The interview with Joseph E. Shtiglits
The interview with Joseph E. Shtiglits, former vice-president of the World Bank, economic advisor to US President Clinton, winner of the Nobel prize in economy for 2001. Published in the Sunday supplement to the «El Pais» newspaper of June 23, 2002. Recently he wrote a book about the IMF under the title of «El malestar en la Globalización» («The Disease of Globalization» — approximate translation). Here are some parts of that interview (based on Russian translation).
— You write that while working in the Clinton administration you were surprised by the circumstance that many decisions in the White House, as well as the IMF, were often taken out of ideological and political considerations, rather than according to the requirements of economy?
— In a certain sense, I was not greatly surprised by what was happening in the White House. I was disturbed that ideology and politics played such a significant role in international economic organizations where professional economists are supposed to set the fashion. For example, research indicated that liberalizing financial market would result not in economic growth but in destabilization of economy. We knew that, it should not have been done according to the science of economics, yet the IMF kept trying to implement exactly this kind of liberalization. Its motives in doing so were purely ideological and political…
— When the reader comes to the end of your book, he might be puzzled with the following question: who is taking decisions which determine world events affecting the well-being of millions of people?
— According to my experience of working in the American government and the World Bank there is no single person who makes such decisions. This is a complex process involving many forces. Even the President of the USA is not able to influence many issues. He doesn’t even have the information necessary to do it. There are too many decisions to be made, one must also take into account the nature of information that he gets… Different groups try to control his incoming information, informing him only of what can persuade him to take a certain position favorable to them. Many people cannot understand that there is no such single man who controls the situation personally.
— OK, it is not a single person, not the President of the United States, but someone, some people do make decisions. Who are they?
— In my book I tried to clarify the fundamental role played in this process by major financial interests and transnational corporations. But at the same time, I would like to stress that there are other forces involved in this game. For example, the «Anniversary-2000» movement played a significant role in reducing the debt. The IMF resisted, but the civil movement turned out to be so strong that got the upper hand on that point. There are many economists inside the World Bank itself who are genuinely concerned with the problems of poverty and environment protection…
|
|
|
— You leave no doubts in your book about the US Treasury and the IMF having the real power. Is it they who determine policy?
— Yes, the IMF sets the macroeconomic and financial policy. Unfortunately, a country needs to get the IMF’s approval before it can receive help from the European Community or the World Bank. In this sense, the Fund’s power is enormous…
— In crisis situations in developing countries the US Treasury and the IMF deliberately gave recommendations which aggravated problems, as you firmly claim in your book, but which corresponded to the economic and ideological interests of developed countries. What does it mean from the moral point of view?
— This means that they used the crises in those countries to pursue their own interests…
— You tell that some heads of states sadly admitted to you that they had to follow the IMF’s tastes though its recommendations were clearly bad for their countries; that the IMF played the role of an international policeman who forced them to make destructive decisions.
— Quite so. They were afraid to get on the IMF’s black-lists. In that case they would not get any credits either in the Fund, or the WB, or the EC. And owing to low IMF assessment they wouldn’t be able to count on attracting private investments. Worse than that, they were afraid even to speak of their problems openly, fearing that such an openness in itself will be considered as impudence and confrontation by the IMF which will then punish them and revenge. It means that they considered any form open dialogue impossible.
— You think that the IMF is mistaken in refusing to take into account the opinion of the governments of the countries where it executes its policy. Is it just like you describe in your book: the Fund’s representatives arrive, in three or four days they suggest the country’s leadership to sign certain conditions [438] similar for all, and then accuse the this same leadership of corruption?
|
|
|
— They lay down a number of conditions…
— Could you tell us how the IMF functions? How is its economic policy defined?
— There is only one country in the IMF which has the veto right. It is the Treasury of the United States.
* *
*
And so on about the same thing…
July 18, 2002.
[1] On this day the «American life style» and the «American dream» were attacked by «international terrorism». Hi-jacked passenger jets hit the towers of the World Trade Center located in New-York City and brought them down, as well as one wing of the Pentagon facilities in Washington. The fourth hi-jacked jet was reported by mass media and US officials to have crashed in Petersburg countryside without hitting anything presumably due to loss of control as the hostages tried to oppose the hijackers.
Could all of this happen without connivance or direct complicity of US special services? — Let everyone decide on his or her own.
[2] On these issues one should refer to the books “It is Time I Should Start the Tale of Stalin…”, “The Brief Course…” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR (IP of the USSR).
The above-mentioned and other works by Internal Predictor of the USSR can be found at www.mera.com.ru and are also included into the complete Information base on sociology, worked out by the Internal Predictor of the USSR distributed on compact disks.
[3] If one is interested in what can cause a financial and economic crisis and depression and how it can be done on somebody’s demand please refer to the works of IP of the USSR “The Brief Course…”, “The Economic «Rupture» Must Be Excised”, abstract of “On Understanding the Macroeconomy of State and World”.
[4] Douglas Reed provides the facts referring to this issue in his book “Dispute on Zion”.
|
|
|
[5] Gorky is named Nizhnyi Novgorod nowdays.
[6] The factory named after Likhachev. At the time it was named ZiS (factory named after Stalin) and was headed by Ivan Lihatchov (1896 — 1956) in the period of 1926 — 1930 and 1940 — 1950. He had an agricultural background, started as a worker at the Putilov factory in 1908. He served in the Baltic Navy during World War I (1914 — 1918) and was a soldier in the Red Army in the years of the Civil War. Later he was promoted to a Red Army commander, then an official of the VChK (National Emergency and Security Committee). In 1953 he was appointed Minister of motor transport and highways in the Soviet government.
[7] Statistical data given here are taken from the book “My Life and Work” by H. Ford. It will become clear from further evidence that they provide documentary proof of the fact that Marxists slander Ford by this article while being aware of the truth. If it isn’t so it only remains to conclude that they are hopelessly dumb and are capable of making sense neither out of a book’s text nor of the happenings of life.
[8] When compared to contemporary competitors.
[9] The sentence is worded in a way, which implies that payment by the hour is the best and most just method of remuneration. Marxists are not interested in that this very method is inconsistent in the conditions of modern industry where manufacturing processes are carried out collectively and where the principle of professional specialization is employed, and this fact will be exemplified further in the text. These men of no scruples and intelligence seek only to maintain the class approach in its purity while turning a blind eye to the differences in morality of concrete people, and to accuse H. Ford of being an exploiter of the working class in his intentions and actions.
[10] One wonders where on Earth have they found a metrologically consistent (there can be no other) science of control generally and of controlling production and distribution, the state, society in particular in Marxism?
[11] We take quotations from the book by Ford (in Russian translation) out of an electronic file obtained in the Internet. That is why we mark quotations with names of chapters only without providing the numbers of pages. The file being quoted can be found in the «Other authors» section in the Internal Predictor of the USSR CD information base.
|
|
|
[12] The quoted file gives «partially capable» instead of «partially able-bodied» though it follows from the context that what is meant is limited work capacity. Unfortunately the Russian translation contained in the file being quoted leaves much to be desired in various other passages as well.
[13] In his book H. Ford writes that among other things «Ford Motors» kept its own hospital. Medical services at that hospital were charged, but those charges and the personnel’s wages were maintained at a ratio that would enable them to pay the charges out of their wages.In other words two birds were killed with one stone: health care was accessible and an economical attitude to one’s health received a monetary stimulus — though medicine is affordable it is not only more pleasant to be healthy, it is more profitable.
[14] This paragraph is followed by an extract containing the statistical data on personnel training that are given in the above-mentioned article «Fordizm» from the “Big Soviet Encyclopedia”:
« The length of time required to become proficient in the various occupations is about as follows: 43 per cent. Of all the jobs require not over one day of training; 36 per cent. require from one day to one week; 6 per cent. require from one to two weeks; 14 per cent. require from one month to one year; one per cent. require from one to six years. The last jobs require great skill − as in tool making and die sinking».
The broader context where the data given by the encyclopedia are taken from shows that the authors of the article «Fordizm» were deliberately slandering Ford, i.e. they had a malicious intent and were performing an order on propaganda.
[15] Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
[16] A device consisting of two multi-pass blocks and a rope passed through them, one end of the rope being attached to one block and the other end (running end) being pulled either manually or by means of a winch when weights need to be moved. One block is mounted on a beam; the other is fixed on the rope being passed several times through both blocks to form rings. Either a crook or a claw is mounted on the free block. The hoist is intended for lifting and moving heavy weights. When operating the hoist the worker must wear clothes reducing the risk of its getting between the blocks.
Ties and broad sleeves may also cause injuries when caught by moving parts of machinery: drills, shafts, cutters, component parts while turnings etc.
[17] Here and further throughout the text <angular brackets> are used to designate our notes and commentaries.
[18] I.e. in the very beginning of the 20th century.
[19] What is meant is the US Administration.
[20] 343 English miles correspond to approximately 550 kilometers, and as Ford says it sometimes takes up to 5 or 6 weeks for a shipment to go this distance. It means that the average speed of transportation on this railroad could be as low as 0.65 km/h while at the time a steam engine could haul a train of 20 to 30 carriages (even if they were two-axle) at a speed of some 40 — 50 km/h. Comparing the two figures may say something about the quality of management at the railroad before it was acquired by «Ford Motors» and after that.
[21] In fact a «financier» in this context nearly always means a «stock exchange speculator».
Similarly almost every time Ford uses the word «banker» one should read «usurer» instead. That is why we have substituted the word «banker» for «usurers» in the remaining part of the quotation whenever it is unambiguously clear that lending loans on interest is meant. This is a norm, which the US banking system operates by, and this substitution simply clears things up calling social phenomena by their proper names.
[22] And moreover so a «financier» who is a stock exchange speculator mostly acting as a parasite on production and on processes of macroeconomic control.
[23] The conclusion Ford makes about US railroads can be applied for interpreting the increase in railroad fares by 30 % in Russia, which took place on January 15th, 2002, and for the production slump at the majority of Russian enterprises that occurred in the course of reforms, especially in high-tech industries.
[24] This means that Ford objects to a society (including economic science, law and legislature) which does not distinguish between:
· profit gained by means of interest on loans and
· profit gained by enterprises of the industrial sector of economy by means of trade.
He also objects to attempts of raising parasitism achieved through financial manipulations to the level of a highly important task. Compare Ford’s point of view with the Koran, sura 2:
«276 (275) Those who feed on interest will rise <on Judgment day> in the same way as those whom Satan casts down with his touch. This will be the punishment for having spoken: «Trade is same as usury». And God has allowed trade and forbidden usury. Those who will hear the word of God and keep away will be (forgiven) what had preceded. His cause belongs to God. And those who carry one are dwellers of flame <hell>, they are in it forever! 277 (276) God destroys usury and breeds charity. Truly God has no love for every sinner! (277) Those who have found faith did good, and built prayer, and lent purification. Those will have their reward from God, and have no fear, and they will not be sad!»
In other words all past, present and future complications in US relations with Islamic countries, and most probably with the rest of the world, have been pre-defined by the fact that the US have built capitalism not according to Ford but contrary to his views — along with the Bible which prescribes usury to Jews as the global system-forming factor (Deuteronomy, 23:19, 20; Deuteronomy, 28:12), directed towards achieving some clearly set out aims (Isaiah, 60:10 — 12). See Supplement 1.
[25] This suggests that banks should not be the usurers’ «kolkhozes» («collective farms») (among their number are not only the stockholders who own the bank but also the average depositors who receive their share of the bank’s usurious income by means of interest on deposits), they should be investment funds which can lend help to any entrepreneur starting a new business or expanding the existing one for the benefit of the society.
[26] Raising the price by $100 — taking into account the necessity to clear not only the loan interest ($4 per car) but the loan itself. The effect a $100 increase in price would have is illustrated through the table given by Ford in his book. The table reflects the trends of car output and reduction of prices for a 12-year time period.
| Time period | Price in USD | Output of cars |
| 1909 — 10 | 950 | 18 664 |
| 1910 — 11 | 780 | 34 528 |
| 1911 — 12 | 690 | 78 440 |
| 1912 — 13 | 600 | 168 220 |
| 1913 — 14 | 550 | 248 317 |
| 1914 — 15 | 490 | 308 213 |
| 1915 — 16 | 440 | 533 921 |
| 1916 — 17 | 360 | 785 432 |
| 1917 — 18 | 450 | 706 584 |
| 1918 — 19 | 525 | 533 706 |
| 1919 — 20 | 575 to 440 | 996 660 |
| 1920 — 21 | 440 to 335 | 1 250 000 |
Ford is nearly apologizing for the rise in prices and the fall in output occurring in 1918 — 1919. He adds the following comment to the table: «The two latest years were the years of war, and the factory was busy with military orders» (Ch. 10. “How Cheap Can One Manufacture Goods?”)
The second half of the 20th century was characterized by different macroeconomic parameters and the trend in car prices was also different: in the early 1960’s stock-produced (i.e. without tailoring the car to the customer’s specific requirements) «Lincoln» and «Cadillac» cars (American luxury cars of the same class as «Chaikas» made at the Gorky car factory if anyone still remembers those) cost about 5000 dollars; in the early 1970’s their price rose to $7000; in the 1990’s stock-produced cars of this class cost around $60000 — 70000. This is just one of the many examples of the accelerating price growth during these 40 years that takes place while science and technology make regular progress. This progress should reduce production costs further and further yet it is hampered by system-forming bank usury. Price growth made emission of dollars necessary in order to maintain the population’s solvent demand, this led to the dollar’s loss of purchasing power and is one of the reasons which caused the global financial and economic misfortunes of the late 20th and early 21st century.
[27] And in fact it was a dependence on usurers. In this quotation and below in all the occasions when lending loans on interest is meant the word «banker» was substituted for the word «usurer». The reasons have been explained above.
[28] The American writer Vidal Gore (a relative of the former US Vice-president Albert Gore, George Bush junior’s rival in the 2000 presidential election, Jacqueline Kennedy’s stepbrother) in his interview to the RTR channel (broadcast on the night of March 15/16th, 2002) disagreed with the maxim lately much overused by the Russian reformers whose authorship they attribute to Leo Tolstoy, namely, «patriotism is the last resort of rascals». Vidal Gore said that in our historic era «reform is the last resort of rascals».
[29] When financial and economic processes taking place in a society are described in terms of a mathematical science known as «game theory» it turns out that the institution of loan on interest is a game with a nonzero sum. It means that this is a game where only one side is pre-programmed to win by the very principles the game is based on without any alternatives. In our case this side is the usurer, and in the historic reality it is the international mafia corporation of usurers.
The usurer (corporation of usurers) maintains loan interest at a level exceeding production growth rate measured in constant prices. By these means the debtor’s paying capacity and the paying capacity of anyone who buys from the debtor passes over to the usurer’s purse because the loan to be paid back together with the interest is included into the product’s cost and price. This way the corporation of usurers parasites on the entire society regardless whether the society employs a financial and credit system or is engaged in natural economy.
[30] A non-usurious banker should get a different training. He should be concerned with the multiindustrial production and product distribution aimed at serving the morally healthy interests of people, state institutions and public organizations. He should view the policy on investments, credit and insurance only as a means to control multiindustrial production and distribution aimed at serving public interests.
[31] This is true. In the history of modern global civilization the usurious banker’s position within the capitalist system of the Western type is a system-forming factor programmed by the Bible’s sociology. This was discussed more than once in the books “The Brief Course...”, “The «Rupture» of Economy Should be Excised” and other written by the Internal Predictor of the USSR. From this point the usurer’s domination is a forced domination. The domination is based on the fact that the institution of loan on interest is a game with nonzero sum where the corporation of usurers is pre-programmed to win without an alternative. Yet they are not the masters of the «game». They are merely an instrument.
[32] That is people capable of controlling the inter-industry proportions of investments and the rhythm of investments within industries during the process of their technological re-equipment. Non-usurious bankers are required to do nothing else.
[33] This way they reveal their own folly by denying others to be intellectuals upon the principle: «If you are so smart, show me your money?» The answer to this question mainly should be as follows: «You’ve got it thanks to me and to many others».
[34] See the novel by an American writer E. Sinclair (1878 — 1968) “The motor-car king” (1937) that was published in the USSR and re-published several times while books by Ford himself were locked up in «spets-hrans» («special depositories»). This is how V. Lenin described E. Sinclair: «… a socialist of senses, theoretically uneducated».
[35] He once held the posts of President Yeltsin’s advisor on economic issues, the minister of economics in 1996 — 1997, at present (first quarter of 2002) he is a free-lance advisor on economics to the government of the Russian Federation.
[36] To be precise it was not Ford who invented the assembly line, yet it was Ford who was successful in applying it. The assembly line was known and used since times immemorial. For example one of the sources on shipbuilding history reports that in Venice galleys were built on the assembly line (to provide re-enforcements to the fleet in the shortest time possible) as early as the Middle ages. There was a well worked-through project, mass production of standard hull and sparring (masts and other parts of rig) components stocked in advance. After the hull was assembled on the building berth and launched it was towed along a canal on the banks of which there were warehouses and workshops. Equipment and outfit to be mounted on the ship were taken from those warehouses and loaded on board. A turnkey fighting unit was built in less than 24 h.
[37] And why not taking up the post of Chairman of the State planning committee of the USSR? — Ford’s world understanding is more in line with conscientious work in this office than with abusing his authority in the rank of a factory’s director in pursuit of personal enrichment which would be an example of what Livshits calls a «business talent». It was people of Ford’s way of thinking (not the people who shared the outlook of academician A. Aganbegyan, A. Livshits, E. Gaidar, M. Fridman and other gangsters under guise of scholars) that were lacking in the Gosplan (State planning committee) of the USSR and the Gosplans of Soviet republics, in the high school and science in general, and we shall make this evident later on.
[38] Is it really so that the mafia of usurers in Russia — mostly peopled by Jews — is inferior in its fierceness to the Russian bureaucracy, where Jewish positions (exactly how it is prescribed by the doctrine of Deuteronomy, Ch. 23:19, 20; Isaiah Ch. 28:12, Ch. 60:10 — 12, see Supplement 1) are also strong? And what is the money that industry and not some abstract «business» spends on usurious bankers made up by? — Under Livshits and Chernomyrdin loan interest rates used to soar up to 240 % per year and have never dropped below 20 %. Is it not a vicious act of sabotage?
[39] Livshits could very well have alluded to Lenin here. «Don’t you dare to give orders!» — was one of the demands Lenin made of party executives who sought to take part in controlling economy at the very start of building socialism. Thus it is only the covers and slogans that change, the problems remain the same…
[40] In a crowd-“elitist” society where the “elite” is also a crowd living by tradition and judging by authority (this is how the sociological term «crowd» is defined) this statement means: the crowd is always right. This way one can get deep into troubles by indulging to corrupted and perverted crowd and following its tastes…
[41] And this is a reluctance to deal with the issue of the objectivity of Good and Evil and an effort to impose somebody’s subjective idea of them pretending that it is an objective one.
[42] A. Livshits asks a rhetorical question:
«How can one manufacture cars when banks do not give long-term loans?»
Ford answered him in his book a long time before A. Livshits was born:
«Borrowing for expansion is one thing; borrowing to make up for mismanagement and waste is quite another. You do not want money for the latter — for the reason that money cannot do the job. Waste is corrected by economy; mismanagement is corrected by brains. Neither of these correctives has anything to do with money».
[43] Rather, they refuse to see and turn their back on this problem when it is pointed out directly. The analytical notes “On the Nature of Bank Activities and Improvement of Well-Being” and “On the Check Parameters of the Macroeconomic System and Organizing its Self-Control in a Socially Acceptable Mode” have been distributed in the State Duma and sent to the Ministry of economics that was at that time headed by professor E.Yasin with Ya. Urinson as one of his deputies (both of them of Jewish origin). The Duma kept silence, and the Ministry of economics replied politely that if we are concerned with publishing a thesis we should apply to the Academy of science and universities and not to their institution.
[44] «The Institute of the transition period economy» which has been headed by E. Gaidar for several years takes up a special place within this system. If given a name corresponding to the nature of his activity the institute would be called: «The Institute of CREATING ECONOMIC PROBLEMS» which it cannot provide solutions for due to feeble-mindedness».
[45] The bank system on the whole performs the following tasks on the macro level of the economy:
· is engaged in accounting of the macro level (keeps counts and transfers monies, accompanying purchase and sale deals of the majority of microeconomic subjects, at least it does so in the so-called «economically developed» countries);
· provides short-term loans to production sphere damping the failures in the rhythmic alternations in the economic subjects’ paying capacity thereby speeding up products exchange and increasing running speed, stability and output capacity of the multiindustrial production and consumption system of the society;
· provides long-term loans to the sphere of production enabling enterprises to overcome investment peaks in their expenditure and thereby ensuring that old productive capacities are renewed, new capacities are introduced and the inter-industry proportions of productive capacities (i.e. the so-called mutual compliance between productive capacities of different industries) are maintained;
· provides loans to families enabling them to satisfy their consumer wants which provides for adaptation of nominal solvent demand to existing market prices. This increases sales of manufactured products and speeds up the delivery of certain services to the population (under an economic policy directed towards the satisfaction of morally healthy needs of population this option gives a chance of a rapid advance in the society’s welfare).
The bank system is indispensable in solving the above-mentioned tasks, yet their solving is not an end in itself for which banks solely exist. This is a means to assemble the number of microeconomy into the systemic integrity of the macroeconomy, that microeconomy solving the majority of productive tasks emerging in the life of society and its members with the help of their technological activities.
[46] In fact a bank deposit is a loan lent by the depositor to the bank. Therefore interest on deposit is a kind of loan interest. Most banks pay interest on deposits out of income where the share of usurious income received from the credit services lent by the bank is quite substantial. In other words every depositor takes part in the usurers’ robbing the society. The only difference between depositors is that the majority lose more by higher prices of purchased goods and services than they gain from income on deposits; and the minority gain more from income on deposits than they lose by prices on purchased goods and services which the money required to return loans with interest is included into.
[47] In order to understand why these numbers are named as the top limit for loan interest rates one must know the following. The average annual growth of the technosphere’s energy potential measured against coal production during the 150 years preceding the beginning of the 21st century was 5 %.As the volume of production is limited by the volume of energy which is put into the manufacturing processes then a loan interest rate which poses no threat to the stability of financial system and of technical renovation of the macroeconomy cannot exceed the growth rate of energy potential within the production sphere (on this issue please refer to the theory of similarity of multiindustrial production and consumption systems in “The Brief Course…” and “Dead Water” in post-1998 editions by the Internal Predictor of the USSR).
In conformity with such energy potential growth rate within the production sphere the limit of loan interest rate at 5 % per year during the whole of the mentioned century and a half lay within the bounds of safety for the macroeconomy of most countries. A 7 % rate was safe for the macroeconomy of usurious countries (crediting countries) whose income contained profits from loans lent to other countries and allowed to compensate for the discrepancy between the energy potential growth rate calculated in constant basic prices and the usurious demands expressed in loan interest rates by means of import. It is exactly this kind of income that devastated the economies of «third world» countries (most of them former colonies), which were ruined by usurious countries. This prevented their cultural transformation and made the people of those countries hate the usurers.
But the point is that besides the factors of a purely financial and economic nature there are other factors significant for the society’s life and the advocates of a «moderate» loan interest rate avoid discussing them. These very factors result in the ways nations react non-financially, as well as in the ways some people react personally when they see that entire regions of the Earth and their population are enslaved often by means of legalized system-forming usury which results initially from acknowledging the rightfulness of «moderate» loan interest rates.
[48] But it might be so that excluding the issue of slavery exercised by financial means from discussion is exactly what this policy is aimed at. We lay the blame for it on the economic science, which is the legacy of the era when Western-type capitalism was being implemented. And we lay the blame on the social and economic publicists who rely heavily on its authority.
[49] Though it is beyond any doubt that every family should have a right of having property passed on from generation to generation, such as a certain amount of money savings, housing, etc., as it provides for stability of family «infrastructure» and of the family itself in succession of generations.
Current Russian legislature violates this natural family right (the mob of lawyers in the Duma know only about individual rights yet they have no idea about protecting collective rights: rights of family, labor collectives, peoples, the mankind) by stipulating what is in fact a tax on the death of parents collected from their children and grandchildren after they take possession of the parents’ apartment if they lived separately.
This is just another example of how foul Russian bourgeois reformers act: being incapable to organize the social production and distribution which provides their citizens with normal life conditions and ensures that the budget is funded the state of bourgeois reformers shamelessly grabs at anything it can.
[50] Substituting the average laborer with the «average tax-payer», which became a custom in the mass media is also a substitution of one matter with another. Are Russian lawyers so hopelessly dumb that they cannot understand this point? — And if they are not dumb why do they refrain from discussing this issue both in Russia and in the «international community»?
[51] This can be proven by rigid accounting means on the basis of the theory of similarity of multiindustrial production and consumption system described in the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR “The Brief Course…” and “Dead Water” in post-1998 editions.
[52] There is two words in English meaning two similar things: concept and conception. They are:
Concept – n. general notion; abstract idea.
Conception – n. 1 conceiving or being conceived. 2 idea, plan. 3 understanding (has no conception).
(“The Oxford Dictionary of Current English”; revised second edition. Oxford University Press, 1996.)
In the present work we use the second word due to it’s third meaning – understanding. Since any conception of living is primarily the understanding not just an abstract idea.
[53] Because it was actually or legally impossible to violate the actual property or administrative rights of others or because directive addressed control was disrupted due to impediments to efficient information exchange in large administrative structures («liked by the tsar, but despised by the dog-keeper») and in remote «branches» where local directorates become actually more powerful than the central one («God is high in the sky, and the tsar is likely far»).
[54] «Investment product» is a term, which denotes means of production, permanent structures, etc. adopted in Western economic science.
[55] It is said in the Bible that construction of the tower of Babylon (no matter what the real project was like) stopped because the participants of the project lost their common language culture.
[56] A nut with the thread in inches cannot be screwed on a bolt with the thread in metric units, etc.
[57] Because from 1994 on “The Brief Course…” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR was published more than once. This work describes the theory of similarity of multiindustrial production and consumption systems which can provide the basis for solving the task of exercising control by means of self-regulating production and consumption in society, which can be performed both to a socially useful end or to a socially detrimental end.
[58] J. Stalin's work “The Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR” is quoted from a computer file therefore the quotations have no reference to pages but refer to chapters only.
[59] «Comparative analysis of the ways American and Japanese directors manage their businesses revealed that for American top-managers the primary goal is profitability of business. Their Japanese counterparts place their <developed> market share at the top. They place profit third from the bottom of a lengthy list». <this makes sense because profitability of business depends on developing and exploiting a certain share of market which remains stable over a long period of time> (V.Hryapov et al. «The economy of an enterprise», Minsk, 2000, p. 101).
Such vector of management, which businessmen and managers of the two countries have, adhered to over decades explains why American capitalism loses the position it has attained by the middle of the 20th century to Asian capitalism represented by Japanese capitalism.
Yet «Ford Motors» under the management of its founder was an exception from this rule, which characterizes Euro-American capitalism over the whole course of its history. In a footnote to Chapter 4.2 we have given a table illustrating the trends in product output and pricing on products that were being improved every year. One can see from this table that the management of «Ford Motors» did not pursue a momentary maximum profit but sought to increase sales, i.e. to develop the market, to expand its share on the market. It was the success in developing the market that provided for stable self-repayment based on sufficient profit. Ford explains this functional dependence several times in his book.
[60] Let us explain the terms used here:
· global policy is the activity directed towards achieving goals regarding the whole of mankind and planet Earth. Essentially it consists in controlling a range of long-term tendencies which very often rules out any correspondence between current politics and existing tendencies. Defining global policy can of course be compared to a «grand chessboard» as Z. Brzezinski did in a book with the same name (Brzezinski Z. “The Grand Chessboard. American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives”. Basic Books) yet one would have to place all countries on this «board» including one’s own;
· foreign policy is the activity directed towards achieving goals of the state’s ruling class beyond the state’s territory and jurisdiction;
· domestic policy is the activity directed towards achieving goals of the state’s ruling class within the state’s territory and jurisdiction.
Ruling classes of the overwhelming majority of state-like formations that existed in history are not homogeneous. Therefore different subgroups within those classes may have different interests and may set different priorities between global, foreign and domestic policy. For this reason global policy, domestic and foreign policy of one and the same state can more or less disagree and hamper each other. One can read about how this may actually happen without having to deal with all the nonsense of political science in the novel by a Polish writer Boleslav Prus called “The Pharaoh” (printed 1895) which was published in Russia several times after 1991 (a review by Internal Predictor of the USSR can be accessed from the file 9608282rc*.doc from the Information base).
[61] The second book by H. Ford that became widely known is called “The International Jew”, first published also in 1922. It was published several times in Russian translation in the 1920’s in the USSR. Yet later it was withdrawn even from the «spetshrans» of central libraries, as the annotation to its 1993 edition says (published by the «Moskvityanin» publishing house, Moscow).
«Spetshran» is an abbreviation of «spetsialnoye hraneniye» («special custody»). In the USSR this denoted library stock that contained books published both abroad and in the USSR which were not classified but had no access to public libraries or were withdrawn from them. Access to the «spetshran» literature was granted only to authorized specialists and only in their professional field of knowledge. One was required to submit a written request and recommendation from the party committee of one’s place of work which had to be approved by superior party authorities and probably by the KGB.
The book “Today and Tomorrow” is less well-known. In this book Ford continues on the topic started in “My Life and Work”.
[62] Atheists have a right to believe that objective rights result from the man’s genetic programs and from the laws of nature on the whole with the terms «genetic programs» and «the laws of nature on the whole» used in their broadest sense. In the context of this work what is important is that «objective rights» exist objectively. The debate on their source and variations in terminology are outside the context of this work.
The issues of religion and atheism are dealt with in other works by Internal Predictor of the USSR in detail: “Towards God’s Ruling…”, “Why does the Internal Predictor Urge People to Live in God’s Kingdom Without Acknowledging the Last Covenant?”, “«Master and Margaret»: a Hymn to Demonism? Or the Gospel of Devoted Faith”, “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”, etc.
[63] It is exactly this way of using capital and small letters that corresponds to the moral and ethic duplicity which is characteristic of the personality’s psyche within the culture of the New Testament canon: «god» and «Caesar».
[64] Algorithm — garbled «al-Khowarismi», the name of a mathematician who lived in Central Asia in the Middle Ages. His name is used as a term for a succession of actions that allow to achieve certain goals. A description of such a set of actions is also called an algorithm. An algorithm consists of the following:
· the information which describes the way incoming information is transformed for every block of the algorithm and
· the actions (measures), which control the exchange of the information transformed within the algorithm between the blocks.
By algorithms we mean the aggregate of particular functionally specialized algorithms.
In the subculture based on the humanities the closest notion to the terms «algorithm» and «algorithms» is the term «scenario», more particularly — a multi-choice scenario.
[65] Even the analysts of radio «Freedom» note that the Duma members proceeding from their own understanding of practicability often initiate laws or pass laws which contradict to the Russian constitution and to laws passed earlier. But the madhouse on radio «Freedom» is not free enough to discuss the issues of different possible social life conceptions and which one of them is the best. Yet these are the questions that have to be asked in order to start getting over the conceptual uncertainty in social self-government and getting rid of folly.
[66] In Russian there are three words sounding differently that are used to show really different things. Two of them are translating on English as “Jew” and there is no word for the third. We (though in citations and in stable statements we will leave an original term) will use the next translation:
Hebrew – shows national (or, correctly, pseudo-national) belonging of a person to the some system of “national” clans.
Jew – it is a word to name the Judaists, so it shows only the religion, not nationality (or pseudo-nationality as “Hebrew” do). There is no need to confuse these two terms. But also “Jew” can be not Judaist, but one who knowingly or unknowingly follows the Judaic conception of all-world domination (see the Supplement 1). So it approaches to the term “zid”.
Zid [zhid] – shows one’s belonging to the active parasites corporation inclined to parasitizing on work and labor of others.
The terms on Russian sounds roughly similar to these ones.
Why do we need to make such a differentiation? Since not each Hebrew is Judaist (and Jew), and not only Hebrews can be Jews. But too often one confuse these nationality and religion (and even the meaning of the word zid is often considered to be just Hebrew. Thus zids of other nationalities fade from the picture).
[67] Called after senator Joseph McCarty (1908 — 1957). He held the post of Chairman of the senate commission of the United States Congress on government agencies’ activities and of the regular commission on investigating «anti-American activities» (since 1953). He started a campaign on persecuting and violating the rights of those suspected in sympathizing communists and also those who opposed to the arms race and the «cold war».
[68] This macroeconomy is hostile to a laborer both as a producer and as a consumer of products. H. Ford had no power over the US macroeconomy. Those who had power over it used it maliciously to set up «the great depression». Many businesses perished in it and many suffered heavy losses. «Ford Motors» was also among the victims: it was forced to close 25 of its 36 factories.
This was the effect of macroeconomic factors, not of some mistakes which the management of «Ford Motors» made in choosing and executing the strategy of business development.
On the other hand, the book “My Life and Work” by H. Ford was published 7 years before 1929 when the «great depression» broke out. Seven years is a long time enough for the society to think its contents over, to start changing its morals and ethics (including business ethics) and to make it impossible for the potential organizers of the «great depression» to fulfill their plans.
[69] It is necessary to add control of the micro- and macrolevels in their interaction to the functions named by H. Ford.
[70] It is really so if the legislators act within the framework of a flawed conception of organizing people’s life in society. For example, this is the case if the legislative, executive and judicial authorities are controlled by the Biblical doctrine of establishing the system of global slavery through financial means.
[71] It is true but it implies that the common people become familiar with conceptual power and make it righteous. This will inevitably lead to the state and government activity being transformed and in consequence — to passing of new laws and abolishing many previous ones.
[72] This sentence contains a falsehood stated by H. Ford: see the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR called “The Brief Course…”, “On the Nature of Bank Activity and Welfare Growth” (among collected articles “The Intellectual Position”, № 1, 1996). Usury as a system-forming economic factor, which occurs in the West and in post-Soviet Russia — is one of the means of executing slavery and therefore is always evil.
And with all this going on all the regular «defenders of rights» make a silent «all-together» on this issue, as if they are all utter fools.
If one analyzes all the nonsense that «defenders of rights» have said and written in the last decades their main point can be compressed into the following motto: «Away with statehood! Long live mafia slavery in civilized forms!»
[73] A discrete product is the one which is calculated in whole numbers only, e.g. it is possible to have 102 cars, not 102.23 cars. When non-discrete products are calculated the quantities are measured by real numbers, i.e. they can be both whole and fractional. E.g., it is possible to have both 102 tons of wheat and 102.23 tons.
Discrete consumption by portions means that consumption is also calculated discretely being determined by the number of portions, though the portion itself can contain a fractional amount of certain products. E.g., in order to make one suit of a certain cut and size various amounts of different fabrics are to be consumed in the manufacturing process, and those amounts do not have to be whole numbers.
[74] If you have purchased alone a volleyball ground with all the necessary equipment driven by sheer love of physical training and seeking no profit from participating in the sport show-business you will not be able to enjoy the game of volleyball anyway because volleyball is a game for two teams by the way its rules are made.
[75] In the terminology of Western accounting assets (in nominal financial expression) = liabilities (to third physical and juridical parties for taken loans, etc.) + owned capital.
[76] The advocates of the «ideal» way of reforming Russia in the Western manner and of «human rights» as they are understood in the West have to see: when the course of accounting at Harvard university business school mentions in a kind of accidental way that a company’s staff is not subject to accounting one gets the answer to the questions asked by the audience with slave-owning inclinations. Because slaves who are one of production means in a slave-owning society are inevitably subject to accounting. And if one looks into US files on accounting documents compiled in the times before the Civil War, especially in Southern states, one will see that it is really so. Yet even today there are efforts to start accounting employees that come from the subconscious, and it demonstrates very brightly the morals, psychology and the true position of most people in the society of US and the West on the whole.
[77] Let us illustrate this with an example. As early as the 1960’s, the earliest stage of developing automatic and computer equipment, an accident happened during the pre-start check of a ballistic intercontinental missile that was about to be tested on the Baykonur space-launching center. The accident occurred due to a mistake in the automatic control system design, which caused an accidental ignition of the second stage engine. Burning fuel went through the first stage fuel tanks and it led to the missile’s exploding at the launching site. One single mistake made in a collective activity, which consisted in designing the automatic control system, caused the death of 91 people (including Commander-in-chief of Strategic missile troops Artillery marshal M. Nedelin) who had been working on the launching site and in its vicinity.
[78] In the Western culture this style of social self-government is described in the «black humor» of the «Murphy laws».
[79] Working conscientiously means to get professional training, to come forward with socially useful initiatives directed towards improving products, technologies, work organization, to help other staff members (including executives) in things that are not stipulated in job descriptions in their common work.
[80] Mass media reported even such outrageous incidents as workers who have been made so miserable by their administration that they attempted to assassinate the corrupt directors most of whom are by the way former members of the CPSU.
[81] One can read about the psychic types and about what becoming truly a human means in greater detail in the following works by Internal Predictor of the USSR: “Dead Water” in post-1998 editions, “«From Human Likeness Towards Being a Human»” (first published under the heading of «From Matriarchy Towards Being a Human…”, “Come and Aid Me in My Disbelief…”, “Principles of Personnel Policy”, “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”. Here we shall provide only a brief comment.
The information which provides the grounds for a human being’s behavior could be divided into following categories:
· basic instincts and unconditioned reflexes, as well as their cultural veneers;
· cultural traditions that are above instincts;
· his or her own limited understanding;
· «intuition on the whole» — things emerging from the subconscious level of an individual’s psyche, coming from collective psyche, external delusions and from being possessed as this term was interpreted by the Holy inquisition;
· God’s guidance on the basis of the previously named things except for external delusions and possessions that are direct intrusions into another person’s psyche against the will of its bearer.
These are things, which are possibly or actually contained in every individual’s psyche. But among them there can be a certain component, which dominates over other in the individual’s behavior. If the first one dominates, then the individual has a psyche of the animal type. By the way his behavior is organized he is an animal resembling a human (such were the members of any national society in the past). If the second dominates the individual has a psyche of the zombie type. He is a bio-robot programmed by culture (such are the majority of Hebrews and most average people in the West move towards reaching this level. The problem of possible over-population is supposed to by solved by family planning programs, legalized sexual perversions and imposing the culture of «safe sex»). The third and the fourth are typical of personalities with the demonic psychic type (they are the so-called «world backstage»: masters of biblical cults, leaders of mondialism, eurasianism, superior scientologists, blunt Satanists, etc.)
And only the fifth corresponds to the human psychic type and is a norm for a human being (Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Stalin all worked towards realization of this norm). Here the individual’s life is no more a game without meaning or a game for pleasure’s sake. This game acquires the meaning of implementing Superior Will maintaining the easiness of childhood busy with joyful game.
[82] Quoting from A.S.Pushkin.
[83] This is one of the moments in H. Ford’s book when he says that income can be superfluous in respect to sensible needs. In practice this statement applies both to family and personal consumption of products and services and to the production sphere. H. Ford pays more attention to production. In the case of personal and family consumption, which is superfluous in respect to natural healthy lifestyle, income often cannot be spent usefully. Instead, it encourages the person or family, especially the generations of descendants, towards degradation. The evil of impoverishment is evident to the majority of people. The evil brought by superfluous income is less evident, and many find it painful to discuss this issue.
[84] A clear explanation for particularly dumb bourgeois and politicians who support the bourgeois «democracy», including Russian ones: you can lose your “elite” status very much sooner than the generation you belong to reaches old age and passes away.
[85] I.e. thirty years after H. Ford’s book was first published.
[86] In Marxism «overproduction» in financial values corresponds to «surplus value» appropriated by the capitalist.
[87] Becoming proficient in conceptual power and working purposefully towards establishing the Soviet power. Since it is the way statehood can exist and the laboring majority can execute power on the part of all people.
[88] Under the condition of constant increase in prices which acts as a macroeconomic factor the same question can be asked the following way: «How long will this cattle bear without a murmur an administration that does not raise wages and does not struggle to use the full power of the state for eliminating the main reasons of price growth — bank usury and stock exchange speculations?»
This question remains topical throughout all the years of Russian reforms. As directors and businessmen refuse to ask that question and to answer it articulately it becomes clear that they — simply as people, no matter what they are professionally — are shit, with minor exceptions.
In another quotation from the book H. Ford makes a far more definite statement on this issue:
«Cutting wages is the easiest and most slovenly way to handle the situation, not to speak of its being an inhuman way. It is, in effect, throwing upon labor the incompetence of the managers of the business» (Ch. 9. “Why Not Always Have Good Business?”).
He continues on this topic in Ch. 10. “How cheaply can things be made?”:
«It is not good management to take profits out of the workers or the buyers; make management produce the profits. Don’t cheapen the product; don’t cheapen the wage; don’t overcharge the public. Put brains into the method, and more brains, and still more brains — do things better than ever before; and by this means all parties to business are served and benefited. And all of this can always be done».
In other words by lowering wages the administration (and statesmen who create macroeconomic prerequisites for it by their policy) acknowledge their own inconsistency both as managers and as honest people.
[89] Trade unions were H. Ford’s aversion because their talkative leaders were unable to take part in this dialogue having no knowledge of products, technologies and production organization. H. Ford is essentially right on this point: when staff and administration treat each other as comrades and respect their common cause trade union bosses seeking the role of negotiators turn out to be unnecessary. In all other cases trade union bosses in their majority are just another corporation of parasites who are sometimes used by backstage forces to deal with employees who seem disagreeable to them and … with businessmen by forcing their staff to go on strikes and make demands that are known to be unrealizable.
That is why trade unions are a weird kind of «school of communism» (an aphorism by V. Lenin imprinted on every page of trade union cards in the USSR).
[90] H. Ford speaks on this issue unambiguously in Chapter 5, “Getting into Production”:
«… for of course it is not the employer who pays wages. He only handles the money. It is the product that pays the wages and it is the management that arranges the production so that the product may pay the wages» (put in bold type by the authors).
[91] This is similar to the principle of the first stage of communism if Marxist terminology is to be used: «take from each person according to his ability, give to each person according to his contribution».
[92] This feeling gave rise to enthusiasm in work. We have all been taught since 1985 by «humanist democratizers» that Stalin the tyrant and despot exploited this enthusiasm in the most atrocious way. And he has left this enthusiasm to his successors, and they have gradually stifled it in the years that passed since Stalin’s murder.
[93] The difference between income from the enterprise’s sales of its products and its expenditure on raw materials, component parts and services provided by outside enterprises that are consumed in the production proper.
[94] In a normal macroeconomy such loans must bear no interest or be granted on preferential terms, i.e. the sum to be returned to the enterprise must not exceed (and sometimes be even less) than the amount of loaned money.
[95] However Russian defenders of rights also keep silent on these problems as if being utterly dumb. Unlike these people H. Ford saw clearly how this issue relates to a human being’s freedom:
«If you expect a man to give his time and energy, fix his wages so that he will have no financial worries. It pays. Our profits, after paying good wages and a bonus—which bonus used to run around ten millions a year before we changed the system—show that paying good wages <i.e. the main part of payments, the salary> is the most profitable way of doing business» (Ch. 8. “Wages”).
[96] Production output can be calculated both in natural values and by production costs. H. Ford say the following on this subject:
«A department <i.e. operating departments> gets its standing on its rate of production. The rate of production and the cost of production are distinct elements. The foremen and superintendents would only be wasting time were they to keep a check on the costs in their departments. There are certain costs—such as the rate of wages, the overhead, the price of materials, and the like, which they could not in any way control, so they do not bother about them. What they can control is the rate of production in their own departments. The rating of a department is gained by dividing the number of parts <i.e. manufactured accounting units of departments’ production> produced by the number of hands working. Every foreman checks his own department daily—he carries the figures always with him. The superintendent has a tabulation of all the scores; if there is something wrong in a department the output score shows it at once, the superintendent makes inquiries and the foreman looks alive. A considerable part of the incentive to better methods is directly traceable to this simple rule-of-thumb method of rating production (put in bold type by the authors). The foreman need not be a cost accountant—he is no better a foreman for being one. His charges are the machines and the human beings in his department. When they are working at their best he has performed his service. The rate of his production is his guide. There is no reason for him to scatter his energies over collateral subjects.
This rating system simply forces a foreman to forget personalities — to forget everything other than the work in hand. If he should select the people he likes instead of the people who can best do the work, his department record will quickly show up that fact» (Ch. 6. “Machines and Men”).
[97] Besides, superior executives should be responsible for employment assistance within the bounds of the enterprise including organizing and financing retraining for employees dismissed from the units of the enterprise and ensuring that their financial status does not deteriorate.
And the macroeconomic system organization should be likely responsible for employment assistance at other enterprises also ensuring that the financial status of employees dismissed from regional enterprises does not deteriorate if it is possible.
These two factors of the micro- and macrolevels are one of the way by which the priorities of the society’s economy manifest themselves: whether the priority is satisfying the needs of people or serving various morally unhealthy clans of oligarchs and their spongers.
[98] This is a kind of «party maximum» for the managerial sphere. («Party maximum» was the limit of income for ALL-UNION COMMUNIST PARTY (BOLSHEVIKS) members. Experts and executives received a smaller salary in comparison to non-party people holding equivalent posts. In the first years of the Soviet regime this maximum protected the party as a means of social self-government from crooks and go-getters. It was later abolished as though it was unnecessary.
Besides if one works more than one’s associates (in this case employees) one needs more time to recover his strength. One therefore has neither strength nor time to spend on sprees and the minimum income which enough to satisfy healthy the needs of one’s own and one’s family is not higher than that of an employee who works less and who has time to spend some money on show business and recreation.
[99] This statement by H. Ford makes clear how broad the gap is between his idea and the idea advocated by mass media while planned economy of the USSR and Russia was being destroyed. Mass media said that if a businessman works for himself he works for society. H. Ford sees it the other way round: if a businessman works for society he receives a right to have a share in the product of collective labor. The condition that Russia is in after a decade of reforms carried out under the motto «by working for himself the businessman works for society!» shows that this motto is nonsense and that H. Ford was right.
Reforms should be carried out not by E. Gaidar’s theories or according to recommendations from the economic school of venality and corrupt morals headed by «Chicago rabbi» (Milton Fridman, Nobel prize winner, born 1912) and other «armchair intellectuals» of their kind. Since they do not feel any kind of interindustry balance. Reforms should conform to the moral and ethic principles of bolshevism which were stated by different people, H. Ford being one of them.
[100] Not only of economic, scientific and technical progress but also of moral and ethic progress or regression. The latter was the case in the post-Stalin USSR and provided moral and ethic grounds for the attempt to restore capitalism which begun in 1985.
[101] In other words, good will of people who understand this necessity should result in establishing a system of organizing social life and the life of its every member that it is expressed in. But this leads us to the problems of conceptual power in society — creating a conception of social life and organizing the control of its multiindustrial production and consumption system.
[102] H. Ford implies that the family is a seed that the society grows from in subsequent generations. In accordance with the role family has the married woman first of all keeps the house, gives birth to children and brings them up. This is what her social role consists in and no one can substitute her in that role due to the biologic features of the species called «Homo sapiens». She has a right to be busy with something else only after she conscientiously fulfils what is destined to her. The man has a different mission in a family which is also determined by the biology of our species: he must ensure that the woman fulfils her internal family mission by taking part in social activities. This means that the remunerations he receives for performing socially useful work is not his personal income but the income of the family he lives in.
Therefore the problem of the woman’s economic independence from the man and «feminism» of other kinds that have recently emerged are one of the many ways that internal family life deviates from its essence — reproduction of new generations and making an integral personality out of every new-born child.
[103] See the table on trends in car prices given in one of the footnotes of Chapter 4.2.
[104] This is the way H. Ford prevent «investors» («middle class») from getting unearned income.
[105] There is a very smart joke that demonstrates this dependence and gives an example of the insanity of «post-industrialists» who are stuck in virtual reality:
A cruise liner is going sank, the storm smashes all the life-boats left against the shipboard, help from the outside world is getting late. The crew has used every means of saving the ship but in vain. The captain is reported that there is still the last chance of saving: there is a «high-tech» expert among the passengers! He is found and brought to the captain’s bridge. He comes and has the following conversation with the captain:
— Do you have an Internet connection?
— We do.
— How much longer can we hold?
— Half an hour…
— O.K. We still have time to put the ship for auction and to sell it. It is not our problem afterwards. Load the browser…
Note: a browser is a computer program intended for surfing the Internet.
[106] Everything that has been claimed to be such are fakes of a more or less villainous nature and their content cannot be compared to this nationally published work addressed to future generations.
[107] Henceforth production (consumption) range is understood as product nomenclature + production (consumption) volume for every item of nomenclature.
[108] The disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power-plant in many respects resulted from the Soviet top academic “elite” being incapable of such a change in activity.
In 1957, 29 years prior to the Chernobyl disaster, I. Yefremov in his science-fiction novel “The Andromeda Nebula” warned people that civilized life on the planet could be destroyed if power engineering were developed on the basis of nuclear disintegration and radioactive pollutants of environment produced by such power-plants were accumulated.
But the «outstanding scientists» of the USSR turned out to be too dumb to follow this warning, to find and commercialize a different technology of power production that would be friendly to the biosphere. They clung to their past professionalism which was the source of income and future career refusing to learn other socially useful activities. They continued and continue still to force the government to finance the work they once learnt to do without thinking about who, when and how is going to clean the radioactive «shit» which they leave everywhere and which spreads all over our planet.
The new alternative power engineering is created by craftsmen of the common people who have managed to renounce the existing views of physical theories.
[109] These balance models are called «inputs — output» in the professional slang of economists. This name suggests that final product output is determined by how inputs (investments) are distributed between industries. V. Leontyev (1906 — 1999), a Russian emigrant of the post-revolution wave, was awarded the Nobel prize in economics for developing balance models and methods of macroeconomic regulation.
The Gosplan of the USSR based its work on essentially similar balance models. Mind you, the Gosplan operated when V. Leontyev has not yet published his first work on this subject. But the workers of the Gosplan got no Nobel prize, and the «public opinion» gives the privilege of creating balance models to V. Leontyev despite that Gosplan’s work is simply impossible without them.
Thus, the issue of biased referees is relevant not only in sports competitions like the commercial show called «The 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt-Lake City» …
[110] Everyone used to solve such systems of two or three equations in high school using the method of calculating determinants or successive substitution. Those who got a higher technical or mathematical education after high school know that this is a well-developed branch of mathematics called «linear algebra» allowing to describe and solve many practical problems in different activities of the society.
[111] In factors of costs quantities of consumed products always include the loss caused by manufacturing processes and by violations of technological procedures which occur in real production.
[112] Most people understand that there is a system of production in society. Yet many people refuse to regard the market as one of the instruments used by the system of distributing products and services in the society. They insist that «distribution» is only something typical of army barracks: you get a pair of state-owned pants having a standard cut once a year and sign where it says «signature».
[113] Children not only of alcoholics but also of those who have a «culture» of drinking are mostly handicapped. Synthetic coloring agents, stabilizers, builders etc., which are used in lipsticks result in women having liver illnesses, as well as men who kiss them (according to some figures more than half of lipstick produced is eaten by men while kissing women). Synthetic fabrics and supporting insets in bras led to a burst of breast cancer diseases. Production unfriendly to environment causes an increase in various diseases the employees and local population have in the region where such production is located. Pharmacology, food additives, preservatives, stabilizers and imitators of natural foodstuff are a topic in themselves. One could go on and on.
[114] The means of assembly are the system of credit and finances, the standards on production and consumption of products, the infrastructures (transport, means of transmitting information) that unite the fragments of the system into an integrity, current legislature and culture on the whole.
[115] When E. Gaidar and his brothers in maliciousness and weakness of mind begun their schizophrenic «market reforms» in Russia they did not understand the practical meaning of these words, in life as well as all those who listened to them spellbound. But those who understood something in the sense of life and destroying life maliciously used their absence of understanding.
[116] Control is impossible without determined set goals.
[117] According to control theory and practice several aims of equal priority form one «group aim».
[118] In other words the selected set of mutually exclusive aims requires that the sheep are safe and the wolves are fed, and this is not always possible.
[119] Insanely luxurious life, being a servant as profession, consumption race chasing fashion, demand for products manufactured by the highest standards and standards beyond common sense, holding excessive property of all kinds in comparison with actual vital needs of a person and a family that are grounded demographically, etc.
[120] Primarily owing to unearned income and exclusively high prices on their participation in social activities that exceed (sometimes several times) the amount necessary to pay for consumption in the demographically grounded range of needs.
[121] One does not need to disprove this by giving the example of the USA where the population’s well-being is high, including those who lives on all sorts of aids and benefits. Actually the consumer well-being of the USA is proof to the above-made statements: the US population constitutes only 5 % of the Earth’s population yet the USA consume about 40 % of global energy production (located largely outside the USA) and account for more than a half of registered environment pollution.
In other words the global market mechanism is adjusted in such a way that the majority of the planet’s population is forced to sell the products of its labor for junk prices providing for consumer well-being of the minority.
[122] This is a viewpoint attributed to empress Catherine II and is not a word for word quotation.
[123] What are the labour inputs on finding and proving a new mathematical theorem? This is a question that will remain undecided. And one comes across such examples in the society’s working life in abundance.
[124] I.e. when prices are formed freely preventing the state from fixing obligatory prices; when there are no quotas which limit or set a minimum obligatory level for certain kinds of production; when there is no well-developed state-owned sector whose production and price policy affect price-forming on all the markets of society; when usury is practiced freely including bank corporations usury; when stock exchange speculations are free inevitably paving the way for freedom of usury, etc.
[125] Yet the liberal defenders of market believe this very method of regulating inter-industry capacity proportions and the absolute production indices to be the norm. Those among them who are most well-meaning and silliest even nowadays want «the market mechanism» to regulate production and distribution in the society in such a way as to form a law-abiding social majority living in prosperity in the succession of generations. Such people pay no heed to the limited ability, which is objectively inherent to this mechanism, and to the way prices are formed in a crowd-“elitist” society.
[126] In the historically real socialism of the 20th century many things were carried to the point of absurdity on purpose. The crowd-“elitism” changed his disguise and substituted the ideal of human righteous community (the so-called socialism) by the reality of barracks for slaves. But this is a special aspect of the issue of socialism.
The reality of slavery based on barracks-like discipline and executed under cover of socialist slogans has only one point where it is related to socialism proper, i.e. to arranging socialist production and distribution of products in accordance with the vital interests of all laborers. It is possible only in a situation where there is neither theory nor theoretically non-formalized practice of controlling the multiindustrial production and consumption system on the planned basis. No theory and practice, which every member of society has an access to and which are understood by its politically active part.
If we are to speak in historically specific terms an attempt to build socialism on the basis of Marxism no matter what country it is made in the freedom of a socialist society is doomed to be substituted with barracks for slaves. One of the reasons is that Marxist political economy is based on imaginary categories that have nothing to do with real life and therefore cannot be practically measured in economic activity. Therefore Marxist political economy cannot be integrated with a system of accounting, financial and economic statistics, and so planned control of economy in a socialist society can be as efficient as the society is free from Marxism.
On the other hand the substitution of declared socialism by the practice of barracks for slaves can be performed the more effectively the lower the educational standard of the society’s majority is. The well-meaning crowd which cannot interpret life independently indulges in a blind faith in socialist leaders. These leaders “elitize” (make an elite out of themselves) and start misusing their power, become parasites which is exactly what provides the grounds for creating the barracks-for-slaves system. Within this system any element of socialism is suppressed by the «socialist» oligarchy which seeks to break away from the limitations imposed on it by the society’s true achievements in building socialism and to convert to overtly legalized crowd-“elitism”. This exactly is the way «perestroika» was started in the USSR leading to emergence of the oligarchy capitalism of the Yeltsin era.
[127] In other words the indices must be measurable (in kilometers, tons, standards, etc.) or registerable by «done — not done».
[128] The reasons market mechanism is completely excluded or blocked partially can be different: ranging from sheer lack of skill to control its adjustment to force of circumstances or deliberate choice of other means to complete the objectives set in the plan.
[129] February 2002
[130] But their views, which were essentially true, did not have a cult status either in the USSR or abroad. They are not the subject of studies and discussions at universities, and judging by the published works it is not these views that set the subject for the studies of official economics.
[131] A fool is more dangerous than an enemy.
[132] It would be more precise to say «in a single algorithms of social self-control».
[133] This condition stipulated by the phrase in italics is necessary because globalization can have different aims but this problem must be practically solved for any variant of globalization to become possible.
[134] Described in the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR “The Brief Course...” and “Dead Water” in editions starting from the 1998 edition.
[135] In this connection one should say directly that the main factor generating nominal price growth, which forcedly leads to the inflationary emission, is interest on loans.
[136] Increasing income in order to ensure sales of certain products in a crowd-“elitist” society can lead to an increase in nominal prices on other products and not to ensuring sales of desired products regardless of their usefulness. For example, high standards of education and health care cannot be provided by means of increasing nominal income of large groups of population because on a self-regulated market such increase in income will result in price growth on products of mass everyday demand.
Therefore paid high standard health care and education on the basis of free self-regulated market is always the privilege enjoyed by the richest social strata whose representatives are more or less parasitic on the life of others. But in the planned economy of the USSR by the middle of 1950-s high standard (judging by world standards of the time) education and health care was practically available for the majority of the country’s population. This became possible due to targeted subsidies of socially useful activities that could not be developed on the self-repaying principle.
[137] In other words the price-list on final products within the demographically grounded range is the financial expression of the error vector for society’s self-control because ideal control is characterized by zero values of control errors and its deviations are characterized by non-zero values of control errors.
That such interpretation of the price-list’s role in modeling the processes of controlling production and consumption is a consistent one has been proved in the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR “The Brief Course…” and «Dead Water” in editions starting from the 1998 edition.
[138] This way a structural transformation of economy was undertaken in the USSR between 1920 and the 1950-s though it contradicted the law of value. In this period the system of general and higher special education was created which was world’s best for that time.
But as soon as this superior profitability which exists in the systemic integrity of economy was forgotten (after the reforms were started in the 1990-s), was no more felt and maintained everything became a mess in science, education, health care, army, industry and regions.
[139] The first one is changes in the planned range of production which occur due to changes in demographic grounding, changes in the tasks of state policy and changes in prices and price ratios caused by the society’s needs being satisfied.
The second one is development of the production and consumption system treated as a technological and organizational integrity proper. This leads to changes in the system’s own characteristics including profitability characteristics for production in industries and in supporting infrastructures.
[140] The Sufficiently common theory of control is described in the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR: “Dead Water” (all editions) and in a separate edition «The sufficiently common theory of control» (study aids for the lecture course given to students of the Applied mathematics and control processes faculty at St. Petersburg state university between 1997 and 1999), published in St. Petersburg in 2000.
[141] Which means that one of the crucial errors made by the Soviet society was in its systemic treatment of a «plan» as an unattainably high target. The result was twisting state reports, which led to absence of resources and means to carry out the plans that were developed. This made the plans unrealizable from the very start as all the efforts to fulfill them inevitably led to violating inter-industry proportions. This approach was retained throughout many five-year plans and the situation inevitably became worse and worse.
Yet this is only one crucial error out of many.
[142] “Great Schemer” was a nickname of Ostap Bender – the main hero of the previous mentioned novel by I. Ilf and E. Petrov “12 chairs” (known in the West as “Diamonds to sit on”). (The translation of this nickname may be made in another way in the English variant).
[143] The scientific, theoretical and partially practical basis for the approach to the problem solution did already exist. It was founded by a Russian scientist Vassily Vassilievich Dokuchaev (1846 — 1903) whose works were not put into practice during the pre-Revolutionary years. In his work “Our Steppes: Their Past and Present” (1892) he formulated a plan to fight the draughts in the black earth region of the European part of Russia. After the Great Patriotic War in the USSR on the basis and in development of his works under Stalin's personal support a state program for the improvement of natural conditions of steppe and forest zone was launched. It was designed to create shelter belts for snow-retention, artificial ponds, etc that were supposed to change the regional water balance and, as a result, of the natural conditions on general. After the Stalin removal the program was partly dropped and partly turned into a project of partial derivation of northern rivers to the south. Nevertheless what had been realized in the years of Stalin bolshevism significantly reduce the damage from the hot winds in the agriculture of the European steppe area.
[144] Another architectural expression of a degrading parasitic way of life is a lodgment or a household which is too large for the family to manage on their own during their free time. As a result a necessity arises to engage a servant or this responsibility rests on the “poor relatives” or dependent acquaintances. It corrupts the morality of the children in the family and of society in general.
[145] Vivarium is a place where small laboratory animals (mice, rats) are kept. A kind of cabinet divided into multiple cells.
[146] Which was created artificially because unqualified working force migrated to towns from the country. In the 1960 — 1970-s this on the one hand depleted the agriculture and on the other hand prevented town industry from undergoing technical re-equipment in due time.
[147] “Six hundred square meters” — a family garden out of the city and a very little house there.
[148] Normally they should service not only the military forces, but also other industries, the country's infrastructure and family life.
It is wasteful to produce stainless steel razor blades or glass and throw them away unutilized. The vast junkyards contain all kinds of stuff and therefore are ecologically harmful. Yet while the junkyards are localized and their places are known, a lot of dangerous stuff is simply thrown away into the biosphere wherever it is possible without control and specification of its level of danger due to carelessness and irresponsibility.
[149] A sort of grapes and of red dry vine produced out of it.
[150] Equilibrium prices ensure the planned profitability of branches under the condition that they implement the planned range of full capacities and of final output. They are the known values in the system of equilibrium price equations, which are included into the system of inter-industry balance equations. The variables in these equations are the proportions of «surplus value» in the product price (wages, taxes, rents, amount of credit and insurance balance, etc in the gross output per unit). The indices are the same as in the indices of direct expenses in the inter-branch balance equations. The matrix of an equilibrium prices equation system is a transposed matrix of an inter-branch balance equation system (i.e. the indices in the columns of one matrix are equal to the indices in the corresponding columns of the other). For more information see specialized literature and the work by Internal Predictor of the USSR “The Brief Course…”
[151] This is a substantiation of the objection addressed to A. Livshits in section 4.2 that H. Ford’s business (and not «commercial» meaning «buy — sell but for a higher price») talent in Stalin’s times was more befitting to a Director of State Planning Committee than to a prisoner in a detention camp.
In Stalin’s times people with such world understanding could become prisoners only through the efforts of open and disguised Trotskyites carrying out the policy of depleting trained personnel of the Bolshevist state. While in post-Stalin times the crowds of those like A. Aganbegyan, A. Livshits and E. Gaidar trammeled the effort to build socialism, which was morally unacceptable for them. They climbed their scientific and political ladders treading down those few with such outlook in a competitive struggle.
[152] In order not to make it uselessly spent a state should have an articulate — historically long-term — strategy of global policy. Global policy is a strict term. If home policy is a system of measures in carrying out the goals of a ruling class within the jurisdiction of its state, foreign policy is a system of measures in carrying out the goals of a ruling class outside the jurisdiction of the state, then global policy is a system of measures in carrying out the goals in relation to the whole mankind, the whole global civilization within as well as outside its jurisdiction.
[153] Meyer Rothschild expressed its attitude towards the political system: «Allow me to control the country’s money and I don’t care who writes its laws».
As far as the laws word the conception of society’s self-control the freedom of usury suits the corporation in any state juridical forms: whether it is capitalism on the basis of freedom of free enterprise and the right of private property over the means of production or «socialism» with a moderate loan interest and the predominance of state and cooperative-kolkhoz property over the means of production — it is all the same.
A morally healthy society’s reaction on such parasitic autocratic claims should be insuperable.
[154] It would be foul to demand him alone to write a treatise on the theory and practice of planning and controlling national economy on the planned basis while simultaneously evolving several mathematical theories and at the same time being the head of state. The Academy of Sciences of the USSR and academies of the republics as well as university science were the institutions intended for the detailed development of versatile problems in the interests of the society.
But they proved their lack of efficiency and failure in the field of social studies both in the time of Stalin and during the following years. Many still lack it today.
[155] Though it isn’t so: look the beginning of ch. 4.3.
[156] This — is a key point to solving the problem if one knows the theory of similarity of multiindustrial production systems and understands how a long-term demographically grounded planning should be realized. The range of production is determined in each historical period by:
· the volume of energy (biogeneous and technogeneous) put into production and consumption;
· the coefficients of efficiency of technological and organizational processes comprising the production process ;
· the dominant social morality expressed in the distribution of accessible energetic potential between the branches of multiindustrial production and consumption system, including the distribution between the branches producing the means of production (which is the guarantee of the production’s complicity to the social needs in future) and the branches producing the end-product.
[157] The words ‘revenues’ and ‘expenditures’ are obviously used in a broader sense than the financial gains and losses in the accountant’s balance at the end of quarter.
[158] Here H. Ford means actually the demographic dependence of morally healthy needs of people and opposes them to the perverted degraded parasitic needs. The significance of division of all needs into two classes (demographically grounded and degraded parasitic) was discussed in Digression 6.
However Ford does not distinguish the two alternative classes and therefore is not precise in terms.
[159] Its reasons are discussed in Digression 6 that dealt with the characteristics of «market mechanism» as a regulator of the inter-industry proportions in production and distribution according to the principle of the priority of satisfying degraded parasitic needs. The latter is produced by the crowd-“elitist” society in which the non-humane types of psychology and the corresponding types of morality and ethics dominate.
[160] This is completely true about the modern Russian system formed by the efforts of reformers during the period of Boris Yeltsin’s presidency.
[161] The answer to this question is a key to solving all social and economic problems. Yet in the quoted book H. Ford did not go into the question at large. In his other work — “The International Jew” — he also could not give a reliable analysis of it because he did not know many facts of the world history, which determined incomprehension of its general course in the past and the possible development in the future.
[162] However the businessmen in the USA did not follow it. There is not much hope than Russian businessmen in their majority will follow this example by their own comprehension and good will — but only under the pressure of objective independent circumstances amounting to the threat to their own lives and the lives of their heirs.
In his conversation with H. Wells on 25th July, 1934 J.V. Stalin named a reason for this quite definitely:
«You, Mr. Wells, seem to proceed from the supposition that all people are good. As for myself I do not forget that there are many evil people. I do not believe in the goodness of bourgeoisie (…)».
Long ago Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius expressed himself similarly on the same question: «It is insanity to think that evil people do not make evil».
[163] It is, actually, a killing description of a culturally developed “elite” whose income is mainly unearned and comes from abusing the possibility to claim exclusively high payment due to the free market regulation of a labor market in a crowd-“elitist” society. It proves Marcus Aurelius’ point.
[164] Named by H. Ford above: mutual admiration the idle and choosy higher society’s own high level of culture.
[165] H. Ford then continues:
«If a man cannot earn his keep without the aid of machinery, is it benefiting him to withhold that machinery because attendance upon it may be monotonous? And let him starve? Or is it better to put him in the way of a good living? Is a man the happier for starving? If he is the happier for using a machine to less than its capacity, is he happier for producing less than he might and consequently getting less than his share of the world's goods in exchange?
I have not been able to discover that repetitive labor injures a man in any way. I have been told by parlor experts that repetitive labor is soul- as well as body-destroying, but that has not been the result of our investigations. There was one case of a man who all day long did little but step on a treadle release. He thought that the motion was making him one-sided; the medical examination did not show that he had been affected but, of course, he was changed to another job that used a different set of muscles. In a few weeks he asked for his old job again. It would seem reasonable to imagine that going through the same set of motions daily for eight hours would produce an abnormal body, but we have never had a case of it. We shift men whenever they ask to be shifted and we should like regularly to change them—that would be entirely feasible if only the men would have it that way. They do not like changes which they do not themselves suggest».
It is his answer to the calumnious accusations put forward against him in the article «Fordizm» from the “Big Soviet Encyclopedia” and quoted in part 3:
«At the same time Fordizm intensified labor to an unprecedented extent, made it dull and mechanical. Fordizm counts on turning workers into robots and requires an extreme nervous and physical exertion. Compulsory pace of work set by the assembly line made it necessary to substitute piece-work payment by payment by the hour. The word «Fordizm» like «Tailorizm» before it became synonymous to exploitation of workers characteristic of the monopoly stage of capitalism which is bent on increasing profits of capitalist monopolies…
Ford praised his system as the one catering for the workers making special emphasis on wages at his factories being higher than the average wage in the industry. However higher wages are connected with higher working pace, quick wear of workforce, the task to attract more and more new workers to substitute those put out of action».
H. Ford adds also:
«In 1914, when the first plan went into effect, we had 14,000 employees and it had been necessary to hire at the rate of about 53,000 a year in order to keep a constant force of 14,000. In 1915 we had to hire only 6,508 men and the majority of these new men were taken on because of the growth of the business. With the old turnover of labor and our present force we should have to hire at the rate of nearly 200,000 men a year — which would be pretty nearly an impossible propositions». (Ch. 8. “Wages”).
It means that with the reorganization of production and the introduction of «Fordizm» employee turnover in one year decreased at least in ten times. It proves that working conditions on «Ford Motors» were better and the wear of labor force was less than at other enterprises.
Industrial labor, especially on the assembly line or in the hot-shops and chemical labs, is certainly not easy in spite of all its organization and payment principles. The latter in many ways depend, for example, on the level of culture in a society and the personnel’s education. At the beginning of the 20th century when «Ford Motors» was created the educational and cultural level of the employees left much to be desired. Illiteracy was a common thing in the USA. (In this aspect Ford writes that under the structure of «Ford Motors» there were created a system of general education and a teenage training system thanks to which a lot of young people became highly skilled workers and decent people). In other words, under different social and cultural conditions the principles of Fordizm would have been different and the labor more humane.
However for those who principally refuses to live in a civilization dependant on the technosphere and the collective nature of technological and control processes, — unless they do not skulk from the work under the pretext of criticizing the existing mode of life, — should be designed a direct program of transition from today’s extremely unhealthy way of life to the biological civilization which activity does not need manufacturing and, therefore, technological processes and manifold means of integrating multiple microeconomy into a single multiindustrial production and consumption system of macroeconomy.
[166] The fact that J.V. Stalin was right in his characteristic of «freedom» under the conditions of bourgeois «democracy» and market liberalism, could be seen at first hand by the millions of citizens of the former USSR after the reformations of 1991.
[167] «When there is an economical freedom — there is a freedom of creative work». – Vladimir Putin, March 13, 2002, during his conference with the editorial board of “Izvestia” on the occasion of its encaenia. (It was founded in 1917 by the Petrograd Committee of Workers and Soldiers’ Deputies right after the February Revolution, was the mouthpiece of the Soviet power).
[168] But as far as it does not answer to everybody's live ideals both the “elite”-corporate «perestroika» and «democratization» proved to be a deadlock and what's more: are doomed to fail. Because inside the Russian civilization acts an internal conceptual power which is alternative to the global witch-demonic power.
[169] Trotskyism in its essence is a schizophrenic, aggressive politically active psyche, which may be disguised as any kind of ideology or sociological doctrine. And psychical Trotskyism is historically older than Marxism in which it found its powerful expression. Trotskyism as a psychical phenomenon is characterized by the non-coincidence of proclamation and dissembling, results and promises.
Therefore the «democrats» by whose efforts the USSR was destroyed in order as it was said to build a «normal bourgeois democracy and civil society» are Trotskyites if to judge by their psychological organization. For more details see the work of Internal Predictor of the USSR “The Sorrowful Legacy of Atlantis” (“Trotskyism is «Yesterday», but not «Tomorrow»”).
[170] That is why they insisted that socialist production relations cannot develop in a capitalist society and transition to socialism is possible only by revolution under their command. And revolutionary muddle helped the masters and higher-ups to clear out those social groups which could have become an obstacle in establishing an undivided tyrannical power under the slogans of «victory of socialism». It was this very strategy that made VChK, the Committee on extraordinary situations (the early form of KGB) in many places during the first years of soviet power a prototype of Hitler's Gestapo but in its Hebrew-Jewish variant.
[171] For a more detailed analyses of the bankruptcy of philosophy and political economy of Marxism see the works of Internal Predictor of the USSR “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”, “The Brief Course...”, “Dead Water” in the editions starting from 1998.
[172] Probably because he honestly believed that his heirs suit as professionals better for the goals of management and development of «Ford Motors» in the close perspective. Moreover it was done under the psychological pressure of historically developed and legally formed institute of private ownership over means of production and the absence of legal forms of socialization (in the above discussed sense) of private property on means of production.
In connection with this question it is important to draw a parallel with the USSR where under the formal legal domination of public ownership over the means of production a tendency was evident to hand over the management by the founders of firms to their children. The sons of aircraft designers A.N. Tupolev, A.I. Mikoyan, the close relatives of many outstanding figures in soviet science and engineering occupy the leading posts in the firms founded by their elder relatives. It is for everyone to decide himself to what extent this practice is efficient.
The heirs are not always the virtuosos as the founders were. Foe example in 1957 «Ford Motors» managed by the heirs of H. Ford found itself in a very difficult situation. A mass production of a new model was launched. It was called Edzel after a deceased by that time Edzel Ford, son of Henry Ford. According to the opinion of the American historians of automobile industry the quality of the model was very low and the design - defiantly forbidding. As a result a lot of units of this model produced in 1957 never found their market, turned into scrap metal and were left rusting for decades in the backyards of the independent dealers (wholesalers) who invested in them.
There is a point of view that a soviet supersonic passenger liner Tu-144 was not a success because Alexander Tupolev, who was the son of Andrey Tupolev, became the head of the project under his father's protection and thus in his career-making pushed aside those probably more able and creatively gifted but without such powerful protection.
During the years of reforms and privatization many of such heirs by kinship became large shareholders — owners of privatised state property that was initially in juridical form a national public property.
[173] Though legislation and the enforcement accompanying it may partially contribute to the formation in a society of corresponding to it morality and world understanding. Yet one should bear in mind that legislation as it is, being one of the expressions of a definite conception of life organization, is dependent on the content of this conception and may benefit to the moral development as well as moral degradation of society.
[174] December 30, 1922.
[175] From the East-European Hebrews' spoken jargon— «Yiddish», originated on the basis of German language with addition of words from other languages.
[176] Chicago lawyer Aaron Shapiro in 1927 brought an action against Henry Ford accusing him of calumny. The cause of this was Ford's statement that Shapiro and other persons of Hebrewish origin (being Jews) participated in plot, which aim was to control American agriculture. The case was already being heard when an apology signed by Ford was produced to the court. The apology contained renunciation of previously brought accusations («International Jew», «Moskvityanin», 1993, publishers' preface, p. 22).
[177] Meaning Hebrew, though Ford used the similar word. See the footnote at the page 68. (Footnote is done by the authors)
[178] Concerning the «Protocols», refer to analytical note of IP the of USSR “Fascist-Minded «Semitism» from the Point of View of Being a Human” (file 970908-Фашиствующий_семитизм_с_точки_зрения_человечности.doc on the CD-distributed Information Base of Internal Predictor the USSR).
[179] The most high-speed transatlantic liners of those years (the “Mauritania” and the “Lusitania”) crossed the ocean at speed of approximately 25 knots (25 nautical miles per hour, one nautical mile equals to 1852 meters); other «decent» liners travelled at speed of about 20 knots; the «third-rate» ones — at speed of 13—17 knots. If H. Ford freighted a «decent» steamship, then hardly 10 hours passed after steamship's departure from New York, and passengers just came to themselves after leave-taking at port and just set up their belongings, when they started to put certain ideas into H. Ford's mind. And there was a more than a weeklong voyage ahead, comfortable saloons and strolls along the deck with the view at the ocean, which contributes to pondering…
But as could be understood from the history of Egypt and quotations from the Bible, cited in the Supplement, two these Jews were right except for one thing: save for the world, the Western regional civilization by that time was ruled by the heirs of ancient-Egypt hierarchy, by means of biblical culture on the whole, and within its course — by means of controlling and Jews, and finances, which were controlled by clans of Jewish usurious "aristocracy".
[180] The term which was used by J.V. Stalin to characterize the writers, since its their works during the pre-television epoch that in many respects formed morality and world understanding of the growing and grown-up generations of educated (i.e. literate) people.
[181] In essence such a widespread attitude to one’s life erases the difference between a man and a working cattle while the owner of the latter is responsible for cattle’s way of living and acting.
[182] In other words, H. Ford's complaints could be easily explicable under the conditions of Russia, where the serfdom was repealed just two years before the birth of H. Ford and his contemporaries, and traditional serfdom psychology in people's behavior had not yet been replaced by some other psychology. The matter is that for Russia it is quite difficult to find reliable statistics on this issue.
[183] The statement that Jewish culture is built on parasitism produces many people's (irrespectively of their origin) emotional, thoughtless reaction of aversion. Therefore we shall remind you once more: usury is parasitism and the way of oppression of people and the offspring, but it is the backbone factor in biblical culture.
The purpose of system of trade of personal copyrights and rights of «intellectual property» is to prevent culture, and especially scientific and technical progress from being the common property. This is the backbone parasitism and the way of oppression of people and the offspring too, developing in the 20th century in biblical civilization.
The ones who protest against such estimation of the institution of personal copyrights and rights of «intellectual property», should come to their senses; they should not close the issue of how to protect the society from the system, in which it is ruled on the basis of corporative-and-monopolistic buying-up and distribution of rights to use cultural, scientific and technical achievements with the issue of how the society should support the creators economically.
[184] IP's of the USSR outlooks at origination of the «Jewish question» are set out in paper “Dead Water” and, in more detail, in paper “Sinai Crusade”; its essence and prospects are considered in papers “Dead Water”, “Towards God’s Ruling…”, “The Sorrowful Legacy of Atlantis” (“Trotskyism is «Yesterday», but not «Tomorrow»”), “«Master and Margaret»: a Hymn to Demonism? Or the Gospel of the Covenantless Faith”.
Here, we shall briefly elucidate this issue. The priesthood of the ancient Egypt had degraded morally and ethically and had craved for undivided global intra-social power. Having seen the futility of force ways of achieving this goal, it saw fit to switch to establishment of world domination of "cultural cooperation". The essence of this new for those years way of aggression was to construct the culture, which, being accepted by other nations, made them dependent of the project bosses. Biblical culture had become this historically real culture. To disseminate this culture and to manage the project locally, they needed an instrument. As such an instrument, during the Egyptian captivity and 40-years long nomads' encampment along the Sinai desert, the historically real Jewry was bred on the basis of the same principles, used for breeding domestic animals' breeds with addition of some kinds of magic. Later on, this basis was inoculated with historically real Christianity — the teaching of Saul (apostle Paul), which replaced the withheld teaching of Christ for two thousand years. And Old Testament was provided with Talmudic comments. This is how historically real biblical culture and its sociology were formed.
Sociological doctrine of biblical project, revealing the essence of the “Jewish question”, is given in the Supplement.
[185] On this issue see IP's of the USSR work “On Racial Doctrines: Unfounded, but Plausible”.
[186] In this case H. Ford would completely realize the meaning of his surname, having opened the people way to new quality of life: «ford» means «passing» over the water obstacle. In certain mythology symbolizes culture as a whole. In this case, the matter concerns overcoming of biblical culture, which became a «water barrier» on the way to humanity.
But in the narrow practical and industrial-and-organizational shape, which «Fordizm» took, it could be adapted in practically any doctrine of industrial civilization life organization, if there was the will of its conceptual power.
[187] Once on TV they said that this is how comic actor of the 20th century, Charles Spencer Chaplin called Adolph Schicklgruber-Hitler. Schicklgruber is the Hebrewish surname, originating from the sobriquet «schickl-gruber», that stuck to the Hebrew, collecting the «schickl», internal tax in the Hebrewish community, which was established by the rabbinate.
Hitler is no more than a schicklgruber. His surname is the sign for those who understand the backstage history. «Holocaust» is the religious myth for the crowd as the continuation of the project «Moustached Clown»: it is cynical, but this is the truth of backstage history of the biblical civilization. Somehow involved in the backstage history, C. Chaplin parodied A. Hitler in the movie “Great Dictator”. Its full version was restored by the USA on the basis of computer technologies and shown on 17.02.2002 at Berlin film festival.
«According to the initial Chaplin’s idea, the final scene of the movie would show the fraternization of the hostile armies, and the soldiers would dance together. But he had to reject this idea due to technical difficulties concerned with the shooting of this scene (what could be difficult in it? — (comment supplied by the authors when citing). Instead, at the end of the film, Charlie Chaplin (who plays two parts in the film — the part of Hebrew hairdresser and the part of dictator Adenoid Heinkel) delivers monologue calling to the peace on the planet (on behalf of who: Hebrewish hairdresser and Hebrewish dictator— the clown who had fooled simple-minded German nationalists and "anti-Semites" (like H. Ford) of the whole world? — (question supplied by the authors when citing). (…)
Chaplin had been working on the film “Great Dictator” for over a year; he had been shooting the film at his own expense. After the film distribution it became one of the most commercial films. In 1940’s it broke all the records of handles in the USA and Great Britain» (Advertising-and-Information Agency “Novosti”, 18.01.2002, report about discovery at the cellar of C. Chaplin's house (in Switzerland) an amateur film with the episodes of Chaplin's shooting “Great Dictator”).
The war was under way, people died on the front lines and in the back areas, concentration camps were operating, but attitude of the Hebrewish “elite” (one of the spokesmen of which was Ch.S. Chaplin) was ironical…
The ones who would like to retort and stand up for Ch. Chaplin should know that derided evil does not cease to be evil and not only does not cease to be dangerous, but becomes still more dangerous, because is perceived ridiculous, but not dangerous and threatening.
[188] «When “The International Jew” began to spread widely and started to have certain influence, American Jew Isaac Lindemann from the organization “American Hebrew” demanded Ford to prove the existence of the Jewish plot. Lindemann stated that he was ready to collect necessary funds to recruit the best detectives. In any case, irrespective of the results of investigation, he intended to publish the results. Henry Ford always sympathized with policemen and detectives, so it seemed to him that he was «tossed up» a brilliant idea. He just had to ensure that investigation was performed by his people, but not by the «Jewish agents»… The automobile king created special headquarters and gathered the team to perform operation designated “Secret World Government”. This team included rather motley people: two officers of the USA Secret Service, several professional detectives, and simply «brave semitologists». “Fearless heroes of the invisible front” followed the famous Jewish figures as shadows and sent ciphered messages to Detroit to their chief. Brave detectives had spent a lot of money trying to find secret telephone line between judge Brandes and the White House. No wonder their efforts were in vain: such line did not exist» (“The International Jew”, the cited Russian edition, Preface, p. 20).
However, the ancient plot did exist, but it worked on the other nearly well-known principles: see Supplement, and other IP's of the USSR works “Dead Water”, “Towards God’s ruling…”, “The Sorrowful Legacy of Atlantis” (“Trotskyism is «Yesterday», but not «Tomorrow»”). These principles could be revealed by any person by simple reading of the Bible, Koran, myths of different nations and scientific books on history, memoirs of private persons and public figures … One should just think about real events that are behind the narration. Authors and compilers of the texts might attract reader’s attention to some facts and lead away from the others; they might witness something without understanding the essence of the things described.
[189] On this issue see USSR IP's works “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”, “«Master and Margaret»: a Hymn to Demonism? Or the Gospel of the Covenantless Faith”, “Come and Aid Me in My Disbelief… (On Dianetics and Scientology in Essence)”, “The Sorrowful Legacy of Atlantis” (“Trotskyism is «Yesterday», but not «Tomorrow»”).
[190] Normally, in relations between consciousness and unconscious levels of mentality, the unconscious levels of mentality bear the principal task of information handling and behavior elaboration, whereas the conscious level performs setup of the «autopilot» of unconscious levels of mentality for solving certain problems.
[191] In other words, to hit upon something new and vitally well-founded, it is necessary not only to master some information as a preliminary, but also to be in the mood, which will let you hit upon something. Otherwise, the mental process in the desired direction either does not start, or, once started, it wanders away or interrupts. Due to such instability in the process of the I-centric thinking, even in cases when the same problems of the social life are thought over by the millions of people, the vitally well-founded solutions are found only by the dozens, and sometimes, only by a few.
Therefore, it is necessary to learn to be the master of your own mood— emotionally notional structure of the soul.
[192] In other words, if you do not like things going on and the way they are going on, you should re-interpret tour morals and ethics and help people around you to do the same. «God does not change the things happening to people, until the people themselves change their thoughts» (Koran, 13:12).
[193] Since in this issue we can refer to the statements of the rabbis and other Jewish authorities, some of who during the first post-revolution years stated that Judaism, communism and Zionism are generally the same.
[194] One of the first publishers of notorious “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” in Russia. He died in the USSR on 14.01.1929 at the age of 68 at large, in 1924 and 1927 underwent short-term imprisonments, but survived.
[195] Suppression of prostitution, gaming (gambling industry), production and distribution of drugs (let us remind you that tobacco and alcohol are also drugs) are socially useful even in case when they can exist in the society illegally for some period of time: the vice should not be protected or supported by existing legislation.
[196] Corporation is the association of individuals for achievement of their personal goals by means of collective efforts. A single person alone could not achieve these goals; therefore they become common for these individuals for a certain period of time (within individuals’ lifetime). Although corporations may exist during the lifetime of many generations, any corporation would fall apart if, at some moment, its critical (with respect to its stability) mass does not get from the corporation the things it is craving for «right now».
[197] For this reason, «National-Bolsheviks», headed by E. Limonov, could not be regarded as Bolsheviks in today’s Russia.
[198] Which this diaspora is, the followers, the participants and the opponents of the «zid-masonic» plot know equally well. For those who doubt its existence we shall cite an extract from the article “Masonry” of “The Big Soviet Encyclopedical Dictionary” (1986):
«Masons tried to create secret world-wide organization with the utopian purpose of peaceful unification of the mankind in the religious fraternal alliance. It played the largest part in 18th — in the beginning of 19th centuries. Both reactionary and progressive social movements were connected with masonry» (p. 770).
To what extent the purpose of zid-masonic plot was «utopian», i.e. objectively unrealizable, and how successful the Masonry was in 19th — 20th centuries, are separate questions. The authors of “The Big Soviet Encyclopedical Dictionary” did not find room in their dictionary for the answers to these questions, and those who are sure that zid-masonic plot did not exist may think about these answers by themselves, by observing present-day life and studying treatises of official historical science and chronicles and memoirs that did not pass the academic censorship.
[199] That is, the Trotskyists behaved as though they were not subjected to substantial criticism, but people around them simply misunderstood the precision of their opinions, which expressed the absolute truth.
[200] As was shown by the experience of the Russian intelligentsia, which sincerely tried to dispute with the Trotskyist state power and became the victim of People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs in 1920’s, as well as the experience of many victims of perestroika in USSR and democratization in the countries, that become its wreckage.
[201] This attitude to Trotskyism as the perverted ideology of scientific communism and identification of Marxism-Leninism with the science was the actual mistake of Bolshevism in USSR in 1917 — 1953.
Looking from the other side, the masters of psychical Trotskyism do not accept discussion and eradication of its psychic basis; therefore they try to present ideologically many-sided psychical Trotskyism as some ideology. They form attitude (either good or bad) of society to this ideology depending on their goals and the circumstances developed.
If some psychical-Trotskyists or their multitude die, this is either represented to the society as death for the high idea (when the «positive» assessment is given, as was in case of Templars, Trotsky and his associates), or is intentionally pronounced and exaggerated as maniacal, demoniac and obsessed (when the «negative» assessment is given, as was in case of Hitlerism). And this bubble covers actual ideas, which these maniacs were programmed to fulfill and which differ substantially from the ones they proclaimed.
[202] The example is the «architect of perestroika» former member of the Central Committee of CPSU psychical-Trotskyist A.N. Yakovlev: from Marxism to Buddhism.
[203] Complete deafness to the substance of the criticisms directed against him combined with adherence to the principle of suppression of Trotskyists’ pronounced declarations, system of dissembling, on the basis of which they are actually acting, having united in the collective unconscious.
[204] Russian word for «majority» is «bolshinstvo», there for «Bolshevism». «Menshevism» is the same-construction antonym for «Bolshevism», since «menshinstvo» is a Russian word for «minority».
[205] Present-day Russia is not a fascist state just because new oligarchy (that has appeared as the result of reforms in Russia) has no active public support. Although there are some groups and public movements that dream of its coming to power and establishing of fascist regime stable in its succession in generations. Among these fascist-dreamers are the leaders of “The Union of the Right Forces”: specifically, I.M. Khakamada, who accused of fascism Communist Party of Russian Federation and, personally, provocateur-imitator of fight for communism G.A. Zyuganov, and who made herself out to be a steadfast anti-fascist on November 9, 2001 in TV program “Freedom of Speech” (on NTV channel). This program discussed the question «Should one be afraid of communists’ coming to power?» and was presented by another fascist-dreamer, Savik Schuster.
[206] «The reasonless people have got used to drag after the novelties…» — poem “Hero” by A.S. Pushkin.
[207] In propaganda of the doctrine of «its non-existence», the success was held by the chiefs of biblical project of total enslavement — the curators of the «zid-masonic» plot.
[208] God the Almighty makes no mistakes. Everything done is done the best possible way under such dispositions and ethics, which are peculiar to the people.
[209] On this issue see the publications: A. Spiridovich, “Gendarme's Notes” (Moscow, “Hudozshestvennaya literatura”, 1991, reprint of edition 1930, Moscow, “Proletariy”) and S. Yu. Vitte, “Memories” (Moscow, 1960) and Internal Predictor's of the USSR comments to them in work “Decapsulation”.
[210] Autocracy is, at the minimum, independence of the society in development of its policy and ideology within the channel of certain conception, at the maximum, conceptual imperiousness of the society and its statehood.
Owing to prevalence of the Biblical cult, the Russian empire was autocratic at the minimum. Though it was not conceptually imperious, but, because the Russian church was and did not submit to Rome as the "Universal" church, and propagandized not individualism but collectivism in contrast to miscellaneous protestantisms, autocratic Russia carried a threat to the «world backstage». It was the threat to obtain the global conceptual imperiousness and autocracy at the maximum. The «world backstage» and its provinces could feel this threat, but to what extent - the issue remains open.
In the following epoch, they understood it this way: «The turn occurred closer to the late 1870-s. (…) At two utmost “points” — North America and Japan — bourgeois system became firmly established. The world was getting more compact and more unyielding to unification at the same time», a Soviet historian Mikhail Yakovlevich Gefter cautiously said about this issue (late now: he died in 1996) in his article “Russia and Marx” in the magazine “Communist”, № 18, 1988.
M. Ya. Gefter put the utmost “points” in quotations marks: it is obvious that he did not mean geographical utmost points, because in such case he would do without quotation marks. But if he presupposed differences in culture and peculiarities of the establishing bourgeois system, the quotation marks are quite relevant: these are really utmost “points” of the «common bushel», which measures the “bourgeoiseness” of the society. In these utmost “points”, bourgeois system was developing in qualitatively different manners: in the USA, under total control of inter-national Jewish usurious capital; in Japan, under complete control of heterogeneous national capital.
Autocratic Russia of the end of XIX — beginning of ХХ century, just like Japan, did not want to get under control of inter-national Jewish usurious capital, and this was the sign of its intractability. But, unlike Japan, the control over the economy and politics from the part of multinational capital, which was loyal to the empire, was not complete.
[211] On November 9, 1918 Kaiser abdicated the crown; and on that very day Karl Liebknecht proclaimed Germany a socialist republic. But, owing to weak political will of social-democrats, in January 1919 in Germany bourgeois liberalism prevailed, and ultimately, it surrendered the power to Hitler’s psychical-Trotskyite Nazism.
[212] The war was Japanese-Russian, but not Russian-Japanese, as it is called by prevailing tradition of historical science, because it has started when Japanese destroyers assaulted the Russian squadron in Port Arthur. In addition, as some sources report, after the cruise from the Japanese naval bases to the area of future military operations, Japanese destroyers entered the near naval base of Great Britain, and from there they made night raid on the Russian squadron in Port-Arthur.
[213] Aleksandr Lazarevich Gelfand (1869 — 1924) — a swindler of the end of 19th — beginning of 20th centuries: he started as a Marxist-revolutionary; after the revolution of 1905 — 1907 he left revolutionary activity for stock gambling; in 1917, he participated in organizing transit of revolutionary-emigrants (including V.I. Lenin) from Switzerland to neutral Sweden (via Germany), and further to Russia.
[214] Particularly, see above-mentioned collected works by L.D. Bronstein edited by N.A. Vasetsky (Moscow, «Politizdat», 1990).
[215] BYLINA is the Russian name for a story, which belongs as a part to ancient Russian epic literature.
[216] Bylinas explained their origin as follows. Russian hero and Serpent after the battle where neither side could defeat the opponent, decided to live in peace and divide the Earth with the border, so that one half would be ruled by the Serpent, the other one — by the hero. Therefore the hero made a plow the Serpent harnessed himself into it, and they started to divide the Earth with the furrow. During this “tillage” the hero directed the Serpent into the Black Sea and drowned him. The Serpent ceased to plague the Russian people, and the furrow remained and is called «Serpent's Mounds» since then.
When the science began to study verbal folk tradition, commentators of bylinas perceived the Serpent as the personification of steppe nomads: actual Serpent's Mounds were constructed as means of protection from the raids of their cavalry.
[217] If it were not concluded, the revolutionary situation in Russian and Europe would have only grown further. The internazi revolution, covered by Marxist socialist slogans, could have won not only in Russian, but on the European continent at large.
[218] Because such a method is used by the «world backstage» to execute power on the local level any attempts to discover and unmask the «world conspiracy» and the agents of the «world government» by detective or police means like it was done by H. Ford always result in absurdity.
[219] In the course of history Russian defence industry and various military supplies warehouses became concentrated on the territory which subsequently came under Soviet control. Those warehouses were so tightly filled that even in the late 1930’s when the «ZiS-3» gun was being developed one of the requirements consisted in the capability of firing 76-mm shells which were left in abundance after Word War I and the Civil War. Complying with this requirement resulted in a lower charge power and inferior performance characteristics.
The reason warehouses were overfilled was that the opposition to the regime of Nicholas II adopted the organisational structure of masonry and sabotaged the war waged by the tsarist regime. Instead it was preparing a coup d’etat to substitute it by a bourgeois republic or a constitutional monarchy that would according to their plan finish the war victoriously. But A. Kerensky turned out to be an agent of the «world backstage» (on this issue refer to the book by N. Yakovlev, “August 1st, 1914”, Moscow 1974; additional issue 3, Moscow, “Moskvityanin” publishing house). He conducted such a political course of the Interim government that would enable Marxist internazis to seize power. To this end he abandoned general L. Kornilov who led the march of front-line army units towards the revolutionary Petrograd and declared him a traitor.
[220] One should keep in mind the following in this connection. In the revolution of 1905 — 1907 all the people of the Russian empire were free in choosing the side they politically supported. Yet immediately after the February revolution, which was timed to Purim (the holiday of Jewish internazism celebrated in the memory of annihilating the national ruling “elite” of ancient Persia), a terror operation was conducted in Gelsinfors — at that time the main base of the Baltic Navy, now Helsinki. In the course of that act of terror guerrillas were killing officers without any legal grounds, and many of those perished people had nothing to be blamed for by lower ranks. Similar terror operations were carried out in the army, and one of the low rank military who killed his officer was conferred an order of St. George by Guchkov (for some time was the military and navy minister in the Provisional Government). Because those acts were committed in the name of revolution, officers who were politically illiterate responded to those mean acts with spontaneous emotions and engaged in counter-revolutionary activity that it was already too late to perform.
This means that many who died fighting in the Civil war on the White army’s side were forced to oppose revolution by Marxist internazis who wanted to prevent it from becoming truly socialist and anti-Marxist. Similarly, Kronshtadt mutiny was organized with complicity of Zinovyev (Apfelbaum) to the end of suppressing the anti-internazism constituent of the revolution. The Kronshtadt mutiny’s slogan was «Soviets without communists!». «Marxists» prefer to be called someone else, including «communists» because they do not want to stain the name of their teacher. The crowd does not bother about the difference between those words and the social and political phenomena which they denominate.
One can read in greater detail about how Russian officers were pushed towards counter-revolutionary activity by internazi revolutionaries in the work by Internal Predictor of the USSR “Exchanging opinions” or in the article by Gerald Graf “The blood of officers” published in the “Slovo” magazine, № 8, 1990, pp. 22 — 25)
[221] One may ask what was the Russian ruling “elite” thinking about when it let that happen? It was as early as the 18th century that it was given a sign in the person of Mikhail Lomonosov (1711 — 1765), a sign showing that they were deeply wrong in giving no chance to get an education to the common people. It was easier for the “elite” to believe that M. Lomonosov was an illegitimate son of Peter the Great than to acknowledge that God gives His divine spark according to His Will paying no attention to the hierarchy of castes established by people, and therefore it is better not to make up those silly hierarchies of personal relationships so as not to stand in the way of God’s Will.
[222] Many of our contemporaries will not be able to understand the reasons for that. Therefore in order to clarify the reasons and goals of the support lent by young workers and peasants to the Soviet regime let us remind you that the lower classes of the Russian empire were almost completely deprived of rights (one should only remember about notes reading «no admittance to park for dogs and people of lower ranks»), including the right of education and personal development, that they had to work like dogs and were paid a wage which did not enable them to satisfy their individual and family needs in the demographically grounded range. As a result of the revolution which was accompanied by maltreatment and economic devastation brought about by the imperial and then Civil War the well-being of most families did not return to the pre-war level (the level of 1913 which was considered as a standard which the USSR’s economic statistics were being compared with almost up to the end of the 1970’s). Yet for young working and country people there opened up new options for personal development and serving the society which were not available to them before 1917. So as you see, there was something worth supporting the Soviet power for and coming forward with initiatives in building socialism.
[223] Things got so serious that Yu. Larin (Mikhail Lurie) came forward in 1929 with a book called “Jews and anti-Semitism in the USSR” which was published simultaneously both in Moscow and Leningrad. There he tried to provide a believable explanation of the «Jewish issue» and to lull the interest common people had for it. He presented it as an inconsistent prejudice inherited from Russia’s past when it was a «prison of nation» where the ruling regime bred strife between nations in order to eliminate the threat of revolution. He also explained their particularly active creativity and their unnaturally large share among the revolutionary parties’ members by the fact that it was their response to the particularly strong oppression of Hebrews on the part of tsarism.
M. Lurie is N. Buharin’s second father-in-law. After the Great October socialist revolution he worked in committees and commissions of the Supreme Soviet of National Economy on financial management, on trade nationalization, on establishing sovkhozi (a kind of collective farms) and others. He died in 1932.
[224] Clearly Trotsky did not understand this and kept trying to be a leader while refusing to get rid of his loyalty to internazism. This is the very reason why he got it on his head with an alpenstock. Had he been a bolshevik he would have lived till his old age like L. Kaganovich.
[225] It is common knowledge how the people of Afghanistan responded to the USSR’s attempt of fulfilling its «international» duty in 1979.
[226] It can be exemplified by the attitude towards the socialist idea shared by people in the Baltic States. In 1917 red Latish riflemen did not even think about something like Latvia’s separation from Russia. They were at one with Siberian riflemen (see the stenograph report on the VI Convention of the RSDLP held in August 1917: “The Proceedings of Conventions and Conferences of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) — Sixth Convention”, Moscow, Leningrad, 1927). After the October revolution of 1917 red Latish riflemen became one of the most reliable supporters of the new state. In one of his articles L. Bronstein (Trotsky) went as far as asserting that had it not been for them, the Soviet power would have collapsed. In 1940 after the Baltic States joined the Soviet Union, what was organized internally by the periphery of internazi «Comintern», protest against the Soviet power and the USSR appeared immediately and was expanding until the collapse of the USSR in 1991.
[227] One of the definitions ascribed to politics is the art of the possible.
[228] And as subsequently disclosed in the course of history the Trotskyite periphery in the USSR’s armed forces cherished their delirious dreams of the «revolutionary war» to the end of establishing Marxist socialism throughout the world until the case of marshals who were brought to court in 1937. They even managed to produce some «scientific» papers on this issue.
[229] Judging from the knowledge readily available today V. Lenin was nearly the only party figure who recognized the great value Stalin’s pre-revolutionary theoretic works had for the cause of bolshevism, the work “Marxism and the national issue” among them. In this work J.V. Stalin provided a definition for the term «nation» which indicates that Hebrew is not a nation but something else what J.V. Stalin gave no definition for.
[230] Because he received a systematic (religious) education in a seminary J.V. Stalin was one of the few party leaders who had a thorough knowledge of the Biblical doctrine of global enslavement. This fact is likewise beyond the understanding of many of his modern opponents and supporters. But thanks to that systematic education he at least sensed that there is no difference between the Bible and Marxism on the level of their content: both are a means of enslaving the mankind.
One can find the grounds for this statement in the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR “It is Time I Should Start the Tale of Stalin…”, “The Sorrowful Legacy of Atlantis” (“Trotskyism is «Yesterday», but not «Tomorrow»”), “A review of possible ways post-1995 history might take” (separate editions and collected articles “Old scenarios in a different wording?”)
[231] As was made known as early as the years of Perestroika, the injury damaged one of the carotid arteries. Due its constriction the brain suffered a lack of blood circulation. This led to functional disorder, general disorder of nervous activity and subsequent death.
[232] This task has never been set out directly by the leaders of the RSDLP, CPSU and CPRF. The basis of party organization has always been thought to be the regulations and party discipline. This is what dooms CPRF to fail politically.
[233] «CC» means «Central Committee».
[234] Essentially implementing this scheme in a party of active and energetic people excluded the option of the CC’s functioning in a secret mafia-like way of «leadership» and was directed against crowd-“elitism”.
[235] A question naturally arises about the qualities not mentioned here: what else is Trotsky notable for except for his outstanding abilities?
[236] The ministry of transport.
[237] The national railway commissariat (NKPS) — the name of that ministry at the time.
[238] «Buharin is not only the most prominent and most valuable party theorist, he is also justly considered to be the party’s favorite. Yet it is very doubtful if his theories can be considered entirely Marxist, because there is something scholastic about him (he never studied and, I think, never understood dialectics)» (“Address to the convention”, records of December 25, 1922).
[239] «Pyatakov is certainly a man of unbending will and outstanding ability, yet he gets too much carried away by administrative work and the administrative side of our cause to be relied on in a serious political matter» (“Address to the convention”, records of December 25, 1922).
[240] Initially this was an important and demanding post yet of a purely technical nature. The person holding this post was in charge of the Central Committee’s secretariat which was to free the «leaders» of the routine bureaucratic work: preparing materials for the meeting of leaders, printing and mailing the resolutions passed on those meetings, etc.
[241] Behind some days before great October socialist revolution they have published in the newspaper the notice on forthcoming revolt.
[242] Essentially in ancient slave-owning societies working cattle and slaves had the same «legal status».
[243] This happened less than a month before he dictated the “Address to the convention”, which is several days before his health condition aggravated sharply. After that fit he was taken to Gorki (not Gorky) where he died in slightly more than a year. Yet V. Lenin’s demand of the Communist party members to leave Masonic lodges was silenced by the official cult history of the CPSU.
[244] It was one of the reasons why the prospect of the socialist revolution victory was not considered a feasible one by the ruling classes.
[245] For more information on these discrepancies see “The History of CPSU” text-books of the soviet period, works of Lenin and Bronstein (Trotsky), which cover the post-revolution subjects, those of the Civil War and of the early period of socialism building in the USSR.
[246] In the late 19th — early 20th century, socialism and communism were in fact propagated as the ideal just community. Historian V. Klyuchevski knew both his contemporary society and the projects of the socialist reorganization, which were popular among the up-in-the-cloud left intelligentsia of those years. Back in the late 19th century he characterized the prospects of Russia’s transfer to socialism in late 19th — early 20th century in just one phrase. This is a key phrase for understanding of the post-revolution decades of real and alleged socialist building: «The just community made up of scoundrels». It is obvious that the more persistent the scoundrels are in their scoundrelling, the more disastrous will be the imposing of socialism in this society, which was successfully proved by the history of the USSR.
[247] Such actions on behalf of the German social-democracy in 1918 resulted in Hitler’s coming to power in 1933 together with the National-Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP in German).
[248] To escape the bloodshed of the first half of the 20th century it was necessary during the second half of the 19th century to work out the global alternative to the Marxist scenario of the world socialist revolution. To do this we had to revise the history of the mankind and the history of the multinational Russian regional civilization in it. We had to change our attitude to the «holy writings» and to overcome the idealistic atheism of the existing religious cults, which pervert people’s understanding of God, of the relationship of each and every person with God, and of God’s Providence. But we also had to overcome the materialistic atheism of science, which rejects the existence of God. Only in this case might there have begun forming the culture, based on the honest faith in God and the conscious, above-the-riot dialogue with Him of every person throughout the life. But Russian intelligentsia turned out to be incapable of solving this problem in due time. As a result of this, we lost the alternative opportunity for development without external wars, revolutions, the Civil War and the abuse of power in the post-war years.
[249] One of leaders of the revolt on 14 (25) December of 1825 against the power of Russian Emperor Nicholas I.
[250] If this view on cause-and-effect relations in social life is accepted, the Great October socialist revolution in Russia, just like any other reform does, happened somewhere in the middle of the interval between two points at which the politically active part of the society finds a new understanding for their past and prospects, as well as for the past and prospects of the entire mankind.
[251] 19th century Russia inherited such an absence of aspiration to bright future from older days. K. Valishevsky provides an analysis of the era preceding the reign of Ivan the Terrible and his reign proper in his book “Ivan the Terrible” (Moscow, «IKPA» publishing house, 1989, a reprint of the 1912 edition). He notes that it was typical of Russian art (arts and crafts along with architecture were the prevalent activities of the time, unlike the genres serving to entertain, which prevail today) to imitate all the other cultures and accumulate completely different elements adopted from the outside.
Both Russian and foreign historians who came to discover this fact either left it without comment reporting it as a historically objective fact of life, or drew a conclusion on its grounds about the Russian spirit being creatively barren, sometimes implying this conclusion in the undercurrent.
Though to illustrate the above-mentioned point of view on Russian culture we referred only to K. Valishevsky who speaks only of the era of Ivan the Terrible, such opinions are supported in respect of all the periods of Russian history by many people. The conclusion about creative barrenness of the Russian spirit and the facts of direct and indirect borrowing which justified that conclusion enabled foreign and Russian political scientists of all times to pile up countless doctrines. Foreign scientists devised the means of conquering and colonizing Russia while Russian scientists tried to think of a way to betray their Motherland for a larger price to foreigners who allegedly were advanced in every field. Therefore, when viewed in terms of this global tradition of political and cultural studies Gorbachev’s Perestroika and subsequent pro-Western bourgeois reforms are nothing new.
Actually what had been described by researchers of Russian culture throughout the entire recorded history of Russian multinational civilization as imitation and accumulation of heterogeneous borrowings in one’s own culture while being creatively barren itself is something else. It is one of the aspects of the multinational Russian spirit’s creativity engaged in creating a global civilization and culture which unites all national cultures. This is the past of globalization done the Russian, not the biblical way.
The fact that in the past there was little creative work proper in the generally accepted understanding of this word while the cultural heritage of other nations was being integrated within Russian culture can be explained the following way. It was caused by the Biblical yoke which the regional multinational Russian civilization was developing under, as the Bible was indeed assimilated but was not properly understood.
Due to that fact it was typical of the formally Orthodox Russians to have a double religion during the entire history of the country, and this duplicity distinguished the Russian Orthodox religion from all the foreign Christian religions: Catholicism, Protestantism in all of its modifications and other autonomic Orthodox churches. It was perhaps only the members of the Church hierarchy whose psyche was crushed by the Bible that were free of this religious duplicity.
But among the common Orthodox people having a double religion had been prevalent in the past and is still prevalent nowadays. It reflects itself in the most diverse facts of life. To begin with, during its entire history Russian civilization was free from internal religious wars (the schism dividing the church into Nikonians and Old Believers was an internal matter of the Orthodox church), and the Orthodox people and the people of other religions lived peacefully in their common regions and worked together to the benefit of all. And to end with, the priest who sanctified the farm of an Orthodox peasant did not dare to sanctify his banya (bath-house) as it was not only the place to wash one’s body, it was also the place where ancient pagan rituals were performed, which was connected with countless unfounded superstitions and where Orthodox people entered only after they took off their cross worn under the clothes as it would scare off the spirits. And even today many artists claiming to be Orthodox quite often praise Russian paganism and express it in their works.
It is well-known that according to the Bible the history of the Biblical culture must end with disasters of global magnitude: earthquakes, wars, epidemics, etc. One can read about these fine perspective in greater detail in the “Revelation of John the Divine” (Apocalypse) which concludes the canon of the “New Testament” and the Christian Bible on the whole. The West has ousted paganism from its life though it is a perfectly sensible dialogue between man and God carried out in the language of the phenomena of life (for a more detailed explanation of what paganism is see the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR “Towards God’s Ruling…”, “Sufism and Masonry: What the Difference is”, “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”). Though it is full of superstitions of all sorts, yet it is devoid of religious duplicity: those who are not blunt Satanists, occultists, agnostics or atheists do not doubt in the Bible’s being truly a Divine revelation if it is the version corresponding to their faith. Therefore the entire Western world is working in accordance with the algorithms of Biblical sociology and is cheerfully hastening the global disaster that is prescribed by the Bible on the whole and by the Apocalypse in particular.
In Russia Apocalyptic prophecies had indeed always been a cult, and during the country’s entire history contemporary calamities had been interpreted in terms of Apocalyptic views and symbolism. But due to double religion the pagan part of the Russian spirit had always objected against the catastrophic end of the modern global civilizations’ history predicted without alternatives.
Yet in order to express that alternative in accordance to God’s Will it was necessary to find a new understanding of the Bible and refuse to acknowledge its historically formed version as a text of Divine Revelation. Instead, it was necessary, rejecting blunt atheism or Satanism, to proceed from believing in God (or in gods) to the inmost personal belief in trust to God in one’s conscience and Life. This opens the way to creating one’s own destiny and the destiny of the entire mankind in concord with God’s Will.
The entire history of Russia since the christening is the history about the way which the Russian spirit goes by in order to reach that point. And until that point is reached, the void created by the absence of aspiration to realize in future a certain original Russian ideal will inevitably be the case, yet as the nature does not tolerate emptiness, this void is filled up with imported Apocalyptic notions different in every epoch. This is typical of the entire culture of pre-revolutionary Russia with minor exceptions: A.S. Pushkin though formally remaining a Biblical Orthodox managed to escape the biblical captivity by means of allegories and symbolism in the narratives of his works of art.
Actually the process of overcoming this void is deeper from the historic point of view, because the very fact of the Biblical culture’s appearance in Russia was possible only due to that paganism of Russian culture became mixed with polytheism and idolatry. The Bible historically really became the first widely known religious text which made some note of believing in God the Almighty though all the same the Biblical dogma was distorted by additions the «world backstage» introduced having coveted an absolute global power over societies which has nothing to do with God yet is exercised in His name.
[252] It is called «historical materialism» in Marxism and can be briefly described by the following theses: «the man originated from his apelike forefather as a result of labor activity and natural selection»; «class struggle is the moving force of history»; «violence is history’s midwife», though violence in this quality is always preceded by hypocrisy breeding ignorance; «social being determines social consciousness».
What is individual consciousness? Most people at least sense it in their personal experience even without understanding it. But «social consciousness» is yet another abstraction invented by Marxism which cannot be consistently understood. Hence come the unfortunate consequences for those who believe that this statement is true, as well as for their fellow citizens and their descendants.
To learn how the multitude of individuals generate the collective psyche and how the individual psyche interacts with the collective psyche determining the social being as well as the individual and collective psyche of future generations, see the following works by Internal Predictor of the USSR: “Sufficiently common theory of control” (“Principles of Personnel Policy belonging to a sate, an «anti-state», a social initiative”), “On Racial Doctrines: Unfounded, but Plausible”, “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”, “The Sorrowful Legacy of Atlantis” (“Trotskyism is «Yesterday», but not «Tomorrow»”), “On imitating and instigating activities”.
[253] In this case there simply would be nobody who supports them among the members of society, and the relics would become «fossils», not subcultures which continue to exist.
This, in particular, can be said of gypsies one of the characteristic traits of whose culture is parasitism on the non-gypsy society which they live in. This quality of gypsy culture has even originated a special verb in the Russian language — «vytsyganit’» (from «tsygan» — gypsy) meaning to persuade, to induce somebody to give something as a «present» despite his own intentions.
[254] Even if the native people of a culture disappear completely, viable «relics» cannot be destroyed. It is demonstrated by the interest to reconstruct the culture of pre-Columbian American civilization, as well as by the «game» of Indians (including movies) some white Americans play in. The result of those games is that the culture of the native people of those lands still exist as a relic pointing out to Americans the defectiveness and viciousness of their own culture in various aspects.
[255] The issue of forming an artistic taste is important, but essentially it comes to two points. First, how is the rejecting of some artistic styles and ability of enjoying others cultivated. Second, what consequences of such cultivated aversion to some styles and works and enjoying other styles and works will there be for society
[256] This is a qualitative transformation of society, its impact on daily life and its consequences being by far greater than those of introducing computer and Internet technologies which process we are witnesses and participants of today.
Opponents may say that the government of Nicholas II worked out a program that provided for eliminating illiteracy by 1920. Yet, they would say, World War I, the revolution and the Civil War impeded its realization. Such opponents should know that, first, Russia had no reasons to enter that war — it was to continue the peaceful policy of P. Stolypin, and there would be neither a revolution, nor a Civil War; second, it was as far back as Alexander III who had a chance of issuing a decree on eliminating illiteracy and developing popular schooling instead of issuing a decree about «the cook’s children» which denied access to education for common people. If accompanied by righteous internal policy, this could create a personnel reserve of people loyal to the state who could resolve the problem of social development of the multinational Russian civilization by way of reform and not by way of a revolutionary upheaval.
[257] Many people got the opportunity of verifying this statement by their own experience and the experience of their children and grand-children after the bourgeois reformers came to power.
[258] Even in the 1970-s when diplomas of most Soviet universities and colleges were not recognized in advanced capitalist countries, the graduates of our universities were superior to foreign graduates in the field of fundamental education allowing them to easily master the applied factual material which has always been serving (with minor exceptions) as the basis of the entire Western system of higher professional education.
Our diplomas were not recognized in the West due to two factors. First, the applied factual material necessary for working in the USSR and in the West was different. Second, due to the closed nature of Western professional corporations.
That our system of education whose principles had not changed since the times of Stalin was better than the Western one even at the end of «zastoy» (stagnation) can be proven by the fact that graduates of Soviet colleges take up a disproportionately large share among the theoretical physicists, chemists and programmers of the USA. Our graduates were taught not how to do things, they learned how things are interconnected in nature and technology, and this fundamental knowledge allowed them when necessary to answer the question of how to do things on their own, thereby resolving applied problems.
[259] Russia will spend many decades to overcome the consequences of that perversion.
[260] The conflict of worldviews called «physicists and lyric poets» (natural scientists, engineers and those educated in the humanities) sprung up in the late 1950-s — early 1960-s and was one of the late expressions of that discord. Yet the name given to that conflict is inaccurate: making natural sciences, called «physics», the object of the «lyric poets» criticism, this name helped the philosophy prevailing in educated circles escape that criticism, though it is philosophy which is in any epoch the source of methods and accomplishments of natural sciences.
[261] Proof of this statement is provided in the following works by Internal Predictor of the USSR: “The Small House in Kolomna” (a comment on the story of the same name by A. Pushkin), “Ruslan and Lyudmila” (How the state of Russian people and the peoples of the USSR developed and came into being in the course of the global historic process, expressed by means of imagery belonging to the First Russia’s Poet A. Pushkin), “Copper Horseman is Something Different from the Copper Snake…”, “«Master and Margaret»: a Hymn to Demonism? Or the Gospel of the Covenantless Faith”.
[262] They all share the spirit of despair and insolubility of social problems considered by the authors because those problems themselves are created by the unnatural Biblical culture which the authors could not rid themselves of. This is the very reason why they are attributed to the nihilistic cultural movement.
They have no «positive hero» whom contemporaries could imitate and thereby arrive at the future happiness of the society. The fates of all characters from Chatsky, Onegin, and Pechorin to Bazarov and Dostoyevsky’s heroes are warnings, saying: do not follow them but look for other ways to shape your destiny and the destiny of the society.
[263] The name of the movement is derived from «future». It shows that V. Mayakovsky looked for the way to the bright future and was not an advocate of avant-gardism as such which is permanently nihilistic and therefore useless to society. In most cases avant-gardism can be characterized by a joke:
— Art should be useful…
— Useful for people?
— No, for the artist.
V. Mayakovsky cared for people’s happiness, not for becoming a well-to-do businessman who fools the fastidious bourgeois and empties their pockets, like one of the 20th centuries best-known avant-gardists — Pablo Picasso — once confessed.
[264] Russian association of proletarian writers.
[265] The opposition to the bureaucratic regimes and socialist ideals continued to express itself artistically in nihilistic avant-gardism in the post-1953 times. The so-called «Bulldozed exhibition» of the Khrushchev period was aimed directly at stimulating this artistic movement.
But nihilism is barren, as the history of post-1985 artistic development in Russia demonstrated. It is barren in the following sense: in the Soviet era every work of art was aimed at expressing some kind of idea. Nihilistic avant-gardism is devoid of ideas. Or, more precisely, it has only one idea — permissiveness of instinctive manifestations. But instincts are the same for everyone, and perversions of instincts bring nothing new: they remain to be instincts under different covers and nothing else. Most «discoveries» of the avant-gardism of the late 20th century repeat the perversions of Russian pre-revolutionary decadence. The only difference lies in applying modern technical achievements that were not known in those times.
[266] I.e. those working in a dialogue with the program running on a multimedia computer which generates a certain video stream, accompanying sound and in future — a stream of other artificial sensations of the imaginary game reality.
[267] It is known that substances with a drug-like effect are produced in the organism of a man who falls under the influence of rock-music. Therefore the slogan «Rock-music against drugs» is nonsense: rock-music is a drug itself.
Besides, by suppressing the psyche with short bars and jagged and phase-shifted rhythms, rock-music is capable of suppressing the inner co-ordination of the sensitive and intellectual activity rhythms for a certain time, thereby making the people dependant on it dumb and narrow-minded.
As shown by subsequent investigation, the 19-year old lad who shot dead 16 people at a school in Erfurt on April 26, 2002 (13 teachers, two schoolchildren and a policewoman who arrived at the site of the tragedy among the police unit) and after that shot himself, was brought up by a single mother who did not cope with his upbringing. As a result, he was expelled from school for missing classes and forging documents after he was left in the same form for the second year. He was a fan of computer «shooter» games and rock-music, and a song was found among his «music» records that contained the words like «kill your teacher with a shotgun». A person in that kind of moral and mental condition was yet a legal holder of a weapon and a member of a shooting club, which is evidence of the fact that it was not only him but also German state officials who had big problems with mental health and with conscience, especially taking into account that it is by far more than the first incident of the kind in Germany and the USA.
Scarcely more than a week after the disaster in Germany which was given a cult status by the mass media, especially online ones, all across Europe, on April 30th news came of a similar tragedy that occurred in a school on the territory of former Yugoslavia: a thirteen-year-old teenager shot down several teachers and himself.
Of course, in most cases there is no strict conditionality of a person’s behavior, connecting art and actions. But on the scale of society such dependency reflected in the behavior of a part of the people is revealed by means of statistics. But the people belonging to the I-centric individualist psychical type proceed from the absence of the strict dependency of actions on art in the general case and bluntly refuse to take in that statistics of social life, refuse to make it an object of state policy and the policy of public organizations. And this makes them nothing less than rascals.
This is one of the many circumstances leading to the question: is the artist responsible for the consequences his art has? Or is it the victims of his artistic work and their victims who are responsible for the consequences?
That is why, when M. Zhvanetsky in one of his stories called KGB agents «the fine arts scholars in civilian clothes» he was essentially right: fine art studies are one of the lines of state and social security. But it was known before M. Zhvanetsky.
[268] A. Solzhenitsin has not yet apologized for this calumny, which he so energetically disseminated.
[269] It is a very interesting book, by the way. Even nowadays it would be useful to republish it as a textbook for the faculties of history, sociology and law at universities. It speaks the truth, though not the whole truth, about the White sea — Baltic sea camp of the NKVD. The book reveals the principles on which the system of correctional institutions should ideally be based.
Those who disagree with this approach should know that if society has to have prisons, it must define the aims and principles of running them. And it should take care in practical everyday life that this system of penalty execution and correction operates in conformity to those aims and principles, which are originally determined by the power of social life conception adopted by the society.
[270] Is there someone who wouldn’t like to live in a society where it is safe to walk the streets of a large city at night, or stroll in a park alone or with a loved one without endangering oneself to an attack or abuse? Is there someone who wouldn’t like to live in a society where children are safe in the streets, at school (were there any schoolchildren and teachers killed in Soviet schools by their nutty armed fellow students?) and while driving in a bus, and where any adult will help a child? Is there someone who wouldn’t like to live in a society where a skilled doctor lends help in the nick of time and is interested in curing the patient, not in the customer’s wallet? — One may continue asking those questions relating to the comparison of the civil society’s reality and the world of «dreams» evoked by the works of socialist realism art. And it is the civil society of capitalism that fails to provide answers to those questions.
[271] This aspect can be revealed as a decrease in crime following the end of violence and devilry shown in movie theatres and on television, yet the film industry bosses will never let that happen: profit at any cost.
[272] Otherwise it only remains to assume that the campaign for unhappiness carried out by artistic means is one of the aims of US state policy.
[273] Besides, it taught people «manners» — the norms of politeness existing in the ruling classes of the Russian empire.
[274] One of the paradoxical features of the epoch and of artistic works, which are ascribed to «socialist realism» according to the above-mentioned principle of expressing the campaign for happiness, consists in that many of those works were created by talented unscrupulous time-servers who were no Bolsheviks and communists by their views, moral and actual behavior. This was demonstrated by the diaries of some of them published subsequently and by the previously unknown facts of their biographies disclosed by contemporaries, as well as their own creative activity in the time succeeding the era of Stalin’s bolshevism.
Among such time-servers were V. Vishnevsky — the author of «An Optimistic Tragedy», and A. Rybakov — the author of «The Dagger» and «The Children of Arbat» — an extremely shallow and therefore a slanderous book about that epoch.
One might ask: how should we treat the fact that a bolshevist state was creating its culture through the talent of those who were essentially its opponents? In our opinion one should treat that fact like one treats the ride to St.Petersburg on Christmas night that the devil gave to Vakula the blacksmith in one of the stories by Nikolai Gogol: If one has to continue with one’s cause but has nothing to use but evil forces, with God’s help one may use even them. Maybe those who are being used will change their minds and become less evil than they used to be…
[275] Russia is the regional civilization of many peoples. It is different from other regional civilizations by being the only truly regional civilization, which has been developing for the largest part of its history within the borders of a state common for all of its peoples. Due to this circumstance patriotism in Russia can be manifested both as devotion to its civilizational building and in the sense widely used in the West as devotion to a state structure which has formed on a certain territory in the course of history. If Russian history is analyzed, it is clear that the common people of Russia have been more or less consciously engaged in civilizational building while the national “elites” were molding state structure to their own benefit. Due to such a division of labor by castes, as soon as the “elite” state system became on obstacle to civilizational building, the “elite” immediately declared the common people of Russian regional civilization unpatriotic in the sense of being devoted to the historically formed state system.
[276] Real patronymic is Antipovitch.
[277] The worst lie was the thesis: «Stalin is to be blamed for everything which happened in the USSR while he was head of state».
The point is that the statements «it happened while Stalin was head of state» and «Stalin is to blame» are not necessarily equivalent and complementary. Much of what was typical of the Stalin’s bolshevism era and is now condemned was caused by events that had happened even before J.V. Stalin was born.
Historic processes proceed with phase shifts — the events are retarded in respect of their causes as it happens in all natural processes. The statement «Stalin is to blame for everything that happened in the USSR while he was head of state» ignores the retardation of events in respect to their causes and is therefore a folly, which allows lying while reporting sound facts. Yet this folly is the basis of the entire “denunciation of J. Stalin” matter brought up in the times of Khrushchev and perestroika.
[278] The same goes to the accusations against J.V. Stalin and the post-Stalin USSR brought by A. Sakharov, psychical Trotskyite and anti-Marxist, and his followers: as sociologists and historians they are all barren flowers and perverts, who were not intellectually countered by the regime of Brezhnev and Gorbachev simply because it chose not to.
[279] Andre Gide gave a negative comment in his book “Return from the USSR”, while Lion Feuchtwanger gave a positive comment in his book “Moscow. 1937”. See the book “Two looks from abroad”, Moscow, “Izdatelstvo Politicheskoi Literaturi”, 1990. For comments on both of the above-mentioned reports of the trips to the USSR see the work of the Internal Predictor of the USSR “On imitating and instigating activities”.
[280] The only thing to praise Rezun for is that he was the first to show the great and diverse work, which was carried out by Stalin to win the war, imposed on the USSR in 1941. (Rezun even gives the justification of the repressions against top commanders of Workers and Peasants’ Red Army in his book “Purification” («Очищение»). However he draws some unauthentic data while covering this subject.
See the collected articles “Intelligent Viewpoint” (1996) for the comment of the Internal Predictor of the USSR on the books “Icebreaker” by V. Rezun, and “Operation «Storm»” by I.L. Bunich.
[281] The Soviet power was overthrown in Finland in 1918 under the military support of Hitler. Before that, Soviet power was developing in Finland as well as on the rest of the territory of the Russian Empire, which stayed free from the German occupation until November 1917.
[282] At that time the political scenarios of the «world backstage» did not allow the Baltic States to become independent bourgeois democracies. It was only the question of which country — Germany or the USSR — would take them under its jurisdiction.
The leaders of the USSR were faced with a dilemma, and it was not a dilemma of occupying the Baltic States or letting them develop on their own. The dilemma was between letting Hitler occupy the Baltic States under the support of the local Nazis and preventing this variant by means of the Soviet Union’s occupation of them.
It was natural for that epoch that pro-German and pro-capitalist elements were repressed with the inclusion of the Baltic States in the USSR and that it was accompanied by abuses.
Bourgeois democracies in these countries were unable to prevent the immerging uncompromising oppositions and were likely to give way to Nazism. Even nowadays the democracies in these countries are nothing but hopeless conceit of their “elite”. They should be wiser. They complain about Stalin and even regret that Hitler did not occupy their country instead of thinking about what was vicious inside the bourgeois democracies of the Baltic states and made them be «the grass on the battlefield» and the victims of the divine connivance.
[283] Except in the USSR where the fifth column was mainly wiped out during the prewar repressions. However its activity would occasionally reveal itself and sometimes bring rather harsh consequences.
[284] The biggest repressions against Hebrews in Europe were also performed after the German invasion to the USSR.
[285] The most serious incident of those happened when general D.G. Pavlov did not perform the directive to put on the alert the troops of the Western Special Command. It became one of the major reasons for the catastrophe of summer 1941. During the investigation Pavlov admitted his parricide but at the court he recanted his evidence. The inquest considered his confession of guilt enough evidence and did not take pains to make any proper evidence base. As a result the investigation could prove only the negligence of functions. For this Pavlov was sentenced to death by shooting. Later, after his death, he was discharged by the neo-Trotskyite Khrushchev’s regime to support the myth of «surprise attack» and to place all the guilt for it personally on Stalin.
In reality, it is a notorious fact that the Navy of the USSR met the «surprise attack» at the battle alarm, i.e. it was not a surprise for them. If one branch meets the “surprise attack” at the battle alarm while units and formations of other branches are really taken off guard by this attack it speaks for the criminal negligence of many of the top commanders at the minimum or for organized parricide at the maximum.
Aware of this fact the neo-Trotskyite regime persecuted the former commander in chief of the Navy, admiral N.G. Kuznetsov, in the post-war period. Marshal of the USSR G.K. Zhukov, whose level of intellect and proficiency contributed to the above mentioned consequences and who was partly responsible for the catastrophe of summer 1941 (he was the head of the General Staff and deputy Defense People’s Commissar of the USSR from July 30, 1940), took part in creation and support of the myth of the «surprise German attack».
[286] But do not be quick to lament that the above-mentioned scenario did not take place in history. At that time Great Britain was the center of the global colonial empire and suppressed millions of people around the world. The welfare of her own people was provided by the policy of colonialism and slave ownership as prescribed by the biblical doctrine. This is a cocktail of Judaic internazism and Anglo-Saxon Nazism. We will not dispute here which Nazism — German or British — is «better».
[287] According to some publications, on June 22, 1941, after the outbreak of hostility the Soviet government contacted Berlin over the radio proposing to stop the German troops (on the assumption that it was not the German invasion to the USSR but a provocation aimed at initiating a war between Germany and the USSR, despite the agreement between their governments).
[288] Both the plans were developed as plans of real military operations to be carried out. At the same time both of them could serve as a misinforming and diversionary maneuver versus each other. Both of them were rather adventurous and because of this each of them would be considered by many foreign military specialists as deliberate misinformation, which could not be the basis for real military operations.
[289] The world community did not forgive the USSR for placing its rockets on Cuba although they were not against the military and rocket bases as well as aerodromes of strategic aviation of the USA and its allies that surrounded the USSR and its allies. This speaks of «the world community».
On the other hand placing the rockets on Cuba was a political provocation. There was no military need for it. This circumstance speaks of the USSR government: political shortsightedness and the atmosphere of error that allowed the appearance of the puppet Khrushchev’s anti-bolshevist regime (the puppet regime for the «world backstage»).
[290] The development of socialism went so far in the USA that a former soviet citizen Victor Fridman, who left the USSR for the United States to escape from the soviet socialism, discovered the unacceptable socialism in the country of his dream. He wrote the book “The Socialist States of America” on this (see the article of Victoria Averbuch “Comrades Cowboys” published in “Rossiyskaya Gazeta”, № 37 February 28, 2002).
[291] The abstract humanists who complain of the immoral cooperation with the fascist regime of Germany either do not understand the global historical process or are hypocrites for they consciously or subconsciously agree to live under the Doctrine (which we draw in the Supplement 1).
From the point of view of Bolshevism both Nazism and internazism have to be eliminated. For this it is necessary to interact with both — to interact to an acceptable extent for Bolsheviks.
Let the abstract humanists answer why they are not indignant about the whole global civilization living under the Doctrine? (See the Supplement 1 of this book for the doctrine)
[292] The motivation of Germany to initiate the war against Poland: the Polish government impeded the land communication over its territory between Western Prussia (now Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation) and the rest of the Germany. As far as the mutually acceptable agreements on this are concerned both parties obviously tried to avoid them acting under the pressure of the «world backstage».
During the period between the two world wars Germany several times offered Poland to arrange the terms of exterritorial transit through its territory (i.e. visa regime and customs supervision of German cargos and passengers by the Polish side), but Poland refused flatly to work out the terms of such a transit. According to the recollections of the Germans who had to go from Germany to Germany through Poland in that period, the Polish officials were often ready to swagger while issuing visas and during passport and customs supervision. At last, after another refusal by Poland to settle this problem Hitler decided to get rid of it by means of force.
The repetition from history is seen in today’s situation around the Kaliningrad region, which borders with the countries of European Union who are reluctant to arrange the exterritorial transit from Russia to Russia. The fact that this problem has arisen means that the representatives from the European Union are as stupid and impudent as those of the bourgeois Poland in the period between the two world wars of the 20th century. However Russia is different from Germany.
[293] This version is very much to the liking of the anti-Stalin intelligentsia. The attempts to create the cult of marshal G.K. Zhukov are caused by hatred of Stalin by the will to explain to the crowd the reasons of the victory in the Great Patriotic War. They want this cult to overshadow the truth about Stalin and that epoch: as though Zhukov is the main, and almost the only, creator of the victory who was unjustly suppressed by Stalin in the post-war years.
Those who believe in this delirious thesis forget that Zhukov was only a professional officer and the victory in the Great Patriotic war required a pre-war preparation in both global and internal politics, preparation of the country’s economy and coordination of the actions at the fronts and in the back areas during the war. It was Stalin who controlled all this ever since the late 1920’s, during the war and till the end of his days. It was Stalin who controlled the activity of Zhukov too. Later, during the «denunciation of the cult of personality of Stalin», this aspect was enveloped in lots of legends and historically inadequate lies (especially concerning the early stages of the Great Patriotic War). Zhukov was one of those who contributed to the creation of this myth.
It was not an end in it self for Zhukov to become a legitimate successor to Stalin or a usurper like a soviet Bonaparte after the Great Patriotic War was over. But there was a trend for intrigue and anti-bolshevism among the post-war generals. Due to his self-conceit and ambitions Zhukov was a good figure to be placed as the head of the state at least for the initial period of the new regime in case of a successful conspiracy by the generals against Stalin. Stalin actually saved Zhukov by sending him away from Moscow and intimidated other generals by repressing some of the top officers for abuse of their positions and breach of Bolshevist ethics (which manifested itself in the «love of trophies»).
As far as the post-war activity of marshal Zhukov is concerned, his personal and business qualities (taken alone his complicity in badgering the former People’s Commissar of the Navy N.G. Kuznetsov is very speaking) proved him to be incompetent in commanding anything bigger than a district. The maximum for which he was suited was the position of the Commander-in-Chief of the Land Forces because neither before the war, during the war or after it did he find an opportunity to inquire into the matters of aviation and the navy. That is why he could not professionally control the combat training, development and usage of the whole armed forces of the USSR in the times of war and peace.
Zhukov was exactly what he was and he deserves praising for all the good that he has done. But it is unacceptable to exaggerate his merits and to build false myths making him a cult — but, in fact, a caricature — figure in history.
[294]V.B. Rezun gives readers the idea that the USSR was a parasitic social system that was incapable of developing using only its internal resources. Thus it was destined to break-up in case of failure of further expansion. According to Rezun that is why in trying to preserve his dictatorship till the end of his days «bandit» Stalin was in favor of conquests under the slogans and ideas of the world socialist revolution.
[295] We do not recognize this building in the status of Christ the Savior Cathedral because it was built with budget money by a regime that robbed the people under the guise of reforms unlike the genuine cathedral built on the people’s donations.
Besides, the new building is slapdash from the point of view of building culture. Especially catching to the eye is the careless finish of the lower room as compared to the upper room in the cathedral. But even the demonstratively stately upper room, which everyone knows from the solemn worship services broadcast on church holidays, is not blameless and these defects suggest the negligence and inability to work.
In the original cathedral the paintings were directly on the walls. In the reconstructed model there is steel lining along the walls, approximately 10cm removed from them. The paintings are placed on this lining and thus are removed from the walls and are not subject to the temperature difference. In theory this surface must consist of planes and smooth patterns, which all together repeat the inside of the cathedral. But the steel jacket deformed during welding and it distorted many lines and surfaces designed in the project.
Deformations are natural no matter what technology of welding you use. But the scale of them in the model-cathedral goes beyond any aesthetic norm because they are visible with the naked eye, cause undulations and distort the ideal lines and surfaces. If such deviations from the designed position and configuration took place while assembling a ship hull at a shipyard (several centimeters inaccuracy!) such savage imprecision would not pass through the inspection department.
This is one of the many facts speaking of absolute lack of conscientiousness while building the model of Christ the Savior Cathedral. This model building embodies the pretense of the epoch of stagnation and self-seeking.
[296] See the memoirs of aircraft designer A.S. Yakovlev, artillery designer V.G. Grabin, former People’s Commissar of the Navy N.G. Kuznetsov.
[297] The only difference between the «leadership» views of Hitler and Lev Gumilev’s “Theory of Drive” is that Hitler saw himself as a candidate for that leadership and he fulfilled his wish, but Gumilev, not being a candidate for that, just gave an opportunity to other candidates for leadership to ground scientifically their claims with the help of his “Theory of Drive”.
This circumstance arouses the following questions:
· Is Anna Akhmatova, the great poet of the «Silver Age» and the mother of Lev Gumilev, personally responsible for bringing up such a man who scientifically grounded the necessity of the «leadership» modification of Fascism?
· Was it wrong to send Gumilev to GULAG although it did not prevent him from creating the “Theory of Drive”? Maybe it prevented him from writing something even more dangerous than the “Theory of Drive”?
On the inconsistency of the “Theory of Drive” read the corresponding chapter in the first volume of the work “Dead Water” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR.
[298] On the inhumane principle of «democratic centralism», which makes people resemble zombies see the work “On Imitating And Instigating Activities” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR.
[299] The entire history of the Party before Stalin became its leader in the late 1920-s was the history of struggle between personal ambitions of the leaders of the narrow circle, each of whom pretended to give the only true interpretation of the texts by Marx and Engels and to assure the veritable development of their ideas in the environment of Russia. This struggle of the leaders for personal or corporate domination had nothing to do with selfless work of implementing the ideals of communism into life.
[300] As a result of the better literacy and skills level of the population, some of the numerous people’s letters to the Central Committee, the People’s Commissariats (ministries), and personally to the Party and State leaders were really of big social significance. They would concern important issues of social life and would offer rather a professional set of measures to solve the problems. One can see it even from the «filtrate» of letters that A. Strelyany reads with ironic sorrow on Svoboda radio station from time to time.
[301] Besides, sessions of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and its republics were held regularly. And the members of Soviets of all the levels were a better representation of the society than the Party activists who would be sent as delegates to the Congresses.
[302] See the work “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR
[303] See the works “Brief Course …”, “Dead Water” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR.
[304] Refusal to finish the construction of the Palace of Soviets is also part of the policy to overcome the leaderism, which is a modification of crowd-“elitism”. The Palace of Soviets was necessary for the masters of Psychical-Trotskyites as an instrument of social magic. First, it was an instrument to support the personality cult of the current leader and his associates. Second, it would help to govern the society moved by gregarious instincts effecting in the crowd. The more delegates of the common people from provinces can be present in the conference-hall and the bigger is their emotional excitement in expectation of such an assemblage, the deeper is the personality suppression by the herd and the heavier is the person loaded with the idea to subdue to the leader, which he can transfer to the surrounding people upon his or her return home.
In recent decades the police got acquainted with the destructive force of the herd psychological effects from the football fans in all the countries. Only the direct communication between people can produce such powerful effects. It cannot be caused by the television (at least not at the point of its development on the verge of the 21st century): there are very few cases of mass football fanaticism leading to destruction of people’s own domestic surroundings.
But the very same herd psychological effects can turn «productive» if they are evoked by a special policy and the audience is specially selected and ideologically prepared. Then these people from the audience can be used to govern the life and activity of the crowd-“elitist” society. This was the goal of the Psychical-Trotskyites from Communist International when they began the project of the Palace of Soviets. A similar function was performed by a complex of buildings, which Hitler built in Nuremberg, Germany, to mesmerize the crowd in the direct communication with it under the guise of the Congresses of the NSDAP.
But the Bolsheviks did not need the building to perform such kind of social magic in. That is why the Palace of Soviets project was stopped as soon as the circumstances allowed. First, the beginning of the war in 1941, and later the dissolution of the Communist International in 1943 left nobody to insist on the construction of the Palace in 1945.
[305] Anecdote that was imprudently and proudly told by a Hebrew-student in the end of 70-s:
Volodarsky and Sverdlov walk along the hall of the Smolny Palace and all of the sudden Volodarsky pushes a not tall, bold, reddish man with a pointed beard. The man darkly smiles and passes by…
Sverldov: «Hey, man?! That was Lenin!!!»
Volodarsky: «Look, Yasha, I am fresh from the States, who is this Lenin?»
Sverdlov: «Hush…!!! The whole gesheft is assigned to him … »
Being a contemporary and the participant of the events Stalin knew much more about it than a Soviet Hebrew student in the end of 70-s.
[306] But after this or that Jew is informed about the guilt, the inverted commas are not needed anymore, because starting from that moment of notification about the assigned to him by the «world backstage’ mission he is free to make a conscious choice: to continue backing up this meanness or actively oppose to it. In this choice there is a key to the solution of the problem of «anti-Semitism», first of all the Jews themselves.
[307] The following shows how out of place this word is: Arabs — Semites, in spite of many Jews whose ancestors are obvious non-Semites — Turks, Khazars, Ethiopians and other at some point accepted Judaism as their religion. According to this historically real circumstance, opposing to the creation of the Arab state in Palestine, Israel manifests anti-Semitism.
[308] In order to be all covering alternative it was necessary for the alternative to operate a wider majority of terms, and, therefore, definitions, than did those who were against it.
But if to remain in the frames of the historically formed at that time cultural terminology all the actions of J.V. Stalin that were not commented by him, could and can be interpreted by different people as mutually exclusive, depending on their understanding of the character of the global historical process and management in it. Because of this point of view for some people Stalin is a contemptible marionette of zid-masonry; from another point of view he is an «anti-Semite» more artful and dangerous than Hitler; the third think he is an ignorant, sly and cruel power-loving man who managed to manipulate almost all (only Hitler was able to deceive him in 1941), including zid-masons, «anti-Semites», due to this and in spite of his mean essence he undeservedly appeared in the first lines of the list of the outstanding politicians and statesmen of the XX century. One see him as a Satanist, others — as a lost son of the Orthodox church who all his life looked for ways to come back to its bosom, etc. But all the commentators of his deeds in the majority are too lazy to read and understand the written heritage of J.V. Stalin and correlate it with the common to us all history.
[309] This is one of the reasons why J.V. Stalin contributed to the creation of the Israel state, which in perspective was suppose to be a bulwark of the multinational Bolshevik socialism in the Far East
[310] «Party! Let me rule!» — is the slogan that thoughtless masses screened the coming of the bourgeois democratization to the power during the Gorbatchev’s perestroika. The slogan goes back to the words of one of the famous festive songs «Party is our — man at the wheel». People holding a mass meeting under that slogan did not relies that man at the wheel is an ordinary subordinate, a sailor on board and that the course is laid by a navigator, it is a task given by a captain (in the marine) and by a captain of the ship in Navy. In other words, man at the wheel makes little difference. If «Party is our man at the wheel», then it is not party that is responsible…
[311] The problem of a successor of J.V. Stalin in the so-called «conjunctive mood of the history» and in the vain dreams about the future of the politically dependant part of the society is still so vital that the authors of the version of «Memories» of J.V. Stalin that are under the power of the aggregor that was formed on the basis of the teaching of E.P. Blavlatskaya and the Rerikhs took their understanding out to the cover of the book «… I want to tell about the main sin against the people. And I am to ask my people for forgiveness because I did not stand the test; I did not left a trustful man after myself». (A.G. Karpova, N.I. Siyanov-Starodubtsev, “Memories of J.V. Stalin. Recollections of Russia”, book 3, Moscow, 2000)
In our opinion such views about the succession of the upper power in society, that are arrogated to J.V. Stalin later, only express the understanding of this matter by the aggregoriously possessed authors of «Memories». With such a primitive and not objective conceptions about the power in society J.V. Dzhugashvili would not have been J.V. Stalin: the history would have known nothing about these names.
[312] Only it appeared that «it is caviar to the general»: in the party and in society morality and expressing it ethics still reigned that constantly created crowd-“elitism”. That is why during the «palace revolution» in the end of February — beginning of March of 1953, the power was taken over by the lovers of the powers of office; they are also careless and irresponsible self-seekers-“elitists”, those who perverted the Bolsheviks’ work on building a society where the fair worker would be free from any parasitism on his work and life.
[313] That acted in majority at the expense of the state, as any other public organization in the USSR.
[314] So-called, though based on the word “Hebrew”.
[315] The 1st try of the suppression of the internazism took place from the middle of 1920-s up to the beginning of the second world war of the 20th century under the name of «fight against Trotskyism» and in its essence it took place by default. It suppressed the activity of the structurally perfect, organized by mafia internazism of the true Marxists in the party and in the state.
[316] We’ll remind you once again that it is the definition to the sociological term «crowd» given by V.G. Belinsky.
[317] The fight against «groveling before the West» in its essence was directed exactly against the Bible doctrine. «Groveling before the West» in reality expressed that the Russian bearers of the servile psychology envied fed slaves of the Bible internazi doctrine of buying the world on bases of Jewish upper state usury and that they were physiologically ready to betray the work on the building a new global civilization for the sake of illusion of the possibility easily have a full belly and a comfortable life.
«Groveling before the West» sprung up during the liberation campaign of the Red Army in Europe. There during that campaign many soldiers — servile bearers of the crowd-“elitist” mentality — saw a highly consumer welfare of the population of the West countries.
These people who did not root out in themselves the servile psychology were not interested in the fact that the consumer welfare of the West population historically really was provided by nothing else but means of internazi conception of management: usury that whipped up the development of the technology and the level of education, parasitism of the metropolises on colonies, etc. This consumer welfare was reached in several centuries in the condition of the undivided reigning of the Bible culture in the West counties that lost their gentile constituent part. It was typical for Russia where the trust was on the way of the development of the technology, techniques and education overtaken the development of morality. Contiguity of the soviet bearers of the servile physiology with the «leading» culture of consumers of the West evoke in many envy and caused a wave of looting, including the one organized in the form of the «trophy campaign».
In the conditions of the post-war USSR this envy of the unrighteous welfare of the West stood on the way of deliberation of our own creative potential and, consequently was an obstacle in the work of the building of a new civilization on basis of the anti-crowd-“elitist” morally-esthetic principals of the humanity.
[318] Precisely, Hebrews, since on Russian here stands Hebrewish “nationality”.
[319] About this see the work of the Internal Predictor of the USSR “On Racial Doctrines: Unfounded, but Plausible”..
[320] Not without reasons: see the work of the Internal Predictor of the USSR “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”.
1 Here K. Simonov means one of his diary’s records.
2 Though the sin was to keep this plenary session secret during all the Khrushchev-Brezhnev era.
3 When the USSR existed there was such a notion as a «party secret». Some issues concerning the state and society life were examined at the so-called «closed» party meetings, plenary sessions and Congresses. Non-party people couldn’t attend «closed» meetings, and the materials of the «closed» meetings, plenary sessions and Congresses were not published in the mass media.
[321] This concerns the question how during decades cult of J. Stalin’s personality was created.
[322] J.V. Stalin reminds of the time when the conflict of «bolshevism and socialism in a separate country — «world backstage» and the world revolution» was the most acute one. The situation of 1918 was in many respects similar to the situation of 1952.
[323] The question of relieving J.V. Stalin of a part of his functions. K. Simonov talks about it further in detail.
[324] It’s distressing to die being a psychical-Trotskyite who hasn’t done his duty to the future.
[325] I.e. J.V. Stalin thought it necessary to speak without any pre-arranged text or thesis of his speech, which could become known beforehand to some of his «guardians» from the Central Committee staff.
This could entail frustration of Stalin’s put-up speech to the extent that he could die suddenly during the plenary session or before it and have no chance to speak.
[326] This is admission of the fact that they realized Stalin wasn’t power-seeking, but cared for succession in the work of Bolshevism.
[327] This is one more admission of the fact that Stalin was sincere in his concern for the future and wasn’t power-seeking.
[328] This oblivion of the fact of the matter resulting from reluctance to understand the matter is a characteristic feature of psychical-Trotskyism: neither the content nor the form, nor the meaning of the given information is remembered, but the emotional impression of the event, which is first of all caused by personal morals rather than the events themselves.
[329] If J.V. Stalin had been mistaken in V. Molotov’s personality, then several years after Molotov wouldn’t have appeared to be a member of the «antiparty group» which included «Molotov, Malenkov, Kaganovich and Shepilov, who joined them», that supposedly opposed Khrushchev’s policy directed at resumption of «Lenin’s standards of the party life» and who wanted to resume the order existed in the party and in the state under Stalin. K. Simonov doesn’t remember about it though.
[330] In 1962 in the town of Novocherkassk of the Rostov region mass disorders broke out caused by the rise in foodstuff prices (meat in particular), which followed immediately after the increase in output quotas at the Novocherkassk electric locomotive producing plant. People gathered on the square demanded meeting with A. Mikoyan. A. Mikoyan was secretly in the town at that time, but he didn’t speak to the people. K. Simonov doesn’t remember about this as well (though it’s possible that he didn’t know about Mikoyan’s whereabouts).
Everything came to the end with military units introduction into the town for «pacification» and burst of sub-machine gun fire: there were victims; after the meeting dispersal its «ringleaders» were arrested, prosecuted and shot.
A. Lebed being a teenager was sitting on a tree during the meeting. When the first bursts were fired, other teenagers like Sasha (then), who had been sitting on the same tree a branch upper and a branch lower, fell from the tree lifeless. Sashe fell down safe and sound, but he remembered this episode for all his life. He remembered about it in August 1991 what Muscovites should be obliged to him for.
As for the rise in prices in post-Stalin period, prices are reduced in national economy as the industry spectrum as well as the consumer satisfaction increase, the way it was done under J. Stalin.
In the antinational economy prices rise independently of the industry spectrum dynamics, as the rise in prices depreciates salaries, pensions, savings and thus makes everyone living by his own labor dependant on the system masters. According to this circumstance E. Gaidar and the «Union of the Right Forces» on the whole, A. Chubais, V. Chernomyrdin, A. Livshits and many-many others would better to hold their tongues and not to say they are true exponents of the democratic idea.
[331] These Molotov’s and Mikoyan’s attempts to justify themselves are just usual servility.
[332] This is a description of a zombie, which is most likely to fit their psyche formation. Every person is responsible for his/her psyche formation him-/herself (and not anyone else): if both of them are zombies, then this is their own and not J. Stalin’s fault.
[333] If the cult of his own personality was disagreeable to Stalin, why should he like the «smaller» cult of Molotov’s personality blossoming under the shade of the cult of Stalin’s personality?
[334] Molotov’s wife’s surname — Pearl — sounds in Russian translation as Zhemchuzhina, which became her party pseudonym and then turned into her surname; she was a Jew by birth. If Molotov knuckled under to his wife, she was imprisoned for revealed anti-bolshevist internazi influence she had upon her husband — a member of the CPSU Central Committee, Politburo and the USSR Minister of Foreign Affairs.
About bed-political women and sex-bombs as weapons of mass destruction see the work “From Human Likeness Towards Being a Human” by the IP of the USSR (first published under the heading of «From Matriarchy Towards Being a Human…”).
[335] Later on Malenkov overlooked, didn’t sense something, thus he found himself in the «antiparty group» together with Molotov. But it’s possible that Khrushchev’s neo-Trotskyists, who knew him very well, didn’t take him into their team and preferred to get rid of him including him into the «antiparty group» of Molotov, Kaganovich and Shepilov, who joined them.
[336] The first impression coming out of the depth of mind, as statistics shows, is in most cases very close to the impartially true one. Everything subsequent is an attempt to justify oneself, an attempt to justify the following Khrushchevism and Brezhnevism, whose nomenclature treated K. Simonov in a quite benevolent way.
[337] I.e. loyal lyric poet K. Simonov was an adherent of the monarchical variant of the power succession provision: where the leader gets a new one inter vivos.
[338] Unlike K. Simonov Malenkov understood that was not necessarily so. And unlike loyal K. Simonov the intra-system mafia was for the second monarchical variant: the «conclave» of «associates» proposes a new leader according to their interests. At the same time they could probably decide when they should bury the former leader. This became apparent in Malenkov’s reaction to Stalin’s suggestion, which would have made the intra-system mafia’s scenario impossible, if there had been Bolsheviks instead of lackeys at the plenary session.
[339] I.e. J.V. Stalin faced the same problem H. Ford had faced, but unlike H. Ford’s problem — Stalin’s one was at the national level:
«But the vast majority of men want to stay put. They want to be led. They want to have everything done for them and to have no responsibility. Therefore, in spite of the great mass of men, the difficulty is not to discover men to advance, but <to discover> men who are willing to be advanced» (H. Ford, “My Life and Work”, chapter 6. «Machines and Men»).
[340] On this subject see the book: Yu. Mukhin “Murder of Stalin and Beria”, Moscow, «Crimea bridge-9D», «Forum», 2002.
[341] But K. Simonov was the only one of several dozens of participants of the Central Committee plenary session in October 1952 who did it, though 27 years after. However he did it on his deathbed, as he didn’t want to go to a better world with a sin upon his soul: with the sin of concealment of the truth in his lackey silence. He knew the truth, but it was concealed from the rest of the society by the mafia power.
Besides, we should understand, that at the Central Committee plenary session in October 1952 J.V. Stalin didn’t just want to express his ideas supposing that delegates would take them round all the USSR. He really wanted to rely on the inner-Party democracy, but the plenary session participants appeared to be incapable of it. He wanted to see an irreversible result in the life of the party itself, and not only delegates to take his words round the USSR, where they would have no consequences and would soon be forgotten because of the flow of everyday events.
That’s why a similar speech by its matter at one of the sessions of the 19th Congress (which, as it may seem, could have solved the problem of the information expansion in the society in a better way due to a greater number of the participants) didn’t do for J. Stalin’s attempt to rely on the real inner-Party democracy: suppression of the personality by means of psychological gregarious effects would work better in a larger audience. A relatively small plenary session audience could better do for exciting people’s political will - thus in the party there would eventually appear the informal (coming from the people) bolshevist power of simple Party members over the State machinery. But unfortunately it didn’t happen.
[342] «Righteous society made up of rascals», — a proactive characteristic by V. Kluchevsky, which warns about the attempt to introduce a majority of bearers of the crowd-“elitist” psyche algorithmic model into the organizational forms of Socialism. It’s desirable to think of it every time when the matter concerns various abuse of power at the time of Stalin’s Bolshevism.
[343] Subscription publications were distributed almost in the way newspapers and magazines are distributed now by means of subscription. The only difference is that one part of subscription publications was delivered to the customer’s place by post, and the other part was distributed through a network of bookshops, where they took stocks of the subscribers and the receipt of the editions they ordered. Correspondingly, a more-than-one-year delay of the regular volumes edition of the subscription publication of J. Stalin’s works couldn’t but go unnoticed and evoke perplexity in rather large sections of the public in all the USSR cities.
[344] Is it possible that the «all-powerful dictator» didn’t understand what was going on? or he was going to live forever and thus postponed the publication of the final version of his collected «revelations» to chronologically uncertain «next time»?
[345] «We’ve endured too much during the last 15 years», — in this way the US National Security Council directive 20/1 of August 18th, 1948 characterizes the period beginning from 1933, when Trotskyists-internazis’ undivided power in the USSR was broken off by Stalin’s Bolshevism. Extensive extracts from this US National Security Council directive under the name «Our Aims Concerning Russia» are cited in the book «The CIA against the USSR» by N. Yakovlev.
[346] Though a greater part of these works was published in the periodical press, the historical experience proves that books and especially collected works are more effective means of information transmission to descendants than separate periodical editions due to two circumstances: first, books are statistically better preserved on library bookshelves (and first of all in home libraries) than newspapers and magazines; secondly, the concentration of significant information is substantially bigger in books and especially in collected works than in longstanding periodicals filings.
[347] “St-Petersburg vedomosti” of the 10th of March 1992. The article “The CIA Planned to Kill the Father of Peoples” said (with reference to the book “Old Friends: American Elite and the CIA Origins” by historian Burton Hersh) that the CIA director Allen Welsh Dulles approved of the plan of Stalin’s assassination in 1952. From this we can understand that J. Stalin’s influence upon the global policy was a very significant hindrance, as far as such an operation was planned concerning an old man (On the December 6th, 1952 J.V. Stalin was 74. His real date of birth, which is confirmed in church records, is the December 6th, 1878), who, taking into account the state of his health and way of life, had just several years more to live.
[348] The 14th, 15th and 16th volumes of J. Stalin’s works were edited in 1997 in Moscow by the publishers «Writer».
R. Kosolapov prepared and organized the edition of the volumes. During Gorbachev’s reconstruction he filled the post of the chief editor of the theoretical organ of the Central Committee of the CPSU — the magazine «Communist» (we can’t say he «worked at his post», if we correlate what was going on in the country with what was published in the magazine «Communist» when R. Kosolapov was at the head of it). The matter of the 14th — 16th volumes, which continue the edition of J. Stalin’s works, was formed with some additions according to the edition of his works published in the USA for «Sovietologists’» needs. It included 14th — 16th volumes published on the basis of the sample copies of the might-have-been soviet edition, which were found in the USA.
[349] K. Simonov was one of the USSR most erudite cultural workers, and in most cases a man, who had independent and not trite thoughts. However even with such qualities he appeared to be psychologically unready to apprehend that little bit of the social truth, which J.V. Stalin stated in his speech at the Central committee plenary session. His example is one of numerous indices that there are statistically objective limits of information perception by any audience (from one person to the whole mankind). No one who brings information home to people can transgress those limits without causing psychological breakdown of this or that kind: depression, stupor, hysterics directed towards the audience itself or towards other people.
[350] Pier Courtad’s epigraph to the book «About the USSR’s Nature. Totalitarian Complex and a New Empire» by Edgar Moren (Moscow, «Science for the Society», 1995; French edition — Fayard-1983).
1 As an example of presuming «know-alls»’ attitude to the «leader» and his works — people who forgot that due to God’s mercy every nation lives a bit better than it deserves according to its temper and ethics — here is an extract from the article «Goebbels’ Creative Development» by B. Khazanov, published in «Oktyabr’» («October») magazine, № 5, 2002:
«Indeed, a great abasement of our time was that the roles of omnipotent rulers were played by mean, unscrupulous, narrow-minded people with primitive way of thinking and poor cultural background. As Goebbels once said — «Leadership has very little in common with education». He was right. One can talk about Stalin’s striking guile as much as he/she likes, one can wonder at his instinctive understanding of methods and machinery of absolute power — but it’s enough to read the leader’s works to evaluate his closed mind. One can admire Hitler’s ability to hypnotize the crowd — but his chaotic book produces the same lamentable impression as Stalin’s works. There’s nothing common with greatness — it’s a question of remarkable meanness.
Power corrupts its bearer; power lets his vile instincts expand in plenty. But there’s power’s charm. Power — and especially omnipotent power — throws reflection on everything that the ruler does. Platitudes from a tyrant’s lips seem to be insight, vulgarity transforms into profundity of thought, coarse humor turns into sophisticated wit. Harshness, meanness, immorality are interpreted as dictates of the highest necessity. Omnipotence aura makes slaves romanticize the ruler, worship his divine boots. This explains the wish to see the dictator as a great man, in spite of obviousness, or at least imagine him as a demon, raise him to the rank of Antichrist. The thought that we were ruled by a pygmy is unbearable».
— Change the Past Tense onto the Present one in this quotation and you’ll get a text, which would be signed by many representatives of Stalin’s Bolshevism soviet “elite”. But in that epoch they hid such thoughts even from themselves, as they were afraid to fall victims of denunciation from «high-moral know-alls» like themselves. But due to such kind of evaluation of Stalin’s personality and works by Bolshevism opponents the publication of the “Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR” became possible: «What’s there? — Ooh… new platitudes from the tyrant’s lips… — to be published».
And those who really were ready to lick Stalin’s boots devoutly didn’t care for his thoughts, but for the chance to lick his boot at least once in life — it’s such a good after which you could die happy. Such kinds of moral-psychological types are at enmity with each other just because of the disputes about problem whose boots to lick and about the queue and frequency of licking their idols’ boots.
2 If there’s no understanding of the global history course, then Stalin’s mentioned work is a collection of platitudes and senseless Marxist jabber — this thought is emotionally expressed by B. Khazanov in the extract from his article, which is cited above.
In order to show vivid consistency of our understanding of the «Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR» and absurdness of different opinions about Stalin’s intellectual primitivism, we had to premise parts 6.1 — 6.7 devoted to the USSR history and global politics history of the 20th century, to the present part, in which we analyze Stalin’s work.
[351] During a generation’s life the nation made its way from almost overall illiteracy, plough and splinter to the best education in the world, to industry based on advanced constructions and technologies, was getting ready to the first space flights.
[352] In other words whether God — Creator of Nature (Universe)— exists, or not, and there is just fiction about Him?
[353] The head of state and ruling party leader while during a quarter of the century personally considering almost every project of five-year or annual USSR social and economic development plan, setting tasks for the authors of the plans and projects, he can’t but notice and understand that Marxian Political Economy is a separate entity, and is neither connected with plan working-out process nor with the control process of the plans carrying out.
But if the leader just poses problems «in general» and signs documents worked up by others, putting signature where clerks show, he won’t it even during several decades, as all following USSR leaders didn’t realize that.
[354] I.e. besides people of authority there may be authoritative sources including ones without any definite authorship (for example, the Bible).
[355] On the other hand, Marxism teachers also didn’t like this question, which had no answer in Marxism. As far as they didn’t know the answer, they automatically found themselves in the opposition to Stalin’s version of life interpretation through Marxism.
[356] «Value transfer from means of production to produce» — this is a Marxist Political Economy notion. There’s no such an objective phenomenon in the real life, but there is an accounting procedure of attribution of amortised deductions, which are a legal part of means of production value, to the production price.
[357] Even now, 11 years after the USSR break-up, when Marxism is no more the dogma, many economists and ordinary people support Marxist Political Economy conceptual mechanism: how come there’s no «necessary» labor time? How come there’s no «surplus value»?
[358] Underbelly — due to the fact that the issue concerning the conceptual categories he named is comprehensible for the most general strata of society without any special education.
[359] This institution replaced Political Bureau. Central Committee Presidium was established by the 19th convention and was to control the party in the interim between conventions and preliminary sessions. It was abolished by the Khrushchev regime after J.V. Stalin had been murdered.
[360] One of Lenin’s utterances.
[361] This is real and is happening in Russia now (2002).
[362] Those who think that in Stalin’s epoch there was terrible tyranny should admit that all the named comrades wished to express their views on this or that problem themselves without fear of falling under the article 58 for counter-revolutionary actions, if the «tyrant» didn’t agree with their opinions. None of them was exiled to the concentration camps. L. Yaroshenko, who lived till the Reorganization (Perestroika), even was interviewed and said that Stalin hadn’t understood national economy and economic science problems.
This fact as well as evidences of those who really had worked with Stalin solving different country problems proves that the following Khrushchev’s statement is lie and slander: «Stalin didn’t act by persuasion, explanation and patient cooperation with people, but by thrusting his ideas on them and demanding strict obedience to his opinion. Those who opposed his opinion or tried to prove their point of view and correctness of their line, were doomed to be dismissed from the office…» (from N. Khrushchev’s «secret» report at the 20 Congress of CPSU convention, which 6 months after was published in the USA, but was concealed from the USSR peoples until Perestroika when «struggle against stalinshchina» (the Stalin’s heritage) began).
But if Khrushchev and the like were ignorant and so pusillanimous, that fear bound their minds to such a degree that it was impossible to convince them of something; and if Socialism and Communism ideals provoked in them subconscious abhorrence and unmotivational aversion, which were directed towards his decisions’ implementation, it’s mean to lay the blame on Stalin for their own ignorance, moral perversity, cowardice and stupidity.
[363] See the «Explanation for the Last Paragraph», which finishes part 6.6.
[364] Central Committee
[365] But if to recollect what H. Ford wrote about the organization of «Ford Motors», it was all the same at his company.
[366] But the reasons can’t be of common sense if there is no definiteness in understanding the terms and in their interrelation with life and with each other, which are the basis for reasoning. And defining the terms is exactly what L.D.Yaroshenko evades.
[367] Footnote to the edition used by Stalin.
[368] In other place Stalin gives the following quotation of Yaroshenko: «Comrade Yaroshenko declares that in his "Political Economy of Socialism," "the categories of political economy — value, commodity, money, credit, etc., — are replaced by a healthy discussion of the rational organization of the productive forces in social production» …»
[369] But there is the third possibility: there are experts of the “common-sense” reasoning whose speeches are intended to confuse others, forming false figurative conceptions about Life phenomena, as a result, those people find themselves dependant on these experts of the “common-sense” reasoning whose figurative conceptions in spite of their words are still consonant to the objective Life phenomena.
[370] At this time in the USSR one could be discontent about one of the two things:
· either that socialism was being built in the country;
· or that the process of building socialism proceeds along with barbarism and abuse of citizens and authorities, that pervert the essence of the socialism.
The first dissidents destroyed the USSR and started reforms of a bourgeois character. The second wave of «dissidents» finishes the reformations and draws the bottom-line.
[371] Out of the window there are trashcans. In the summer flies skit around them. This anti-sanitary is the built-in part of the architectural-urban style of «khrushchevki» (blocks of tiny low-cost flats that were erected during the time of Khrushchev), it represents the «concern about people» of psychical-Trotsky Khrushchev and Brezhnev’s regime.
The fact that now from sunrise until sunrise these trashcans are watched and investigated by «free» «proprietors» is an accomplishment of Gorbachev’s regime and reforms of Yeltsin and Gaidar. Of course, the tertiary treatment and reprocessing urban ore branch is necessary but we cannot agree that it should be organized in such a way by means of forcing people out of life to the scrap-heap.
In the USSR there was no such a majority of people who were decayed to the life on scrap-heap because of the state politics, neither in its high time, nor in the time of its degradation.
[372] Though some contemporary supporters of «Conspiracy» do not go deep into it.
[373] As a result of searching the Internet we found references only to the following editions:
1. Bogdanov A.A. “Tectology. Universal Organizing Science”, book 1 — 3, S-Petersburg, Moscow-Berlin, 1913 — 1922.
2. Bogdanov A.A. “Tectology. (Universal Organizing Science)” — second edition in 2 books: book 1 — 304 pages, book 2 — 351 pages — Moscow «Economica», 1989.
[374] If it were successful, then after publishing in 1913 the first chapters of this work of A.A. Bogdanov there would have been algorithmic reconstruction of the neo-sphere of the Earth and the problem of overcoming the Marxism would have been solved in some way in the first half of the 20th century. The history of the 20th century would be different.
[375] The author is А. Kitashov, biological department of the Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, the paper work dated by the year of 1995. The address of the paper in the Internet (June 2002): http://1.cellimm.bio.msu.ru/people/cetum/bogdanov.html (in the address “l” — Latin letters, but not the graphical signs for number “1” instead of the first symbol which is “one”).
[376] The author of the paper gives references to the page numbers of the Berlin edition of the “Tectology”, 1922, with the original punctuation, where possible.
[377] Yu.I. Mukhin in the aforementioned book «Murder of Stalin and Beria» (Moscow, «Crimea Bridge-9D», «Forum», 2002) on page 484 cites the lists of the books from Stalin’s library. Among them there are 2 books of A.A. Bogdanov «Brief course of Economics» that were published before the Revolution are mentioned.
[378] I.e. such, where Self-focused conception pretensions to express world-view positions and interests of all mankind.
[379] Those who think that this argument based on the paperwork is not convincing, may turn to the works of A.A. Bogdanov. In particular Self-focused (anthropo-focuced) atheism of a material kind is expressed in his article «A Mystery of Science», which may be found in the Internet and which is included in the catalog «Other authors» in the Information base of the USSR that is distributed on CDs.
[380] «There is no need, let say, to limit goals and subjects of the scientific researches by ethical demands. Ethics accumulates experience of the past life, including (may be even in the first place) experience of past failures. And science is always a search of new possibilities of society development and its adaptation to the surrounding conditions. In seeking (of course, not in use) there shouldn’t be any restrictions!» (From an article of academician N.N.Moiseev and professor of physics and mathematical science I.G.Pospelov «Set of Evolution and Mind», magazine «Priroda» № 6, 1990)
Though the authors write that «the main attribute of evolution process is its unpredictable character», but on the foundation of all the historical experience of crowd-“elitism” self-destruction of humanity is guaranteed, if crowd-“elitism” will still coincide with the absence of ethical restriction for goals and subjects of researches.
Since it is impossible to limit the investigation and use of the knowledge in the society and evil morals of the society will turn into evil any knowledge, then the only protection from this destruction is ethical, and morally conditioned in their essence, restrictions for goals and subjects of the researches that are applied by researchers themselves: scientific knowledge can’t be used for evil until it is not investigated; that is why barbarism of society, that decline the moral and ethical progress is the virtue for itself and for environment.
Let’s continue looking at this question about interrelation of morals and “Tectology” and turn to the edition of «Gorbachev-Fond» (creation of his starting capital is a special matter of moral and ethical and criminal and legal character) “Perestroika. 10 years later” (Moscow, “April-85”, 1995, circulation 2500 copies, i.e. the edition is under the secret classification “For elite only”). Page 159, art critic Andreeva I.A. says the following in a confused way (her self-rating, see p. 156):
«Moral basis — it is high-flown and complicated. But the elements of ethic are quite available to us». It is said after the words of the «physicist» — mathematician and say «ecologist», academic of Russian Academy of Sciences Moiseev N.N., went by the art critic («lyrist»):
«On the top (in the context he speaks about power structure) there may be a scoundrel, a rotter, a place-hunter, but if he is a clever man, many would be forgiven to him, because he would understand that what he does is useful for the state» (p. 148).
— No one said anything against it, in spite of the fact that academic actually identified morally conditioned interests of a clever scoundrel with the interests of the whole country. But it does not scare neither the academic, nor his listeners, because they have become just as immoral or of evil-moral as the scoundrel that are hypothetically in their attention. What scares them? — The academic gives an answer:
«What we were afraid of? We were afraid of what A.A. Bogdanov wrote in his “Tectology”: when some system (organization) appears it brings forth, desirably or not, its own interests. This is what happened with our system. There appeared a certain elite group that practically usurped the property of the great country».
— The academic is lying, because «this certain elite group» did not appear from nothing, it was generated by the principle that was earlier formulated by the academic: It is true that there was a day when clever scoundrels and rotters organized on the basis of Self-focused demonical atheistic moral and expressed their own low and dirty interests in the biblical doctrine of all-enslavement and the development of science that sees no Higher moral, expressed in the life of Creation, cover them up just as N.N.Moiseev did by referring to “Tectology”.
In this way N.N.Moiseev proved the point of J.V. Stalin in his rejection of «tectology» and of relatively similar in quality to it morally petrified atheistic organizational-managing theories to which «cybernetics» belongs as well.
[381] It is expressed in the life of Creation and due the power of its all-embracing character is identified by atheism with «immorality» of Nature. But righteousness is one for all. The difference is only in attitudes to it: it expresses the subjectivism of God and for all the rest, righteousness, as an ideal of their possible morality, is an objective from of Above-predetermined entity.
[382] We express hope that freedom-loving intelligentsia (if any of them is reading this text) has understood right away what is said in this thesis, even without reading “Tectology”.
But in our opinion, this terminological conceptual, the sense of which words was clear almost only to the author of “Tectology” — to
A.A. Bogdanov himself, — represents expression of the fact that his understanding of the general organization of Life as such was blurred, fragmentary, kaleidoscope-like. Exactly because of this unclear understanding of laws that were immanent to the analyzed by him «object = object» — Life as such — the volume of the «Tectology» turned out to be of 3 books and its terminological conceptual is rather «exotic» from the point of view of many even educated part of the society. As such «Tectology» of Bogdanov is not more than of a historical and textological interest, since it is easier and more effective to formulate all from the beginning rather than correct its different inaccuracies and errors and add something.
Our practice shows that relatively general theory of management may be formulated in 10 pages with the use of the commonly used terminology of a mathematic and engineering character with some broadening of the meanings of terms, it includes only 9 conceptions that are interconnected and that can always be connected with reality of life. The full text of the constructive materials of the study course of the Relatively general theory of management takes in the book 112 pages, including the 10 pages of its brief description, which are given in details in the full version. See «The dead water» in the editions, beginning from 1998 and separate publishing of «Relatively general theory of management».
[383] Aggregor (from aggregate) is a collective mentality formed by people with similar parameters of their biofields and some senses. Thus to form an aggregor one needs at first – the similarity of peoples power parameters of their biofields, and at second – the similarity of some their senses (professional, sense of being etc.) For example – the aggregor of smokers. They found their special sense in smoking and when one smoke he “tunes” his biofield by the special (similar for everybody) way.
[384] In the present work we are not going to consider the question about the sacred religion of Stalin, as a system of his personal relations with God beyond any dogmas and rituals. This topic is touched upon in the works of the IP of the USSR “Turn back in rage…”, “The Brief Course…” and “It is Time I Should Start the Tale of Stalin…”.
[385] In this respect anti-Stalinists and other opponents of bolshevism should to think about the nature of Providence and about their own relations with God.
[386] For the USA the war was really costly, from the point of view of investment costs, rather than bloody or expensive on the ground of damage caused. During the period of war US armed Forces had the death toll of about 500 thousand people. There was no destruction on the territory of the USA.
US navy at the end of the war can be considered as a showing of the investments costs. It became the most powerful navy in the world and almost every unit of it was built within three years of war (after 1941), including dozens of heavy ships i.e. battleships and aircraft-carriers, and a few hundreds of light ships, i.e. cruisers, destroyers, convoy aircraft-carriers, and a number of ships with other functions. In times of piece shipbuilding programs of the kind including development of production facilities of shipbuilding industries, would take decades.
Due to the geographical location of the USA and US role in the war during that period production facilities of US national economy developed considerably and that distinguishes them from other countries that took part in the war. In other words investments in the war brought a good return while the death toll was not heavy regarding the number of population. It counted 500 thousand to 150 million people of the population, while in Belarus it was about 2 million to 8 million people.
[387] Lend-lease expenses of the USA for the period from March 11, 1941 to August 1,1945 amounted to $46 billions (13 per cent of all the military expenses of the war and more than 50 per cent of their export). The USSR got $9.8 millions out of the sum. No matter what they propagandized concerning the military supplies from the USA as compared to the USSR’s own volume of production, and the quality of American tanks and planes, one should not forget the Studebecker trucks and other kinds of products needed at war. They probably were not the key needs but were important enough to lighten the burden of war for the economy of the USSR.
[388] At that time you could even find it in newspapers that after the war had been finished capitalist countries began developing state economy intensively. It inevitably led to organizing a state system of economy management. In particular Great Britain nationalized several industries when the war was ceased.
[389] Some scoundrels and lamebrains (these words are not an emotional outburst but a reasonable characteristic of their morals and intellectual powers) tried and excluded the planned state beginning out of the economical activity of society. This attempt proved that advanced technology industries such as aerospace or abstract science could not survive without a planned state beginning and especially being suffocated by bank usury.
[390] It was this culture that H. Ford wrote about s you can see in the previous chapters.
[391] Still they produce for the sake of profit. Production range extends due to scientific, technical and organizational progress and in developed countries finally it reaches the level of sufficiency according to the number of population. However it is not followed by a structural reforming of national economy, reducing daily working hours, encouraging creative work of the population in a field apart from the paid job.
Instead of discussing ways of solving these problems, western economists discuss the problem of artificial maintenance of employment under the conditions of the existing organization of producing and distributing system. They justify reduction of the technological lifespan of production and the cult of fashion. At the same time they admit that it is possible to create models of refrigerators, washing machines etc that approach the ergonomic optimum, i.e. so convenient to use that no drawbacks of the construction can make one change it for an up-to-date model. They can be in use for 20 — 30 years and satisfy a want of them within five years. But after that capitalism economy will cease functioning, the level of unemployment will rise that will lead to increase in crime and other problems. It cannot be tolerated.
Accordingly it is necessary for maintaining the existing system of social relations of the crowd-“elitism” to develop entertainment industry in order to busy the unemployed, to adjust the demand to constantly renewing fashion and to depreciate resources characteristics of production to maintain employment.
As you can see this strategy of economy management does not coincide with the one suggested by J.V. Stalin in “Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R.”. The question is which strategy is better? It is obviously Stalin’s one because in the long run it is capable of getting in harmony with the Earth’s biosphere and the outer space providing good living and working conditions, amenities of rest and meeting the needs of personality development. While the strategy of the West exhausts more and more resources of nature and society aimlessly consuming everything for the sake of crowd-“elitism”. Most of the people in this society are just attachments to their working places or “dregs of society”, and the minority of the population is spongers.
[392] So the question of the meaning of the words «submission of the State machinery to monopolies» is a question of terminology and thoroughness of analyzing the processes that take place in monopolies and in the State machinery while it is submitting to monopolies.
If it were only about coalescence it would reveal itself in the State machinery as legitimization of bribery and exaction of state officers. It would make these crimes look decent as certain «democratisers» in Russia, G. Popov in particular, suggested. But submission of the State machinery to monopolies’ management has a broader sense than legitimization of money and shares bribery within the bounds of «the legislation of lobbying» or in another way.
If one sticks to the ordinary meaning of words and rules of grammar, and relies only on the descriptions without getting to the point he/she can really get an impression that Stalin knew nothing about introducing a planned beginning to Capitalism economy, that he wrote one thing but we try to arrogate another thing to him. Let people who think so explain in detail what the manifestations of «submission of the State machinery to monopolies» are. Why does the planned beginning not permeate through monopolies’ activity and reach the State machinery’ activity?
Or probably this submission appeared in Stalin’s dreams? Then Joseph Stieglitz, the Nobel Prize in economics winner of 2001, also dreamt of it and this loathsome vision appeared even more vividly. (See Supplement 2.)
The question of submission of the state to monopolies proves that it is no use to read Stalin’s works with only one’s left-brain in action, without referring to the real historic circumstances of the age. Commenting them on the basis of such «reading» is making a fool of oneself or a scoundrel and a swindler in front of all somewhat thoughtful people.
[393] It would be stupid to refuse the mistakes made and the abuse of power, but those were not numerous; as a consequence the first bolshevist state in the history of the global civilization did not collapse.
[394] When the matter concerns comparing quality of products, it is better to correlate with certain consumer standards of different social groups.
[395] It is so if we consider the reality of that time and the life of the working people, not libelous myths composed by loony Trotskyite politicians, i.e. Khrushchev’s followers and «democratisers», and the intellectuals. Nowadays they are supposed to have created «unexcelled spiritual values» and to have claimed the prior right for material comforts that were created mostly by others without any assistance of the intellectuals-abstractionists of science and culture.
[396] Which were «awfully far from people…» if we put it in V.I. Lenin’s words.
[397] Yu. Mukhin avoids speaking about the problem of conceptual authorities in the aforementioned book «Murder of Stalin and Beria». He concentrates readers’ attention only on mafia bureaucratic degeneration the Party machine alone, which corrupted and in the end brought up managers in the rest of industries. In spite of the fact that the author of the book shields specialists, production managers, it is management in general and leading specialists that showed their nonentity and anti-national nature during the years of Khrushchev’s rule and in the following age, especially during the perestroika and other reforms.
Therefore everybody who has read or just intends to read this book should not only know but also understand the following. The measures, J.V. Stalin took to change the status of the party and the state system, which Yu. Mukhin writes about were only the consequence of Stalin’s conceptual authority. Any original conception of administration finds expression in broad function of administration, the function in its turn expresses itself in the architecture of administration structures. See the USSR IP’s work «The Dead Water» part II, the chapter «Representation of the broad function of state and non-governmental structures of the social self -administration system».
[398] A daily all-union newspaper, the gazette of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), later on of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
[399] This work is not about linguistics as many people think, but about miserable tendencies in science in the USSR, demonstrated by J.V. Stalin by the example of linguistics.
[400] At that time it was called «bourgeois regeneration».
[401] Though one should not delude oneself. If Trotsky’s wing of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party won, bureaucracy headed by L. Bronstein would come to power. In his «Letter to the Party Congress» V. Lenin accused him of «excessive enthusiasm for purely administrative aspect». It was accusation against L. Bronstein (Trotsky) of the “elite” bureaucracy: representatives of the upper stratum of bureaucracy misuse their right to express more or less good wishes. Without having mastered practical knowledge and skills they entrust their subordinate «specialists» who are to have these skills and knowledge, with all the work to realize these wishes (which may really be good). Actually the «specialists» may not have any knowledge and skills due to the bureaucratic management style. They are rejected the right to participate in the activity of the upper layer of the hierarchy, as well as the right to criticize the upper bureaucrats personally, let alone drawing conclusions or inferences for future.
Many pressmen and mass media in general claim for their sole right to express their more or less good wishes. They claim for the right to call to account by means of public denunciation for a real or imaginary abuse of power owing to pressmen’s ignorance in matters they express their opinion about. Accordingly these claims are one of the gravest and most dangerous types of bureaucracy, for it is informal bureaucracy.
[402] This way K. Marx explained in good time who created the cult of personality of J.V. Stalin in the Soviet society for what reasons and purposes.
[403] As if adding to Marx’s words V. Belinsky gave the definition of a crowd that we have already mentioned: it is a «gathering of people living by tradition and judging by authority». Accordingly bureaucracy is not elite, though it rules, but a crowd, «a senseless people». Belinsky is precise in his definition: he criticized «judging by authority», but did not touch upon the personal aspect of every single bureaucrat. Many people reproach the USSR IP for recognizing no authority. His is not true. The USSR IP acknowledges certain personalities impact on the history and recognizes their authority in this sense. But the USSR IP is against «judging by authority» on the ground that every person has to act according to particular features of the age. That is why the USSR IP suggests substituting the culture of thinking for «judging by authority». It would give everyone an opportunity to get rid of intellectual dependence.
[404] In 1970 — 1980 it was the most widely used edition. It became the last one published in the USSR.
[405] This word is that of «intellectuals» and does not describe the point precisely unlike a coarse vulgar word. The point is that whatever name we give to this person a toady cannot overcome his sex instincts. Sex instincts of a Homo Sapience aim at maintaining vitality of the species in the biosphere. According to this function a woman is made unconditionally psychologically dependent on children, while a man is made unconditionally psychologically dependent on a woman. And women show their demonic character to misuse men’s instinctive subjection to them. As a result men often reveal their mistresses will which in not always wit and socially responsible.
However in civilized society of crowd-“elitism” this unconditioned instinctive subjection of men to women and subjection of women to children is restrained by cultural factors. This problem is analyzed thoroughly in the USSR IP’s works such as “From Human Likeness Towards Being a Human”, “Principles of Personnel Policy belonging to a sate, an «anti-state», a social initiative”, and the Supplement to “The Sufficiently common theory of control” in separate editions beginning from the year of 2000.
[406] As mafia makes a hierarchy in real life of crowd-“elitism” society and biblical teaching dominates over society, bureaucracy inevitably falls into admiration of zids. In the end it serves «world biblical backstage» to the detriment of their own people and their development potential.
[407] Referring to Lenin’s definition of a social class well known in the Soviet period, it was clear even at that time that bureaucracy in the USSR was becoming a social class, an exploiter parasite antisocialist and anticommunist class.
«Social Classes. “Classes are groups of people, which differ in their place in a certain historic system of social production, in their relation to means of production (stated in laws), in their role in the social labor organization, therefore they differ in the ways they get their share of public welfare and its proportions. Classes are groups of people one of which can misappropriate the other group’s labor due to the difference in their positions in a certain structure of national economy”. (V. Lenin. The Complete Works, edition 5, volume 39, page 15.)» (Cited from the “Big Soviet Encyclopedia”, edition 3, volume 12, page 280; reference to “The Collected Works” of V. Lenin, to “The Great Start”).
As the saying goes, guilty conscience needs no accuser. So the Big Soviet Encyclopedia tries to justify the Soviet Party bureaucracy of Khrushchev and Brezhnev periods mainly to continue «explaining» the point:
«This definition was given by V. Lenin referring to classes of an antagonist society. Their relationship leads to class struggle inevitably. Yet classes still exist in socialist society that has eliminated exploitation of <people by parasites>…»
This was to be understood in the following way: there are only single manifestations of some officers’ bureaucracy that make semblance of bureaucracy really existing. There is no parasitic bureaucracy but a body of managers who come of common people and who are still a socially useful working group of population.
V. Lenin made a vitally valid definition of the term «social class». Besides even before the Russian Revolution in his book «State and Revolution» he wrote (with G. Apfelbaum-Zinoviev as his co-author) openly that bureaucracy was hostile to the essence of the Soviet power. It was so fair and persuasive that during the period after Stalin’s rule corresponding fragments were never discussed at party studies or within courses of social science in higher educational establishments. If anybody referred to them in the course of a seminar on his/her own initiative the leader would fall into tedium and try to change the subject immediately, to go on break or to close the seminar:
«By the example of the Commune <of Paris, 1871> Marx showed that under socialism officials are not «bureaucrats», «officers» any longer as any time replacement alongside with appointment by election is introduced, as WAGES RAE BROUGHT TO AN AVERAGE OPERATING LEVEL and parliament institutions are replaced by working ones <parliament: parler (Fr) — to speak, i.e. parliament is a speaking club, mostly speaking to no purpose>, i.e. making laws and carrying them into effect. […] In practical measures of the Commune Marx saw THE TURNING POINT THAT OPPORTUNISTS ARE AFRAID OF AND DO NOT WANT TO ADMIT BECAUSE OF THEIR COWARDICE AND UNWILLINGNES TO BREAK UP WITH BOURGEOISIE...» (put in capital letters by the authors).
We would like to draw your attention to the fact that practical measures of the Commune of Paris are basic to their description by classics of Marxism, i.e. they also come from life, not from Marxism. From the standpoint of the Sufficiently common theory of control reducing managers’ wages to the average level in productive industries the Commune of Paris tried to close feedback of social management on the working majority, turning them to high-yielding groups of “elite”, both national and transnational. The Commune crashed, because people who agreed to run the management on the offered conditions did not have the necessary qualification, while those who had it demonstrated arrogance of the “elite” and regarded Paris workers as rowdy crowd to be brought to their level. So they turned MORALLY UNREADY to manage society by concerns of the majority’s life and at the same time to live as an average family.
Some people can argue that Stalin made no reference of the kind and never said openly that bureaucracy was an exploiter class, therefore we again attribute wisdom to him post factum. But crowd-“elitism” society is able to maintain a campaign with the slogan «Annihilate bureaucracy as a class!» that is similar to the motto «Annihilate the kulaks as a class!» They could be driven to that by Trotskyites and after that the USSR would be left again without any professional managers. J.V. Stalin did not want it to happen and hoped to solve the problem another way of social and historic development, as it is clear from “Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R.”.
Besides in the USSR under Stalin and in the following years «State and Revolution» and Lenin’s works that give the definition of the term «social class» used to be cult works. Thus nothing except indifference to the lot of Motherland or cowardice could prevent a schoolchild, a student or a Party member in the course of party studies from behaving according to real historic circumstances reform as Bolsheviks.
But bureaucracy in Russia is still a social class, a parasite exploiter class hostile to all the society and to itself. There is no place for bureaucracy in the future. Let the bureaucracy know and remember about it…
Fighting bureaucracy is always either “a funny game” called «hide-and-seek» the very bureaucrats or a class struggle of working people for introducing humanness into life. But one of the parasite classes of the crowd-“elitism” society prevents it.
[408] However the Soviet bureaucracy of 1920 — 1930’s also deserves thanks. This thoughtless and weak-willed monster overridden by J.V. Stalin appeared good enough for stopping the open mafia pseudo-democratic absolute power of Marxist psycho-Trotskyism in 1920 — 1930’s. But by the end of 1940’s it stood in the way of the further development of the USSR.
[409] It is not a question of adding badly constructed aircraft to the armory but of providing the troops with production bundle that does not meet the standards and approved technical demands.
[410] Bureaucratic management style of various products «life cycle» is one of the implicit mediate reasons of almost all the known man-caused disasters. It concerns both: great and slight ones, from spontaneous inflammation of color TV-sets (the «epidemic» of 1970’s) to the Chernobyl disaster and the submarine «Kursk» wreck and many other incidents that remain unknown or unrecognized as disasters.
[411] «Becoming active makers of social development» implies conceptual authority of common people (called «lower classes» in terms of crowd-“elitism”) and absolute subordination of the state organization to it. That is not what despots, tyrants and power-seeking people appeal to.
[412] J.V. Stalin virtually proved that macroeconomy of a state could work stably in the regime of systematic planned cut in prices. After the derationing of 1947 prices used to be cut every year demonstrating an incontestable increase in social labor productivity. Unlike H. Ford who carried out the policy of a planned cut in prices on the level of microeconomy in his company «Ford Motors», in the USSR the policy of a planned cut in prices was adopted within the state-super concern. As a result of this policy all people’s wealth increased but not only of those who can settle themselves and live by some additional income differing a lot from the rest of society’s standard of living.
That is what the «World backstage» and its henchmen (financial and stock-exchange tycoons and their tame pressmen and social «science») cannot forgive him for. On the other hand the present Russian «opposition» is either stupid or so coward that does not dare to make the demand for the regime «Long live Stalin’s policy of a planned cut in prices!»
[413] In this case Stalin per se would not have been in history, there would have been a more successful person than L. Bronstein, another «Trotsky» by spirit, i.e. by his mind and morals.
[414] Referring to the aforementioned anecdote, we can say that «world backstage» has made a mistake in their attempt to charge «the bargain» to Stalin. They did it but the «bargain» became the national property owing to Stalin and together with him dissolved in the future where there was no room for «world backstage» …
Sjids of all nationalities really have reasons to feel angry with Stalin.
[415] Correspondingly Khrushchev and Brezhnev’s policy (with N. Baybakov running the State Planning Committee of the USSR) of «production equipment instead of production of consumptive use» was a distortion of Stalin’s course by means of running to an absurd extreme. What is more the production equipment was out-of-date and imperfect due to bureaucratization of science, research and development, the State Planning Committee of the USSR and the republics.
[416] It concerns both: Capitalist and Socialist economy with the only difference. The difference is that in Capitalist economy speculative sector is legal, while in Socialist economy it is to be suppressed legally and socially.
[417] For a detailed study see the USSR IP’s «A Brief Course…», «The Dead Water» ( in editions of 1998 and succeeding years). In these works the theory of multi-industry system of production and consumption unfolds as well as general rules of organization of the long-term planning system conditioned by population study.
[418] Nikolai Baibakov (b. 1911) was the head of the committee for forward planning of the Council of Ministers from 1955 to 1957. From 1957 to 1958 he worked as the head of the State Planning Committee of the RSFSR. From 1965 till his retirement during perestroika he was the vice chairman of the Council of Ministers and the head of the State Planning Committee of the USSR.
We know nothing about N. Baibakov’s grievances against economics and against outstanding economists or muddlers personally on the ground of his dissatisfaction with their «scientifically valid» planning methods. We agree that it was impossible to put Stalin’s demands into practice on the basis of the existing methods of planning and the way control used to be organized in the USSR. It was impossible not because of real impracticability, but because of the unfounded methods of planning in operation. (You can go back and see the nonsense of the book “The Planned Equilibrium: installation, maintenance, efficiency” by V. Belkin and V. Ivanter, quoted in «Digression 7».) It was also impossible because of the management bureaucratization. It was impossible to put Stalin’s demands into practice, as legitimate scientists were incompetent professionally and intellectually.
Initiative in developing methods of planning was not encouraged or supported by bureaucrats of the State Planning Committee and the Central Committee. Even the initiative of such prominent figures as the world chess champion and Doctor of Science Mikhail Botvinnick. Those with no titles were also ignored. If they dared to insist they were suppressed, expelled from the Communist Party, charged with being graphorrhea addict and with anti-Soviet work, etc.
[419] Once again we want to remind you that in spite of the bureaucratic and propagandistic custom of the USSR a NORMAL plan for the state and society had the following characteristics:
· It is not a high hurdle that the multi-industry system of production and consumption had to clear at the breaking point;
· It is an attainable level with a control index that the system of production and consumption had to maintain and would better exceed. It must be guaranteed by the freedom of scientific and technical, and entrepreneur management creative work.
In other words the plan must be guaranteed not to be tense. In process of accomplishing it organization of work must guarantee exceeding production volume if it is needed and forestalling schedule deadline if it is admissible. It must also guarantee development, mastery of technique and production of new products of public utility that initially have not been planned.
[420] If the state is the owner of the financing system then it is mediately the owner of everything that is taken stock of throughout the territory regardless of the patterns of ownership.
Therefore from the State Planning Committee’s viewpoint (as well as that of Ministry of economy) products exchange as a united system of production and distribution accompanied by monetary circulation is built on the basis of interior cost values of the system. They include expenditures conditioned financially, which are characteristic of the system management and stocktaking on different levels. They include: workshop cost value, the cost value of the enterprise workshop cost value + overhead expenses; branch or regional cost value including dues and donations constituents; all national economy cost value = internal prices of production; foreign market prices as one of the features of external economic potential of a super concern-state.
This approach to the description of economic processes secures the unity of form and content on every level: from an individual to super concerns and global economy of the humanity. The approach comes from the principle of integrity of multi-industry system of production and consumption. This way of understanding economic processes corresponds with axioms of economics (Digression 2) and with main rules of political economy of an industrial civilization (Digression 6). If it dominates in society them micro level management of national economy and macro level management can be brought to a conflict only by evil design and society’s inactivity. Those were things not to be found during the period of Stalin’s Bolshevism.
If the owner of the financing system is not the state (legally it is manifested by the independence of the Central Bank from the state), the financing system is the legal property of international mafia. Mafia is also the owner of everything that is taken stock of throughout the territory regardless of the patterns of ownership.
[421]It underlies the possibility of a planned state cut in prices.
[422] Except for goods and services of daily needs. Their range is constantly changing, that is why the production can be mass, oriented towards not an individual order but the revealed statistics of needs.
[423] For more information about virtual structures and management on their basis see the USSR IP’s work “The Sufficiently common theory of control”. Here we shall be brief. Management structures can be permanent and liven up if their activity is necessary. Besides they can appear if their activity is necessary and liquidate themselves by the end of their activity and appear again when new needs come to light. This regime of structure functioning is termed «management on the basis of virtual structures».
Basically if elements composing a super system (i.e. elements are systems) are ripe for management on the basis of virtual structures the super system functions more effectively. This accounts for releasing the elements, which could be employed for inactive full-scale permanent structures. Besides under certain circumstances and due to their own features full-scale permanent structures become parasite if they try to keep their quality under changed conditions.
[424] As a result of their «reforms» nuclear-powered icebreakers designed to pilot a convoy of watercrafts over the Arctic Ocean route without budgetary financing of «northern delivery» waste their technological lifespan for cruises. They take western tourists fed up with exotics to the North Pole and «earn» about $30,000 per every tourist to work at piloting watercrafts over the Arctic Ocean route at the end of summer and in autumn.
It is one of the examples of imbecility disguising sabotage impartially being an act of sabotage. It is beyond Y. Gaidar’s intellect to understand and to put the principle of the superior profitability of national economy as a united system into practice. The same concerns supporters of pro-bourgeois reforms in Russia.
[425] In the USSR IP’s InfoBase distributed on CDs the text is in the section «Other Authors».
[426] «The Ministry of Internal Affairs» (Police etc).
[427] It means «Young guards» — Literary-publicistic magazine in the USSR and nowadays in Russia.
[428] It reminds us of a true story. It presents how Great Britain facilitated Hitler in the course of World War II to give an order to get ready to repulse the landing operation of the allies of the anti-Hitlerism coalition in Greece in 1943. Actually they were preparing for a landing in Italy and carried it out.
Adolph Hitler consulted his personal astrologer. He was acquainted with another astrologer as they had worked together before the war. The latter knew the way Hitler’s astrologer used to work. During the war he was invited to work as an adviser in Great Britain to duplicate the recommendations that Hitler got from his personal astrologer relying on the common methods. The doubling adviser decided that Hitler would be advised to get ready to repulse the landing operation of the allies in Greece. When Winston Churchill was informed of it he commanded to prepare for a landing in Italy though the headquarters had been working out the operation in Greece.
After that in the Atlantic Ocean a body in the uniform of a British officer and a case were taken out. The case was full of documents, which made it evident that a landing and opening of a new front in Greece had been being prepared. The papers were given to the leaders of the Nazi Germany. At the same time an «unsuccessful» «search» of the «bearer of secrets» was conducted by the English. It also became known to the German intelligence service. Finally German leaders made sure they were right to prepare for a landing of allies in Greece. They went on developing their military potential at that cite. But allies landed in Italy in 1943. Hitler’s personal astrologer passed away in a concentration camp…
So the trick with the body of a «secrets bearer» is a standard procedure in the stock of secret services.
[429] A. Pushkin. «About the second volume of «The History of the Russian People» by Polevoy» (1830). Cited by the Complete Academic Works in 17 volumes reedited in 1996 by the «Voskresenie» publishers. First published in 1949 by the Academy of Science of the USSR. Page 127.
[430] «Ford Motors»
[431] An abbreviation of Information Free.
[432] It is contrary to the very human nature itself and is therefore one of the faces of Satanism.
[433] But Internet network projects are only a beginning: scientific, design, political and other projects can be based on same principles. They reflect virtual structures-based activity, which has been mentioned in the main part of this book.
[434] By those who are themselves creatively barren and have nothing to do with creating and work of art, science, technology or other.
[435] The activities of the RF Duma aimed at subjecting Russia to the Western conception of copyright and allied rights is yet one more anti-national act among others, reflecting the ill-natured recklessness of some MPs and the idiocy of other.
[436] This is a step further towards creating a system of buying up information on the basis of usury and corporate mafia control of its distribution.
[437] Actually in the Soviet times the laws on copyright and allied right were aimed at making cultural achievements as easily available to people as possible. If bureaucrats suppressed creative work and creators, especially in the post-Stalin times, it is a different matter relating not to the laws proper but to their practical application.
[438] It does not say so in the interview given to «El Pais», but in other interviews which can be found on the Internet Shtiglits asserts that IMF representatives have standard conditions for all countries consisting of 111 clauses. Shtiglits also says that everyone is offered large bribes, and those who nevertheless refuse to sign, are simply destroyed physically.
Дата добавления: 2019-09-02; просмотров: 207; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!