Zum Inhalt der Seite gehen

Suche

Beiträge, die mit bolsheviks getaggt sind


WHAT LENIN'S ILLITERACY ERADICATION LOOKED LIKE


WHAT LENIN'S ILLITERACY ERADICATION LOOKED LIKE

Bild/Foto

“Izvestiya All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets.
of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets
December 30, 1919, #294 (846)

DECREE

on the elimination of illiteracy among the population
R.S.F.S.R.

In order to provide the entire population of the Republic with the possibility of conscious participation in the political life of the country, the Council of People's Commissars has decided:

I. All the population of the republic between the ages of 8 and 50 who cannot read or write are obliged to learn literacy in their native or Russian language, if they wish. This education shall be conducted in state schools, both existing and established for the illiterate population according to the plans of the People's Commissariat for Enlightenment.

Note. This paragraph applies to Red Army soldiers, and the corresponding work in military units is carried out with the close participation of the political departments of the Red Army and Navy.

II. The period of liquidation of illiteracy is established by the provincial and city sovdepas according to their affiliation. General plans for the liquidation of illiteracy in the field are drawn up by the organs of the People's Commissariat of Education within two months from the date of publication of this decree.

III. The Narkompros and its local bodies are given the right to engage all the literate population of the country, not conscripted into the army, to teach illiterates by way of labor conscription, with payment for their labor according to the norms of the workers of Enlightenment.

IV. The People's Commissariat of Enlightenment and its local bodies involve all organizations of the working population, such as trade unions, local cells of the R.C.P., the Union of Communist Youth, commissions for work among women, etc., in the work of liquidating illiteracy.

V. Literacy trainees who are employed, with the exception of those employed in militarized enterprises, shall have their working day shortened by two hours for the entire duration of their training, with pay.

VI. To eliminate illiteracy, the bodies of the People's Commissariat of Education are allowed to use people's houses, churches, clubs, private houses, suitable premises in factories, plants, Soviet institutions, etc.

VII. The supplying bodies are obliged to satisfy the requests of institutions aimed at the elimination of illiteracy in preference to other institutions.

VIII. Those who evade the duties established by this decree and those who prevent illiterates from attending schools shall be held criminally liable.

IX. The People's Commissariat of Education is instructed to issue instructions on the application of the present decree within two weeks.

Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars
В. Ulyanov (Lenin)

Manager of Affairs V. Bonch-Bruyevich
Secretary S. Brichkina

Moscow
Kremlin
December 26, 1919.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

INSTRUCTION

on the elimination of illiteracy among the population of the R.S.F.S.R.,
issued by the K.K.P. as a follow-up to the decree on the elimination of illiteracy
illiteracy, dated December 29, 1919.

№1. This instruction is intended to eliminate illiteracy among the population between the ages of 14 and 50, i.e. that part of the population which is usually served by institutions of Out-of-School Education.

№2. The work of eradicating illiteracy among the population between the ages of 14 and 50 is carried out by the Out-of-School Department of the N.K.P., the provincial, city, district and volost Sub-departments of Out-of-School Education together with the institutions of organized population. Where there are no Vneshkolnye Podotdepartments, the work on liquidation of illiterates is entrusted to local executive committees.

№3. Commissions and meetings of representatives of the organized population (trade unions, the Union of Communist Youth, the Women's Work Department, delegates of women workers under the People's Education Departments, the Village Work Department, etc.), Soviet and Party institutions are organized at the provincial, city, district and volost institutions mentioned in No. 2 in connection with literacy eradication work.

These commissions and meetings meet both to discuss general questions on the eradication of illiteracy and to solve specific practical questions. Depending on the nature of the questions, the composition of these commissions and meetings also varies; for example, for the discussion of questions on the elimination of illiteracy among the urban proletariat, representatives of professional organizations are invited, while for the solution of questions on the elimination of illiteracy among the rural population, the Departments for Work in the Countryside may be involved. To solve the question of the elimination of illiteracy among the female proletariat, representatives of trade unions, women's commissions, etc. are invited.

№4. The plan of work on the liquidation of illiteracy consists in the following: all work should be based on the self-activity of the population itself. At a general meeting of the Out-of-School Sub-Departments, together with representatives of the organized population, Soviet and Party institutions, a general plan for the eradication of illiteracy in a given place is worked out, namely: the technique of counting the literate and illiterate is established, the organization and supply of schools established for the eradication of illiteracy are planned, etc.

a) In order to enable the town and volost subdepartments to calculate correctly the required number of schools and to distribute these schools over the territory depending on the residence of illiterates, it is necessary to find out in the nearest future the number of illiterates in a given district, their residence, sex and age composition.

Out-of-school township sub-departments through party organizations, through the Union of Workers of Education and Socialist Culture and other professional organizations, through the Union of Communist Youth determine personally the number of persons who can be involved in the work to eliminate illiteracy as teachers.

b) The records of illiterates among the organized population are kept by their institutions, and among the unorganized population by the town and township Vneshkolniki Subdepartments. Information about illiterates is recorded in a special register, and a separate register is drawn up for each population or urban district, where the following information is recorded about each illiterate: name and surname, sex, age and occupation. Upon receipt of this information, the town and volost sub-departments determine the required number of schools and their location. Then, together with representatives of the organized population, they work out the grounds necessary for the Gubispolkom to set the terms for the elimination of illiteracy. After considering these proposals, the Gubispolkom develops a general plan for the eradication of illiteracy in the province and publishes it for general information. The deadline for the eradication of illiteracy is set either one day for the whole province or different days for different parts of the province.

№5. At the same time, taking into account the literate and illiterate population, the town and volost sub-departments take measures to open schools for illiterates as soon as possible and to provide these schools with teaching aids and supplies. In order to save time and money, schools of the first series are opened at existing schools of the first and second stages, at institutions of out-of-school population, at party organizations, and in factories.

In the future, when the work of accounting for illiterates is completed, an additional series of schools will be opened in other places, so that every locality capable of producing a group of pupils of at least 15 will have its own school.

№6. According to the general sense of the decree on the elimination of illiteracy, the elimination of illiteracy is to be understood in the sense of teaching illiterates to read, write and count. For these reasons, native language (reading, writing) and elementary mathematics are included in the program of the established schools for the elimination of illiteracy. As for social science, it can be introduced on condition that a communist is assigned to teach it. Detailed programs of the school are sent by the Extracurricular Department of the People's Commissariat of Education additionally.

№7. The time of instruction, the number of days and hours of instruction per week in literacy schools are determined by the Out-of-School Department in accordance with the living conditions of the various strata of the population.

№8. The eradication of illiteracy begins with the younger ages and gradually continues up to the age of majority.

Extracurricular sub-departments, town and township, determine who may be exempted from compulsory literacy instruction.

№9. Short-term congress courses are organized for the training of instructors and teachers in the province, counties and rayons.

№10. Each school has its own school council, which directs the whole life of the school. The council consists of at least four persons - representatives of pupils and students in equal numbers.

№11. The students of the school are divided into groups of 15 - 25 people at the beginning of the classes. In establishing the groups, the age of the students and the degree of development shall be taken into consideration.

№12. Pupils who have passed the school are subjected to tests with regard to their mastery of the mechanism of reading, writing and numeracy. During the tests, in addition to the pupils, representatives of the organized population, Soviet and Party institutions may be present. Those who fail the tests are retaken for a second course.

№13. In order to enable pupils to deepen the knowledge they have acquired at school, it is necessary to introduce them to the use of local institutions of out-of-school education.

№14. Out-of-school sub-departments make timely estimates of expenses on literacy eradication and include this expense in the general estimates of their sub-departments.

Among the expenses on literacy eradication are: maintenance of the personnel invited to the sub-department in connection with literacy eradication work, remuneration of the labor of teachers, maintenance of premises and household expenses, procurement and purchase of textbooks and teaching aids.

№15. When calculating the labor remuneration of students, the norm of the People's Commissariat for Education should be taken. Work on adult education shall not be considered as part-time work.

№16. Every month the provincial, city, district and volost Vneshkolnye Podotdelas submit to their executive committees reports on the progress of work on the elimination of illiteracy, and district and city Vneshkolnye Podotdelas, in addition, every three months submit consolidated reports on the city and district to the Vneshkolnye Podotdelas of the People's Commissariat for Education.

People's Commissar for Education
А. Lunacharsky

Secretary of the NKL Collegium V. Zimovsky
#lang_en #Russia #USSR #soviet #russian #history #Lenin #communism #bolsheviks #education



КАК ВЫГЛЯДЕЛ ЛЕНИНСКИЙ ЛИКБЕЗ

"Известия Всероссийского Центрального
Исполнительного Комитета Советов
от 30 декабря 1919 года №294 (846)

ДЕКРЕТ

о ликвидации безграмотности среди населения
Р.С.Ф.С.Р.

В целях предоставления всему населению республики возможности сознательного участия в политической жизни страны Совет Народных Комисаров постановил:

I. Все население республики в возрасте от 8 до 50 лет, не умеющее читать или писать, обязано учиться грамоте на родном или русском языке, по желанию. Обучение это ведется в государственных школах как существующих, так и учреждаемых для неграмотного населения по планам Народного Комиссариата по Просвещению.

Примечание. Действие этого пункта распространяется на красноармейцев, причем соответственная работа в военных частях производится при ближайшем участии политотделов Красной Армии и Флота.

II. Срок ликвидации безграмотности устанавливается губернскими и городскими совдепами по принадлежности. Общие планы по ликвидации безграмотности на местах составляются органами Наркомпроса в двухмесячный срок со дня опубликования настоящего декрета.

III. Наркомпросу и его местным органам предоставляется право привлекать к обучению неграмотных в порядке трудовой повинности все грамотное население страны, не призванное в войска, с оплатою их труда по нормам работников Просвещения.

IV. К ближайшему участию в работах по ликвидации безграмотности Народным Комиссариатом Просвещения и местными органами его привлекаются все организации трудового населения, как-то: профессиональные союзы, местные ячейки Р.К.П., союз коммунистической мооодежи, комиссии по работе среди женщин и проч.

V. Обучившимся грамоте, работающим по найму за исключеннием занятых в милитаризованных предприятиях, рабочий день сокращается на два часа на все время обучения, с сохранением заработной платы.

VI. Для ликвидации безграмотности органам Народного Комиссариата Просвещения предоставляется использовать народные дома, церкви, клубы, частные дома, подходящие помещения на фабриках, заводах, в советских учреждениях и т.п.

VII. Снабжающим органам вменяется в обязанность удовлетворять запросы учреждений, имеющих целью ликвидацию безграмоности, преимущественно перед другими учреждениями.

VIII. Уклоняющися от установленных настоящим декретом повинностей и препятствующие неграмотным посещать школы привлекаются к уголовной ответственности.

IX. Наркомпросу поручается в двухнедельный срок издать инструкцию по применению настоящего декрета.

Председатель Совета Народных Комиссаров
В. Ульянов (Ленин)

Управляющий делами Вл. Бонч-Бруевич
Секретарь С. Бричкина

Москва
Кремль
26 декабря 1919 г.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

ИНСТРУКЦИЯ

о ликвидации безграмотности среди населения Р.С.Ф.С.Р.,
изданная К,К.П.в развитие декрета о ликвидации
безграмотности, от 29 декабря 1919 года

№1. Настоящая инструкция имеет в виду ликвидацию безграмотности среди населения в возрасте от 14-ти до 50-лет, т.-е. той части населения, которая обычно обслуживается учреждениями Внешкольного Образования.

№2. Работа по ликвидации безграмотности среди населения в возрасте от 14-ти до 50-лет выполняется Внешкольным Отделом Н.К.П., губернскими, городскими, уездными и волостными Подотделами Внешкольного Образования совместно с учреждениями организованного населения. Там, где Внешкольных Подотделов не существует, работы по ликвидации безграмотных возлагаются на местные исполкомы.

№3. При указанных в №2 губернских, городских, уездных и волостных учреждениях в связи с производством работ по ликвидации безграмотности организуются комиссии и совещания из представителей организованного населения (профессиональные союзы, союз коммунистической молодежи, отдел по работе среди женщин, делегатки работниц при отделах Народного Образования, отдел по работе в деревне и т.д.), советских и партийных учреждений.

Указанные комиссии и совещания собираются как для обсуждения общих вопросов по ликвидации безграмотности, так и для решения частных практических вопросов. В зависимости от характера вопросов меняется и состав этих комиссий и совещаний, так, например, для обсуждения вопросов ликвидации безграмотности среди городского пролетариата приглашаются, главным образом, представители профессиональных организаций, а для решения вопросов по ликвидации безграмотности среди сельского населения могут привлекаться Отделы по работе в деревне. Для решения вопроса ликвидации безграмоности среди женского пролетариата приглашаются представители профессиональных союзов женских комиссий и т.под.

№4. План работ по ликвидации безграмотности состоит в следующем: вся работа должна базироваться на самодеятельности самого населения. На общем собрании Внешкольных Подотделов совместно с представителями Организованного населения, советвских и партийных учреждений вырабатывается общий план ликвидации безграмотности в данном месте, а именно: устанавливается техника учета грамотных и неграмотных, намечаются организация и снабжение школ, учреждаемых для ликвидации безграмотности и т.п.

а) Для того, чтобы городкие и волостные Внешкольные Подотделы могли правильно исчислить потребное количество школ и правильно распределить эти школы по территории в зависимости от местожительства неграмотных, необходимо в самое ближайшее время выяснить число неграмотных в данном районе, их местожительство, половой и возрастной состав.

Внешкольные горолские волостные Подотделы через партийные организации, через союз работников просвещения и социалистической культуры и другие профессиональные организации, через союз коммунистической молодежи определяют персонально количество лиц, могущих быть привлеченными к работе по ликвидации безграмотности в качестве учащих.

б) Учет неграмотных среди организованного населения производится его учреждениями, а среди неорганизованного населения - городскими и волостными Внешкольными Подотделами. Сведения о неграмотных заносятся в особое ведомости, причем на каждое население или городской район составляется отдельная ведомость, куда заносятся, путем обхода дворов, о каждом неграмотном следующие сведения: имя и фамилия, пол, возраст и занятия. По получении означенных сведений Внешкольными городскими и волостными Подотделами определется потребное количество школ и их местонахождение. Затем совместно с представителями организованного населения вырабатываются основания, необходимые Губисполкому для установки сроков ликвидации безграмоности. При рассмотрении этих предложений Губисполком вырабатывает общий план ликвидации безграмотности по губернии и публикует его во всеобщее сведение. Срок ликвидации безграмотности устанавливается или один день для всей губернии, или разные для различных частей губернии.

№5. Одновременно с учетом грамотного и неграмотного населения Внешкольные городские и волостные Подотделы принимают меры к скорейшему открытию школ для неграмотных и к обеспечению этих школ учебными пособиями и принадлежностями. В целях экономии времени и средств школы первой серии открываются при существующих школах 1ой и 2ой ступени, при учреждениях внешкольного населения, при партийных организациях, на фабриках.

В дальнейшем, когда будет закончена работа по учету неграмотных, открывается дополнительная серия школ в других местах, с таким расчетом, чтобы каждое населенное место, могущее дать группу обучающихся не менее 15 человек, имело свою школу.

№6. Согласно общего смысла декрета о ликвидации безграмотности, ликвидацию безграмотности следует понимать в смысле обучения неграмотных чтению, письму и счету. По этим соображениям в программу учреждаемых школ для ликвидации безграмотности включается родной язык (чтение, письмо) и начальная математика. Что касается обществоведение может вводиться при условии поручения преподавания его коммунисту. Подробные программы школы высылаются Внешкольным Отделом Народного Комиссариата Просвещения дополнительно.

№7. Время обучения, число дней и часов занятий в неделю в школах грамоты определяются Внешкольным Подотделом сообразно с условиями жизни разных слоев населения.

№8. Ликвидация безграмотности начинается с младших возрастов и постепенно продолжается до возрастов предельных.

Внешкольные Подотделы, городские и волостные определяют, кто может быть освобожден от обязательного обучения грамоте.

№9. Для подготовки инструкторов и учащих в губернии, уездах и райнах организуются краткосрочные курсы съезды.

№10. Каждая школа имеет свой школьный совет, который и руководит всей жизнью школы. Совет состоит не менее, как из четырех человек - представителей учащих и учащихся в равном количестве.

№11. Слушатели школы при начале занятий разбиваются на группы 15 - 25 человек. При установлении групп принимается во внимание возраст учащихся и степень развития.

№12. Учащиеся, прошедшие школы, подвергаются в отношении усвоения ими механизма чтения, письма и счета испытаниям. При испытаниях кроме учащих могут присутствовать представители организованного населения, советских и партийных учреждений. Невыдержившие испытания остаются на повторный курс.

№13. Для того, чтобы учащиеся могли углублять полученные ими в школе знания, необходимо их приобщить к использованию местными учреждениями внешкольного образования.

№14. Внешкольные Подотделы своевременно изготавляют сметы расходов по ликвидации безграмотности, внося этот расход в общие сметы своих подотделов.

К числу расходов по ликвидации безграмотности относятся: содержание персонала, приглашаемого в Отдел в связи с работами по ликвидации безграмотности, оплата труда учащих, содержание помещения и хозяйственные расходы, заготовка и приобретение учебников и учебных пособий.

№15. При исчислении оплаты труда учащих следует принимать норму Народного Комиссариата по Просвещению. Работы по обучению взрослых не считаются за совместительство должностей.

№16. Губернские, городские, уездные и волостные Внешкольные Подотделы каждый месяц представляют своим исполкомам отчеты о ходе работ по ликвидации безграмотности, а уездные и городские Внешкольные Подотделы, кроме того, в три месяца раз предоставляют сводные отчеты по городу и уезду во Внешкольный отдел Наркомпроса.

Народный Комиссар по Просвещению
А. Луначарский

Секретарь коллегии НКЛ В. Зимовский



#lang_ru #СССР #история


РАЗРУШАЛИ ЛИ БОЛЬШЕВИКИ ИНСТИТУТ СЕМЬИ?


РАЗРУШАЛИ ЛИ БОЛЬШЕВИКИ ИНСТИТУТ СЕМЬИ?



Недавно Путин высказался следующим образом:

«Теперь по поводу того, что изначально после 1917 года вся деятельность государства была направлена на разрушение семьи, — это не совсем так. ВНАЧАЛЕ ДЕЙСТВИТЕЛЬНО ТАК И БЫЛО. Это в примитивном виде излагалось как обобществление женщин, но у людей с примитивным социалистическим сознанием. А у элиты совсем по-другому, у элиты это было основано на положениях Маркса, Энгельса, в том числе на работе Энгельса „О семье, частной собственности и государстве“. В ней он писал, что если строгая моногамия является верхом добродетели, то, безусловно, пальму первенства нужно отдать ленточной глисте, где в 40 тысячах её члеников располагается и мужской, и женский аппараты, и она всю жизнь только тем и занимается, что совокупляется сама с собой. ВОТ НА ЭТОМ И БЫЛО ОСНОВАНО НА ПЕРВЫХ ПОРАХ, ПОСЛЕ 1917 ГОДА, ОТНОШЕНИЕ К СЕМЬЕ. То есть свободная любовь пропагандировалась и практиковалась. Но позднее, мы знаем, как на парткомах и месткомах рассматривались семейные дела, как боролись за сохранение семьи. Это уже была совсем другая история. Так что и по ходу развития советского общества, и по ходу развития институтов государства отношение к семье тоже менялось. И здесь всё-таки с Вами трудно согласиться, что весь этот период всё было направлено на разрушение семьи. Мне кажется, что слишком радикально Вы высказались».

Аналогичную чепуху распространяют и на научных кафедрах, и в патриотических газетёнках. Ложь — принцип работы буржуазной пропаганды.

Нельзя не отметить, что фрагмент работы Энгельса с ленточной глистой так глубоко западает в душу всем филистерам, что кроме него они ничего не запоминают в работе классика. Тогда как в данном случае Энгельс высмеивает нелепые аргументы буржуазных «учёных», которые ВЫВОДИЛИ ИЗ МОНОГАМИИ ЖИВОТНОГО МИРА МОНОГАМИЮ ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКОЙ СЕМЬИ. Если бы Владимир Владимирович читал Энгельса внимательно, то чуть ниже он бы заметил следующие слова:

«Хотя сообщества животных и имеют известную ценность для ретроспективных умозаключений относительно сообществ людей, но эта ценность только негативная. У высших позвоночных животных известны, насколько мы знаем, лишь две формы семьи: многоженство и сожительство отдельными парами; в обоих случаях допускается лишь один взрослый самец, лишь один супруг. Ревность самца, одновременно скрепляющая и ограничивающая семью животных, приводит ее в противоречие со стадом; из-за этой ревности стадо, более высокая форма общения, в одних случаях прекращает свое существование, в других утрачивает сплоченность или распадается на время течки, а в лучшем случае задерживается в своем дальнейшем развитии. Одного этого достаточно для доказательства, что СЕМЬЯ ЖИВОТНЫХ И ПЕРВОБЫТНОЕ ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКОЕ ОБЩЕСТВО — ВЕЩИ НЕСОВМЕСТИМЫЕ, что первобытные люди, выбиравшиеся из животного состояния, или совсем не знали семьи, или, самое большее, знали такую, какая не встречается у животных».

Теперь посмотрим как большевики «разрушали семью».

Так, 18 декабря 1917 года был принят:

«Декрет о гражданском браке, о детях и о ведении книг актов состояния.

Российская Республика впредь признает лишь гражданские браки.

Гражданский брак совершается на основании следующих правил:

I. Лица, желающие вступить в брак, словесно объявляют или подают о том, по месту своего пребывания, письменное заявление в отдел записей браков и рождений при городской (районной, уездной или волостной земской) управе.

Примечание. Церковный брак, наряду с обязательным гражданским, является частным делом брачущихся.

II. Заявления о желании вступить в брак не принимаются: а) от лиц мужского пола ранее 18 лет, а женского — 16 лет от рождения. В Закавказье туземные жители могут вступать в брак по достижении женихом 16 лет, а невестою 13 лет; б) от родственников по прямой линии, полнородных и не полнородных братьев и сестер, — причем наличность родства признается также между внебрачным ребенком и его потомством с одной стороны и его отцом и его родственниками — с другой; в) от состоящих в браке, и г) от умалишенных.

III. Желающие вступить в брак являются в отдел записей браков и дают подписку в отсутствии перечисленных в ст. 2 сего декрета препятствий для вступления в брак, а также подписку в том, что они вступают в брак добровольно. Виновные в даче заведомо ложных показаний об отсутствии препятствий, перечисленных в ст. 2, привлекаются к уголовной ответственности за ложное показание, а сам брак их признается недействительным.

IV. По отобрании выше предусмотренной подписки, заведующий отделом записей браков заносит событие брака в книгу записей браков и затем объявляет брак вступившим в законную силу. При вступлении в брак бракосочетающимся предоставляется свободно определить, будут ли они впредь именоваться фамилией мужа или жены или соединенною фамилией.

В удостоверение события брака, брачущимся выдается незамедлительно копия свидетельства об их браке.

V. Жалобы на отказ в совершении брака или на неправильности записи приносятся, без ограничения срока, местному судье по месту отдела записей браков; определение же местного судьи по таковой жалобе может быть обжаловано в общем порядке.

VI. В случае, если прежние книги записей брака были уничтожены или иным путем погибли, или если по иной причине состоящие в браке лица не имеют возможности получить выпись о своем бракосочетании, — этим лицам предоставляется право подать заявление в соответствующий, по месту жительства обоих супругов или одного из них отдел записей браков о том, что они состоят в браке с такого-то времени. Такое заявление, подтвержденное, сверх подписки, предусмотренной ст. 4‑й сего декрета, еще подпискою супругов в том, что книга записей действительно погибла, или что они по иной уважительной причине не могут получить выписки о браке, служит основанием для записи брака вновь и для выдачи о том копии свидетельства.

О детях.

VII. Запись о рождении ребенка составляется тем же отделом записей браков и рождений по месту пребывания матери, причем о каждом рождении в книге записей рождений совершается особая запись.

VIII. О рождении ребенка отделу обязаны объявить или его родители, или один из них, или лица, на попечении коих, за смертью родителей, остался новорожденный, с указанием присвояемых ребенку имени и фамилии и с представлением двух свидетелей в удостоверение события рождения.

IX. Как книги записей браков, так и книги записей рождений, ведутся в 2‑х экземплярах, причем один экземпляр по окончании года пересылается для дальнейшего храпения -в соответствующий суд.

X. Дети внебрачные уравниваются с брачными относительно прав и обязанностей как родителей к детям, так и детей к родителям.

Отцом и матерью ребенка записываются лица, подавшие о том заявление и давшие соответствующую в том подписку.

Виновные в даче заведомо ложных показаний по содержанию сего привлекаются к уголовной ответственности за ложное показание, а сама запись признается недействительной. В случае неподачи отцом внебрачного ребенка указанного выше заявления, матери ребенка, опекуну его или самому ребенку предоставляется право судебным порядком доказать отцовство».


И где же тут «разрушение семьи»?

Более того, на следующий день был принят декрет о расторжении брака, а 18 сентября 1918 года принимается полноценный кодекс «Законов об актах гражданского состояния, брачном, семейном и опекунском праве».

Вместо уничтожения, разрушения, запрещения БОЛЬШЕВИКИ РАЗВИВАЮТ ИНСТИТУТ СЕМЬИ, ПРОВОЗГЛАСИВ СОЦИАЛИСТИЧЕСКУЮ СЕМЬЮ ВЫСШИМ ТИПОМ СЕМЬИ.

В 1926 году был принят новый кодекс. Наиболее существенным нововведением этого кодекса было придание правового значения фактическим брачным отношениям. Придавалось решающее значение не факту регистрации брака, а взаимному соглашению сторон. Важнейшим доводом в пользу придания правового значения фактическим брачным отношениям были статистические данные, свидетельствовавшие о том, что в незарегистрированных браках (их общее число составляло около 7% от всех браков), как правило, состояли женщины из наименее обеспеченных слоев населения, особенно нуждавшиеся в правовой защите. Часто такие женщины, брошенные фактическим супругом, оставались без средств к существованию, поскольку ни права на имущество, ни права на взыскание алиментов по закону не имели. Второй важнейшей новацией была замена режима раздельности супружеского имущества режимом общности. Это обосновывалось тем, что принцип раздельности не давал женщинам, не имевшим источника доходов, права на имущество семьи, поскольку всё имущество приобреталось на доходы мужа.

Ну и повышение возраста для женщин по понятным причинам.

Это и есть разрушение семьи? Почитайте внимательно, убедитесь, что Путин и научные работники буржуазной кафедры, пишущие про разрушение семьи, НАГЛО ВРУТ.

Или для Путина и ему подобных «разрушение семьи» это низвержение порядка правового неравенства в семье? Действительно, ведь в своде законов Российской империи указывалось, что «жена обязана повиноваться мужу своему, как главе семейства; пребывать нему в любви, почтении и в неограниченном послушании, оказывать ему всякое угождение и привязанность…» — вот такую семью Советская власть уничтожила путём отрицания, то есть развития всего положительного и отбрасывания всего реакционного. В строгом соответствии с диаматикой.

Кстати говоря, вопрос о равноправии женщин обсуждался в I, II и III Государственных думах, но так и не получил разрешения. Царское правительство упорно сопротивлялось распространению на женское население даже тех куцых гражданских прав, которые оно вынуждено было провозгласить земской реформой 1864 г. и Манифестом 17 октября 1905 г. Такое отношение к женщине было присуще не только царскому правительству и господствующим классам, но и значительной части трудящегося населения, особенно в деревне.

Женское неравноправие усугублялось огромным разрывом между общепризнанными достижениями передовой русской культуры того времени и духовной жизнью большинства населения, прозябавшего в темноте и невежестве. Дореволюционная Россия была страной массовой неграмотности. Особенно много неграмотных было среди женщин. По проведенному в 1908 — 1913 гг. обследованию в 12 губерниях европейской России, неграмотность сельского женского населения составляла от 74,1 (Московская губерния) до 95,2% (Пензенская губерния). Даже в Москве в 1912 г. 43,4% женщин не умели читать и писать.

Придумали вышеобозначенный пропагандистский миф о том, что большевики уничтожали семью, вовсе не путины. Ещё русско-германский буржуа Менерт писал:

«Большевики сразу же после революции повели борьбу с семьей… И все же русские, не будучи сверхцивилизованным народом, и поныне сохраняют еще, несмотря на все, что им пришлось пережить в последние десятилетия, естественную склонность к упорядоченным половым отношениям… Это не значит, что они (коммунисты) преодолели свою внутреннюю неприязнь к семье. Для них семья — это бельмо на глазу, и не только из-за ее консервативности. Их раздражает уже само существование этого единственного в стране не контролируемого ими института, самобытной и замкнувшейся в себе ячейки, инородного тела в государстве, которое во всех остальных отсеках контролируется сверху донизу».

Дадим краткий обзор марксистской позиции по семье на первой фазе коммунизма.

В одной из своих ранних работ, «К критике гегелевской философии права» (1843), К. Маркс писал:

«Лишь в гражданском обществе семейная жизнь становится жизнью семьи, жизненным проявлением любви. Сословие же землевладения представляет собой, напротив, варварство частной собственности против семейной жизни».

В первом в истории проекте программы коммунистов, составленном Энгельсом, «Принципах коммунизма» (1847) — в ответ на утверждения таких вот путиных XIX века, будто коммунисты хотят ввести общность жен, говорилось:

«Общность жен представляет собою явление, целиком принадлежащее буржуазному обществу и в полном объеме существующее в настоящее время в виде проституции. По проституция основана на частной собственности и исчезнет вместе с ней. Следовательно, коммунистическая организация вместо того, чтобы вводить общность жен, наоборот, уничтожит ее».

Этот тезис повторен и в «Коммунистическом манифесте» и в работе Энгельса «Происхождение семьи, частной собственности и государства», которой козырнул Владимир Владимирович.

О «планах» марксизма в отношении брака и семьи говорится следующее:

«Как только отпадут экономические соображения, вследствие которых женщины мирились с этой обычной неверностью мужчин, — забота о своем собственном существовании и еще более о будущности детей, — так достигнутое благодаря этому равноправие женщины, судя по всему прежнему опыту, будет в бесконечно большей степени способствовать действительной моногамии мужчин, чем полиандрии женщин».

Ленин писал, что марксизм противопоставляет проституированной буржуазной семье, распущенности и мимолётным связям «пролетарский гражданский брак с любовью».

Кроме того, Ленин решительно протестует против вульгаризации вопроса:

«Отношения между полами не являются просто выражением игры между общественной экономикой и физической потребностью. Было бы не марксизмом, а рационализмом стремиться свести непосредственно к экономическому базису общества изменение этих отношений самих по себе, выделенных из общей связи их со всей идеологией».

Таким образом, У МАРКСА, ЭНГЕЛЬСА, ЛЕНИНА НЕТ ДАЖЕ НАМЕКА НА ОТРИЦАНИЕ ИНСТИТУТА СЕМЬИ. Они отвергали лишь собственническую семью и торгашеский брак по расчету, требовали освобождения брачно-семейных отношений от извращающей их власти собственности и денег, боролись за равноправие женщин с мужчинами и за то, чтобы семья основывалась на любовных отношениях.

НИКТО В МИРЕ НЕ СДЕЛАЛ ДЛЯ ЛЮБВИ БОЛЬШЕ, ЧЕМ БОЛЬШЕВИКИ, ПОТОМУ ЧТО ИМЕННО ПРИ СОВЕТСКОЙ ВЛАСТИ ТРУДЯЩИЕСЯ БЫЛИ ОСВОБОЖДЕНЫ ОТ ГНЁТА КАПИТАЛА, ОСВОБОЖДАЛИСЬ ОТ ПОРОЧНОСТИ ТОВАРНО-ДЕНЕЖНЫХ ОТНОШЕНИЙ, В ТОМ ЧИСЛЕ ПОСРЕДСТВОМ ТОГО, ЧТО КАЖДЫЙ ЖИТЕЛЬ СССР ПОЛУЧАЛ ЖИЛЬЁ И РАБОТУ, А ЗНАЧИТ БЫЛ СВОБОДЕН ДЛЯ ВЫСТРАИВАНИЯ ОТНОШЕНИЙ НА ОСНОВЕ ВЫСШИХ ПРОЯВЛЕНИЙ ЛИЧНОСТИ — ДРУЖБЫ И ЛЮБВИ. СТРАНА ЛЮБВИ НАЗЫВАЛАСЬ СССР!

Персонально Коллонтай и другие отдельные писатели, которых и обсасывают всякие современные «учёные», были носителями вульгарных взглядов на семью. Их взгляды в политике большевиков не претворялись. В СССР издавалось много различной литературы, очень многие видные деятели, в том числе занимая высокие государственные и партийные посты, выступали в печати с ошибочными взглядами по разным вопросам, особенно в 1920-е, когда был настоящий разгул троцкизма и полутроцкизма во всех областях.

Все эти декреты о национализации женщин и заповеди половых отношений — фальшивки или дурацкие левые кривляния молодежи. Ленин по поводу левачества в этих вопросах говорил:

«Вы, конечно, знаете знаменитую теорию о том, что будто бы в коммунистическом обществе удовлетворить половые стремления и любовную потребность так же просто и незначительно, как выпить стакан воды. От этой теории „стакана воды“ наша молодежь взбесилась, прямо взбесилась. Эта теория стала злым роком многих юношей и девушек. Приверженцы ее утверждают, что теория эта марксистская. Спасибо за такой „марксизм“…».

Подобные теории раздували провокаторы и идиоты от левой фразы: троцкисты, анархисты и другие враги рабочего движения. Они и легли в основу буржуазной мифологии по этому вопросу.



#Russia #USSR #soviet #russian #history #family #bolsheviks #socialism #communism #marxism #Lenin #lang_ru #СССР #история


DID THE BOLSHEVIKS DESTROY THE INSTITUTION OF THE FAMILY?


DID THE BOLSHEVIKS DESTROY THE INSTITUTION OF THE FAMILY?



Putin recently expressed himself as follows:

“Now regarding the fact that initially after 1917 all the activities of the state were aimed at the destruction of the family - this is not quite true. IN THE BEGINNING IT WAS INDEED SO. It was presented in a primitive form as the generalization of women, but to people with a primitive socialist consciousness. And the elite had a completely different idea, the elite had it based on the provisions of Marx, Engels, including Engels' work “On the Family, Private Property and the State”. In it he wrote that if strict monogamy is the top of virtue, then, of course, the palm of superiority should be given to the tapeworm, where in 40 thousand of its members there are both male and female apparatuses, and it spends its whole life only copulating with itself. THAT'S WHAT THE ATTITUDE TO THE FAMILY WAS BASED ON AT FIRST, AFTER 1917. That is, free love was promoted and practiced. But later, we know how family matters were considered at party committees and local committees, how they fought for the preservation of the family. It was already a completely different story. So as Soviet society developed, and as the institutions of the state developed, the attitude to the family also changed. And here, however, it is difficult to agree with you that everything during this period was aimed at destroying the family. It seems to me that you have expressed yourself too radically.

Similar nonsense is spread in scientific departments and in patriotic newspapers. Lies are the working principle of bourgeois propaganda.

It should not be overlooked that the fragment of Engels' work with the tapeworm is so deeply ingrained in the soul of all philistines that they do not remember anything in the work of the classicist except it. Whereas in this case Engels ridicules the ridiculous arguments of the bourgeois “scientists” who DETERMINE FROM THE MONOGAMY OF THE ANIMAL WORLD THE MONOGAMY OF THE HUMAN FAMILY. If Vladimir Vladimirovich had read Engels carefully, he would have noticed the following words just below:

“Although animal communities have some value for retrospective inferences about human communities, this value is only negative. In the higher vertebrates there are, so far as we know, only two forms of family known: polygamy and cohabitation in separate pairs; in both cases only one adult male, only one consort, is allowed. The jealousy of the male, which at the same time strengthens and limits the animal family, brings it into conflict with the herd; because of this jealousy the herd, a higher form of socialization, in some cases ceases to exist, in others loses its cohesion or disintegrates during heat, and at best is delayed in its further development. This alone is sufficient to prove that the FAMILY OF ANIMALS AND THE PERFECT HUMAN SOCIETY ARE IMPOSSIBLE THINGS, that primitive men, emerging from the animal state, either did not know a family at all, or, at most, knew one which is not found in animals.”

Now let's look at how the Bolsheviks “destroyed the family.”

Thus, on December 18, 1917 it was adopted:

“Decree on civil marriage, on children and on the keeping of registry books.

The Russian Republic shall henceforth recognize only civil marriages.

Civil marriage shall be performed on the basis of the following rules:

I. Persons wishing to marry shall verbally announce or submit a written application to the department of marriage and birth records at the city (district, county or volost zemstvo) administration at the place of their residence.

Note. Church marriage, along with compulsory civil marriage, is a private affair of the marrying couple.

II. Applications for marriage are not accepted: a) from males earlier than 18 years of age, and from females - 16 years of birth. In Transcaucasia, natives may marry when the groom is 16 years old and the bride is 13 years old; b) from relatives in the direct line, full-blooded and not full-blooded brothers and sisters, and the existence of kinship is also recognized between a child born out of wedlock and his offspring on the one hand and his father and his relatives on the other; c) from married persons, and d) from insane persons.

III. Those wishing to marry shall come to the marriage registry office and sign that there are no obstacles to marriage listed in Article 2 of this decree and that they are entering into marriage voluntarily. Those guilty of knowingly giving false testimony that there are no obstacles listed in Article 2 shall be held criminally liable for false testimony, and their marriage shall be declared null and void.

IV. Upon taking the aforementioned signature, the head of the marriage record department shall enter the event of the marriage in the marriage record book and then declare the marriage to be valid. At the time of marriage, the married couple is free to determine whether they will henceforth be called by the surname of the husband or wife or by a joint surname.

As proof of the marriage, the couple shall immediately receive a copy of their marriage certificate.

V. Complaints against the refusal to perform a marriage or against irregularities in the record shall be filed, without time limit, with the local judge at the place of the marriage record office; the local judge's ruling on such a complaint may be appealed in general.

VI. If the former marriage record books have been destroyed or otherwise perished, or if for any other reason the married persons are unable to obtain a record of their marriage, these persons are entitled to file a statement with the appropriate marriage record office in the place of residence of both spouses or one of them that they have been married since such and such a time. Such a statement, confirmed, in addition to the subscription provided for in Article 4 of this decree, by the signature of the spouses that the marriage record book has indeed perished or that they are unable to obtain extracts of the marriage for any other valid reason, shall serve as the basis for recording the marriage again and for issuing a copy of the certificate.

About children.

VII. The birth of a child shall be recorded by the same marriage and birth records department at the place of residence of the mother, and a special entry shall be made for each birth in the book of birth records.

VIII. The birth of a child must be announced to the department either by the parents or by one of them, or by the persons in whose care the newborn child has remained after the death of the parents, indicating the name and surname to be given to the child and presenting two witnesses to certify the event of birth.

IX. Both the books of marriage records and the books of birth records shall be kept in 2 copies, one copy of which shall be sent to the appropriate court for further storage at the end of the year.

X. Children born out of wedlock shall be equalized with married children with respect to the rights and duties of both parents to their children and children to their parents.

The father and mother of the child shall be registered by the persons who have applied for and subscribed to it.

Those guilty of knowingly giving false testimony on the contents of this statement shall be held criminally liable for false testimony, and the record itself shall be declared invalid. If the father of a child born out of wedlock fails to submit the above statement, the mother of the child, his guardian or the child himself shall have the right to prove paternity by judicial procedure.


And where is the “destruction of the family” in this?

Moreover, the next day a decree on the dissolution of marriage was adopted, and on September 18, 1918 a full-fledged code of “Laws on acts of civil status, marriage, family and guardianship law” was adopted.

Instead of destruction, destruction, prohibition, the BOLSHEVIKS DEVELOPED THE INSTITUTE OF THE FAMILY, PROVOSING THE SOCIALIST FAMILY A HIGH TYPE OF FAMILY.

In 1926, a new code was adopted. The most significant innovation of this code was to give legal significance to the actual marriage relationship. It was not the fact of registration of the marriage, but the mutual agreement of the parties that was decisive. The most important argument in favor of giving legal significance to de facto marital relations was statistical data showing that unregistered marriages (their total number amounted to about 7% of all marriages) usually consisted of women from the least wealthy strata of the population, who were particularly in need of legal protection. Often such women, abandoned by their de facto spouse, were left without means of subsistence, since they had neither the right to property nor the right to alimony under the law. The second major innovation was the replacement of the regime of separation of marital property with a regime of community. This was justified by the fact that the principle of separation did not give women who had no source of income the right to the family property, since all property was acquired with the husband's income.

And raising the age for women for obvious reasons.

Is this the destruction of the family? Read carefully, make sure that Putin and the scientific workers of the bourgeois department, writing about the destruction of the family, are blatantly lying.

Or for Putin and his kind “destruction of the family” is the overthrow of the order of legal inequality in the family? Indeed, in the code of laws of the Russian Empire it was stated that “a wife is obliged to obey her husband as the head of the family; to remain in love, honor and unlimited obedience to him, to give him every pleasure and affection...”. - This is the kind of family that the Soviet power destroyed by negation, i.e. by developing everything positive and discarding everything reactionary. In strict accordance with diamatics.

By the way, the question of equal rights for women was discussed in the I, II and III State Dumas, but was never resolved. The tsarist government stubbornly resisted extending to the female population even those meager civil rights which it was forced to proclaim by the zemstvo reform of 1864 and the Manifesto of October 17, 1905. This attitude toward women was inherent not only in the tsarist government and the ruling classes, but also in a large part of the working population, especially in the countryside.

Women's inequality was aggravated by the huge gap between the generally recognized achievements of the advanced Russian culture of the time and the spiritual life of the majority of the population, which lived in darkness and ignorance. Pre-revolutionary Russia was a country of mass illiteracy. Especially many illiterates were among women. According to a survey conducted in 1908-1913 in 12 provinces of European Russia, the illiteracy of the rural female population ranged from 74.1 (Moscow Province) to 95.2% (Penza Province). Even in Moscow in 1912. 43.4% of women could not read and write.

The above propaganda myth that the Bolsheviks destroyed the family was not invented by the Putins. Even the Russian-German bourgeois Menert wrote:

“The Bolsheviks immediately after the revolution waged a struggle against the family... And yet Russians, not being a super-civilized people, still retain today, despite all that they have had to endure in recent decades, a natural inclination to orderly sexual relations... This does not mean that they (the Communists) have overcome their inner dislike of the family. For them, the family is an eyesore, and not only because of its conservatism. They are irritated by the very existence of this one institution in the country that is not controlled by them, an original and self-contained unit, a foreign body in the state, which in all other compartments is controlled from top to bottom”.

Let us give a brief overview of the Marxist position on the family in the first phase of communism.

In one of his early works, “Toward a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right” (1843), K. Marx wrote:

“Only in civil society does family life become the life of the family, the vital manifestation of love. The landed estates, on the contrary, represent the barbarism of private property against family life”.

In the first ever draft of the Communist program, compiled by Engels, “The Principles of Communism” (1847) - in response to the assertions of such 19th century poutines, as if the Communists wanted to introduce the community of wives, it was stated:

“The community of wives is a phenomenon that belongs entirely to bourgeois society and exists in its entirety at the present time in the form of prostitution. Prostitution is based on private property and will disappear with it. Hence, the communist organization, instead of introducing the community of wives, will, on the contrary, destroy it”.

This thesis is repeated both in the “Communist Manifesto” and in Engels' work “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State”, which Vladimir Vladimirovich trumped.

It says the following about Marxism's “plans” for marriage and family:

“As soon as the economic considerations, as a consequence of which women put up with this usual infidelity of men, - the concern for their own existence and even more so for the future of children - fall away, so the equality of woman, achieved thanks to this, will, judging by all previous experience, contribute to an infinitely greater extent to the actual monogamy of men than to the polyandry of women.”

Lenin wrote that Marxism contrasts the prostituted bourgeois family, promiscuity, and fleeting liaisons with “proletarian civil marriage with love.”

Furthermore, Lenin strongly protests against the vulgarization of the question:

“The relations between the sexes are not a mere expression of the play between social economy and physical need. It would not be Marxism but rationalism to seek to reduce directly to the economic basis of society the change of these relations in themselves, isolated from their general connection with the whole ideology.”

Thus, Marx, Engels and Lenin had not even a hint of rejection of the institution of the family. They rejected only the possessive family and the mercantile marriage of convenience, demanded the liberation of marriage and family relations from the power of property and money that perverted them, fought for the equality of women with men and for the family to be based on loving relationships.

NO ONE IN THE WORLD DID MORE FOR LOVE THAN THE BOLSHEVIKS, BECAUSE IT WAS UNDER SOVIET RULE THAT WORKERS WERE FREED FROM THE OPPRESSION OF CAPITAL, FREED FROM THE VICIOUSNESS OF COMMODITY-MONEY RELATIONS, INCLUDING THROUGH THE FACT THAT EVERY CITIZEN OF THE USSR RECEIVED HOUSING AND WORK, AND THUS WAS FREE TO BUILD RELATIONSHIPS BASED ON THE HIGHEST MANIFESTATIONS OF PERSONALITY - FRIENDSHIP AND LOVE. THE COUNTRY OF LOVE WAS CALLED THE SSSR!

Personally, Kollontai and other individual writers, whom all sorts of modern “scholars” are pontificating about, were carriers of vulgar views on the family. Their views were not implemented in the Bolsheviks' policy. A lot of different literature was published in the USSR, many prominent figures, including those holding high government and party positions, spoke in the press with erroneous views on various issues, especially in the 1920s, when there was a real rampant Trotskyism and semi-trotskyism in all areas.

All those decrees on nationalization of women and commandments of sexual relations are fake or stupid leftist cranks of the youth. Lenin on the subject of leftism in these matters said:

“You know, of course, the famous theory that it is as if in Communist society to satisfy sexual aspirations and love needs is as simple and insignificant as drinking a glass of water. From this “glass of water” theory, our youth became furious, downright furious. This theory has become the evil doom of many young men and women. Its adherents claim that this theory is Marxist. Thank you for such 'Marxism'...”.

Such theories were fanned by provocateurs and idiots from the left: Trotskyists, anarchists and other enemies of the labor movement. They formed the basis of bourgeois mythology on this question.



#Russia #USSR #soviet #russian #history #family #bolsheviks #socialism #communism #marxism #Lenin #lang_en #СССР #история


A FEW WORDS ABOUT LENIN FOR “DUMMIES”

All those who take to judging Lenin today are united by an absolute misunderstanding of the meaning of his teachings, the reasons for his popularity among the people and the motives behind the creation of the USSR. Simply put, none of them has ever read Lenin and is not going to read him (although now is the right time, given the situation in the world economy). Especially for them - on a mundane, primitive level - I will outline the logic of the Bolsheviks in 1916.

1. The development of capitalism inevitably leads to crises. Crises are always resolved through war.

2. With each successive crisis, imperialist wars will become more and more destructive.

3. In imperialist wars, the class structure of societies is most brutally exposed: the poor and powerless are the first to perish, while the rich sit in the rear and do not perish.

4. Russia, as a backward capitalist state, has no chance of winning a world war. As a semi-colonial power, Russia is dependent on external creditors, and therefore with the lives of its soldiers constantly saves the allies on the Western front. Even in case of Entente's victory over Germany, it was Russia that would inevitably become the next “patient of Europe” (see the Crimean War). Russia's technological lagging behind England, the USA, France and Japan (see Russo-Japanese War) is such that it leaves practically no chance for the state to survive. The speed with which the Entente accepted Nikolai's abdication and then rushed to take the Tsar's inheritance, fully confirms these assumptions.

5. In order to prevent another world war (in which one day everyone will die - both Russians and non-Russians), it is necessary to create another, alternative world economic system (USSR).

6. To protect this world economic system from the inevitable aggression of capitalism, its creators must make a qualitative leap in science, technology, education, medicine. Every citizen of the new state must feel his or her involvement in it and be motivated to defend it. The tsarist government was unable to create such motivation among the people in World War I (see “The German will not reach the Urals”).

7. To build a new world economic system within the borders of the RSFSR would be absurd. It would not have survived. It required an ideology that would unite all the nationalities inhabiting the Russian Empire. This ideology could not be neither Russian nationalism, nor Orthodoxy, nor imperialism as such. Neither by force, nor by persuasion to drive Turkestan, the Caucasus, Siberia, the Far East, Ukraine, etc. under the imperial roof was no longer possible (Denikin, who was attacked by Georgians N. Zhordania near Adler, will not lie). Only justice could become the ideology uniting “Russians-Uzbeks-Latvians”. The state framework - only the Union of equal peoples. A union, not an empire.

8. The new world economic system will inevitably be strangled and suffocated in a blockade (there is no peaceful coexistence of two systems) if it does not take offensive actions. Hence the mondialist thesis of permanent revolution. Attention, orthodox Stalinists: this thesis was never rejected even by Stalin. Stalin only said that first we must build the state and only then get involved in any revolutions. Actually, it was on the basis of these differences that Trotsky earned his ice pick. Rejection of the idea of fighting capitalism on foreign territory (in WWII the Allies did not open a second front until the Comintern was abolished), eventually led to the fact that the USSR had to fight on its own territory. “Coexistence of two systems” turned out to be a scam for suckers.

9. The destruction of the USSR did not cancel out any of the above problems. Capitalism is entering a crisis unprecedented in history, the way out of which it habitually seeks through war.


#Russia #USSR #soviet #history #capitalism #crisis #Lenin #Stalin #bolsheviks #marxism #study #knowledge for #future


"End of December 1905 – the first #RussianRevolution and street fighting in Moscow. The days when Soviets of Workers appeared for the first time. Here’s some rules published in December 1905 by militant wing of Moscow #Bolsheviks."

source https://www.tumblr.com/fuckyeahmarxismleninism/770971238373916672/fuckyeahmarxismleninism-end-of-december-1905 #RussianHistory #History #Insurgency #Strategy #Tactics #insurrection #OpSec #PerSec




#France tells #Israel to halt #GolanHeights incursion and calls military deployment in buffer zone “a violation of the 1974 disengagement agreement” between Damascus and Tel Aviv.

France has coveted #Syria since before #WWI. See #DamascusProtocol (written by secret Arab societies), #ThievesBanquet (#Russia, #Britain, and France), and #SykesPicot Agreement (secretly carving up #MiddleEast between Britain and France, but never implemented because #Bolsheviks blew it up)

https://www.politico.eu/article/france-israel-middle-east-golan-heights-syria-un-war-defense-idf-buffer-zone/



How Khrushchev derailed the locomotive of history



Machine translation from https://histoireetsociete.com/2024/09/29/comment-khrouchtchev-a-fait-derailler-la-locomotive-de-lhistoire/

We are among ourselves... in this blog which has broken ties with social networks and which seeks to build in our small collective a place of collective reflection since this is not permitted in the political-media space which is heading towards war , fascistization, clientelist divisions and the fear of facing both the past and the future. As I tried to explain, we are in a temporal paradox, that of a historical shift. It is clear that what we are facing is new, the solutions are unusual and require experimentation, collective reflection... But at the same time what prohibits this essential cooperation is the way in which we have managed to convince the working class, the youth, all the victims that there was no other alternative than individualist coping... What is happening is abominable and our leaders are leading us towards the apocalypse, but socialism, the collective, is worse. And we will not get through this without confronting this trauma of the past as the Russians and the Chinese do. Once again this translation by Marianne on the “Khrushchevian derailment” represents a contribution and as long as it is ignored there cannot be a revolutionary party and not even a reformist one. Since with the end of the USSR, there is no longer a reformist party, only parties which believe they can more or less control the pace of regression, negotiate it. (note by Danielle Bleitrach translation by Marianne Dunlop historyandsociety)

By Serguei Kostrikov and Elena Kostrikova (1)

This text is actually the conclusion of the book by Serguei Kostrikov and Elena Kostrikova, The locomotives of history: the revolutionary year 1917, a title which alludes to the famous phrase of Karl Marx: “Revolutions are the locomotives of History”. I do not believe I am betraying the authors by attributing a large part of the responsibility for the derailment of the locomotive to Khrushchev, even if he was not the sole cause. (notes and translation by Marianne Dunlop for History and Society).

We are convinced that the materials contained in this book, taken from Russian periodicals of the revolutionary year 1917, convincingly prove that the February bourgeois revolution and the great October socialist revolution were inevitable. Contrary to the predictions of its enemies, not only did Russia not sink into the abyss of oblivion, but it became one of the greatest world powers, it defeated the universal evil of fascism, it led the struggle of the advanced forces of humanity against oppression, for real democracy, for justice, for national and social liberation – this is the historical merit of the working people led by the Bolshevik Party.

Ideological opponents of Marxism will say with philistine sarcasm: "Well, where did your world power go, why did it collapse, where is your Marxism-Bolshevism?" The Soviet system, the socialist economy and the friendship between our peoples withstood the test of strength during the years of relentless war. In the USSR, unlike Tsarist Russia, there were no irreconcilable contradictions, no economic and social problems that could not be resolved within the framework of socialism. Our power has not disintegrated, it has been destroyed. At the end of the 20th century, we all witnessed a monstrous betrayal, the example of which is difficult to find in history. This betrayal was committed by representatives of the ruling "elite", who placed themselves at the service of external forces who had never stopped fighting against the first socialist country in the world.

The roots of the tragedy that occurred lie not in the vices of socialism, but in the fact that at a certain stage the leadership of the Communist Party ceased to rely on Marxist doctrine, did not not realized the need for its development. “Without theory we are dead,” Stalin warned. The world was changing, the international situation posed more and more difficult questions, and at that time the field of ideology in our country gradually stagnated.

After World War II, the authority of the USSR and socialism had reached an exceptionally high level. This is evidenced by the new role of our country in the world, the emergence of new socialist states, the rise to the forefront of communist and workers' parties in many countries, the development of the national liberation movement in the colonial empires. From the point of view of bourgeois ideologists and politicians, it was necessary to disrupt this wave of growth of the authority of socialism and the influence of Marxist ideology. And in the bourgeois camp, it was necessary to find ways to modernize capitalism. This is clearly seen not only in the alternation of conservative and liberal parties in power, the establishment of neoliberalism and neoconservatism in the economy and politics. Reactionary movements, including neo-fascists, have been revived. They also tried to penetrate the sphere of left-wing ideology, not only in their country, but also in socialist countries. Many left-wing organizations appeared. All of them are characterized by petty-bourgeois revolutionism, ultra-leftist phrases, distancing from Marxism-Leninism, its revision, attempts at petty-bourgeois interpretation in relation to new conditions, or a complete rejection of the doctrine and a struggle against her.

These groupings reflected the objective tendencies of Western societies in the conditions of the scientific and technical revolution and the socio-economic processes that it engendered. Engineers, technicians and other intellectuals, previously privileged, inevitably transformed into openly exploited “proletarians of mental work” and became politically radicalized. On the other hand, the many leftists reflected the struggle of the bourgeoisie against the true communist movement, against Marxism as such. It is important that we understand the main thing: in the West there was an active intellectual search aimed at creating ideological constructs that opposed or destroyed Marxism. This was a new major front of ideological struggle. And we had to meet this challenge with all our might.

Why, having created a powerful socialist state, having won the Great Victory, were we not prepared for confrontation in a new form? Why, after making a gigantic breakthrough into the future, were we not able to truly evaluate what we had accomplished and defend it when the time was right? Why did people who were not only dogmatic, who did not develop Marxism, but who were not Marxists at all, find themselves at the head of the party? ?

One of the reasons lies in the changes of people within the state and party leadership that took place in the post-war period, and especially after the death of Stalin. Our victory was dearly paid for. The human losses were heavy and irreplaceable. To a large extent, the war destroyed an entire generation of newly formed Soviets. These were, one could say, people of the future, in good physical and moral health. Children of workers and peasants who, without the war, would have become production managers, scientists, representatives of creative professions, military and political leaders.

They constituted an invaluable genetic heritage for the nation. Today, we miss not only them, but also their children, who would have been raised to become true Soviets, true patriots of their country. Those who were lucky enough to survive performed a true miracle: in a few years they restored what had been destroyed, created a superpower and were the first to make a breakthrough into space.

Unfortunately, while the best representatives of our people were fighting and creating, careerists with Party cards were sneaking into power, skillfully posing as ideological communists. In the mid-1950s, at the top of the party bureaucracy, whose vices had been ruthlessly combatted by Stalin, there was a rush for power. The results are known. First of all, the denunciation and liquidation of Beria, then "the dismantling of the anti-party group Molotov-Malenkov-Kaganovich and others." In the end, Khrushchev, ignorant but skilled in the art of intrigue, prevailed over all others.

Under Stalin, every civil servant, whatever his rank, knew full well that his position did not protect him from the most severe sanctions. With Khrushchev, the apparatchiks received a guarantee of immunity – that is, in effect, irresponsibility – from the party apparatus and bureaucracy. From that moment on, a process of massive and accelerated decay and degeneration of the ruling bureaucracy began. “The cadres decide everything” (2), said Stalin. The “dragon’s teeth” sown under Khrushchev produced poisonous sprouts for a long time. In the 1980s, Khrushchev-era “cadres” rose to the highest level of power. It was Khrushchev who allowed people like Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Yakovlev and their ilk to sneak into the highest ranks of the party. “We had too many 'Khrushchevs',” VM Molotov later recalled with bitterness.

For Khrushchev, the reckless “denunciation of the cult of personality” served above all his own justification and self-affirmation, and not at all the restoration of Leninist norms. He himself easily violated these norms by dismissing from office, dismissing from the capital or retiring all those who did not agree with his adventurist orientation and whom he considered dangerous to himself- even. He did not imprison them or shoot them just because he had cut himself off from this path. But he humiliated them mercilessly. Molotov, Malenkov, Zhukov, Shepilov, Furtseva and many others understood this perfectly. All this has not improved the party. But he undermined his authority, as well as the authority of socialism on the world stage. Like a merchant on the spree, Nikita squandered and squandered the gigantic moral and political capital acquired at the cost of the blood and sweat of our people..

Khrushchev undeservedly reaped the fruits of the victories won under Stalin. The breakthrough into space (3) allowed him for a time to distract attention from the socio-economic problems he had caused. With the arrival of Khrushchev, his line of extensive development of the country and the economy triumphed. The reckless and unbridled expansion of virgin lands at the expense of the restoration and development of the indigenous agricultural areas of central Russia, decimated by the war, is spectacular in appearance, including in terms of propaganda. But it was not justified. At the beginning of the 1960s, we had already drawn on state reserves, then began to regularly buy grain from abroad, financing foreign producers..

The failures of the economy and the rise in prices caused discontent among the population. This is how workers were shot at in Novocherkassk. During the entire Soviet period, no leader of the country had dared to do such a thing !

As a result, Khrushchev's policies translated for the USSR into senseless spending inside and outside the country, adventurous economic and political decisions, demagoguery, ideological swindling and propaganda, the split and weakening of the international communist movement, the loss of world authority, guidelines, ideals and the degeneration of party cadres. His arrogant troublemaking policies almost led to nuclear conflict with America in 1962.

Khrushchev's name is associated with stagnation in the field of ideology. An uneducated man with a petty-bourgeois mentality, he adopted the slogan “catching up with and overtaking the West in all areas” as his basic development strategy. In the very essence of this slogan was the idea not of our identity, not of the already realized benefits of socialism, not of reasonable sufficiency. The idea of ​​our backwardness and even a kind of inferiority was imposed on the Soviet people. Of course, Lenin also spoke of the need for Soviet Russia to “catch up with the advanced countries.” But he spoke about scientific, technical, cultural and industrial progress, about the advanced organization of management and production, on the basis of which a completely different society was to develop. Lenin reasoned from the position of a politician in the 1920s, at the head of a country devastated by wars and interventions and culturally and technically backward. Khrushchev, on the other hand, was the head of a superpower that had achieved enormous successes in economics, science and culture, and had managed to win an unprecedented war thanks to the achievements of socialism. It was necessary to view the pursuit of development dialectically, and not to chase after the bourgeois West. Khrushchev's slogan "catch up and overtake" was deeply philistine and reflected a petty-bourgeois view of development and its goal. We were asked to beat the enemy on their territory and according to their rules. Khrushchev psychologically oriented the population towards a consumer society, without taking into account the traditions of our peoples, economic expediency, state possibilities and probable socio-psychological, ideological and political consequences.

The obvious advantages of socialism, which allowed everyone to develop normally, healthily and creatively, were replaced by petty-bourgeois consumer instincts – “theirs are better, bigger, more beautiful”. The West has transformed itself into a glittering showcase of an infinite quantity of junk, of necessary and less necessary goods – a veritable Ali Baba's cave. Like a savage blinded by glitter from a tin can and abandoning real jewelry for cheap trinkets, Khrushchev's common man was ready to give his soul for chewing gum and Coca-Cola, not doubting not that all the benefits of socialism were guaranteed to him forever. We had lost our ideological “immunity” against capitalism! On a daily basis, the West has surpassed us.

After Stalin, ideology in the USSR stagnated. From Khrushchev onwards, no senior Soviet party leader, unlike his predecessors, wrote anything himself. At the same time, the new party “elite” was terribly removed from the lives of the people. Lenin and Stalin, driven by the desire for a just world order, knew how to ignite the masses with their ideas. In the most difficult hours, they were able to find words that were close and understandable to ordinary people, touching their souls and instilling in them faith in victory. They encouraged work and struggle. But he who does not consume himself will never be able to lead others.

They encouraged others to follow him. The soulless and bureaucratic “agitation” of the era of “stagnation” could only discourage the study of Marxism. Despite the numerous Marxist-Leninist universities, schools and circles where studies were formalized, the mass of the Party became politically and ideologically infantile and easily infected by petty-bourgeois instincts..

Our official ideological propaganda apparatus, headed by MA Suslov, did not find answers appropriate to the times, did not react correctly to the new phenomena brought to the fore by the processes of the scientific and technical revolution and globalization . Foreign ideology began to quietly seep into the vacated space, ideas were borrowed from Western philosophers, sociologists and economists. Certain academic institutions have become sanctuaries of opportunism: the Institute of the United States and Canada, IMEMO, IMRD, etc. A whole layer of intellectuals who did not think in a Marxist way was created. But it was they who found themselves at the time in the roles of advisors, consultants and speechwriters within the Central Committee of the CPSU. “Burlatski-Arbatov-Bovin” and others wrote speeches of leaders, party programs and resolutions on the most important issues.

The famous “thaw”, which made Khrushchev so beloved by our liberals and those of the West, did not occur by his will. He used it as a social backdrop to assert his power by crushing his predecessors and political opponents. Khrushchev and liberalism have little overlap. The character himself embodied petty-bourgeois radicalism. Khrushchev's "thaw" gave birth to the "sixties", these "adult children" of socialism. Why socialism? Because they owe him everything: a life saved from fascism, a better education, and even their creativity. With enchanting siren voices, they led naive novelists to sing about "the fog and the smell of the taiga", while they themselves firmly believed only in money. Like cuckoos, they destroyed and ravaged the nest that sheltered them. Biding their time, they were happy to relax in the houses of creativity and state dachas, gracefully entertaining the nomenklatura when they asked. They did not risk much, because they were firmly convinced that their Western patrons would not let them down. At the first opportunity, they “escaped” abroad. Today they are professors, like Nikita Khrushchev's son, in foreign universities, letting the people get out of the mud into which they have dragged them.

The real heroes of the sixties and seventies were very different. These young people who, following the example of their fathers and older brothers, built new cities and factories, built dams on the Angara and Yenisei, led the Baikal railway through impassable taiga to Love, explored space, made scientific discoveries, and simply worked honestly where the Motherland called them. They were true ideologues, true patriots, whose motto was: “As long as my dear country lives!” » (4). Current authorities try hard not to remember those times. But the monuments of this great era and its heroes are magnificent books and films, truly talented songs and much more..

What about today? Does our country, our people, the whole world have a socialist perspective or has the bourgeois “end of history” arrived? What needs to be done to give workers around the world hope for a better life? ?

First of all, do not deny our great past, draw from it the strength for a new breakthrough towards the future. The revolutionary teachings of Marxism are by no means obsolete. Its founders saw far. It is in their writings that the key to understanding the modern era is found. Let's return to Marxism, let's relearn to think scientifically, dialectically, from the point of view of the class, and not in a philistine way.

A hundred years ago, VI Lenin prophetically declared: “To imagine that world history moves forward smoothly and neatly, without occasional gigantic leaps backward, is undialectical, unscientific, theoretically incorrect. »

Which means: “There will be new victories, new fighters will rise!” » ; “A new October is coming ! » (4)

Notes :

1) The authors of the book “The Locomotives of History: The Revolutionary Year 1917” are two Russian historians specializing in revolutionary movements. Sergei Kostrikov heads the chair of history and political science at the Moscow State University of Management; Elena Kostrikova is a doctor of law, member of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. We published on H&S articles by their son, a journalist at Pravda.

2) This famous phrase from Stalin should not be misinterpreted: it simply means that choosing the right leaders (at all levels) is of the utmost importance.

3) 1957 : 1is Sputnik ; 1962 : 1is man in space. These projects were planned and prepared under Stalin.

4) Quotes from Soviet songs : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3KVAByJids

#history #khrushchev #ussr

For more details (in Russian) on the methods and mechanisms of the collapse of the Soviet Union, see S.G. Kara-Murza, Manipulation of Consciousness -
#USSR #soviet #russian #revolutions #Lenin #Stalin #bolsheviks #ideology #communism #socialism #history #study for #future


Anti-Communism Is A Fundamentalist Religion, Now Followed By Billions| Countercurrents


it is not the socialist revolution that provokes mass violence, but the bourgeois counter-revolution, that begins when capital realises that it is losing its property and power.
...

Beyond that, the picture was of a “triumphal procession of Soviet power” (this heading in Soviet textbooks was no accident). In the winter of 1917-1918 the relationship of forces saw half a million members of the workers’ militia, the Red Guard, pitted against a few tens of thousand White Guard members in the south of Russia. Everything was quiet until the counter-revolution received vast sums of money from the Triple Alliance (primarily from Germany) as well as from the Entente, and all these imperialist countries launched aggression against the young Soviet power.
...

And this applies to countless examples, all over the world, where the West first provoked and brutally antagonized socialist or communist countries, then accused them of cruelty, and finally “liberated” them in the name of freedom and democracy, literally raping the will of their people. All this just so European and North American imperialism would survive and thrive.
...

Ask the common men and women of the streets of London, Paris or New York, what they know about Stalin’s era, or the famines in the early years of the USSR, or in Communist China?

99.99% know nothing. Where these famines took place, or why? But they are absolutely certain that they took place. No doubts, whatsoever. No doubts that they happened “because of Communism”. Westerners are intellectually obedient, like sheep. Most of them do not question the propaganda unleashed by their regime. Are they really “free”?

The famine in the Soviet Union actually took place because the young revolutionary country was totally devastated by the Western and Japanese invasions, which tried to break and plunder the country. British, French, U.S., Czech, Polish, German, Japanese invasions, to name just a few.

But ask, for instance, the Czechs, how much they know about their Legions that controlled the Trans-Siberian railroad, on their way from Europe to Vladivostok. Plundering, rape, and mass killing. I tried. I asked, in Prague and Pilsen. They thought I was a lunatic. The Legions are portrayed as heroic, in their history books.
...

In both cases, Western propaganda made people believe that the real cause for the loss of lives in Russia and China was Communism! The brainwashing has been so successful, that even in Russia and China, millions of people have been fully indoctrinated by these countlessly repeated lies coming out of the West.

But ask in London, whether people know anything about the fact that under the British occupation of India, tens of millions of people died from starvation; victims of the famines triggered by London, for many reasons, one of them being an attempt to lower the population. Over 50 million Indian people, cumulatively, died in these famines, between 1769 to 1943, in British administered India.

Should we, as a result, ban the British political system? I am convinced that we should! But that is usually not what the people of the world, including the victims of the British colonialist barbarity, are demanding.
...

The goal of Western propaganda has always been to equate Communism and Fascism, the two most antagonistic systems in history, in the world. It was the Soviet Communist system, which smashed Nazism to pieces, saving the world, at an enormous cost of approximately 25 million human lives.

Only Western imperialism can be compared to German Nazism. The two are made of the same stuff.
#capitalism #imperialism #europe #Western #intervention #mccarthyism #anticommunism #anti-Russia #USSR #Stalin #bolsheviks #socialism #communism #soviet #russian #history #China

Anti-Communism Is A Fundamentalist Religion, Now Followed By Billions| Countercurrents — https://countercurrents.org/2020/06/anti-communism-is-a-fundamentalist-religion-now-followed-by-billions/