Valery Podguzov
Translation - Miron Makarov

Scientific Centralism as an antidote from
opportunistic degradation of parties with Communist names

Original

What has to be done to finally overcome the herd in the psyche of people?

The strategic goal of communist practice is to form relations that are opposite of those that developed between people in the process of separating human society from the herd of primates but remained dominant throughout the history of mankind until October 1917.

The prehistory of humanity is characterized by the fact that, at this stage, the tribes of erect mammals, remained at the herd level of development, verbally formalized many details of their life, forms of relations, and means of subsistence. The most detailed verbal reinforcement of herd principles and motives of behavior erect mammals was in the Roman Law (especially at the part of protecting holy animal institutes of private property and slave-owning democracy) and in holy religious commandments. As religious institutes were strengthened, people were forced with fire and sword to believe that society is just a flock, a flock of peculiar sheep led by a shepherd, and therefore, the herd form of social relations has a divine origin.

If we take into account the content of the Bible, and much more reliably, the results of paleontological research, we will have to admit that, initially, the animal world appeared and existed on Earth for millions of years, i.e. a stable example for "Adam and Eve", and primitive people could not have any other ideas about the forms of relations between living beings, except for herd ones. The animal experience was fixed verbally in the minds of people, as a role model. It is symptomatic that the first deities among people were a "sacred" cow, "Taurus", a "minotaur", a talking snake, etc.

Naturalists have recorded indisputable facts of the use of tools by monkeys (from a stick to a stone), the facts of teaching young animals multi-stage methods of obtaining food. But the history of monkeys remains meaningless and without signs of progress because primates have not yet thought of about verbal fixation of their productional and organizational achievements. And thats why every new generation of monkeys must again learn all lessons of nature, through many repetitions of the same lesson.

Psyche that has not reached the verbal level excludes the opportunity of social anthropogenesis. This primitive level of the psyche makes it impossible for monkeys to accumulate, assimilate, and even more so, the creative development of socially significant information.

The verbal level of the signaling system was a necessary prerequisite for separating a person from the animal world, but it was insufficient. It took a long time that was full of tires and falls to learn how to label phenomena with words, and find more rational ways of thought movement from phenomenon to essence, from content to cause-and-effect relationships, i.e. to create diamatics as an extremely concrete, categorical, and not formal logic Consequently, the entire history of humanity, which has already taken place, is nothing but a slow movement of relatively isolated ethnic groups from primitive herding to human forms of interaction proper, to overcome atavism.

It is obvious, that the whole modern democratic phraseology in it's essence, that is, for the reasons of its origin, there is a verbal form of fixing the herd principles of the majority's domination over the minority with a periodic change of the leader, which, however, can be trampled over time, which happens systematically with modern presidents, popularly elected and popularly despised in all civilized countries.

The formation of diamatical logic is a sufficient condition that stops the monopoly of herd consciousness. The process of separating a person from the herd, begun by systematic, diverse, meaningful mass physical labor, has reached its completion in Hegel's dialectic. Among the most diligent students of Hegel, it is impossible not to mention Clausewitz, David Riccardo, Feuerbach. Feuerbach understood the main thing in Hegel's idealistic dialectics and became... a materialist.

Marx by combining Feuerbach's materialism with reworked Hegel's dialectics created the foundations of fundamental diamatics. Marx proved that the own history of humanity will begin only after all the SOCIAL activities of people will be carried out in strict accordance with the known objective laws, that is, with a fully constructed communism. Everything that has happened is happening, and will happen to humanity up to this moment has been and is its prehistory, overflowing with atavisms in religious and legal packaging.

If you just look at the wild lines of customers at the days on the days of humiliating sales, if you just look at annually military parades at the capitals of Western countries, if you just look at how football fans can kill for their favorite team, if you just look at how liberal democrats constantly fight for who is more democratic inside their flocks you will understand that psyche of most modern bipeds erects didnt looks so different from the psyche of the flock.

Even more depressing impression should be made on people by the debates in the parliaments of the world about spendings on the army and police, prisons, and special services. The increase in expenses for the maintenance of law enforcement agencies proves that the WHOLE set of modern social relations has not gone far from a pack of baboons, in which the leader's fangs until they are blunted, are the only argument in maintaining a democratic herd "order.

The appearance of the" Manifesto of the Communist Party", and later Marx's" Capital", was the historical event in the culture of humanity, from which the process of forming the subjective potential for the transformation of the last herd-like formation, i.e. capitalism, into a humanized society, originates. For the first time, people got a mirror in which they can see not only vices of the market herd but also reasonable guarantees of transformation into a normal healthy human society.

Of course, mathematics made a certain contribution in the matter of isolating a person from the biota. But, as the practice has shown, this verbal knowledge about QUANTITATIVE dependencies in the inanimate matter is completely insufficient to overcome atavism in people. You can memorize tensor forms of calculus while remaining Oppenheimer, Taylor, Sakharov (famous dissident), or Berezovsky (Russian oligarch). Mathematical knowledge, in pre-communist formations, only increased the power of the money-grubbers over nature and people, turning nature itself and the ethnic group into an object of competitive destruction, up to world wars. Almost every technical discovery of the era of private property, including nuclear energy, initially found its application in military affairs, and only then in civilian production, and some never found a peaceful "profession". Significantly, Hegel and Marx were very good at modern higher mathematics, you can easily check this by just reading their works. History doesnt know any mathematicians who have at least a satisfactory understanding of Hegel's dialectics and Marxs economic theory. You can slander diamatics as much as you want, but this cannot cancel the position that it is impossible to find someone from mathematicians who have read, at least, the "Science of Logic". Even Einstein had enough strength for Mach and Russell ( And, remarkably, you can see it in his Theory of Relativity'' [a note from the translator]), but not for Hegel.

However, the defeat suffered by the CPSU proves that even among communists, it should be far from just about reading and remembering the content of the works of the classics of diamatics. Since the bearers of the left idea recognize the system of relations of communist society is diametrically opposed to the system of herd market democratic relations of capitalism, i.e., if the communists, in theory, have risen above atavism, then in practice they are obliged to conduct things in such a way that communist relations pass full testing in the internal party life of the left parties themselves, i.e., they would permeate its entire practice and prove their effectiveness, first of all, within the party. Many years of practice showed that modern leftists are afflicted with many bourgeois moral ailments, one of them is a propensity for philistine-motivated competition. The slogan of modern brotherhood must be implemented by the communists in their sphere and only after that communists will gain the right to convince people to make this experience public. But here we are not just talking about the slogan of ostentatious, blood brotherhood or friendship we are talking about the scientifically based social "technology" of the formation of relations of SINCERE, SCIENTIFIC brotherhood.

Only when principles of brotherhood and its theoretical formulas will be understood and will get sencional emotional approval by the every party member, ONLY when the daily personal experience of building a genuine society will no longer generate neuroses, bouts of envy, when the overall result in the form of social progress will cause sincere rejoicing in the individual's soul, ONLY in this case can and should there be confidence in the individual's consciousness that an animal has died in him, i.e. egoism, and a scientific UNDERSTANDING of the diamatics of the personal and social has been established.

Real communization of society is the most important condition to the personal happiness of every person and, at the same time, the main form of "payment" for his works.

Since ancient times and to this day, the issue of graduation is solved much easier than the issue of genuine and comprehensive education of the majority of the inhabitants of the planet. Therefore, people, throughout their history, in the process of producing the material conditions of their existence, are FORCED to enter into economic relations with each other in the absence of scientific knowledge about what they are actually doing. If it were otherwise, the oligarchs would not be able to produce millions of armies of deceived shareholders and investors with diplomas of MEPhI (National Research Nuclear University) and Moscow State University.

Gradually the more people understand the fact that the main form of market democratic relations is a competition between everyone with everyone until the total annihilation of the competitor. But in the minds of many people there exists a misconception that competition is a kind of jousting with an open visor.

People, for centuries, trading in the markets, did not understand that this act, full of shamelessness and greed, is the main moment of competition, that the essence of the price discussion process, i.e. bidding, consists in the desire of both traders to deceive each other and, at the same time, not to let themselves be deceived.

They did not understand that in the course of trading, always and everywhere, one of the traders turns out to be objectively deceived, i.e., the loser of price competition. The modern financial system demonstrates the same thing everywhere: the unscrupulous desire of the sellers 'countries to rob the buyers' countries, the creditor countries to strangle the debtor country already at the stage of concluding a loan agreement, and the debtor country not to repay the loan, i.e. to ruin the bank country.

This process is quite informative and frankly shown, for example, by Soros in his book "The Crisis of World Capitalism", and by John Perkinson in his book "Revelations of an Economic Killer". The entire economic history of humanity before Lenin and Stalin in the history of the domination of the "poke method", i.e. the exploitation of the Russian licensed technology" maybe "under the European PR brand"risks".

The history of the USSR is the first attempt to translate economic relations between people into the mainstream of a scientific approach. Until 1917, in the entire world economy, the brain's ability to think was used only speculatively, for example, to violate the requirements of the law of value. Entrepreneurs, reflecting on prices, tried to do their best, that is, to cheat their neighbor, but it turned out, as always: "overproduction" of goods, inflation, mass bankruptcy, unemployment, crisis, war, the death of millions of people and a huge mass of material values, a senseless waste of the life of entire generations.

Communism, on the contrary, can be based only on the conscious systematic use of objective laws of optimization of industrial relations and, therefore, excludes the inefficient waste of material, intellectual, chronometric, and demographic resources of society. Naturally, there will be democrats who will say: "Then why did the USSR economy lose the economic competition to capitalism?".

First, it is not clear why many modern Russian intellectuals rejoice in their victory over the USSR, because the Russian Federation is dying out, having already lost more population than the USSR in the Second World War. It became clear why the market world was striving for victory over socialism in the economic competition. But in the narrow consciousness of market intellectuals, the very fact of victory overshadows all its cannibalism. Secondly, the long-term economic recession in the United States, the crisis in Spain, Greece, Portugal, the civil wars in the Arab world are a consequence of the" loss " of the USSR. Thirdly, the USSR collapsed because already in the CPSU, under Gorbachev, at least two-thirds of the party members did not possess Marxist theory, most often to no extent, but, using the democratic procedure, made their way into the lead. In this regard, the entire directorial, general, ministerial, "tsekovsky" corps of leadership in the USSR had nothing to do with communism. They DIDN'T know how to build it. The leadership of the post-Stalinist CPSU, even if there was a fervent desire among individual members of the Central Committee, was absolutely unable to bring science into the practice of expanded communist reproduction of socialist society. Starting with Khrushchev, especially after the removal of Molotov and Shepilov from the Central Committee, there were no members in the leadership of the CPSU who could be called Marxist theorists, at least in some approximation. That is why all the market democratic media annually celebrate the memorable dates of the life and work of Khrushchev, Kosygin, Andropov, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze as their agents, without whose stupidity and betrayal the destruction of the USSR would have been impossible.

The ingloriously ended history of the CPSU and the difficulties experienced by modern left-wing parties, the splits that systematically occur in them, the lack of any significant political results, convincingly prove that the norms of internal party life and the forms of relations between party members did not meet and still do not meet the criteria of communism.

Therefore, before building communist, i.e. scientifically based relations in society, it is necessary that the party learns to uncompromisingly build these relations within itself.

One must have an abyss of stupidity in order to claim the role of the vanguard party and, at the same time, not be able to build communist relations in the party environment itself.

The experience of the RSDLP teaches that Lenin and Stalin, approaching the historical moment when it was necessary to begin large-scale practical actions, somehow freed the party from members who had a sea of "their own opinions" that were different from the scientific one. The practice has shown that numerous carriers of "their opinions" in the party, in fact, have always been carriers of absolutely erroneous opinions and "morality" of gastrointestinal and genital origin.

There was no case when Lenin or Stalin left the Bolsheviks and joined the Menshevik wing of the party. On the contrary, it was the Mensheviks, including Trotsky, and many future Trotskyists who joined the Bolsheviks, formally leaving the herd of Mensheviks, and at every decisive turn of history they turned in politics with the consistency of a dog's tail. It is significant that in 1923, immigrants from other parties made up 7% of the members of the RCP(b). These were by no means workers "from the machine" and not peasants "from the plow". There are cases when former White Guards and even tsarist gendarmes formed cells in the backwoods, accepting each other into the Communist Party. For example

Meanwhile, it is possible to build communist relations only when the activists of the Communist Party, on the fundamental issues of the universe, take an absolutely scientific position, when the diamatic way of thinking about the world turns into an organic way of their thinking. If someone is inspired by dianetics, eugenics, or hermeneutics, Popper or Weber, they absolutely do not need to join the Communist party and try to convince the communists of the failure of diamatics. They have the right to form their own party on their own ideological basis and prove the validity of their theoretical choice in practice.

It is the members of modern parties with communist names who are afraid of hard work on themselves, but, most often, are too lazy to perform it. Meanwhile, the hopes are futile that it is possible to have vague ideas about the essence of communist social relations but to carry out the practical construction of a communist society.

Is it possible to build communism, if members of parties with communist names dont have a conscience?

It is quite obvious that none of the modern democratic, religious and ethnic parties claims the title: "the mind, honor, and conscience of the modern era". For all such parties, it is important that a barely noticeable majority of voters who came to the ballot boxes voted for it in the current elections. And after the election, you can relax, especially since you don't need to do anything special, because, according to the prevailing paradigms, either the market or god will do everything for you.

However, if we pursue two closely related historical goals, namely, to exclude the rebirth of a party with a communist name and, on this basis, to bring the construction of communism to a victorious final, we will have to admit that the main task of every communist should be to take care of the level of development of his own CONSCIENCE.

It is clear that the weak knowledge of Marxism by the majority of members of modern parties with communist names is convincing proof of the lack of conscience among these members. A major indicator of the shamelessness of the members of modern left-wing parties is the state of complete insignificance of their party literature.

The principle of democratic centralism played a cruel "joke" with the CPSU not by itself, but because, firstly, in the last set of the CPSU and its leadership, most (about two-thirds) were subjects who had no conscience at all, and secondly, in the CPSU, by a "strange" coincidence, as it has now become clear, no one made any attempts to give a scientific explanation of the phenomenon of conscience. Everyone, especially the patent scoundrels, praised Lenin, but they "forgot" that Lenin called on the party to work extremely conscientiously so that the workers in the Communist Party would see the intelligence, honor, and conscience of the modern era. Lenin believed that the "mother of history" needed not a communist party in name, but a party consisting of communists.

As they say, feel the difference.

The further the party moved away from 1953, the more it forgot that the CPSU should remain the only party in the world that cares entirely about the quality of party members, and not about their number. Therefore, apparently, the artistic study of the phenomenon of conscience in the USSR did not find a proper embodiment. The party "forgot", and the "kultregers" did not guess. The cries of a slightly sobered brother Karamazov, Raskolnikov's postulates, in short, Dostoevism, are ALL that the overwhelming part of the modern artistic intelligentsia still appeals to when it comes to conscience.

For the same reason, Solzhenitsyn called his manifesto "Not to live by lies". The question is, why not call this essay "Living according to conscience"? But, being a hard man, Solzhenitsyn understood that it was immeasurably easier to live "not according to a lie" than to live according to conscience. At least, in this essay, he advised people to tell the truth as they understand it themselves, without bothering their conscience with work. I.e., Solzhenitsyn urged people to speak "not according to the truth", but as they please. Naturally, in this version of the struggle for the truth, any graphomania, especially a drunk one, is a truth-teller.

In the case of the collapse of the USSR, Solzhenitsyn undoubtedly played the role of a kind of banner, somewhat more noticeable than, for example, Vasily Belov, Glazunov, or Novodvorskaya. Therefore, remembering Solzhenitsyn, we are investigating a fairly representative case of atrophy of conscience, which entailed serious consequences. Strictly speaking, Solzhenitsyn is a subject from the same row as Herostratus, Nero, Caligula, although he is more cunning, and therefore he slept in his own bed.

In the depths of his soul, Solzhenitsyn could not help but understand that living according to CONSCIENCE means, at least, living according to the principle: think a hundred times before you blurt out and even more so cut to the quick without anesthesia.

However, all the kitchen gatherings of dissidents, judging by the contents of their almanacs, were meetings of fabled roosters and cuckoos. The vilification of UNFINISHED communism, the glorification of personal merits in the matter of shoving sticks in the wheels of this movement and, in conclusion, collective viewing... pornography, as the main cultural value of the Western way of life, was the permanent program of all such sessions of life "not according to lies".

Solzhenitsyn, the scion of the richest family in the Kuban, a former Komsomol member-an opportunist, a cynically truthful man who expounded his vindictive nonsense under the guise of truth, but never, like, for example, Govorukhin and Ryazanov, who did not utter the truth. Actually, that's why he preferred fiction prose because in it it was possible to force the heroes of his novels and stories to truthfully speak nonsense, abominations born of the squalor of Solzhenitsyn's own worldview, the zemstvo scale of his stupidity. He made his paper characters moral freaks, traitors, simple "Denisovichi", of course, never received a rebuke from his "anti-heroes". This was much more cunning than the "technology" that was chosen, for example, by Navalny, Nemtsov, Ponomarev, or the All-Russian political "babushka", Alekseeva. These people are talking nonsense from the podium in front of a mass of swamp intellectuals, including policemen. But, so far, only democratic police officers see signs of falsehood in their appeals and, periodically, with visible pleasure, beat provocateurs directly in the face.

Conscience from the point of view of a scientific approach

One of the deep dramatic laws is that the truth is always concrete. Therefore, in order not to put the process of forming knowledge about conscience among party members only in line with heroic Red Guard feelings, it is necessary to consider what conscience is in terms of its content, essence, the law of its awakening, ways to test party members for the maturity of their conscience, for the degree of skill in its mobilization.

Naturally, in modern Russian society, which is accustomed to pronouncing scientific ideas in Latin, ancient Greek, at least, English terms and letters, the use of the Russian word CONSCIENCE to denote the diamatics of the individual may seem an unacceptable simplification. However, we will leave lambdas and sigma to physicists, and we will try, to begin with, to explain the essence of the diamatics of personality to the Russian reader in the language of Pushkin, Tolstoy, Sholokhov, in order to be understood, first of all, on the territory of the former USSR.

It is very difficult, translating the word CONSCIENCE from Russian into Aristotle's native language, not to translate it as the DIALECTIC of personality, or even better-the DIAMATICS of personality, i.e. the extremely demanding SCIENTIFIC dispute of the subject with his POSSIBLE errors for the sake of comprehending the absolute truth in order to perform an action that is flawless from a scientific point of view.

The Russian word CONSCIENCE denotes the RATIO of NEWS, i.e. the ratio of one'S OWN THOUGHT to another'S OWN THOUGHT, both of which are born of the same reason, primarily the desire of the subject to assess the degree of the scientific validity of his own act, born of thought.

Conscience is not a feeling that arises spontaneously, not a slight shame in front of deceived readers, as it was, for example, with the writer Vasily Belov shortly before his death.

The word CONSCIENCE in the Russian language means the daily trial of every intelligent person over himself, without the right to make mistakes and pardon. Conscience is an exhausting, sometimes painful search for malicious intent, therefore, stupidity in one's own actions, CONDEMNING oneself even for an involuntary MISTAKE in views on events, on people, and even more so for hasty STATEMENTS, the fallacy of which is a lie from the point of view of scientific truth.

However, if the diamatics is not the matrix of conscience, then a conscience, as it has been for centuries, works idly, and humanity moves along the path of progress, mainly through tragedies. Complete ignorance in the field of diamatic knowledge makes all attempts to mobilize conscience fruitless.

Until now, in literature, especially fiction, published in Russian, the word conscience denoted strong EMOTIONAL feelings about what they had done, and not the process of meaningful uncompromising self-condemnation, with a high degree of mobilization of the scientific factor. The question of guaranteeing the INFALLIBILITY of conclusions at the moments of such self-condemnation remained in the shadows, i.e. the question of the level of objective competence of the "lynching". The heroes of the works, by the will of the writers, simply suffered in search of the truth, and this was enough for fiction writers. The philistine sensual interpretation identifies conscience only with strong psychological experiences based on the collision of narcissism with a misdemeanor that contradicts the norms of morality of its circle. Conscience, in the bourgeois sense, manifests itself in the form of impulses of "remorse" that generate discomfort, but gradually lose their sharpness. The bourgeois, for example, will never fight against the poverty and homelessness of children, no matter how "gnawed" his impulses of conscience. Otherwise, where will it be possible to find cheap labor and orphans for a broad gesture of "adoption" for the sake of satisfying, as mass American practice shows, their sadistic pedophile pathologies under the guise of charity.

Diamatics as a system of scientific knowledge, on the contrary, does not involve the involvement of feelings in solving complex social problems. Diamatics does not distinguish between the laws of the development of matter and consciousness. It was diamatics that proved their unity, identity, and opposite. Matter simply moves by interacting. Diamatics is a calm, ACCURATE way of investigating significant problems, without "switching to personality", without any influence of emotions.

But, since the human consciousness is not free from feelings, the word conscience, in the scientific sense, reflects the organic unity of accurate, cold diamatics with adequate ethical, aesthetic, and volitional reactions of the individual. The productive human conscience is the emotionally colored diamatics of the personality.

Of course, the process of conscience can be successfully carried out not only in Russian, but also in any other language, if there is a similar concept in this language and, at least mostly, mastered categories of diamatics. If the diamatics is not assimilated by the person, then all attempts at scientific introspection are doomed, at best, to an error, in whatever language this error is formulated.

To paraphrase the words of the poet, we can say: we say conscience, we mean the diamatics of personality, we say the diamatics of personality, we mean conscience.

Conscience is a reflection on the contradiction contained in one's own solution to social problems. Only with such an internal dispute with oneself is a synthesis possible, that is, the resolution of the contradiction between how a person should have acted, from the point of view of the laws of PROGRESS, and how he actually acted, and why.

The main questions of conscience, in the scientific meaning of this phenomenon, are not so many questions about meanness and honesty, about villainy and virtue, about kitchen wisdom and militant stupidity, as about the contribution of the individual to the PROGRESS of mankind.

As you know, the ancient Greeks called an idiot a person who did not participate in the political life of a slave-owning society. But today, SIMPLY participating in modern market policy means showing, at least, profound ignorance, as demonstrated, for example, by Zyuganov, who has been participating in the work of the bourgeois Duma (Russian parliament) for 20 years, i.e. in the gradual degradation of the Russian Federation. Today, it is appropriate to call idiots, first of all, those people who do not understand that only those conclusions and actions that by their very nature serve the cause of social progress can be justified by conscience.

Let us repeat that a certain "technical" feature of the concept of diamatics consists only in the fact that diamatic thinking reveals the laws of the development of being and ideas in general. The word diamatica applies to all cases of conscientious research of the causes and facts of development. The materialistic dialectic of personality, i.e. conscience, is a special case of diamatics, generated by the opposition of the individual and the general, individual and social values in the consciousness of a person, atavism, and humanity in the potential of each person. The unity and struggle of these opposites act as an internal cause of personality development, jumps in its state, and social role.

Of course, each individual, in the end, is a consequence of the totality of social relations, the nature of the development of the social productive forces of his epoch. But the fact that at least two not only opposite but two antagonistic classes are formed within the same level of development of social productive forces indicates that there is no automatism in the formation of personality. A person is not able to commit a moral or immoral act before he decides to commit it.

But if you look through the textbooks of philosophy and scientific communism of the period of the rotting of the CPSU, then you can find only vague, meaningless muttering about the formation of a "man of communist society" in them. And this is on the condition that Lenin quite definitely called petty-bourgeois unscrupulousness the most destructive spontaneous force that generates capitalism every minute.

Soviet psychologists and teachers turned out to be complete ignoramuses in matters of mathematics, and therefore did not solve a single theoretical and practical problem related to overcoming philistinism, petty-bourgeoisism, and therefore unscrupulousness in the minds of people.

It remains unclear that the integral historical orientation of society is the sum of the "vectors" of the social orientation of each individual, i.e. their personal self-assessment and goal-setting, which manifest themselves in real relations between people about the production of the conditions of existence of the individual and society.

It is absurd to hope to build communism in a society in which the semi-animal ideas of the majority of ordinary people are not opposed by a clear, scientific worldview that displaces petty-bourgeois idiocies from the psyche of individuals.

The Soviet working class has repeatedly proved that it can comprehend and implement "into material" any most complex and large-scale task: from the Victory overworld fascism to space exploration and classical ballet. But the majority of Soviet social scientists, including the so-called 50s and 60s, rode shamelessly and fed upon the neck of the Soviet working class, without giving ANYTHING to its culture, hoping, at best, for some automatism in the formation of the class consciousness of the proletarians by the very fact of their proletarian origin.

It is clear that, depending on the verdict of individual conscience, in the case of a certain number of judgments coinciding, an integral "vector" of conscience or unscrupulousness of a certain MAJORITY is formed. This "vector algebra" is the basis for the transformation of the superstructure into either a slave-owning democracy, or fascism, or market liberal democracy, or a dictatorship of the working class. It is natural that when egoistic petty-bourgeois motives dominate in the minds of people, public morality and politics tend to slaveholding or liberal democracy, with the obligatory institution of slavery and genocide, i.e. to the American model, or fascism with concentration camps and guest workers, i.e. to the German model.

In the "Breakthrough" it has been repeatedly noted that vulgar materialists have learned, like a rhyme, only that the formation includes a basis and a superstructure, that the superstructure is, first of all, politics and ideology, that ideology can be secular and religious, that the basis is primary, and the superstructure is secondary, without understanding the diamatics, i.e. the unity and identity of these opposites. The overwhelming majority of scientists of the CPSU did not understand that even in exploitative formations, in which mass ignorance is a prerequisite for the existence of these formations, the relative correspondence of public consciousness to social existence does not arise spontaneously, that the content of religious theories and political doctrines is not formulated in clouds and does not fall out in the form of precipitation.

The Hegelian formula that everything real is reasonable should be understood not as a justification of existing orders, but as a statement of the fact that every real, i.e. existing superstructure, even the most idiotic, is generated by "reason", and only because there are various concrete religions, forms of representative, executive, and judicial authorities, subjectively "constructed", i.e. invented, in one way or another corresponding to the basis, i.e. the established production relations. Every religious myth or legal law introduced into practice is the fruit of many years of author's efforts and propaganda work, very often, of unnamed "apostles".

Soviet social scientists were obliged to surpass bourgeois sociologists, political scientists, cultural scientists, and Sovietologists in quality, i.e. in the effectiveness of their research, their superstructure, but they could not do this. The only weak justification for Soviet social scientists is that it is immeasurably easier to mythologize, i.e. to lie than to get to the real causes and essence of social relations.

After capitalism, through the crises of overproduction, proved that industrial production is already capable of surpassing the entire effective demand of the world's population, and all the objective prerequisites were ripe for a radical reorganization of distributive relations, it took Marx twenty most difficult years of intense scientific work to write "Capital", i.e. to lay, "just", the cornerstone in the theoretical foundation of the superstructure of the future formation. Then it took another 55 volumes of Lenin's works, 16 volumes of Stalin, to form the scientific foundation of the theory of communism, still poorly assimilated by our contemporaries.

Figuratively speaking, the theoretical "walls and dome" of the superstructure of the communist formation, due to mental laziness, and therefore illiteracy, hence the UNSCRUPULOUSNESS of modern "left" leaders, have not been erected to this day.

Many left-wing theorists have not yet understood that in the presence of OBJECTIVE technological prerequisites for the emergence of, for example, slavery, it is necessary that, first, a SUBJECTIVE decision to become a slave owner matured in the individual's consciousness, his conscience should fall asleep, and only after that he put a person in the stocks, rarely feeling contempt for himself. After the conscience ceased to bother a person at night, he decided to become an even greater parasite, i.e., "anointed of God". And when his conscience finally left him, he entered into relations with each in the most cynical, capitalist form of wage slavery. In the course of the struggle of the business class for the strengthening of its parasitism, religions and political doctrines are changing according to the principle from less effective to more parasitic. An increasing number of resources, including intellectual and financial resources, are purposefully spent on maintaining the correspondence between the exploitative basis and the ideological superstructure in modern conditions. Only at the cost of huge costs can the relative conformity of the ideological superstructure to overripe industrial relations be maintained for the time being.

All material objective prerequisites for the emergence and development of exploitative relations are realized only to the extent of the absence or extinction of conscience in the individual. Conscience and the success of entrepreneurial activity are not compatible at all. The slave owner and the feudal lord were forced to support the lives of the slaves they bought. Capitalist exploitation, that is, capitalist exploitation. the record productivity and intensity of labor under capitalism are based, first of all, on the lack of education of mental and physical labor mercenaries, and secondly, on the fact that there are millions of unemployed armies behind the shoulders of workers who are ready, for the sake of a piece of bread, to oust already working "classmates" from their jobs. Moreover, having hired a slave, the capitalist will pay him not earlier than after a week of hard work. No capitalist cares what a guest worker who has been accepted for a probationary period will eat during this first working week. In this, capitalism is more brazen than all previous formations.

Quality of thinking and conscience

The high assessment of the role of conscience in the process of becoming a communist's personality is based not on wishes alone, but the laws of the development of individual and social consciousness, both from a physiological and social point of view.

Many people know the literal, i.e. simplified version of the interpretation of the law of dialectics on the transition of quantitative changes to qualitative ones, but few people know that this law is the law of the dominance of quality over quantity, that quantity is not the leading side of this unity. Human speech is not a set of sounds from " a " to "z", not the Hebrew untranslatable spell "abracadabra", but, first of all, a THOUGHT filled with concrete content, which is subordinated to the number of letters and words used. Moreover, the higher the quality of understanding the problem, the fewer letters are needed to express the idea. That is why any science, having penetrated deep into the essence of the phenomenon, expresses the whole truth of the discovery with a formula consisting of the minimum necessary number of signs and letters (D-T-D`). However, memorizing mathematical, physical, or economic formulas, without comprehending the essence of the phenomena under study and methods of proof, as the practice has shown, does not develop the mind, and even more so, conscience. Memorizing formulas before comprehending the meaning of the phenomenon means "harnessing the cart ahead of the horse". The formula rationalizes consciousness only if all the real entities covered by the formula and their interrelations are understood and assimilated.

No matter how MANY prayers you have memorized, you will not become wiser from this, because the prayers do not contain a single grain of knowledge or logic and are addressed to no one. The situation is almost the same with memorizing mathematical formulas, which are a set of symbols that say nothing to someone who is not familiar with the objective prerequisites and the logic of the conclusion of this formula. All Einsteinians have memorized the supposedly great Einstein formula, but for a hundred years they have been trying to explain to viewers in hours-long programs what they understand in this formula, but they are only getting closer to the biblical version of the creation of the world. A little more and we will talk about the three whales on which this formula is based.

And vice versa, only when firmly assimilated, a single scientific truth allows you to assimilate the next, true one from the proposed set of subsequent units of information and, thus, successfully move towards mastering the system of truths. Approximately in such a diamatic algorithm, the periodic system of elements of Mendeleev was born. And in general, a scientist becomes not the one who proves the same theorem an infinite number of times, but the one who, based on the first theorem, deduces the second, third and, thus, creates, for example, geometry, as a certain number of DIFFERENT, but qualitatively EQUALLY TRUE, conscientiously proven theorems. And due to the fact that the progress of science is, in the end, precisely according to the diamatic laws of cognition, the further it goes, the more convincing the fading role of religious "enlightenment" in society and the increasing role of scientific education looks. Moreover, religious "enlightenment" institutions, due to their persistent opposition to science, are increasingly losing credibility and turning into hotbeds of unscrupulous terrorism.

Conscience becomes more productive the higher the individual's achievements in the field of mental development and information content of his consciousness. However, without combining theoretical knowledge with current socio-political practice, conscience can add nothing to the development of personality. "Pure" philosophers, among whom, as a rule, experts in the history of philosophy consider themselves, as the practice has shown, have not brought anything wise to the socio-political development of society. They only fought for the personal right to say a lot of things that "God will put on their soul".

Among the liberal Democrats, the myth of the highest education and the finest culture of the Russian nobility, especially the White Guard generals, such slaves of conscience, is being intensively exploited. However, how can the tsarist generals be attributed to the number of conscientious people, if they made their main intellectual baggage knowledge about the methods of mass destruction of people on the slaughter field, i.e. the theory and practice of military "art"? The science of mass beatings cannot be the basis of conscience. Precisely because of such "education", neither the gallows nor the mass shootings organized by the tsarist generals for a long time aroused in them the desire to think about the "teardrop of a child". Moreover, seeing the inevitable defeat of his adventure, organized with the money of the German Kaiser and the Entente, saving his skin, feeling a sense of hatred for the Russian people who rebelled against their lordship, Denikin ordered everything to be burned and blown up in "Great Russia". General Krasnov's" conscience " worked so well that, later, it led him to the service of the fascists. According to the Democrats themselves, the former White Guards, Baltic nobles, and Vlasovites, together with the fascists, destroyed 27 million Soviet workers, peasants, intellectuals, and their children during the Great Patriotic War.

The fact that Stalin may have been a "bad commander" does not negate the fact that the death of 27 million Soviet workers is the work of the hands and conscience of the carriers of the European model of civilization, i.e. fascists and specific carriers of the Russian noble "culture", anti-communist monarchists, clerics, and democrats with diplomas from tsarist universities. Maybe Stalin was, indeed, a very bad commander, but, as the first two years of the Second World War showed, no one could defeat the Aryan and aristocratic executioners until the battle of Moscow, except Stalin.

Very few of the White Guards, in the end, realized that by organizing the "white" movement and fraternizing with the fascists, they were only trying to restore their right to tyranny, excesses in everything, in order to force the Russians to remain forever in a state of "reins in the stable of the flogged". As Denikin testifies in his memoirs, there was nothing else in the "white conscience", which was satiated with excesses. The thinking of the ideologists of the " white terror "was so empty that until the defeat both in the Civil War and in the Great Patriotic War, they, shooting hundreds of thousands of non-party peasants and workers," freeing " them from life, claimed that they did it at the behest of their conscience, for the sake of freeing the workers being shot from the power of the Bolshevik Jews.

In other words, a conscientious White Guard is more dangerous than a fool.

They may say, but what about the red terror? We have to explain for the thousandth time that the Bolsheviks, having taken up the fallen power of the tsar and the provisional government in 1917, released all capitalist ministers, all generals, and officers on their honest and noble word that they would abandon the parasitic lifestyle and, in the future, would earn their living only by honest work. Several tens of thousands of officers joined the Red Army, although many did it for unscrupulous reasons, which later gave rise to many military dramas. The former gendarmerie ranks have not yet joined the Bolsheviks in the Cheka, and many tsarist officers, generals, and ministers of worship have already begun to make their way to the Don, Kuban, and beyond the Volga to organize an armed campaign to restore their parasitic lifestyle.

At first, it seemed to some participants of the white movement that they were acting according to the dictates of conscience, hanging and shooting peasants and workers. But only after suffering a military and moral defeat from hastily created workers ' regiments, each of which had as many as three Bolsheviks and a whole commissar, some White Guards, realizing the idiocy of their executioners, disappeared forever into the vastness of Asia, Africa, Europe, and America. In most of the White Guards, even the "Gallipoli sitting" did not awaken conscience, since the brains of the executioners, most often, lose the ability to think adequately. It is no coincidence that many of them entered the service in other armies, including the Fascist, Romanian, Bulgarian, and the French Foreign Legion. This proves that the nobles and the market intelligentsia did not care in principle who, where, and in what quantity to kill.

This is how the connection between the quality of knowledge, the productivity of the work of conscience, and human destiny looks in the historical context.

The work of conscience is a personal matter

The popular thesis, "the truth is born in a dispute", is perceived by the majority too literally, not diamatically. Ideologists, for example, the RKRP and the Communist Party are firmly convinced that only by going to gatherings, shaking the air (until the cleaner throws them out of the hall), they are getting closer to the truth. They do not realize that only after having exhausted their own objections to each problematic point, a conscientious theorist has the right to bring the product of a completely completed study to open discussion. And even then, by giving opponents time to study new theoretical material and having a firm intention to implement the results of the research into practice. But modern supporters of "political clubs" and "educational clubs" do not realize that the criterion of truth is practice, not gatherings, even if they are in LJ, at which, lazy polemicists, have not been able to convince each other for 20 years about how to understand, for example, Lenin's teaching about socialism, about classes, and try to measure a person's class membership as a percentage by the size of shares in his salary.

To achieve the truth, it is not necessary in all cases to have a physical opponent. Of course, an interested interlocutor, when discussing a problem, sometimes helps to accelerate the movement of thought to the truth. A patent fool, with his specific questions, always only takes up time and leads the discussion to a dead end. But the more competent an individual is in the field of diamatics, the more meaningful and qualitative his self-analysis, i.e. the work of conscience, the fewer crimes and mistakes he can commit on the path of life, the more constructive in his activities, the weaker the punitive functions of conscience manifest themselves, the more creative forces, positive emotions it generates in the individual.

The absence of a competent and interested interlocutor is not a factor that prevents the movement of thought to the truth. A diamatic, i.e. a person with a competent conscience, can dispassionately oppose himself according to the laws of diamatic logic incomplete office silence. A conscientious person knows that the deep truth never lies on the surface, that it must be extracted, figuratively speaking, breaking through, like a miner, through the empty "rock" of his own delusions to the "ore-bearing vein" of truth. Another question is that having formulated proof on an urgent and important problem, the author is obliged to make it the subject of study and approbation, tracking the progress of both.

Conscience as a criterion of Communist Party membership

Turning the question of conscience into the main question of membership in the Party of Scientific Centralism, we thereby call for recognizing a diamatically filled conscience as a CRITERION of party membership for every communist.

In the general scientific sense, the word "criterion" denotes a factor that allows or does not allow a specific phenomenon to be attributed to a certain class of phenomena. Class is a general scientific term used to denote a set of phenomena that are related in their essence, but opposite to another set, i.e. another class. For example, the class of mammals, the class of amphibians, the class of exploiters, the class of exploited.

Conscience, if, of course, we keep in mind the diamatically filled process of continuous self-control, allows the individual himself to judge how much he has grown to the role of the vanguard of the working class, more accurately than any external judge can judge. It is the competent conscience of every communist that, to a greater extent than the form of a party ticket, guarantees the non-degeneration of the party, ensures the competent participation of a communist in propaganda and organizational work.

If conscience, i.e. a diamatically filled self-control, does not prevail in every communist, then the sum of unscrupulous party members will not be able to do anything against any other equally unscrupulous member. This is exactly how the circular guarantee of incompetence and, consequently, dishonesty in the personnel of the CPSU began to form in the time of Khrushchev, which reached all-pervading omnipotence under Andropov and his patronage. For the same reason, the self-destruction of the RCRP also occurs. The fact that the RKRP has once again been renamed and exists in the form of the RKRP-CPSU is now more known in the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation than in any working collective.

It is worth asking the question: can an unscrupulous person be a COMMUNIST in the full sense of the word, i.e., by a person who sincerely DESPISES and organically does not accept the relations of private property, i.e., all forms of egoism, who finds the meaning of his life in serving society, the cause of its development as an environment in which only the development of EACH individual is possible?

When the RSDLP(b) became the ruling party, and the question of conscience remained for many, brought up by the monarchy and capitalism, only a figure of speech, bourgeois intellectuals, power-hungry democrats climbed into the party. After the collapse of the CPSU, they, choking with delight, confided how they and their fathers made their careers at the expense of the party ticket, and how they themselves purposefully discredited Marxism wherever they could.

Meanwhile, in the history of society, no model of a person has been created more perfect than the model of a real communist, and there is no criterion of humanity higher than the uncompromising Bolshevik conscience. At one time, having become convinced of the uncompromising, inflexibility, the conviction of the Bolsheviks of the Leninist and Stalinist schools, both the White Guards and the fascists made the implementation of their plans directly dependent on the success in the physical destruction of all the Bolsheviks, first of all, the commissars.

Since thinking itself, in general, can be either diamatic or adiamatic, to the extent that conscience, armed with diamatics, becomes uncompromising in relation to stupidity and meanness, excluding the rebirth of a communist into an opportunist. Therefore, calling for the organization of the Party of Scientific Centralism, we once again raise the Bolshevik experience to the shield, when the inflexibility of the Communists was determined not by personal interest, temperament, and will, but by a scientific understanding of the causes and content of the class struggle, figuratively speaking, the fact that "there is no ford in the fire". The uncompromising nature of a scientifically filled conscience is the criterion of a person's maturity, his suitability for the role of a communist.

With this approach, it is easy to notice how absurd the phrase "freedom of conscience" is without a clear statement of the question: what is conscience free from? From responsibility for mistakes? From the objective laws of the development of society? Here we can see the same mean trick that was used by the teacher of all human rights defenders, Solzhenitsyn: to tell the truth, but not the truth that is actually there, but the one that is beneficial to the propagandist himself.

Conscience can therefore play the role of a criterion of an individual's readiness for the role of a communist because the work of conscience is carried out on the basis of comparing one's own thoughts and actions with the requirements of objective laws of PROGRESS, and not someone's external will or interest alone. Diamatics is the only science that frees the individual from subjectivism in his views on nature, thinking, and society.

In the history of the CPSU, the RKRP, the CPSU(b) Nina Andreeva, and the other VKPB, who constantly accused each other of leftism, then of opportunism, there was always a depressing property in one issue: none of them was going to fill the conscience of the members of these parties with a diamatic content. Any person who was admitted to the party at a meeting of the primary organization on the most formal grounds, after a scanty period of unencumbered stay as a candidate, was called a communist.

Until now, it has remained unconscious that the party leadership's schematic, superficial "knowledge" of the diamatics of personality, i.e. the science of conscience, is the most important prerequisite for the decay and rebirth of all its members and organs, since, figuratively speaking, a bad example is contagious.

The practice has proved the incapacity of the entire Soviet philosophical school. Diamatics was considered in the works of the settled Soviet philosophers as the doctrine of the development, first of all, of the external world (from lecture to lecture, the atom was mused as a successful example of the unity of opposites, and the transformation of ice into the water as an excellent example of a leap), but the diamatics of the connection of theory and practice, the law of the unity of wisdom and stupidity, truth and error in each individual consciousness, the problem of the "leap" of the consciousness of a wage slave into revolutionary world consciousness, were neither detailed nor updated. Lacking the methodology of revolutionary thinking, official philosophers and party bureaucrats trampled on socialism, absolutely and sincerely not understanding how to build communism.

If the party members used the word dialectic "in vain" in explaining any political processes, then, for example, in the practice of educational and educational work, formal logic and pedology were generally planted for some time, instead of the properly undeveloped diamatics of the individual, i.e. conscience, the foundations of which can be found in the pedagogical views of Frunze, in the works of Makarenko and the novels of N. Ostrovsky.

I have not been able to find "yesterday" and today several intellectuals at a university or, especially at school, who would read the "Science of Logic", at least for "sports interest", for many years of observation. This is the answer to the question of why there is no one at the head of many parties with communist names who would be recognized as a modern theorist of communism. Even Alvaro Cunhal, even Fidel Castro, even Hugo Chavez are known only as inflexible practitioners, crystal-honest fighters for the happiness of all people on earth, but not as modern Marxist theorists.

Why don't proletarian and peasant "walkers" join modern parties with a communist name? Because among the activists of these parties, as they have not seen, for the last twenty years they have not seen a single member of the party whose conscience would force him to study dialectics as it was studied, outlined, developed, and applied to the classics of Marxism. Modern party leaders with communist names are absolutely not authoritative as scientists, even for workers.

Therefore, taking into account the experience of past disintegration, in order to join the party of scientific centralism, each applicant must carefully and uncompromisingly understand the motives that motivate him to make such a decision. First of all, you need to explain to YOURSELF what exactly forces you to take this step, and only then agitate and convince others.

They may say that this is a utopia, that without strict EXTERNAL personnel selection and control it is impossible to ensure the purity of the party ranks, that a scoundrel is not able to awaken his conscience, that a scoundrel, for the sake of a career, will join any party, take an oath, like Vlasov or Yakovlev. Therefore, they say that it is necessary to clean the party by voting from undesirable elements from time to time.

But the practice of repeated PURGES carried out in the VKPB showed the insufficiency of this organizational measure. In the process of purges, the Trotskyists, taking advantage of the vice of democratic centralism, often squeezed out, indeed, Bolshevik cadres from the party. Strictly speaking, there were no purely ORGANIZATIONAL mechanisms that would allow maintaining the purity of the party ranks in the party, whose members should be guided primarily by science.

The purity of the party ranks is directly proportional to the degree to which the conscience of each party member is armed with the methodology of scientific world-understanding, including general diamatics. A person is not able to perform the functions of a communist if he has not learned the objective laws of squeezing out "bastards" from himself.

Diamatics without conscience is dead, conscience without diamatics is stupid

The vote at the 28th Congress of the CPSU on the transfer of the USSR economy to a market basis showed that by that time there were already more than two-thirds of the party members from the category of bastards. Moreover, the point is not so much that most of the opportunists were, indeed, only hard-working party careerists, but that the conscience of the majority was objectively ILLITERATE, and therefore the party members did not understand that even their psychological readiness-to heroically fight in open battle with obvious aggressors and die for the cause of communism-could not help them in the competent struggle against their own philistinism, with "minor" vices, among which mental laziness, unwillingness to study Marxism a crucial role. The depth of the intellectual decline of the entire party is indicated not by the fact that the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, Gorbachev, brazenly distorted Lenin's quotes from the rostrum of major party forums, but by the fact that the entire composition of the congresses and plenums of the CPSU Central Committee did not see the substitution and distortion of quotations, because they were not only not familiar with the primary sources properly, but also did not understand the meaning of many memorized quotes.

Most members of the CPSU stupidly and obediently waited for a positive effect, first from Kosygin's reforms, then from Andropov's large-scale experiment to transfer the planned economy of the USSR to full self-financing, without waiting for positive results, they continued to argue with an intelligent look about self-financing models, not realizing that, thereby, they were destroying the remnants of the planned economy with their own hands. By that time, the economics department of the Communist magazine was already headed by Gaidar, who, due to his lack of intelligence and meanness, suppressed any attempt to discuss the mistakes of Gorbachev's reforms in the magazine. And, seeing the growth of crisis phenomena in the economy, not realizing that this is the result of self-financing, party members and anti-party elements began to transfer the economy of the USSR to market rails. Figuratively speaking, the pimple was treated with a tincture of pus.

Objectively working for capitalism, and not noticing this, the majority of Soviet people in March 1991, at a referendum, innocently voted for the preservation of the USSR, not realizing that they had already practically crushed it with their own hands.

That is, no one will be able to be devoted to the idea of communism without a specific, detailed understanding of the essence of this formation. An uneducated, i.e., unscrupulous "kumunist" will always be a victim of self-deception and primitive deception, when under the slogan "more socialism", under the red banners, he will be made a builder of capitalism in its most bandit model.

What needs to be done to make the criterion of conscience work?

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the process of building communism is a process of materialization of the conscience of each individual in the level and pace of development of the productive forces of society, in the pace of changes in the nature of production and other social relations between people. Communism cannot be built before the consciousness of communists will function based on conscience, the matrix of which is the mastered diamatics.

A thought process with a claim to conscience can and does arise in the psyche of any level of scientific fullness. But the world-historical experience of the victories and defeats of the pro-communist forces proved that where and when the members of the Communist Party possessed the diamatic method, there and then the party's program was fully implemented, and humanity received examples of the highest manifestation of morality, armed with scientific methodology. At any other level of scientific training, a person is deprived of the opportunity to adequately assess his act's social "price". Consequently, the higher the degree of mastering by an individual of the diamatic method of self-knowledge, i.e. conscience, the less likely it is that this individual will invent, for example, weapons of mass destruction against "his neighbors", that, in the field of economic relations, he will descend to the level of Mavrodi, "black realtors" or Soros, and in politics he will fall to Solzhenitsyn or Sakharov.

Diamatics does not allow consciousness to descend to the level of a Herostrato-like fool.

Today, the entire civilized world scornfully treats or brazenly suppresses the dialectics of Hegel and the diamatics of Marx, extols the idealism of Kant, the positivism of Mach, the eclecticism of Popper and Weber, at the same time wondering why it is not possible to stop the growth of corruption, prostitution, banditry, fraud, maniacism and other organic elements of market democracy. If the intelligentsia of Europe had mastered, at least, the dialectics of Hegel in a timely manner, not to mention the diamatics of Marx, then there would have been neither the first nor the second world wars. For many centuries, society has been divided into a class of scoundrels and a class of their uneducated victims, because neither of them possesses diamatics. Therefore, some resemble bedbugs, while others are either vegetables or cannon fodder.

Tragicomically, but to all the appeals of the" Breakthrough " to its opponents to publish a series of articles with the correct version of the diamatics, they answered and answer that they have not yet had time to study the works of Hegel, they have not comprehended the diamatics so much as to present it consistently and convincingly, but they are sure that the breakers interpret it incorrectly. Our opponents never shared a secret, how did they think when they made decisions, for example, about numerous renaming of the party, about numerous associations with "Potemkin political villages", how did they think that registration would give them more than this bourgeois norm gave the Communist Party? The ideologists of the RKRP think like this:" Why do you need to know how to think? You need to pretend that you know how to think, and solve all issues by voting because the majority cannot be wrong."

The question is, can those who are already used to solving the problems of party management with the help of the mechanism of democratic centralism, i.e. with the help of the votes of an incompetent majority, who are already used to holding leadership positions, amuse their ego, strictly ensuring that the environment feels the benefits of such a form of mutual responsibility, bother their brains with the study of Logic, build themselves as a researcher, an informally authoritative propagandist, and organizer? No, they can't. This is the situation, practically, in all modern parties. Today, it is impossible to find differences in the procedures and regulations according to which the congresses of both the most right-wing and the most "left" parties are held.

Therefore, unfortunately, the "Breakthrough" will have to be a monopolist in the field of propaganda of the "Science of Logic" for a long time, to explain the essence of the diamatic teaching of Marxism, which has not been mastered and therefore misunderstood by the majority of those who today undeservedly carry a ticket of a party member with a communist name. These cunning people do not think in terms of dialectics but in terms of Grandfather Shchukar. They do not think about communism and are not able to propagandize it. A relatively high position in the modern party hierarchy is enough for them. They are, as a rule, executive people, most often to the point of stupidity, but already deprived of the skills of creativity, i.e. revolutionary thinking.

What is needed to implement the principle of scientific centralism as the main organizational principle of building a party capable of bringing the matter to the complete victory of communist society?

First, it is necessary to categorically recognize the principle of democratic centralism as one of the organizational principles of party building, since, as more than a century and a half of practice has shown, this principle has led and leads ALL parties with a communist name, at least to a guaranteed decrease in the quality of the leadership, to the emergence of groupism, nepotism, intrigue and, ultimately, to the seizure of power in the party by illiterate subjects, i.e. opportunists.

Secondly, it is necessary to make the study of diamatics the first duty of an applicant even for the title of sympathizer and to make a deep knowledge of diamatics the main criterion for the transition of a communist to the number of party leaders of any rank.

Therefore, thirdly, only those Communists who are engaged in systematic scientific research work and are marked by systematic propaganda and agitation publications in the party media, real success in involving employees in political practice in communist positions can be appointed to the number of leaders of party organizations and party institutions.

Fourth, it is necessary to abandon the production and quantitative justifications of the status and functions of party organizations. Today, everyone is used to the formulation that a primary party organization is formed as a guild organization if there are at least three party members and, strictly speaking, has the right to be able to do nothing except pay membership fees, hold monthly mournful gatherings, distribute any newspapers sent "from the center". Meanwhile, to fully comply with the concept of "communist organization", each group of comrades who have joined the party MUST be able to solve the complex of tasks set for the communists by SCIENCE. But if an organization that calls itself a primary, communist organization is not able to perform its program and statutory functions, then there is no reason to call such a group of individuals a primary communist organization.

Primary organizations should be considered those that can independently carry out a full range of scientific, propaganda, agitation, and organizational work in labor collectives, developing and creatively applying the general theory of Marxism to specific tasks of the experienced period in specific conditions of the place, the experienced period and the scale of activity. There is not the slightest sense in calling such a party organization primary, whose members are not able to cover events systematically and from a scientific point of view.

The main sign of the existence and maturity of the primary Communist party organization is its practical participation in propaganda and agitation based on its own PRINTED or other (for example, electronic) mass permanent information body.

In the XXI century, assessing the path of victories and defeats passed by the Communist parties, the increased thinking, and reading skills of the majority of the population of industrial countries, it is necessary to call on all those who decided to link their fate with the struggle for real social progress to part with political and information dependence, to consciously strangle everything that Lenin called one of the main enemies of communism, i.e. komchvanstvo. It is this step that will be most difficult for many modern anti-bourgeois writers to take.

It is not the party whose every memento heroically walk with a flag in a column of demonstrators or stand on a corner with a pack of last year's newspapers that can consider itself communist, nor is it the party in which its members see their main merit in the ability to follow the leader in the tail of the economic struggle of the proletariat, but only the party in which EVERY communist has proved in practice his personal ability to bring a scientific worldview to the proletarian strata and organize their activities.

Today, to be at a major party forum dedicated to an important political issue, it is enough to present a party ticket or an extract from the minutes of the meeting. And to get into the leadership of the party, it is enough to have a party ticket, an extract from the protocol, and a little luck, so that 50%+1 of the same member as you voted for you at the conference and congress.

A communist is obliged to work systematically to improve his scientific and theoretical level and to work continuously in the propaganda and agitation institutions of the party on the ground and in the center. The quality and frequency of each publication in the local party press and the Internet should be the subject of systematic attention from the Central Body of the party and its departments. And if everyone likes to repeat that there is no place for compromises in ideology, then a person who makes mistakes in the party press has no place, especially in the party's governing bodies.

Instead of a conclusion

Once, at the congress of the RKRP, I had to witness such a monologue. A major member of the Central Committee of the RKRP, Comrade Yu., admitted that he was already getting tired of working in the organizational field, and therefore he was going to switch to an easier job: to become a secretary for... ideology. And so they did. And the chairman of the ideological commission was elected Comrade Ya., an employee even more mature, and therefore even less productive in all respects, than Comrade Yu.

At the present stage, the question of the stay of a comrade in a leading position in the party of Scientific Centralism should be radically different. As soon as a communist ceases his personal active scientific, propaganda, or agitation work, he must voluntarily leave the leadership post, retaining his right and duty to participate in the work of advisory bodies, up to the party congress. Strictly speaking, if a communist cannot clearly and competently propagandize the scientific ideas of communism, then what is such a person doing in the Communist party at all, and even more so in its leadership?

Thus, nothing is easier than to distinguish a communist from an opportunist.

An opportunist is, first of all, a bipedal, erect mammal that has not contributed anything CONCRETE to the cause of approaching communism. An opportunist is a being who is always looking back, around, under the feet, into the mouths of others, but does nothing in propaganda and agitation to really accelerate the movement of the masses towards communism. An opportunist is a creature that clings to the party like cancer to healthy tissue. Being surgically excluded from the party, the opportunist instantly shows his inability to think and act in a communist way.

A communist can be called a Person who, first of all, can present to readers, as Mayakovsky wrote, "all one hundred volumes of his party books." Irresponsible chatter in discussion clubs, on the pages of internal party "Discussion sheets," is not at all a reason to consider a talker a communist.

A communist is a productive, conscientious scientist-practitioner, organizer, and performer who has the necessary level of knowledge and skills of applying the diamatics in general to the phenomena of social life and the diamatics of the individual, i.e. conscience, to himself.

And conscience is called only that which really serves the cause of building communism. Any other form of conscience is from the evil one.

It is not difficult to imagine how fiercely the opportunists will attack the principle of SCIENTIFIC CENTRALISM, which excludes the penetration of people who are lazy for intellectual work, but who are eager for power, into the leadership of the Communist Party, how they will sing the principle of democratic centralism, which allows idlers and opportunists to decompose any Central Committee from the inside over and over again.

So, let's get to work, comrades. Science is a difficult matter, but the only reliable one.

January-February 2013
Translation - July 2021





@Mail.ru Rambler's Top100
RSS-