Articles

      ARTICLES

     Boris Ikhlov


LGBT: THEORY OF INTRODUCTION

HOLOCAUST-2
Or FASCIST USA

MAJORITY OF RUSSIA POPULATION LIKES STALIN – WHAT ARE REASONS?
Putin and Medvedev lie again

PUTIN IS DIRTY MURDERER

THE 12TH OF APRIL AND WHO VON IN WORLD WAR II

MARXISM TODAY

MARXISM TODAY- 2

THE CRISIS OF THE PROTEST MOVEMENT


LGBT: THEORY OF INTRODUCTION

The bourgeoisie is forced to be hypocritical and call democratic republic as “all people power” or a democracy in a general, or pure democracy, which in reality is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the dictatorship of the exploiters over the working masses.
Lenin

The text that you will read below, Facebook deleted and blocked me for 24 hours "for publishing something that is incompatible with Facebook standards".
Facebook did not block my texts, where I talked about the Ukrainian Hitlerites-Bandera. Facebook did not block me even when I published a text in which I stated that the propensity for murder, which was engaged in by the British in Ireland and India, English immigrants in America and Australia, was genetically transmitted to modern Americans by inheritance, as dog’s dynamic stereotypes are inherited.

In India, the British exterminated 90 million Hindus, in North America – more than 100 million local residents (the number is taken from the calculation with the Ferhulst equation), only 9 million Negroes died during the transportation from Africa, American soldiers executed 1 million civilians with torture during the two months of the occupation of North Korea.
But in the original text, I spoke out against hypocrisy, against the fake American morality.
Facebook belongs to oligarch Zuckerberg, I violated the moral standards of the capitalist Zuckerberg. The reaction to my text make me realize that I am on the right track.

***

LGBT, according to Wikipedia, refers to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. The term has been used since the 1990s and is an adaptation of the abbreviation "LGB", which in the mid-to-late 1980s began to replace the term "gay community". Since 1996, there is a LGBTQ, Q stands for "queer", i.e. "sexually not at all".
Since 1999, some patients offer the abbreviation "LGBTI", later merged with the previous one into "LGBTIQ". Also, “A” can be added to the end in the meaning of asexual (i.e. impotent and frigid) and “P” in the meaning of pansexual, i.e. they have a full complex of perversions, except for impotence.

In the 60s in the United States, homosexual acts, even between adults by mutual agreement, occurring in private homes, were a criminal offense throughout the United States (with the exception of Illinois, which decriminalized them in 1961). Twenty states had laws that allowed anyone to be arrested on suspicion of homosexuality. In the states of Pennsylvania and California, people suspected of homosexuality could be placed in a psychiatric institution for all life. In attempts to cure homosexuality, psychiatrists used castration, aversive therapy, hypnosis, electroconvulsive therapy, and lobotomy.

28.6.1969 in the gay bar "Stonewall Inn" on Christopher Street (Greenwich Village, New York), a clash of police officers and pederasts took place. The authorities immediately took advantage of this to create a series of false political goals, including replacing the culture with a "sex culture", and even the term "gay subculture" appeared. The historian David Carter declared that Stonewall Inn "was to the gay movement what the fall of the Bastille was to the beginning of the French Revolution." It was the beginning of the emasculation of the concept of "revolution". The media proclaimed that the gays and lesbians of New York had overcome gender and class differences, becoming a cohesive community, almost the party of "United America", like modern ruling party “United Russia”, i.e. the exploiting oligarchs and the exploited workers were declared equal.

In the 1970s, lesbians suddenly faced the question of equality with homosexuals. They viewed gender stereotypes as a patriarchal relic. Lesbian feminists avoided the role models that were common in gay bars. With the growth of the feminist movement, supported by the ruling circles of the leading countries of the world, both united, later transgender and bisexual people joined them.

The police persecution of homosexuals successfully coincided with the "witch hunt" for the authorities, so the US Communist Party became related to the movement for the rights of perverts and soon disappeared from the political arena. Same-sex love, anti-exhibitionism (the movement for the freedom of the sale and use of drugs) and the fashion for hippies were thrown In the youth environment by the CIA, so the powerful movement of the 60s in the United States, which included many strikes against conveyor depersonalization, was emasculated.

In June 1999, the U.S. Department of the Interior designated the building at 51-53 Christopher Street as a National Historic Landmark. Same-sex marriage is now legal in Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, France, Portugal, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, and the United States.
Only on December 26, 2013, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2014, which lifted the ban on consensual sodomy (perverted sexual intercourse), enshrined in article 125. However, long before this moment, the bourgeois governments of the leading countries of the world included the struggle for LGBT rights in their general policy of imposing tolerance and human rights on other countries.

At the same time, since 2014 one have banned the promotion of homosexuality in eight US states, including Alabama, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and Utah. In Arizona, a ban is imposed on the depiction of homosexual relations as a "positive alternative" of lifestyle, in Alabama and Texas, homosexuality is "unacceptable to the general public" by law, the court insists that children in sex education classes are taught that " homosexual behavior is a criminal offense."

At the same time, Saudi Arabia, where homosexuality is publicly executed, India, where gay men are imprisoned for 10 years, Singapore, where gay men are imprisoned for 2 years, Malaysia (20 years), Qatar (25 years), Kuwait (7 years), Turkmenistan, where gay men are prosecuted, Egypt, where homosexuals are punished in any process initiated by the public, Sudan, where homosexuality is imprisoned for 10 years, Nigeria with a complete ban on homosexuality, Yemen, where homosexuals are sent to prison or subjected to public flogging, Arab Emirates, where the head is cut off for homosexuality – they have not been subjected to any sanctions from the US, they are not being subjected to them, and they will not be subjected to them.

The UN Human Rights Council has voted on a resolution condemning the use of the death penalty for "apostasy, blasphemy, adultery and homosexual relations." The resolution was adopted by a majority vote: 27 countries voted in favor, while 13 voted against the resolution, and seven countries abstained. You will laugh, but the United States voted against the abolition of the death penalty for homosexuality.

By the way, the death penalty has been preserved in a number of states, in Alabama, Virginia, Florida, etc. "by the electric chair; in Wyoming, Missouri, California, Maryland, and Arizona, by the gas chamber; in New Hampshire, Washington, and Delaware, by hanging; in Oklahoma, by firing squad." Dozens of people are killed every year.

***

Sexual perversions is "a group of psycho-physiological disorders in which sexual satisfaction is caused by a source that does not cause arousal and sexual satisfaction in a normal person.
The medical encyclopedia contains thousands of types of sexual perversions. Among them we can read about gerontophilia (sex with the elderly), totemism (sex with things), homosexuality (same-sex sex), pedophilia (sex with children), necrophilia (sex with corpses), bestiality (sex with animals). There was a prison article "for the rape of cattle with a fatal outcome" in the Criminal Code of the USSR, inclination to homosexuality was also subject to criminal prosecution. But homosexuality itself as illness in the USSR, unlike in the United States, was not prosecuted, for example, in 80th the rector of Perm State University and the head of the Department of scientific communism of the university were passive pederasts - Victor Jivopistsev and Vladimir Maltsev.
On the contrary, in Hitler's Germany, legal gay clubs were widespread.

Medical research shows that such sexual perversion as homosexuality has two socio-biological roots: 1) unfavorable living conditions, stressful conditions, and 2) genetic abnormalities. Since at the beginning of their appearance on the planet, living organisms were hermaphrodites (some fish species remained hermaphrodites), genetic homosexuality is an atavism, like the remains of a tail in the form of a coccyx. Sometimes the disease proceeds in parallel with normal sexual life, sometimes it displaces it.

Manchester, June 22, 1869, Engels wrote to Marx in London:
"... The book 'Pederast' that you sent me is the height of curiosity. It is in the highest degree unnatural exposure.
The pederasts begin to count their ranks and believe that they constitute a force in the state. All they needed was an organization, but based on this data, it seems to already exist in secret. And since they count such outstanding people in all the old and even in the new parties, from Rezing to Schweitzer, their victory is inevitable.
«Guerre aux cons, paix aux trous–de–cul»! (war to the pussy, peace to the holes in the ass) - this will now be the password.
Fortunately, we are personally too old to fear that if this party wins, we will be forced to pay tribute to the victors with our bodies.
But the younger generation! However, it is also possible only in Germany for such a good fellow to come forward, that turn swinishness into a theory, and proclaim: join, etc.
Unfortunately, he lacks the courage to openly declare himself "this", and he had still coram publico (in front of all people) to operate “on the "front”, but not "immediately included in the deal," as he once put it.
But wait, when the new North German criminal law recognizes the rights of assholes, then things will go very differently.
We poor people, who are used to acting from the front, with our childish penchant for women, will then have a pretty bad time...» (Ïèñüìî Ôðèäðèõà Ýíãåëüñà Êàðëó Ìàðêñó, 22.6.1869 // Ñîáð. ñî÷. 2–å èçä. Ò. 32. Ñ. 260)

Immoralism is a characteristic feature of capitalist society.
Today, LGBT is actively used by the ruling classes of the bourgeoisie to suppress the proletariat, forcing the class struggle into a safe channel for capital to fight for the rights of "sexual minorities". So, US President Biden called the most important goal of his presidency to increase the number of LGBT members in American society to 50%. In his opinion, the numerical predominance of heterosexuals over gays is unfair.

***

Gustave Lebon argued: "A society devoid of ideology, and with it the national idea, can claim one name - a herd of rams"
The United States shows the world by its example that the opposite is true: a society with a bourgeois ideology is a herd of rams.

Capitalism is ugly. The United States is the personification of capitalism, everything is ugly in the United States, cinema and literature, feminism and the environmental movement, love and the movement against racism. The oligophrenia of members of the American parliament is the norm, the state standard, and the maxims of the function of American idiocy are Bush Jr., Obama, Biden.

The previous text “From Plato to Markuse” see hear: https://aftershock.news/?q=node/769547
But in Russian.

14.2.2021

HOLOCAUST-2
Or FASCIST USA


History of North Americans is not as rich as Arabs or Jews history. But in the short term ... they still managed to show the world the wonders of humanity and tolerance, success and diversity of opinions. Dogs save static stereotypes, more of that, dogs keep  dynamic stereotypes handed down, and what we can say about Homo sapiens, with such history pedigree. The English were first who built concentration camps, for Boers. In India the British destroyed the 90 million population.

Only in 1661-1774 years about one million slaves were imported from Africa in the United States, and more than nine million Blacks died on the way. Income of slave traders from this operation in the prices of the mid-XVIII century was not less than 2 bln. doll. An astronomical figure for that time. Only in the 1863 Proclamation of Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery. But only formally. Remember Mayakovsky: "To Whites – dollars, to Blacks - no ..." The last racist laws abolished in the United States only in 1965. But how to delete from memory photos of the beginning of the twentieth century, where happy Yankees over the corpses of slain Blacks? President Thomas Jefferson said that the slavery, in general, is a bad thing, however, it strongly contributed to the overall progress of the United States. Read - white progress. This Jefferson phrase is captured on the wall in the museum of slavery in Liverpool.

American wars begin with the first attack on the Injuns in 1622 at Jamestown, then the war with the Injuns-algokins in New England in the 1635-1636 followed, then the war in 1675-1676, which ended with destruction of nearly half of the cities in Massachusetts. Other wars and skirmishes with the Injuns continued until 1900. Over the entire period of the outcome of the Europeans from the Old World the English with the Spanish had destroyed 120 million Injuns (I may prove this number with equation of Ferhulst), which is allows you to talk about real genocide, greatly exceeding the mass murder of Jews by Hitler. Add to that 100,000 Injuns sterilized.
Here are the known reference: other examples of US aggression.

1833 y. – USA invasion of Argentina, there was an uprising in Argentina that time.
1835 - Mexico. US sought to capture Mexico territory used its unstable political situation. Having started from the early 20-ies. the colonization of Texas, in 1835, US inspired the revolt of Texas settlers, who soon declared the secession of Texas from Mexico and declared its "independence."
1835 - US invasion of Peru, there were strong agitation of the people in Peru that time.
1836 - another invasion of Peru.
1840 - American invasion in Fiji, several villages were destroyed.
1843 - US invasion of China
1844 - another invasion of China, the suppression of the anti-imperialist uprising
1846 - aggression against the New Granada (Colombia)
1849 - US Navy were close to Smyrna, to force the Austrian authorities to release an arrested American.
1849 - Shelling Indochina.
1851 - American troops landed on the island of Johanna, to punish the local authorities for the arrest of the captain of the American ship.
1852 - US invasion of Argentina during popular unrests.
1853-1856 - English-American invasion of China, where US and England were knocked out by the military confrontations currently favorable terms of trade.
1853 - invasion of Argentina and Nicaragua during the popular unrests.

1853 - American warship came to Japan to force it to open its ports to international trade.
1854 - Americans had destroyed the Nicaraguan town of San Juan del Norte (Greytown), so they took their revenge for insulting of Americans.
1854 - United States made an attempt to seize the Hawaiian Islands, captured Tiger Island near Isthmus of Panama.
1855 - American squads led William Walker invaded Nicaragua. In 1856 with the support of US government, he proclaimed himself president of Nicaragua. American adventurer tried to connect Central America to the United States and turn it into a base for US slave-owning planters. However, the combined armies of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras ousted Walker of Nicaragua. He was later captured and shot in Honduras.
1855 - American invasion of Fiji and Uruguay.
1856 - The invasion of Panama.
1857 - Two invasions of Nicaragua.
1858 - Intervention in Fiji, punitive operation was carried for killing of two Americans.
1858 - Invasion of Uruguay.
1859 - Attack on the Japanese fort of Taku.
1859 - The invasion of Angola during the civil unrests.
1860 - The invasion of Panama.
Attention! 1862 - the expulsion of all Jews from Tennessee with confiscation of property.
1863 - Punitive expedition to Shimonoseki (Japan), where "anybody insulted the American flag".

1864 - military expedition to Japan to beat from Japanese favorable conditions in trade.
1865 - Paraguay. Uruguay in the unlimited military assistance the US, Britain, France, etc. invaded of Paraguay and destroyed 85% of the population of this rich in that time country.
1865 - introduction of American troops in Panama during the coup.
1866 - unprovoked attack on Mexico
1866 - a punitive expedition to China for the attack on the American consul.
1867 - a punitive expedition to China for the murder of several American sailors.
1867 - the attack on Midway Island.
1868 - multiple invasion of Japan during the Japanese civil war.
1868 - invasion of Uruguay and Colombia.
1874 - the invasion of China and Hawaii.
1876 - the invasion of Mexico.
1878 - the attack on the Islands of Samoa.
1882 - the invasion of Egypt.
1888 - an attack on Korea.
1889 - a punitive expedition to Hawaii.
1890 - introduction of US troops in Haiti.
1890 - Argentina. Deployment of troops "to protect the interests of Buenos Aires."
1891 - Chile. Clashes US troops with insurgents.
1891 - Haiti. The suppression of the uprising of black workers on the island of Navassa, which, according to US statements belonged to the US.

1893 - introduction of troops to Hawaii, the invasion of China.
1894 - Nicaragua. Within a month, the troops occupying Bluefields.
1894 - 1896 - the invasion of Korea.
1894 - 1895 - China. US troops are involved in the Sino-Japanese War.
1895 - Panama. US troops invaded of the Colombian province.
1896 - Nicaragua. US troops invaded of Corinto.
1898 - US troops invaded of the port of San Juan del Sur in Nicaragua.
1898 - Hawaii. Capturing of islands by US troops.
1899 - 1901 - Philippine-American War
1899 - Nicaragua. US troops invaded the port Bluefields.
1901 - the deployment of troops to Colombia.
1902 - the invasion of Panama.
1903 - United States sent warships to the Panama Isthmian in order to isolate the Colombian army. November 3 was proclaimed political independence of the Republic of Panama. In the same month, Panama, were virtually completely dependent on the United States, was forced to sign a treaty with the United States, according to which the territory for construction of the canal "in perpetuity" was provided in the use of the United States.
1903 - the invasion of Honduras, the Dominican Republic and Syria.
1904 - sending troops to Korea, Morocco and the Dominican Republic.

1905 - US troops intervene in a revolution in Honduras.
1905 - the invasion of Mexico (dictator Porfirio D;az helped to suppress the rebellion).
1905 - sending troops to Korea.
1906 - the invasion of the Philippines, the suppression of the liberation movement.
1906 - 1909 - American troops are in Cuba during the elections.
1907 - American troops enforced protectorate of "dollar diplomacy" in Nicaragua.
1907 - US troops intervened in a revolution in the Dominican Republic
1908 - American troops are in Panama during the elections.
1910 - attempts to chop off anything in Mexico.
1910 - Nicaragua. US troops invaded the port of Corinto and Bluefields. The United States sent military forces in Nicaragua and organized anti-government conspiracy (1909), in which Celaya was forced to flee the country. In 1910 the junta was formed from the pro-American generals: X. Estrada, E. Chamorro and the employee of American mining company A. Diaz. In the same year Estrada became president, but the following year he was replaced by A. Diaz, supported by US troops.
1911 - Americans landed in Honduras, to support the uprising under the leadership of former President Manuel Bonnily against the legitimately elected President Miguel Davila.
1911 - the suppression of anti-US rebellion in the Philippines.
1911 - introduction of troops in China.
1912 - American troops are in Havana (Cuba).

1912 - American troops are in Panama during the elections.
1912 - the invasion of US troops in Honduras.
1912 - 1933 - occupation of Nicaragua, constant struggle with the guerrillas. Nicaragua has become a colony of the monopoly "United Fruit Company" al. US companies. In 1914, Washington signed an agreement by which the United States had the right to build an inter-oceanic canal in the territory of Nicaragua. In 1917 E. Chamorro became president, the US concluded with him several new agreements which led to even greater enslavement of the country.
1914 - US troops are in the Dominican Republic, the battle with the rebels of the Santa Domingo.
1914 - 1918 - a series of incursions into Mexico.
1914 - 1934 - Haiti. After numerous uprisings America introduced its troops, the occupation continued for 19 years.
1916 - 1924 - 8-year-old occupation of the Dominican Republic.
1917 - 1933 - the military occupation of Cuba, economic protectorate.
1918 - 1922 - intervention in Russia. The Americans were killing civilians, robbing the country, there are many facts, photos in archives.

Lenin said that tsarist Russia was the gendarme of Europe. But those who know the history of Russia, understand that Russia was a pale shadow of the United States in terms of aggression.

1918 - 1920 - Panama. The deployment of troops to quell the unrest after the elections.
1919 - Costa Rica. The revolt against the regime of President Tinoco. Under US pressure Tinoco resigned as president, but the unrest in the country have not ceased. The landing of US troops to "protect American interests". Elections of the President D. Garcia. “Democratic” rule had restored in the country.

1919 - American troops are fighting on the side of Italy against Serbs in Dolmatov.
1919 - American troops are in Honduras during the elections.
1920 - Guatemala. 2-week US intervention.
1921 - American supported for the “rebels”, who fought for the overthrow of Guatemalan President Carlos Herrera for the benefit of the US United Fruit Company.
1922 - intervention in Turkey.
1922 - 1927 - American troops are in China during the popular uprising.
1924 - 1925 - Honduras. Troops invaded of the country during the elections.
1925 - Panama. US forces dispersed a general strike.
1926 - Nicaragua. Invasion.
1927 - 1934 – US troops are posted over whole China.
1932 – US invasion of El Salvador from the sea. There was an uprising in Salvador that time.
1937 - single military clash with Japan.
1937 - Nicaragua. With US troops support Somoza comes to power, displacing the legitimate government of Hamid Sacasa. Somoza became the dictator, his family ruled the country following 40 years.
1939 - introduction of US troops in China.

1945 - The US shed two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, August 6 and 9, about 200 000 (according to other sources, 0.5 million) were killed. People, mostly women and children. There is a widespread opinion that these bombs were dropped in order to save American lives. In fact these bombs were dropped in order to intimidate the Soviet Union. After the bombing discouragement of Japanese soldiers was not observed, the Soviet troops were forced to destroy the Kwantung Army in Manchuria, North Korea, Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. And only on the 2nd of September Derevianko and MacArthur received from the Japanese instrument of surrender. After the occupation of Japan by American troops 10 million people died from hunger. Moreover, as usual, the Americans fully demonstrated their civilization: a tradition was wearing them souvenirs made from bones and other body parts of dead Japanese.
And after that!! – today 30% of Japanese think that no US, but USSR shed atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki!

1948 - 1953 - military operations in the Philippines. The decisive part of Yankees in punitive actions against the Filipino people. The death of many thousands of Filipinos.

In 1948, the Soviet Union withdrew its troops from North Korea. Kim Il Sung, the head of Korean partisans who fought against the Japanese occupiers, became the head of the administration of this part of the peninsula. The Americans didn’t withdraw their troops from South Korea, did not recognize local people's power and created its own military administration. They dispersed the guerrilla units of the Koreans who fought against the Japanese and  substantially replaced the Japanese occupation for the US occupation. Syngman Rhee formally became the head of South Korea. South Korean army intensively trained by specialists from the Pentagon. Just before the outbreak of hostilities, June 18, 1950, George Dulles inspected the troops of Syngman Rhee.
June 23 Syngman Rhee troops launched a massive artillery preparation. June 25, Sunday, at four o'clock in the morning  pro-American forces of South Korea attacked North Korea across whole the contact line of the 38th parallel. Several divisions and separate military parts in different areas wedged in North Korea for two and more kilometers. But within hours the advancing group of troops of Syngman Rhee were stopped and defeated.

Kim Il Sung decided to counter-attack and the Korean People's Army that evening moved to the south. The United States and other civilized countries still believe that Kim Il Sung, attacked the evening of 25 June at the peaceful South Korea, began the war. One doesn’t like to remember the tragic walk four divisions of Syngman Rhee on North Korea, it is not fashionable.
June 26 Korean People's Army was under the walls of Seoul, Syngman Rhee fled the country. Under the pretext of reflection North Korean “aggression” Yankees began the war in Korea. The United States dropped an average of 5 tons of bombs and shells per one victim Korean and one 120 kilograms of ammunition per hectare area (in World War II, this figure does not exceed 1 tonne per person and 30 kilograms per hectare).

Americans ever committed mass executions and executions in the occupied territories of Korean. November 7 US troops shot 500 local residents on the mountain Sudo in the province of Hvanhe and 600 residents in the county Pekson. In the city of Sariwon Yankees drove 950 people to the mountain Marasan cave and shot all of them with machine guns. In the Pyongyang they threw into concentration camps 4000 residents, half of whom were executed. US soldiers threw bodies of executed into wells and water reservoir. October 18, Americans drove 900 inhabitants of Sinchhonskogo county in the shelter, doused with gasoline and burned alive. 300 Korean women and 100 children were among the burned. The city of Yonan, US troops buried alive in the ground more than 1,000 people, several dozen children. The mine Ynnyul , more than 2000 people were dumped into the pit and covered with ore. The city of Ehchzhu, US Marines drove 180 local residents on a small ship, dragged into the sea away from the coast and sank with the ship.
The county Chzheren, hawkers of democracy quartered boy who helped the guerrillas. In the village Sanamli Yankees scored 10-cm nail in the nose of seventeen guy, in the same village they ripped stomach of a pregnant Korean women and cut 300 men of straw. The Senri, Yankees ripped the stomach of a pregnant woman, showing off that they destroy reds to the root. The parish Onchhon, Yankees hammered a stake through the sexual organ of arrested Korean girl, in another parish - they hot genitals of another girl with a hot iron and killed her. Just a few months of American occupation more than a million civilians were executed. Even Hitler could not organize the genocide in the occupied territories on such a scale.

August 16, 1950, five units of B-29, struck in the area near the front, there were a lot of towns and villages in the area. Ocean of fire raging as a result application of hundreds of tons of napalm. August 26, it appears in archival sources briefly: "Burnt 11 villages." Pilots frequently bombed large population centers by radar data or reset masses of napalm on secondary targets when they could not achieve the main objectives. July 31, 1950, in a major raid on the industrial center of Hungnam 500 tons of bombs were dropped on the radar data through the clouds, flames rose up into the air by 50-100 meters. August 12, Air Force dropped 625 tons of bombs over North Korea, it would require 250 aircraft B-17 in the Second World War. By late August B-29 dropped on North Korea 800 tons of bombs a day. 5 Most of them consisted of napalm. From June to the end of October 1950 B-29 dropped more than 3 million gallons of napalm. Air Force were delighted with the new weapon. To evaluate these weapons, we recall that the Nazis were forced to negotiate with Moscow that mustard gas, phosgene, sarin, soman will not be used - because of the threat of application of napalm.

In October 1950 the US military - under the auspices of the UN! - crossed the 38th parallel and invaded the territory of North Korea. 10.17.1950 commander of US forces in Korea Harrison issued an order, and one could read there the following: "Destroy all the red bandits to free North Korea from the red monsters. Hunt them, kill all of them, civil servants and members of their families. Kill all sympathizing  them." Over the 52 days of occupation by UN troops Sinchon County was destroyed about a quarter of its population. Americans killed more than 35,380 people, of whom about 16 200 children, the elderly and women. After the liberation of Chinese and Korean forces in Pyongyang  2,000 killed prisoners were found in city prison, they were not evacuated, but simply shot. In the vicinity of Pyongyang about 15 000 people were found that were killed during the occupation of the city by the Americans. Picture was similar in other cities and districts of North Korea.

Since November 1950, General Douglas MacArthur ordered to create a desert between the front and the Chinese border, destroying from the air every "building, factory, city, village" in an area of thousands of square kilometers of the North Korean territory. This destruction began on the border of Manchuria and continued to the south.
08.11.1950 B-29 dropped 550 tons of incendiary bombs on Sinyudzhu, "erasing (her) from the map." A week Hoeriong was "burnt down" by napalm.
By 25 November "a large part of North Korea between the Yalu River and to south up to enemy positions was more or less burned", soon the area was "desert of scorched earth." This was before the decisive Sino-Korean offensive that cleared Northern Korea from United Nations forces. When it began, the US Air Force on the 14-15th of December dealt a blow to Pyongyang for seven hundred ;-ton bombs, napalm dropped from Mustang fighters, including 175 tons of bombs of slow blowing, which landed with a thud and then blew up when people who were trying to pull out the dead from the napalm fire.
At the beginning of January General Matthew Ridgway again ordered the air force to hit the capital, Pyongyang, "with the aim to burn the city to the ground with incendiary bombs" (this was happened in two blows - 3 and 5 January). When the Americans retreated to the 38th parallel, they continued the tactics of scorched earth and burnt Yudzhongbu, Wonju and other small towns in the south (National Archives, RG338, KMAG file, box 5418, KMAG journal, entries for 6, 16, 20 and 26 August 1950).
In January 1951 US General Ridzhveyya said in his order: "Shoot any civilian suspected that it is red - not taking him prisoner. The Chinese and Koreans apparently have just a little different from the beasts. " Before the end of the war as a means of pressure on the Korean side of the US Air Force destroyed the dams on the rivers Kusongan, Toksagan and Pudzhongan. As a result, large areas were flooded farmland, causing famine among the civilian population of North Korea.

In 1954 the United States prevented the implementation of key provisions of the Geneva Agreements on Vietnam, stated the international recognition of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Vietnam, prevented consultations between North and South, ripped holding planned for 1956 general elections and the subsequent unification of the country. South Vietnam was included in the "scope of protection" of established by the United States in the autumn of 1954 the aggressive SEATO bloc.
Since January 1955 the United States, in violation of the Geneva agreements, forbidding entry to Vietnam of foreign military personnel and the importation of arms, began to provide direct military aid to the Saigon regime, to sent to South Vietnam military advisers and specialists, to organize and equip the Saigon army with modern weapons, to build military bases on South Vietnam.

In 1961 for the management of military actions against the South Vietnamese patriots American military headquarters headed by General Harkins was established in Saigon, and in 1962 - the military command (Military Aid Command). US military personnel began to participate directly in combat operations. By the middle of 1964 there were about 25 thousand US troops in South Vietnam. However, one couldn’t break the resistance of the Army of Liberation of South Vietnam, established in 1961. Anti-government demonstrations of workers, students and intellectuals did not stop in the cities of South Vietnam. By the fall of 1964 the South Vietnamese patriots led by the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam (established in December 1960) and with the support of the overwhelming majority of the population freed about 3/4 of the country.

In July 1964 the United States sent in the Beibu Gulf (Gulf of Tonkin) naval ships of the 7th Fleet to patrol the coast of North Vietnam. They intruded into the territorial waters of Vietnam. In early August 1964 the US Navy and Air Force
without declaring war bombed and fired at a number of military facilities projects and settlements on the coast of North Vietnam.
07.02.1965 jets based on aircraft carriers of the 7th Fleet US bombed and shelled Dong Hoi city and other settlements in the area of North Vietnam in the region of 17th parallel, and from April the United States had begun to systematically bombed and shelled the southern regions of Vietnam.
03.08.1965 first part of the US Marine Corps landed in South Vietnam (in the district of Danang), and in April Command of the US Army in Vietnam, led by the General Westmoreland, was created.
09.07.1965 American Air Force began a systematic bombardment of the southern regions of Vietnam, located between the 17th and 19th parallels, and in late August launched a bombardment of irrigation facilities.

USA turned Vietnam into a proving ground for testing and improvement of hundreds of weapons and military equipment. United States, using the war in Vietnam, gave (to 1969) fighting experience more than 2 million people, Including most of the flight personnel and almost all personnel of the United States Pacific Fleet. The Yankees had put in practice the use of weapons of mass destruction (napalm, phosphorous bombs, toxic gases and toxic substances, defoliants containing dioxin and herbicides); they destroyed crops, vegetation and forests in the liberated areas, applyingthe tactics of "scorched earth".
In the years 1961-1971 defoliants were sprayed over at least 16% of the territory of Vietnam, from 2.1 to 4.8 million people fell under of action of it. There are nearly a million people suffering from diseases associated with defoliants in  the official list of the Ministry of Health in Vietnam, many of them were born after the war. During the war the Yankees commonly performed medical experiments on human beings.

By the end of 1966 the number of American expeditionary force has doubled and amounted to 380 thousand people. The American command began preparations for the second "strategic counteroffensive" in the dry season of 1966-67. By this time, the United States concentrated in South Vietnam 7th Air Army, and in Thailand - a significant part of the 13th Air Army and the 3rd Division of the Strategic Air Command (B-52 planes). 3 drum carrier were constantly along the coast of Vietnam. In this area it had focused around 4,000 combat and support and transport aircraft and helicopters of the United States.
In 1967 the US Air Force sharply intensified the bombing of North Vietnam - dams and other irrigation facilities, hoping to cause flooding in the valley of Red River and flood the rice fields, and in the dry season to leave crops without water.

By the beginning of the dry season of 1967-68, when the Americans planned a large military operations in South Vietnam, there were 475 thousand US troops, 40 ths. - on ships of the 7th Fleet off the coast of Vietnam . USA focused in South Vietnam 6 army divisions (1st, 4th, 9th and 25th Infantry, 1st airmobile and 101st Airborne), 2 Marine Division (1st and 3rd) and 4 separate brigades (11th, 196-I and 199-I light infantry and the 173rd Airborne). In addition, there were 11 divisions of Saigon troops, two divisions and one brigade of mercenaries of South Korean, Australian, New Zealand, Thai and Filipino troops. The total number of troops was at the end of 1967 about 1.3 million. In 1968-1969 every month more than 2 million tons of various military goods were thrown from USA to the theatre of war. Since the beginning of the war until the end of 1968 the US Air Force made more 900 thousand sorties in the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. They dropped on the locations of the Forces of liberation of South Vietnam and Laos approximately 2.3 million tons of bombs. During the same time the US aggressor forces conducted over 500 search and punitive operations by forces from the battalion to several brigades ...
.. But Hera spread her hands - since the new generation of fighters "MiG" and multiple rocket launchers, reliable "Kalashnikov", heroism and self-sacrifice of Vietnamese… Boy from the Soviet  village, Peter Grusin pussy aggressor in the tail and mane. The US Army lost 8612 aircraft and helicopters, about 150 ships ...  Vietnam swung gave America under the ass.
For this reason all respectable democracies of the whole world hate the Soviet Union.

In the photo of those years American proudly shows its prey - a part of corpses Vietnamese. Newsreels: Marine kicks in the belly of lying on the ground a Vietnamese prisoner. Widely known was the phrase of one of the American officers: "In order to save the village, it is necessary to burn down." In 1968, in the village of My Lai a massacre of civilians was committed by American soldiers. Crime gained fame in 1969. It was destroyed, according to various estimates, more than 500 civilians. Many of the victims before killing were subjected to tortures by American soldiers, and women were gang-raped. Only one person out of all soldiers was found guilty by a US court, and in 3.5 years was released.

Site WikiLeaks has published a video in which the US Air Force helicopter shelling of civilians in Baghdad. The incident occurred in July 2007, as a result of the shelling 12 people were killed, including two journalists. Shooting was conducted cameras mounted on US Apache helicopters. On the record shows how the pilots watching a group of about eight people on the streets of Baghdad, where the pilots took over the militants. One of the pilots says that they are armed with machine guns and grenade launchers. Meanwhile, on the frame Reuters photographer with a camera and the driver of the same agency that talking on a cell phone can be seen All the people are calm. However, one of the helicopters opens fire. At the same time pilots comment on their actions cynical remarks."Ha-ha-ha, I shot them," - shouted by an American pilot. The other replies: "Oh, yeah, look at the dead bastards." After that, the helicopters also fired at a minibus that drove to pick up the wounded. In the van, as it turned out, there were two children who were seriously injured. However, the American crew blamed the Iraqis themselves. "Well, it's their fault that they attract children to fight," - says one of the crew members. "Exactly," - says the other.

The year 2008 has come and the world realized that bastion of humanism and democracy is the only currency speculator, who at home produces only 20% of property product, that “bastion” lives for others, which is in debt, as in silks at 14 trillion dollars, dollar itself is provided by 4 cents. In the fall of 2011, the Americans protesters filled the streets and squares of the country. After the collapse of the Soviet Union labor and capital faced nose to nose.

***
Up to now someone thinks that the first concentration camps were set up by the Bolsheviks. But the British set up concentration camps much sooner. In the 20th century the concentration camp in Solovki and other places were set up by the White Guards, on the 3.2.1919 by local government of Miller – Chaikovskii with support of western democracies. Prisoners were subjected to terrible torture. After the Bolsheviks came to Solovki tortures ceased. But even before the British concentration camps were set up by the Americans.
Source: Chicago Historical Society (ICHi-01800) The Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago © 2005 Chicago Historical Society. The Encyclopedia of Chicago © 2004 The Newberry Library.

Camp of Freedom in America under the name of Andersonville. About 194 thousand northerners passed through it in a relatively short period of time, about 30 thousand of them died. In Andersonville prisoners were tortured even without the aim to figure out any military or other information useful to the authorities of the camp, but from the simple sadism. In Federation camp "Douglas" prisoners were often deprived of clothes and they had to carry bags with slits for the arms and head. At the most part prisoners had no even the underwear. Blankets were removed, so during the winter cold more weak and injured people died from the cold. Accounting of prisoners in the camp "Douglas" from the very beginning was not conducted practically and it is believed that many Confederates, who "disappeared", in fact, were killed in the camp and were buried no one knows where, since the graves were also not taken into account. Some of the dead prisoners were buried in the swampy ground.

Camp of Freedom "Rock Island”. The first prisoners (over 5,000 people) arrived at Camp 3 December 1863. Many of them were sick with smallpox, and since there was no quarantine zones and insulators in the camp, the infection spread rapidly. By January of 1864 325 people died and another 635 were seriously ill, and even in a couple of months number of patients had tripled. Though soon the Yankees had built several medical facilities. By May 12, 1865 only 2164 prisoners remained in the camp, and all this time 12 215 people had passed through the camp, 1945 people of whom died (according to other sources not less than 2131 people), 45 escaped and 3729 were exchanged. The remaining prisoners were released in June, after the surrender of CSA. Prisoners who passed through the northern or south camps were like died.

Then, following the example of blood brothers, concentration camps were created for Lord Kitchener Boer families in South Africa during the Boer War of 1899-1902.
However, the very first concentration camps were established much earlier. In the 17-18 centuries, Americans have created a reservation for the Injuns. Is it fascism? Of course.

The same features of American society we can see at the end of XX century.
Los Angeles riot in April-May 1992 followed after police beating black Rodney King and after the acquittal of police in court. 9 thousand police officers, 10 th. National Guard troops, 3,300 employees of the Army and Marine Corps, 1000, the FBI, armored vehicles, combat and police helicopters and police had been involved. Shoot to kill was opened, more than 11 thousand people were arrested. In addition to the authorities privileged residents of the city, the Koreans, the owners of shops shot rebels on their own initiative. The revolt was suppressed in a matter of hours, sweep lasted from the 1st to May 6th. About 500 people from among the detainees still serving their sentences in prison - they got from 25 years to life imprisonment. According to American data 53 rebels were killed 53, according to other data more than 100 rebels were killed only from the bullets of police and soldiers, In total - more than 200. Claims from the UN and the international community were absent. Officials responsible for the use of force against peaceful demonstrators, were not subject to sanctions.
What are you saying about police in Kiev in February 2014?

We remember serious strikes in the US against the depersonalizing of the conveyor system in the late '60s. We remember one of the best in the world American cinema: "They shoot horses, is not it" "Pursuit," "The generals of sand pits", "O Lord, keep children and animals," etc., etc. We have seen how the US authorities eradicated the movement of the 60s with the help of a hippie, same-sex love, free love and drugs. But back in the 80s, Americans admired paintings of Rockwell Kent,  listened with delight to music by Gershwin, admired the poetry of Shelley, Keats, Whitman, Eliot, Pound, Frost, read all the books of Irving, Garth, Hawthorne, Wolfe, Dreiser, Harper Lee, Faulkner, Steinbeck, Hemingway, Mark Twain, the amazing science fiction books. We remember the Americans protested against the Vietnam War. What’s happened? Terrible was happened. Michael Jackson, Schwarzenegger, Stallone, Seagal, Harry Potter became the idols of the public. States deteriorated in a short period of time.
In new time fascist USA staged disaster in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria.

But in general.
Calculation of the coefficients of mortality for the years of liberal reforms gives more than 30 million extra deaths in Russia. In Ukraine - about 12 million. The same calculation for all the years of Stalin's rule gives only 4-5 million extra deaths (not to be confused with the repressed, which is twice as much). Only in 1937 was shot and placed in a concentration camps about half a million people just according to so-called limits, shipping instructions (shot on the list of 60 thousand, actually - more than 150 ths.). Victims of famine in the Volga region in 1933, in Ukraine, in the Caucasus, in the Urals in 1933 are included in these 4-5 million. Causes of hunger in 1933 are well known: 1) a poor harvest, 2) the actions of the Soviet Union. Namely, in 1925 peasants were given the right to buy and sell land. Then for the year 60% of the land was concentrated in the hands of 6% of farms and poor harvest struck. 1928-1929, when powers started a violent accelerated collectivization (livestock recovered only at the end of 50th) and the dispossession of the middle peasants, contrary to Lenin's Decree on Land, Lenin's speech about middle peasants and decisions of the 15th Congress of Communist party. To this we must add the folding of the NEP (new economy policy with developed market, which, according to Lenin, was calculated for decades).
The United States were ahead of the Soviet Union are ahead in this. During the Great Depression and the "cannibalization" of farmers by banks (see, eg, "The Grapes of Wrath", Steinbeck) claimed the lives of more than 8.5 million lives of North Americans, with only 1930 to 1940th years, about twice as much as Stalin repression.

Extended reference, from the book "The cure for death"

One may say: oh, it’s propaganda!!! Awful, horror!!!
Of course, it’s propaganda. But it’s truth! 


MAJORITY OF RUSSIA POPULATION LIKES STALIN – WHAT ARE REASONS?
Putin and Medvedev lie again

Rotting of system is not an analysis already, such a smell - though one can hang an ax. One oligarch Sergei Polonsky is Wonder of the World. "Who does not have a billion dollars, may go to an ass", - Polonsky sent citizens of Russia at the beginning of last year on exhibition in Cannes. In general, he proposed to clean Moscow of the paupers. Opposite case was happened: Polonsky himself was cleaned up and found himself in such ass, that he had to deal with a mass of those who ever haven’t even hundreds of thousands of dollars. So to say relatively ass...

Prime Minister Putin, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos-2009 about the crisis of 2008, said, finally, what the leftist press never tired of talking from the mid-90s: "The system of global economic growth gave a serious crash, in which one center is virtually unlimited, uncontrolled printing money and consume goods, and the other manufactures inexpensive goods and saves money issued by other states."
Since then, the dollar has been steadily growing in Russia, inflating of dollar habitually engaged by the Central Bank RF, subordinated Medvedev-Putin. Despite the apparent dollar orientation of the Kremlin, Medvedev went to represent Russia in Davos, not Putin.

Dismissed by Putin former minister Kudrin told reporters at forum that he could still track down two main points of view at the forum and, therefore, the two main directions of discussion. The first point of view – that the world is on the verge of recovery. The second - the crisis will escalate. Comparing the forum with forum last year, Kudrin said that "in a global context it was easier, all sighed, and there was even some excessive euphoria"."
That is, despite the acute Kudrin’ observation, everybody sighed, obviously relieved, including those who predicted worsening of the crisis.

Of course, the Russia side could not resist to play along with U.S.
Even schoolchildren are aware that the euro zone was created in order to be able to individual European countries to confront the American superpower in economic competition. But Gref, the lamp of the mind, said that "there are regions whose future is not clear to me, the future of the eurozone is not clear to me." The head of Russia's largest bank is pessimistic about the future of the euro zone in the long term, considering it an artificial union in terms of economic policy. Kudrin said that the output of individual countries of the euro area is possible in the foreseeable future.
Apparently, overtired from thinking about the economy, Gref said during a business breakfast Saving Bank of RF said: "We have talked so much about the global crisis, we are tired ..."

Before the opening of the forum WEF published a report "Scenarios for the Russian Federation", which listed the key factors that will influence the long-term economic development of the Russian Federation until 2030. Expert Group, which included Oleg Tsyvinski of Yale University, ex-Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin and Sergei Guriev of the New Economic School, presented these three scenarios for Russia's future for years to come, "rebalancing regions", "shaky stability" and "to the other side of prosperity".
The first scenario assumes a regional differentiation of the Russian Federation. That is rich regions will become richer and the poor - poorer.
The second predicts a sharp decline in oil prices (up to $ 60 per barrel). According to Kudrin, who presented this scenario, with a sharp reduction in budget revenues Russian government does not choose to invest in infrastructure and development, but in social stability: the payment of salaries, pensions and other social obligations. In such circumstances, according to the ex-minister of finance, the economy will be very difficult to grow.
In a third scenario, oil prices will remain high, but the government is not decided to institutional reforms. In this scenario, the changes will be from "bottom" – from grown riches from the middle class. It has no enough money in order to feel happy, so it needs to be more involved in social and political life, said speaker Sergei Guriev.
How this will happen is unknown, experts admit.
The expert is also unknown, we would add, that the middle class in Russia is absent. Generally.

"Rebalancing regions" suggests with that the gradual decline in energy prices initiative of economic and political changes comes from unexpected sources, and institutional reforms are implemented at the level of the Federation subjects against congestive processes in the central institutions of power.
"Shaky stability" - sudden sharp and prolonged drop in oil prices in the absence of institutional reform forces the government to strengthen controls over the economy. Russia has maintained the illusion of economic stability and carried forward painful reforms.
"Beyond the wealth" - the high price of oil and gas are stored, which leads to "the satisfied inaction concerning to institutional reforms." Under this scenario, a large part of Russian society have higher incomes, but social unrest is growing - due to the inefficiency of state services and the growing of bureaucracy.
Medvedev disagreed with pessimistic conclusions of the experts.

"For Russia, this year was very challenging in terms of the investment climate in the part of political events. Elections are held, but the reform agenda has not been fully defined. Acute problems while suspended or unsolved - the investment climate, institutions, corruption, government work, law enforcement, judicial, administrative work, democratization " - Kudrin told reporters on the sidelines of the WEF.
Medvedev did not agree with the pessimistic assessment Kudrin 2012.

Having breakfast in Davos with Saving bank of RF, Anatoly Chubais, with his incredible logic noted: "... the quality and professionalism of the people who in our country today is responsible for the economy, are surprisingly high, I can not name a single layman ... But looking at the real economic situation, one cann’t say so. We are inefficient and uncompetitive. One direction I would call key. Corruption, infinitely weak protection of private property, dependence of the judiciary. This is the root of our problems. None of them is economic. The root of our economic problems - beyond the economy. The solution - outside the economy."
Why corruption was out of the economy - God knows, why ineffective - and suddenly the professionals ...
American investor and billionaire George Soros has called Russia a "sinking economy". “Forbes” writes it.
"It's sinking economy, led by Putin in the wrong direction," - he said at an economic forum in Davos. According to him, the best thing one can do - do not invest in Russia.

Notwithstanding Soros, Medvedev had concealed from the world oligarchy public that he and Putin has their own, a third, distinct from the detected Kudrin, the secret point of view that they are reported only for the citizens of Russia, only for residents, exclusively: Russian Federation has given a light to all developed countries: until they get out of its crisis, Russia has managed to not only get out of the crisis and to achieve, well, at least, the state of the pre-crisis 2007. Russia for 2012 and even 2011, and even for 2010 has dramatically improved its economy. That is bound to affect all areas of Russian society.

Six weeks before the Forum in Davos Prime Minister Medvedev on REN TV in his long interview five channels, including Marianna Maximovskaya,  explained in detail that bullshit is not nonsense, but in fact - very, very, very again. As preskriptsii yet not old prime minister said that first in several years one can  watch the country's population growth. He said that about: "It's there all sorts can chat, they say, the country is dying out, but among the experts, among experts, gentlemen ... you know. And this happiness - thanks to the measures taken in the last six or seven years. "
Apparently, Mr Medvedev did not know that the same joyful fact that "at last", "first" – one reports to public regularly for many years, as a rule, before the next elections, or prime ministers or presidents speeches in public.
One can only guess as experts had managed instead of mortality and fertility to talk about population growth, which could be observed due to the unprecedented increase in fertility, or because of the invasion of armada of migrants. Finally, the population could increase by aliens! In black suits. See at the end of a shift at the gates of the bushing of the plant - men in black are coming. They divorced in perestroika. Our aliens. Color of nation. Successive class.

However, the main uncertainty lies in the fact that nothing has changed around - payment for utility services jumping up and jumping, universities generate fake experts, medicines, food, are falsified or fabricated, wages in the factories does not increase, the number of drug addicts and HIV is growing and growing ...
What measures were taken to stop all it, to overcome the demographic crisis, if nothing has changed around? What had Medvedev in mind? Mystery. Secret. In a special folder. The measures we will return later.
So far, compare: mortality was:
In 1906-1910. - 29.6 (in the "enlightened" countries - 15.6, in "marginalized" countries - 23.8)
By 1917, the mortality rate in Russia was 32.5 per thousand (by the way, the Perm region - in the lead with a noticeable margin).
In the early 20's, despite the famine of 1921-1922. - 21 ppm.
In 1940, under Stalin - 18.0 (References of 1987; from Zemskov’ data from 2000 year references - 21.65)
In 1960, with a bad (according to Kurginyan) Khrushchev - 7.1
In 1970, with a good (according to Kurginyan) Brezhnev - 8.2
In 1985, with Gorbachev - 10.6
In 1993, the mortality rate was under Yeltsin in Russia exceeded the birth rate. By extrapolation calculations of Yulii Shchipakin in 1994, the number of "excess" deaths (compared to the pre-perestroika period) amounted to RF 1 million people a year, a similar number was in 1997, published by the State Statistics Committee.
In 2000, according to Perm - 24.7
In 2007, under Putin to Perm - around 25.0 according to my calculations, done in conjunction with the staff of the registrar of the Permian (calculations repeatedly published in the media.)

Infant mortality (under one year) in Russia in 1901 amounted to 40.5%, in 1910 - 38%, which is 1.5-3 times higher than in other countries (eg in Norway). Starting from 1920 in Russia infant mortality had reduced. And this is really "due to measures" - of the Bolsheviks, in contrast to the tsarist government they began to take an example from the developed countries.
Curtailment of the NEP (New economy policy), the beginning of industrialization by the expense of the countryside, accelerated collectivization and dispossession, marching against the Decree on Land and Lenin's speech about the middle peasant, the permit in 1927 the peasants to buy and sell the land (which led to a concentration of 60% of the land in the hands of 6% of households and thereby caused crop failure) led to an increase in the infant mortality rate (up to the level of the first decade of the XX century).
[Accordingly, the number of peasant uprisings in 1900 - 1917: Year Number: 1900 - 49; 1901 - 50; 1902 - 340; 1903 - 141; 1904 - 91; 1905 - 3228; 1906 - 2600; 1907 - 1337; 1908 -931; 1909 - 933; 1910 - 1030; 1911 - 613; 1912 - 300; 1913 - 135; 1914-1915-1916-1917 - 5782. Total for 1900-1917: 17560. Reference: "GPU has fixed the period January 1928 to December 1929 over 13000 riots and mass actions in the villages."]

The peak height of infant mortality in Russia was in 1933 (295.1 per 1,000). Only by the end of the 30s, the infant mortality rate began to decline slowly, but remained a half to two times higher than in developed European countries.
The new principal reduction of infant mortality in Russia occurred at the end of the Second World War due to a number of factors. Basically - it is the introduction into clinical practice of antibiotics and sulfonamides, which led to a reduction in infant mortality from respiratory diseases, from majority of infectious diseases. In 1946, the infant mortality rate in Russia reached 92 in 1000, which is 74% lower than it was in 1940. It could drop much earlier, simply the most advanced in the world party organs slowed the development and introduction of penicillin.
Before perestroika infant mortality in the Soviet Union (particularly in Ukraine) was lower than it was in the world.
By the end of XX century, due to the reforms, the infant mortality rate in Russia was 2-5 times higher than in developed countries (the official 2000: Russia - 15.3 per 1,000 births, Sweden - 3.4 per 1000, 3.0 per 1000 in Iceland ), that is, with an absolute decrease the relative gap was even greater than it was at the beginning of XX century. Such indicators are higher than in Russia in Romania and some former Soviet republics. Actual mortality rates and infant mortality rates in Russia to this day is much higher.

Trusting Medvedev sings with these words: "According to the Health Ministry, life expectancy in Russia in 2011 was 70.3 years. For men - 64.3 years and for women - 76.1. If we compare these figures with those for 2007, we can conclude that a marked increase in life expectancy of Russians - almost 3 years. Four years ago, on average, men lived to 61.4 years, women - to 73.9, and the average life expectancy was 67.5 years. Rosstat data published on the official website of the Health Ministry of the Russian Federation.
According to authorities, over 5 years, the number of deaths, including from external causes (road accidents, alcohol poisoning, suicide), decreased by 16.4% - from 2303.9 thousand in 2006 to 1925.1 thousand in 2011.
This sharp decline in mortality and simultaneous increasing the birth rate has led to the fact that the population decline in Russia decreased by 5.2 times - to 687.1 thousand in 2006 to 131.2 thousand in 2011. In August and September 2011, for the first time since 1991, was recorded natural increase in August by 10.7 thousand people, in September - by 4.2 thousand people. "(Site dp.ru)

Citizens, do you trust the Health Ministry? Come to the hospital in the community, and you'll do choice - to believe or not to believe.
Doctors in hospitals doesn’t treat, doctors in hospitals only register your condition. Medicine became whore pharmacology, illiterate doctors for the hide wages prescribe expensive and useless medicines. And well, if the hospital had not yet been eliminated ... When a business puts a microwave antenna directly on the high-rises - mortality is reduced, of course. Do you trust Rosstat? Especially its data on the average salary in the industry?

Of course, words "dramatic reduction in mortality" can only lead to nervous laughter. We see how business does not index the salary for factory workers for 4-5 years, some plants do not get paid over the years, the WTO began to destroy production, the prices of consumer goods are growing by leaps and bounds, corruption of officials is unheard of - these are "measures"? It is thanks to such measures population in Russia suddenly began to bear much more hard and decided not to die?
But pay attention to the fact that the death rates and birth rates are not calculated for the month and for the year, because they bind to decrease or increase in population over the last month or so - is meaningless. We note another gaffe of Rosstat and Health Ministry: in 1991, the Soviet Union and Russia one had seen steady natural growth.

Two days after Medvedev’ conversation Putin in his “Message” said: "The population decreased by 1 million a year, we were able to reverse the situation, so in 2010 the population is growing. Five months one can see natural increase, birth rate exceeds the death rate." That is not from 2011, like in the words of Medvedev - but since 2010.
What did manage to break? Crowbar to the head? The war into houses only amplified, poor against poor, for place of a head of partnership of flat owners – because of unemployment and low income.  The crisis - ask the developers - is still here, housing prices are going down – small number of people can buy flat. Drugs regularly arrive in the city, to Perm - 10 tons every year. Go to maternity hospitals, it will tell how many babies die. How powers could "break" - when factories are closing. Population “increased in 2010” – but it is nonsense, crisis was still ongoing from 2008.

From whose fingers Putin sucked 200 thousand increase in 2012 if the increase is calculated only of the Census, and it was in 2010? How Putin relates in 2012 to his phony increase the mortality and birth rates, death rates, and if the birth rate, etc. in his Massage in 2012, if it was counted only in 2013? How many migrants in 2011 were reported by citizens of the Russian Federation? How many citizens did leave the country?

But what kind of a magic wand did Putin wage to reduce mortality from 25 per thousand in 2007 to 8 per thousand births? Or, may be, fertility – he raised it to 25 by his own example with Kabaeva, doesn’t he?
It was the opposite! Situation was "broken" in such manner: the laws passed in the Putin years, the monetization of benefits, the new law on pensions, the new Housing Code, led to the extinction of pensioners: from 40% in the Soviet Union and 40% of Russia in the 90 to 28.7% in 2007. And when mass of the pensioners died - the lower turnout in elections removed, because pensioners give the majority of voices.
A mortality rate is still considered excluding the mass graves for the homeless at the ends of the cemeteries and without cemeteries on boundaries of districts. Yes, and other mortality hides - one only North Cemetery in Perm in the last 8 years has grown with a huge collective farm fresh graves, and it’s growth rate is not reduced. Perm North cemetery takes the first place in Europe in square sense. And this is a young cemetery, it is 35, and European cemeteries are old. And if crypts in such cemeteries as Highgate or Pere Lachaise are separated, then in the North cemetery graves are back to back.

But Putin is lying against even the official statistics. In 2011, almost like in 2010, officially birthrate was 12.6 ppm (which, of course, one and a half times too high), and the mortality rate was 13.5 per thousand officially (which is underestimated by almost half). Ie Russia continues even officially extinct. Imagine how "professionals" sit in the Health Ministry and the Federal Statistics Service, if they themselves discharge excess of deaths over births, and immediately tell reporters that in 2010 there was an increase of the population, and even at a million, from 142 million to 143 million!

According to foreign reports, which also do not account for the mass graves for the homeless and the "adjacent" cemeteries, the mortality in 2011 was 16.03 per thousand, and the birth rate - 10.9 ppm (http://www.indexmundi.com/russia/demographics_profile.html). Mortality is bigger than the birth rate in one and half times. See the difference with Putin-Medvedev data!
Global statistics organizations predict that Russia between 2025 and 2050 will lose in the population from 20 to 50 million people
To “break” the situation you need some force to do this. However, the state in Russia is so weak that it can not introduce a progressive scale of taxation. Russian entrepreneurs are not able to undertake. Nanotechnologies in Russia are a bluff. Capital flees from Russia. Illiterate and lazy businessmen send money in tax havens or American or Swiss banks. They are smart enough to even send capital to the developed countries, like the U.S., UK, France. Imagine that Vietnam invests in Germany ... But it's not the point. If it were only a bourgeois or bureaucrats. One could just shoot them or send them to master the North territories. And Russia would be resurrected from the dead.
However, Russia has no one to revive. Education reform has created an illiterate proletariat. There are almost no specialists and high skilled workers in factories. The collapse of the industry, lawlessness bourgeois, health care reform, alcoholism and adulterated food products made proletariat sick and lethargic. Education reform, drugs, AIDS, syphilis, degradation of parents, unemployment at the end of school and university made growing proletariat sick, moronic, indifferent and criminal.

From 1927 to 1930, the Soviet Union was put into operation 323 new enterprises. In 1931 alone, 518 first-born of the domestic industry (one or two a day) commissioned. Modern (at that time) industrial plants with dozens of industries were created - automobile and tractor, heavy engineering factories, power plants, metallurgical and chemical plants. In the mid-1930s Soviet industry (including mining) was second in the world, 8070 new large industrial enterprises were built.
In 1913 tsarist Russia holds a strong fifth in the world in the general level of economic development, by the end of the 1930s the Soviet Union came in second place behind the U.S. in terms of national income, and in many ways ahead of France, Britain, Germany and even USA. Dozens of new cities across the country were built. For the first time in our country mass production of airplanes, trucks, cars, tractors, combines, synthetic rubber, and various types of weapons and military equipment began. Over the years 1929-1941 600-700 large enterprises annually entered in order every year. The growth rate of heavy industry were two to three times higher than those that were in pre-revolutionary Russia in the years 1900-1913.
In modern Russia, “creative class” is only able to destroy, remove, close. Among the victims - thousands of enterprises, villages, small towns. The former Soviet Union as a result of the reforms has lost over 50% of the industry. During the Great Patriotic War the Soviet Union lost 30% of the industry of level of 40's. Raven got the freedom of speech, but lost the cheese. Fool, believed the fox.

The main point. Putin in his “Massage” agreed with account of Shchipakin that population in Russia decreased by 1 million a year.
Yulii Shchipakin, my colleague in ecologist movement in 80-th – 90-th, repeated my calculations in connection with 90-th. At the middle of 80-th I calculated the number of Stalin repressions with the data of different mortalities - 4-5 millions deaths above “usual” level.
(Data of Antonov-Ovseenko - 100 million, of Avtorkhanov - 60 million, of Khrushchev - 20 million are the clear fake; Zemskov’ data taken from the U.S. sources, nearly 1 million - seriously understated.)
If population decreased by 1 million due to reforms of Yeltsin-Putin-Medvedev, it means that from 1991 till 2012 there were about 23 millions deaths in Russia - above Brezhnev’ period level. It is much more than in Stalin period. Yeltsin-Putin-Medvedev killed much more people than Stalin killed. Can foreign lefts see it? Commitment to Stalin is 100% merit of liberals.

Is this good? Of course, it is good: the ordinary Russian citizens understand more than foreign "analysts." Ordinary citizens understand that the ruling class in Russia – is much more worse than Stalinist regime, worse than fascists.
But on the other hand – what does it mean a commitment to Stalin? This means that people will not protest actively. They protest, sitting in front of the TV. They are waiting for the new Stalin. And this situation is favorable to the Kremlin.


PUTIN IS DIRTY MURDERER

The birth rate in 1988 was 16 per thousand in Russia. That is, 16 births per 1,000 population of Russia in the year. In some years in the Soviet Union, it reaches up to 24 ppm. In 2000, in Perm, it was little more than 7 ppm. That is, fertility because of the liberal reforms decreased by 2.5 - 3 times.
In 2005 TV and newspapers began to spread the lie that the birth rate had increased to 10. This is the official data disseminated at briefings of regional administrations. But that could not be! Because the number of workers at the plants continued to decline. In Perm, a spent Putin's second term, died plant named Dzerdjinskii (production of cooling systems for submarines, oil separators for the military fleet, etc.), at first the dismisal was from 18 thousand to 15 thousand people and then plant finished off. In Perm Motor plant Pratt&Wittney dismantled the line of engines for the MIG-31M, the number of labour collective fell from 42 thousand to 7 thousand workers, at "Motovilikha factories" - from 27 thousand in primary production - up to three thousand ( factory produced the S-300 (Favorit, better, than American “Patriot”), "Tornadoes" and so on) even in Chernomyrdin period. Nobody remember about  S-300 in Putin period. When, during Putin's second term Hindu wanted to bue 14 "Twisters" (“Tornadoes”?), it appeared that there was no specialists, skilled workers at plant, all were laid off, all equipment was sold. When plant made first constructions, they did not come to missiles, produced by plant in Tula-city - the anecdote to the whole world. In the dead "Welta" (defense industry, 15 thousand employees), "Morion" (automatic long-distance calls) one settled hucksters clothes and cars. During Putin's second term the Permian defense telephone factory died, began to die military institute NIIPM (solid fuel for rockets), Bucket paint factory died too, three poultry farms were ordered to live long. In other cities - the same picture: the first term of Putin's KAMAZ dismissed 53 thousand people, the whole city.

People in the USSR were not rich, but could work and could buy 100 kg of meat on his salary. On the average. Today - on the strength of 60 kg (workers in the hot shop of "Motovilikha plants" get 18 thousand rubles, 600 doll./month), and such meat, that consists of 50% of water. There is no other meat in Russia shops. In such manner powers kill the people, in such manner Russia is dying.
One doesn’t need to be separated the period of Yeltsin from period of Putin – they are the same, Putin continued the dirty business of Yeltsin. Police and judicial lawlessness became system, criminal have become the norm. Schools are permanently dying, as well, as kindergartens and hospitals. Medicine is the whore of Pharmacology, doctors working for the owners of pharmacies. There is cretinism instead of culture in Russia. Continued “Reforms” of secondary and higher education is continuing, the idiot test system is retarded/ One-third of boys and girls do not attend school. Another third visits school in part. Hospitals choked with baby syphilis.
Education for young people means phone numbers on the pillars: "We make essays, term papers, diplomas and dissertations for you." The old chiefs of shops groan from the armada of nerds, flooded into the factories. Economic growth is an impudent fraud, there is no one to raise. So what's the geek whistles of "stability", who cries, that would be anarchy without Putin, who cries, that Putin has no rivals!
Putin is lying, that industry will produce 400 new ballistic missiles for 10 years. With a shit if the only plant in the country, in Votkinsk-city, producing ballistic missiles, produces 2-4, maximum of 10 missiles per year (in the USSR - 100 per year). A "new" missile "Topol-M" fall short of the outdated "Satan." Putin - is trash.
New buildings in the country, raised by immigrants, with appalling violations of technologies, so high-rise buildings will soon crumble. Dilapidated housing under construction burned, sometimes with the occupants, at best, people are resettled in communal flats with the deterioration of living conditions. All this had place with the connivance of the authorities and law enforcement agencies. All of this is exceptional "merit" of Putin.

There is no one "lift" and fertility - in 2005 (Putin's second term) in the Perm region army of people of AIDS-illness fastened (according to the data of the region administration) on 15 - 25 people per week (in fact, much more), according to official statistic 83% of them are addicts. In Perm, epidemiological threshold for disease AIDS - has long been exceeded. Before the second Putin elections birth rates soared, without waiting for the end of the year (ie, it was impossible to calculate), so new mothers filled with enthusiasm, that exceeded the plan. Russia then immediately came out of the demographic crisis. Imagine, screamed hired idiots on TV, it is first time when the birth rate exceeded the death rate! Even cows pulled their socks up sharply for Putin and increased milk production, yes, it was.

Infant mortality up to a year in 1988 in the Russia - 18.9 ppm (a lot), in Ukraine - 14.2. It is impossible to say about any reduction of these parameters with the collapse of health care, with reducing by half the production capacity and the degradation of the general population. These figures can only increase dramatically! Walk into any hospital and the nurse will tell you how many babies died in childbirth. Only at birth! But why do the girls give birth - the fruit of poverty? To replenish the army of homeless people? And where will the children work after high school? As bandits?

As soon as it comes to the demographic crisis, so one begins to talk about birth rate. But if we must talk about the mortality rate. It was equal 7.8 ppm, and in 2000 in Perm - 24.7. Official data now - 15. In 2005, official figures - also 15, is also unchanged compared with the period of Yeltsin. Look attentively! But on the basis of information received form the registry office in the Perm, it is possible to count: mortality, too, about 25, no change compared to the year 2000. The official figure registrar - 15, it is the official number of wells. But the official figure must be added in 1500 tombs, removed from the city, graves for the homeless in the ends of the cemeteries, two unrecorded cemeteries, burned in the crematorium, etc., and not to divide the official population figures in the city, and the real. Thus, in Perm in 2005, the official number of residents - 970 thousand, but 930 thousand, in fact/ If we extrapolate the donor Perm city in the whole country, it is roughly 1 million excess deaths per year in the Russian Federation, for the time of reform - the order of 25 million victims of the liberal policy, Yeltsin-Putin's reforms.

The law on the monetization of benefits, the new law on pensions have reduced the number of pensioners from 40% in the Soviet Union and Yeltsin's Russia to 28.7% in Putin period.
But, as always, before the election, Russia ceases to die! To begin to die back immediately after the election.
Not to mention the life expectancy. It decreased as well as down. What do you call this mode? The current regime worse than the Nazis: they destroy other people, these - their own. Stalinism killed 5-6 million people in the Soviet Union (I calculated it in 1986, I operated with data of mortalities), Yeltsin-Putin regime - 25 million in Russia alone. Only the nazi scum could agitate for Putin, only oligophrenic or freaks can vote for Putin.

Boris Ikhlov, secretary of executive committee of Russian political union “Worker”


THE 12TH OF APRIL AND
WHO VON IN WORLD WAR II

People in USA think that USA were and are first in everything…

One can, of course, ascribe to Marconi the invention of the radio, but he just stole improved to applicable for radio arrester of Hertz from Russian scientist Popov. One man from India said me: “But WE know that Marconi!” But Marconi had simply stolen the Popov’ invention.
Mass broadcasting in the USSR began in 1931 y., and in the United States - only in 1939 y.

However, in the American mythology Americans are the first in everything, and even believe that the first cosmonaut in the world was Sheppard. While his ship was not even entered orbit without flew to cosmic space. May 5, 1961 Booster "Redstone 3" brought the spacecraft capsule on a ballistic trajectory of suborbital flight. The flight lasted 15,5 minutes. The world has not noticed his flight, after almost a month before the first man in the world, Yuri Gagarin, went into space to orbit, performed one circle around the Earth. The flight lasted 108 minutes.
The situation is even worse: one seriously believes in the United States that the first woman cosmonaut in the world, too, was an American - Sally Ride. June 18, 1983, she flew into space, not alone, but like a crew member of the mission "Challenger» STS-7. Our Valentina Tereshkova flew into space 20 years earlier, in 1963, alone. And in 1982, another Soviet woman, the world's second woman cosmonaut Svetlana Savitskaya made a flight on "Soyuz T-5", "Soyuz T-7" and orbital station "Salyut-7". In 1984, she made a flight on "Soyuz T-12" and orbital station "Salyut-7" and became the world's first female astronaut that walked in open space.
Hello Russia’ idiots-feminists!

Without a doubt, the United States are a great space power, unless, of course, the word “great” is applicable to such paltry distances compared with the galaxy distances. Of course, the Americans landed on the Moon six times. Well, it’s a pity that instead of records of their presence on the Moon world saw shooting of Stanley Kubrick in Hollywood - well, if the Yankees are so inclined to props, external effects ... Well, if the Yankees do not want to share with the world scientific community the results of their last five expeditions to the Moon…
In 1972, NASA launched devices “Pioneer-10” and “Pioneer-11”. “Pioneer 10” was the first spacecraft that had reached the third cosmic velocity (16.6 km/s, using the axial rotation and orbital motion of the planet), and which went beyond the solar system.
"Pioneer-10" was the first spacecraft that visited and photographed the planet Jupiter. Apparatus twin "Pioneer 11" also examined Saturn.
 In 1977, the US launched two apparatus "Voyager-1" and "Voyager-2". They transferred first high-quality images of Jupiter and Saturn, and then "Voyager-2" was sent to Neptune and Uranus, and reached them - the first time in the history of space exploration.

The Soviet press widely covered the exploits of the American "Pioneers" and "Voyagers", because there was no inferiority complex. The Soviet Union first sent into orbit and the satellite, and dogs, and human, the first female astronaut was Soviet, the first spacewalk was the Soviet, the first multi-flight was the Soviet, the first long-lived space station was the Soviet, records stay in orbit was the Soviet, plus first in the world landings on Mars and Venus.

March 23, 1881 Russian scientist and revolutionary N. I. Kibalchich while incarcerated, put forward the idea of rocket aircraft with swinging combustion chamber for ruling of thrust vector. A few days before his execution Kibalchich developed the original design of the aircraft, able to perform space flights. His request for transfer of the manuscript to the Academy of Sciences had not been satisfied by the Commission of Inquiry, the project was first published only after October revolution, in 1918, in the journal "Past stories» (? «Áûëîå», not “Past”), ¹ 4-5.
In 1914 Russian and Soviet scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky was the first who put forward the idea of using rockets for space missions.

The first artificial satellite was launched into orbit in the Soviet Union on Oct. 4, 1957.
The world's second spacecraft launched into Earth orbit on Nov. 3, 1957, Soviet spacecraft for the first time brought a living being into space, it was the dog Laika.
The dog Laika was sent into space, when one was knowing that she would die. After that, the United Nations received a letter from a group of women from the state of Mississippi. They demanded to condemn the inhumane treatment of dogs in the USSR and put forward a proposal: "If beings should be sent to space for the development of science, there are  plenty Little Negros for it in our city."
August 19, 1960 - the first orbital flight into space of living beings with the successful return to Earth was committed. Dogs Belka and Strelka made this flight on the Soviet ship "Sputnik-5".

1.4.1959 Soviet station "Luna-1" took place at a distance of 6 thousand km of the Moon's surface and went into a heliocentric orbit. It became the world's first artificial satellite of the Sun.
9.14.1959 Soviet station "Luna-2" for the first time in the world has reached the lunar surface in the area near the Sea of Serenity near craters Aristides, Archimedes, and Autolycus, bringing pennant with the coat of arms of the Soviet Union.
4.10.1959, the USSR launched AMC "Luna-3", which was the first world's apparatus that photographed the back side of the Moon, also made during the flight first in the world's practice gravity assist.
April 12, 1961 - the first manned flight into space was made, Soviet man Yuri Gagarin made it.
08.12.1962, the world's first group space flight on the Soviet ships Vostok-3 and Vostok-4 was committed.
June 16, 1963 - the world's first flight into space of female astronaut (Valentina Tereshkova) in the Soviet spaceship “Vostok-6” was committed.
October 12, 1964 - the first world’s flight of Soviet multi-seat spacecraft “Voskhod-1” was made.
March 18, 1965 - the first exit of man into open space was made. Soviet cosmonauts Alexei Leonov and Pavel Belyaev performed a spacewalk from the “Voskhod-2”.
February 3, 1966 – Soviet AMC “Luna-9” made the world's first soft landing on the Moon, panoramic pictures of the Moon were transferred.
1.3.1966 – Soviet apparatus "Venera-3" for the first time reached the surface of Venus, bringing pennant of the USSR. It was the world's first flight of the spacecraft from Earth to another planet.
April 3, 1966 - Soviet station "Luna-10" became the first artificial satellite of the Moon.
1.16.1969 - the world's first docking of two manned Soviet spacecrafts “Soyuz-4” and “Soyuz-5” was produces.
9.24.1970 – Soviet station "Luna-16" made a fence and subsequent delivery to the Earth of the samples of lunar soil. At second, it was the first unmanned spacecraft that brought rock samples to Earth from another cosmic body.
11.17.1970 - soft landing on the Moon and the launch of the world's first semi-automatic remote-controlled from the Earth of self-propelled machine "Lunokhod-1" were made.
December 15, 1970 – Soviet apparatus  "Venus-7” made world's first soft landing on the surface of Venus.
November 27, 1971 Soviet station "Mars-2" for the first time reached the surface of Mars.
December 2, 1971 – Soviet apparatus “Mars-3” made the first soft landing on Mars.
October 20, 1975 Soviet "Venera-9" became the first artificial satellite of Venus.
October 1975 - two soft landing of Soviet spacecrafts "Venera-9" and "Venera-10" were made, they transferred world's first photographs of the surface of Venus.
April 19, 1971 – the USSR launched first orbital station “Salyut-1”.
2.20.1986 – the USSR launch the basic module of the space station "Mir". (The only American station "Skylab" was launched early in 1973, but worked for a year and went out of orbit.)
11.15.1988 - the first and only space flight ISS "Buran" in automatic mode.
Such were the successes of the state created by the leadership of Lenin.

Actually, that's all over and done with.
As for Yeltsin-Putin-Medvedev period – due to liberal democratic reforms there are continuous failures, falls of "Proton", "Phobos", "Progress" and an endless backlog. Now China has bypassed Russia in space exploration.

But the States is treating the world's population totally. Billions of dollars, including in Russia, are left to the creation of myth, that the USA had won in World War II, not the USSR.

Of course, the US lend-lease supplied the Soviet Union during the war. But not free of charge. For gold. They put a paltry 4% of that produced the Soviet Union to the war. Moreover, bad technique and bad food. But much more: during the war the United States (Ford and others) provided Hitler fuels and lubricants, equipment and weapons!

Soviet destroyed 607 enemy divisions, Allied forces - only 176 divisions. According to other sources the Soviet Union destroyed even more - 80% of all divisions of the Hitler’ coalition. And if fierce battles  were on the Eastern Front,  whole battalions of fascists gave up to every drunk American rider on the West.
Thus, we can say that the United States does not substantially participate in the struggle against German fascism.

Let's see how the world was organized in 1945 and how it has degenerated.
In May 1945, May 1994 and June 2004, the Institute of Public Opinion Research of France spent three sociological survey among residents of their country, repeating the same question: "How do you think - what country has made the greatest contribution to the defeat of Nazi Germany?" Below we see how decades were changing perceptions of French people about the price of victory in the Second World War:
1945: 57% - the Soviet Union, 20% - US 12% - France, number of bump against people - 32%.
1994: 25% - the Soviet Union, 49% - US 20% - France, number of bump against people - 69%.
2004: 20% - the USSR, 58% - United States, 20% - France, number of hit hard people - 78%.
We see that the degradation of the French population is the function that almost strictly increases linearly with time argument.

Who did play a key role in the victory over Nazism in World War II? Only 15% of respondents chose the USSR. Five responses were invited: the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, the United States, or others or option "do not know". These are data from a survey of the International Project for the Study of Public Opinion Sputnik.Mneniya.
According to the survey, the majority of the US population (79%), France (58%) and half of Germans (50%) believe that  leadership in the victory over fascism belongs to the US Army. 59% of UK residents believe that their country is a leader in the fight against Nazism. 11% of Britons believe the key role belongs to the US, 15% - to the USSR.
Data were obtained through a survey conducted by the French research company Ifop and the British company Populus commissioned by Information Agency and Radio Sputnik.

Of course, Russia is the capitalist  country as well as USA, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Japan etc. But Russia didn’t bombard kindergartens by  shells with depleted uranium in Belgrade, Russia didn’t kill a half of million people in Iraq, Russia hasn’t arranged a humanitarian catastrophe in Libya, Syria. Not USSR, but USA soldiers executed more than a million inhabitants in few months of occupation of North Korea. Hitler did not dream.

I may tell where USA are first. The US consumes 50% of world energy. The US emit 50% of global emissions, it is the most dirty country in the world.

Yesterday the world's population believe in ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, arranged by Milosevic. It believed in the barbed wire and watchtowers. It believed in the myth of Srebrenica. It believed in the "revolutionaries" in Libya, believed in the "revolutionaries" in Syria.
Today the world's population believes in aggression of Russia in Ukraine, though Kiev demands from Russia aggressor discounts on gas, and Russian state banks pay money for Ukrainian military operations in Donbass (Cberbank, VTB, VEB).  It believes in the capture of the Crimea, but do not want to know that 85% of the Crimean population voted for joining the Crimea to Russia. It believes that Russia is to blame for the accident with Boeing, though the Netherlands did not provide any evidence. It believes in totalitarianism in Russia, though the Kremlin is unable to establish a progressive tax.
They believe. Idiots.
Look the article “Demographic  catastrophe in Russia” hear  http://shtirner.ru/na-angliiskom/ , in the list.
Look the text “Marxism today” here:

MARXISM TODAY

Professor of economics Paul Zaremka (State University of New York at Buffalo) wrote the article to the bicentenary of the birth of Marx, fragments of which we will consider in sequence.

1) «Karl Marx's intellectual legacy is so broad that different people are able to be attracted to the aspects most useful to them, not only for scholars but, more importantly, for working people».

To our great regret, it is the working class and other detachments of the proletariat with low incomes that are least familiar with the works of Marx. I will say more: activists of the left groups are practically unfamiliar with the books of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Plekhanov, not to mention the books of Ilyenkov or Lorenzo Vall, Lukacs or Antonio Labriola, Gramsci or Moses Hess, Cassidy or Tommaso Campanella.
The reason is clear: all this science is not required by the worker during his production. All that he read in the off-hours is eroded from his head when he, for example, is standing at the conveyor. The production period is the most important for the worker. If a worker has been working on the same detail for 3 years, then, in the process of disaggregation (in Hegel terms), the same detail, in lieu of Marxism, is formed in his head, roughly speaking.

I'm not talking about individual representatives, like Spinoza, Joseph Dietzgen, Khalturin, Shlyapnikov or Myasnikov, it's about the working class as a whole.

Today's strike is a demand for more favorable conditions for the sale of labor force. The question of taking power by the working class is not worth it. As for Russia, this is what workers say: "In order to take power, we need a higher education, which we do not have. Secondly, we do not want responsibility."
Workers understand what they say. Let me remind you, Lenin pointed out that the dictatorship of the proletariat is not only violence and not so much violence. It presupposes such working class that can take ruling of the entire economy of the country in their hands.

The main principle of Soviet power is the control of workers from below at a state official of any level, including Stalin. But complex production can not be controlled without higher education. Therefore, illiterate workers entrusted both control and management to the same state officials. Therefore, not workers controlled Stalin, but Stalin controlled workers.
The second principle of Soviet power is the modest payment of state officials. But Stalin abolished the Lenin’ party maximum.

The XII Congress of the RKP of Bolsheviks in 1923 (without Lenin) decided that the dictatorship of the proletariat is expressed in the form of a dictatorship of the party. Meanwhile, in his fundamental work "The State and the Revolution," Lenin wrote: "The dictatorship of the proletariat is expressed in the form of Soviet power, in the form found by the workers themselves."
Thus, there was no Soviet power in the USSR, nor did the dictatorship of the proletariat. Plekhanov also pointed out that the dictatorship of the class as the sky from the earth is different from the dictatorship of a handful of revolutionaries.
Marx wrote that a socialist state can only be the dictatorship of the proletariat. If this dictatorship was not there, then there was no socialism either. There was no such absurdity as the "degenerated workers' state". Re-born as far as?? Rebirth in what??
So Lenin in 1919 said: "It is unlikely that our grandchildren will see socialism ..."

In 1999, workers of the Vyborg Pulp and Paper Mill seized the plant. They were threatened with massive layoffs. The workers chose the director. The main reason for the defeat: 1) the workers shifted the management of the plant to the director and his team, 2) the workers shifted the leadership of the protest to the chairman of the trade union committee and his team. The authorities arranged a hunt for the director, and the chairman of the trade union committee was simply bribed.

One is to understand, that contradiction can not be withdraw (ñíÿòî) by destroying one of its sides - the bourgeoisie. The second side, the workers and peasants, will inevitably restore it - from itself. What we saw in the USSR. The privileged existence of a layer of Soviet managers gradually determined their bourgeois consciousness. So working class must eliminated not bourgeoisie only, but itself.
So at first capital must demand workers with higher education - at the level of a single, special and universal.
Everybody knows Marx phrase: the level of development of a capitalist is determined by the extent to which science has become a productive force. But the phrase refers not only to instruments. But also to the workers!

Let us note that, consequently, oppression is not only the usurpation of the management of surplus value by a narrow social stratum, the bourgeois or the "Soviet" power, but in labor itself, as Marx wrote, a heavy, monotonous, stupefying, depersonalizing physical labor.

As one knows, both the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks understood that Russia was a backward country that was not mature for the socialist revolution.
Lenin reasoned thus: on the one hand, the productive forces determine the relations of production. But who does forbid the revolutionary transformed superstructure to grow into a backward basis?
On the other hand, Russia is a weak link in the chain of imperialism. If this link is broken, then socialist revolutions will break out in developed countries. Then the developed proletariat of these countries will come to the aid of the backward Russian proletariat.
However, the world revolution did not happen. The productive forces in the developed countries, too, were not ripe for a change of system. Therefore, in the USSR, backward productive forces led the production relations in accordance with themselves. What became apparent in 1991.
People in China are more honest. In 1956, at the 8th CPC Congress it was stated that there was state capitalism in China. Further, we assumed the Great leap from capitalism to communism, bypassing socialism. But in 1976, Deng Xiaoping began restructuring and China remained capitalistic. Although today Comrade Xi Jinpy tells the world about socialism with a Chinese face.

Obviously, until the working class at the level of the general does not feel such oppression, it is not necessary to speak of a socialist revolution.
But this does not mean that the lefts must wait for this moment with folded hands.

2) «For capitalist enterprises in Brazil, Kenya, India, Spain, the US or anywhere, labor power reflects the reality that workers sell their labor hours to capitalists and they are told what to do without any democratic input from them. Workers don't care what they produce: They need the money. Capitalists don't care either: They want profit. Workers only receive as compensation the equivalent, in some currency, of the laboring time needed to produce the commodities they can get to subsist, at whatever level. The remainder in laboring hours that the capitalist keeps is "surplus value," the fundamental concept for Marx».

I would like to clarify. If you remove the extra hours (to short the working day!), capitalist will still make a profit. Because the worker produces surplus value not only in extra hours, but every minute.

Let me remind you, Marx wrote in “Capital” that mass, combined labor causes enthusiasm, thus, the workers care. However, today the enthusiasm has dried up. The worker really does not care, even if he creates a spaceship.

On the other hand, the capitalist care - he is driven by competition. Therefore, the capitalists organize the "democratic contribution" of the workers. For example, on Citroen, mailboxes are hung everywhere, where workers can omit their letters with proposals concerning production.
In this regard, it is worth noting the Russian bourgeoisie. Its specificity is that, first, it is comprador. Secondly, it achieves an average profit rate not, for example, by introducing new technologies, improving the organization of production, etc., but by freezing or retaining the wages of workers. Workers at the same time do not protest in their majority.

3) «The actual life of people around the world differs greatly. Some do better, some do worse, and a fraction may find some satisfaction in their work. But almost all products we consume anywhere, within our deep capitalism, have been produced by workers who are merely hired hands. Marx's work mentions workers being thereby "alienated," and this has been chosen by some for an emphasis. But he also develops concepts to explain how capitalists are able to appropriate ever more surplus value. He explains the motivation for technology changes experienced much more in capitalism than in prior societies. He describes the forces around the accumulation of capital, and the division of surplus value into industrial profits, rent and interest. He provides analyses for financial expansion. He even addresses environmental issues appropriate to his time so that we can find those insights useful today, and exhibited a foresighted analysis of the US Civil War as it was developing».

It should be emphasized that the capitalist spends net industrial profits on depreciation of equipment, advertising, new technologies, expansion of production. He is unable to eat surplus value after taxes! For example, a billionaire like Carnegie did not spend much on himself, walked in an old suit, drove a cheap car.

In contrast, Stalin lived in such a way that any sheikh would envy: first-class cooks, the best doctors, the best cars, the best sanatoria ...

Similarly, the profits of any Soviet enterprise were spent: taxes, depreciation, new technologies, expansion of production.

Capitalism is such a mode of production in which the labor force becomes a commodity. It was this definition that resolved the contradiction of the old political economy, which did not know where the profit comes from. After all, the goods are sold at a cost, with an equivalent exchange, profits can not arise. Nevertheless, it exists. Marx dialectically resolved the contradiction: a new type of commodity, labor power, generates surplus value in exchange.

Hence we see that there was one more identity between the USSR and the capitalist countries: there was a hiring institute in the USSR, labor power was also a commodity. The only difference was that its buyer was not a separate capitalist, but an aggregate capitalist, represented by the state.
The absence of a labor market should not be embarrassing: you do not exchange rudders for bodies inside one monopoly that manufactures trucks. And, no matter how Stalin denied, the law of value operated in the USSR with regard to the labor force, which was brilliantly proved by the worker from Zelenograd-town Yu. Radostev.
If one wants to know, there was great unemployment in the USSR in Stalin period and much less in 1987 – about 1,7 million people.

As for ecology, it is unlikely that Marx could foresee that the West will exaggerate environmental problems for the destruction of the USSR, Russian oligarchs will fight for resources by deceiving the population about environmental threats, and Greenpeace will be used as an instrument for suppressing competitors, in that power in the Arctic , as well as for surveillance of the Northern Fleet of Russia. Note that Greenpeace was not active against British Petroleum, which organized a world ecological catastrophe.

4) «Of course, aspects of his work need to be readdressed. For example, Rosa Luxemburg, a revolutionary for Poland and Germany, criticized Marx's lack of full awareness that accumulation of capital could not go on forever - if nothing else because of the problem of continually finding markets for increasing production of commodities ordered by capitalists for no other purpose than profits, at the same time that they want restricted wages».

As we know, Marx pointed to one of the manifestations of the basic contradiction of capitalism - the discrepancy between the growth of production and the limited effective demand of the working people, that is, the capitalist's desire to limit wages (In Russian: Works, Vol. 25, p. 268).
Secondly, Lenin demonstratively criticized the criticism of Rosa Luxemburg, in a number of articles on the markets he showed that capitalism can develop even without seizing foreign markets. Thus, the end of capitalism with the end of globalization is a false thesis.

5) «Moving on, Marx describes what workers actually did when they had power in Paris in 1871. But he also describes the ferocity of the subsequent opposition by capitalists, namely, a bloodbath. He would not be surprised at all by the Chilean coup by Augusto Pinochet in 1973 nor the US hostility to the Chinese or Cuban revolutions. He would not be surprised that May Day with origins in the US is not celebrated as a holiday in its country of origin. However, and this is important, great intellectuals can be misused. They can be objects of misuse precisely because of their penetrating insights. When Marx exposes capitalism in the raw for workers, some can refer to his insights for their own nefarious purposes, purposes that have nothing do with the emancipation of workers, even as they might so suggest. This problem is not a simple one as we have to first understand correctly what motivated Marx.
It is not good enough to say that Marx wanted a society free of exploiting classes. The very next question would be how to get there. In fact, "how" is perhaps far more important and difficult. We must respect people, but we also must respect the power of those against the people, and that power is greater now than in Marx's time. As an illustration, the US government used nuclear weapons openly, and proudly, twice for mass extermination. If push comes to shove for any government of capitalists - and that was not even the case for Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Marx's understanding would tell us that there are no limits. I repeat: no limits. With the Middle East a modern flashpoint and Israel with its nuclear weapons potentially facing revolution sooner or later, Marx is giving us a message. And we are obligated to take account of it if we are to be really for the people».

By the way, the Kaiser Wilhelm suggested Marx to move to him to fight together against the bourgeoisie with the help of his political economy. Marx refused.
It would seem that with the introduction of new technologies, with the increase of labor productivity and the mass of capital, the ruling classes have more and more opportunities to suppress the proletariat, to buy it, to use even Marxism-Leninism against the proletariat. Is not the CPRF, this pocket "communist" opposition, serving this purpose?

The contradiction of capitalism is that with the growth of production, the administrative apparatus is less and less capable of mediating the entire aggregate of economic ties. There are only two options for the ruling class: either to start redistributing power from the top down, that is, to start destroying oneself. Or simplify the system by breaking the economy into components. The latter option was implemented in the USSR in December 1991.

The growth of centrifugal tendencies is also observed in the USA, and these trends will intensify in view of the expansionist policy of the United States. By the way, Harriman predicted the disintegration of the United States.

On the other hand, capital in its development uses everything that comes to hand. But, in turn, the development of capitalism develops and productive forces.

Many workers in Russia have put forward to me the thesis that the proletariat in its struggle can not go beyond certain limits - because of the threat of use of nuclear weapons.
On the contrary, this capital has limits to the struggle against the proletariat. The bourgeois can arrange a lockout, but can not do anything without those who bring him a profit.

Capital can not already use nuclear weapons in a competitive struggle. Only the 2nd World War could give the US the opportunity to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But the US could not use nuclear weapons in China, nor in North Korea, nor in Vietnam, Cuba, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya or Syria.
The total use of nuclear weapons is impossible in principle, it threatens nuclear winter. Around 1982, a discussion was broadcast on television between a certain NATO colonel and the Soviet political scientist Arbatov. Arbatov criticized the American buildup of nuclear weapons. However, the colonel retorted: the presence of nuclear weapons is a factor restraining wars. Colonel repeated the words of Engels: "Someday mankind will accumulate so much weapons that wars will become impossible."

There is another, more significant error in the thesis of the threat of the use of nuclear weapons by the bourgeoisie against the proletariat. It presupposes such a ridiculous practice of the struggle of the proletariat, which is not directed to the army. The army, meanwhile, consists of people.

Therefore personally I have no respect for those who are against the people. Moreover, those who are against the people are becoming more and more fascists, all over the world: in the USA, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia.

But we, the Marxists, are always obliged in our practice to think whether our bourgeois clan is using our activity. Examples of such use are left-handed. Thus, various Trotskyist and so called “goscap” (state capitalism in the USSR) groups were used by the US State Department to clear the NATO road to Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria in mass consciousness.
All the leftists of the world applauded the disintegration of the USSR. Cretins. 30 million extra deaths in Russia, 12 million - in the Ukraine.
Washington commands "Milosevic!" And the leftists are against Milosevic. Washington commands "Gaddafi!" And the leftist - against Gaddafi. Washington commands "Assad!" And the leftist - against Assad.
More of that, many Trotsyist groups supported Bandera fascists on maidan in Kiev!
More of that, the most rich people in the world privatized revolution itself! In Georgia, Libya, Syria, Ukraine.

6) «Turning to my own country, the US, I had not expected the political situation we are now in. It is worse than expected. Some aspects are front-page news, but there are horrible details too numerous to single out without distorting the message. Basically it is total disrespect for humanity by the federal government. Yet the candidacy of Bernie Sanders in the last presidential campaign surprised many, and he said and continues to say that he is a "democratic socialist." He even has a photo of the great US socialist Eugene Debs in his office. He had and has considerable popularity, particularly among younger people, in a country that had been taught by propaganda to hate "socialism." And, suddenly, there is now a new uprising by teenagers against gun violence who speak for themselves about it, not through adults. Changes are occurring».

There are only 20% of thing production in the USA, speculative capital dominates. Thus, the US lives at the expense of the rest of the world, USA consume 50% of the world's energy and throw 50% of the world's emissions into the atmosphere.
Changes in the richest country of the world began immediately after the legalization of bourgeois relations in the USSR and the disintegration of the country. As the counterweight disappeared, the USA carried out aggression in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria.

On the other hand, the welfair was liquidated, the minimum wage was reduced. The military-industrial complex in the field of high technologies was reduced. Negro protests began.
In 1992, 9,000 policemen, 10,000 National Guards, 3,300 US Army and Marine Corps, 1,000 FBI officers were introduced, armored vehicles, combat and police helicopters were deployed to Los Angeles to suppress a peaceful demonstration. The fire was opened to defeat, about 100 people were killed, more than 11 thousand people were arrested. About 500 people from among the detainees received from 25 years to life imprisonment. Claims from the UN and the world community were not. Officials guilty of using force against peaceful demonstrators were not punished.

Similar changes occurred in other developed countries. In the UK, powers refused free of charge medicine, curtailed educational programs, shut down the mines, unemployment jumped. In Japan, with its institution of lifelong recruitment, 5% unemployment arose, which was a shock to the Japanese. In France, money from public schools was transferred to private schools, social programs were reduced, and the pension qualification was increased.

That is: all over the world labor and capital collided nose to nose, without an intermediary in the form of the so-called camp of "socialism". The working people realized that they should fight on their own. In this connection, and also in connection with the fact that after the disappearance of the USSR not only the national consolidating image of the enemy disappeared, but also the international consolidating image of the enemy. It was possible to observe, as wars broke out with the strengthening of the euro.

In 1999, the non-cash currency of the euro was introduced to the world, replacing the ecu, which was equated to the dollar. In the spring, bombardments of Belgrade followed, after which the exchange rate of the non-cash euro becomes less than 1 dollar.
By the autumn of 2001, it is planned to introduce cash euros. There is a "terrorist attack" on September 11. Euro cash is introduced only 1.1.2002, the euro starts to crowd the dollar. The British "The Economist" draws the euro as a viper. By the end of January 2003, the euro for the first time exceeded the dollar at 1.06, in March the bombing of Baghdad followed, NATO invading Iraq.
On September 11, Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh was killed. She was a key figure in the campaign for the country's entry into the euro area. On September 14, a referendum on this issue was planned in Sweden. The euro is again rolling back.
By the summer of 2008, the euro exceeds the critical threshold of $ 1.5 and is not going to stop. In September, Washington authorizes Georgia's actions in South Ossetia. For 4 days the euro falls against the dollar from 1.52 to 1.34, and then to 1.26.

Dmitry Medvedev ruled In Russia during this period, he had no accounts with foreign banks, because he easily cut off the gas pipe "for repairs." The barrel immediately rose, the ruble returned to its positions.
But at the end of 2013 the euro again approached the $ 1.5 mark. The United States had no choice? US arranged a Maydan in Kiev. After the forced annexation of Crimea, Putin was appointed a world evil, the image of the external enemy was successfully reanimated.

Although Putin is not a world evil at all! There is no totalitarianism in Russia, the bourgeoisie in Russia has not yet ripened from the class-in-itself to the class-for-itself, because the state is so weak that it is unable to collect a progressive tax. There is no Putin regime, Putin is just a protege of the ruling class of the raw-material bourgeoisie.
Although attempts to resuscitate the image of the enemy in the face of Putin were made in 2001, and in 2006 (after the "Munich speech"). Inside Russia, Putin confidently plays the role of the enemy of the United States.

However, one can not judge the changes in moods in the USA according to Sanders. Rather, on the contrary. The fact is that the US copied from Russia not only the electoral "roundabouts", but also the tactics of "torpedoes". "Torpedo" - this is clearly not the favorite, which the ruling party launches in elections, so that he can steel votes from a competitor. And Sanders performed well his role - he bought a left-wing electorate, for the credibility of hanging in the office photo Debs. And he gave his votes to the shark of imperialism - Hillary Clinton.
According to Sanders, one can judge the naivete of the lefts, who believe that something can be changed by presidential elections. Right, only a herd believes that the owner changes when a shepherd changes.
The shift to the left is in the other: more than half of American voters did not come to the polls.
As for the youth - personally I have no illusions about it. As people say in Russia: "For youth! For the courage! For the fresh wind! In your strong heads".

7) «Perhaps the single most important message from Marx is that "another world is possible." Why possible? First, we obviously have had other worlds before. And, second, we have no choice but for yet another and better, given the truth about capitalism! Workers of the world unite!»

The Soviet Union is understood under the "other world", obviously. And in vain, because its disintegration showed that the level of productive forces was too low. It was so low that the USSR lagged far behind the developed countries according to the main criterion noted by Lenin in the pamphlet “The Great Initiative”: on labor productivity.

Secondly, I would object to such ideas about Marx. "Worlds", "schemes", "systems", choice between "worlds", etc. are the essence of bourgeois illusions. And the truth about capitalism is also not the main thing, as Marx said, the weapons of criticism will not replace criticism with weapons. In view of the fact that fascism is a natural feature of capitalism, without bloodshed it will not be possible to change the society without bloodshed, alas.

The socialist revolution will be realized not because of the idea of "other worlds", but when the obsolete production relations will hinder the development of the productive forces.

Alas, today the main slogan of strikes is "Do not make us worse!" It is impossible to unite workers even one factory shop. What kind of world association can we talk about. The so-called "mobilizations", flash mobs, antiglobalism, altreglobalism,  etc. - chickens are laughing.
The world is in a protracted crisis, the productive forces are weakened, and a period of regression has come. What is clearly visible on drunk Sarkozy, on the pedophile Berlusconi, on the barking on the entire air of Hilary Clinton, on the inadequate Therese May, etc.
Now let us turn to the main question formulated by the author in the most bourgeois form: "How to get there". I.e. in the "other world", and supposedly there are specialists, lamps of reason, shines of mind, who know the right path.

First, note the wrong paths.
The first path is the creation of such a remarkable correct party, which, at last, will lead the working class and lead it into socialism. Many adhere to such views, apparently, the collapse of such a powerful structure as the CPSU, taught them nothing.
As for the workers. The workers are fed up with the fact that they are not considered to be people, but are considered a herd of sheep who need a shepherd. They are people, and therefore they are going to think with their own head, and not with the head of the party general secretary. And this is not a hint at anarchy. No one renounces the power of the Soviets. Simply Marx defined socialism as "the living creativity of the masses". The mass, not the party lights of mind.

The second wrong path is the lack of understanding of Marxism. Marxism as a method, not works of Marx.
Everyone is convinced that the evil of capitalism is concentrated in money, money expresses the value of the commodity.
In the article "Criticism of the Gotha Program" Marx writes that the value of the commodity is generated by the abstract labor of a worker. What is needed for the product of labor to dump its commodity form? Marx is convinced that labor becomes abstract in the process of market alienation, in the sphere of exchange. Therefore, in order to destroy the value, it is necessary to liquidate the market. What the Bolsheviks tried to do.

However, the same Marx wrote in the “Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844” about the stultifying, depersonalizing labor of the worker, and Ilyenkov points out ("Dialectics of the abstract and concrete in the Capital of Marx") that the physical labor of the worker is already abstract in the process of production. It is this production abstraction that generates abstractness in the sphere of exchange.
Lenin in practice understood Marx's mistake and in 1921 introduced a new economic policy (NEP). It was designed for decades, but Stalin turned NEP in 1927.

That is: socialism by definition is a transitional period when the old social division of labor that divides society into classes is being eliminated. First of all, the contradiction between mental and physical labor is resolved, as Marx writes in the same article, "Criticism of the Gotha Program."
In 1953, Stalin, in his pamphlet “The Economic Problems of Socialism”, denied the contradiction between mental and physical labor in the USSR and repeated Marx's mistake from beginning to end.

But still - "how"? No way.
Because this question can be answered only by the practice of the struggle of the working class, which, according to Lenin, is above theory. As Marx said: every practical step is more expensive than a dozen programs.

To begin with, we must forget the words from the “Manifesto…” about the leading role of the party. We must understand that Lenin's book "What to do?" is obsolete. The situation has changed! The labor movement - can independently break free from the framework of economism, without introducing into the inert dark matter of the working class the divine political consciousness by party priests.
One may note strikes against abstract conveyor labour in USA at the end o0f 60th or Soviets at Italian plants at the same period or acts of workers of Sud Aviation in 1968. Finally, examples of the Paris Commune and the first Soviets in Russia!
And you see - authorities pay the left parties for their participation in the elections. The authorities made from all parties from ultra to ultra security buffer between themselves and the masses. Parties have discredited themselves around the world, absenteeism is growing all over the world.
By the way, the editions of most Marxist journals are concentrated in the USA and Great Britain, even Indian and German ones. This means that most of the left organizations are controlled by the CIA and MI-5. Consequently, workers must create their own independent factory political organizations.

The role of left parties is only to help workers in their self-organization, like Lenin wrote in his project of the first program of Russia social democratic workers party.
Lenin's book “The Childhood Illness of Leftism in Communism” is also obsolete, in the part where Lenin writes about the vanguard of the working class. If the vanguard is a minority, the working class is not ripe for dictatorship, it can not control its vanguard in the role of state officials. If the vanguard is a majority, this term loses its meaning.

We must understand that the disintegration of the USSR was logical. But this does not mean that the October revolution in backward agrarian Russia in 1917 was a theoretical error of smb, like wrote Menshevik Kuscova in her “Credo”. The bourgeois revolution has been walking for a whole century only over one small France. The era of regression will pass, the era of socialist revolutions will continue.

22.5.2018
Correspondence with Western professors

After the publication of my article “Marxism Today”, a curious correspondence arose.

Tamas Krausz writes:
“Friends, it’s old and simple theory of state capitalism, it follows to nowhere, plus support of new capitalism”.

Krauss simply ignorant, he did not read Russian authors, so he considers the theory of state capitalism in the USSR like unpretentious.
But "something native is heard in the long songs of coachman": "Your genetics are pouring water on the mill of imperialism!"

I write:
“Dear friends, it is very easy to say "or, it’s old theory..." It's a little more difficult to try to understand what I wrote.
As for other non "state capitalism" "theories" - they do not lead to anywhere, but morons don't understand it. To tell me truth I am tired of illiterate foreign dunces

Marxism is old theory too and a lot of bourgeoisie morons write that it doesn't lead to anywhere. And we see like "communist" party of Russian federation supports powers, like Trotskyist parties serve Washington, like "socialists" in France rule like capitalists, like all other left groups in the world can't do anything during tens of years. Useless lefts!”

Krauss writes:
“No, no. Illiteracy is hipothesis, everything is  capitalism in the 20th century. You should read something else in this subject too. Really this theory of state capitalism is not only old, but too simply. Read Marx on state socialism and will understand stalinism. To repeat all the time the same hipothesis is very boring and ideologically also very problematic. Do not get offended. Prefere thinking on it. Thanks. I read you for a long time. Respect other's opinion too.

I answer:
“No, no. illiteracy is not hypothesis. I proved it in my article on example of US professor. And I SAW different left groups and "scientists" in UK, Argentina, France, German, Canada etc. I wrote their stupid books with the claim to scientific character.

 You should read something else in this subject too. Really all other theories besides the theory of state capitalism are not only old, but too simply. Read Marx more and may be you will understand smth. To repeat all the time the same hipothesis is very boring and ideologically also very problematic. Do not get offended.
 And I'l be glad to respect other' opinions too. If they are not stupid. But I don't see in your word any opinion! Only empty words about nothing.
 
 Sorry... do you really think that I didn't read Marx on state socialism??
  Our group learned scientific communism, Marx politeconomy, philosophy and historical materialism when we were stidents. Then we about 10 years lerned it once more - to beat "soviet" professors. And we beat them easy. So please don't be bulge”

Then Krauss pulls out something, but not arguments against some fragments in my article, but old, eaten arguments against the theory of state capitalism in the USSR:

“The old state socialist regime was not profitoriented market economy opposite to the new capitalism with semifascist face. Nobody could inherit the state ownership that is why the upper stratum of bureaucracy had to change regime (system). Or Thatcher and K;d;r are the representatives of very different historical, economic, social and political systems in principe and in practice with some similar features. The core of a historical phenomenon can be found in the difference. Read Luk;cs on the "overhelming moment" in Ontology without bulge.

I answer:
“The fact that there was no profit-oriented market economy in the USSR is an old propagandistic song. Any capitalist monopoly destroys the market, this was noted by Ricardo yet. You need to know the economy of the USSR, profit was the most important indicator in the economy. Well, but no one has yet proved that there was socialism in the USSR.

The right of inheritance is deeply secondary. But you do not understand the situation. Capital is not a pot that the son inherits from his father. Capital is a social attitude. It consists in the fact that the son of an elite actor becomes an elite actor, the son of a KGB general becomes a KGB general, the son of the 1st secretary of the regional committee becomes a member of the CPSU Central Committee.
 
Of course, there was a different situation the UK and Hungary. But the situation was different in Great Britain and Argentina. You need to understand the variety of forms of capitalism.

As for Lucasc, of course, I read him about 20 years ago. He is stalinist and made a lot of mistakes. And you have to read Ilyenkov, Batischev, Kessidy, Mamardashvily, Vazyulin if you want to understand smth.

I appeal to you as a deaf person - you have not refuted any part of my article!
I stop writing. I don't like those who is bulge, but can't think”.

Of course, Krauss could not stand it, he decided that his word must necessarily be a last resort. He writes:
“You are the big mixer. Nothing exists except for your dogma. Plan economy and the was an antithesis. Market economy without  unemployment???  You do not prove anything. You do not understand even the  logic of profit production. After that no sense to discuss with you, really”.

The unhappy Krauss has nothing but abuse. "Planned economy, planned economy ..." He just does not notice my words about Ricardo. Since he is unable to understand the evidence, he writes that I have not proved anything. Yes, and that was to prove. I just showed that he has no arguments! He does not even understand that I have not written a word about unemployment! So I understand, he does not know, that in 1986 there were 1.7 million unemployed in the USSR, but in market Japan with its institute of lifelong hiring unemployed was not at all.

The author of the article, professor Zarembka, whose article I criticized, also wrote to me.
“Boris, thank you for your extended reactions to my short piece which I have read fully.  I understand that English is not your native language but I could understand you.  Keep in mind that I was only given 1000 words, so many ideas could not be elaborated. I will focus on three reactions I have:
1. I do not disagree with your interpretation of Bernie Sanders, but the point from an American perspective is his ability to maintain that he is a "socialist", while many were not bothered with that.  If you lived as long as I have here, you might understand its importance, even if he himself merely passed his support onto Clinton.  Anti-socialism/anti-communism has a long ideological history here.  As to the youth, if we do not respect them and their energy, we are lost.
2. You make an interesting comment that nuclear weapons are paper-tigers, like Mao said.  You cite something from Engels, but I don't know where that is.  In any case, could you explain more how you think nuclear weapons are now useless?  I do think Israel is quite capable of actually using it and, frankly, I don't think the rest of the nation states would do more than complain, even if forcefully, and perhaps do some sanction.
3. I believe you misunderstand Luxemburg and thus you are in a long line of those who dismiss her.  I could send you my published opinion, if interested.
All the best, Paul”.

I answer:
«Dear Paul, thank you for your letter. You are right, I am not good hand at English and have no practice in 18 years, so I am glad that you have caught me.

1. Not so long ago I read a book in which the articles of the leaders of many Communist parties of the world are collected about what the proletariat is. This question was asked of him by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF). I was amazed at the ignorance (illiteracy) of the leaders of the Communist Parties. Now 2018, but they do not know what the proletariat is and can not distinguish it from the workers! They correctly identify the doctor in hospital, engineer and worker with the hired character of labor. But they do not understand that workers differ from engineers and doctors in the content of labor. And CPRF too.
So they don’t understand Marxism, they don’t understand society dynamic: socialism is a movement towards overcoming the old social division of labor, primarily the division of labor into the mental and physical.

Lenin repeatedly stressed that the Bolsheviks are a party of the working class, not intellectuals, not peasants. He called the working class a hegemon because socialism and communism are a fundamental interest precisely for the working class. The intelligentsia will not disappear under communism, but the depersonalizing labor of the worker must disappear, and with it the working class.
Therefore Marx wrote that "all the oppressed strata of society must realize the interests of the working class as their own."
We are with working class so WE ARE NOT LOST.

And what do the Western Lefts do? They have no close ties with the working class, but they add to cart, recruit a female movement, buggers, Jews, hippies, students etc. and even schoolchildren. I saw it in Argentina, in Netherlands, in UK, in France…  We saw youth with it’ energy in fascist maidan in Ukraine, the youth jumped, as crazy, and shouted: "Russians and Jews - on knives!", “Russian - on the gallows!” “Who does not jump - that is Russian!”
You see we in Russia are tired from Western stupid primitive.

Of course Sanders may think about himself that he is socialist. But why??? Did he organized any strike,  blocked of highways, did he create any workers committee at any plant and so on, what is his PRACTICE? Only bla-bla-bla? Mitterand and Holland are socialists too. And what? Many people in Russia think about themselves that they are communists.
But the PRACTICE OBJECTIVE RESULT of Sunders’ activity was help to Hillary Clinton.
May be, the word “socialism” is new for US. But… how to say… It is not great attainment, to my mind. It is word only. And I don’t respect energetic youth with empty heads. The world is not France, and today is not 1968.

2. I didn’t wrote that nuclear weapons are paper tigers. Of course it is dangerous, of course there is problem of using of it by terrorists etc. I didn’t wrote that nuclear weapons are “useless”. But, at first, nuclear weapons make the third world war impossible in view of nuclear winter. At second it gives only possibility to save itself for North Korea from US aggression.
As for Engels you may be sure, he wrote the words about war, that I repeated. Lenin repeated such words too, in his wife Nadejda Krupskaya’ stories she writes he said that in the future “the war will become so destructive that it will in general become impossible". I live in military Ural so I know Russia may annihilate USA during 2 hours without any possibility of any defense as well as USA may annihilate Russia.

It is evident that Israel is the same fascist county as USA, look 2nd attached file. I mean: the idea of superiority of the US and Jews over all nations of the world, unprecedented aggression, strangling freedom of speech, if not with the help of prisons, but with the help of layoffs, the killing of children by policemen, police violence, etc.
Several Israel journalists wrote that Israel was ready to use nuclear weapon against Iran. To my opinion it is only words. Of course, every normal man wants sanctions – because of Israel aggression. But you see it is impossible, USA will stop any attempts of sanctions.

I know several Trotskyist groups that every year write resolutions against Israel. Of course, all of them are useless. I think it is such a game.
To my mind one is to choose other method: to publish truth about Israel, step by step. And not in newspapers or on TV, but in leaflets.
On the other hand there are workers in Israel. So we are to think how to support class fight in Israel, it is only way.

3. As for Luxemburg I agree with Lenin. I wrote two words about her, if you don’t agree, please, write, what my words are wrong from your point of view and why.
And have you read Lenin's criticism of Rosa Luxemburg? What can you object to Lenin?
But if you may send me your article, I’l be glad.
Best wishes, your Boris Ikhlov

PS. Because you selected only 3 points, I hope you are agree with all other fragments from my article, especially main fragments.
PPS.
In  the  early  90's  I  corresponded  with  one of the leaders of the American  Negro movement Ajamu Dillahant. I wrote to her that it would be nice if the Negro movement closed in the labor movement. After all, the  problem of the blacks of the United States is a particular thing, their struggle is the fight against the consequence while preserving the cause. Ajamu stopped her correspondence”.

Paul writes:
“Attached is my defense of Luxemburg.  A prior work of mine that is cited includes as an appendix the first translation from Russian of Lenin's marginal notes on Luxemburg's book (by James Lawler). Lenin, to the best of my knowledge, never wrote a coherent criticism of her 'The Accumulation of Capital'.  Yes, Lenin said she was 'wrong' and wrote some private letters praising criticisms of her, but without saying clearly why.  In 1915 he merely cites in publication Bauer, Eckstein and Pannekoek in support of a statement that she is wrong, but without indicating which portions of what
they wrote are correct, less than correct, or in error. 
If you know something that I don't know about Lenin's writing on Luxemburg's book, please let me know.  Otherwise, his claim that she was 'wrong' really is not worth much discussion.  If she is wrong, it is not because Lenin said so.

On Sanders, you are correct but the problem is not only or mainly about Sanders' personality.  What I was trying to convey about Sanders and about youth is that the U.S. is in movement, politically, and there is opposition to fascism here which would require much too much discussion to be included in that short piece.

I don't much like reference to 'Jews' as such.  Because, as you point out, there are working-class Jews in Israel.  If I were to accept 'Jews' as a category, then also each and every other religion as if coherent.  'Zionists' is better.  But even that reference disguises the materiality of capitalist expansion.  One comment I recently read actually says that Israel is a fundamentalist Christian (!) state, disguised with its 'Jewish' reference point. Even this still makes religion the reference point in its effort to describe the main power behind this tiny state of a few million.
On nuclear weapons, I am not sure I understand you.  Do you agree or disagree that nuclear weapons COULD truly be used, say, by Israel?  I am not asking about 'threat'.  I am asking about DROPPING the bomb from a plane or firing a nuclear missile.  I am saying it is truly possible and thus must be taken account of.
Thanks, Paul”

I answer:
“Of  course,  the total use of nuclear weapons is impossible because of the  nuclear winter. That is, the US, Russia, China, India will not be able  to  apply  it.  Britain and France, as NATO members, will not be able  either.
North  Korea  is  not  going  to use nuclear weapons until the US will attack.
Pakistan  and  Israel  are  the  last  in  the  list.  These are small countries  with   a   small  amount  of  nuclear weapons. Their use of nuclear  weapons  in  small wars means their self-destruction. But the threat of use is deterrent for the Arab countries.

Of  course,  we  may  and  must  cry about Israel' nuclear weapon – to compare with North Korea. But, to my mind, it is not first task. First task is Israel aggression.

As  for Luxemburg. Of course, Lenin didn't criticize 'The Accumulation of   Capital"   especially,   his   articles  are  about market, about Luxemburg  position  about  automatic  death  of capitalism, about her position  on  national  question  etc.  We  studied  it  when  we were students,  so I will send you everything, but not quickly - you see, a lot of work, we must finish smth.

I looked through your article and should like to make several remarks.
So  I  ask  you  once more to send me, if it is possible, your text in other format, not pdf but word.

As  for  Sunders  - you are right, modern processes in USA are radical and complete, so I shall be glad if you tell about the situation in US in details.
Sincerely, Boris”

Paul didn’t send me the article in other format.
The professor cites in the article about Luxembourg such personalities, as Raya Dunaevskaya, Tugan-Baranovsky and others, gives their opinions like the truth. While, for example, Lenin thoroughly criticized Tugan-Baranovsky. Tugan-Baranovsky simply did not understand the Marxian scheme of simple reproduction.

The reader, you see - the professor ignores my questions, my requests, he does not want to answer!
A narrow specialist is like a flux - the completeness of him is one-sided. Zarembka specializes in Rosa Luxemburg, he can not understand anything else. But the American professor does not know the elementary things. He does not know how Lenin criticized Rosa Luxemburg!

Imagine how low the scientific level of professors in the West fell. Lenin laughed at the theories of Rosa Luxemburg. He completely refuted them. Of course, Luxemburg is a revolutionary, but her theory speaks of the automatic death of capitalism. Luxembourg and Sismondi rigidly link the existence of capitalism to the presence of external rank. This, of course, is nonsense.
«Capitalist production in general, writes Marx, does not exist without foreign trade. But if we assume normal annual reproduction at a given scale, we thereby represent the case in such a way that foreign trade only replaces native objects with objects of another use or natural form, and it does not affect the ratio of value, and therefore, , in which two categories are exchanged for each other: the means of production and the means of consumption, as well as the relations of constant capital, variable capital, and surplus-value, that the value of the product can be decomposed into of each of these two categories.. Therefore, attracting foreign trade to the analysis of the annually reproducible value of the product, without giving anything new either for the problem or for its resolution, can only bring about confusion. Therefore, it is necessary to completely disengage from it» ("Capital", vol. II, Ch. XX, section XII).

The Luxembourg mistake is primitive, elementary, but Western professors raised her musty theory to the banner.
This is understandable - her theory is directed against Lenin, against Marx!

I did not correspond with professor Cyrus Bina, but he also congratulated Marx on his birthday.
He particularly writes: “Marx’s grasp of capitalist competition and his distinction of capital from landed property can be found early on in The Poverty of Philosophy (1847), where Marx chides Pierre-Joseph Proudhon on two major issues. First is on capitalist competition by which the process of concentration and centralization manifest itself and the accumulation of capital leads to class polarization. Here Marx capitalizes on a synthetic analysis in which competition and integration, just as space and time in Einstein’s theory are synthetically entwined; neither competition nor integration (i.e., concentration and centralization of capital) has separate standing. This view of competition is what Marx employed in his Capital (1867), some two decades later”.

Thank you. Hence, Marx agreed with Proudhon. Although the book of Marx is directed precisely at the criticism of Proudhon. It also turns out that competition and integration are like space-time. Those. in the early 20th century. banks, united, did not destroy small banks, and cohabited with them… Unless in the 80s, the consumer products of the USA did not find that the antimonopoly legislation does not work… The professor forgot what cartel collusion is? Einstein turns in a coffin as a propeller: time and space devour, cancel each other!
Zarembka is a specialist in Luxembourg, Bina is an expert on Proudhon, for which he receives money.

Further, Bina is smashing the Marxists, who buried theories of the value of Marx. I wonder where he dug up those.
“These same Marxists also habitually refer to the present epoch as neoliberalism thus generating a twofold error: (1) identifying the United States (and the epoch of Pax Americana, 1945-1979) with neoliberalism – a euphemistic label for globalization – and in consequence (2) papering over the loss of American hegemony and irreversible shift in the balance of global power. In other words, these radical scholars (along their liberal counterparts in the apologist circles), perhaps inadvertently, lionize the leaders of the now defunct era and misrepresent the nature of international relations of today. On this account too, in my opinion, Marx’s legacy should be crystal clear by now”.

I.e. Bina is not limited of mixing Proudhon with Marx. He assures us that there is no neo-liberalism in Russia! He assures us that the US for Europe does not knock free trade out of Europe. At the same time, the US allegedly does not impose strict protectionist measures.
It turns out that after the collapse of the USSR, the US did not become a world hegemon, a world gendarme.
Bina still writes that there are crazy people abroad US who are afraid, as if the US hegemony, that is, fascism of the United States, may be disappeared!
Is it clear why Bina is a professor?

At the end, Bina appears before us almost Blake:
«The glimmer of hope is in the air. The heavens point to a singularity. The two hundred candles are burning intensely against gentle wind in Highgate Cemetery (North London), while birds of spring are singing in unison: “Workers of the World Unite …” Happy Birthday Karl – Happy Birthday!»

Bina writes quite seriously. In Russia, such a phrase would cause Homeric laughter. Bina does not ask what the working people think, he asks heaven and birds. The workers themselves do not talk about solidarity, but Bina's birds sing about it.

So that by… Both correspondences confirm my "hypothesis" that the Western Lefts are little educated and can’t think. Most of them are morons.
Otherwise, how could capitalism tolerate Marxists? Such "Marxists", on the contrary, benefit for capitalism, so they have the title of professors.

MARXISM TODAY - 2


Professor of economics Paul Zaremka (State University of New York at Buffalo) wrote the article to the bicentenary of the birth of Marx, fragments of which we will consider in sequence.

1) «Karl Marx's intellectual legacy is so broad that different people are able to be attracted to the aspects most useful to them, not only for scholars but, more importantly, for working people».

To our great regret, it is the working class and other detachments of the proletariat with low incomes that are least familiar with the works of Marx. I will say more: activists of the left groups are practically unfamiliar with the books of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Plekhanov, not to mention the books of Ilyenkov or Lorenzo Vall, Lukacs or Antonio Labriola, Gramsci or Moses Hess, Cassidy or Tommaso Campanella.
The reason is clear: all this science is not required by the worker during his production. All that he read in the off-hours is eroded from his head when he, for example, is standing at the conveyor. The production period is the most important for the worker. If a worker has been working on the same detail for 3 years, then, in the process of disaggregation (in Hegel terms), the same detail, in lieu of Marxism, is formed in his head, roughly speaking.

I'm not talking about individual representatives, like Spinoza, Joseph Dietzgen, Khalturin, Shlyapnikov or Myasnikov, it's about the working class as a whole.

Today's strike is a demand for more favorable conditions for the sale of labor force. The question of taking power by the working class is not worth it. As for Russia, this is what workers say: "In order to take power, we need a higher education, which we do not have. Secondly, we do not want responsibility."
Workers understand what they say. Let me remind you, Lenin pointed out that the dictatorship of the proletariat is not only violence and not so much violence. It presupposes such working class that can take ruling of the entire economy of the country in their hands.

The main principle of Soviet power is the control of workers from below at a state official of any level, including Stalin. But complex production can not be controlled without higher education. Therefore, illiterate workers entrusted both control and management to the same state officials. Therefore, not workers controlled Stalin, but Stalin controlled workers.
The second principle of Soviet power is the modest payment of state officials. But Stalin abolished the Lenin’ party maximum.

The XII Congress of the RKP of Bolsheviks in 1923 (without Lenin) decided that the dictatorship of the proletariat is expressed in the form of a dictatorship of the party. Meanwhile, in his fundamental work "The State and the Revolution," Lenin wrote: "The dictatorship of the proletariat is expressed in the form of Soviet power, in the form found by the workers themselves."
Thus, there was no Soviet power in the USSR, nor did the dictatorship of the proletariat. Plekhanov also pointed out that the dictatorship of the class as the sky from the earth is different from the dictatorship of a handful of revolutionaries.
Marx wrote that a socialist state can only be the dictatorship of the proletariat. If this dictatorship was not there, then there was no socialism either. There was no such absurdity as the "degenerated workers' state". Re-born as far as?? Rebirth in what??
So Lenin in 1919 said: "It is unlikely that our grandchildren will see socialism ..."

In 1999, workers of the Vyborg Pulp and Paper Mill seized the plant. They were threatened with massive layoffs. The workers chose the director. The main reason for the defeat: 1) the workers shifted the management of the plant to the director and his team, 2) the workers shifted the leadership of the protest to the chairman of the trade union committee and his team. The authorities arranged a hunt for the director, and the chairman of the trade union committee was simply bribed.

One is to understand, that contradiction can not be withdraw (ñíÿòî) by destroying one of its sides - the bourgeoisie. The second side, the workers and peasants, will inevitably restore it - from itself. What we saw in the USSR. The privileged existence of a layer of Soviet managers gradually determined their bourgeois consciousness. So working class must eliminated not bourgeoisie only, but itself.
So at first capital must demand workers with higher education - at the level of a single, special and universal.
Everybody knows Marx phrase: the level of development of a capitalist is determined by the extent to which science has become a productive force. But the phrase refers not only to instruments. But also to the workers!

Let us note that, consequently, oppression is not only the usurpation of the management of surplus value by a narrow social stratum, the bourgeois or the "Soviet" power, but in labor itself, as Marx wrote, a heavy, monotonous, stupefying, depersonalizing physical labor.

As one knows, both the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks understood that Russia was a backward country that was not mature for the socialist revolution.
Lenin reasoned thus: on the one hand, the productive forces determine the relations of production. But who does forbid the revolutionary transformed superstructure to grow into a backward basis?
On the other hand, Russia is a weak link in the chain of imperialism. If this link is broken, then socialist revolutions will break out in developed countries. Then the developed proletariat of these countries will come to the aid of the backward Russian proletariat.
However, the world revolution did not happen. The productive forces in the developed countries, too, were not ripe for a change of system. Therefore, in the USSR, backward productive forces led the production relations in accordance with themselves. What became apparent in 1991.
People in China are more honest. In 1956, at the 8th CPC Congress it was stated that there was state capitalism in China. Further, we assumed the Great leap from capitalism to communism, bypassing socialism. But in 1976, Deng Xiaoping began restructuring and China remained capitalistic. Although today Comrade Xi Jinpy tells the world about socialism with a Chinese face.

Obviously, until the working class at the level of the general does not feel such oppression, it is not necessary to speak of a socialist revolution.
But this does not mean that the lefts must wait for this moment with folded hands.

2) «For capitalist enterprises in Brazil, Kenya, India, Spain, the US or anywhere, labor power reflects the reality that workers sell their labor hours to capitalists and they are told what to do without any democratic input from them. Workers don't care what they produce: They need the money. Capitalists don't care either: They want profit. Workers only receive as compensation the equivalent, in some currency, of the laboring time needed to produce the commodities they can get to subsist, at whatever level. The remainder in laboring hours that the capitalist keeps is "surplus value," the fundamental concept for Marx».

I would like to clarify. If you remove the extra hours (to short the working day!), capitalist will still make a profit. Because the worker produces surplus value not only in extra hours, but every minute.

Let me remind you, Marx wrote in “Capital” that mass, combined labor causes enthusiasm, thus, the workers care. However, today the enthusiasm has dried up. The worker really does not care, even if he creates a spaceship.

On the other hand, the capitalist care - he is driven by competition. Therefore, the capitalists organize the "democratic contribution" of the workers. For example, on Citroen, mailboxes are hung everywhere, where workers can omit their letters with proposals concerning production.
In this regard, it is worth noting the Russian bourgeoisie. Its specificity is that, first, it is comprador. Secondly, it achieves an average profit rate not, for example, by introducing new technologies, improving the organization of production, etc., but by freezing or retaining the wages of workers. Workers at the same time do not protest in their majority.

3) «The actual life of people around the world differs greatly. Some do better, some do worse, and a fraction may find some satisfaction in their work. But almost all products we consume anywhere, within our deep capitalism, have been produced by workers who are merely hired hands. Marx's work mentions workers being thereby "alienated," and this has been chosen by some for an emphasis. But he also develops concepts to explain how capitalists are able to appropriate ever more surplus value. He explains the motivation for technology changes experienced much more in capitalism than in prior societies. He describes the forces around the accumulation of capital, and the division of surplus value into industrial profits, rent and interest. He provides analyses for financial expansion. He even addresses environmental issues appropriate to his time so that we can find those insights useful today, and exhibited a foresighted analysis of the US Civil War as it was developing».

It should be emphasized that the capitalist spends net industrial profits on depreciation of equipment, advertising, new technologies, expansion of production. He is unable to eat surplus value after taxes! For example, a billionaire like Carnegie did not spend much on himself, walked in an old suit, drove a cheap car.

In contrast, Stalin lived in such a way that any sheikh would envy: first-class cooks, the best doctors, the best cars, the best sanatoria ...

Similarly, the profits of any Soviet enterprise were spent: taxes, depreciation, new technologies, expansion of production.

Capitalism is such a mode of production in which the labor force becomes a commodity. It was this definition that resolved the contradiction of the old political economy, which did not know where the profit comes from. After all, the goods are sold at a cost, with an equivalent exchange, profits can not arise. Nevertheless, it exists. Marx dialectically resolved the contradiction: a new type of commodity, labor power, generates surplus value in exchange.

Hence we see that there was one more identity between the USSR and the capitalist countries: there was a hiring institute in the USSR, labor power was also a commodity. The only difference was that its buyer was not a separate capitalist, but an aggregate capitalist, represented by the state.
The absence of a labor market should not be embarrassing: you do not exchange rudders for bodies inside one monopoly that manufactures trucks. And, no matter how Stalin denied, the law of value operated in the USSR with regard to the labor force, which was brilliantly proved by the worker from Zelenograd-town Yu. Radostev.
If one wants to know, there was great unemployment in the USSR in Stalin period and much less in 1987 – about 1,7 million people.

As for ecology, it is unlikely that Marx could foresee that the West will exaggerate environmental problems for the destruction of the USSR, Russian oligarchs will fight for resources by deceiving the population about environmental threats, and Greenpeace will be used as an instrument for suppressing competitors, in that power in the Arctic , as well as for surveillance of the Northern Fleet of Russia. Note that Greenpeace was not active against British Petroleum, which organized a world ecological catastrophe.

4) «Of course, aspects of his work need to be readdressed. For example, Rosa Luxemburg, a revolutionary for Poland and Germany, criticized Marx's lack of full awareness that accumulation of capital could not go on forever - if nothing else because of the problem of continually finding markets for increasing production of commodities ordered by capitalists for no other purpose than profits, at the same time that they want restricted wages».

As we know, Marx pointed to one of the manifestations of the basic contradiction of capitalism - the discrepancy between the growth of production and the limited effective demand of the working people, that is, the capitalist's desire to limit wages (In Russian: Works, Vol. 25, p. 268).
Secondly, Lenin demonstratively criticized the criticism of Rosa Luxemburg, in a number of articles on the markets he showed that capitalism can develop even without seizing foreign markets. Thus, the end of capitalism with the end of globalization is a false thesis.

5) «Moving on, Marx describes what workers actually did when they had power in Paris in 1871. But he also describes the ferocity of the subsequent opposition by capitalists, namely, a bloodbath. He would not be surprised at all by the Chilean coup by Augusto Pinochet in 1973 nor the US hostility to the Chinese or Cuban revolutions. He would not be surprised that May Day with origins in the US is not celebrated as a holiday in its country of origin. However, and this is important, great intellectuals can be misused. They can be objects of misuse precisely because of their penetrating insights. When Marx exposes capitalism in the raw for workers, some can refer to his insights for their own nefarious purposes, purposes that have nothing do with the emancipation of workers, even as they might so suggest. This problem is not a simple one as we have to first understand correctly what motivated Marx.
It is not good enough to say that Marx wanted a society free of exploiting classes. The very next question would be how to get there. In fact, "how" is perhaps far more important and difficult. We must respect people, but we also must respect the power of those against the people, and that power is greater now than in Marx's time. As an illustration, the US government used nuclear weapons openly, and proudly, twice for mass extermination. If push comes to shove for any government of capitalists - and that was not even the case for Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Marx's understanding would tell us that there are no limits. I repeat: no limits. With the Middle East a modern flashpoint and Israel with its nuclear weapons potentially facing revolution sooner or later, Marx is giving us a message. And we are obligated to take account of it if we are to be really for the people».

By the way, the Kaiser Wilhelm suggested Marx to move to him to fight together against the bourgeoisie with the help of his political economy. Marx refused.
It would seem that with the introduction of new technologies, with the increase of labor productivity and the mass of capital, the ruling classes have more and more opportunities to suppress the proletariat, to buy it, to use even Marxism-Leninism against the proletariat. Is not the CPRF, this pocket "communist" opposition, serving this purpose?

The contradiction of capitalism is that with the growth of production, the administrative apparatus is less and less capable of mediating the entire aggregate of economic ties. There are only two options for the ruling class: either to start redistributing power from the top down, that is, to start destroying oneself. Or simplify the system by breaking the economy into components. The latter option was implemented in the USSR in December 1991.

The growth of centrifugal tendencies is also observed in the USA, and these trends will intensify in view of the expansionist policy of the United States. By the way, Harriman predicted the disintegration of the United States.

On the other hand, capital in its development uses everything that comes to hand. But, in turn, the development of capitalism develops and productive forces.

Many workers in Russia have put forward to me the thesis that the proletariat in its struggle can not go beyond certain limits - because of the threat of use of nuclear weapons.
On the contrary, this capital has limits to the struggle against the proletariat. The bourgeois can arrange a lockout, but can not do anything without those who bring him a profit.

Capital can not already use nuclear weapons in a competitive struggle. Only the 2nd World War could give the US the opportunity to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But the US could not use nuclear weapons in China, nor in North Korea, nor in Vietnam, Cuba, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya or Syria.
The total use of nuclear weapons is impossible in principle, it threatens nuclear winter. Around 1982, a discussion was broadcast on television between a certain NATO colonel and the Soviet political scientist Arbatov. Arbatov criticized the American buildup of nuclear weapons. However, the colonel retorted: the presence of nuclear weapons is a factor restraining wars. Colonel repeated the words of Engels: "Someday mankind will accumulate so much weapons that wars will become impossible."

There is another, more significant error in the thesis of the threat of the use of nuclear weapons by the bourgeoisie against the proletariat. It presupposes such a ridiculous practice of the struggle of the proletariat, which is not directed to the army. The army, meanwhile, consists of people.

Therefore personally I have no respect for those who are against the people. Moreover, those who are against the people are becoming more and more fascists, all over the world: in the USA, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia.

But we, the Marxists, are always obliged in our practice to think whether our bourgeois clan is using our activity. Examples of such use are left-handed. Thus, various Trotskyist and so called “goscap” (state capitalism in the USSR) groups were used by the US State Department to clear the NATO road to Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria in mass consciousness.
All the leftists of the world applauded the disintegration of the USSR. Cretins. 30 million extra deaths in Russia, 12 million - in the Ukraine.
Washington commands "Milosevic!" And the leftists are against Milosevic. Washington commands "Gaddafi!" And the leftist - against Gaddafi. Washington commands "Assad!" And the leftist - against Assad.
More of that, many Trotsyist groups supported Bandera fascists on maidan in Kiev!
More of that, the most rich people in the world privatized revolution itself! In Georgia, Libya, Syria, Ukraine.

6) «Turning to my own country, the US, I had not expected the political situation we are now in. It is worse than expected. Some aspects are front-page news, but there are horrible details too numerous to single out without distorting the message. Basically it is total disrespect for humanity by the federal government. Yet the candidacy of Bernie Sanders in the last presidential campaign surprised many, and he said and continues to say that he is a "democratic socialist." He even has a photo of the great US socialist Eugene Debs in his office. He had and has considerable popularity, particularly among younger people, in a country that had been taught by propaganda to hate "socialism." And, suddenly, there is now a new uprising by teenagers against gun violence who speak for themselves about it, not through adults. Changes are occurring».

There are only 20% of thing production in the USA, speculative capital dominates. Thus, the US lives at the expense of the rest of the world, USA consume 50% of the world's energy and throw 50% of the world's emissions into the atmosphere.
Changes in the richest country of the world began immediately after the legalization of bourgeois relations in the USSR and the disintegration of the country. As the counterweight disappeared, the USA carried out aggression in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria.

On the other hand, the welfair was liquidated, the minimum wage was reduced. The military-industrial complex in the field of high technologies was reduced. Negro protests began.
In 1992, 9,000 policemen, 10,000 National Guards, 3,300 US Army and Marine Corps, 1,000 FBI officers were introduced, armored vehicles, combat and police helicopters were deployed to Los Angeles to suppress a peaceful demonstration. The fire was opened to defeat, about 100 people were killed, more than 11 thousand people were arrested. About 500 people from among the detainees received from 25 years to life imprisonment. Claims from the UN and the world community were not. Officials guilty of using force against peaceful demonstrators were not punished.

Similar changes occurred in other developed countries. In the UK, powers refused free of charge medicine, curtailed educational programs, shut down the mines, unemployment jumped. In Japan, with its institution of lifelong recruitment, 5% unemployment arose, which was a shock to the Japanese. In France, money from public schools was transferred to private schools, social programs were reduced, and the pension qualification was increased.

That is: all over the world labor and capital collided nose to nose, without an intermediary in the form of the so-called camp of "socialism". The working people realized that they should fight on their own. In this connection, and also in connection with the fact that after the disappearance of the USSR not only the national consolidating image of the enemy disappeared, but also the international consolidating image of the enemy. It was possible to observe, as wars broke out with the strengthening of the euro.

In 1999, the non-cash currency of the euro was introduced to the world, replacing the ecu, which was equated to the dollar. In the spring, bombardments of Belgrade followed, after which the exchange rate of the non-cash euro becomes less than 1 dollar.
By the autumn of 2001, it is planned to introduce cash euros. There is a "terrorist attack" on September 11. Euro cash is introduced only 1.1.2002, the euro starts to crowd the dollar. The British "The Economist" draws the euro as a viper. By the end of January 2003, the euro for the first time exceeded the dollar at 1.06, in March the bombing of Baghdad followed, NATO invading Iraq.
On September 11, Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh was killed. She was a key figure in the campaign for the country's entry into the euro area. On September 14, a referendum on this issue was planned in Sweden. The euro is again rolling back.
By the summer of 2008, the euro exceeds the critical threshold of $ 1.5 and is not going to stop. In September, Washington authorizes Georgia's actions in South Ossetia. For 4 days the euro falls against the dollar from 1.52 to 1.34, and then to 1.26.

Dmitry Medvedev ruled In Russia during this period, he had no accounts with foreign banks, because he easily cut off the gas pipe "for repairs." The barrel immediately rose, the ruble returned to its positions.
But at the end of 2013 the euro again approached the $ 1.5 mark. The United States had no choice? US arranged a Maydan in Kiev. After the forced annexation of Crimea, Putin was appointed a world evil, the image of the external enemy was successfully reanimated.

Although Putin is not a world evil at all! There is no totalitarianism in Russia, the bourgeoisie in Russia has not yet ripened from the class-in-itself to the class-for-itself, because the state is so weak that it is unable to collect a progressive tax. There is no Putin regime, Putin is just a protege of the ruling class of the raw-material bourgeoisie.
Although attempts to resuscitate the image of the enemy in the face of Putin were made in 2001, and in 2006 (after the "Munich speech"). Inside Russia, Putin confidently plays the role of the enemy of the United States.

However, one can not judge the changes in moods in the USA according to Sanders. Rather, on the contrary. The fact is that the US copied from Russia not only the electoral "roundabouts", but also the tactics of "torpedoes". "Torpedo" - this is clearly not the favorite, which the ruling party launches in elections, so that he can steel votes from a competitor. And Sanders performed well his role - he bought a left-wing electorate, for the credibility of hanging in the office photo Debs. And he gave his votes to the shark of imperialism - Hillary Clinton.
According to Sanders, one can judge the naivete of the lefts, who believe that something can be changed by presidential elections. Right, only a herd believes that the owner changes when a shepherd changes.
The shift to the left is in the other: more than half of American voters did not come to the polls.
As for the youth - personally I have no illusions about it. As people say in Russia: "For youth! For the courage! For the fresh wind! In your strong heads".

7) «Perhaps the single most important message from Marx is that "another world is possible." Why possible? First, we obviously have had other worlds before. And, second, we have no choice but for yet another and better, given the truth about capitalism! Workers of the world unite!»

The Soviet Union is understood under the "other world", obviously. And in vain, because its disintegration showed that the level of productive forces was too low. It was so low that the USSR lagged far behind the developed countries according to the main criterion noted by Lenin in the pamphlet “The Great Initiative”: on labor productivity.

Secondly, I would object to such ideas about Marx. "Worlds", "schemes", "systems", choice between "worlds", etc. are the essence of bourgeois illusions. And the truth about capitalism is also not the main thing, as Marx said, the weapons of criticism will not replace criticism with weapons. In view of the fact that fascism is a natural feature of capitalism, without bloodshed it will not be possible to change the society without bloodshed, alas.

The socialist revolution will be realized not because of the idea of "other worlds", but when the obsolete production relations will hinder the development of the productive forces.

Alas, today the main slogan of strikes is "Do not make us worse!" It is impossible to unite workers even one factory shop. What kind of world association can we talk about. The so-called "mobilizations", flash mobs, antiglobalism, altreglobalism,  etc. - chickens are laughing.
The world is in a protracted crisis, the productive forces are weakened, and a period of regression has come. What is clearly visible on drunk Sarkozy, on the pedophile Berlusconi, on the barking on the entire air of Hilary Clinton, on the inadequate Therese May, etc.
Now let us turn to the main question formulated by the author in the most bourgeois form: "How to get there". I.e. in the "other world", and supposedly there are specialists, lamps of reason, shines of mind, who know the right path.

First, note the wrong paths.
The first path is the creation of such a remarkable correct party, which, at last, will lead the working class and lead it into socialism. Many adhere to such views, apparently, the collapse of such a powerful structure as the CPSU, taught them nothing.
As for the workers. The workers are fed up with the fact that they are not considered to be people, but are considered a herd of sheep who need a shepherd. They are people, and therefore they are going to think with their own head, and not with the head of the party general secretary. And this is not a hint at anarchy. No one renounces the power of the Soviets. Simply Marx defined socialism as "the living creativity of the masses". The mass, not the party lights of mind.

The second wrong path is the lack of understanding of Marxism. Marxism as a method, not works of Marx.
Everyone is convinced that the evil of capitalism is concentrated in money, money expresses the value of the commodity.
In the article "Criticism of the Gotha Program" Marx writes that the value of the commodity is generated by the abstract labor of a worker. What is needed for the product of labor to dump its commodity form? Marx is convinced that labor becomes abstract in the process of market alienation, in the sphere of exchange. Therefore, in order to destroy the value, it is necessary to liquidate the market. What the Bolsheviks tried to do.

However, the same Marx wrote in the “Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844” about the stultifying, depersonalizing labor of the worker, and Ilyenkov points out ("Dialectics of the abstract and concrete in the Capital of Marx") that the physical labor of the worker is already abstract in the process of production. It is this production abstraction that generates abstractness in the sphere of exchange.
Lenin in practice understood Marx's mistake and in 1921 introduced a new economic policy (NEP). It was designed for decades, but Stalin turned NEP in 1927.

That is: socialism by definition is a transitional period when the old social division of labor that divides society into classes is being eliminated. First of all, the contradiction between mental and physical labor is resolved, as Marx writes in the same article, "Criticism of the Gotha Program."
In 1953, Stalin, in his pamphlet “The Economic Problems of Socialism”, denied the contradiction between mental and physical labor in the USSR and repeated Marx's mistake from beginning to end.

But still - "how"? No way.
Because this question can be answered only by the practice of the struggle of the working class, which, according to Lenin, is above theory. As Marx said: every practical step is more expensive than a dozen programs.

To begin with, we must forget the words from the “Manifesto…” about the leading role of the party. We must understand that Lenin's book "What to do?" is obsolete. The situation has changed! The labor movement - can independently break free from the framework of economism, without introducing into the inert dark matter of the working class the divine political consciousness by party priests.
One may note strikes against abstract conveyor labour in USA at the end o0f 60th or Soviets at Italian plants at the same period or acts of workers of Sud Aviation in 1968. Finally, examples of the Paris Commune and the first Soviets in Russia!
And you see - authorities pay the left parties for their participation in the elections. The authorities made from all parties from ultra to ultra security buffer between themselves and the masses. Parties have discredited themselves around the world, absenteeism is growing all over the world.
By the way, the editions of most Marxist journals are concentrated in the USA and Great Britain, even Indian and German ones. This means that most of the left organizations are controlled by the CIA and MI-5. Consequently, workers must create their own independent factory political organizations.

The role of left parties is only to help workers in their self-organization, like Lenin wrote in his project of the first program of Russia social democratic workers party.
Lenin's book “The Childhood Illness of Leftism in Communism” is also obsolete, in the part where Lenin writes about the vanguard of the working class. If the vanguard is a minority, the working class is not ripe for dictatorship, it can not control its vanguard in the role of state officials. If the vanguard is a majority, this term loses its meaning.

We must understand that the disintegration of the USSR was logical. But this does not mean that the October revolution in backward agrarian Russia in 1917 was a theoretical error of smb, like wrote Menshevik Kuscova in her “Credo”. The bourgeois revolution has been walking for a whole century only over one small France. The era of regression will pass, the era of socialist revolutions will continue.

22.5.2018
Correspondence with Western professors

After the publication of my article “Marxism Today”, a curious correspondence arose.

Tamas Krausz writes:
“Friends, it’s old and simple theory of state capitalism, it follows to nowhere, plus support of new capitalism”.

Krauss simply ignorant, he did not read Russian authors, so he considers the theory of state capitalism in the USSR like unpretentious.
But "something native is heard in the long songs of coachman": "Your genetics are pouring water on the mill of imperialism!"

I write:
“Dear friends, it is very easy to say "or, it’s old theory..." It's a little more difficult to try to understand what I wrote.
As for other non "state capitalism" "theories" - they do not lead to anywhere, but morons don't understand it. To tell me truth I am tired of illiterate foreign dunces

Marxism is old theory too and a lot of bourgeoisie morons write that it doesn't lead to anywhere. And we see like "communist" party of Russian federation supports powers, like Trotskyist parties serve Washington, like "socialists" in France rule like capitalists, like all other left groups in the world can't do anything during tens of years. Useless lefts!”

Krauss writes:
“No, no. Illiteracy is hipothesis, everything is  capitalism in the 20th century. You should read something else in this subject too. Really this theory of state capitalism is not only old, but too simply. Read Marx on state socialism and will understand stalinism. To repeat all the time the same hipothesis is very boring and ideologically also very problematic. Do not get offended. Prefere thinking on it. Thanks. I read you for a long time. Respect other's opinion too.

I answer:
“No, no. illiteracy is not hypothesis. I proved it in my article on example of US professor. And I SAW different left groups and "scientists" in UK, Argentina, France, German, Canada etc. I wrote their stupid books with the claim to scientific character.

 You should read something else in this subject too. Really all other theories besides the theory of state capitalism are not only old, but too simply. Read Marx more and may be you will understand smth. To repeat all the time the same hipothesis is very boring and ideologically also very problematic. Do not get offended.
 And I'l be glad to respect other' opinions too. If they are not stupid. But I don't see in your word any opinion! Only empty words about nothing.
 
 Sorry... do you really think that I didn't read Marx on state socialism??
  Our group learned scientific communism, Marx politeconomy, philosophy and historical materialism when we were stidents. Then we about 10 years lerned it once more - to beat "soviet" professors. And we beat them easy. So please don't be bulge”

Then Krauss pulls out something, but not arguments against some fragments in my article, but old, eaten arguments against the theory of state capitalism in the USSR:

“The old state socialist regime was not profitoriented market economy opposite to the new capitalism with semifascist face. Nobody could inherit the state ownership that is why the upper stratum of bureaucracy had to change regime (system). Or Thatcher and K;d;r are the representatives of very different historical, economic, social and political systems in principe and in practice with some similar features. The core of a historical phenomenon can be found in the difference. Read Luk;cs on the "overhelming moment" in Ontology without bulge.

I answer:
“The fact that there was no profit-oriented market economy in the USSR is an old propagandistic song. Any capitalist monopoly destroys the market, this was noted by Ricardo yet. You need to know the economy of the USSR, profit was the most important indicator in the economy. Well, but no one has yet proved that there was socialism in the USSR.

The right of inheritance is deeply secondary. But you do not understand the situation. Capital is not a pot that the son inherits from his father. Capital is a social attitude. It consists in the fact that the son of an elite actor becomes an elite actor, the son of a KGB general becomes a KGB general, the son of the 1st secretary of the regional committee becomes a member of the CPSU Central Committee.
 
Of course, there was a different situation the UK and Hungary. But the situation was different in Great Britain and Argentina. You need to understand the variety of forms of capitalism.

As for Lucasc, of course, I read him about 20 years ago. He is stalinist and made a lot of mistakes. And you have to read Ilyenkov, Batischev, Kessidy, Mamardashvily, Vazyulin if you want to understand smth.

I appeal to you as a deaf person - you have not refuted any part of my article!
I stop writing. I don't like those who is bulge, but can't think”.

Of course, Krauss could not stand it, he decided that his word must necessarily be a last resort. He writes:
“You are the big mixer. Nothing exists except for your dogma. Plan economy and the was an antithesis. Market economy without  unemployment???  You do not prove anything. You do not understand even the  logic of profit production. After that no sense to discuss with you, really”.

The unhappy Krauss has nothing but abuse. "Planned economy, planned economy ..." He just does not notice my words about Ricardo. Since he is unable to understand the evidence, he writes that I have not proved anything. Yes, and that was to prove. I just showed that he has no arguments! He does not even understand that I have not written a word about unemployment! So I understand, he does not know, that in 1986 there were 1.7 million unemployed in the USSR, but in market Japan with its institute of lifelong hiring unemployed was not at all.

The author of the article, professor Zarembka, whose article I criticized, also wrote to me.
“Boris, thank you for your extended reactions to my short piece which I have read fully.  I understand that English is not your native language but I could understand you.  Keep in mind that I was only given 1000 words, so many ideas could not be elaborated. I will focus on three reactions I have:
1. I do not disagree with your interpretation of Bernie Sanders, but the point from an American perspective is his ability to maintain that he is a "socialist", while many were not bothered with that.  If you lived as long as I have here, you might understand its importance, even if he himself merely passed his support onto Clinton.  Anti-socialism/anti-communism has a long ideological history here.  As to the youth, if we do not respect them and their energy, we are lost.
2. You make an interesting comment that nuclear weapons are paper-tigers, like Mao said.  You cite something from Engels, but I don't know where that is.  In any case, could you explain more how you think nuclear weapons are now useless?  I do think Israel is quite capable of actually using it and, frankly, I don't think the rest of the nation states would do more than complain, even if forcefully, and perhaps do some sanction.
3. I believe you misunderstand Luxemburg and thus you are in a long line of those who dismiss her.  I could send you my published opinion, if interested.
All the best, Paul”.

I answer:
«Dear Paul, thank you for your letter. You are right, I am not good hand at English and have no practice in 18 years, so I am glad that you have caught me.

1. Not so long ago I read a book in which the articles of the leaders of many Communist parties of the world are collected about what the proletariat is. This question was asked of him by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF). I was amazed at the ignorance (illiteracy) of the leaders of the Communist Parties. Now 2018, but they do not know what the proletariat is and can not distinguish it from the workers! They correctly identify the doctor in hospital, engineer and worker with the hired character of labor. But they do not understand that workers differ from engineers and doctors in the content of labor. And CPRF too.
So they don’t understand Marxism, they don’t understand society dynamic: socialism is a movement towards overcoming the old social division of labor, primarily the division of labor into the mental and physical.

Lenin repeatedly stressed that the Bolsheviks are a party of the working class, not intellectuals, not peasants. He called the working class a hegemon because socialism and communism are a fundamental interest precisely for the working class. The intelligentsia will not disappear under communism, but the depersonalizing labor of the worker must disappear, and with it the working class.
Therefore Marx wrote that "all the oppressed strata of society must realize the interests of the working class as their own."
We are with working class so WE ARE NOT LOST.

And what do the Western Lefts do? They have no close ties with the working class, but they add to cart, recruit a female movement, buggers, Jews, hippies, students etc. and even schoolchildren. I saw it in Argentina, in Netherlands, in UK, in France…  We saw youth with it’ energy in fascist maidan in Ukraine, the youth jumped, as crazy, and shouted: "Russians and Jews - on knives!", “Russian - on the gallows!” “Who does not jump - that is Russian!”
You see we in Russia are tired from Western stupid primitive.

Of course Sanders may think about himself that he is socialist. But why??? Did he organized any strike,  blocked of highways, did he create any workers committee at any plant and so on, what is his PRACTICE? Only bla-bla-bla? Mitterand and Holland are socialists too. And what? Many people in Russia think about themselves that they are communists.
But the PRACTICE OBJECTIVE RESULT of Sunders’ activity was help to Hillary Clinton.
May be, the word “socialism” is new for US. But… how to say… It is not great attainment, to my mind. It is word only. And I don’t respect energetic youth with empty heads. The world is not France, and today is not 1968.

2. I didn’t wrote that nuclear weapons are paper tigers. Of course it is dangerous, of course there is problem of using of it by terrorists etc. I didn’t wrote that nuclear weapons are “useless”. But, at first, nuclear weapons make the third world war impossible in view of nuclear winter. At second it gives only possibility to save itself for North Korea from US aggression.
As for Engels you may be sure, he wrote the words about war, that I repeated. Lenin repeated such words too, in his wife Nadejda Krupskaya’ stories she writes he said that in the future “the war will become so destructive that it will in general become impossible". I live in military Ural so I know Russia may annihilate USA during 2 hours without any possibility of any defense as well as USA may annihilate Russia.

It is evident that Israel is the same fascist county as USA, look 2nd attached file. I mean: the idea of superiority of the US and Jews over all nations of the world, unprecedented aggression, strangling freedom of speech, if not with the help of prisons, but with the help of layoffs, the killing of children by policemen, police violence, etc.
Several Israel journalists wrote that Israel was ready to use nuclear weapon against Iran. To my opinion it is only words. Of course, every normal man wants sanctions – because of Israel aggression. But you see it is impossible, USA will stop any attempts of sanctions.

I know several Trotskyist groups that every year write resolutions against Israel. Of course, all of them are useless. I think it is such a game.
To my mind one is to choose other method: to publish truth about Israel, step by step. And not in newspapers or on TV, but in leaflets.
On the other hand there are workers in Israel. So we are to think how to support class fight in Israel, it is only way.

3. As for Luxemburg I agree with Lenin. I wrote two words about her, if you don’t agree, please, write, what my words are wrong from your point of view and why.
And have you read Lenin's criticism of Rosa Luxemburg? What can you object to Lenin?
But if you may send me your article, I’l be glad.
Best wishes, your Boris Ikhlov

PS. Because you selected only 3 points, I hope you are agree with all other fragments from my article, especially main fragments.
PPS.
In  the  early  90's  I  corresponded  with  one of the leaders of the American  Negro movement Ajamu Dillahant. I wrote to her that it would be nice if the Negro movement closed in the labor movement. After all, the  problem of the blacks of the United States is a particular thing, their struggle is the fight against the consequence while preserving the cause. Ajamu stopped her correspondence”.

Paul writes:
“Attached is my defense of Luxemburg.  A prior work of mine that is cited includes as an appendix the first translation from Russian of Lenin's marginal notes on Luxemburg's book (by James Lawler). Lenin, to the best of my knowledge, never wrote a coherent criticism of her 'The Accumulation of Capital'.  Yes, Lenin said she was 'wrong' and wrote some private letters praising criticisms of her, but without saying clearly why.  In 1915 he merely cites in publication Bauer, Eckstein and Pannekoek in support of a statement that she is wrong, but without indicating which portions of what
they wrote are correct, less than correct, or in error. 
If you know something that I don't know about Lenin's writing on Luxemburg's book, please let me know.  Otherwise, his claim that she was 'wrong' really is not worth much discussion.  If she is wrong, it is not because Lenin said so.

On Sanders, you are correct but the problem is not only or mainly about Sanders' personality.  What I was trying to convey about Sanders and about youth is that the U.S. is in movement, politically, and there is opposition to fascism here which would require much too much discussion to be included in that short piece.

I don't much like reference to 'Jews' as such.  Because, as you point out, there are working-class Jews in Israel.  If I were to accept 'Jews' as a category, then also each and every other religion as if coherent.  'Zionists' is better.  But even that reference disguises the materiality of capitalist expansion.  One comment I recently read actually says that Israel is a fundamentalist Christian (!) state, disguised with its 'Jewish' reference point. Even this still makes religion the reference point in its effort to describe the main power behind this tiny state of a few million.
On nuclear weapons, I am not sure I understand you.  Do you agree or disagree that nuclear weapons COULD truly be used, say, by Israel?  I am not asking about 'threat'.  I am asking about DROPPING the bomb from a plane or firing a nuclear missile.  I am saying it is truly possible and thus must be taken account of.
Thanks, Paul”

I answer:
“Of  course,  the total use of nuclear weapons is impossible because of the  nuclear winter. That is, the US, Russia, China, India will not be able  to  apply  it.  Britain and France, as NATO members, will not be able  either.
North  Korea  is  not  going  to use nuclear weapons until the US will attack.
Pakistan  and  Israel  are  the  last  in  the  list.  These are small countries  with   a   small  amount  of  nuclear weapons. Their use of nuclear  weapons  in  small wars means their self-destruction. But the threat of use is deterrent for the Arab countries.

Of  course,  we  may  and  must  cry about Israel' nuclear weapon – to compare with North Korea. But, to my mind, it is not first task. First task is Israel aggression.

As  for Luxemburg. Of course, Lenin didn't criticize 'The Accumulation of   Capital"   especially,   his   articles  are  about market, about Luxemburg  position  about  automatic  death  of capitalism, about her position  on  national  question  etc.  We  studied  it  when  we were students,  so I will send you everything, but not quickly - you see, a lot of work, we must finish smth.

I looked through your article and should like to make several remarks.
So  I  ask  you  once more to send me, if it is possible, your text in other format, not pdf but word.

As  for  Sunders  - you are right, modern processes in USA are radical and complete, so I shall be glad if you tell about the situation in US in details.
Sincerely, Boris”

Paul didn’t send me the article in other format.
The professor cites in the article about Luxembourg such personalities, as Raya Dunaevskaya, Tugan-Baranovsky and others, gives their opinions like the truth. While, for example, Lenin thoroughly criticized Tugan-Baranovsky. Tugan-Baranovsky simply did not understand the Marxian scheme of simple reproduction.

The reader, you see - the professor ignores my questions, my requests, he does not want to answer!
A narrow specialist is like a flux - the completeness of him is one-sided. Zarembka specializes in Rosa Luxemburg, he can not understand anything else. But the American professor does not know the elementary things. He does not know how Lenin criticized Rosa Luxemburg!

Imagine how low the scientific level of professors in the West fell. Lenin laughed at the theories of Rosa Luxemburg. He completely refuted them. Of course, Luxemburg is a revolutionary, but her theory speaks of the automatic death of capitalism. Luxembourg and Sismondi rigidly link the existence of capitalism to the presence of external rank. This, of course, is nonsense.
«Capitalist production in general, writes Marx, does not exist without foreign trade. But if we assume normal annual reproduction at a given scale, we thereby represent the case in such a way that foreign trade only replaces native objects with objects of another use or natural form, and it does not affect the ratio of value, and therefore, , in which two categories are exchanged for each other: the means of production and the means of consumption, as well as the relations of constant capital, variable capital, and surplus-value, that the value of the product can be decomposed into of each of these two categories.. Therefore, attracting foreign trade to the analysis of the annually reproducible value of the product, without giving anything new either for the problem or for its resolution, can only bring about confusion. Therefore, it is necessary to completely disengage from it» ("Capital", vol. II, Ch. XX, section XII).

The Luxembourg mistake is primitive, elementary, but Western professors raised her musty theory to the banner.
This is understandable - her theory is directed against Lenin, against Marx!

I did not correspond with professor Cyrus Bina, but he also congratulated Marx on his birthday.
He particularly writes: “Marx’s grasp of capitalist competition and his distinction of capital from landed property can be found early on in The Poverty of Philosophy (1847), where Marx chides Pierre-Joseph Proudhon on two major issues. First is on capitalist competition by which the process of concentration and centralization manifest itself and the accumulation of capital leads to class polarization. Here Marx capitalizes on a synthetic analysis in which competition and integration, just as space and time in Einstein’s theory are synthetically entwined; neither competition nor integration (i.e., concentration and centralization of capital) has separate standing. This view of competition is what Marx employed in his Capital (1867), some two decades later”.

Thank you. Hence, Marx agreed with Proudhon. Although the book of Marx is directed precisely at the criticism of Proudhon. It also turns out that competition and integration are like space-time. Those. in the early 20th century. banks, united, did not destroy small banks, and cohabited with them… Unless in the 80s, the consumer products of the USA did not find that the antimonopoly legislation does not work… The professor forgot what cartel collusion is? Einstein turns in a coffin as a propeller: time and space devour, cancel each other!
Zarembka is a specialist in Luxembourg, Bina is an expert on Proudhon, for which he receives money.

Further, Bina is smashing the Marxists, who buried theories of the value of Marx. I wonder where he dug up those.
“These same Marxists also habitually refer to the present epoch as neoliberalism thus generating a twofold error: (1) identifying the United States (and the epoch of Pax Americana, 1945-1979) with neoliberalism – a euphemistic label for globalization – and in consequence (2) papering over the loss of American hegemony and irreversible shift in the balance of global power. In other words, these radical scholars (along their liberal counterparts in the apologist circles), perhaps inadvertently, lionize the leaders of the now defunct era and misrepresent the nature of international relations of today. On this account too, in my opinion, Marx’s legacy should be crystal clear by now”.

I.e. Bina is not limited of mixing Proudhon with Marx. He assures us that there is no neo-liberalism in Russia! He assures us that the US for Europe does not knock free trade out of Europe. At the same time, the US allegedly does not impose strict protectionist measures.
It turns out that after the collapse of the USSR, the US did not become a world hegemon, a world gendarme.
Bina still writes that there are crazy people abroad US who are afraid, as if the US hegemony, that is, fascism of the United States, may be disappeared!
Is it clear why Bina is a professor?

At the end, Bina appears before us almost Blake:
«The glimmer of hope is in the air. The heavens point to a singularity. The two hundred candles are burning intensely against gentle wind in Highgate Cemetery (North London), while birds of spring are singing in unison: “Workers of the World Unite …” Happy Birthday Karl – Happy Birthday!»

Bina writes quite seriously. In Russia, such a phrase would cause Homeric laughter. Bina does not ask what the working people think, he asks heaven and birds. The workers themselves do not talk about solidarity, but Bina's birds sing about it.

So that by… Both correspondences confirm my "hypothesis" that the Western Lefts are little educated and can’t think. Most of them are morons.
Otherwise, how could capitalism tolerate Marxists? Such "Marxists", on the contrary, benefit for capitalism, so they have the title of professors.


THE CRISIS OF THE PROTEST MOVEMENT

The first blow to the worker and Communist movement has caused rapidly-forced collectivization according to  Trotsky’ plan, that Stalin adopted, the dispossession of the middle peasants (everything against Lenin’ policy), the murder of the delegates of the XVII Congress of CFS in 1934, and Moscow open processes 1935-1936 years, which the comrades of Lenin attributed ridiculous accusations, then these people were killed.
What are the results?
Class and party
Here are a few quotes from Lenin's work "What to Do".
"The workers could not have a social-democratic consciousness. It could only have been brought from outside. The history of all countries shows that the working class is able to develop only a trade unionist consciousness exclusively by its own efforts... " [1]
At this point, the materialist Lenin becomes an idealist, it is not matter that develops from itself, but the idea is primary, it is brought from outside into the dark, stagnant, inert matter of the working class.
However, history shows that both the Paris Commune and the Soviets were created by the workers themselves, without party spiritual pastors.
Stalin made Lenin's situational statement of workers ' illiteracy a conceptual idea. Today, " bringing political consciousness to the masses", "the inability of the workers to break out of the trade union framework by theiselves" - is a fundamental idea for all bourgeois parties.
"The consciousness of the working class cannot be a truly political consciousness if the workers are not trained to respond to all and every case of arbitrariness and oppression, violence and abuse, to whatever class these cases may belong; and moreover, to respond precisely from the social-democratic point of view, and not from any other point of view" (p. 69).
Pay attention to the word "accustomed". Lenin wants to teach the workers how parents teach their children? On the other hand, if the workers do not respond to the oppression by the authorities of such bourgeois as Furgal, Grudinin, or Navalny, this, on the contrary, is good, it means that the remnants of independent thinking have not yet been eradicated from the working class.
Why does Lenin put the Social Democrats as the standard of everything? And if the Social Democrats are wrong – should the working class follow their mistakes? Today, the working class is called upon to respond to the oppression of sexual minorities, the provocateurs beaten by the police, and the dictatorship of those whom the United States appoints as dictators.
If Leo Tolstoy, Gorky, and many other great people were outraged by the police suppression of senseless student demonstrations in St. Petersburg and Moscow in 1899, today demonstrations of this type, ridiculous, exalted, shocking and provocative, cause a desire to support the police.
"Who should the team of professional revolutionaries consist of? The founders of modern scientific socialism, Marx and Engels, themselves belonged, in their social position, to the bourgeois intelligentsia. In the same way, in Russia, the theoretical teaching of social-democracy emerged quite independently of the spontaneous growth of the working-class movement, and emerged as a natural and inevitable result of the development of thought among the revolutionary-socialist intelligentsia." (p. 31).
Marx, Engels, Lenin, Kollontai, and many others laid down their lives for the cause of the working class. These are unique cases, there are no such cases today. But here Lenin 1) separates the evolution of social-democracy from the working-class movement, 2) considers the development of social-democracy independent of the working-class movement, so he clearly distorts history.
“And I will defend this position, no matter how much you incite the crowd against me for my "anti-democracy". And so I say: 1) that no revolutionary movement can be strong without a stable and continuous organization of leaders; 2) that the wider the mass that is spontaneously involved in the struggle, which forms the basis of the movement and participates in it, the more urgent the need for such an organization and the stronger this organization must be (for the easier it is for all demagogues to attract the undeveloped strata of the mass); 3) that such an organization should consist mainly of people professionally engaged in revolutionary activities” (p. 121).
This is what Stalin said: the party should consist of special people, a kind of swordsmen.
Of course, no one is against the organization. But whose organization is it? Either it is an organization of the intelligentsia, or of the workers themselves. Either the workers have the intelligence and power to displace the objectionable head of the organization, or they do not.

Lenin writes about the undeveloped strata of the masses. In 1917, in Russia, workers had at best 3 classes of education, and not all of them. In the 80s, workers had 10 years of education, and some had higher education or incomplete higher education. Today, workers visit libraries, listen to the radio, watch TV, and use the Internet. Highly skilled workers have received a much deeper education over the years of complex work than the education of many party functionaries. For such workers, it is precisely the propaganda of the social-democratic professional revolutionaries that appears to be empty demagoguery.
"The only serious organizational principle for the leaders of our movement should be: the strictest secrecy, the strictest selection of members, and the training of professional revolutionaries. If these qualities are present , then something more than "democracy" is also guaranteed, namely, complete comradely trust between revolutionaries... they have no time to think about toy forms of democracy, but they feel their responsibility very vividly, knowing from experience that the organization of real revolutionaries will not stop at any means to get rid of an unfit member" (p. 142).
After Stalin had been rude on the phone to Krupskaya, after the XII Congress of the RKPb had ignored his call to remove Stalin, Lenin could see for himself that "comradely confidence" and "getting rid of an unfit member" were his illusions, and a harmful one at that.
"And our wise men, at a time when the whole crisis of Russian social-democracy is explained by the fact that the spontaneously awakened masses do not have sufficiently prepared, developed and experienced leaders, speak with the profundity of Ivanushka: "it is bad when the movement does not come from the bottom"!"
“This kind of' “push from the outside” was not too much, but, on the contrary, too little, ungodly and shamelessly little, in our movement, because we were too diligently stewing in our own juice, too slavishly worshipping the elementary “economic struggle of the workers with the masters and with the government”. We, revolutionaries by profession, must and will continue to engage in this kind of" pushing " a hundred times more. But it is the fact that you choose such a vile word as the "boost side", which inevitably makes the working (at least working as undeveloped, underdeveloped as you) distrust of all who bear his political knowledge and revolutionary experience, causes an instinctive desire to resist all such people - you are a demagogue, and demagogues are the worst enemies of the working class” (P. 122-123).
First, today a revolutionary by profession is a parasite who lives on the membership fees of his organization. The workers have no confidence in such people.
Secondly, a person differs from an animal in that he thinks. If someone takes away this distinction from the workers, claims that they themselves cannot think, because they, the party pastors, have the right to bring them political knowledge from the outside, this someone will certainly arouse the distrust of the workers.
Third, today this thesis of Lenin is not just outdated, but harmful. For there have been so many nudges from bourgeois liberals, Stalinists, various pro-American anarchists, Trotskyists, loudmouths, and demagogues in recent history that these nudges are already making the workers angry.
The bourgeois "Choice of Russia" was pushing for strikes, Academician Sakharov was pushing, and the shouter Grigory Isaev was pushing. Udaltsov-Tyutyukin and Navalny are pushing. Finally, by order of the US state Department Tikhanovskaya and her accomplices in Belarus called to strikes .
However, the whole pathos of Marxism is the affirmation of the independent thinking of the worker. Lenin repeats after Marx: socialism is "the living creativity of the masses." The masses, not the parties. Socialism, according to Lenin, is "a struggle against all kinds of oppression," and this struggle is without the creativity of the parties. It is not difficult to see that in his polemics with the anarchists, Lenin completely repeats the ideas of Bernstein-Kautsky.
It is not difficult to see that today ALL parties, both left and right, use the Bernstein scheme, which boils down to the following: the party bonzes write the program, the party gray ranks bring it to the masses, the masses follow the program, mainly vote in elections, after which the party bonzes get senior government posts.
All parties reject materialism, which claims that the class is primary and the party is secondary; all parties follow bourgeois idealism and strive to lead the working class.
Thus, the idea of Kautsky and "a government that meets the proletariat" is realized, for which Lenin called Kautsky a renegade. Practically all Trotskyist organizations follow Kautsky's thesis.
Thus, the left-wing parties turn out to be right-wing, bourgeois - in their practice.
In many of his other works, Lenin directly contradicts his own book "What to Do?"
A state official in the USSR is a party official. "Let's reduce the role of state officials to the role of simple executors of the will of the working people!"("The order from the Council of labor and defense to the local Councils"). Socialism – when "everyone after working out their 8-hour lesson begins to engage in state activities" ("the next tasks of the Soviet government"), "every cook can not manage the state, but every cook must learn this". And these were not empty words – in the first years of Soviet power, 20 million people passed the educational program of the state service. However.
One of the main reasons for the defeat of the revolution
Marx writes in a letter to Zasulich that if the Russian revolution does not remain alone, and the working-class movement of the West does not reconcile itself to the capitalist system, then the victory of the revolution and socialism in Russia with its peasant communal tradition will be assured. Otherwise, the Russian revolution as a communist revolution will be doomed to failure [2].
In 1882, Marx and Engels linked the question of the Russian and world revolution. If the Russian revolution serves as a signal for the proletarian revolution in the West, then both of them will complement each other [3].
Thus, Lenin and Trotsky, rejecting the idea of the victory of socialism in a single country, followed the classics. Trotsky deduced the necessity of a world revolution from the international division of labor, Lenin pointed out that backward, agrarian Russia was not ripe for a socialist revolution, capitalism had barely begun to develop in it, it was necessary that the revolution in Russia should push revolutions in the developed countries, then the victorious proletariat of these countries would come to the aid of the Russian proletariat.
Stalin followed the Lenin-Trotsky line even after Lenin's death in 1924, but then accepted Bukharin's idea of the possibility of the victory of socialism in a single country.
Lenin, on the other hand, made no secret of the fact that the socialist revolution in Russia was defeated – even before the revolution in Germany was defeated.
In 1918, when the left-wing Marxists accused him of "building" state capitalism, Lenin replied that state capitalism was a step towards progress.
In the same year, he points out to the workers who want to expel the bourgeoisie, nationalize the factory and start managing it independently, that they cannot manage the enterprise, because they do not know either production or the market [4].
Therefore, in 1919, at the congress of agricultural communes, Lenin argued that "we cannot “introduce” socialism' now", which would be good if the “grandchildren will see socialism”.
The dictatorship of the proletariat, Lenin emphasizes, is not only and not so much the suppression of the bourgeoisie, but the ability of the working class to take the economy of the whole country into its own hands.
It is impossible to "introduce" socialism in Russia, writes Lenin, "for we are illiterate" [5].
Therefore, the Workers ' Opposition (Shlyapnikov, Myasnikov, etc.), which decided that the time had already come to transfer power to the workers, without receiving broad support from the masses, disappeared from the political scene.
The matter does not end with the realization of the defeat of the socialist revolution in Russia. There is another angle from which to consider the question of relation between class and party.
In the article" The Infantile disease of Leftism in Communism " of 1920, Lenin attacked the German Social Democrats, not wanting to understand their opposition to the party class.
But in 1923, when the XII Congress of the RKPb was being held, he understood this contrast from his own experience.
Plekhanov pointed out that the dictatorship of the proletariat is as different as heaven from earth from the dictatorship of a group of revolutionaries-commoners. The Congress of the RKPB, without Lenin's participation, decided that the dictatorship of the proletariat was expressed in the form of the dictatorship of the party. Lenin, on the other hand, emphasized that "the dictatorship of the proletariat is expressed in the form of Soviet power, a form found by the workers themselves" ("The State and the Revolution"), and he spoke about the same thing at the 1st Congress of the Comintern.
For more information, see [6]. It is not difficult to see that today ALL the left-wing organizations of the world stand on the positions of Bernstein-Kautsky-Stalin. Thus, all these organizations are anti-communist.
But the anti-communism of the left does not end with following Bernstein.
Purchased lefties
What are the modern Trotskyists, socialists, Communists, and in general all the leftists doing? Are they related to the struggle of the working class in their own country? Nothing like that. They announce that a socialist revolution has begun in some country, and collect money from members of their party to go for a walk in that country. If Washington appoints someone in some oil-or gas-rich country as a dictator, the left immediately agrees and says that this "dictator" is the main obstacle to the world socialist revolution. The left is also fighting Russian imperialism. Not with American, God forbid! No leftist in the world will ever say a word about the American world gendarme. The left also protects the rights of women, blacks, pederasts and protects nature from Russia. In short, anything but the struggle of the working class. The left declares the protection of pederasts – you will laugh - an integral part of the struggle of the working class.

After Strauss Kahn was removed from the leadership of the IMF by Washington with an idiotic accusation of sexual harassment, and no matter that the accusation turned out to be false, after the whole world saw the idiocy of accusations of sexism and so on, it became obvious that the women's rights movement, feminism, is being used by American capital for its own interests. Feminism has degraded, gone wild, and become a tool for the suppression of the proletariat.
The same thing happened much earlier with the environmental movement. Since the 80s, Greenpeace has been a tool in the hands of American corporations to suppress competitors. Even earlier-the trade union movement became completely subordinated to capital, Russia in the 80s and 90s learned from its own experience how the AFT KPP and others implement the interests of the US State Department in different countries.
I have already written how in the United States in the 60s, the introduction homosexuality into the protest movement by the secret services, along with anti-exhibitionism, the hippie movement, etc., led to the disintegration of the movement.
Today, the accusation of homophobia is used by Washington as a club for those governments that are trying to show independence from the United States.
Another club has been created exclusively for Russia – the accusation of nationalism, of great-power chauvinism, and more specifically, of anti-Semitism. Although there is no less anti-Semitism in the USA or France than in the USSR.
Even the anti-racism movement has been perverted by capital, reduced to absurdity, turned into its opposite – black racism. The anti-racism movement has discredited itself, turned out to be a means in the hands of the US Democratic Party to achieve Biden's victory.
In the same way, the anti-fascism movement was discredited, and the anti-fascists, along with the anarchists, also found themselves in the service of Biden.
The literacy and intellectual level of the leaders of left-wing organizations and the professorships of left-wing organizations is discouragingly low.
One of the Russian luminaries of reason, professor Mikhail Khazin, speaking on TV, said: "Marx argued that if the world becomes a single system of division of labor, capitalism will end."
But Marx never said that. This thesis was put forward by Rosa Luxemburg, and Lenin convincingly refuted it.
The professorship in Europe and the United States is even more primitive. All of America imagines that Sanders is a socialist!
However, it is far from just a "non-systemic" protest or a sharp decline in the mental abilities of the left – since the Frankfurt School.
Previously, the special services, for example, Germany managed to emasculate left-wing organizations, impose the path of terrorism on them, and then eliminate them.
Today, Trotskyist organizations openly sided with Washington, repeating propaganda accusations of the dictatorship of Milosevic, Hussein, Gaddafi, and Assad. Trotskyist organizations, under the guise of resolutions against the bombing, objectively served the United States, they cleared the way for NATO in the mass consciousness.
It came to the point that the Trotskyists supported Hitler's Maidan in Ukraine.
Capital has tamed even the communist parties. Some of them are Stalinist, that is, they have nothing to do with Soviet power, with the power of the working class, with socialism.
Today, the authorities of all parties, systemic and non-systemic, from the ultra-right to the ultra-left, have created a protective buffer between themselves and the masses. Capital pays for the election campaigns of the Communist parties, and the more candidates from the Communist parties become deputies – the more money capital pays to the communist parties.
Once again: "socialism is the living creativity of the masses." The masses, not the parties.
Of course, every representative of one or another left-wing organization is sure and will convince others that he is a Marxist, a socialist, a communist. But the masses must understand that in reality they all are anti-communists.
In 1877, the work of Petr Alekseev in court "process of fiftieth," said: "... the Russian working people can only hope to themselves and no one from whom to expect except from one of our intelligent young people..."
Today the Russian working people first need to fear is the intelligent young people and to rely only on itself.
In hydrodynamics, there is an interesting effect: heating from above dampens the convection from below. In the 1980s, the Liberal Democrats ' instilling of a multi-party system with the support of the CPSU elite suppressed the growth of the labor movement. President Putin was particularly zealous in instilling a multiparty system. Multiparty heating stifles activity from below. To suppress - one needs to lead!

Consequently, the working people should not involve themselves in bourgeois parliamentary election campaigns. Workers need to avoid being used by any left-wing organizations. One can't trust their demagoguery, their slogans, their oracles. The only way out is in the self-organization of the workers, in their independent actions, independent of the various parties.
Workers, doctors, teachers, and others need to create their own security services, their own mutual aid funds, and their own mass media.
Literature
1. Lenin, (The complete collection of essays, vol. 6, p. 79.
2. Marx, K. The letter to V. I. Zasulich // Essays, 2nd ed., vol. 19. M.: State Publishing House of Polit. literature, 1961. S. 250-251.
3. Marx K., Engels F. Preface to the second Russian edition of the "Manifesto of the Communist Party" // Op. 2-e ed. Vol. 19. M.: State Publishing House of Polit. literature, 1961. p. 305.
4. Rees A. V. Journey to the revolution. Russia is in the midst of a Civil War. 1917-1918.
5. Lenin, On cooperation // 5-e ed. Vol. 45. M.: Polit. literature, 1970. p. 377.
6. Ikhlov B. L. On the dialectic of the class – party relationship.
http://krasnoe.tv/node/19953?withThread=01
http://www.proza.ru/2013/11/21/1006