kuchinster

2023-09-02 07:16:48

On issues of periodization of the history of the USSR

In October 1917 in Russia, when not a single industrial enterprise, not a single locomotive had yet been destroyed (the Bolsheviks had not planned this at all), Russian society, the first in the world, got rid of the parasites who used their enterprises for the purposes of waging invasive, destructive wars. The liberation of Russian society from the selfishness and uneducated entrepreneurs, from the power of banking monopolies, already at the end of the 20's, provided not only a complete restoration of industry, not only the highest in the history of mankind rates of development of productive forces, but also the pace of scientific, technical and cultural progress. Already in the 20-ies Zhukovsky, Timiryazev, Pavlov, Michurin, Tsiolkovsky, Kapitsa, Kurchatov, Tupolev, Polikarpov, Degtyaryov, Paton, Lebedev, Meyerhold, Eisenstein, Pyatnitsky, for the first time in history, received all the necessary conditions and means for their scientific, design work and artistic creativity.

In August 1991 in the USSR, too, not a single enterprise had been destroyed yet, but the CPSU, Soviets and Gosplan of the USSR had maliciously abstained from managing all the productive forces of society, voluntarily giving banks and enterprises into private hands, including foreign ones. I.e. huge production capacities of the superpower stopped for 10 years not because the communists violated the laws of "copromatism" or thermodynamics, but because the majority of the "party billet-bearers" of the CPSU, professed not diamatic, but some kind of "economic thinking", which made the party members and technical intelligentsia unemployed, homeless, criminals, egoists, liberals, nationalists, clerics and, in the near future, millions of ruined "shuttle traders", deceived tourists, shareholders, shareholders and depositors.

Some comrades still explain the collapse of the CPSU and the USSR only by the betrayal of the top, but do not try to explain neither to themselves nor to others, why in August 1941 in the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (b), in the army and in industry there were only a few traitors, and half a century later, in August 1991, the Central Committee of the CPSU, the directorial and ministerial corps, the Soviet generals, almost in their entirety, refused to do anything in defense of socialism, and painted themselves as democrats, liberals, nationalists and clerics?

In Stalin's time, the entire ministerial and directorial corps knew that it was very seriously responsible, first of all, for the quality and quantity of products manufactured in accordance with the proportions of the strategic plan of the whole country, and cost, indicators played only a modest accounting role. Only with the revival of capitalism on the territory of the USSR was the stupid phrase revived: "all the necessary material means are available, but it cannot build, there is no... financing", as if factories and bridges were being built out of bills.

Since Andropov's time, in the USSR, the so-called economic, i.e. egoistic criteria have prevailed over scientifically grounded real proportions of social production. The ministries and administrations of enterprises, having switched to full self-sufficiency, objectively and practically turned into capitalists working for personal monetary profit. The practice of harnessing the financial "cart" ahead of the "horse" of a concrete plan for the development of productive forces reigns in the Russian Federation to this day. Having no concrete plans, but only the general national wishes of the president to improve some things, to mend gaping failures, the government in 2020 is forced to state that billions of rubles have been plundered, and 148 billion rubles have not been spent.

But this situation did not arise under Yeltsin. The practice of Andropov's time had already shown that both the General Secretary himself and the members of the CPSU Central Committee had no concrete scientific idea of what should be done to continue building communism. They began to treat the imperfections of socialism... with capitalism.

Therefore, concerning the question of periodization of the history of the CPSU and the USSR, we should speak about two stages. The first stage, under the leadership of Lenin and Stalin, under whom the political and theoretical superstructure was organized, and filled with such content (due to the genius and education of the leaders, the growing education of specialists and consciousness of the masses, the uncompromising struggle against anti-communist views), which ensured the dynamic ascent of the Soviet base and the whole society, moving further and further away from the system that collapsed as a result of the First World War, to the country that, in fact, defeated both the USA and Bree in the Second World War. Before 1953, the basis of the first phase of communism had successfully taken root in many countries liberated from fascism.

But now few people dispute that after 1953 there came a second stage, when the basis in the USSR, especially in large industry and state farms, outwardly, until 1983, still remained within the limits of the USSR Constitution, but at the head of the CPSU and in the superstructural institutions, i.e., in the USSR Academy of Sciences, in the Lenin VPA, in the "Znaniye" society, in the "Communist" magazine, there were fewer and fewer people with knowledge of dialectical-materialist methodology. In the USSR Academy of Sciences, in the Lenin Military Academy, in the "Znanie" society, in the "Communist" magazine, there were fewer and fewer people who possessed dialectical-materialist methodology, and therefore everything communist in the country went to zero after Andropov introduced the self-financing reform.

I.e., if the USSR and the CPSU retained the communist names of the elements of the superstructure and, nominally, party superstructure institutions, but there were practically no connoisseurs of Marxist methodology in the country and in the party, which brings scientific content and communist tendencies to the development of production relations, then the construction of communism is out of the question. If the complete collections of the works of the classics of Marxism, if they are quietly covered with dust on the shelves in party committees and regional committees, but are not properly studied by the members of the Communist Party, if this knowledge is not clarified in connection with new objective circumstances, then all this literary heritage of the victorious classics remains a "thing in itself" that has no positive influence in real time on society, which is once again sliding into the era of mass bourgeois, and therefore liberal, Nazi and clerical ideology.

In view of the defeats suffered by the CPSU at the second stage of its history, it is necessary, as diamatics prescribes, to once again logically "dance from the stove" of simply contemplating the facts of the decay of social formations observed in world history, to the theoretical generalization of conclusions from these facts, to the search for regularities of all such collapses, and from them to the formulation of a conclusion about the presence or absence of a single cause and antidote to such phenomena in the history of mankind.
of mankind.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/6796858.html
#russian #soviet #history