(theses for the 100th anniversary of the formation of the USSR)
The Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917, referred to in modern scientific literature as the Workers' and peasants' and Great Russian Revolution, opened the way to a new communist future of mankind, and thus became the first phase of the world revolution that began and won a number of victories in the twentieth century, as well as the worldwide transition from the prehistory of mankind to its true history. Only five years later, on December 30, 1922, the peoples of the former tsarist Russia, freed from the yoke of capital and feudalism, announced the formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which was based on the idea of a just society, and for the first time in the history of mankind they began to create a fundamentally new society in which the best ideals of justice and humanity, genuine freedom, equality and fraternity were embodied in practice. The Soviet Union went through many difficult trials, defeated fascism in the Second World War, unleashed primarily for its destruction and for the liquidation of the communist movement, had a decisive influence on the liberation of a number of countries from colonialism, on the emergence of new socialist societies and progressive changes in capitalist countries, but was criminally destroyed as a result of the counter-revolution of 1991.
Russia's return to the path of socialist development and the re-creation of the USSR in a new form and, possibly, in a new configuration, has always been relevant, all three post-Soviet decades, but has become even more relevant since the beginning of the "special military operation" (SMO) and only increases in its course.
The war in Ukraine is a common tragedy of the peoples of Ukraine and Russia, all the peoples of the former Soviet socialist republics, who jointly built a fair society free from exploitation, a new communist world.
Let us emphasize once again that this tragedy is a direct, albeit long-term consequence of the treacherous and criminal destruction of the Soviet Union, the blame for which lies primarily with the President of the USSR, General Secretary of the CPSU Mikhail Gorbachev, President of the RSFSR, member of the CPSU Central Committee Boris N. Yeltsin, President of the Ukrainian SSR, member of the CPSU Central Committee Leonid M. Kravchuk, Chairman The Supreme Council of the Republic of Belarus, Stanislav S. Shushkevich, on the entire CPSU and, last of all, on the entire Soviet people.
Responsibility for the subsequent anti-Sovietization, Nazification and militarization of Ukraine, as well as other former Soviet republics, also directly or indirectly lies with them, in general, with the Russian and Ukrainian "ruling elites", with the "ruling elites" of other former Soviet republics, including businessmen, government and political figures, cultural figures, and political leaders, who were members of communist, socialist and social democratic parties. A significant role in the collapse of the USSR belongs to the West, first of all, the USA and the EU.
A genuine victory in the war in Ukraine can and should be a victory for the workers of Ukraine and Russia, and such a victory can and should become final only as a result of the re–establishment of the USSR - in the former or in the new borders.
This victory, including the complete and irreversible denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine, is impossible without the re-Sovietization of Russia, without the restoration of the USSR.
The writer and dissident Vladimir Maksimov once defined post-Soviet Russia as a combination of the worst features of Soviet socialism with the worst features of Western capitalism. So it has remained, in fact, although Russian peripheral capitalism is better than some Latin American or African, but still worse than the "social" Swedish, German, or French. In addition, he and the philosopher Alexander Zinoviev admitted: "We aimed at the USSR, but got to Russia." This statement is true today, and it will be true tomorrow: everyone who aims at the USSR gets into Russia and destroys it.
SMO has only exacerbated, although not yet to the limit, and brought out the contradictions of Russian peripheral, nomenclature capitalism. It is enough to listen to the invited experts in the broadcasts of Vladimir Solovyov on Vesti FM radio and Solovyov himself, or the invited experts on Radio Komsomolskaya Pravda in the broadcasts of Sergei Mardan and Mardan himself to make sure of this. In particular, they talk about the so-called mistakes made during the preparation of the SMO and during its implementation, including in the rear, which are a direct consequence of the policy carried out under the banner of "reforms" for all three post-Soviet decades. Even the President acknowledged one of these mistakes at a meeting with the mothers of SMO participants on November 25, 2022: “first, as for 2014. In hindsight, we are all smart, of course, but we proceeded from the fact that maybe Lugansk and Donetsk will be able to come to an agreement somehow within the framework of the Minsk agreements, which you probably know about, will still be able to somehow reunite with Ukraine. We sincerely went to this. But we didn't fully feel the mood of the people, it was impossible to fully understand what was going on there. But now it has probably become obvious that this reunion should have happened earlier. Maybe there would not have been so many losses among civilians, there would not have been so many dead children under shelling, and so on”.
As a result, SMO is increasingly beginning to resemble the Russo-Japanese war, and the Russian Federation the tsarist Russia of that time and the period of the First World War.
The program of re-Sovietization is presented in various versions in the programs of the Association "Soviet Union", the Left Front, and even in the program of the Communist Party of Russian Federation (CPRF), links to which are available on the Internet, as well as in the periodical electronic publication "Soviet Renaissance". Therefore, we emphasize only one important point: this program is not a dogma, but a guide to action, and it can and should be adjusted and refined in the course of its implementation, taking into account both the positive and negative experience of Soviet socialism and modern socialism in China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, in several countries of the socialist orientation of Latin America.
Such a program is desirable and due. And what about the question of questions: is it feasible in practice in Russia, taking into account all the real circumstances, and what can and should the left do in order for this implementation, even to a minimum extent, to happen? Isn't it a utopia?
Of course, no one, including us, can promise that tomorrow or even the day after tomorrow there will be a situation when the left in Russia will come to power one way or another and begin implementing this program, or, at worst, the Russian "ruling elite" will be forced against their will and will, creaking with teeth, proceed - albeit in an incomplete, stripped-down form - to its implementation in the hope of taking one step forward, then taking two steps back.
Nevertheless, there are some prerequisites for the emergence of such a situation, and the task and duty of the left is to develop them as far as objectively possible, and to be ready, if it happens, to take power and responsibility for the fate of the country and the world on themselves. The three internal prerequisites are as follows:
1) Liberation, still partial, and returnable, from financial dependence on the West, i.e. from the financial capital of the capitalist center (USA-UK-EU);
2) Reconstruction on a new scientific and technical basis, still partial, of domestic industry, transport, energy and infrastructure;
3) The re-creation of Soviet education, science and culture on a new scientific and cultural basis, at least partially, as far as it is possible today.
There is also one external premise that is closely related to the internal ones: the formation of a new anti-Western, anti-capitalist union as a result of Russia's forced cooperation with China and other socialist countries, as well as with countries of developing "peripheral capitalism", such as India, Iran, etc.
The main contradiction, so to speak, of the "rear" of SMO is that objectively and subjectively, i.e. from the point of view of common sense and the "lower classes", re-Sovietization is needed like air, and it should be carried out under the red Soviet flag, but the "upper classes" are afraid of the Soviet essentially "lower classes", re-Sovietization and the Soviet flag at least in the same way as during the "perestroika" Gorbachev and his entourage were afraid of the "lower classes" and "perestroika from below".
The essence of the historical moment, as Savvas Michael-Matsas correctly emphasized in his report "USSR: After the 1991 disaster is a Soviet Renaissance possible and/or necessary?" at the international scientific conference "100 years of the formation of the USSR", held on December 17-18, is as follows: "To complete or to reverse the 1991 disaster? That's the question."
Association "Soviet Union"
December 23, 2022