This is the third and final volume of a work that dealt with the process of the revolution and the construction of socialism in the Soviet Union, the capitalist restoration, the social-imperialism, its crisis, its disclosure, the failure of perestroika, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian imperialism in the last 20 years, in a world no longer bipolar but with multiple poles.
The preparatory works as well as the investigation, the production of material and the publication of the three volumes demanded more than two decades.
This is the third and final volume of a work that dealt with the process of the revolution and the construction of socialism in the Soviet Union, the capitalist restoration, the social-imperialism, its crisis, its disclosure, the failure of perestroika, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian imperialism in the last 20 years, in a world no longer bipolar but with multiple poles.
The preparatory works as well as the investigation, the production of material and the publication of the three volumes demanded more than two decades.
In the chapter XVI, I analyze the qualitative changes in the relations of production from the moment that revisionists, who expressed to the new bourgeoisie elements, usurped the leadership of the Party and the state. The analysis and examination of the political and ideological superstructure reveals the system that actually exists, the monopolist capitalism of state, and their particularities. The “real socialism” was the denial of socialism; its conversion in imperialism and in fascism through an original manner.
Chapters XVIII and XX are focused on the social-imperialism as a scientific category, and how the facts were demonstrating that the USSR was not anymore, and couldn't be, the natural ally of peoples and nations of the Third World.
The imperialists proclaim the supposed “complete failure of socialism”, and its ideologues say that, according to them, it is because of the “great intellectual failure of Marxism”. But, they hide jealously guarded that Mao Zedong, the leader of the revolution in the most populous country in the Earth, and the main Marxist-Leninist theorist of our time (ignored or vilely attacked), had unraveled the character of qualitative change occurred in the USSR with the 20th Congress of the CPSU (February 1956) and the coup in June 1957. After a few years, precisely using the tools theory of Marxism, Mao showed that the promotion of revisionism to power was the rise of the bourgeoisie to power.
A wall of silence has been set up to hide this analysis of Mao. Because the bourgeoisie, both from the East and the West, were interested in spread by all means among the masses of people the idea that the USSR that collapsed in 1991 was a communist society.
In the early 1960’s, Mao Zedong made a fundamental question: where does and why emerge elements that follow the capitalist road like Jruschiov’s, that nest in the top and can reach to usurp the direction. To address this problem, Mao had firmly followed to the historical materialism in opposition to the idealism. Argued that the revisionism of Jruschiov could not be the product of a mere negative individuality and, therefore, their causes should be unraveled. It was necessary to study the contradictions of the socialist society in the economic base and in the superstructure to discover the objective and subjective roots of bourgeois revisionism.
This fundamental issue is at the center of the debate in the international communist movement, since the defeat suffered by the working class in 1957 in the USSR and at the end of 1978 in China.
In the chapter XXIV, the problems of the base and the superstructure are analyzed in the light of the first historical experience of socialism and with the guide of the theory of Mao on the continuation of the revolution in the conditions of the proletarian dictatorship.
The Proletarian Cultural Revolution China, begun in 1966, although was defeated, prevented the capitalist restoration for twelve years and shows a way to deal – with the forces restorer, recovering the portions of power that are in your hands.
The Proletarian Cultural Revolution China, begun in 1966, although was defeated, with the direction of a truly communist Party who practiced the mass line, has prevented the capitalist restoration during twelve years, and showed a way to confront with the forces which seek the restore, recovering the portions of power that are in your hands. It also shows a road that goes in-depth in the great democracy, revolutionizing the social relations of production and the domains of ideology, education and culture.
Great Democracy meant that the vast majority formed by the direct producers, the creators of wealth, the masses of workers who were previously dispossessed, exploited and oppressed, could start to take government decisions in their own hands. On the contrary, the Yankee democracy, such as the one of other capitalist countries, is an oligarchic and commercial democracy, a democracy for a small minority.
In relation to this debate, it is of utmost importance rescue the contribution of Che Guevara, as the depth of his struggle against the soviet revisionism, which was evidenced in his work: Notes of criticism of the political economy, hided during 40 years and published recently in 2006.
The more advanced experiences for building of socialism were part of the struggle to achieve and overcome a capitalist nations more developed, but not by any way, but the way it precisely is interest of the proletariat as class: to carry the revolution until the end, that is to eliminate the causes that led to the division of society in classes and the exploitation of man by man.
The bourgeoisie, in particular the renegades of Marxism, seek to bury the great revolutions that changed the world in large part of the XX Century in oblivion and lies. As I said in the Introduction to the First Volume (3/10/1991): “they do not examine their mistakes – that certainly they made, as it could not be otherwise – in order to draw lessons to better move forward on the path of the revolutionizing the economy, politics and culture. They omit the main – the achievements – , exaggerate errors, beautify and put by clouds the bourgeois way for growing and modernization. “They dogmatically cling to the capitalist “model” of economic, scientific and technological development”.
On the other hand, without understanding the true social nature of the USSR of Jruschiov, Brezhnev and Gorbachev, is not possible to understand the world history of the last half century. In Argentina, for example, cannot be rightly identified the causes and the objectives of the coup and the genocidal dictatorship installed on 24 March 1976 without investigating and revealing the penetration of socialimperialism in our country and the weight reached by it.
From the beginning, the Russian monopolist bureaucratic bourgeoisie was endowed with a huge power inherited from the achievements of the socialist Soviet Union. It could usurp the prestige of the October Revolution, as well as the influence on the peoples of the world of the historical soviet victory over Nazism and the great social achievements.
The USSR became a superpower, socialist in the words but imperialist in the facts. However, as any imperialist bourgeoisie who arrives last to the distribution of the planet, it needed to expand and therefore involved on dispute with the other superpower, the Yankee, in the pursuit of getting the world hegemony. In the 1970S, it succeeded on put to the US on the defensive and reached parity in military strategy. However, its real force was below its voracity, as Mao noted when full offensive of socialimperialism was taken place.
Deep internal contradictions corroded to the USSR. Its analysis is dealt with in the chapters covering on the particularities and divisions of the ruling class; also, in chapters on Afghanistan (first military defeat of socialimperialism), on the Brezhnevism and the crisis in the early 1980S, on the “cold war”, the Perestroika and its failure, the collapse.
A new situation was generating and it happened the unimaginable: in 1991 collapsed the Soviet Union, which was one of the two superpowers. This occurred without firing a shot (except the bloody repression of Moscow against the people in Georgia and Lithuania). Another, very different, had been the history of the Soviet Union when it was socialist. In 1918-1921, the nascent soviet power of the workers and peasants, led by the Communist Party, confronted and defeated the armies of the landowners and the bourgeoisie, which was supported by the military intervention of fourteen capitalist countries. In 1941-1945, the first socialist country fought hard and defeated Hitler Germany that had already occupied France and almost all of the continental Europe. In 1945-1949, the USSR rejected the American blackmail and ended with its nuclear monopoly.
In chapters XXII and XXIII, I focused the process that finally led to the implosion of USSR and the following course until the middle of de first decade of XXI century. The Russian Federation, the main component and dominant of the Soviet Union, kept the fundamental of the war machinery and industrial apparatus, with the immense natural resources and with the seat of permanent member (with the right to veto) in the Security Council of the United Nations.
Despite its potentiality, Russia continued sinking into a very deep and prolonged socio-economic crisis. Chaired by Yeltsin in the early 1990s, has repeatedly been on the edge of chaos and ran serious dangers of dismemberment.
At the end of 1999, Putin assumed the presidency. This fact represents the entry of Russian imperialism to a new stage. The Kremlin put an end to its setback. It began to focus on the need to modernize its industry and its technology and deploys its forces in this regard. It is committed to crush by blood and fire the resistance of the Chechens and other Caucasians peoples. It is launched to regain positions in the former Soviet republics, in a tough dispute with its imperialist rivals. Aims to assume the role of great Eurasian power and actively participates as such in the main issues of international politics. It is being deployed in the “backyard” of US. The official spokespersons of Moscow declare: “we returned to Latin America to stay there”.
This exacerbates the dispute between the US, the British, the Chinese, the Russian and Europeans in our country and our region. This dispute could be taken as opportunity by revolutionaries and anti-imperialist people, only on the condition of not bear illusions in supposedly “good” imperialisms, and firmly maintain an independent position, like the one the patriots raised two hundred years ago: “neither old master nor new master, let us be free of any foreign domination”.
The deep worldwide economic crisis of capitalism, which began in April 2007 in the United States, is prolonged and are incalculable their social and political consequences. The historical experience of this time, which remains, as Lenin said, the era of imperialism and the proletarian revolution, shows us that there is a reciprocal relationship between economic capitalist crises, political instability, wars and revolutions. Once again, it left naked the hunger, the unemployment and the super exploitation to which the capitalism condemns to workers. Once again, it is evident that the system denies to the vast majority of young people their right to have a future.
The crisis puts on the table the need for the revolution, for which it is imperative that there exist a Party capable of creating subjective conditions to make possible the necessary.
April, 20th 2010
Thanks to:
Claudio Spíguel, by their valuable comments and suggestions.
My colleague of life, for her support.
Eli, comrade from the Youth, for their cooperation.
Horacio Ciafardini
He was an intellectual and militant revolutionary who studied in depth the Marxist theory. He conducted research on major problems and contributed to its elucidation. He was also a remarkable teacher, whose courses massively attracted to students. He was secretary of the drafting of the magazine Theory and Policy. For more than six years, he was hostage of the dictatorship established in 1976, most of the time in the terrible conditions of the prison of Rawson. Horacio remained at high principles by which had always struggled. When he recovered the freedom, he immediately resumed its Marxist economic research and advanced in the development of new jobs. But the prison had undermined his health, and only survived two years. His example and his work endure and are still alive.
