The All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (AUCPB), inheriting Bolshevik principles of the R.S.D.W.P. -R.S.D.W.P.(b) - A.U.C.P.(b) - of Lenin's policiy in the CPSU, is the highest form of proletarian class organisation, advanced detachment of the working class, acting in unity with the peasantry and labour intelligentsia, standing on the Party's positions for: the gain of political power - overthrowing the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the destruction of private ownership over the instuments and means of production, the revival of the USSR, the further strenghtening of the proletarian interests for the complete victory of socialism and gradual transition to communism. The ideological and theoretical basis of the AUCPB is formed by Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, is their doctrine in its creative application and development in modern conditions. The AUCPB is a component of the global communist movement with the aim of communism triumphing over the whole planet.

Wednesday, 24 April 2013

FOR BOLSHEVISM - No 5 (122) MAY 2013




Monthly AUCPB bulletin on workers’ movement in ex-USSR with additional reports specific to Britain’s hardest hit

No 5 (122) MAY 2013
From the history of the skinhead movement

Perhaps everyone has at least once heard on news that some skinheads in heavy “bovver” boots have beaten up non-whites in the streets, but mostly just those people who they do not
like in general. And any citizen in their life has certainly at least once heard the word skinhead, which most often is associated with "Swastika", Nazism, Hitler, etc.
The bourgeois media in society form a stereotype that skinheads are essentially Nazis, angry thugs, making Nazi salutes.
Initially, however, the skinheads were not racist. The skinhead was more than just a shaved head, heavy boots and braces. It was a way of life, a separate subculture, originating from the working class.
The beginning
To start with, let's see what the word “Skinhead” really means,
Early mentions of skinheads appeared in the press and in music in the late 60's, and more precisely in 1969. It was the year of the flowering onset of the skinhead subculture as such: “Remember the Spirit of '69” was the very roots of the subculture, the "golden age" of its development.
Skinheads appeared in the working class outskirts of London from the number of young workers of the British proletariat. The image
of British working-class life dictated the clothing style for the working youth. These were very varied in the form of bleached jeans, high work boots or army boots, button-up or polo shirts, sports coats, donkey jackets, braces and the "caps", etc. The short cropped hair (not bald), the reason of which was simplicity of the haircut, over time, became a kind of style of the skinhead movement. The style of music which the working youth listened to was "early reggae" "soul" and "ska". Thus, the first skinheads were closely related with the Jamaican singers of that time.
At the turn of the 70's and 80', politicization of the skinhead subculture began. The British nationalists were the first to draw their attention to the skinhead, poisoning the minds of young people by their Nazi and racist ravings. Many skinheads became angry and hostile towards Nazi propaganda, and they became actively opposed to the nationalist agitation. Since then, the skinhead movement has split and consists of many groups.
There are several trends of skinheads – the "red" skins, the anarcho-skinheads, "national socialist" skinheads and traditional skinheads or "traditionals." There are also a variety of organizations and groups, such as: RASH (Red and Anarchist Skinheads) and SHARP (Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice).
"Red" skinheads are skinheads inheriting from the working class communist and socialist ideas. They stand on positions of proletarian internationalism, are involved in various
antifascist campaigns, fighting against nationalism and capitalism.
"Anarcho-Skinheads" adhere to anarchism or anarcho-communism, actively fighting against Nazism, racism, and against capitalism, working closely with the "red" skins in close proximity of their ideological positions. Also, in this environment you will quite commonly find "environmental anarchists."
"NS" skinheads (National Socialists, it is they who get the most media attention, because they formed a stereotype of skinhead culture as such.) Most often, they are uneducated young people who vehemently support Hitler's ideas, and are known for carrying out extremely brutal and numerous murders. The activities of the "NS" skinheads are usually criminal in character.
"Traditional skinheads" or the "trads" are non-political skinheads, not declaring any political views. They arose as a response to the emergence of political branches of the initial subculture. They copy the style of the skinhead culture of the late 1960’s.
“RASH” - (Red & Anarchist Skinheads) or literally, "Common struggle of red and anarchist skinheads" is an international association of
skinheads standing on the position of left radicalism, anti-fascism and anti-globalization. The organization was formed in New York City, and supported by young people from various cities in Canada, the U.S., Germany and Italy. The motivation of the association was that the anarcho-skinheads actively stood up for the "reds" during fights in bars and at concerts. Previously, there was a marked division between "red" and "anarcho-skinheads" in ideology, but nowadays, there is almost no difference as such.
“SHARP” - (Skinheads Against Racial Prejudices) are an anti-racist association, opposing "NS-skinheads" and other chauvinist organizations. The SHARP movement abandoned the leftist views of “RASH” and its
ideology is defined as "anti-fascism" and "anti-racism”.
Skinheads in the former Soviet republics
Skinheads first appeared on the territory of the ex-USSR in the early 1990-s and these were namely the national socialist far-right "NS-skinheads." The skinhead fashion for them came with the increasing nationalist sentiment among the youth, and since initially in the former Soviet Union, there were no "red" and "anarcho-skinheads ", and so ordinary people got the impression that the "NS-skinheads" were the only representatives of this subculture.
But a response had to appear, and so, in the late 90's in the environment of young workers appeared "Red" and "anarchist" skinheads, and “RASH” and “SHARP” movements were formed, members of which fight neo-Nazis, campaign
among young people, both at music concerts and on the Internet.
Our time
Nowadays among the skinheads there are almost no national socialists. The nationalists have
lost this sub-cultural fashion. At the same time, the "red" and "anarchist" skinheads are actively developing. Their popularity is growing with the development of the Internet, with the development of left-wing and anti-fascist musical trends. Skinheads are openly proud of the working class and belong to it. Russian skinheads as a target audience, are very receptive to the ideas of establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat, a socialist revolution and the class
struggle, thanks to which the number of supporters of the Bolshevik ideology in this subculture is growing.
It is impossible not to notice the fact that in this movement, sympathy for the working class is actively promoted. As the “Redskins Army Madrid” activists say about this, “Our idea of patriotism is love for the working class and this love goes beyond borders and countries. Nations and nationalism is an invention by the
bourgeoisie for their interests in general and divided the proletariat. Our homeland as said by Africa de las Heras (a Soviet agent of Spanish origin), is the Soviet Union – the motherland of workers."
We, Bolsheviks should actively campaign among supporters of the skinhead subculture, and this work should be carried out by the young fighters. This subculture consists of 90%
youth. We need to carry out antifascist actions together, to attract skinheads to Bolshevik activities and find comrades in this environment. Promote the ideas of Bolshevism among skinheads, in order to advance the cause of the Great October Socialist Revolution!
P. Serpov


To First Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea

First Chairman of the DPRK National Defence Commission

Supreme Commander of the Korean Peoples Army

Marshal of the DPRK

Kim Jong Un

Pyongyang, DPRK
30 March 2013

Dear Comrade Kim Jong Un!

I appeal to you, the leader of the Workers' Party of Korea and the DPRK Socialist state.

In the numerous Statements made by the DPRK Foreign Ministry, NDC, the Supreme Command of the KPA and the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea that we had received in March of this year from the Embassy of the DPRK in the Russian Federation, they have stated the heightening of tension on the Korean Peninsula in connection with the large-scale U.S. military exercises near the border with the DPRK with the demonstration of the modern means of nuclear war and regular provocations against the DPRK in order to initiate a response from the DPRK.

In the Statements of the Central Committee of the AUCPB, we have repeatedly reaffirmed our continued support to the leadership of the DPRK’s Songun policy, their conducting of their own research in nuclear and the necessity in any research study to test in practice these studies. For this reason, we have supported the DPRK underground nuclear tests. We have welcomed the launch of space satellites in the direction of space exploration. We have supported the establishment of the DPRK's nuclear shield, as the only way to protect the current conditions of peaceful labour of the DPRK citizens from any aggressor.

We understand the complexity of the conflict between the DPRK the United States at the present time and the open U.S. desire to destroy the DPRK and its socio-political system, elected by the people of the DPRK. We strongly condemn and denounce the provocative U.S. policy towards the DPRK and the brutal embargo, which has been carried on by the U.S. for more than sixty years. Today, the U.S. has become the world's policeman, trying to get all countries to think and act as pleases the U.S., and yet destroying any political leader and country daring to assert their own right to self-determination of their policies. We condemn the ongoing policy of the UN Security Council on adopting on the request of the U.S. countless so-called resolutions increasingly complicating the situation with the DPRK.

But we do not support the recent militant tendency in the DPRK in reference to a pre-emptive strike on the U.S., as the governing structures of the DPRK have repeatedly in March informed the world. Such Statements by the DPRK is exactly what the United States has long sought - to hang a label on the DPRK as the aggressor and blame the DPRK for the current volatile situation on the Korean peninsula. In other words – to blame the DPRK for the worsening situation, thus removing responsibility from itself – the U.S., and this is totally unacceptable because it does not correspond to reality. Moreover, it is the United States’ cherished dream to blame a socialist state for aggression and a way to discredit the very idea of socialism on a world scale. To succumb to the provocations of the U.S. means to help them in their fight against the world communist movement, to help the U.S. to extend the existence of the criminal capitalist (under imperialism) system, now in a deep crisis.

A pre-emptive strike launched by any of the opposing parties will mark the beginning of a local war, inevitably developing into a world war involving nuclear weapons that cannot be underestimated.

We turn to you, Dear Comrade Kim Jong Un, in calling for perseverance, and restraint and not allow unacceptable prevalence of emotions over cold reason. This perseverance, restraint and not allowing unacceptable prevalence of emotions over cold reason was always the case and dominant in the politics of the Great Kim Jong Il.

The whole world holds its breath, waiting from YOU a correct political decision to resolve a daunting situation on the Korean peninsula, caused by fault of the U.S. and the UN Security Council.


General Secretary of the CC AUCPB

29 March 2013.


Interview given by Nina Alexandrovna Andreeva, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (CC AUCPB) to the editor of the "Politics" department of the Russian newspaper publication "Arguments and Facts"(Argumenty i Fakty) in connection with the 25th anniversary of the publication of her article "I cannot give up principles".

AiF- What is the history behind your letter? Why did you choose to send it to namely the newspaper "Sovietskya Rossiya" (Soviet Russia)? Did you try to send it to any other publications? What prompted you to write the letter? And what did you hope to achieve by this appeal?
N.A.- After my analysis of the revelations by Western media about the real purpose of Gorbachev in his ongoing "perestroika" I started to follow closely Gorbachev's speeches, his omissions, and other words that made me feel that he was strongly hiding what he was actually doing and what he was aspiring to.
Society was then raving in perestroika ecstasy and misunderstanding of WHAT was actually happening. Meetings, discussions, seminars, extensive ostentatious meetings by Gorby with the people, and hints, only hints with no clear answers to questions put to him by people at these meetings. The staging of provocative anti-Soviet plays by M.Shatrova, and overwrought reaction of the audience and the staging of plays in theatres with an openly anti-Soviet content. The anti-communist speeches made by artists and politicians in the press.
In the student environment there were constant debates and discussions taking place on various issues of life and Soviet history, military conscription for young people, and emigration to other countries for permanent residence, etc.
As curator (teacher) of a student group, as a Soviet teacher, I found it necessary and important to draw people's attention to what was really going on in the country during Gorbachev's perestroika. In the summer of 1987, I wrote an article entitled "Recollections on the future." (The newspaper came up with that name. It did not reflect the content of my article on the problems of perestroika. The title I gave was "Reflections on the future"). The article was published in the newspaper "Leningrad worker" (dated 09.10.1987, p.4). My second article in January 1988, the editor of the same newspaper was afraid to publish and he ordered the article be hidden inside a safe and away from the paper's editorial staff. Both of the articles (copies of the original), I sent to the newspapers "Pravda", "Leningradskaya Pravda", "Literary Gazette" and the "Soviet Russia." On February 23, 1988 only "Soviet Russia" responded by proposing to significantly reduce the text and prepare for the publication of the material on one column. I agreed, and after March 8 handed the material to an employee of "Soviet Russia" who came to me at work in the university. The article "I cannot give up principles" was published on March 13, 1988 with minimal revisions (the editorial proposed that a paragraph about "repressions" be inserted, without which they could not print the article, and they changed the tone of the ending of the article. I wrote: "This is what we stand for and stand for and we WILL!" However in the printed newspaper article it was published as -"This is what we stand for, and this is what we will continue to stand for").
No other revisions, corrections or edits in my article were made. The article can be found in the book "Unprecedented Principles" (L., 1992, circulation of 100 000 copies.) and online at AUCPB main website: www.vkpb.ru (section - Library). The book was translated into English, French, Italian, Spanish, Japanese, Chinese and Korean.
The purpose of my writing this article, as before, was to draw the attention of the Soviet people to WHAT was actually happening, and the desire to get everyone to think about the essence of "perestroika" itself.
AiF- Are you satisfied with the effect your appeal made on the public? If you could go back in time, would you have repeated the same thing? And in your opinion, in the late 80's was it indeed possible to prevent the collapse of the Soviet Union?
N.A.- I do not consider sending materials to different newspapers as a form of action as such. It was simply the desire to express my own opinions and concerns about the ongoing Gorbachev policy. After all, behind all of Gorbachev's demagoguery and playing at being the "peoples’ leader" who cared only about the welfare of the people, I felt this to be all false and a desire to conceal something "until the right time." Analyzing (Gorbachev's perestroika), I felt the need to express my concerns regarding the Soviet people, and that perhaps they were being deceived by the General Secretary of a leading communist party of the world and the leader of a socialist superpower. In particular, his speech at the UN in 1987, when Gorbachev proposed a new interpretation of the name USSR as the Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics to replace the original Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The most important of this name interpretation – SOCIALIST, had vanished. After all, Soviets (in the modern sense are municipalities) can be both socialist and bourgeois. We recall the period of July 1917, when V.I. Lenin removed the slogan "All Power to the Soviets", since they had turned Menshevik. After some time, this slogan was again raised by Lenin on the agenda. Or another time, on the objectives of perestroika (Gorbachev's speech at the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU in the summer of 1987). His speech in the publication of the works of Gorbachev was "edited" and that part of his speech was removed. But it remained in print immediately after the plenum issue of "Pravda", which I read and underlined and placed (for me) a question mark. At the plenum, Gorbachev said that the task of perestroika was "... to root out an old tree, plough the land, sow seeds and reap the fruits...". Put very clearly.
I realized that Gorbachev had set the task to root out SOCIALISM. History has confirmed my fears. There were many other "reservations" from the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU.
Yes, I'm satisfied with the social response to the publication of my article. In fact, after this there the division of society into two camps occurring – between supporters to preserve socialism and those who decided to destroy all that was associated with the Soviet period (As they say, everything was defined: who stood on what side of the barricades). Supporters of socialism (judging from the letters that were sent to me) amounted to about 80%, the followers of Gorbachev - less than 20%. Unfortunately, in literature on the subject there is a "correction" on the number of supporters of socialism. Yegor Ligachev (I believe) lied, then pointing to the figure of 60% for Gorbachev of those who shared the position of article-interview of Egor Ligachev to the editor of newspaper "Soviet Russia" ("Sov.Rossiya», № 26 of 13 March 2008). The "tug of war" in favour of the "fifth column" is now shown on all the TV shows that discuss the history of the Soviet period and the role of Stalin in it. But the truth can not always be hidden and lied about. In an interview on the 60th anniversary of Stalin's memory of March 5, 2013 on the website of Channel 5 from St. Petersburg, in which I participated, in the introduction to the topic by the host, to my great surprise, she naively announced the following: "... The data polls are striking: the people's love for Generalissimo Stalin, according opinion polls, is growing. Now, in contrast to 2011, the one-third, and now nearly half of the respondents are ready to subscribe to the Stalinist fanatics and believe that the Generalissimo did a lot of good for the country."
And this change of attitude towards J.V. Stalin, who is slandered by enemies of the Soviet people, and had dirt poured over him by Trotskyite Khrushchev at the Twentieth Party Congress, the objective perception of greatness and tremendous importance, as a result, the role of Stalin in the history of people living on one sixth of the Earth's surface, and the whole of humanity is due to us, due to members of AUCPB. This is the result of our work in these difficult years following the accomplishment of the counter-revolution and the rabid anti-Stalinism in the country instilled by media of the ruling power. This is the result of the publication in "Soviet Russia" of my article "I can not give up principles," heralding the rebirth of Bolshevism.
If it were possible to go back in time, I would have done exactly the same as I did then. I have nothing to regret. I fully confirm the firmness of my position, stated then, 25 years ago.
In the late 80's, it WAS POSSIBLE to prevent the violent destruction of the USSR, if the leadership of the country was really communist and thought about the country and its people who entrusted the power with their lives, their future and their children’s future. But in the upper echelons of power there were very many careerists, opportunists and philistines in spirit (and who even "took offence to Soviet power"), those people who were previously expelled during the period of party cleansing under Stalin. Most of them finished up on the side of the counter-revolution fifth column. Elitist intellectuals also became a part of the "fifth column." And we, the modern Bolsheviks at that time, were not a political organization capable of carrying on wide propaganda among the people. The petty party nomenklatura we just scared and started to set themselves up under the new capitalist relations in society under the banner of communist rhetoric. I can tell you that we planned a struggle against the counter-revolution by forming the Bolshevik platform in the CPSU. First there was formed the All-Union Society "Unity - for Leninism and communist ideals" (Yedinstvo) (Moscow, May 1989), and then at a national conference in Minsk, the Bolshevik platform in the CPSU was established.
The goal of forming the Bolshevik platform in the CPSU was to return to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union an organizational and political appearance, also the ideological and moral role of the vanguard of the working people of our country in their struggle to achieve their objective of historically determined class interests, that is, for the construction of a socialist and communist society. We assumed with this to rally and unite all healthy, progressive, socialist and patriotic forces which existed at that time in society, and on this basis to respond resolutely to the bourgeois counterrevolution, which with each day was becoming more dangerous and dramatically sweeping across the Socialist Motherland of the USSR.
As stated in the Appeal adopted at the conference it was aimed at all communists and non-party Bolsheviks:
At the Extraordinary Congress the Resolution stated that the "Party must be represented by communists able to:
- reject perestroika as an anti-peoples, defeatist policy that brought the country to a national catastrophe and in the near-term, complete dismemberment of the USSR into "separates sovereignties" and the transformation of the Motherland into a semi-colony of the West;
- hold Mikhail Gorbachev and his entourage to party account for the collapse of the CPSU and the Soviet state, for the betrayal of Lenin, the October Socialist Revolution, and the international communist and workers' movement;
- to assess from the party-class position the situation in the party and the country and to develop a scientifically-based fundamentally new policy of the CPSU, which expresses the fundamental interests of the working people, aimed at saving the Motherland from the impasse of the crisis and restore the former might of our multi-national state with policies to ensure the success of socialism in peaceful competition with the capitalist system;
- To elect a new leadership to the CPSU, which will be able to implement the policies worked out at the XXIX Extraordinary Party Congress;
- to disgrace all the traitors, apostates, turncoats, in the camp of anti-communism and, especially, former Politburo cronies Yakovlev, Eduard Shevardnadze, Yevgeny Primakov, Boris Yeltsin."

Gorbachev on the phone instructed his secretary to clarify the wording of the Resolution of the Conference "On bringing Gorbachev to justice ..."
The Conference brought together more than 800 delegates. Present was also the top party leadership of Belarus (cowardly hidden on the balcony), and the party nomenklatura from other regions of the USSR.
We had planned to hold the Extraordinary Congress in autumn 1991. The situation in the country was becoming tense with each passing day. After the events of August 1991 with the State of Emergency Committee, on August 29, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR suspended the operations of the CPSU across the entire USSR. A complete ban on the activity of the CPSU and the Russian communist party was brought about by Yeltsin's decree on November 6.
The possibility of holding our Extraordinary XXIX Congress of the CPSU was becoming unreal. We were changing tactics to combat the counter-revolution.
AiF- What changed in your life after this appeal? How did your family react to this letter?
N.A.- First of all, why did my article provoke such a response in the Politburo and a reaction on the part of Gorbachev? Because, in the words of the chief (after Gorbachev), architect of "perestroika" Alexander Yakovlev (Politburo member, department head of ideology and propaganda of the CPSU Central Committee), the article "raised serious questions in such a way, that it cannot be called anything other than an ideological platform and manifesto of anti-perestroika forces... For the first time, readers in such a concentrated form have seen in this "letter to the editor" not a search, not a reflection or even an expression of bewilderment and confusion to the very complex and controversial issues happening inside the country, but instead they see an utter rejection of the idea of renovation, a very definite statement of a rigid position, a position which is essentially conservative and dogmatic. Essentially, red thread permeates right through the content of two main theses: why all this perestroika reconstruction and have we gone too far on the issue of democratization and openness (glasnost)? The article calls on us to make corrections and adjustments on the question of perestroika, or otherwise, allegedly the "powers" will have to save socialism ... "(from Ideological document of the Central Committee of the CPSU," newspaper “Pravda", April 5, 1988 article entitled "Principles of Perestroika : Revolutionary Thought and Action." Later on, this material was called an editorial document").
My article was reprinted in more than 800 newspapers across the USSR.
On 23 and 24 March, under the pressure of A. Yakovlev and Shevardnadze, the Politburo were gathered, whose agenda was on one issue – the article by Nina Andreeva. Gorbachev during the two days of meetings of the Politburo by employing the "strong-arm" tactic made everyone who was present in person dissociate themselves from the provisions of the article "I cannot give up principles." Those present more or less did this. After publication of Yakovlev’s article, that’s when the hounding of the author of "I cannot give up principles" began. The CC CPSU forced many organizations and professional creative associations, etc to write devastating responses to my article. The institute I worked at "excommunicated" me from classes with students by order of rector of the university. To my address at the institute arrived letters with the threat of physical violence. On the street any "perestroika" supporter who knew me in the face either insulted or simply cursed me. The media also organized a persecution against me.
Leningrad TV program "The Fifth Wheel", created by Bella Kurkova succeeded in this and organized it immediately after the publication of my article. Especially this program which was being hosted by someone called Pravdyuk, a lackey of "perestroika" who was writhing in ecstasy... There was persecution, not only against me, but against my husband, who had two heart attacks deliberately induced.
This orgy lasted a long enough time. In such circumstances, I refused to submit to the contest to teach for a second term at the Lensoviet Institute in February 1989 and took a leave of absence "without pay", which lasted until my retirement.
My husband was also denied employment. For over 2 years we survived without any wages, using only what available savings we had saved up in the savings bank for a "rainy day". We did inform any of our close relatives about this in order not to upset them. Thus they still did not know anything about this "epic."
As they say, in any negative aspect, there are also positive aspects. This persecution hardened me personally for the future struggle against counter-revolution - "perestroika." Active work led, as already mentioned, to the forming of the All-Union Society "Unity - for Leninism and communist ideals" (established in May 1989, in Moscow). In July, 1991 at an All-Union conference in Minsk, the Bolshevik platform of the CPSU was constituted, whose supporters declared themselves as the heirs and successors of the revolutionary proletarian, Leninist line in the CPSU. In the future, based on the All-Union Society "Unity - for Leninism and communist ideals" and the Bolshevik platform of the CPSU, the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks was formed (at the Founding Congress of November 8, 1991, Leningrad).
AiF- In your letter you talked about the need to observe principles: do You think that modern politicians have principles? Can modern-day politics have principles?
N.A.- It is hardly necessary to speak about principals of those people who place personal power, money, and personal well-being at the heart of everything. The current government and authorities in the Kremlin do not serve the people any more, but only serve the U.S. monopolies and are under U.S control. Putin's policy reminds me of the characters in Ivan Krylov's fable "The Cat and the Cook." Putin is trying to live in peace with the "thieves in law - oligarchs" and at the same time with the robbed and impoverished people. And "where it is necessary to use power," Putin engages in demagoguery. For example, his statement regarding Russia’s military reforms which are lethal for the defence of the country. Everything has been destroyed, and Serdyukov, the embezzler "stool-maker" (a furniture maker with no military education whatsoever) was put in charge of the Ministry of Defence, and more, Putin decided not to abandon the destructive military reforms, but only "to continue them, just by sharpening and polishing up the mechanisms of the war machine. The strategic logic for modernising the Armed Forces remains unchanged"! (From a speech by Vladimir Putin to colleagues in the Ministry of Defense 2/23/2013). The same situation is on the issue of "reforming" other spheres of life. Realizing the malignancy of the "reforms" being carried out, Putin is unable to abandon them, thus continuing the policy of Gorbachev of destroying the country. Putin has showed his affinity with Gorbachev, by his birthday greeting to Gorbachev himself, noting his "contribution to the development of Russia's contacts with the West," and not only in this sphere.
J.V. Stalin was principled in politics and in everything else. Lack of principle in politics is a weakness, an inability of a leader to lead, leading to chains of command in policy, to dictates on part of the enemy and betrayal of the interests of the country.
AiF- How do you feel about the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF)?
N.A.- Gennadi Zyuganov (leader of the CPRF) during Soviet times (1989-1990) was deputy head of the department for ideology and propaganda of the Central Committee of the CPSU (Head of Department was Alexander Yakovlev). The CPRF was formed after the lifting of the ban on communist activities in February 1993. But in 1991, Zyuganov agreed with Boris Yeltsin on the issue of forming a "non-extremist" party of socialist orientation", and this was approved by Yeltsin and Burbulis. The forming of such a party by Zyuganov became top on the agenda after the establishment of the AUCPB (on November 8, 1991.) along with the rapid growth of its membership. In the first few months of AUCPB party work, about 20 thousand people across the country had joined it. Prior to that, at the All-Union Conference of the Bolshevik platform of the CPSU in July 13-14, 1991, as already mentioned, a resolution was adopted "On the political lack of confidence in the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Mikhail Gorbachev." There was a point in it about "bringing Mikhail Gorbachev and his entourage to party justice and holding them to account for the collapse of the CPSU and the Soviet state, for the betrayal of Lenin, the Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917, and the international communist and workers' movement." Thus, in agreeing with Yeltsin to establish the CPRF, Zyuganov was thinking about saving his own skin as well.
Zyuganov has always held a compromising and appeasing position with the Yeltsinites, and keeping to the “growth to power” line. In early 1993, with the establishment of the CPRF, Gennady Zyuganov on Gorbachev’s recommendation, membership lists of the district committees of the CPSU were used. With the forming of the CPRF, Yeltsin had achieved his goal of weakening the communist movement, by having absorbed into himself the party law-abiding "infantry" (mass).
In October 1993, Boris Yeltsin could have been removed from power. Moscow was seething with anger by people dissatisfied with Yeltsin’s policies. Yeltsin and the further development of the counter-revolution had been saved by Zyuganov.
On October 2, 1993 in Moscow, Zyuganov spoke on Central TV to address the people, calling on everyone "not to take part in any of the events or clashes taking place in Moscow," but to stay at home. But by the 3rd of October, Yeltsin gave the order to start shooting at the defenders of the Supreme Soviet in the centre of Moscow and at the Ostankino television studios, and on October 4, the shooting the building of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation (the "White House") using tanks, where there were members of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation, supporters of Soviet power, soldiers and many Soviet people. Yeltsin crushed the revolt against him, drowning it in blood. Many young people were killed. The number of victims amounting in excess of 10,000 lies on the conscience of Gennady Zyuganov. Among many of the defenders of Soviet power and the participants of the October 1993 events in Moscow, Zyuganov qualifies as a "cohort to Yeltsin who changes his views and patrons, depending on the political situation."
Zyuganov always builds himself into the system, changing one lot of slogans for complete opposite ones depending on the situation. An ardent communist before perestroika, he had transformed into a social democrat, declaring that "Russia had already exhausted the limit on revolution." He was never a supporter of J.V. Stalin, but due to the rapidly changing social attitudes towards Stalin from minus to plus, Zyuganov’s supporters nowadays are not shying away from portraits of Stalin in our AUCPB columns at demonstrations and are even declaring their loyalty to Stalin. Zyuganov is in consensus with the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), and publishes articles in support of it. In the ranks of the CPRF there is no unity and therefore splits take place, with party organisations in the regions leaving the party. CPRF organizations in different regions differ in their political views. In many regions, we work alongside them at events.
AiF- Who did you vote for in the presidential election?
N.A.- We do not vote in the presidential elections, but raise awareness among the population about the electoral system and the candidates. Nearly all candidates for president do not differ from each other in pursuing the policy of the ruling class of the bourgeoisie. And the counting of votes is always such that the projected percentage of "in favour" is always confirmed. Stalin said that in the bourgeois electoral system, what is important it's not about who votes, it's about how the votes are counted. We shall participate in the presidential elections, if we see a fundamental difference in political positions of the candidates. For example, if one of the candidates are true pro-Americans or pro-fascist, we will vote to block their passage to the upper echelons of power.
AiF- Do you support Vladimir Putin?
N.A. – It depends on the specific issue. We support Putin on the issue of merging of former Soviet republics, leading to the unification of proletarians too. Therefore we support the efforts of the President to expand the number of members in the Customs Union. But we are totally against his policy of "de-Stalinization", insulting the feelings of the Soviet people who built socialism and defended socialism and life on Earth by the victory won by the people under the leadership of Generalissimos Stalin in the Great Patriotic War and World War II. "De-Stalinization" is even more shameful in that the current oligarchs make huge profits in factories built in the period of Stalin's five-year plans, profits from the power plants built under Stalin, and profits from the sale of our natural resources, mined during the period of Stalin in the country. We support Putin on the issue of banning U.S. trading in Russian children (the so-called U.S. "adoption" of Russian children - "adoption" by citizens abroad).
We absolutely do not support him in his education reforms designed at contempt and oblivion of the great history of Russia, the Soviet Union, at the lack of culture and the dense grey ignorance of our beautiful Russian classics in the field of art, literature ... We do not support him in the transformation of Russia from a secular state into a clerical one by the forcible imposition of biblical ideology onto society. Marxism as the only scientific theory of social society has been erased and dropped, with nothing to replace it. Now the Bible's old myths are propagated instead as the ideology of modern society. So many "churches" of all types of religion have recently been built, but no thought about the construction of affordable housing for the people. We do not support Putin in the commercialization of education and health, as it is not available for the majority of the population. We do not support the President in matters which are defective for the country, for the people. We do not support him on the issues that lower the dignity of the Russian nation over others. We are not nationalists, but we must respect the nation, which forms the name of the country - Russia.
AiF- Do you support the current protest movement? Why?
N.A.- The protest movement, is in fact quite varied. The "March of the Millions", the "Left Front," "Just Cause," "Civic Society," “Rot Front” ... and many others which somehow only slightly differ from the above, or do not have a distinct political agenda. The protest movement can be separated and attempts made to try to analyze them in relation to their attitude towards private ownership over production and the goal that they set for themselves, and for which they were created. In relationship to private ownership, we have two different camps. The "March of the Millions", "Left Front" ("left", but not at all leftist but rightist in the conventional sense, there is a substitution of names and meaning - political linguistics), "Just Cause", "Civic Society" are for private ownership, and represent the interests of the ruling bourgeois class, or, as they say - liberal values. "Rot Front" and the Russian Communist Workers’ Party (RCWP) – are parties with one leader V. Tyulkin and they advocate socialist values. All the protest movements inside are quite heterogeneous. The liberal movement differs in orientation by the various "blocks" either of the bourgeoisie or the comprador, or national. The "March of the Millions" (Boris Nemtsov, one of the leaders) is oriented to the comprador bourgeoisie, "Left Front" (Udaltsov) - also. "Just Cause" (Alexei Navalny) the same. Boris Nemtsov, declared that "protests are the only way to change the system in general." As prime minister under Yeltsin, he revealed HOW he wants to change the system. Therefore, enough of him.
We do not support this movement, since their purpose seems to be the replacement of Putin by a more pro-American-oriented leader, the collapse of the country, and surrendering on all positions of the country over to the United States. Their way of achieving their goal is by raising tension in the country, fear, horror, unrest and provocation. The events in Bolotnaya Square in Moscow in May 2012 showed the desire of the liberal protest movements to organize their own "Maidan" (orange revolution), where one can always keep carrying out provocative work on creating an explosive situation. Therefore we support Putin in curbing the activities of this "fifth column." There is a feeling that Medvedev does not stand apart from the movements of the "liberals." Putin supports the national bourgeoisie more. The liberals, like they claim, want to come to power through elections. Because of this there is a lot of noise about changing election rules. At the time of elections and the disagreements which follow over the results, the protest movement can then organise an "orange revolution", or any other "flower" revolution with all the ensuing consequences. And the West will assist, as always ... The "Party of Action" (Konstantin Babkin, M. Prokhorov), the movement "Civic Society" represent the interests of the national bourgeoisie. Mass protests have not yet been organized.
The socialist-oriented protest movement Rot Front state their aim to get into parliament through elections. They do not seem to have any other goals.
AiF- Why, in your opinion, did many leaders and policy makers after having worked in the CPSU and made up the ranks of that party in the 1980-s then remain in power after the Soviet Union collapsed, and have now completely entered the ruling "United Russia" party?
N.A.- This shows the degeneration of the CPSU from a party defending the interests of the working class, into a party that protects private property ownership interests, the interests of the philistine, careerists and opportunists. It is known that many people joined the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to climb the career ladder. Party “cleansing” conducted by Joseph Stalin liberated it from careerists who had infiltrated it, but not always. Trotskyist Nikita Khrushchev was able to climb into the VKP (b) (AUCP(b)) and escape expulsion during the party purges. Indeed, the odious "United Russia" party is made up of almost 90% of former members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Today, the "United Russia" party, created as a party to the president, is not respected in society. The careerism of its members climbs to the surface all too often, using their party affiliation in the interests of personal gain.
If we talk about members of the CPSU clambering into bourgeois power, then Boris Yeltsin himself was a secretary of the CPSU for many years, and even a candidate member of the Politburo, and his minister of state security Golushko – was KGB chief for Ukraine, the Secretary of State and Deputy Prime Minister Burbulis taught Marxism-Leninism in universities. The ideologue of reform and practically the head of government Yegor Gaidar, headed the department for the main theoretical journal of the CPSU, called "Communist", and after that, in the main CPSU newspaper "Pravda". The next Prime Minister Chernomyrdin was a member of the Central Committee of the CPSU.
Even in 1995, according to the Institute of Sociology, the Yeltsin administration by 75% and the Government of the Russian Federation by 74.3% consisted of former CPSU party nomenklatura. The only member of the Yeltsin government who was not in the Communist Party earlier, was the Minister of Foreign Economic Relations S.Yu. Glazyev - and he also became the only minister to condemn the actions of Yeltsin and came out in support of the Supreme Soviet.
It follows from this that the higher party nomenklatura was the active driving component in the preparation and accomplishment of the counterrevolution in the USSR.
AiF- If you wrote an appeal to the country today, in what publication would you put it, and what would be in your appeal?
N.A.- I would have my appeal placed in a publication where I could be sure of an undistorted appeal, without possibility of falsification of my thoughts. My current appeal would be devoted to the issue of the revival of socialism and the Soviet Union as a united multi-national family of the former Soviet republics.

7 March 2013. Leningrad


The world of capitalism has recently experienced yet another earthquake. Looking at the TV screens, the viewer is finding it difficult to distinguish from which country the news has appeared on the screen: either from Greece, Turkey, Italy, Spain, or Portugal - the picture is the same - loads of angry people, police cordons, tear gas attacks on protesters, batons and shields policemen, gendarmes, military police, armoured vehicles and armoured personnel carriers. This time around everyone is surprised at the ever quiet and it would seem prosperous Bulgaria. It is as if no one had expected such shocking pictures of police violence from there, and the stubborn resistance by angry people.
And most interestingly is that among the protesters there are hardly any older people who still remember their good life, even in the days of "underdeveloped" socialism, who made up the mass of all the protests, mostly insisting on raising pensions. This time is was the young people who took to the streets. Those born in the early 80's and do not remember anything from the time of socialism (that is, there is nothing for them to compare to), and do not accept the current state of affairs.
During the years of counter-revolution, due to the "shock building of capitalism", Bulgaria has become the most impoverished country in Europe. Yes, it has become an EU member by paying a huge fee and get out of it only pitiful handouts, and then each time, the "Europeans" seek a reason not to pay, especially if Bulgaria does not obey the orders of the U.S. and NATO. The years of primitive capital accumulation was accompanied by barbarous destruction of factories, cooperatives, robbery of the people who painstakingly created all this under socialism. When you go around the country, it seems that there has been a war raging more surgical than the one that crushed Yugoslavia. Abandoned buildings and looted shops of once powerful industries, broken roads, broken pavements, the skeletons of former farms and farm buildings – everywhere, the stamp of desolation, destruction and despair. Spacious cooperative fields overgrown with weeds, vineyards, apricot and peach orchards, destroyed canneries, and almost 200 deserted villages. Add to this, 40% unemployment and 1.6 million educated and skilled people of working years leaving the country. The worst thing is that namely the former Communist Party, which overnight became the Socialist Party, began the process of privatization and dragged the country into the EU and NATO, allowing Bulgaria’s skies to be used for bombing brotherly Serbia.
And a country once full of surprises with its rapid growth - in the list of exports were powerful ships (there were more than 1 million built in Bulgaria), which were bought by traditional shipbuilding states - Britain, Spain, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, and the Soviet Union. Bulgaria occupied one of the first places in the world for producing motorcycles and electric cars, the export machine tools with electronic control, producing automobiles and automobile engines, equipment for space research and supplied itself with quality refrigerators, washing machines, and even had a computer factory. Under the pretext that Bulgarian industrial production is not competitive enough with foreign companies, entire industries have been destroyed - shipbuilding, machine building, metallurgy (last powerful metallurgical plant Kremikovtzi sold under the hammer for nothing, of course, pre-stripped). So the most powerful company was sold off for a song. The latest news has been the announcement of the failure of military factories in Sopot, which have until now been producing weapons, including "Kalashnikovs", night vision devices, etc. For several months workers at this company have not been paid wages, and they were at the plant during the coldest winter days in the snow, in protest against the tyranny of the management, who continued to successfully sell weapons without having to pay those who produce them. Against the background of this protest, followed by a continuous rise in prices, which are sometimes higher in Bulgaria than in Europe, with low wages and poor pensions - 70% of pensioners have a pension of about 100 euros a month only.
The culmination of tension came in the form of February electricity bills for electricity consumed in January - the bills had increased several times that passed all bounds of peoples’ patience. In all towns and cities across the country arose spontaneous rallies and marches. They demanded the expulsion of foreign companies from the country - distributors of energy - Czech "CEZ" and Austrian "EVN". Indeed, the very electric current produced by Bulgarian thermal power plants and the nuclear power plant at Kozloduy, costs three times less than the cost of distribution and the bills themselves as the Bulgarians' joke, are like an encrypted spy's report." No one knows who, where and with whose permission such a complex formula for billing for the use of electricity has been created. It’s even harder to decipher the central heating bill. A person is billed on facts like whether your home is near a main pipe or your neighbours have heating, or heating on the stairways in an apartment block is warming you, even if all the radiators are turned off. The ingenuity of how the organizations recover peoples’ money is simply amazing.
But no one has yet invented how a person living on a miserable pension can actually pay for electricity or heating every month and yet still remain alive. And then the people took to the streets. The movement started spontaneously. To aggravate the situation and the fact that on the day of memory of Vasil Levski, the hero who fought against the Ottoman slavery - February 19 when he was hanged in 1875 by the Turks, the people of Sofia who choose traditionally to lay flowers at his monument in the centre of the city, were met by a cordon of police and gendarmerie – on Levski Square and nearby the streets were surrounded by buses, "Desert Cat" armored vehicles of the military police. For the first time in modern history, President R. Plevneliev gave his speech on Levski in front of an empty square. When he left the square, the crowd booed him from outside the police cordon. When police began allowing people onto the square near the monument, they were searched and had to pass through metal detectors. Many threw flowers directly on the asphalt. The indignation began to grow.
At the same time, near Orlov Bridge in Sofia, protesters gathered to protest against government inaction against monopolist companies. A column of protesters marched from the bridge to the monument of Levski. They chanted: "Mafia," and "Resignation!". When the police tried to keep people away from the monument, a clash broke out between them. There were injuries with people with cracked skulls and broken arms. 25 people were arrested, and 14 sought medical attention.
On the same day the opposition parties, among them the former Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) (now - the Bulgarian Socialist Party, refused to participate in a meeting of the Economic Commission, believing that they do not have to puzzle themselves over solving the problems created by the ruling party GERB - "Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria" formed in December 2006, and at the time getting the support of the majority of the population, tired of false promises, and the Democrats and former communists, equally cleverly fleecing the country. At the head of the party stood Boiko Borisov - a former firefighter, a specialist on pumps and hoses, for a time even a former bodyguard of T. Zhivkov and one of the managers of the security company of so called "fighters", specialists in fighting sports, who became one of the first Bulgarian gangsters. By unknown paths, the former security guard in a short time then became chief secretary of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Mayor of Sofia, and finally, Prime Minister. Since then, he has not stopped appearing every morning on one or another television company, telling viewers how his grandfather was shot by the People's Court under communism as an active fascist, although it is well-known that his father was a colonel in the fire service, but a child of a fascist could not hold this rank under socialism. Although this is not the case. The ability of local politicians to change their uniforms, depending on the political situation forced the protesters to shout the slogan: "No to all parties!".
Protests in Bulgaria continued. The Cabinet resigned, despite all the boasting and promises made by B. Borisov. This resignation was really a surprise to many people, and GERD was considered unmanageable. The fact is that at the end of January there was a referendum, with the desperate resistance of the ruling party, on whether Bulgaria needs new sources of energy - everyone knew that it was about the building, or rather, the completion of the nuclear power plant in Belene, the foundation of which was laid under socialism. Borisov several times changed his mind - then announced that construction would continue then, suddenly opposed it. The fact is that the nuclear power plant was designed in Russia and had to work with Russian generators and a Russian reactor. With the explicit onset of the U.S., bourgeois politicians in Bulgaria started to repeat the thesis of the need to avoid energy dependence on Russia. But the country cannot supply enough electricity – and even heating uses mainly electricity. At the same time, new nuclear power plants in Romania and Turkey have been built, and are being built in Serbia and Bulgaria, which has so far earned enough by selling electricity, and is facing the prospect of buying electricity. And the government on the background of this problem has increased the price of electricity by 15%, and bills have suddenly increased by 2 - 3 times. At the same time, the government has flatly refused to reject the licenses of monopoly power distributors, which are exporting the profits from the production of energy, like the Germans who bought the shipyard in the Bugarian city of Ruse, paid meager salaries Bulgarian shipbuilders and had exported considerable profit.
Bulgarian society still knows little about the conditions at U.S. and NATO bases in the country. Bulgaria pays for these bases, because the U.S. envoy says on TV screen, "these bases are for general use." Incidentally, at the base airfield in Sarafovo, a bus exploded full of Israeli tourists who had arrived on holiday to Bulgaria without protection, knowing that they were flying in to "their own" that is, they were landing at a U.S. base. And over a few months, the U.S. simply squeezed from Bulgaria confirmation that the explosion was carried out by "Hezbollah." No matter how the Bulgarians tried to explain that there was no evidence of this, even after a long investigation, without any evidentiary ruling, the Bulgarian authorities have slyly recognized the attack as the work of "Hezbollah". Even stranger is the fact that a few days after this incident, the European Union refused to recognize "Hezbollah" as a terrorist organization. But someone wants to place Bulgaria in confrontation with a country such as Iran, and the Bulgarians do not like this at all.
All these external and internal conditions are kept in suspense inside Bulgarian society. As elsewhere in the former socialist countries, the communists ceased being communists, having lost the confidence of the people. And at the moment there is no force that can solve the problems of society. Grassroot spontaneous protests however show that the counter-revolution 23 years ago did not create acceptable living conditions and do not give even a glimmer of hope for an optimistic future. It was not in vain that the protesters demanded a change of the present constitution which protects the rights of capital, and change the system that has brought them to despair. Recently, two young men killed themselves by self-immolation that shocked the people.
But meanwhile the perpetrators of all this are either Stanishev - chairman of the Socialist Party, Kostov – a Democrat, or Borisov of GERB. No one has stated the main culprit is CAPITALISM. Possibly during the protests and struggle, the young people coming into the political arena, will learn to see the truth. A society in which everything is bought and sold cannot be otherwise defined. But, as Georgi Dimitrov (first communist leader of Bulgaria form 1946 - 1949) said at the Leipzig process, "But no matter what, the Earth is spinning, and it is spinning towards communism!".
Today in Bulgaria protests continue regardless of the government having resigned at the demand of the protesters. Grassroot spontaneous protests have gradually become managed by two national committees. Every day, even on weekends (and these days even more actively), thousands of people take to the central square and the streets to demand a change of the system and to check all privatization deals and agreements with foreign countries. Miners have gone on strike, followed by declared willingness of doctors and nurses to strike. Workers at a nonferrous metals plant in Kyrdzhli went on strike.
All participants in the protest to support the demands of the railway workers to stop privatization of Bulgarian railways. In Burgas each day protesters go to the port with demands to stop the procedure for privatization of the port. The start of these events began to the surprise of Bulgarians themselves – at the always so calm, holiday resort of Varna. It entrenched the country's largest enforcement group "Team-security", which controls the production of 5% of gross domestic product. And so far from it, no one can sort them out. It is engaged in racketeering, has a "window" on the sea and land borders for the passage of drugs, cigarettes, alcohol and other contraband. At its head are former naval officers. It is known that almost all power structures are associated with this group, and it controls all the Black Sea coast of Bulgaria and half the country. A young man 36 years demanded that the mayor end the domination of the mafia group, but he was denied even a conversation. Then Plamen (that was his name), doused himself with gasoline and set himself on fire. He died in a Varna hospital. His last words were: "Team Security needs to be destroyed". "Every day, people come to the spot in front of City Hall and leave according to local customs, stones and flowers in memory of the Plamen and write their demands: "Mayor and City Council – resign!" The mayor resisted the protesters demand until March 8, and then resigned. City Council is still to deliberate, but its fate is sealed. And today in several cities in Bulgaria protesters expressed their distrust of the local authorities. The fire started by Plamen is flaring up all over. Three more boys committed immolation. The President has been in consultation ready to announce the composition of a (temporary) government, which is obliged by the Constitution to prepare and hold early elections. Protesters insist on the adoption of new rules of elections, even a new constitution, not relying on the existing “democracy” in this European country. The struggle is unfolding.

by Candidate of Historical Science
Alla Gigova
Bulgaria - March 2013

FOR BOLSHEVISM-AUCPB website http://aucpbenglishwebsite.blogspot.com
Join the online supporters group / discussion forum For BolshevismAUCPB by e-mail at http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/ForBolshevismAUCPB
or email: zabolsh@yahoo.co.uk
Russian AUCPB website address: vkpb.ru
FIGHTING FUND – Comrades and Supporters of the AUCPB and Subscribers to "FOR BOLSHEVISM INSIDE THE COMMUNIST AND WORKERS' MOVEMENT" and other material of the AUCPB, can make a donation towards the further publication of AUCPB material translated into English from Russian by posting a cheque to Solidarity with Workers of ex-USSR. Cheques can be written out to our fighting fund account "FOR SOLIDARITY WITH WORKERS OF THE EX-USSR" sort code 30-93-60, account Number: 02312361 (Lloyds). Address for posting is cheques available by first contacting publisher by email at zabolsh@yahoo.co.uk

You can also pay by Paypal via our website http://aucpbenglishwebsite.blogspot.com and clicking on the DONATE TODAY button.
Many thanks to all our comrades and supporters for all their material support!

No comments: