
Underground work began in “every workshop” in which a team of workers outlined numbers to save resources and, above all, energy. Initial plans were revised, they made adjustments to the possible savings of resources. After that, the calculations of various brigades were summed up on the scale of a particular volost or district and transferred to the regional level. Each region summarized data both according to the state plan, and according to the results of the increase in labor productivity at workplaces submitted by each district. The final results from each region were transferred to Gosplan, where the most intense work on the summation of the data took place. The sizes of the saved resources were determined, the amounts of the saved funds were calculated in monetary terms, the data were compared with the banking system, the figures were outlined for obtaining the planned profit and the direction of its future use to improve the position of workers, including lowering prices.
Of course, the work in the State Planning Committee and near it was a hot frying pan, since the implementation of the second program of the party took the form of a law. A law can not be broken. Hence the conclusion: “cadres decide everything!”. In the prewar period and during the Great Patriotic War, all electrification worked on the front. And do not be this powerful help of the rear, organized to increase productivity, it is difficult to imagine how much the war itself would have lasted. But Lenin's electrification proved to be the most effective means in increasing production for the front and for victory.
Today it is fashionable to equate the Stalinist economy to one word — industrialization, since the driving belt of the flywheel of Lenin's electrification in it remains incomprehensible. It is understandable only to the working class itself, who felt for himself how the profits of him work in a socialist state building communism. But, as Lenin remarked, 99% of the Communists never understood the essence of electrification and “never learn.” On the part of Lenin's forecast, those who "never learn," turned into complete oblivion of those who created the "electrification of the whole country" and those who followed in their footsteps, creating the country's nuclear missile shield.
But the nuclear missile shield of the country served as a warning to those who wanted to repeat Hitler’s experience on the territory of our country, indicating, at the same time, the cosmic direction of the development of the revolution itself begun by Great October. And this direction has already led to the development of other planets. In this situation, communism itself played the role of a transitional stage on the way to the Universe. But the bureaucracy in the Soviet Union understood communism only as a biblical "paradise on earth", therefore it strongly avoided electrification.
Struggling with the "Stalin personality cult", the party bureaucracy actually struggled with the fundamentals of Lenin's electrification, destroying the economy of socialism, and the emerged "sources of the emergence of anti-Stalinism stemmed from the inability of the top leadership of the CPSU to continue the path begun by Great October. In other words - from the inability to continue the transition to the new economic way of life of all mankind, based on energy as an advanced method of trade. ” (N.A. Andreeva).
The forced departure of Malenkov in 1957 from all posts was marked by the launch of the first artificial Earth satellite being created under his leadership since 1946. Actually, the surrender of Malenkov of the post of 1st secretary of the CPSU Central Committee to Khrushchev, even before Beria’s murder, will result in that his Chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers has since been attacked by his own comrades in the CPSU Central Committee. Therefore, any unsuccessful political step Malenkov could be his last. And here you can ironically over the weakness of Malenkov, who did not make out the anarchist in Khrushchev and put him to the cadre power in the party. But the trouble of Malenkov was that he could not single-handedly pull the whole cart behind the Central Committee of the CPSU, in which the partycrats preferred to live carelessly on the laurels of victory in the great war. As for the "weak" Malenkov, no one could launch a strong flywheel of aircraft manufacturing (since 1942) and rocketry in the country.
The fate of the USSR and the communist movement in its post-space is in many ways reminiscent of the fate of Stalin’s successor, Malenkov. Modern Communist parties have shredded so much that various political analysts from the government are able to interfere in their political space, as Andrei Fursov does, defending the bureaucratic model of modern power in Russia by the fact that Stalin “ruled” only by the power of the bureaucratic apparatus. And since Stalin’s authority already reaches 90% of the support of the population of Russia, the constant imposition of this thought on the people by the official media makes such an idea of a bureaucratic apparatus in the country quite acceptable.
Political analysts of modern Russia very skillfully make mistakes in the history of the country of the Soviets, withdrawing from the broad masses the political analysis of the revolution given by Lenin and his followers. Because, through this history of the country, there is also a history of profit, when it worked for the laboring masses through a policy of lowering prices. The task of such analysts is to preserve a near-power elite with their capital, which, even under bourgeois laws, does not work for self-expansion. The entire economy rests on the sale of resources and the export of profits abroad. Thus, the profit is distributed as in the beginning of the twentieth century: the largest income is the richest.
The task of political analysts is to continue the opportunistic policy of the Central Committee of the CPSU on the left flank of Russia, which was expressed by the inability to continue the revolution of the transition to a new economic way of life of all humanity based on energy as an advanced method of trade. And without an advanced method of commodity exchange based on energy resources, an environmental disaster will only gain momentum, poisoning today. To this will be added an economic catastrophe, driven by the crisis of the world capitalist market.
That is why Andrei Fursov, as the personification of modern analysts in Russia, acts as a guidebook on the foundations of the economic base of Lenin's electrification. Because, if it is good to analyze the direction of development of the Great October Revolution, then it will be necessary to demand a transfer of profits to the interests of the laboring masses, that is, to demand lower prices and move development towards communism. And what kind of communism can these analysts call for, if they do not tolerate this word? They all move to "biblical paradise."
May 2019
Leningrad
