Category Archives: All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)

Stalin in the Distorted Mirror of History Falsifiers


All Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks

At the present time, anti-communism is losing its priority place in the ideology of bourgeois reformism, because today, the people of Russia can clearly compare “how it was in the communist time and how it is in Yeltsin’s time.” Another thing is that the Stalin epoch is separated by over forty years from the present time. Therefore, they instantly bring forth anti-Stalinism which is an extremely dangerous form of anti-communism.

It is important to keep in mind that many Communists perceived “as the truth” the so-called revelations of Khrushchev, made at the XX Congress of the CPSU. The bourgeois counter-revolution used them with all their might. The lie of the “Khrushchev Thaw” was fully used by the opportunists of a number of communist parties in the world. In this connection, we greet the publication of a book by Ludo Martens “Another view about Stalin” which deals a telling blow to anti-communism.

It is known that scientists are appraised by their discoveries, artists by their paintings, writers by their works. So the politicians should be appraised by the results of their rule. The rule of Stalin’s activities are enormous. Winston Churchill said: “Stalin came to Russia with a wooden plough and left it in possession of atomic weapons.”

Such results are not accidental. Stalin possessed the most important qualities of a political leader. He correctly estimated the future. He correctly promoted aims and formulated tasks. What is more — he proposed the best ways to go in achieving these tasks. He possessed a strong political will-power which helped to achieve the set aims. Stalin had a very bright personality, a great dialectical mind, many-sided knowledge, colossal efficiency and outstanding organizational abilities. He was a keen diplomat. In his daily life, he was very modest, a man without any greed or desire for riches. There is uncounted evidence of it all.

Stalin earned colossal authority in the International Revolutionary Movement as well as in the Communist Movement, and like Lenin, he earned great respect and love of the toiling masses. This people’s love converted into a great material force which helped the Soviet people to surmount trials, made by the capitalist environment, into the first Socialist State. Today, the bourgeois reformers ridicule in a ruffian manner the people’s love and esteem of the Stalin heroic generation of builders and defenders of socialism.

N.S. Khrushchev lost to a great extent his authority because he was eradicating not the “personality cult,” but people’s love of Stalin. Why was the name of Stalingrad changed to Volgograd? Why did they secretly, in a manner of thieves, remove Stalin from his place in the Mausoleum? Would it not have been sufficient to apportion a separate wall in the Mausoleum for Stalin’s sarcophagus in order to allow all those who wished to do so to come and visit it? Then it would not have been necessary to place in it next leaders of the party.

Theirs is not the same scale of activities and not the same results as that of Lenin and Stalin. After all, none of them earned the love of the people! People’s love cannot be earned in an empty place. People may sympathize with advances and promises, but not forever. As a result, Khrushchev became the object of laughs, Brezhnev of mockery, Gorbachev of scorn, and Yeltsin of hatred.

Why do the ideologists of the bourgeoisie and renegades hate and fear Stalin now? Why is it that in the USSR since Khrushchev’s time, they keep on destroying Stalin’s writings and the literature about him with such frenzy? Possibly because Stalin’s logic is able even now to charm and fascinate unprejudiced readers and investigators, to help them to separate the super-qualified steel of Leninism from the rusty scrap of opportunism, revisionism and other petty-bourgeois works, contained today in the arms of counter-revolution.

You know, the enemies of Stalin are fighting not with his epoch as a realistic past of the country, but with a completely false sick fiction. There is no truthful search for facts, but a manipulated avalanche of lies and ignorance. For instance, they write that the country paid dearly for the achievements of Stalin. As if Stalin in that period could have chosen the correct path or a wrong path of development! Between bad and worse roads? More often, the situation internally and externally forced the Soviet government to choose between bad roads and extremely dangerous roads. Many problems cropped up that demanded immediate actions according to the sources available at that moment. Therefore, they had to do with whatever was available and possible (keeping in mind that the USSR was surrounded by enemies). It is a fact that the road chosen at that time by the Soviet government headed by Stalin was the path that was optimal. Soviet Union went through the path in a few years that took other developed countries one hundred years.

Another attack was that under Stalin, people lived very poorly. We lived at that time according to the means and possibility under the prevailing conditions. The period of “self reliance” was from 1920 to 1950. USSR did not receive any help from anyone. But our economy was not in a crisis as it is now in 1941. With every year, our lives were improving. We were happier and more satisfied with every passing year.

Of course, the development of life and economy is not without problems. There were still classes, and the development had to be looked upon as to which class should be served, the majority or the minority… cooperatives or private enterprisers? The people were gaining higher understanding, moral fortitude and unity in constructing socialism and these are the people that stopped the Hitler tanks and hordes when they invaded our Motherland.

The Great Patriotic War gave credence to Stalin’s leadership and policy. He became the focal point as the leader and war tactician of the highest order. As Commander-in-Chief, his role in the war was beyond reproach by anyone, including the foreign enemies who had nothing but praise for Stalin’s leadership during the war. Today however, the so-called “war experts” have “liberated the General Command of the Red Army” from the history of the Great Patriotic War. Paradoxically, after the victory of the Soviet people in 1941-1945 years, according to the anti-communists, the victory was achieved in SPITE of Stalin! What were the true facts?

Khrushchev at the 20th Congress of the CPSU emphatically said that Stalin fought the “war globally and not on the front”! Stupidity of this utterance immediately brought denials, demands of apology by the living Generals, Marshals and front-line fighters during the Great Patriotic War. Nevertheless, this Khrushchev version up to this day prevails, supported by scores of “historians,” all of them writing volumes upon volumes of lies and not having any trouble financing their books, etc., etc.

The biggest lie is that Stalin did not know when the war started, got panicky, locked himself up at the dacha outside of Moscow, was getting senselessly drunk for one week, taking himself away from every facet of governing, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

In reality, everything was much different.

JUNE 22, 1941 — Politbureau and Stalin at its head worked on the text of the speech to the Soviet people, which was delivered by Molotov, giving directives, commands on mobilization of other civilians to the ranks of Red Army, announcing the appointment of Marshals and Generals of different fronts, etc.

JUNE 23, 1941 — General Central Command was established.

JUNE 24, 1941 — Emergency meeting of the leaders of Industry to plan the war output. Held in the cabinet of Marshal Stalin.

JUNE 25, 1941 — Reserve Army was formed under the command of Marshal Budyonny.

JUNE 27, 1941 — Decision of the CC All Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks to mobilize Communists and Komsomol members.

JUNE 29, 1941 — Directives of the CC AUCPB to broadcast the speech of Stalin on July 3, 1941. After that, the meeting of the Politbureau with the General Command of the Red Army.

JUNE 30, 1941 — Establishment of the State Defense Committee with Stalin as its head.

Documents of these days give the lie to the vicious lies of Khrushchev.

The most prevalent lies about Stalin is that in 1937-1938 years, the army was decimated with purges and that Stalin purged and killed 300,000 commanders and political commissars. These falsehoods and lies should look at the known facts, that the Red Army had only 140,000 commanders and political commissars in total.

In the magazine “Young Guard” (1989 — #9) there was published a document taken from the archives of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR, which was presented at that time to Stalin, Molotov, Voroshilov and Beria on May 5, 1940, that in 1937-1939, 36,898 commanders were dismissed from the ranks of Red Army. More than 75% of them were retired because of their age, sickness, moral grounds (drunkenness) and unworthy of service in the Red Army. From August of 1938, there was working a commission which was told to look into these cases and make recommendations. More than 30,000 requests were received by those dismissed to look into their appeals. In January 1, 1940, this commission returned to their posts more than 12,461 commanders, from those 10,700 were formerly dismissed for political reasons and now put back into ranks.

Do not forget that there were hidden enemies of the Red Army inside the CC CPSU and did their dirty work.

In the above listing of numbers in the Red Army, let us not forget that there were thousands of former Tsarist officers, who were accepted into the Red Army by Trotsky, in whose ranks were Tukhachevsky, Yakir, Uborevich and others. Most of them harbored their lost class interests and were hidden enemies of socialism, although there were hundreds who became loyal Army Officers in the Red Army and fought valiantly against the Hitler Hordes.

The main conspirator of these anti-state officers was Trotsky who was expelled in 1929 but still kept in touch and led the hidden officers in the Red Army. Let us not ignore the fact that foreign secret services were also in touch with these officers and manipulated them for their own ends.

Many so-called “historians” to this day say that in the middle of 1930s, there was no Officers Corps left in the USSR. Let us examine this falsehood again. How serious are these charges and how are they built on facts? They say that it was a planned uprising against the political leadership of Marshal Voroshilov. If this was the case, in any civilized country, this action is called a PUTSCH. In the Soviet Union, they would call this attempt an anti-Soviet pro-Trotsky agreement. This Putsch was found out and brought into the open and this was just before the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War. This attempt was tragic and in any tragedy, there are some innocent people that suffer, because the guilty enemies try to implicate innocent patriots, communists who had nothing to do with this attempt. Every serious student of history knows this to be a fact — examples in the historical context are many. The blame must be shared by the counter-revolutionaries and some enemies that were inside the NKVD.

In the “War and Historical Magazine” (1991 — #9) there is a photocopy of the statement by Tukhachevsky who was in charge of Internal Security of USSR. The Marshal states that he was arrested May 22, 1937, taken to Moscow on May 24 and was interrogated on May 25th. In his statement of May 26th, he says that he agrees with his sentence as was handed down by the Tribunal. He then proceeded to give facts, names of the conspirators, their actions, and gives documents. All this was handwritten in his own hand. He said that he was not forced to do this confession. The Captain who was interrogating him in no way would have been able to know the facts, the details and the personnel. It showed that Tukhachevsky, after his arrest, was demoralized by actual facts and decided to give the details himself and confess that he was guilty. The other conspirators also confessed since the proof was irrefutable.

Of course, there were mistakes in the General Command and Stalin… in what High Command of the Allies were there not — they readily admit this, but of course, the press does not condemn them or dwell of their human errors. President Roosevelt of the USA publicly admitted that one third of his decisions were wrong. Roosevelt said that America should have stepped in quicker to help the USSR and not wait for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.

Stalin was never worried about his prestige. Whenever he made a mistake, he always said so and tried to correct it. As an example, during the Plenum of CC AUCPB in 1938, he admitted being rude and uncivil to some party people and non-party personnel. This was published in all of the newspapers in the USSR. There were people that were rehabilitated and received apologies personally from Stalin. You must remember again, that Stalin DID NOT know everyone that was sentenced, he based himself on people like Beria for information and documentation. Knowing the history as was given above, you can draw your own conclusion as to the complexity of those years.

in 1939 at the XVIII party congress, again the question was brought up of repressions. The Congress decided to eliminate the previous leadership of the organs and started cleansing the party of unhealthy and enemy elements within it.

The mistake was that the AUCPB was not regularly cleansing itself of opportunists and that did harm to its operations.

V.I. Lenin was very truthful when he said that the governing party must always cleanse itself from “false skins” and “opportunists-lap lickers”.

Source

Final Declaration of 15th International Seminarium “Problems of revolution in Latin América”

15th International Seminar: Problems of the Revolution in Latin America

The world is still shaking from the economic crisis of the capitalist system that broke out just over three years ago within U.S. imperialism. Its manifestations and effects spread rapidly, first to the more developed economies and then to the entire planet. The small and brief signs of partial recovery, extolled by the financial groups and economists who are defenders of the system as evidence that the crisis has come to an end, have only confirmed the cyclical nature of the crises, within the framework of the general crisis of capitalism.

The measures tried by the governments and international agencies to overcome the problems have resulted in their intensification. By the logic of the functioning of capitalism the working classes, youth and peoples in general become principal victims of the crisis, but they do not face it with resignation: they resist, they struggle and in important sectors they come out with proposals demanding that the crisis be paid by the capitalists who are responsible for it, not the workers.

Today in various parts of the world the fight for wages, jobs, education, and health care have been joined to the banners of democracy, freedom and other political rights. We are experiencing a period of the rise of the struggle of the masses and its torrent has brought down authoritarian and dictatorial regimes such as Ben Ali (in Tunisia) and Hozni Mubarak (in Egypt) and kept others in check. The questioning of bourgeois institutions is present in these struggles, as in the demands of the “indignant ones” in Spain, in the strikes by workers in Greece and England, and in the mobilizations of the youth in the Americas. It is obvious that the political expressions of the crisis are becoming prominent.

In Latin America the democratic, progressive and left-wing tendency is being affirmed and strengthened in the most advanced sectors. For some time we have seen that there has been a change in the political and social relationship of forces in the region: the neoliberal bourgeoisie and its parties suffered political and electoral defeats in several countries and lost positions in the administrative apparatus of the State; some progressive governments emerged as a result of the search for change by our peoples, of the fights waged against governments openly subservient to foreign capital and to the interests of the local ruling classes.

Without a doubt this new Latin American scenario marked a positive step for the peoples, for the democratic, progressive and left-wing forces because it encouraged the desire for change among the masses, it affirmed their confidence in their ability to overcome a system that has only brought hunger and hopelessness to the workers and peoples. A crucial aspect is that the new situation put the prospect of socialism as an alternative to the decadent capitalist system on the table for discussion.

However, over the years, we have seen the political limits of those governments. Some more rapidly than others have begun to turn to the right, betraying the expectations of the beginning of those new times for those who have always lived under oppression. Free trade agreements with imperialist countries or blocs, anti-popular laws, processes of criminalization of the social protest, handing over of natural resources to foreign capital and neoliberal economic measures have been adopted by almost all those governments that promised change.

Most of the regimes that encouraged the prospect of implementing profound economic, political and social changes, and therefore opened up spaces for the left-wing organizations to advance in the accumulation of revolutionary forces, have become obstacles to the advance of the struggle of the masses, to the perspective of the revolution and socialism; they are, in fact, governments that support the capitalist system.

The turn to the right taking place in the majority of those governments, in spite of the expectations of the ruling classes and imperialism, has not led to discouragement or frustration among the peoples. The desire for change is still present; it is shown in the protests against unemployment, for education, for the land, for water, against taxes, for democracy, because their voice is heard when it is time to make decisions in the spheres of government.

The prospect of the victory of the revolution and socialism is being maintained, it does not depend on what opportunism, reformism or any bourgeois pseudo left-wing faction does; it is in the hands of the workers and peoples, of the genuinely revolutionary forces. For the victory of the revolution, it is essential to utilize and combine all forms of struggle, according to the features present in each of the countries.

Now, in order to put an end to the contradiction that defines the nature of the epoch in which we live, the contradiction between labor and capital, we cannot ignore the fight against the policy that social-democracy in power carries out in the name of social change but for the benefit of the ruling classes and imperialist financial capital.

For the advance of the revolutionary struggle it is necessary to remove the nefarious bourgeois ideological influence in its different forms in the movement of the workers, the youth, women and the popular movement in general; to that end we must combine the momentum of the fight of the masses for their material demands and political rights with the ideological debate to expose the pro-capitalist character embodied in these proposals. The unmasking of opportunism and social democracy is part of the ideological struggle that we revolutionaries raise against capitalism and its defenders in general.

The organizations of the revolutionary left are the most advanced sector of the democratic, progressive and left-wing tendency, their responsibility is to work to ensure that the whole tendency and the peoples in general see and understand the political limits that the progressive governments have and the nature of those of a neoliberal character and above all, to ensure that they take up the banners and program of a genuine revolution that leads to socialism.

In this process, the policy of unity with the sectors and forces involved in the defense of the aspirations and rights of workers and peoples and to defend the sovereign interests of the country is essential.

Moreover, the unity must go beyond national borders, since, while the revolution is a process that must be implemented in each country, in essence it is an international movement. It is our commitment to form a great anti-imperialist front of the peoples, which is expressed in specific struggles and actions. The active solidarity with all those peoples who are fighting for social and national liberation and independence is part of our work. Today we express our support for the struggle of the Palestinian people against criminal Israeli Zionism, to the people of Puerto Rico in their struggle for independence; we reject the imperialist blockade established for five decades against Cuba and the presence of occupation troops in Haiti; we condemn all acts of political and military aggression and intervention by the imperialist powers against the peoples.

With our collective effort we have arrived at the 15th International Seminar that, year after year, has followed-up on the fundamental problems that circumstances impose on the revolutionary organizations. We reaffirm the importance of such events that allow us to sum up and share experiences; therefore we commit ourselves to continue this work and to publicize the agreements and resolutions made on this occasion. We call for a similar event next year.

15th International Seminar: Problems of the Revolution in Latin America
Quito, July 15, 2011

Revolutionary Communist Party of Argentina
Marxist-Leninist Revolutionary Party (Argentina)
Olga Benario Women’s Movement (Brazil)
Revolutionary Communist Party (Brazil)
Minga Sur Palmira – Alternative Democratic Pole (Colombia)
Communist Party of Colombia (Marxist-Leninist)
Communist Party of Labor of the Dominican Republic
Caribbean Youth (Dominican Republic)
Communist Party of Mexico (Marxist-Leninist)
Revolutionary Popular Front (Mexico)
National Democratic Front (Philippines)
Caribbean and Latin American Coordinator (Puerto Rico)
Communist Party (Bolshevik) Russia
Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist)
Socialist Revolutionary University Front (Venezuela)
Ana Soto Women’s Movement (Venezuela)
Education Movement for Emancipation (Venezuela)
Gayones Movement (Venezuela)
Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Venezuela
Revolutionary Youth of Ecuador
Ecuadorian Confederation of Women for Change
Democratic Popular Movement (Ecuador)
Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador

May Day: From the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) to the ICMLPO (Unity & Struggle)

Dear Colleagues,

On behalf of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of the Soviet Union, on behalf of working people in Russia and the various republics of the former Soviet Union, received fraternal greetings and congratulations on the 1 May Labour Day.

The proletariat of Russia celebrates the day in the fight against semi-fascist dictatorship Medvedev-Putin that each passing hour, more is revealed as the regime of capital, the Mafia and genocide.

Despite the brutal repression, the announcement of “lawless”, equivalent to a death sentence for the leader of the PC (b) Smirnova Zinaida, despite the prohibition of our newspapers and endless attempts to defeat the masses, the Bolsheviks in Russia are in the front ranks of the fighters against the dictatorship.

This year marks 20 years since the breakdown of the USSR and the ultimate recovery in the homeland of Lenin and J. Stalin of the powers of capital. The experience of the Socialist State, first in the world, the experience of past victories and defeats of socialism remain valid today, for the revolutionary forces in the world. The Communist Party throughout the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks) is addressed to all parties and organizations with the proposal to hold together the first of May.

With communist greetings:

Alexander Lapin, First Secretary of Central Committee PC (b)
Dr. Zinaida Smirnova, PC Central Committee Secretariat (b).