FREEDOM TO GRUP YORUM AND MUSTAFE KOCHAKU!

To the President of the Republic of Turkey
Recep Tayyip Erdogan

To the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Turkey

To the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Turkey



APPEAL

Executive Committee and Political Council

Single international anti-imperialist

anti-fascist front (EMAAF)



On the support of the Turkish revolutionary music group Grup Yorum and the communist Mustafa Kochak



For many years, the persecution of communists, as well as democratic and progressive figures: human rights activists, lawyers, artists, musicians, students, workers, who oppose the oppression of world imperialism, against the reactionary policies of the Turkish government, in defense of democratic rights and freedom of the people of Turkey.

One of the irreconcilable fighters against imperialism and reactionary policies of the Turkish government is the revolutionary music group Grup Yorum, created in 1985 after the fascist coup on September 12, 1980.

Grup Yorum is the voice of the oppressed people of Turkey and other oppressed peoples of the world. For 35 years, Grup Yorum has been singing about the disasters and sufferings of peoples, about their oppression and exploitation, about the aggression of world, primarily American, imperialism against the peoples of the world, about the struggle of peoples for their freedom and independence, about the struggle against fascism for socialism.

Grup Yorum constantly takes part in protests and rallies organized by workers, peasants, students and high school students across the country. The group travels around the country, performing songs for the people, drawing strength and creative spirit from the people.

Throughout the 35 years of their work, members of Grup Yorum have been persecuted for singing the truth about the life of ordinary people. During this time, 400 members of Grup Yorum were arrested, many musicians were tortured, more than 400 lawsuits were brought against them, 170 concerts of Grup Yorum were banned in Turkey.

Since the declaration of the state of emergency in Turkey in the summer of 2016, the repression of the Turkish government against Grup Yorum has intensified. All Grup Yorum concerts in Turkey were banned, musicians were arrested, charges were brought against them without evidence, police regularly raided their Idil cultural center in Istanbul, during which musical instruments were broken and books were torn.

In February 2018, 6 members of Grup Yorum were put on the wanted list, and remuneration in the amount of 300,000 Turkish liras (about $ 48,000) was announced for their heads.

In the summer of 2019, three imprisoned Grup Yorum musicians, Helin Bölek, Ibrahim Goekcek and Bahar Kurt, went on an indefinite hunger strike to protest the persecution of Grup Yorum and unfair trials of the musicians. In November 2019, Helin Bölek and Bahar Kurt were released after the trial, but continued their hunger strike (Bahar Kurt recently suspended her hunger strike). In February, for health reasons, Ibrahim Goekcek was released, who also continued to head free.

Helin Bölek and Ibrahim Goekcek have been starving for more than 250 days. Now they are on a hunger strike to death, which means that either their demands will be accepted or they will die. Musicians demand the release of all members of Grup Yorum who are still in prison, and the termination of cases against them, the termination of police raids on the Idil Cultural Center, the exclusion of 6 members of Grup Yorum from the wanted list, and the lifting of all bans on Grup Yorum concerts in Turkey.

Another fighter against fascism and imperialism is the Turkish communist Mustafa Kochak, who was unfairly accused of providing weapons to attack prosecutor Mehmed Selim in 2015 and illegally sentenced to life imprisonment. The verdict was issued on the basis of false testimony of a police informant; no other evidence was brought against Mustafa Kochak's guilt.

In protest against an illegal court and an unfair sentence, as well as against specialized courts conducting political trials, against torture used by the police, against laws encouraging police informants, Mustafa Kochak began a hunger strike on July 3, 2019, which he subsequently went on a hunger strike until of death. Mustafa Kochak has been on hunger strike for more than 240 days.

Hunger strike is one of the important and sometimes inevitable means of combating repressive state policy in Turkey. But this tool is often very expensive for those who use it.

The health status of Helin Bölek, Ibrahim Goekcek and Mustafa Kochak is very serious and worsens every hour.

Executive Committee and Political Council of the United International Anti-Imperialist Anti-Fascist Front

- express solidarity with the people of Turkey fighting against fascism and imperialism;

- recognize the claims of Helin Bölek, Ibrahim Goekcek and Mustafa Kochak

- and consider that these requirements should be immediately satisfied
Turkish authorities.

FREEDOM GRUP YORUM AND MUSTAFE KOCHAKU!

            A.E. Gigova, Chairman of the Executive Board of the EMAAF

              B. B. Zelikov, Chairman of the Political Council of the EMAAF

N.V. Sablina, member of the Political Council of the EMAAF



EMAAF Headquarters,

Varna city (Bulgaria),

02/29/2020

About the All-Union referendum on March 17, 1991

The above date is deeply memorable, deeply significant, for everyone who has the Soviet Union as their homeland, for everyone who was painfully worried and worried about the destruction of our common Fatherland during the criminal counter-revolution of 1985-1993, organized and conducted by state criminals united under the nickname "Democrats." Honest Soviet people are firmly convinced of the realization of our great dream - the revival of a single, free and beautiful Soviet Motherland.

More than a quarter of a century has passed since the active phase of the counter-revolution of 1985-1993. Some important details of the events of those years were erased from memory. We have not yet comprehended sufficiently deeply the methods and essence of the entire sequence of actions of the "democrats" to destroy the Soviet Union, we do not understand everything. And we must thoroughly study the history of the tragic events of the counter-revolution in administrative, political, legal terms, objectively, without emotions, to understand - where were the "weaknesses", defects in this, it seemed, impeccably debugged, powerful design. It is necessary to objectively identify all the good that was in the experience of the Soviet Union, take this "note". At the same time, having studied the tactics of its enemies in the experience of the destruction of the USSR, tightly “putty” those “crevices” and “holes” in which the counter-revolution grew and gained strength.

In the political arena of the country, during the days of the referendum, it was simply "stormy"! This is the “rollback” of the nationalist struggle of the leadership of the Union republics with the center, and the “circus struggle” of the allied Gorbachev with the Russian Yeltsin, and a complete misunderstanding by the masses that Gorbachev-Yeltsin is the same as in the saying: “two boots are a pair”. On June 12, 1990, the Supreme Council of the RSFSR adopted the so-called Declaration on State Sovereignty of the RSFSR, which initiated the "parade of sovereignty."

What methods did the “democrats" manage to promote the "nationalist whirlwind"? Indeed, the principles of the equal rights of all nations, the friendship of peoples, and proletarian internationalism have always been at the core of Bolshevik national politics. It was on these principles, distorting them in every possible way, that the “democrats" “beat”, destroying the main bonds that connected the Soviet republics — the friendship of peoples. Cries of democrats like: "Everyone wants to take everything from Russia"; “Russia will cease to be a cash cow”; “Juices ceased to suck from us”, “All republics were like a load — Russia would be easier without them”, etc., alas, they continue to be popular among the Russian masses now. And the “democrats", in turn, said to Ukrainian, or Kazakh, or Uzbek residents: they finally got rid of these Russian colonialists who pumped cotton from us (lard, diamonds, substitute whatever you want).

In such a “dilapidated” state, the Soviet Union came to an All-Union referendum. Add to this the crisis state of the economy, inter-ethnic conflicts blazing in many regions of the country, the complete destruction of the defense system associated with the Warsaw Pact. December 24, 1990 IV Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR on the proposal of M.S. Gorbachev adopted a resolution stating: “In connection with the numerous appeals of workers expressing concern about the fate of the USSR, and given that the preservation of a single union state is an important issue of state life, it affects the interests of every person, the entire population of the Soviet Union, the People’s Congress of deputies of the USSR decides: to hold a referendum of the USSR to resolve the issue of maintaining the renewed Union as a federation of equal sovereign Soviet Socialist Republics taking into account the results of voting in each republic separately. "

Finally, the question of the referendum scheduled for March 17, 1991, was formulated and published as follows: "Do you consider it necessary to maintain the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as an updated federation of equal sovereign republics, in which human rights and freedoms of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?" . The answer is yes or no. It can be seen: despite mentioning the full name of the Motherland beloved by Soviet people, a seemingly insignificant detail was left in the wording of the question - the “updated federation of sovereign republics”. The question of the referendum itself, as it were, hinted at veiled plans to use the referendum of the USSR for bourgeois reform of the country.

In the RSFSR, the Belorussian SSR, the Ukrainian SSR, the Uzbek SSR, the Kazakh SSR, the Azerbaijan SSR, the Kyrgyz SSR, the Tajik SSR, the Turkmen SSR, central republican referendum commissions were created, constituencies were formed, district and precinct commissions formed, other measures were taken to guarantee citizens the opportunity to participate in the All-Union popular vote. Thus, a referendum was held in most republics. Throughout the country, 185 million citizens were put on the voting lists, 80 percent of those eligible to vote took part in the referendum. The Central Referendum Commission of the USSR determined: 77.85 percent of citizens

The USSR said "yes" to the union state.

Summing up the results of the All-Union referendum, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, in a resolution of March 21, 1991, emphasized that the decision of the people adopted at the referendum was final, binding, and should be fully reflected in the draft new Union Treaty.

The results of the referendum were a clear and unequivocal indicator of the desire of the majority of Soviet people to live together, to preserve the Union. However, the leaders of several republics openly called for not to reckon with its results. Back in January 1991, representatives of "Democratic Russia", gathered at the Democratic Congress in Kharkov, decided to abolish the Union and replace the Federation with the Commonwealth of States. In February, shortly before the referendum, it was reported that the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan sent representatives to Minsk to consider proposals for the creation of the Commonwealth without the participation of the union leadership, which meant, in essence, the transformation of a single union state into an amorphous confederate Community of Independent States.

A large period of time from the referendum to the events commonly referred to as the State Emergency Committee (August 1991) was filled with a fierce, largely “undercover” struggle of such different groups as those connected with Gorbachev and Yeltsin, but, as we now understand, they had only global goals - to destroy socialism, destroy the USSR. The market struggle has caught the eye of ordinary people. The main object of disagreement of that time was - which Union treaty to conclude? After March 17, the President of the USSR led a double game. Meeting on April 23 in Novo-Ogaryov with the leaders of nine republics, he signed with them the so-called “9 + 1 Statement”. A new body, which was not stipulated by the Constitution and actually opposed to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, was formed and began to operate - the Novo-Ogarevsky conference of leaders of the republics. Despite the loud statements, in fact, from the very beginning of the negotiations in Novo-Ogaryov, it was a question of a community, not a federation. The President of the USSR tried to play the role of an arbiter at the meeting, but essentially gave up one position after another, departing from the federation’s demand fixed in the referendum. That is why on July 12, 1991, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR adopted another Decree, which indicated that the Treaty could be signed only after serious revision and coordination between the republics with the participation of the plenipotentiary union delegation formed at the session of the Supreme Council. This delegation again, for the third time, was instructed to proceed, first of all, from the results of the All-Union referendum. In giving the commission of the Union delegation, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR unambiguously determined the procedure for signing the Union Treaty, indicating that it meant "to sign it at the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR."

At a secret meeting on July 29 and 30 in Novo-Ogaryov, which Gorbachev held with Yeltsin and Nazarbayev, firstly, the text of the Union Treaty was significantly changed towards de-federalization - the concept of union property disappeared from the project, and annexes on the mechanism for implementing the Treaty were removed. But the most important thing: after the signing of the Treaty, the Constitution of the USSR was supposed to cease to be in effect, and in a significant part - the Constitution of the RSFSR. Secondly, the signing of the Union Treaty was postponed to August 20, 1991. Thirdly, the signing was planned to be carried out in several stages by representatives of individual republics, and not at the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR, which was seen as a hindrance to the implementation of the intended plan.

All of this together - global betrayal, deception of the population and deputies, monstrous (then not yet commonplace) violation of the rule of law and the will of the people, expressed in a referendum on March 17 - and became the reason for the creation of the State Emergency Committee. And finally, after the August counter-revolutionary coup two weeks before the Bialowieza conspiracy, on November 27, 1991, Gorbachev unveiled his latest document - the draft “Treaty on the Union of Sovereign States”. It no longer mentions the referendum of March 17, and the state system of the union says the following: “The Union of Sovereign States (GCC) is a confederate democratic state ... The states that make up the Union retain the right to independently resolve all issues of their development .. . ". As we see, the peoples of the Soviet Union were offered, instead of the federation for which they voted, even if they were not fully aware of its meaning, an amorphous confederate entity.

Now we understand that the negative course of events that led to the collapse of the Union was the result of the actions of those forces that, having lost all sense of proportion, sought to seize power in any way. It is the thirst for power that explains the extreme intolerance and aggressiveness of the national elites in the Union republics, which sacrificed the interests of their peoples, vitally interested in preserving the union state, to their own ambitions. In fact, the referendum of March 17, 1991 became a referendum on the "reformatting" of the country.

A special place in adventure
The "democrats" of "destruction" of the USSR played a criminal disregard for the law "On the Procedure for Solving Issues Related to the Exit of the Union Republic from the USSR" adopted by the Supreme Council of the USSR on April 3, 1990 (No. 1409-1). The Law says: The decision on the withdrawal of a Union republic from the USSR is made by free expression of the will of the peoples of the Union Republic through a referendum (popular vote). A decision is considered adopted if at least two-thirds of USSR citizens who permanently reside in the republic by the time the question of withdrawal is voted for it. If it is established that the referendum has been held in accordance with the law, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR submits the matter for consideration by the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR. The Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR establishes a transitional period not exceeding five years, during which issues arising in connection with the republic’s withdrawal from the USSR must be resolved. During the transition period, the Constitution of the USSR and the laws of the USSR remain in effect on the territory of the outgoing republic.

During the transitional period, the fate of all-Union property located on the territory of the republic (enterprises and complexes of basic industries, space research, energy, communications, sea, rail and air transport, communication lines, trunk pipelines, property of the USSR Armed Forces, defense and other objects), as well as the property of all-Union public organizations; financial and credit settlements of the leaving republic with the USSR were settled, and bank relations; regulated property and financial-credit relations of this republic with other union republics, autonomous entities; coordinated the status of territories that did not belong to the leaving republic at the time of its entry into the USSR (remember the Crimea!); guarantees have been provided for the maintenance of historical and cultural monuments and burial sites in the territory of the outgoing republic; the outgoing republic compensates all the costs associated with the relocation of citizens from the borders of the republic.

Absolutely unconstitutional is the recognition of the independence of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania by the President of the USSR Mikhail Gorbachev, which followed on September 6, 1991 and was formalized by a resolution of a certain USSR State Council. Further more. Here is the notorious Decree B.N. Yeltsin No. 1400 of 1993 and much, much more.

With the advent of "democrats", we live in a world of absurd "virtual" constitutionality, generated by liberal pro-Western doctrine, to which the Soviet people have never had anything to do.

Fighting for the reconstruction of our homeland - the USSR, we, the Bolsheviks, are obligated to pay priority attention to exposing the lies that the "democrats" diligently sow in the media, the Internet, speeches and speeches. The truth will win!

S.V. Khristenko

Nina Andreeva: Putin's amendments should be rejected

Interview N.A. Andreeva edition of "Interlocutor" March 18, 2020

In March 1988, the teacher of the Leningrad University Nina Andreeva, the author of the famous article “I Can’t Give Up Principles” (was published in “Soviet Russia”), put the Politburo on its ears and made the whole country talk about itself.

Then Andreeva expressed concern about the course pursued by Mikhail Gorbachev. Now, after 32 years, she is still worried about the future of a country that is again at a turning point.

Article

Today Nina Andreeva once again appeals to readers. But not in connection with perestroika, but after the Constitutional Court legalized the right of Vladimir Putin for the fifth and sixth terms. Andreeva calls for a boycott of the vote on amendments that, in her opinion, “are designed to give the appearance of legality to preserve the power of President Putin, who has been at the head of the country for twenty years. It is supposed to change the form of power in Russia so that Putin remains its sovereign leader, and the political regime itself does not change its essence. ”

According to Nina Andreeva, “the balance of power between capital and the masses can be changed only as a result of the revolutionary struggle of the working masses for their rights and interests - for socialism. No hope for a “parliamentary republic" or a "good president" is real. "

"When will this banditry by the authorities end?"

“The purpose of my letter in 1988 was to urge people to pay attention to what is being done in the country and where the current government is leading,” says Nina Andreeva. - Exactly the same thing I'm talking about now. But the situation has changed. People are so absorbed in the fight against poverty that the bulk of the population is not up to politics.

I lead the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, which we created in 1991, and I know what is happening in the regions: people are fighting for survival. They are afraid to lean out so as not to lose that very little that they have today. The impoverishment of the population is evident.

It’s not enough to say that people were crushed. They were all dragged into a noose. They don’t even pay salaries, which is wildness. This is a mockery of common sense when those in power determine the minimum wage of 11 thousand rubles. Probably, to feed Putin’s dogs, which he already has a whole kennel, and then you need more every day than this cost of living for a simple hard worker for a month. When will this banditry by the authorities end? It is impossible to live on the money that she defines as a living wage.



"The skin is torn so that nothing remains even under the skin"

- Pensioners of our two capitals - northern and Moscow - still make ends meet somehow. But in the regions, people who have worked for 40 years receive a pension of 7-8 thousand rubles. This is a mockery! And how much are the drugs? And housing services? What about transport? What about food? The population was reduced to the position of slaves. Of course, one cannot be content with this.

What is happening with healthcare now ?! This is a disgrace! If you want to get more or less tolerable treatment, you have to go to a paid clinic. But the paid system bites too much, it is not available to the vast majority of citizens. Although all these benefits are created by these our hard workers. Someone from the American billionaires formulated the idea well: the bees collect honey, but they do not use it. Do our workaholic bees use the wealth that they should have, based on their contribution to national income? The answer is obvious. The situation is critical.

The protest is ripening among the people, and it is no different from the “yellow vests” protest in France. All 25 points put forward by the French workers in front of their government and President Macron are the same as ours. On the so-called pension reform, as a result of increasing the retirement age, the state has already saved 20 billion rubles over the past period. And for the year 2020 this will amount to 50 billion. The skin is being torn! And as they tear, nothing remains even under the skin.

"Putin is surrounded by a gang of" reformers "from the Lake cooperative

- For changes to take place in the country, it is necessary that the communist and protest movement be ready for action. But by the attempts of the authorities, we have so many registered pseudo-communist parties that today there is no single communist movement. As well as there is no single protest movement.

There are no leaders in the communist movement. Those that are, for the most part, are fiction, figlars. Being essentially Kremlin projects (the more parties and leaders, the easier it is to neutralize them), they put above all not business, not the interests of the people, but their own “I”, opportunism and a good everyday life. Everyone is sitting shut, if only they who did not pick them up. Their goal now, at the moment, is to drag people into polling stations on April 22 with beautiful words.

The liberals, like us, are in favor of a boycott of the vote on constitutional amendments, which I think is absolutely right, because the sole purpose of the vote is to legitimize everything that happened under Yeltsin. But liberals are not defenders of Russia: they look
They are working in the West, and mainly due to the fact that they receive generous grants from abroad. We are out of the way with them. They yell, “Down with Putin!”, And we say that today, by and large, the issue is not Putin, but the whole oligarchic criminal system, this capitalist bourgeois system, which was established through a political coup in 1991 against the will of the people.

Look who surrounds Putin - a gang of "reformers" from the Lake cooperative, his fellow students at the law faculty of Leningrad University, employees of the city administration (city hall) of Leningrad (St. Petersburg) when Mayor A. Sobchak was working (when Putin worked there), KGB associates, relatives of varying degrees of kinship. They are all upstairs, they are almost all billionaires. Did they give something back without a fight?

The robbery of the country continues on an enormous scale. And if we take into account that all the natural resources of our country are in private hands, then we can safely say: they steal from us to the point of insanity. And nothing says that the government will stop it. Because oligarchs are power.

The President, to put it mildly, was misleading, recently answering a question from the TASS correspondent about oligarchs in the draft “20 Questions to Putin”. He said that we have no oligarchs. They supposedly remained in the past. Now there are billionaires ... How is it not the oligarchs ?! If they are not deputies of the State Duma, but are mayors or heads of large industrial holdings and banks, this does not mean that they do not rule the current government in the country. Even how they rule! And only the "naive" cannot fail to understand this.

“We call for a boycott of the vote”

- The current economic system has long become obsolete. If everything remains as it is, and Russia continues to follow the market economy, then the country will face very difficult times. I think that Russia is unlikely to hold on as an independent state.

Life itself requires a change in the socio-political system: we need a complete rejection of the liberal capitalist system, a transition to the Stalinist model of economic management, which has shown full effectiveness. Russia needs socialism. Putin will naturally not do this. Obviously, the tops do not want to change anything.

To change the country, it is necessary that the lower classes be capable of organized action against the existing oligarchic regime. The Russians are not yet ready for this. But they are quite capable of boycotting the upcoming vote. The proposed “new” Yeltsin Constitution with Putin’s cosmetic patches, enshrining further lawlessness of the people, should be rejected.

We Bolsheviks are calling for a boycott of the vote on April 22, 2020.

Nina Andreeva.

https://sobesednik.ru/politika/20200318-ta-samaya-nina-andreeva-poprav?utm_referrer

Human opinion on capitalism

Most of the world's inhabitants have become disillusioned with Western-style capitalism and liberal democracy, and see little future for themselves.

Such conclusions follow from the report of the authors of the Edelman Trust Barometer study, conducted in October-November 2019. In the course of this study, more than 34 thousand people were interviewed in 28 countries of the world, and 56% agreed that capitalism does more harm than good.

The share of such answers was especially high in Thailand (75%) and India (74%), however, more than half of the respondents in their seemingly prosperous countries such as France (69%), Italy (61) declared their disappointment in modern capitalism. %), Spain (60%), the Netherlands (59%), Ireland (57%), Germany (55%), Singapore (54%) and the United Kingdom (53%). In Russia, 55% of respondents agree that there is more harm than good from capitalism. The increase in general pessimism is logically accompanied by a decrease in confidence in the political system: 57% of the respondents said that the authorities serve the interests of the minority.

Most are dissatisfied with capitalism, even in "developed countries."

Distrust of the market system and the demand for an alternative that would meet the needs and requirements of the majority of the population is a growing phenomenon, but not a new one. Back in 2010, according to Gallup polls, more than a third of Americans spoke positively about socialism, despite the fact that the term and generally any idea of ​​a social and economic system alternative to a market (i.e. capitalist) in the USA were carefully trampled on and denigrated by decades of powerful propaganda for all levels: from the media, schools and churches to specialized foundations and institutions.

A similar picture can be observed in the UK: YouGov polls in 2016 showed that the majority of respondents are more likely to have a negative attitude towards capitalism and rather a positive attitude to socialism, especially among young people. The situation in Germany is even more obvious. It is significant that such sympathies are often not expressed in greater support of the official left-centrist, left-liberal and social-democratic parties, which over the past 30-40 years have finally refused even in words the transformation of the capitalist system into something else, and they are only talking about its cosmetic improvements and regulation.

The mood of Russian citizens as a whole is in line with world trends, which is clearly seen from a study conducted in 2017 and 2019 by the Carnegie Moscow Center. Residents of the Russian Federation more and more want changes, moreover, "decisive and large-scale." But no matter how the authors of the study try by carefully selecting questions and directing respondents to achieve the picture they want for themselves — that citizens want changes in a liberal way, more than “democracy” and the market, the results are completely opposite.

Russian citizens lose faith that “stability” and the market are good for them

The number of Russian citizens who believe that decisive full-scale changes are needed has increased from 42% (as of July 2017) to 59% (as of July 2019).

Liberal reforms interest people far less than affordable medicine and education, job creation, lower prices for food and utilities. Even the item “redistribute resources in favor of the poor at the expense of the rich” gained more than “carry out democratic reforms”. In the same way, people in their desire for change do not want to focus on the United States, and even less so Ukraine: the desire to rely "only on their own experience" is leading, which the authors of the study reluctantly respond, "Perhaps they mean Soviet management practices. " And only 18% of those surveyed by the Carnegie Center agreed that "the market will regulate everything." It is also characteristic that as the main opponents of change, the respondents called not only “officials and bureaucracy”, but also big business, and the proportion of those who think so has grown sharply since 2017.

Another part of the study, devoted to “personal contribution to change”, in our opinion, speaks more about the researchers themselves than about the citizens they interviewed. As possible options for what citizens would have to do to improve their lives, they offered them a list of “change of profession / retraining,” “partial payment of medical services,” “canceling part of social benefits,” “expanding the system of paid education,” and “ raising utility bills ”. It is logical that most people who wanted and want from the changes are not shocking liberal reforms in the Ukrainian style agreed only on the first point - retraining and changing their profession, and rejected all the others. The authors of the study, of course, are blatantly annoying.



There is nothing strange in such moods in Russia and around the world. Another Oxfam study showed that the state of billionaires around the world - there are about 2.1 thousand people - exceeds the total state of 60% of the world's population, or about 4.6 billion people. And if we take the entire population of the planet, then the people included in 1% of its richest inhabitants, in aggregate, have a fortune twice the wealth of 6.9 billion people in the world.

Similar reports are made almost every year, and every year the situation becomes even worse. But a lot has already been written about this situation with glaring inequality and the injustice of the socio-economic structure both in the Russian Federation and in all other parts of the global system. As well as what is proposed to do with it.

On the other hand, barricades, among major business figures and various international structures, are increasing expectations of an imminent crisis. Everyone understands that the market system creates large-scale crises that destroy the lives of millions of people with an enviable frequency, and the time is right for another crash. The pessimism of top managers regarding the growth rate of the global economy has reached record levels. The problems of the world economy are exacerbating even faster than expected, and the head of the IMF at the forum in Davos warns that the world will face a new Great Depression. Some domestic experts are also talking about the impending crisis in the world economy, although it is still unclear whether their specific forecasts will come true. Perhaps all that is missing is the trigger in the form of some kind of malfunctioning of exchange software in the USA or a sudden epidemic in Asia.

Everyone is restless. Such a respectable magazine as Forbes wrote at the end of last year that large-scale upheavals await modern society, calling even the world revolution among the possible. The realization that the global socio-economic system, based on private property and a free market, has exhausted the possibilities of its development and leads mankind to perish, is already coming to those who derive the most benefits from its existence and would like to close it most of all eyes.

The environment is being destroyed at a record pace

The demand from the working population for an alternative to a market socioeconomic system, crushed in the 80s and 90s of the last century, is growing as more and more people realize that while maintaining the current order, nothing shines for them. Worse, the continued existence of the system in its same form threatens them not only with ordinary living in poverty and exhaustion in the constant rat race of the market. Events looming on the horizon, threatening a much faster loss of livelihoods, and even life: due to another crisis swollen by speculation in the global economy, more frequent wars in an unstable international environment or the consequences of mindless environmental destruction.

Of course, you should not take it for granted, or succumb to premature panic. The global market system is unlikely to collapse from the next crisis, but it will certainly aggravate the already troubled situation in the world. It is unlikely that a new world war will begin from today to tomorrow, but the world more and more begins to resemble the beginning of the twentieth century, on the eve of the First World War. Environmental degradation will not lead to the instant death of mankind in a cataclysm of absurd proportions. Natural disasters will simply become more frequent, resources will be depleted, and pollution will accumulate further. Life will become worse, usually slowly and not so noticeably, and sometimes - by sudden leaps.

Those who want to seriously fight for the interests of the working-class majority need to bear in mind these threats, as well as the growing demand for a different, more just and sustainable social structure. The ground for the development of a movement aimed at fundamental changes in life already exists. We need to work on preparing this event now, so that at a crisis moment the working people are ready to take the fate of humanity into their own hands.



2020.01.25 https://www.pf.team/articles/kapitalizm-nadoel-bol%2527shinstvu__bGtpaZYF

March 8 - Day of International Solidarity of Working Women

Dear women!

The Central Committee of the AUCPB heartily congratulates you on International Communist Women's Day on March 8 - the Day of International Solidarity of Working Women in the struggle against the bourgeois system, against the exploitation of man by man, for economic, social and political equality, for the bright future of future generations, for socialism and peace on Earth!

We celebrate March 8th Day in the year of the 150th anniversary of V.I. Lenin and the 75th anniversary of the Victory of the Soviet people over fascist Germany in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945

Then, in the formidable 1941, women, together with men, rose to the defense of the Soviet Motherland. The whole burden of the war was on the shoulders of women who remained in the rear. They, working on collective farms, factories and factories, raising children, fighting the Nazi invaders in the Red Army and the Red Navy, in partisan detachments and hospitals, forged the coming Victory of 1945.

The Soviet woman carried on her shoulders the restoration of the USSR after the devastating fascist invasion, at the same time giving birth to children, raising Soviet science to the heights of Cosmos, launching the first Cosmonaut of the USSR and the world Yu.A. Gagarin ...

Soviet women, like the entire Soviet people, due to the bourgeois counter-revolution that took place in the 1990s, not only lost the Socialist Fatherland, but also turned out to be doomed to slave exploitation by the capitalists - the “new Russians”.

Nowadays, prices are constantly rising in the bourgeois RF, a significant part of industry has been destroyed, even the birth of children and the big problem of finding them in kindergartens, education at schools and institutes have become paid. Normal comfortable housing became burdensomely paid, and for a significant part of the population - inaccessible.

Equality for women today is purely declarative.

     In Russia, the protest movement against capitalism as the initial stage of the class struggle is only growing every year, especially in the regions.

A woman worker, as part of the working class, the working peasantry and the working intelligentsia, can find her true happiness, love and freedom only under socialism, only by fighting for it against criminal capitalism.

Dear women, we wish you success in this difficult path of struggle for a worthy future.

-------------------------------------------------

Comrades, stay alert!

Vladimir Putin traps the Communists into voting for a “new” anti-Soviet constitution!

On March 5 of this year, according to the established tradition of recent years, Soviet patriots and communists of Arkhangelsk (members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Russian Communist Party) held a memory watch at the monument to Stalin on the occasion of the death of the Leader of the Soviet People.

They made speeches, recalled the past, were indignant at the mocking cynicism of Vladimir Putin, who called for a vote on amendments to the "Yeltsin" constitution on April 22, 2020 - the 150th anniversary of the birth of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.

The Communists faced the problem of participation / non-participation in the public-political campaign declared by the authorities to support and legitimize the "Putin" amendments to this constitution.

On issues of power and property, both constitutions are essentially identical. However, in the eyes of the working people, Yeltsin remains “a drunkard and a traitor to Soviet power”, and Vladimir Putin was and remains “a slave to the galleys”. But these galleys belong to the owners who came to power in Russia with the support and participation of that same Yeltsin.

How to be?

For members of the AUCPB and the RKRP, the question is simply solved - they do not play with the imperious "thimbles" and do not participate in the farce in voting for "Putin's" amendments.

Members of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation is all the more difficult. The party leadership took the initiative of President Putin with all seriousness and officially approved at its plenum 15 amendments to the new edition of the constitution. The sixteenth amendment “on the prohibition of foreign property to Russian officials and deputies” was introduced by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation during the discussion. For all these proposals, the Communist Party leadership was refused ...

And what to do now?

If you call for a boycott of the vote, you will quarrel with the president of the country ...

If you take part in the vote, you will become an accomplice of the "Putin" provocation and disgrace yourself before the working masses ...

Let's hope that the Communist Party of the Russian Federation has enough real Communists and they will find a decisive answer to the emerging revolutionary situation in Russia.

Vasily Pozdeev.

Arkhangelsk

==================

On March 5, 1953, the Leader of the Soviet people, Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, passed away

 the question of Stalin

Fragments from an article by the CCP regarding the Open Letter of the CPSU Central Committee

The editorial board of the newspaper "People's Daily", the Editorial Office of the magazine "Hongqi"

(September 13, 1963)

The Chinese Communist Party invariably believes that the complete and indiscriminate denial of JV Stalin by Comrade Khrushchev under the pretext of the so-called “struggle against the cult of personality” is completely erroneous and tendentious.

A letter from the CPC Central Committee dated June 14 indicates that the so-called “struggle against the cult of personality” contradicts Lenin's integral teaching on the relationship between leaders, the party, the class and the masses and violates the principle of democratic centralism in the party.

In his Open Letter, evading the answer to the fundamental arguments put forward by us, the Chinese Communists pasted the label to the Chinese Communists as "defenders of the personality cult, carriers of Stalin's erroneous ideas."

At one time, V.I. Lenin, giving a rebuff to the Mensheviks, said: "Not to respond to the principal argument of the enemy and ascribing to him only" pathos "means not arguing, but cursing." The Central Committee of the CPSU in its Open Letter does exactly the same as the Mensheviks did.

Despite the fact that in the Open letter of the CPSU Central Committee the dispute is replaced by abuse, we will nevertheless give fundamental arguments and numerous facts to answer this letter.

The Great Soviet Union is the first state in the world of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Initially, the leader of the party and government of this state was V.I. Lenin, and after his death, I.V. Stalin.

After the death of Lenin, Stalin not only stood at the head of the party and government of the Soviet Union, but was also the universally recognized leader of the international communist movement.

The history of the world's first socialist state, which began with the October Revolution, is only 46 years old. Of these, for about 30 years, the main leader of this state was Stalin. The life and work of Stalin occupies an extremely important place both in the history of the dictatorship of the proletariat and in the history of the international communist movement.

The Chinese Communist Party has always believed and still believes that the question of how to understand Stalin and relate to him is not only a question of assessing Stalin himself, but, more importantly, the question of how to generalize the historical experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the historical experience of the international communist movement since the death of Lenin.

At the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU, Comrade Khrushchev completely and indiscriminately denied Stalin. On such a fundamental issue related to the entire international communist movement as the question of Stalin, he had not previously consulted with fraternal parties, and after the Twentieth Congress, confronting them with a fait accompli, he began to impose a decision on them at the Congress. Whoever disagrees with the CPSU leadership in assessing Stalin is accused not only of “justifying the personality cult”, but also of “interfering” in the internal affairs of the CPSU. However, no one can deny either the international significance of the historical experience of the world's first state of the dictatorship of the proletariat, or the historical fact that Stalin was at the head of the international communist movement, and therefore cannot deny that the question of assessing Stalin is an important question of principle concerning the entire international communist movement. So on what basis do CPSU leaders prohibit other fraternal parties from giving an objective analysis and assessment of Stalin’s activities?

We have always opposed and are opposed to the wrong criticism of Stalin, which is conducted from an erroneous position and erroneous methods.

During the life of Lenin, Stalin fought against the tsarist regime, engaged in the propaganda of Marxism; Having entered the leadership of the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party led by Lenin, Stalin led preparations for the 1917 revolution, and after the October Revolution he defended the gains of the proletarian revolution.

After the death of Lenin, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet people, led by Stalin, waged a decisive struggle against all internal and external enemies, defended and strengthened the world's first socialist state.

Under the leadership of Stalin, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet people firmly and steadily pursued a line in their country on socialist industrialization and collectivization of agriculture and achieved great successes in socialist transformations and socialist construction.

Under the leadership of Stalin, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the Soviet people and the Soviet Army, waging extremely heavy battles, won a great victory in the anti-fascist war.

JV Stalin defended and developed Marxism-Leninism in the struggle against opportunists of all stripes, against the enemies of Leninism - the Trotskyists, Zinovievites, Bukharinites and other agents of the bourgeoisie.

JV Stalin, through his theoretical works, which are the immortal works of Marxism-Leninism, made an unfading contribution to the cause of international the communist movement.

Generally speaking, under the leadership of Stalin, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet government pursued a foreign policy in line with proletarian internationalism and greatly supported the revolutionary struggle of the peoples of the world, including the revolutionary struggle of the Chinese people.

JV Stalin led the struggle, being at the very forefront of the historical stream, he was an implacable enemy of imperialism and all reactionaries.

All the activities of Stalin are closely connected with the struggle of the great Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the great Soviet people and are inseparable from the revolutionary struggle of the peoples of the whole world.

The life and work of Stalin is the life and work of the great Marxist-Leninist, the great proletarian revolutionary.

         The leaders of the CPSU condemn us, the Chinese Communists, for acting as the “defenders” of Stalin. Yes, we protect Stalin. In the conditions when Khrushchev falsifies history and completely and indiscriminately denies Stalin, it is quite natural that our immediate duty is to stand up for Stalin in the name of the interests of the international communist movement.

Defending Stalin, the Chinese Communist Party defends the right side of its activity, defends the glorious history of the struggle of the world's first state dictatorship of the proletariat born of the October Revolution, defends the glorious history of the struggle of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, defends the prestige of the international communist movement in the eyes of the working people of the whole world, in a word, defends the theory and practice of Marxism-Leninism. And so not only the Chinese Communists do this, so did all the Communists who are devoted to Marxism-Leninism, all the staunch revolutionaries, all honest people

But what about Comrade Khrushchev and some other leaders of the CPSU, starting with the начиная Congress of the CPSU?

        Instead of giving a historical, scientific and comprehensive analysis of the life and work of Stalin, they deny everything and everything, without distinguishing truth from untruth;

* Instead of treating Stalin as a comrade, they treat him as an enemy;

     * Instead of generalizing experience and drawing lessons through criticism and self-criticism, they blame all the mistakes on Stalin or ascribe to him the so-called “mistakes” arbitrarily fabricated by them;

   * Instead of giving facts and arguments, they are engaged in demagogy and incitement, attacking with personal attacks on Stalin.

By sending curses to Stalin, Khrushchev thereby inflicts the greatest insult to the great Soviet people and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the greatest insult to the Soviet Army, the greatest insult to the dictatorship of the proletariat and the socialist system, the greatest insult to the international communist movement and the revolutionary Marxism of the whole world, .

What is the difference between the curses of Khrushchev against Stalin and the curses that imperialists, reactionaries of various countries and renegades of communism send to Stalin? Why is there such a fierce hatred of Stalin? Why is it attacked even more viciously than enemies?

Speaking against Stalin, Khrushchev actually speaks with frantic fury against the Soviet system, against the Soviet state. In this regard, his spitefulness is not inferior in language to such renegades as Kautsky, Trotsky, Tito, Djilas, and even far surpasses them.

V.I. Lenin in his article “On the Political Importance of Warfare” wrote that “the abuse in politics often covers the utter inaction and helplessness, powerlessness, angry powerlessness of the wrestlers”. Is it not their lack of ideology, helplessness and angry impotence that the leaders of the CPSU seek to cover up with abuse to JV Stalin, who always seem to be being haunted by Stalin’s ghost?

The vast majority of Soviet people do not approve of the vilification of Stalin. They remember with more warmth Stalin. The leaders of the CPSU, however, seriously broke away from the masses. Everything seems to them that everywhere the ghost of Stalin wanders and pursues them. In fact, it is the broad masses who express extreme dissatisfaction with the complete and indiscriminate denial of Stalin. Until now, Khrushchev does not dare to acquaint the Soviet people and the peoples of the countries of the entire socialist camp with the secret report made by him at the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU, in which he completely and indiscriminately denies Stalin. This is because the secret report is embarrassing to show people in the face and that this report is completely alien to the masses.

If Khrushchev’s memory is not short, then he must remember that he himself in his speech delivered at a mass rally in Moscow in January 1937, correctly condemning those who attacked Stalin, said: “Raising a hand against Comrade Stalin, they raised it against us all, against the working class, against the working people! Raising their hand against Comrade Stalin, they raised it against the teachings of Marx - Engels - Lenin! ” More than once, he himself sang the praises of Stalin, calling him "a close friend and ally of the great Lenin" "

the greatest genius, teacher and leader of mankind ”,“ the great Marshal of Victory ”,“ a friend of the people in their simplicity ”,“ a father ”.

If Khrushchev’s memory is not short, then he, of course, must remember that it was he himself, during the period of Stalin’s leadership, who especially eagerly supported and implemented the then policy of the struggle against counter-revolution.

On June 6, 1937, at the Fifth Party Conference of the Moscow Region, Khrushchev said: “Our party will mercilessly crush a gang of traitors and traitors, wipe the entire Trotsky-right carrion off the face of the earth ... The unshakable leadership of our Central Committee, the unshakable leadership of our leader comrade. Stalin. ... We will destroy the enemies without a trace - all to one - and scatter their dust in the wind. "

On June 8, 1938, speaking at the IV party conference of the Kiev region, Khrushchev said: “The Yakirs, Balitsky, loving, Zatonsky and other scum wanted to bring Polish lords to Ukraine, they wanted to bring German fascists, landowners and capitalists here ... We destroyed quite a few enemies, but not all. Therefore, we must look at both. We must firmly remember the words of Comrade. Stalin, that as long as there is a capitalist environment, spies and saboteurs will be sent to us. ”

Nowadays, when modern revisionism has become widespread, one should not be surprised at such disgusting behavior of Khrushchev. Back in 1915, Lenin, condemning the departure of the revisionists of the от International from Marxism, noted: “In our time, forgotten words, confused principles, overturned worldviews, pushed away resolutions and solemn promises are not surprising.”

The events that took place after the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU fully showed what serious consequences the complete and indiscriminate denial of Stalin by the leadership of the CPSU led to. The complete and indiscriminate denial of Stalin gave the imperialists and reactionaries of various countries the shell that they were so eager to get to launch an anti-Soviet, anti-communist campaign. It was after the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU that the imperialists, taking advantage of Khrushchev's secret anti-Stalinist report, launched a broad anti-Soviet, anti-communist campaign throughout the world. Seizing the opportunity, the imperialists, reactionaries, the Tito clique and opportunists of all stripes launched an offensive against the Soviet Union, against the socialist camp and communist parties, as a result of which many fraternal parties and fraternal countries found themselves in an extremely difficult situation.

The frantic campaign against Stalin, launched by the leadership of the CPSU, caused revitalization among the Trotskyists, who had long become political corpses. They made a fuss about Trotsky’s “rehabilitation”. In November 1961, on the eve of the closing of the КП Congress of the CPSU, the international secretariat of the so-called IV International published a "letter to the Congress of the CPSU and the new Central Committee of the CPSU." The letter says that Trotsky predicted back in 1937 that "a monument to the victims of Stalin would be erected"; “Today, this prediction comes true. At your congress, your first party secretary has already promised to erect this monument. ” This letter in particular requires that Trotsky’s name “be carved in gold letters on the monument to the victims of Stalin.” Without hiding their deep joy, the Trotskyists believe that the campaign launched by the CPSU leadership against Stalin "opened the door for Trotskyism" and this "will greatly contribute to the development of Trotskyism and its organization, the Ⅳ international."

I.V. Stalin died in 1953. Three years later, the leadership of the CPSU launched a broad campaign against Stalin at the КП Congress of the CPSU; and eight years later, at the ⅩⅩⅡ Congress of the CPSU, it again launched a broad campaign against Stalin, and removed his body from the Mausoleum. In developing such broad anti-Stalinist campaigns one after another, the leadership of the CPSU aims to nullify the unfading influence of this great proletarian revolutionary on the Soviet people and the peoples of the whole world, to subvert Marxism-Leninism, which Stalin defended and developed at one time, and to open for itself the path to comprehensive carrying out its revisionist line.

The revisionist line of the CPSU leadership originates precisely from the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU, and at the ⅩⅩⅡ Congress of the CPSU it took shape in a complete system. It becomes more and more obvious that the revision by the leaders of the CPSU of the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of imperialism, of war and peace, of the proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat, of the revolution in colonies and semi-colonies, of the proletarian party, etc., is inextricably linked with their complete and sweeping denial of Stalin.

The complete and indiscriminate denial of Stalin by the leadership of the CPSU is carried out under the screen of the so-called "struggle against the cult of personality."

The so-called "struggle against the cult of personality", launched by the leadership of the CPSU, did not at all aim to restore the "Leninist norms of party life and the principles of leadership" as they themselves advertise this. On the contrary, this “struggle” means a departure from Lenin’s teachings on the relationship between leaders, party, class and masses, a departure from the principle of democratic centralism in  party.

Everyone knows that the creation of the atomic and hydrogen bombs by the Soviet Union was a great success for the workers of science and technology of the Soviet Union and the Soviet people, achieved during the leadership of Stalin. The base for rocketry was also laid during the leadership of Stalin.

The leaders of the CPSU make under the guise of the slogan "struggle against the cult of personality." In fact, they, in the words of Lenin, "instead of the old leaders who hold universal views on simple things, put forward ... new leaders who speak supernatural nonsense and confusion."

Khrushchev said: “Oh, how good it would be if Stalin died ten years earlier!” As you know, Stalin died in 1953. If Stalin died ten years earlier, that would be in 1943, that is, just when the Soviet Union launched a counteroffensive in the Great Patriotic War. Who longed for Stalin's death at that time? Hitler!

In the history of the international communist movement, the opportunists have never succeeded in denying Marx, Engels, Lenin with the help of insinuations, nor can Khrushchev succeed in denying Stalin with the help of insinuations.

Khrushchev can, using his privileged position, somehow revise Marxism-Leninism, but he will never succeed, using his privileged position, to subvert Marxism-Leninism, which was upheld by I.V. Stalin and which the Marxist-Leninists of the whole world upheld and defend.

Long live the great revolutionary doctrine of Marx - Engels - Lenin - Stalin.

NATO troops have no place on the territory of the Republic of Belarus!

STATEMENT

by left-wing patriotic public associations of Belarus, which formed the Coordination Council "Unity"



NATO troops have no place on the territory

of the Republic of Belarus!

 As the agency "Minsk-News" reported with reference to the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Belarus, yesterday and today, a unit of the British marines arrived on the territory of the Republic of Belarus for joint training with Belarusian peacekeepers.

In this regard, the left-patriotic public associations of the republic, which formed the Coordination Council "Unity", declare:

in the territory of the Republic of Belarus there should be no place for military units of foreign states, except for union Russia and the states that are members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, including for participating in joint training, exercises, maneuvers and parades.



       The leaders of the left-patriotic public associations of Belarus, which formed the Coordination Council "UNITY":



L.E. SHKOLNIKOV, Secretary-Coordinator of the Republican Public Association "For the Union and the Communist Party of the Union"

B. B. ZELIKOV, Chairman of the Republican Civil Committee of the Patriotic Public Association "Fatherland"

 V.V. DRACO, Chairman of the Republican Council of the public association “For Democracy, Social Progress and Justice”, deputy of the House of Representatives of the National Assembly of the Republic of Belarus I Convocation

 G.I. SIMANOVSKY, Secretary of the Coordination Council "UNITY", formed by the left-wing patriotic public associations of Belarus

 Hero City Minsk,

March 1, 2020

On the position of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation regarding the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation

In two issues of the newspaper Pravda (No. 9 of 01/30/2020 and No. 12 of 02/06/2020) - the central organ of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) - a statement by the Presidium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation “The Constitution is obliged to protect the interests of the majority” and the article “Russia we need a Constitution of justice and a government of public trust ”, signed by the chairman of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Gennady Zyuganov.

As previously noted in the materials of the AUCPB, a party led by Zyuganov is only called a communist party, but in reality it is a Social Democratic party of a parliamentary type. This is exactly what it was planned by the trinity - Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Zyuganov - at their joint meeting in August 1991, and it was created in February 1993. The ideological principles of the Communist Party — opportunism, revisionism and cooperation with the bourgeoisie — have been the foundation of the Communist Party since its founding. . In politics, she denies the revolutionary path of struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat, in economics, it admits its multistructure with private ownership of the means of production.

The Communist Party’s statement noted that “In the event of a fair referendum being conducted fairly and not replaced by a“ nationwide poll ”, the“ execution ”Constitution (Yeltsin’s 1993 - V.Z.) had no chance of success.” We have to remind our readers that precisely because the Communist Party brought 15% of voters to a referendum on December 12, 1993, the Yeltsin bourgeois Constitution became the main law of the Russian Federation, which is still in force (According to official figures, 54.81% of the Yeltsin draft constitution The Russian Federation was supported then by 58.43% of those who voted). The AUCPB, as is known, urged not to participate either in the blood parliamentary elections or in a referendum under the conditions of the bourgeois Yeltsin dictatorship.

Further, in a statement by the Communist Party, Putin’s amendments are not enough, so their party proposes its own:

“- to fix the belonging of the Russian bowels to the people ...;

- oblige the government to index pensions ...;

- fix the retirement age as the most important social guarantee: 60 years for men, 55 years for women;

- establish that the minimum wage and minimum pension cannot be less than the subsistence level ”(The statement lists seven more similar proposals).

The question arises: since 1993, Zyuganovites have been sitting in the State Duma of Russia for 27 years and constantly come up with similar proposals that the Russian parliament has not accepted. Why? Because the Zyuganovites, who call themselves Leninists, in reality do not want to heed the warning of V.I. Lenin on "parliamentary cretinism" under the rule of the bourgeoisie.

At the end of his article published in the February issue of Pravda, Zyuganov writes: “At the same time, we also abstained from voting against (the government of Mishustin - VB), believing that we need to give the new cabinet a chance to change the situation for the better.” That is, for many years, deputies from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation have not learned anything if they believe that the bourgeois government is able to improve the lives of ordinary people.

And all this despite the fact that the Communist Party has its own very significant experience. As you know, on March 15, 1996, the lower house, at the suggestion of Zyuganovites, despite Yeltsin’s warnings, adopted a resolution according to which the decision of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR of December 12, 1991 to denounce the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR was recognized as invalid. From this day on, the USSR was considered restored. But Yeltsin ignored this decision, telling reporters that at his order the ambassadors of the CIS countries were gathered, who were explained that this decision of the State Duma would have no consequences. So ingloriously ended the demagogic attempt of the false communists.

It should be noted that many Russians have not trusted Zyuganov for a long time, since he failed them in the same 1996, when, having gained the majority of votes in the presidential election, he transferred victory to Yeltsin without a fight.

Vasily Zelikov

Minsk city

OBJECTIVE VIEW OF SOCIALISM AND SOVIET POWER

In the newspaper of the Union of the struggle for national sobriety (SBNT) "Comrade" No. 9 (205) - October-November 2013, an article was published under the heading "Robbery strategy. Failing weapon of the enemy. " The source is indicated at the end of the article - DESNITSA newspaper, No. 4 (14), 2000 (Moscow). Thus, this article was written 20 years ago. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to reproduce it today, these days.

Its author is Fedor Grigorievich Uglov (1904-2008), an outstanding surgeon of our time (a student of an outstanding Russian doctor N.N. Petrov), doctor of medical sciences, professor of I.P. St. Petersburg University Pavlova, Honorary Chairman of the St. Petersburg Society of Surgeons, full member of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, International Slavic Academy, Petrovsky Academy of Sciences and Arts, editor-in-chief (from 1953 to 2006) of the journal “Herald of Surgery”, member of the Union of Writers of Russia, sober lifestyle advocate , laureate of the Lenin Prize.

A. Shpagin

The mass media, being in the hands of people alien to Russia and its indigenous population, are climbing over their heads to represent our country and our life under Soviet rule in black colors.

As an active participant in this life from the age of 13 and throughout the entire period of the existence of Soviet power, as a person who has never participated in any power structures, I can quite objectively and impartially say what our life was like, and everyone can compare it with what it has become in the last ten years for a Russian person who is not participating in the new power structures.

I’ll tell you about the state of health and human longevity under Soviet rule. I think this side of human life and society best describes the social system.

I will give for comparison statistical data on Sweden, where they were well recorded (these indicators are typical for most European states with a capitalist system).

In 1755, in Sweden, the average life expectancy was 34 years (previously it was much lower); in 1816–40 (i.e. after 60 years) - 41 years; in 1911–20 (i.e. after another 95 years) - 57 years; in 1945-50 - 68 years old.

A similar situation in the USA: 1800 - 33 years; 1850 - 42 years; 1900 - 49 years; 1950 - 68 years.

Now the data for Russia. If in 1896–97. in European Russia (in which serfdom was abolished only 40 years before - February 19, 1861), the average life expectancy was 32 years (and even less with the outskirts, inhabited mainly by ethnic minorities), already in 1926 –27 years she grew up to 44 years old (for men 42 years old, for women under 47 years old). By this time, illiteracy was eliminated in the country and education compulsory for all was introduced. In 1955–56 the average life expectancy was already 67 years (63 years for men and 69 years for women). Thus, over 50 years, the average life expectancy has doubled. In 1970–76 life expectancy for men was 65 years, for women 74 years.

Thus, Russia during the Soviet era, in matters of increasing life expectancy in 50-60 years, has come the way in which the capitalist countries took 150-200 years.

This is only one of the indicators of governing the country and caring for a person. Of course, this does not exhaust the achievements of Soviet power. Free treatment has been introduced, available at all levels. In health, the achievements of Soviet power were among the most outstanding in the world. This is the elimination of tuberculosis and sexually transmitted diseases, and a reduction of almost ten times the infant mortality rate, and much, much more.

The Soviet government introduced compulsory 7-year education in the country (and then secondary education), affordable and free higher education with scholarships for students.

The rapid development of science began. In addition to numerous universities, in which, along with teaching, a lot of scientific work was carried out, numerous research institutes were created in all the most important fields of science. Under Soviet rule, we were the first in the world to go into space. But the most important thing is that in a historically short period, Russia has turned from a backward semi-illiterate country (before the revolution there were 90% of illiterates) into a country of universal literacy. An army was created - the strongest in the world. For 10-12 years, the armament of the army was created, which could withstand the weapons assembled and created almost throughout Europe. Is it necessary to compare all these achievements of Soviet power, verified by history, with those "achievements" that the "democrats" achieved for their almost ten-year rule of the country? What did they turn our country into, our army? Having plundered the whole nation, they enriched a handful of criminals who, having taken seats in the government and put their bribed bullies in all the media, "rubbed points" to the world, talking about their "reforms." They turned the richest country with a prosperous population into separate pieces of individual "princes"in “with the impoverished multimillion people in almost all the“ principalities ”- and the few who are fattening from the looted wealth, who, with the help of the media created in their own image, fool the people every day, trying to achieve its humility.

And so that people do not remember the Soviet power, which from the standpoint of their present life is a paradise on earth, they are trying in every possible way to slander it. But the more their “voices” lie, the clearer the true face of the Soviet power appears and the more the desire to return to it again grows.

Understanding perfectly how the life of most people has changed dramatically for the worse with the advent of the "reformers", the ruling mafia, in order to drown people's memory and poison them, began to solder the people at a frantic pace, not only opening all internal alcohol gateways, but also giving complete freedom to all foreign solders turn our country into an alcoholic sea.

Under the “reformers,” the level of alcohol consumption went up steeply, reaching catastrophic proportions unprecedented in world history.

Children's homelessness has sharply grown (which was eliminated by the Soviet government within two or three years of the very first and difficult period of its existence).

What achievements can the "reformers" boast of?

It turns out that over the past ten years, the life expectancy of Russian people has decreased to 58-60 years (that is, 10 years) and continues to decline. The birth rate decreased by 2–3 times, the mortality rate increased sharply, exceeding the birth rate by 1–1.5 million people per year. During the "reforms" we have already lost at least 10 million people.

Chubais chose alcohol as the main weapon for the destruction of Russian people - the most powerful and reliable.

Under Soviet rule, alcohol consumption ranged from zero (over 11 years) to 7–8 liters recently per capita per year. Under the "reformers" it reached the limit of 25 liters per capita per year. In its entire thousand-year history, Russia did not have such a level!

But the "reformers" alcohol genocide seemed insufficient weapons against the Russian people. They opened all the doors to illegal drugs, directing their deadly blow to youth and adolescents. Now, according to unofficial data (official sources are silent, as they got water in their mouths), almost 40% of drug addicts among young people and teenagers! But it is known that for a person it is enough for several years to “generation” for a sad end.

Enemies of the Russian people can rub their hands in pleasure. According to Dulles’s plan, an additional lethal weapon is aimed at Russian youth, aimed at our teenagers, which will complete what the Gaidar-Chubais and others like them started.

Having ravaged the country, drowned out the people, killed teachers and doctors, raised the prices of medicines to lawlessness, they celebrate their Pyrrhic victory.

A few years ago I made a report among the workers of Severodvinsk. Speaking about the increasing level of alcohol consumption, I said that the enemies of Russia deliberately solder the Russian people. Someone from the audience asked defiantly: "Where do you see these enemies? Why do not we see them?" Now I would like to ask this person a question: "Does he really not see the enemies who solder Russian people today?"

P.S. Sometimes you can hear surprise from the girls, why now guys, men went some kind of weak, frail? But where do strong, healthy guys, men come from (they don’t fall out of the sky!) If the girls themselves first smoke, drink, take drugs, disfigure their beautiful bodies with completely harmless tattoos, piercings, and then give birth to babies with all the consequences ...

That is why girls are given “privileges” in nightclubs: free admission, “spill”, where, in addition to alcohol, drugs are mixed in; after drinking such “drinks” with girls, you can do whatever you want ...

Close to this is such a "picture" of capitalism as juvenile delinquency. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs alone, in 2019, 37,953 offenders under the age of majority were identified, they accounted for 3.9% of all solved crimes in Russia last year. Moreover, the number of grave and especially grave crimes by minors is growing: if in 2018 there were 9716, then in 2019 - 10 113. The statistics also recorded 1615 cases of involving minors in criminal activity.

The Republic of Tuva is the record holder for juvenile delinquency, where juveniles are involved in almost every 10th solved crime. Next comes Karelia with 7.2% of the total number of crimes uncovered. Then follow the Sverdlovsk region, the Nenets Autonomous Okrug and the Trans-Baikal Territory. The top ten “winners” are Volgograd Oblast and Primorsky Krai. Child crime has become a problem in the Pskov, Novgorod, Ivanovo and Amur regions.

All this is politics, the class struggle of the capitalists against the working class, against the working people. Only socialism and soviet power can put an end to all this!

A. Shpagin (VMGB)

Address by the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the AUCPB to the working people of Russia

The next bourgeois version of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, securing the dominance of big capital and the exploitation of Russian workers, should be rejected

 President of the Russian Federation V. Putin announced amendments to the main law of the state - the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation.

It was adopted at the end of the year (December 12) as a result of tank shots rumbled in Moscow on October 3-4, 1993. Then President B. Yeltsin dispersed the Supreme Council of Russia and shot his defenders, thereby making a coup. The 1993 Constitution was imposed on the people of Russia by force. The proposed revision of the 2020 Constitution preserves the essence, the main content of the Constitution on the blood of 1993. It was adopted in the interests of large Russian capital in order to push through reforms with the help of accelerated methods. Under this Constitution, authoritarian presidential power was introduced, which gave the president the right to form a government and dissolve parliament (State Duma). The role of parliament, in fact, is reduced to decoration: any law adopted by the State Duma is subject to approval by the "upper house" - the Federation Council - and the president, who may reject the adopted laws. Finally, the president has the right to issue his own decrees, which have the same force as laws.

The basic law of the state, providing for the dictatorial powers of the president, is typical for those capitalist countries where power is unstable and the lack of democratic support is replaced by a strong police regime. Similar "constitutions" can be found in Latin America during periods of military dictatorships, when the "constitution" is nothing more than a fig leaf. An authoritarian power scheme was also, for example, in France during the time of General de Gaulle: this power was established when the French regime "staggered" and the bourgeoisie needed to strengthen it.

The 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation was designed to protect bourgeois power, regardless of which parties would be elected to the State Duma. By inheritance, it (the Constitution) passed from Yeltsin to Putin.

The current constitutional amendments are intended to give the appearance of legality to preserving the power of President Putin, who has been at the head of the country for twenty years. It is supposed to change the form of power in Russia so that Putin remains its sovereign leader, and the political regime itself does not change its essence.

The main innovation will be the emergence of another authority - the State Council. The formula, when the president becomes the chairman of a certain high “Council”, has already been successfully tested in Kazakhstan - there N. Nazarbayev moved from one high chair to another.

Moreover, in Russia, the parliament is promised a slight expansion of rights. According to the amendments, the State Duma will be able to vote not only “for” or “against” the new Prime Minister, but also on the candidatures of some of the ministers. However, the powers of the president, formally reduced in favor of the parliament, are expanding elsewhere: now he will receive the right to initiate the dismissal of the chairmen of the Supreme and Constitutional Courts.

It is obvious that within the ruling authorities there is still a struggle of groups for a new look of the Constitution, and amendments are born in this struggle - hence the contradictions in them. One of the leading political scientists suggested that different amendments were written by different groups of people who did not coordinate them with each other. For the sake of masking the main perturbations, it is proposed to add to the basic law such moments as indexation of pensions for pensioners and the minimum wage corresponding to the minimum subsistence level (which looks shameful, but is presented as some good). Someone else jokingly proposed to add to the Constitution that “the weather should be good”, “the right of people to breathe,” etc. Various lobbyists began to compose their own amendments in order to strengthen their influence: for example, the Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Kirill suggested mention “God” in the Constitution, and Cossack chieftains proposed the introduction of “Cossack police”. Etc…

But the jokes aside.

Regardless of who specifically becomes the head of state, which body will be added a little more authority, and which one will be slightly reduced, the 2020 Constitution of the Russian Federation, with the introduction of cosmetic amendments to the 1993 Constitution, does not change its essence. This is a bourgeois document that substantiates the power of the capitalists in the country and the lack of rights of the masses of working people with pompous words.

New formulas retain authoritarian, dictatorial forms of government, based primarily on the police force. In Russia, in fact, there is no parliament and parties, even in the form in which they are supposed in bourgeois-democratic states, and the entire system of power is subordinated to the interests of oligarchic groups.

The balance of power between capital and the masses can be changed only as a result of the revolutionary struggle of the working masses for their rights and interests - for socialism. No hope for a “parliamentary republic" or a "good president" is real.

For this reason, conscious workers should not participate but boycott hypocritical attempts by
the current government to draw them into empty "discussions" and "votes" around all sorts of decorative amendments to the bourgeois constitution. Conscious workers should understand that all this fuss was created by liberals to slyly give the “new” Constitution of the Russian Federation hostile to the people the ephemeral status of “popular approval” (“expression of will”). According to the statements of the supreme power of the Russian Federation, with the adoption of the "new" Constitution, there will be no change in the liberal course leading Russia into the abyss. The 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation, dictated by Western puppeteers Yeltsin, cannot be “finalized” and presented to the people in the form of “improved”. The proposed "new" Constitution of the lack of rights of the people should be rejected.

                                                                   February 17, 2020 Leningrad