On the 8th of December the working population of former Soviet socialist and now bourgeois republics called to memory a tragic date — another anniversary of signing of the ill-fated Belavezha Accords, by which in a sense the process of the USSR destruction was accomplished and legalized.
The great country, that had been astonishing the whole world with its tremendous success in economy, as well as in politics, and in the social sphere for the 70 previous years, suffered the final and terminating blow which made the country cease to exist. From that day the USSR became mentioned only in the past tense. And the Soviet people, who had never wished that, proved unable to prevent the process, and they have to pay for their weakness up to the present.
Neither of the newly formed sovereign states, that had earlier been a part of the USSR, could avoid the fate of a primitive colony of the prevailing imperial powers. Even the largest of them — bourgeois Russia — couldn’t do better than become an energy-serving handmaid for the advanced European and Asian countries, moreover, she manages to be proud of it. To say nothing of the rest of the republics, possessing immeasurably less supplies of resources and workforce! Most of them are only still alive due to preserved economic relations with Russia.
The economies of all post-Soviet republics are now based on 1 or 2 branches, mostly of a material sector. All the most high-value, science-intensive and pioneering branches of industry are destroyed or dilapidated. The population living standards have fallen enormously. Social guarantees are at minimum everywhere. Instead, in these newly-appeared «independent» countries there is a giant increase of social differentiation, disorder, poverty, homelessness, child neglect, unemployment, drug abuse, prostitution and other “delights” of capitalism, that have never been heard of in the Soviet Union.
The destruction of once united country has directly affected 75 million people out of the 300 million of the USSR population. Men and women, old people and children have entirely fallen on difficult times and have become refugees, victims of bomb attacks or physical violence on the part of bourgeois nationalists in their own country. Those people have all at once found themselves to be second-class human beings without elementary civil rights in the republics they have always called their home. Dozens, maybe even hundreds of thousands of former Soviet people have fallen in inter-ethnic and country-to-country military conflicts, originated from the processes of the USSR separation and property distribution. Those wars have been incessant for more than two decades now, new ones making things worse.
The vast majority of the former Soviet Union citizens regret the loss of the great united country, even those who have never lived in the USSR, born after its destruction.
Yes, that is exactly destruction — it is for a reason that we call the division of one great country into a lot of different states «destruction», not «disintegration» or «collapse», as the bourgeois lackeys call that process. The fact is that the words «disintegration» and «collapse» in their true senses imply that the whole has broken into pieces by ITSELF, without anybody’s efforts. But the facts, and mainly the essence of what has happened, have shown clearly and intelligibly, that the USSR division was carried out consciously and purposefully, and became a natural result of Gorbachev’s Perestroika policy. It means that to say «disintegration» or «collapse» is to cover the truth from the working people and to mislead them concerning the real causes of the tragedy that has happened to them.
As for the USSR partition process legalization, it was not without reason that we have written above «in a sense», because the rules of the Soviet republics secession from the USSR procedure were not observed. The laws applied in the Soviet Union at that time, particularly the main and principal law — «Treaty on the Formation of the USSR», whose clauses with some amendments were included into all the Soviet Constitutions, were just brushed aside by the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, that had taken political power in the country during Perestroika and is nowadays actively hammering the primacy of law formula into the working people’s heads.
That is understandable. Those were the laws established by the working people, and they reflected the interests of the USSR labourers — workers, farmers, personnel and working intellectuals, that is the immense majority of the country’s population. But now it is bourgeois laws that rule the day at the former Soviet Union territory, they provide narrow society sector — bourgeoisie, proprietors of means of production — with special privileges.
What was their own was socially-innate, and they were certain to adhere to it. While socially-hostile Soviet laws could be ignored, the more so because the counter-revolutionaries knew beforehand: Soviet workers, if honestly asked, would never support the bourgeoisie. (That’s why during Perestroyka they were lying to working people about «improved socialism», disguising under the attractive word combination the process of its destruction and building new capitalist relations in its place).
To sum up, all the former Soviet republics, and now — independent and sovereign states, have attained their independence in illegal way. In point of fact, these countries as separate state formations exist only because the world community has acknowledged them — countries of global community just agreed to name those territories as separate states, no more than that. However, this recognition does not mean that all these republics’ formation and existence met regulations of the USSR actual law. Alas, there is no legal ground for existence and functioning of post-Soviet independent states. There is just one — the will of the now ruling class — the bourgeoisie, who needed that «independence» as a breath of their nostrils.
Really, what documents are offered to us so we could take it for granted that these republics have ceased their membership in the USSR and do exist as separate states?
The documents are the above-mentioned Belavezha Accords on creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), and amendment acts in form of the Alma-Ata Declaration, whereby a number of republics, not participating directly in signing the Belavezha Accords, have joined the CIS, and also the CIS Charter.
But all these documents concern the formation of a certain new alliance of separate countries — СIS, with only those republics able to join the Commonwealth that had already ceased their membership in the USSR. There are great problems exactly with that particular moment. In fact, it turns out that not a single Soviet Union republic has seceded from the USSR, since the secession procedure set by the Soviet laws has not been followed by any of the existing and allegedly independent post-Soviet states.
Declaration of the formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
«Declaration of the formation of the USSR» was signed on December, 29 in 1922 during the conference of delegations from the Congress of Soviets of four republics: RSFSR (Russia), USSR (Ukraine), BSSR (Belorussia) and TSFSR (Transcaucasia). On December, 30 in 1922 this document was ratified by the USSR First Congress of Soviets, that way the formation of the new state including the four Soviet republics was institutionalized. This date — 30 December 1922 is the USSR formation date. Later other Soviet republics joined the Union agreement.
The agreement could be annulled only and exclusively by collective decision of all plenipotentiary representatives of Soviet republics participating in it. The latter could be done only by the highest body of State power in the USSR — the Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR that was the only one to approve the changes, made to the USSR Constitution concerning the dissolution of this State formation.
There was a special law in the USSR named «The procedure of solving issues, related to a Soviet republic’s secession from the USSR» (№1410-1 dated 03.04.1990), in which the «divorce» procedure between the republic and the Union center was well-defined. According to that law, first it was necessary to delimit responsibilities between the republics, to realize the change of ownership, to establish the State frontier and so on. All in all, it had to take about 3 to 5 years.
The above was confirmed by the USSR Constitutional Supervision Committee on December, 11, 1991, making a statement after the Belavezha Accords signing; as the statement said, individual republics had no right to make decisions concerning the rights and interests of the other republics, and that the USSR authorities could cease their existence only «after determining the fate of the USSR in an appropriate constitutional procedure.”
However the idea of following that «constitutional procedure» was utterly rejected — counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie was in a hurry to take everything into their own hands, and in the first place — to divide public property, acting under the principle «if you’ve got it, flaunt it», before Soviet people could come to their senses. The bourgeoisie couldn’t «drag it out» for 3 to 5 years. That’s why the Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR was never summoned — it was dangerous and extremely unprofitable to the winners, who understood perfectly well, that People’s Deputies of the USSR could refuse to vote for the USSR disunion. They had signed a lot of antinational acts during the period of their deputyship, voting collectively to Gorbachev’s liberal tune from 1989 till 1991, but they could refuse to approve the USSR destruction. The more so because of the All-Union referendum in March, 1991 which had clearly shown, that Soviet people were for sure in favor of preserving the USSR. Convening the Congress, as well as the actions in accordance with the law № 1410-1, threatened to aggravate the situation in the country non plus ultra: by that time Soviet people were fed up by the process of Perestroyka.
That’s why the only legal option of splitting the USSR into separate republics was rejected by counter-revolutionaries at once. They tried to take a different approach — to create a new formation instead of the Soviet Union – a formation of bourgeois republics – by replacing one union by another similar one in Soviet people’s minds, who didn’t understand the class-specific point of the action. The legalization of that new union agreement was meant to be done by its ratification in local republic parliaments, not in the union parliament. That couldn’t contribute to the legitimacy of the USSR destruction, but that would look more authoritative — the parliaments had been elected by citizens of the republics, and as the case might be, «people’s will» could be used as a cover, that is what bourgeoisie has always been trying to do.
In this building on December, 8, 1991 the Agreement establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States was signed. Belovezha Forest, Viskuli. Belorussia
That is why on December, 8, 1991, in Viskuli (Belovezha Forest, Belorussia), senior officials and Heads of Governments of RSFSR, the Ukraine and Belorussia (B.Yeltsin and G.Burbulis, L.Kravchuk and V.Fokin, S.Shushkevich and V.Kebich, respectively) signed «The Agreement establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States» (СIS) and other related documents, that are called now «Belavezha Accords». It was done without telling anyone, including the leaders of the other Soviet republics, some of whom did not seek the USSR elimination at the time, fully realizing in what a sad pickle their «separate states» would come to be, as they were economically inter-related and interdependent with each other, primarily with Russia.
The moment of Belavezha Accords signing
The preamble to that Agreement stated that «The USSR as a subject of international law and geopolitical reality ceases its existence». The agreement ratification by superior State bodies of Soviet republics, approving the whole agreement, would enact that phrase too, and that would provide a legal ground to the USSR division. But that wasn’t as simple as that, either.
While in the Ukraine and Belorussia there were no particular problems with Belavezha Accords ratification about establishing the СIS — they were ratified by Superior Councils of those republics on December, 10, – in Russia they failed to solve the problem so quickly. Fundamentally, with a good legal reasoning, it is not solved up to now.
The matter is that according to article 104 of the Constitution of the RSFSR, in force at the moment of Belavezha Accords signing, their ratification implied the convocation of the highest body of State power in Russia at that time — the Congress of People’s Deputies of the RSFSR as the agreement affected the state system of the republic as a part of the Soviet Union and thereby caused the changes in Russian constitution. But the Vl Congress of People’s Deputies of Russia convened in April 1992 refused three times to ratify Belavezha Accords, that’s why among other things it was dissolved by president Yeltsin in October 1993.
The bourgeoisie on top in Russia did not dare to organize new elections to «People’s Deputies of the RSFSR» and to convene a new congress with more controllable deputies after 1993. Note, they would have to carry out elections under the RSFSR laws, and in accordance with the latest version of its Constitution! And even in such a bourgeois-biased form (with all the changes and additions relating to Perestroyka) this regulatory body in its essence did not allow to control it to the full extent (unlike today’s Russian parliament — the State Duma and the Federation Council not solving a thing), which made it a constant threat to the bourgeois class ruling. In addition, soon after the dissolution of the Congress of People’s Deputies of the RSFSR by Yeltsin, the new Russian constitution was adopted, that is in force to the present day, and that clearly and intelligibly announced the former RSFSR as a bourgeois country «Russian Federation», with no allowance for such a State authority body as Congress, that is a real, not sham parliament! That’s why in Russia the bourgeois class on top had to be satisfied with what was available — the solution of the RSFSR Supreme Soviet that ratified Belavezha Accords on December,12, 1991. But the problem is that this ratification doesn’t have legal force because it is not approved by the congress!
In addition, there is one more decision of the RSFSR Supreme Soviet having no legal force: the decision taken on December, 27, 1991, just to be on the safe side, so people’s deputies of the USSR could not keep the counter-revolutionaries from pulling off their deals, the decision which stopped the activity of the USSR people’s deputies at the territory of Russia since 2 January 1992 «due to cessation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics existence and establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States». It also forbade applying the USSR legislative instruments that regulated the USSR people’s deputies’ activity. Actually, with the issue of the USSR existence cessation not solved, there could not be any prohibition on the activity of publicly elected deputies of the USSR, or on operation of the USSR law at the territory of Russia!
But they hurried to forbid the USSR people’s deputies for a reason: on 17 March 1992, on the anniversary of the All-Union referendum, the deputies tried to organize in Moscow the 6th Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR, where, naturally, they were planning to consider the most important question — that of the fate of the Soviet Union. However, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR announced that efforts to reactivate any former USSR government bodies at the territory of Russia would be considered as an encroachment on state sovereignty of the country and they were incompatible with the status of Russia as an independent state, certainly, needless to say, with the due repressive measures to be applied to the offenders. New gentlemen that came to power decided not to bother about the legitimacy, but to go old school — to act using a force.
The present Russian parliament — the State Duma of the Russian Federation, that adopted the Resolution No. 157-II of the State Duma «The decision on legal force for the Russian Federation of the USSR referendum of 17 March 1991 on the preservation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics» on 15 March 1996 had to affirm all the above concerning the USSR. Article 3 of that Resolution says: «To affirm that the Agreement establishing the Commonwealth of Independent States dated 8 December 1991, signed by the RSFSR President B. N. Yeltsin and the State secretary of the RSFSR G.E Burbulis and not approved by the Congress of people’s deputies of the RSFSR — the highest body of State power in the RSFSR — had no in the past and has no at present a legal force in the part relating to the Soviet Union cessation». According to up-to-date bourgeois reference books and constant complaints of some «communists» who naively believe that life could change a lot if you wrote something on a sheet of paper and then voted for it, «that decision of the State Duma had no real political consequences». Neither could it have them, we can add.
Why? Because it doesn’t matter what paper says — it is more important what we have in fact, in reality.
Formally the USSR does exist, that is, the treaty of alliance is not annulled. But in fact – it doesn’t!
And this is not just about the Soviet state borders in order to gather all former territories «under one roof». Even if we could do it now in some miraculous way, we would not get the USSR anew. Because the matter is not in the form, but in the content — in the economic and social framework that existed in the country with the name of «the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics». The 15 countries constituting that Union were SOCIALIST, not bourgeois! They could be less or more in number, they might have these or other borders — that was not so important. What was important is that political power in those republics belonged to the working people — workers and farmers, employees and working intellectuals, and the economic system in the state named «the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics» was based on communal property for means of production. These are the core features determining the Soviet Union, not borders or laws! Currently, however, it is the many-faced bourgeoisie that is ruling at the former USSR territory, with its ever-present, precious private property. While they exist and rule, there will be no USSR (or USSR-2,… USSR-10, etc.)!
Once more, it is not names or laws that matters, it is what really exists.
The process of the USSR destruction was a reality; it was going on for years, actually from the very beginning of Perestroyka. After the bourgeoisie grabbed the political power in the country, the USSR could not exist for a long time — it inevitably was meant to divide into parts.
When former Soviet people realized what had happened, when they began to pay their lives and fates for that division, when even the part of Soviet intellectuals that were full of joy and excitement while meeting the capitalist beast saw what they had done, then Gorbachev – that spotted Judah – tried to justify himself and shed all responsibility, announcing that he had never wanted the USSR division, but only sought to destroy socialism. But one cannot exist separately from another — that is the thing! The laws of capitalism themselves do not allow that! In addition the facts deny the absence of such a wish of Gorbachev — on the contrary, it was present.
Yes, the next day after the Belavezha Accords signing, the USSR president М. S. Gorbachev did make a statement, however he didn’t condemn the actions of the leaders of the three republics who had obviously exceeded their authorities: instead they were just rebuked a little and reminded that the procedure of secession from the USSR was somewhat different. Something to the effect that the question had to be solved only in an appropriate constitutional procedure, with the involvement of all the union republics and taking into consideration their people’s will [1]. But as one of the former people’s deputies of the USSR V. Alksnis recalled, «as soon as KGB leaders of the Belorussian SSR were informed about the intention of Yeltsin, Kravchuk and Shushkevich to sign the accords, liquidating the USSR, it was immediately reported to Moscow, including Gorbachev. Elite Special Forces of Belorussian KGB moved to Viskuli and surrounded the forest in the area of the hunting residence waiting for the order to arrest the USSR liquidators. In response from Moscow they were ordered to stay on the positions and wait for the order. But the order never came…»[2].
It means that Gorbachev knew perfectly well what was happening in Viskuli, but he had no wish to quell the activities of «liquidators», as Alksnis called them. No matter how he is justifying himself now, no matter how he is wriggling to deny his wish to destroy the Great country, all that is an impudent out-and-out lie and a try to clear himself, laying the blame on Yeltsin, who is not alive anymore. Facts are a stubborn thing: once you didn’t prevent, then you did agree. The more so because the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee should have certainly known at least the Marxism basics. It means that the President should have to understand that the politics of Perestroyka that he had initiated, simply could not lead to another result!
Actually, the Soviet Union was destroyed classically, directly under the guidance of Marxist books. (And who would then dare to declare Marx was not right? Only a person knowing nothing about Marxism!)
We are not going to describe all the events of that period in detail — it has been done many times and thoroughly enough. Those who are interested in it can look it up, for example, in bourgeois Wikipedia, requesting to seek «Sovereignty parade» and «The dissolution of the USSR». It is another matter that the events are characterized there from the bourgeois class point of view. It is important for us to understand what happened from the working class point of view, from the perspective of revolutionary theory of Marxism-Leninism.
We will briefly touch upon the main points.
The USSR destruction was bound up with national movements in the republics that began to arise, form and grow actively as soon as Gorbachev announced about the politics of capitalist reforms, known as Perestroyka.
In the country whose policy in the national question had been based on the principle of proletarian internationalism, which had helped all Soviet nations and nationalities, large and small, to blossom in economic, political, social and cultural terms, there suddenly appeared a tendency to isolation and distancing from one another. Here and there, seemingly with no reason, inter-ethnic conflicts began to appear, sometimes turning into open violent confrontations with the involvement of militia and army subdivisions. Very often they were initiated by real provocations, actively presented by local mass media as infringement of one nation’s interests.
In general, mass media did make a good figure in the process of Perestroyka, as we have written many times before. Since Gorbachev’s taking the office of the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee they began to regenerate, turning from means of informing Soviet citizens into means of manipulation and control. This change affected the working people’s attitudes, particularly, their attitude to the national question. The proletarian internationalism was thrown aside, and bourgeois nationalism, acting, certainly, in its characteristic manner of «nationwide matter» and «national interests», took its place.
Economic foundation of that process included market-type reforms, private property implanted everywhere to distance and divide people economically, and especially powerful man-made economic crisis, which erupted in the country as a result of counter-revolutionaries’ conscious actions. Note that till that moment the USSR had had no such problem as economic crisis for more than 70 years.
In 1989 the economic crisis in the Soviet Union was acknowledged in an official statement. During the period of 1989 to 1991 practically all basic consumer goods disappeared from the sale in the public trade. A purchasing card system was introduced in the country (the ration system of providing basic goods with food stamps).
Counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, using all mass media, convinced the Soviet population that the Soviet economy was unviable, that it couldn’t provide its citizens with what was most urgently needed. Actually, the real reason of economic crisis in the USSR was in actions of bourgeois counter-revolutionaries, who grew richer in the new circumstances and at the same time tried to destabilize the economic and social situation in the country in order to undermine the trust of Soviet working people in planned economy and socialism. All kinds of goods were produced by Soviet industry in enormous quantity, no less than earlier, but they were either exported abroad by new businessmen, or destroyed, or sold triple the price on the black market. The new-born bourgeois class was intensely compiling the initial capital, playing up to their foreign brothers at the same time and enriching them to the max.
The crazy carve-up of the Soviet People’s property resulted in striking together of different groups of growing and consolidating bourgeoisie, that used its traditional methods and ways of fooling the working people — nationalism and religion — to protect their economic interests. This competitive struggle of counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie led to inter-ethnic conflicts that took place at the territories of union republics in 1988 to 1991.
In 1988 there was an intense conflict in Nagorny Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Mutual ethnic cleansing, forced migration, economic blockades and direct military action with the involvement of army subdivisions in April 1991. That war between two former Soviet republics is still continuing up to the present.
June 1989 — the engagement in Novy Uzen between Kazakhs and inhabitants of the Caucasus. In order to neutralize the conflict they had to use army vehicles and equipment: armored fighting vehicles, tanks, military helicopters, etc.
15-16 July 1989 — engagements between Georgians and Abkhazians in Sukhumi.
May-June 1989 — terrible events in Ferghana valley of the Uzbek SSR, with several nationalities living at one place. Mass outrages, murders and consequently — thousands of people forced to flee.
13 — 20 January 1990 — mass violation against the Armenian population in Baku, the Azerbaijan SSR. Robbery, murders, burning, property destruction and again forced migration of thousands of people.
May 1990 — massacre of Jews and Armenians in Andijan (The Uzbek SSR). Thousands of murdered and injured.
June 1990 — engagements between Kyrgyz and Uzbek («Osh massacre») in the Kyrgyz SSR. The name speaks for itself — the deaths of innocent people, who just got in the way of the capital stock growth.
At the same time there also was an escalation of the inter-ethnic conflict in the Crimea — between the Crimean Tatars and the Russians, and between the Ossetians and the Ingush in the Prigorodnyi region of North Ossetia.
But the local national bourgeoisie needed more force than that of the armed bands, consisting of people duped into them to defend its interests, so it could feel safe from the attacks of rivals from neighboring republics, and from oppressed and exploited working people of their own nation. It was necessary to keep those fighters in check in some way. The bourgeoisie needed a greater power — the power of the state, namely the state apparatus with all its institutions — laws, prisons, police, army, etc.
That’s why it is natural that inter-ethnic conflicts lead to formation of nation-States which at first declared their sovereignty (priority of local republic laws over federal), and then their independence and secession from the Union State — the USSR.
During 1990—1991 all Soviet republics declared their sovereignty. The RSFSR was one of the first, by the way. This process was named «Sovereignty parade». At that time the bourgeoisie of Union republics refused to pay taxes to the Union budget. I don’t think it is necessary to explain the reason. Newly appeared private owners, who fell greedily upon the political power, did not care about the fact that such measures were already harmful for the economies of those republics, which then lost a serious financial assistance for their development from the Union center, with undermining the deep bounds between enterprises forming the integrated technological chains.
In 1991 the period of «independencies» came. Before famous August events (GKChP[3]) two Union republics — Lithuania and Georgia — declared their sovereignty, four more republics — Estonia, Latvia, Moldavia, Armenia — refused to enter a new alliance (Gorbachev’s Union of Sovereign States) and announced about the transition to independence. After GKChP almost all the rest Union republics declared independence, except most Central Asian republics, such as Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, which didn’t push for independence.
What does it all amount to?
It amounts to the fact that there was a real civil war on the territory of the USSR, going in two directions simultaneously: seeking the power counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie tried to pull the political power out of the working people’s hands (one social class fighting against another social class), and at the same time it waged a competition struggle within its social class for former public property sharing (a fight within one social class) using the same working people, whom they had managed to pit against each other tearing them apart.
The result of that war was a restoration of capitalism in all Soviet republics (the bourgeoisie victory in the first direction) and the USSR division into parts (the result of struggle in the second direction — the competition within the social class of counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie).
Was it possible to avoid all that?
Yes, but upon the sole condition — if private property for means of production had not been permitted. But since the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie needed political power exactly for restoration of the institution of private property in the USSR with parallel destruction of public property, the USSR destruction was a logical and inevitable process from the moment Gorbachev announced about market-type reforms.
The matter is that inevitable and logical result of private property for means of production and, consequently, for products of labor, produced by using it, is in fact market formation. And market as the basis of life in capitalism is a constant anarchy and disorganization. One can survive in it only by means of running wealth accumulation and, consequently, getting stronger and more powerful. This is the only way to stand in capitalist competition that has a main law, saying «be the first to gobble up your rival, or you will be gobbled up by a stronger one».
To protect from opponents the bourgeoisie needs what is called «national movements». This is what V.I. Lenin wrote in his article «The right of nations to self-determination»:
“This is not the first time that national movements have arisen in Russia, nor are they peculiar to that country alone. Throughout the world, the period of the final victory of capitalism … has been linked up with national movements. For the complete victory of commodity production, the bourgeoisie must capture the home market, and there must be politically united territories whose population speak a single language, with all obstacles to the development of that language and to its consolidation in literature eliminated. Therein is the economic foundation of national movements. Language is the most important means of human intercourse. Unity and unimpeded development of language are the most important conditions for genuinely free and extensive commerce on a scale commensurate with modern capitalism, for a free and broad grouping of the population in all its various classes and, lastly, for the establishment of a close connection between the market and each and every proprietor, big or little, and between seller and buyer.” (Emphasis added by L.S.)
For that particular purpose – for primitive protection from competitors (the bourgeoisie of neighboring republics, and first of all of Russia as the strongest and the most powerful one), the bourgeoisie of each Soviet republic needed «independence» and «sovereignty», with their help it stupefied the working people of the republic, convincing them that it was better to live apart than altogether in one large country.
“The national state is the form most suited to … capitalist, civilised, economically progressive conditions, … it is the form in which the state can best fulfil its tasks… of securing the freest, widest and speediest development of capitalism“ , wrote V.I.Lenin in his work «Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism».
Every bourgeois tries to hog the cover. It is an inevitable thing in market relations. So they were hogging it from each other, until they tore our country into pieces.
The Soviet Union was not dissolved, comrade workers, it was TORN by growing capitalism, demanding for its development the isolation of more or less large nations at a certain territory.
But how can there be any independence of one worker from another, once they are producing one and the same product together?
«Independence» is necessary not for workers, but for those who take possession of that product, having spent not a moment to produce it – the bourgeoisie. «Independence» is a preferential right of the workers’ robbery by one group of bourgeoisie before another one, no more than that! The notorious «state independence» at the period of capitalism is also independence of the bourgeoisie from the working people! National bourgeoisie is using «independence» in order to get rid of all competitors who can challenge the authority.
* * *
Now, let’s make a few conclusions from the above.
The first one, logically derived from all that we know now about the «secession» of Soviet republics from the USSR: «CIS is an illegal, fictitious and unauthorized formation».
In principle, it is so from the standpoint of the very law, to which now ruling bourgeois class is ready to pray.
The second one: «nobody seceded from the USSR».
And it is true. But it doesn’t mean that we need to make another conclusion, which can often be heard from some of our citizens who prefer illusions to sober estimation of reality: that the USSR still exists.
Alas, it doesn’t exist. It is the CIS that really exists in spite of the fact that it is illegal and non-existing from technical point of view.
The paper, the law is one thing, but reality is quite another one.
The faith in the existence of the USSR at present is no more than idealism, analogous to religion, but expressed in some other form. Idealism has always been a philosophy of exploiting classes. The foundation of philosophy of modern revolutionary class is dialectical materialism. No matter what good purposes make people bury their heads in the sand, not to see the reality, this action will always only benefit oppressors and exploiters, that is, the bourgeoisie.
Why? Because illusions and fantasy will not put us in the right direction towards reconstruction of socialism in the country!
Dreaming of socialism is not enough, it is necessary to act. Not just act, but do it right.
Is it possible to find the right course of action, if you are afraid to open your eyes and look at the reality? Moreover, if you have no map, showing the location of the opposing forces and you don’t know exactly how the process of class battle is going?
Dialectical materialism, demanding to look at the world around with one’s eyes wide open, actually gives the vital map to the working class, and following that map they can find their way to victory over their class enemy. While idealism in any form constantly and inevitably serves the interests of the bourgeoisie — even in the form of passionate love to the USSR, if it is not supported by socialist, i.е. dialectic-materialistic outlook
Why? Because it conceals the right way, throws people off the track, distracts efforts of the working class and laboring masses to struggle with the insignificant, non-substantive and sometimes non-existent — with illusion or fiction. Such a «struggle» is not able to unravel the bourgeoisie domination! That’s why idealism is always an invaluable service to oppressors and exploiters, retaining and extending their domination.
In relation to the point of our discussion it means that in understanding of what has already happened and is happening now and therefore in the struggle for socialist reconstruction of the society, the working class must focus on the existing and historic reality, not on legacy or law. It doesn’t matter if the USSR division was legal or illegal, it is the fact of our life — the life itself has given it the force of law. It is extremely important to understand the latter statement, because our future depends on it, dear comrade.
That was the point of our insight into the way the process of the USSR division into parts was accomplished and then legalized: it can clearly show that a quantum leap in social development, even in the reversal form — that of counter-revolution — does not regard any former state laws and legal norms, it establishes its own laws and norms based on the logic of life itself. The written laws appear much later — just to register the accomplished fact, to confirm it legally.
Why is it important for us?
Because nowadays we are facing a new socialist revolution, that is a logical and inevitable consequence of action of objective laws of social development. These laws cannot be created, they can only be discovered and studied. And the studying of those objective laws proves unequivocally that the twist of history in the form of bourgeois counter revolutions at the territories of former socialist countries will be overcome, and their development will go the path of progress again. And mind you, it will happen not in the long term, but probably in the nearest future, the objective conditions for that being fully-fledged. It is up to the subjective conditions now, indispensable for actualizing the revolutionary situation in the form of a new social revolution. It is vitally important for the working class to do the right things in the period of festering of revolution, to prepare for it with clear understanding of what is happening and in doing so to create and prepare these subjective conditions.
The bourgeoisie understands the latter no less than you and I do. That is why they are trying hard to deprive the working class of its most important and main weapon — dialectic-materialistic outlook, which provides the right vision and understanding of the reality, and therefore allows to see the way to the final liberation. The bourgeoisie, wishing to retain their domination, strives to tie hands of the revolutionary class, to blindfold it, to confuse everybody with their bourgeois worldview, which often acts in the form of idealistic outlook.
One of the main points of bourgeois ideology is the myth of indisputable law acting in capitalist society, presented as some abstract force, existing on its own and standing above man and human society, to which any member of a bourgeois state (primarily, of course, from the oppressed classes!) must absolutely obey.
The bourgeoisie is persistently hiding from the working people the fact that law is a temporal and historic idea, that the law existing today in our country is nothing else but its own will stated in the form of a set of rules and standards of conduct, that Russian workers are bound and obliged to adhere to. That this law in itself is worth nothing, if it is not supported by violence, i.е. if there are no special groups of armed people (police, bailiffs, army, etc.), who physically force the oppressed to obey to the ruling class. That the bourgeoisie itself, snatching the political power out of Soviet workers’ hands during Perestroyka and destroying the state, did not reckon with any Soviet laws working at that time, but by force established their own laws — just for their own sake.
It means that the working class, all working people of our country, oppressed and exploited today by bourgeois class and its servants, have every right to do the same things as the bourgeoisie, when the laboring masses rise for their last and decisive fight. They are not obliged to take into consideration any laws and standards of conduct established by the bourgeoisie, but they must be guided only by their revolutionary right, creating and establishing in society such rules and life standards, that correspond to the working people’s best interests.
L. Sokolsky, 17.12.2014
