Full composition of writings. Volume 15
Thank you for downloading the book from the free electronic library http://filosoff.org/ Enjoy reading! J.V. Stalin Complete Works. Volume 15. Conversation about the textbook “Political Economy” January 29, 1941 (synopsis). 1. Political economy should be defined differently. You remember that Engels, for example, defined political economy as the science of production and exchange. Marx gave his definition of political economy as the science of production and production economic relations. Everyone also knows the definition of political economy given by Bogdanov as the science of the development of social economic relations between people. It is also known that Lenin, in his review of Bogdanov’s book, approved of this definition of political economy. The textbook gives a different definition. We cannot agree with this. If this is accepted, the reader of the textbook will be disoriented. He has the right to ask which definition of political economy is correct, and why Lenin’s definition is not taken. That is why I propose to give another definition of political economy, something like this: political economy is the science of the development of social-production, that is, economic, relations between people. It clarifies the laws governing the production and distribution of necessary items for both personal and industrial consumption. This definition is correct, it is more understandable and accessible. It emphasizes that in political economy we are talking about forms of ownership, about property relations, because production and economic relations include, first of all, property relations. It should also be kept in mind that distribution is understood here in the broad sense of the word. The textbook suffers here too; the textbook says very little about banks, about trading, there is nothing about stock exchanges. 2. Let's move on to section 5 - “Socialist system”. There are some improvements here, but a lot are also broken compared to the previous layout. For example, the textbook says that the law of value was overcome under the conditions of the Soviet economy. It is unclear why it was overcome? We have payment for collective farmers, workers, and the intelligentsia for their work. People of different qualifications are paid differently; the work of an engineer, for example, is three times higher than the qualifications of a worker. Categories such as price and cost have not disappeared. For example, we are far from controlling prices yet. To dictate prices in the market, huge reserves are needed. We don't always succeed in this. For example, in Lithuania, bread prices began to increase rapidly. We gave 200 thousand poods of grain there, and prices fell sharply. This is what it means for the state to dictate prices on the market, but these are isolated phenomena; in the national economy as a whole, we do not yet have such reserves. Isn’t it clear from this that the law of value has not yet been overcome, it is in effect? When we begin to distribute according to needs, and not according to labor, then the law of value will be overcome. Now we are still spinning, we are within the limits of the law of value. We want to get out of this law, to overcome it, but we have not yet gotten out, we have not overcome it. For example. We still have two prices - one price is ours, the other price is not ours. There is a struggle between them. We have two more markets - one market is ours, the other market is not ours. When citizens sell products and goods to each other, this cannot be taken into account by the state now. There is also a struggle between these markets. This is all a fact, this is the truth, and economic science must tell the truth. 3. The operation of the law of value is also associated with the existence of such things as, for example, difference, or differential, rent. It hasn’t disappeared with us; we have different yields from different areas of crops. The only thing is that this rent goes into the pocket of the state. The point is not whether we have differential rent, but about who this rent goes to, who uses it. We shouldn’t over-praise our system, and we shouldn’t under-praise either. You need to stay within limits. As long as payment is based on labor, the law of value applies. When we dictate prices on the collective farm market, then it will be a different matter. Note M.: Yes, and the collective farm market is almost private, each collective farmer sells his own products. The collective farm market is a different matter. Here the subject is a collective farmer, the collective farmer’s income does not go towards the exploitation of people, cannot be used for the purpose of exploitation. 4. From time to time, propaganda or a poster bursts into the textbook. Economists study the facts, and suddenly there is a “Trotskyist-Bukharin gang”, etc. All this must be crossed out, there is no point in it. This is a poster, it is not suitable for a serious textbook. We appeal to the mind, but here they appeal either to the stomach or to the feelings. 5. There is a lot of fancy talk here about the planned economy, saying that it is impeccable, wonderful, etc. It must be said simpler, more clearly, to say that under capitalism it is impossible to plan the economy on a national scale, because the economies there are separated. Planning is possible there, sometimes very good, good planning within individual enterprises, trusts, cartels, syndicates, etc., but planning as a whole in the national economy is impossible. If you try with us without a plan, everything will collapse. Our planned economy is as inevitable as people's consumption of bread. This follows from the fact that all our enterprises are united by the state. Here we should take Lenin’s criticism of Kautsky’s views on the possibility of unification and economic planning under capitalism. Lenin proved, speaking against Kautsky, that capitalists and bourgeois states are not capable of planning the economy as a whole. So, instead of saying in simple language that our enterprises are united, but those there are separated, they have piled up a lot of unnecessary, incomprehensible, abstract things. 6. Here, for example (p. 369), about the correspondence of productive forces to production relations. This is school talk. Marx and Engels were forced to say all this abstractly, abstractly, only theoretically. We are at the helm, everything is clear in our economy, we can see everything, we need to speak simpler, more accessible, more understandable, more specific. 7. It would be good to define the tasks of the planning center. So, for example, the first task is to plan the economy in such a way, and this is the first task to ensure the independence of the country’s national economy, so that the economy does not turn into an appendage of capitalist countries. We must have everything in our own hands and not become an appendage of the capitalist economy. This is the most general, but very, very important task. If we did not have such a planning center that ensured the independence of the national economy, industry would have developed in a completely different way, everything would have started with light industry, and not with heavy industry. We turned the laws of capitalist economy upside down and turned them upside down. We started with heavy industry, not light industry, and we won. Without a planned economy this would have been impossible. After all, how did the development of the capitalist economy proceed? In all countries, business began with light industry. Why? Because light industry brought the greatest profit. What do individual capitalists care about the development of ferrous metallurgy, the oil industry, etc.? Profit is important to them, and profit came primarily from light industry. We started with heavy industry, and this is the basis that we are not an appendage of capitalist farms. The second task of the planning center is to build the development of industry and economy in the interests of the victory of socialism, the construction of socialism. The task of planning is to close all the valves for the emergence of capitalism. Here we no longer have to take into account the principle of profitability of enterprises. In our country, the matter of profitability is subordinated to the construction, first of all, of heavy industry, which requires large investments from the state and it is clear that at first it is unprofitable. If, for example, we left the construction of industry to capital, then the flour industry would bring the most profit, and then, it seems, the production of toys. This is where capital would begin to build industry. This is what the Trotskyists and Rykovites proposed. The third task of the planning center is to prevent imbalances in the national economy. But in such a big matter as the national economy, there will always be individual breakthroughs. In this case, it is necessary to have reserves of both funds and labor. This should also be planned. It is in this spirit that everything about planning needs to be corrected. There are incomes, profits, differential rent, but they don’t go there. Note V.: It may be more appropriate to use the term not “profit”, but “socialist accumulation”. Until the profit is withdrawn, it is not accumulation. Question: Is it correct to use the expression - surplus product? They are confused - since there is a surplus product, that means surplus value; Since there is surplus value, it means exploitation. We need to think about these questions. These types of income remain (surplus product), but they are used not for exploitation, but for other purposes. That's the whole point. 8. There were proposals to reduce the role of money to calculation. Trotsky repeatedly put forward and defended this. Even during Lenin’s lifetime, Trotsky advocated this; he advocated money as a calculation. 9. The law of value governs the economy through numerous sacrifices and destruction. Our case is different. Engels wrote in Anti-Dühring about the transition from necessity to freedom, he wrote about freedom as a conscious necessity. The law of value must be realized by us, we must consciously calculate the cost according to the law of value, and not through sacrifices, destruction, etc. Consequently, the nature of the law of value, its content, changes. Question: Do we have the product? If there is money, there is also a product. All these categories remain, but their meaning has changed, their functions have changed. Take, for example, surplus product. People are embarrassed to talk about this, but it is useful for the worker to say that he should know that he does not receive everything, that there is a surplus product. After all, the working class is the boss, it works for the whole country, for itself, it must know that reserves are needed for a rainy day, it is necessary to spend on defense, hospitals, schools, on the development of culture. Clearly he can't have it all. Note B. : Marx also criticized Lassalle for claiming that under socialism everything would be distributed among the workers. 10. About wages, about the income of workers, peasants and intellectuals. The textbook does not take into account that people work, exceed plans, strive to produce more, not only because they are in power with us, that they are the masters, but also because we have interested them. Remember - there were theories - “communes in enterprises”, “collective wages”. With the help of such theories you cannot increase production; you need to hook a person into personal interests. For this purpose, there is a bonus system for managers, and a piece rate system for ordinary people. An example is the latest law on wages for collective farmers in Ukraine. I'll give two examples. In coal, the same professions on the surface earned more than in underground work, and things were going badly. They did the opposite, and the situation changed decisively. Note M.: And when they again turned to checking this issue (1939), it turned out that again workers working underground receive less than professions working on the surface. Such is the power of the elements. Note by S. (apparently, Stalin I.V. - Ed.): The heads of economic enterprises, people's commissariats, trusts, mine directors drag the best engineers to their office for inquiries, etc. Cotton. We had a bad time with cotton. This is the fourth year since they changed the order, got people personally interested in large harvests and large sowings - and things started to go. The same should be said about the latest law in Ukraine. The more you harvest, the more you get. Personal interest is required
Collection of unknown works.
Instead of a preface:
Release of the Collected Works of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin (Dzhugashvili)(1879-1953), started by the Marx-Engels-Lenin Institute under the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks in 1946, as you know, it was interrupted after the 13th volume (works from the period July 1930 - January 1934) and has not been resumed since 1951.
(From the preface to the collection of unknown works)
From there you can glean remarkable information that volumes 14-15-16 were “collected” by McNeil, which Kosolapov himself “expanded and supplemented.” Later, he “collected” volumes 17 and 18 of the PSS. In fact, under the pretext of fighting suppression, it was not clear what was published, it was not known what it was based on and, as a result, it was generally unknown who the texts belonged to.
Such an approach, when “self-made” (sic! Kosolapov’s own statement) “self-made” ones were attached to the verified and academic text of 13 volumes, immediately aroused criticism and suspicions of falsification, which the author vigorously began to challenge
The quality of this “remake” can be assessed from the very first 14th volume, the first document in it dates back to the 34th year, the second to the 36th, the third to the 40th, and the fourth again to the 34th.
It’s good if the documents still refer to issues of Pravda, which are generally available, which are published and which can be verified, but it’s worse when document No. 6 refers to the Kansas City Star newspaper. IO.I2.I943, and “a photocopy of the publication was handed over to the compiler by R.F. Ivanov (Ed.)”
Further worse, volume 15 of this collection begins to refer not to historical documents and evidence, even in the form of “photocopies,” but to the books “Stalin in the Family Circle”, “Stalin: Truth and Lies” by Zhukhrai, and so on.
How can you treat a publication with such texts:
TELEGRAM TO K.K. ROKOSSOVSKY
November 23, 1942
"... The 3rd motorized division and the 16th tank division of the Germans have been completely or partially removed from your front, and now they are fighting against the front of the 21st Army. This circumstance creates a favorable situation for all the armies of your front to become active actions. Galanin acts sluggishly, give him instructions so that Vertyachiy is taken no later than November 24. Also give instructions to Zhadov so that he moves on to active actions and chains the enemy forces to himself. Give a good push to Batov, who in the current situation could act more assertively."
(According to the book Zhukhrai V. Stalin: truth and lies. P. 144)
The ellipsis is not mine, the ellipsis of the compiler.
Based on the above fragment, one can draw an elementary conclusion: the author of the collection grabbed whatever he could, I wasn’t interested in the text and didn’t check it. If the author of the book (Zhukhrai) to which this “PSS” refers would suck the text out of thin air, what would stop the compiler (Kosolapov) from including cranberries in the text of the PSS? Nothing would have stopped it. With this approach, who can guarantee that the texts are authentic? No one.
Moreover, you can guarantee with 100% confidence that this PSS contains cranberries!
Volume 18 of the Complete Works of Kosolapov features a certain conversation between Stalin and Kollontai, in which Stalin talks about the fight against world Zionism.
A detailed debriefing of what this conversation is and who the liar and falsifier who invented it can be found
Just think, how many more such forgeries and lies are taking place under the “PSS Stalin” brand?
Historical documents have always been in demand and a sharp ideological weapon; the demand for various forgeries has not dried up and will not dry up. Throwing in fakes, like the “Katyn Documents” or new works by Stalin, is inevitable and inevitable. They were, are and will be.
The personality of the IVS is an extraordinary personality, the formation of the USSR, industrialization, victory in the War of Existence (WWII), transformation into a superpower are inextricably linked with her, and it is flattering for every speculator, every political pygmy in the ashes of a power to ride such a powerful figure and take advantage of her authority.
So,
- Marxist,
- follower and student of Lenin,
- communist,
- internationalist
They have already tried or are trying to make Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin
Clerical,
- Black Hundreds,
- Russian nationalist,
- conservative, “statist” and “imperial”.
And on this occasion I can only advise one thing - keep your ears open! It is possible that, following the political situation, volumes 19 and 20 of a collection of unknown works will appear, edited by Kosolapov or some Kosoluky, in which we will learn... that Stalin was a Martian and a supporter of the Galactic Federation.
And let me remind you once again: the first 13 volumes of Stalin’s PSS are authentic, everything else is trash. And I would like historians to finally get around to documents and primary sources, so that someone would finally compile and verify the texts of Stalin, whom we still know little from documents.
To date, the Working University named after I.B. Khlebnikov released the first six volumes of the publication “Stalin. Proceedings", conceived as the most complete collection of available Stalinist texts today (which, of course, does not pretend to be a complete collection, as some mistakenly believe, because too large an array of documents is concentrated in the archival funds of the Presidential Archive, the Foreign Policy Archive, the FSB Archive, which are closed to researchers; and the former party archive - now RGASPI, is in no hurry to declassify a number of cases). These volumes reflect the first significant period of I.V.’s life and work. Stalin, ending in October 1917. In January 2016, the next, 7th volume, containing documents from October 1917 to March 1918, was put into layout. The layout of Volume 8 (April–June 1918) is now being completed.
The first two years of publication have passed. They allowed the team working on it to develop certain techniques and techniques for preparing volumes. The range of attracted specialists is expanding. Practice-tested methods are being introduced to achieve the required quality and aimed at minimizing deadlines. Still, 35-40 volumes - this is exactly what we predict is the final volume of the publication - this is a long-term and specific work, the results of which should not deceive the expectations of readers and lead to a qualitative expansion of the publicly available source base both on the history of the USSR as a whole, and in terms of the role and I.V. values Stalin is one of the main characters during the period of the struggle for Soviet power, its formation, socialist construction in the Soviet Union, and beyond its borders.
We have long wanted to tell readers about how and under what conditions the preparation of the publication is being carried out, because we are confident that stories about this seemingly inconspicuous, but at the same time important and interesting work, will allow us to better and more deeply understand Stalin’s texts.
In the process of studying archival materials and including them in volumes, university staff are constantly faced with research tasks. The successful solution of these seemingly incidental, secondary tasks as a whole allows us to talk about a multi-volume book “Stalin. Proceedings" not just as a continuous publication of archival texts, but as a scientific publication that has distinct features of an academic one. We are talking about what is called the scientific apparatus. And one of its most labor-intensive and information-rich elements is the Name Index.
"WHAT'S IN A NAME..."
In Stalin’s texts, explanatory notes and comments to them, in texts placed by the compilers in the Appendix, in the biographical chronicle of I.V. Stalin, presented in each volume within a given chronological period, mentions a variety of individuals. The index is intended to provide the reader with brief background information about each of them. The number of such persons varies from volume to volume from 150 to 300 or more. To date, since the preparation of texts is significantly ahead of the actually published volumes (now the center of gravity of research activity falls on 1919, which corresponds to volumes Nos. 10–12), there are already over one and a half thousand personal notes in the work.
The principle of constructing the Name Index is as follows. If this or that figure is mentioned in the volume, the index, firstly, always contains information about his last name, first name and patronymic (in the case of foreign origin, also presented in the national alphabet) with their possible variations, as well as pseudonyms, underground nicknames, etc. .d., year and place of birth (variants of this information, if this issue is not clear) (for Russia - province, district, city/town/village, etc.), year and place of death (indicating the circumstances of death, if any are known), basic brief description. For example:
Babushkin Ivan Vasilievich(born 1873, Ledenskoye village, Vologda province - died 1906, Mysovsk, Transbaikal region, shot without trial at Mysovaya station by the punitive expedition of General Meller-Zakomelsky) - professional revolutionary, member of the RSDLP.
Damanskaya Augusta Filippovna(Aresniy Merich) (b. 1877, village of Popelyukha, Podolsk province - d. 1959, Cormeil-en-Parisy, France) - writer, translator, literary critic.
Latsis Martyn Ivanovich(Martins Yanovich) (present Sudrabs Jan Fridrikhovich) (Sudrabs Jānis) (b. 1888, us. Ragaini, Livonia province - d. 1938, on charges of anti-Soviet activity, sentenced by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR to capital punishment and executed) - Soviet statesman and party leader.
Further, the name index provides the main milestones of a person’s biography, from the beginning of his activity to the top chronological level of this volume (facts of arrests and convictions for revolutionary figures, positions held in a particular department for officials, ranks and command positions for the military, etc. ). For State Duma deputies, the fact of election to the Duma of the corresponding convocation and the region that the deputy represented are reflected. For those elected to Congresses of Soviets - the fact of election to a particular congress, the territorial or party organization from which the delegate was elected, the fact of election to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the corresponding convocation. For members of the Constituent Assembly - the constituency and the organization that nominated him for election. For members of political parties - date of entry, membership in governing party bodies; for members of the RSDLP, in addition to this, the fact of election to party congresses, indicating the party organization from which he was elected:
Gusev Sergey Ivanovich(Drabkin Yakov Davidovich) (b. 1874, Sapozhok Sapozhkovsky district, Ryazan province - d. 1933, Moscow) - active participant in the revolutionary movement, Soviet party and military leader. Member of the St. Petersburg “Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class” (1896). For his active revolutionary activities he was subjected to numerous arrests and exiles (1897–1917). Member of the RSDLP (1898). Member of the Don Committee of the RSDLP (1902–1903). Delegate to the Second Congress of the RSDLP (1903). Participant in the Geneva “meeting of the 22” (1904). Secretary of the St. Petersburg Committee of the RSDLP (01–04.1905). Candidate member of the Central Committee of the RSDLP (04–12.1905). Secretary of the Odessa Committee of the RSDLP (05.1905–1906). Member of the Moscow Committee of the RSDLP, organizer of the Zheleznodorozhny district of the Moscow organization of Bolsheviks, delegate to the IV Congress of the RSDLP (from the Moscow org.) (1906). At party work in St. Petersburg (1909–1917). Secretary of the Petrograd Military Revolutionary Committee (10–11.1917). Delegate to the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, member of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the second convocation (10.1917). Secretary of the Committee for the Revolutionary Defense of Petrograd - manager of the affairs of the Northern Commune (02–03.1918).
It is clear that the general list of persons mentioned in the volume turns out to be very heterogeneous. In addition to Stalin’s comrades in underground work and leadership activities in the party and state, there are also his political opponents, whom he writes about in his articles, mentions in public speeches and in directives. In addition to the “first plan” persons, there are many characters whose paths crossed with Stalin’s only once, perhaps by accident, although they were also destined to play their role in his biography: apartment landlords in places of exile, recipients of Stalin’s various written appeals ( including the owners of forwarding addresses - mailboxes for party correspondence), persons who addressed him as a people's commissar, heads of local authorities to whom he addressed instructions on behalf of the Council of People's Commissars, etc.
Standing apart are the ranks of the Police Department and security departments, the spies and agents who conducted police correspondence dedicated to Joseph Dzhugashvili, who compiled reports, reports and observation diaries about him, published in Appendices to the volumes.
Another separate category is the Soviet researchers of the history of the revolutionary movement and Stalin’s legacy, who worked at IMEL in the middle of the last century and carried out tremendous work on systematization, translations and substantiation of authorship for hundreds and hundreds of leaflets, newspaper publications and letters. They own numerous examinations and dozens of references included in the scientific commentary and the Appendix of the publication.
Naturally, in a number of cases it is not always possible to find reliable information in the required volume about such persons, and this sometimes is not so important. Ultimately, for the telegraph operators who received or sent Stalin’s telegrams, it is enough to indicate that they are telegraph operators; for the once-mentioned Chokprod commissioners, it is enough to indicate that they are commissioners, etc. It’s worse when this or that person appears in contact with Stalin on a business matter, but details about him, as well as about this contact itself, cannot be found out.
To prepare name indexes, a wide variety of reference materials are used, starting with the profile thematic card files available in the RGASPI and the RF State University and ending with dozens of biographical reference books and name indexes of other academic publications. Information obtained on each person is, if possible, cross-checked and presented in a standardized form. And it must be said that work with the name index begins before all others, as soon as the next text falls on the table. This labor-intensive and very responsible activity requires not only perseverance and accuracy, but also considerable time. In relation to the document, the dates are still being clarified and double-checked, handwritten, hard-to-read fragments are being deciphered, its historical context and the need to prepare an explanatory note are being determined, and all this time the well-known, little-known or completely unknown persons mentioned in it are already being worked on and have come to our attention. And when, as a result of many months of work, heterogeneous texts, read, processed and equipped with the necessary scientific apparatus, are combined into a future volume, the name index (constituting about 10% of the final volume) is basically ready.
And we must admit that our efforts are not always enough to, as they say, reach every character. Considering the volume of the entire publication and the resulting pace of its preparation, we are sometimes forced, reluctantly and as an exception, to record the lack of sufficient information about a particular person among the compilers. Probably, in-depth research in some cases could provide the required information. But compilers do not always have the necessary time and cannot delay the publication of a book because of one or two unknown persons.
Thus, to the letter to Elena Vladimirovna Khoroshavina, written on November 10, 1912 from Krakow, Stalin writes a note: “Give this newspaper to Smolensky and the brethren. Your Vasiliev." ( Stalin. Proceedings. T. 5. P. 105.). An analysis of all party pseudonyms known at that time, as well as potential Stalinist addressees, unfortunately, did not allow us to identify a person who could be identified as “Smolensky”. In the Name Index I had to give the depressing: "Smolensky - identity not established". However, in the process of searching, Alexander Trishin, a responsible employee of the editorial team who directly works on the database of the publication’s personalities, put forward a bold and beautiful version, which it was decided to reflect in a note to the document:
Note. It was not possible to establish who is hiding behind the pseudonym Smolensky. Perhaps, by “Smolensky and the brethren,” Stalin meant the teaching staff and Bolshevik workers of the famous Smolensk (Kornilov) evening and Sunday school, where N.K. taught and campaigned in different years. Krupskaya, A.M. Kalmykova, L.N. Knipovich, sisters Z.P. and S.P. Nevzorovs, E.A. Karavaeva and others. V.I. also came here to see Nadezhda Konstantinovna. Lenin. From the Smolensk school came such revolutionary workers as I.V. Babushkin, P.S. Gribakin, brothers A.I. and F.I. Bodrovs and others.
While in exile in Turukhansk, on May 20, 1914, Stalin wrote to G.E. Zinoviev, in fact - to the foreign party center. The letter from the underground member lists many party comrades, of course, hidden behind pseudonyms: this includes V.I. Lenin (Frey), and N.N. Zhordania (Kostrov), and N.K. Krupskaya (N.). And at the very end of the letter (again at the end!) the phrase appears: “I shake your hand firmly. Where is Rold? I'm healthy now." ( Stalin. Proceedings. T. 6. P. 22). We will not bore the reader by recounting a wide variety of sources on the pre-revolutionary history of the party, which we rummaged through in search of the mysterious Rold. At some point, leading Leninist specialist Vladlen Terentyevich Loginov drew our attention to the publication of the notebooks of Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya, secretary of Iskra, who was responsible for appearances and passwords in the party for many years (Address Book of the Central Committee of the RSDLP (1912–1914): Notebook of N.K. Krupskaya with Russian addresses: Documents of the Institute of Marxism-Leninism under the CPSU Central Committee // Historical archive. 1959. No. 1). In fact, they are an encyclopedia of party pseudonyms, almost all of which Soviet researchers were able to decipher at one time. Moreover, the sought-after Rold is undoubtedly not an ordinary comrade: a member of the Russian Central Committee inquires about him from Zinoviev. Needless to say, there is no such thing in Krupskaya’s records. In general, no traces of this mysterious character were found during a persistent three-year search. I wondered if Koba was teasing the police reporters with a fictitious character: let them run around and look for them... As a result, another disappointing entry: “Rold is a party pseudonym; Identity not established."
The February Revolution took place. Stalin left Achinsk, where he was at that moment along with other exiled Social Democrats, and returned to St. Petersburg, where he immediately became involved in the revolutionary struggle. On May 10 (23), 1917, he participates in a meeting of the St. Petersburg Party Committee, where issues of tactics in the upcoming municipal elections are discussed. A detailed record of the debate records the speakers, either by first name and patronymic (“Comrade Sergei” - S.Ya. Bagdatyev, “Comrade Gleb Ivanovich” - G.Ya. Bokiy), or by last name (“Kharitonov”, “Zalutsky”, “Podvoisky” ""), or by the name of the organizations represented (“comrade from the Moskovsky district”, “comrade from the Latyshksky district”). And only three are designated under party pseudonyms: “Uncle” - M.Ya. Latsis, a certain “Milts” and “R.Sh.” ( Stalin. Proceedings T. 6. P. 137). Need I say that the search for the mysterious Miltz and R.Sh., as in the case of the notorious Rold, ended in nothing? The maximum that we could assume (here A. Trishin’s resourcefulness showed itself again) was that perhaps Milts is a shortened abbreviation of the surname, first name and patronymic of the same Martyn Ivanovich LaTsis...
However, the examples given are still a rare exception. And everyone who picks up volumes of the publication “Stalin. Proceedings" will be able to verify this: at the end of the book he will find succinct and accurate information about hundreds of persons mentioned in it with a complete listing of all the pages where they appear.
Enjoy reading!
"Stalin. Works"
(ISBN 978-5-906293-02-2, Prometheus info. M., 2013. 600 pp.).
http:// [email protected]
http://grachev62.narod.ru/stalin/
Volume 2 1907-1913
Preface
The second volume of the Works of I.V. Stalin contains works written mainly in the period from the second half of 1907 to 1913, before Comrade Stalin’s exile to the Turukhansk region, where he stayed until February 1917. These works mainly cover two periods of the revolutionary activity of Comrade Stalin, the Baku period and the St. Petersburg period.
Works dating back to the first half of 1907 are devoted to the tactics of the Bolsheviks in the first Russian revolution (“Preface to the Georgian edition of K. Kautsky’s pamphlet “The Driving Forces and Prospects of the Russian Revolution””, the article “The Electoral Struggle in St. Petersburg and the Mensheviks” and others). Articles of this time were published in the Georgian Bolshevik newspapers “Chveni Tskhovreba” and “Dro”. They are published in Russian for the first time.
The works written since June 1907, during the period of revolutionary activity of Comrade Stalin, mainly in Baku, highlight the struggle of the Bolsheviks with the Menshevik liquidators for the preservation and strengthening of the illegal revolutionary Marxist party (“Party crisis and our tasks”, “Resolutions adopted by the Baku Committee 22 January 1910”, “Letters from the Caucasus”). The articles are devoted to the issues of leadership of the revolutionary labor movement and trade unions: “What do our recent strikes say?”, “Oil industrialists about economic terror”, “Conference and workers” and others. The work “London Congress of the RSDLP (Notes of a Delegate)” is devoted to the results of the V Congress of the RSDLP. Articles by I.V. Stalin of this period, placed in the second volume, were published in the newspapers “Baku Proletary”, “Gudok” and “Sotsial-Demokrat”.
From the second half of 1911, the St. Petersburg period of the revolutionary activity of Comrade Stalin began (1911–1913). Comrade Stalin, having headed the Russian Bureau of the Central Committee, directs the work of the party in Russia to implement the decisions of the Prague Party Conference. Works dedicated mainly to the new revolutionary upsurge in the labor movement and the tasks of the Bolshevik Party in connection with the elections to the Fourth State Duma date back to this time. These include: the leaflet “For the Party!”, articles - “New Line”, “They Work Well...”, “Getting Started!..”, “Order of St. Petersburg Workers to their Workers’ Deputy”, “The Will of the Representatives”, “Elections in St. Petersburg " and others. Articles were published in the St. Petersburg newspapers “Zvezda” and “Pravda”.
The second volume includes the famous work of I.V. Stalin’s “Marxism and the National Question” (1913), which developed the Bolshevik theory and program on the national question.
The article “On Cultural-National Autonomy,” written by Comrade Stalin in exile in Turukhansk, and a number of other works have not been found to this day.
Preface:
The third volume contains the main works of I.V. Stalin, relating to the period of preparation for the Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917.
In 1917 I.V. Stalin in close collaboration with V.I. Lenin led the Bolshevik Party and the working class as they fought to gain state power.
A significant place in the works of I.V. Stalin, published in the third volume, is occupied with the issues of the Bolshevik leadership of the masses during the days of the June and July demonstrations, in the elections to the district and city dumas of Petrograd (appeals “To all workers, to all workers and soldiers of Petrograd”, articles “Against isolated demonstrations”, “ Municipal campaign”, “What happened?”, “Close ranks”, “Today is the election”, etc.), during the defeat of Kornilov’s counter-revolutionary speech (“We demand”, “The conspiracy continues”, “Foreigners and the Kornilov conspiracy”, etc. ) and during the period of direct preparation for the armed uprising in September-October 1917 (“Towards a democratic conference”, “Two lines”, “You can’t wait to wait...”, “The counter-revolution is mobilizing - get ready to fight back”, “Forging chains”, “Exam of impudence”, etc.).
A number of works in the volume are devoted to the issues of the party’s struggle to transform the Soviets from organs of mobilization of the masses into organs of uprising, into organs of proletarian power (reports at the emergency conference of the Petrograd organization of the RSDLP (b) and at the VI Congress of the Bolshevik Party, articles “All power to the Soviets!”, “Power Soviets”, “Strikebreakers of the Revolution”, “What do we need?”).
Articles by I.V. Stalin, published in the volume, were mostly published in the book “On the Road to October,” which was published in 1925 in two editions. These articles were first published in the newspaper “Pravda” - the Central Organ of the Bolshevik Party, which was also published under the names “Proletary”, “Worker”, “Worker’s Path”, and in the Bolshevik newspapers “Soldatskaya Pravda”, “Proletarskoe Delo”, “Worker and Soldier”, etc.
Institute of Marx-Engels-Lenin under the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks
1) In the form of any sums of money for further dubbing. (It is necessary to collect 550 thousand rubles.)
2) In the form of listening to the voiced material of the following volumes and checking it with the original text
to look for errors, inaccuracies, and reservations.
3) Distribution of Audiobooks
Who wants to help, write to e-mail: http://audio @ ivstalin.su
Tags: ,
Interesting article? Tell your friends:
Before Lenin and Stalin, the history of society did not know examples of such a complete fusion of revolutionary state genius and the broadest, far-sighted scientific thought in the same persons. This unity of practical activity and creative theory in the activities of the leaders of the greatest revolution is not an accident; it is natural and follows inevitably from the very essence and characteristics of the huge social process of transforming a capitalist society into a socialist one.
“...in its practical activities,” writes J.V. Stalin, “the party of the proletariat should be guided not by any random motives, but by the laws of social development, practical conclusions from these laws.
This means that socialism is turning from a dream about a better future for humanity into science.
This means that the connection between science and practical activity, the connection between theory and practice, their unity should become the guiding star of the party of the proletariat” (“History of the CPSU(b). Short Course”, p. 109).
An important feature of a completely new phase in the development of human society, the phase begun by the Great October Socialist Revolution, is precisely that for the first time history does not just “happen” by itself, it begins to be consciously directed. The Soviet socialist state has been created and is developing Bya plan built on the scientific basis of the teachings of Marx - Engels - Lenin - Stalin.Historical materialism teaches us that creative, effective ideas and theories themselves arise as a result of the development of the material life of society. But, once they arise, under appropriate conditions they turn into a huge force that greatly facilitates the advancement of society and leads it. “New social ideas and theories,” writes Comrade Stalin, “actually arise because they are necessary for society, and without their organizing, mobilizing and transformative workimpossibleresolution of pressing problems in the development of the material life of society" (“History of the CPSU(b). Short Course", p. 111).
The obligatory and constant penetration of scientific guiding ideas into practical revolutionary work manifested itself from the very first years of JV Stalin’s revolutionary activity. In his work “Briefly about party differences” in 1905, he wrote:
“They say that in some countries the working class itself has developed a socialist ideology (scientific socialism) and will develop it itself, and in other countries, therefore, it is completely unnecessary to introduce socialist consciousness into the labor movement from the outside. But this is a deep mistake. In order to develop scientific socialism, one must stand at the head of science, one must be armed with scientific knowledge and be able to deeply study the laws of historical development” (Works, vol. 1, p. 99).
However, theory alone, divorced from life, is inevitably ineffective and dead.
"What is scientific socialismwithout a labor movement?- Comrade Stalin writes further in the same article. - A compass, which, if left unused, can only rust, and then it would have to be thrown overboard.
What is the labor movementwithout socialism?- A ship without a compass, which will land on the other shore anyway, but if it had a compass, it would reach the shore much faster and would encounter fewer dangers.
Combine both together, and you will get a beautiful ship that will rush straight to the other shore and reach the pier unharmed” (ibid., pp. 102-103).
J.V. Stalin quotes the words of V.I. Lenin:
“Our party is a conscious exponent of an unconscious process” (ibid., p. 104). These words briefly express the essence of the relationship between theory and practice in the development of society and explain the meaning of affirming the partisanship of scientific thought.
The thesis about the inextricable connection between theory and practice in revolutionary activity, both before the victory of the revolution and during the construction of a socialist state, runs like a red thread in the works, speeches and statements of our great leader and teacher. The fusion of his activities as a revolutionary and as a theorist, a leading figure in science, is constant and deeply organic. This merger largely determined the rapid and stunning successes of the proletarian revolution.
In the era of imperialism and proletarian revolutions, it was no longer possible to limit oneself to the tenets of Marxism, which were correct in their time, for the era of pre-monopoly capitalism. The development and continuation of the teachings of Marx and Engels was required, which was brilliantly carried out by Lenin and Stalin. On the eve of the October days, J.V. Stalin said:
“The possibility cannot be ruled out that Russia will be the country paving the way to socialism... We must discard the outdated idea that only Europe can show us the way. There is dogmatic Marxism and creative Marxism. I stand on the basis of the latter” (Oc., vol. 3, pp. 186-187).
Almost a decade later, in 1926, I.V. Stalin, further developing the same position, pointed out:
“The greatness of Lenin, as a successor of Marx and Engels, lies precisely in the fact that he was never a slave to the letter in Marxism... This is precisely the greatness of Lenin, that he openly and honestly, without hesitation, raised the question of the need a new formula on the possibility of the victory of the proletarian revolution in individual countries, without fear that the opportunists of all countries will cling to the old formula, trying to cover up their opportunist cause with the name of Marx and Engels” (Oc., vol. 8, pp. 249-250) .
Further development and deepening of Marxism for the conditions of our Motherland, which began to build socialism in October, Marxism is not a dogma, but a guide to action, a guide for every day, for five years, for such decisive periods of history as the years of the Great Patriotic Warwar - this is the extraordinary power of the powerful, effective science of Lenin - Stalin. Analyzing the case of Lenin, J.V. Stalin pointed out that V.I. Lenin “foresaw the movement of classes and the probable zigzags of the revolution, seeing them at a glance” (Soch., vol. 6, p. 61).
The same scientific genius of prediction also permeates all the revolutionary state activities of J.V. Stalin.
It is necessary to re-read the pages of “Questions of Leninism”, “A Short Course in the History of the All-Russian Communist Party of the Soviet Union”, volumes of the works of J.V. Stalin, compare them with the stages of the history of our Motherland over the past 50 years in order to understand the full scope, complexity and far-sightedness of the Lenin-Stalin science of development human society. The most important sections of this science, closely and complexly interconnected, can be named: the doctrine of imperialism and the general crisis of capitalism, the doctrine of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the doctrine of the possibility of building socialism in one country, the socialist multinational state, the relationship between the proletariat and the peasantry, the industrialization of the country, about the collectivization of agriculture, about the Constitution of the Soviet Socialist State. These chapters of the majestic Lenin-Stalin teaching about the Soviet socialist state, about the development of human society as a whole, about the paths of transition to a communist society have entered our lives very closely, and in our consciousness the boundaries of theoretical thought and its implementation in life have been erased. Leninist-Stalinist science has completely merged with the practice of our socialist state.
This science has become a regulator of changes in the economic foundations of our country, its social structure, political system and relations with surrounding capitalist states. She revealed the contradictions of capitalism, which led the latter to a critical phase of imperialism and proletarian revolutions. V.I. Lenin and I.V. Stalin fully analyzed this stage of capitalism, theoretically substantiated the power of the Soviets as the best state form of dictatorship of the proletariat, proved the possibility of building a socialist society in the country of the dictatorship of the proletariat, surrounded by imperialist states, outlined specific paths of economic policy and ways of gradually involving the bulk of the peasantry in. the channel of socialist construction, set and resolved - as an integral part of the general question of internationalproletarian revolution is a national-colonial question. Continuing and developing the teachings of Lenin, I.V. Stalin concentrated his attention on the problem of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the constructionsocialistsociety in conditions of a victorious revolution and imperialist encirclement. The October Revolution determined the beginning of a new era in the history of mankind. It aggravated the crisis of capitalism to maximum degrees. New problems have arisen concerning both capitalism itself and the relationship between the socialist and capitalist systems; The question arose about the continued existence of capitalism.
JV Stalin indicated and implemented solutions to the most important socio-economic problems for this unique period of coexistence of two systems - capitalist and socialist. V.I. Lenin discovered the law of uneven development of capitalism under imperialism. J.V. Stalin made new, decisive conclusions from this law.
“The law of uneven development during the period of imperialism,” pointed out J.V. Stalin, “means the spasmodic development of some countries in relation to others, the rapid exclusion of some countries from the world market by others, periodic redistributionalready divided worldin the order of military clashes and military catastrophes, the deepening and aggravation of conflicts in the camp of imperialism, the weakening of the front of world capitalism, the possibility of the proletariat of individual countries breaking through this front, the possibility of the victory of socialism in individual countries” (Oc., vol. 9, p. 106).
This formula shows the organic connection between the modern development of capitalist society and wars and the inevitability of proletarian revolutions, and substantiates even more deeply than before the possibility of building a socialist state in one country.
The Lenin-Stalin theory about the feasibility of socialism in one country included, first of all, a solution to the important problem of the economic foundation of socialism. In this regard, J.V. Stalin gave new solutions to the problem of industrialization of the country and collectivization of agriculture. "
Objecting to those who understood industrialization as the development of industry in general, J.V. Stalin pointed out that “industrializationshould be understood primarily as the development in our country of severe industry and, especially, as the development of our own mechanical engineering , this main nerve of the industry in general. Without this, there is nothing to talk about ensuring the economic independence of our country” (Works, vol. 8, pp. 121-122).
In his speech at the conference of Marxist agrarians, J.V. Stalin called on scientists to solve new theoretical problems in the field of economics. Stalin's theory ensured the socialist restructuring of agriculture and the victory of the collective farm system in the countryside.
The most important feature of J.V. Stalin’s teaching on the development of the USSR on the path to communism lies in his steady affirmation of the global significance of the October Revolution. Back in 1927, J.V. Stalin foresaw the enormous scope of the revolutionary movement in the West and East. Events of enormous importance that unfolded before our eyes in Western Europe - the victory of the cause of people's democracy in Poland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Albania, Czechoslovakia and the creation of a democratic, peace-loving republic in Germany - confirm the correctness of Stalin's analysis of the situation that emerged after the October Revolution.
In 1927, J.V. Stalin pointed out that the “October Revolutionopenednew era, eracolonialrevolutions carried out inoppressed countries of the world in unionwith the proletariat,under the direction ofproletariat" (Works, vol. 10, p. 243). In the same year, in his speech “The International Situation and Defense of the USSR,” J.V. Stalin, considering the revolutionary movement in China and its stages, decisively pointed to the third stage - the Soviet revolution, “which does not yet exist, but which will come” (ibid., page 14). The formation of the new Chinese Republic, which threw off the yoke of imperialism and colonial oppression, reveals with striking convincingness the depth of Stalin's analysis of social processes.
Example activity. Lenin and Stalin most decisively overthrows the old ideas of science as an abstract area of thought, abstracted, removed from life and developing according to its own, internal laws. Genuine, advanced Leninist-Stalinist science grows out of life, is caused by life and remakes life, nature and society.
The teachings of Lenin and Stalin are immense in their breadth. It covers the most general principles of knowledge of nature and society and at the same time analyzes and solves the practical issues of today in the finest detail.
The philosophical dialectical-materialist basis of this teaching was set out by J.V. Stalin in two remarkable works, separated in time by more than three decades. The main part of the article “Anarchism or Socialism?”, published in 1906-1907, is devoted to the consideration of the dialectical method; J.V. Stalin returned to the same fundamental question in his work “On Dialectical and Historical Materialism” in 1938, which was included as an integral part in the “Short Course on the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)”. In this work, J.V. Stalin gave a systematic presentation of the dialectical-materialist worldview, striking in its simplicity and depth.
First of all, a direct connection is established between the general philosophical principles presented and revolutionary practice.
In his work of 1906, J.V. Stalin wrote: “Marxism is not only the theory of socialism, it is an integral worldview, a philosophical system from which the proletarian socialism of Marx naturally follows. This philosophical system is called dialectical materialism” (Works, vol. 1, p. 297).
The same most important thesis, in an even more definite form, was repeated by J.V. Stalin at the beginning of his 1938 article:
“Dialectical materialism is the worldview of the Marxist-Leninist party” (“History of the CPSU(b). Short course”, p. 99). This thesis emphasizes the partisan nature of dialectical materialism and determines its practical and political severity and orientation. At the same time, the dialectic of society is only a special case of the general dialectic of nature; its laws extend not only to the life of human society. “The history of science shows,” wrote J.V. Stalin in 1906, “that the dialectical method is a truly scientific method: starting from astronomy and ending with sociology, everywhere the idea is confirmed that there is nothing eternal in the world, that everything changes, everything develops. Consequently, everything in nature must be considered from the point of view of movement and development. And thismeans that the spirit of dialectics permeates all modern science” (Works, vol. 1, p. 301).
J.V. Stalin in clear, distinct strokes characterizes the special aspects of dialectical changes in nature and society and gives an irrefutable in its evidence formula for a materialistic solution to the fundamental worldview question of the relationship between the material and the mental in nature:
“Of course, in the world,” wrote J.V. Stalin in 1906, “there are ideal and material phenomena, but this does not mean at all that they deny each other. On the contrary, the ideal and material sides are two different forms of the same nature or society, they cannot be imagined without each other, they exist together, develop together, and, therefore, we have no reason to think that they deny each other.
Thus, the so-called dualism turns out to be untenable.
One and indivisible nature, expressed in two different forms - material and ideal; a single and indivisible social life, expressed in two different forms - material and ideal - this is how we should look at the development of nature and social life. ...development of the ideal side, development of consciousness,precededdevelopment of the material side, development of external conditions: first external conditions change, first the material side changes, andthenconsciousness, the ideal side, changes accordingly” (Works, vol. 1, pp. 312-314).
These words of I.V. Stalin could be used as the epigraph of all works, the entire teaching of I.P. Pavlov on higher nervous activity.
In “A Short Course on the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)” J.V. Stalin gave an exhaustive description of the Marxist dialectical method. Dialectics affirms the necessary universal interconnection of objects and phenomena, the fallacy of attempts to understand and study them in isolation. The most important condition for understanding nature and society, dialectics believes that it is a constant consideration of their continuous movement and development. In contrast to metaphysics, dialectics does not consider the process of growth and development as a simple quantitative process; it reveals the most important transition of quantitative changes into discontinuous qualitative, fundamental changes. Finally, the main property of the dialecticalThe development of nature and society consists in the struggle of opposing tendencies during processes. J.V. Stalin quotes Lenin’s words:
“In its proper sense, dialectics is the study of contradictionin the very essence of objects"(“History of the CPSU(b). Short course”, p. 104).
All the activities of J.V. Stalin as a great leader leading peoples to communism, as a brilliant teacher and scientist, are imbued with dialectics, the powerful Marxist dialectical method that resolves any difficulties. The entire scientific work of J.V. Stalin is a rich, inspiring example of the application of Marxist dialectics. At the same time, the dialectical materialism of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin is full of optimism and unshakable confidence in victory. This optimism extends to the fate of society and to the comprehensibility of nature as a whole.
“...In contrast to idealism,” says J.V. Stalin, “which disputes the possibility of knowing the world and its laws, does not believe in the reliability of our knowledge, does not recognize objective truth, and believes that the world is full of “things in themselves,” which can never be known by science - Marxist philosophical materialism proceeds from the fact that the world and its laws are completely knowable, that our knowledge of the laws of nature, verified by experience and practice, is reliable knowledge that has the meaning of objective truths, that there are no unknowables in the world things, but there are only things not yet known, which will be revealed and known by the forces of science and practice" (“History of the CPSU(b). Short Course", p. 108). This confidence of our great teacher - a dialectical materialist in the indestructibility of natural science , the conviction in the objective value of science about nature, in its boundless prospects, gives strength and hope to Soviet researchers in their creative work to master nature and understand it, as well as in their struggle against the mysticism and idealism of modern bourgeois science.
JV Stalin reveals in a new way the most important features of historical materialism. The materialistic essence of this teaching, first of all, as in natural science, allows us to assert the reliability of the science of the laws of social development. Socialism is thereby transformed from a dream about a better future for humanity into science. The main position of historical materialism is that the conditions of material life determine the life of society. But this statement does not removethe role of social ideas and theories as a driving factor public development generated by this very development. At the same time, the role of the conditions of material life can also be very various . J.V. Stalin examines the long-standing question of the role of the geographical environment in the development of society and proves, contrary to the opinion widespread in earlier times, that the geographical environment, due to its low variability over long historical periods, cannot be defining factor in the development of society, since changes in this development occur much faster than changes geographical environment.
JV Stalin further shows that the history of society is, first of all, the history of production, methods of production replacing one another, the history of the development of productive forces and production relations. For a capitalist society, a discrepancy between production relations and productive forces is inevitable, leading to economic crises and then to social revolutions. On the contrary, the socialist economy of the USSR is characterized by complete compliance of production relations with the nature of the productive forces.
The philosophical works of J. V. Stalin, together with “Materialism and Empirio-criticism” and “Philosophical Notebooks” of V. I. Lenin, constitute the most important primary source of the guiding ideas of dialectical materialism, to which advanced science now constantly resorts in its development. A remarkable property of the philosophy of Lenin and Stalin lies in the inseparable connection of its most general, at first glance seemingly abstract, provisions with the practice of the history of society and culture, developing before our eyes.
One of the manifestations of the gigantic creative activity of I.V. Stalin in the field of theory and practice of the socialist revolution and the construction of a socialist state is his role in organizing the new Soviet science in all its breadth and diversity. This science, which arose and grew on the basis of the legacy left by pre-revolutionary Russia, has the right to be called new both in content and in scope, and above all in its purpose. Soviet science is people's science. Its special features as a folk science are characterized in the famous p.speech of J.V. Stalin, delivered on May 17, 1938 at a reception workers higher school in the Kremlin. J.V. Stalin then proclaimed a toast to the prosperity of science, which is not fenced off from the people, is ready to serve them and serves the people not under coercion, but voluntarily, with pleasure, to science, which is not confined to the shell of monopolists, to science, which opens all doors to young forces countries. Soviet science became popular science in the Stalin era because it was entirely aimed at serving the people, and because a wide stream of people poured into it from factory floors and collective farm fields. This new folk science does not want to be a slave to tradition and boldly breaks traditions, norms and attitudes when they become outdated. Thus, in the Soviet country, after October, traditions were decisively broken in the science of society, in natural science, chemistry, biology, geology, in a wide variety of fields of technology, electrical engineering, hydraulic engineering, mechanical engineering, aviation, etc.; a new story has emerged political economy, new doctrine of law; Michurin biology won; chemistry and geology have become powerful practical tools of technology; the country was electrified, the Moscow metro appeared, there were built huge hydraulic structures, and, surprisingly American strategists and diplomats, the Soviet new science mastered atomic energy in an unprecedented time.
In his speech, as an example of courageous people who broke the old and created the new in science, despite any obstacles, J.V. Stalin cited the greatest man of our time - Lenin. For all progressive humanity in our time, it is clear that next to Lenin stands his student and brilliant successor I.V. Stalin.
“It also happens,” J. V. Stalin pointed out, “that new paths in science and technology are sometimes paved not by people generally known in science, but by people completely unknown in the scientific world, ordinary people, practitioners, innovators.” Inspired by Stalin, our Soviet science and technology has now included a whole army of ordinary people, advanced workers and collective farmers, and in the honorary lists of Stalin Prize laureates, next to academicians, professors and engineers, there are the names of hundreds of workers and peasants.
In the Soviet country, science develops, spreads among the people and is implemented in life in a completely different way than it has been elsewhere before. People's Soviet science is at the same time a party science.
It moves and grows in those directions that are indicated as the most pressing by the leader of the Soviet people - the Communist Party, led by its great leader I.V. Stalin. The principle of partisanship determines the very content of the sciences, their program, their most important channels. The Communist Party is the vanguard of the advanced working class. Only this class, the triumph of which is historically inevitable, provides the social basis for advanced science. Hence, the partisanship of science is an expression of its correctness. The influence of the principle of partisanship is great and fruitful in all areas of knowledge: in the social sciences, in technology and in natural science.
The sharp differences between Soviet natural science and bourgeois science are its strongly expressed materialistic basis and practical focus on serving the people. In the capitalist world, precisely in recent decades, attempts have intensified more than ever to turn natural science in most of its fundamental sections - mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology - into the service of idealism and even simply theology. These aspirations are firmly opposed in Soviet natural science.
In numerous brilliant studies, Soviet mathematicians opposed attempts to present mathematics as a kind of unrestricted and undirected idealistic game of the mind with their science as arising from the needs of practice, from experience and aimed mainly at solving specific problems of technology and science. At the same time, such abstract branches of mathematics as number theory and topology were raised to a very great height, considered as an important reserve for overcoming new difficulties, which, undoubtedly, are caused by the further growth of technology and science.
Soviet astronomy became a dam against the muddy flow of mystical concepts about the creation of the world, about the limitations of the universe and its expansion, etc., which were widespread in the capitalist world. New ideas about the evolution of the universe are developing, sharply breaking with traditions. Our observatories, equipped with instruments invented by Soviet scientists and built by Soviet workers, make it possible to view and study the universe with new eyes.
Soviet physicists made a significant contribution to the materialist doctrine of matter and its structure, of force fields, of light and its propertiesand provide great assistance to the development of new technology in industry , agriculture and medicine. At the same time, a decisive rebuke was given to idealistic philosophical statements about the equality of the teachings of Ptolemy and Copernicus, about indeterminism and the unknowability of phenomena, supposedly based on the theoryrelativityand wave mechanics.
The victory of Michurin biology in the Soviet Union meant the collapse of mechanistic and idealistic theories in the doctrine of living matter. I. P. Pavlov’s teaching on higher nervous activity, which is part of the very foundations of the materialist teaching about nature, has found tremendous development in our country, with the exclusive personal attention of Lenin and Stalin. The special care and attention of I.V. Stalin to the teachings of I.P. Pavlov was manifested, in particular, in the creation of an entire Pavlovian town near Leningrad - “the capital of conditioned reflexes.”
The ways of disseminating science in the Soviet country among the people, according to the thoughts and instructions of J.V. Stalin, have become unusually wide and varied. Important and practically significant results of science, discoveries and inventions become immediately known through the large circulation of books, the use of radio, through hundreds of thousands of lectures given throughout the country, through countless exhibitions. The country's scientific intelligentsia, which itself emerged from the depths of the people during the Soviet years, takes part in this important work of disseminating knowledge. Every year in our country the line between physical and mental labor is becoming more and more noticeable; scientific achievements of great fundamental importance become known to the masses; they help to form a conscious understanding of nature and society for every worker.
Thus, science, from a separate caste-based area of culture, accessible to a few, became in the Stalin era, along with art, a national property. As a result, the army of scientists is constantly growing, which is replenished by the people, and the results of science bring benefits on a scale that previously seemed unthinkable. This is the main property of our Stalinist party science.
Another property of it is a constant, inextricable connection with life, with practice. “Science, which has broken ties with practice, with experience, -What kind of science is this?” (“Questions of Leninism” , p. 502), says Comrade Stalin. The issue of implementing the results of scientific research in life became the main one. The Soviet country makes introduction a necessary condition for a scientist of any specialty - mathematician, physicist, engineer, chemist, biologist, geologist, historian, literary critic, economist, philosopher . For our Motherland, the times when cultural figures could believe that they supposedly existed “not for battle” are forever gone. Soviet science is, first of all, a powerful instrument for the material progress of socialist society. This organic property of Soviet science is constantly being concretized and tempered. An important movement of recent times, the movement of the community of scientists and workers, science and production, especially clearly expresses this most important property of Stalinist science.
The national importance of Soviet science was clearly demonstrated during the era of Stalin's five-year plans and during the Great Patriotic War. Guided and inspired by the genius of Stalin, our scientists, engineers, advanced workers and collective farmers in a short time creatively mastered diverse and complex technology and in many cases created it anew. This technology was required to transform the country from a backward agrarian state into a powerful industrial state with a huge new industry, rational agriculture, widely diversified transport and unprecedented hydraulic structures.
Soviet science and technology, on the direct instructions of I.V. Stalin, with amazing speed created new types of weapons, glorious Stalinist aviation, artillery, radio and a highly developed military sanitary service for protection against enemies. The most subtle types of industry—electrical, optical-mechanical, and chemical—grew, became stronger, and became unusually differentiated. The country, which until recently imported most of its technical equipment from abroad, now receives it in abundance in its factories. In this grandiose technical revolution, carried out under the leadership of I.V. Stalin, a very important place belonged to theoretical science. Therefore, for this purpose, Soviet Stalinist science became planned.
The state role of science required clarity and organization in the ways of its development. The army of scientists and engineers began to learn to systematically develop their strategy and tactics, coordinating them with the general state economic plans. Contrary to the skepticism of the Old Believers in science in the capitalist world, Stalinist science became a planned science. This is one of its main and inseparably associated features, distinguishing it from the disorderly and random growth of science in the capitalist world, dictated, especially in technical fields, often by the interests of individual competing firms and the so-called fashion, the driving springs of which, in their own right, turn, are in the conflicting interests and whims of capitalist society.
The socialist nature of the Soviet state and the enormous volume of tasks facing our planned science in the Stalin era determined its special collective character. Unlike the science of pre-revolutionary Russia, when the solution to any scientific problem was always associated with one person, many of the most important scientific and technical problems are now solved not by individual scientists, but by entire teams of specialists, sometimes very large. In the honorary lists of Stalin laureates, groups most often appear as authors of the work. Emphasizing the ownership of an individual's scientific result, which permeates the history of science in the capitalist world, is replaced in Soviet science by identifying its social, state significance.
The October revolutionary victory marked the beginning of a completely new era in the history of our national science. In addition to the noted profound fundamental qualitative changes, this was manifested in the enormous growth of science. The few ranks of scientists of pre-revolutionary Russia grew in the era of Lenin - Stalin into a large army* of Soviet scientists, numbering over a hundred thousand specialists in various fields. These scientists now have thousands of well-equipped institutes at their disposal throughout the country.
A striking example of the growth of Soviet science is the history of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which during the Soviet years transformed from a closed scientific institution with several small experimental institutes and a large number of static museums, libraries and archives:into a huge, world's largest association of research institutions, institutes, observatories, laboratories, stations, etc. in all fundamentally important areas of science, with 16 branches, located throughout the country from Sakhalin and Vladivostok to Chisinau and Petrozavodsk. Near the USSR Academy of Sciences, ten academies republics that are part of the Soviet Union. Some of these academies have become very important in a short timeresearchcenters. This amazing growth and development of the academies of sciences was the result of the exceptional attention of the government and the party and personally of Lenin and Stalin to the development of domestic science, the kind of science that is needed in a socialist country moving towards communism.
The extraordinary growth of Soviet science, its increasing successes, the sense of patriotism and pride in our native country have raised the question in a new way about the significance of our national science, about some of the remarkable successes of its past. In pre-revolutionary Russia, an unworthy skeptical attitude towards the scientific achievements of our native science has long been cultivated. Such skepticism was deliberately supported by the tsarist government, which preferred to rely mainly on foreign assistance in technology and science.
The great “scientists of pre-revolutionary Russia - Lomonosov, Mendeleev, Butlerov and others had to fight in difficult conditions for recognition of the merits and dignity of Russian scientists. Russian science, despite the extremely unfavorable conditions for its existence and growth in Tsarist Russia, could rightfully be proud of its brilliant discoveries in various fields of knowledge and technology. Russian science in the 18th century had the honor of the concrete scientific development of atomic theory; Russian science determined a whole revolution in the study of space; In the 19th century, chemistry reached its highest development and generalization in Russia. The successes of Russian geology were fundamental, diverse and significant. Russian geography, geology and geophysics successfully competed in their development with the corresponding sciences of other countries.
Despite this, admiration for foreign science was widespread among scientists; the authority of their scientists was belittled or simply not recognized. These slave traditions of the past of Tsarist Russia are becoming obsolete and disappearing in the Stalin era. Soviet scientistlooks with pride at his present in the field of science, but at the same time remembers with respect certain glorious pages of the past.
Interest and attention to the history of Russian science has sharply increased. As a result of the great work of researchers, outstanding figures of the past, sometimes completely forgotten, have been discovered. Russian priority has been undoubtedly established in a wide variety of areas of technology. The diverse scientific activities of M.V. Lomonosov, N.I. Lobachevsky, D.I. Mendeleev and many other great Russian scientists now appear to Soviet people in a completely new way.
The Soviet country, Soviet scientists have revealed the qualitative height of the national scientific heritage of the past. With amazing breadth and completeness, Soviet science and the entire people celebrated the anniversaries of M.V. Lomonosov, D.I. Mendeleev, I.P. Pavlov. In the Stalin era, the importance of the scientist grew as never before, and for the first time a correct assessment was given of all the good things in the field of culture that the Soviet country inherited from the past.
In this growth of the authority of science and scientists, a huge role belongs to I.V. Stalin. Even during the formidable years of the Great Patriotic War, in its most crucial period, I.V. Stalin closely followed science, the activities of the Academy of Sciences and helped it in every possible way in its work. “I hope that the USSR Academy of Sciences,” he wrote in a telegram to the President of the USSR Academy of Sciences V.L. Komarov on April 12, 1942, “will lead the movement of innovators in the field of science and production and will become the center of advanced Soviet science in the ongoing struggle against the worst enemy of our people and all other freedom-loving peoples - German fascism."
Under the leadership of Lenin and Stalin, our science grew beyond recognition, along with the entire Soviet culture, along with the entire country. After the severe trials of our Motherland during the Great Patriotic War, after the brilliant victory over the Nazis, after the Soviet people, the Soviet Army, Soviet workers, engineers and scientists showed their strength, organized by the Soviet government and the Lenin-Stalin party, I.V. Stalin could confidently address our scientists with the famous words:
“I have no doubt that if we provide proper assistance to our scientists, they will be able not only to catch up, but also to surpass in the near futureachievements of science outside our country" ("Speech on pre-election meeting of voters of the Stalin electoral district of Moscow on February 9, 1946,” Gospolitizdat, 1946, p. 22). Four years have passed since these words were spoken, and the successes of Soviet science during this time have been so great that there is no doubt that Soviet scientists are close to solving the task set before them by I.V. Stalin.
The USSR Academy of Sciences is proud that I.V. Stalin is a member of it as an honorary academician. With the election of J.V. Stalin, the USSR Academy of Sciences stated the extraordinary significance of the contribution made by J.V. Stalin to the treasury of advanced science throughout the world.
Together with the entire Soviet people, together with the leading people of the whole world, Soviet scientists respectfully and warmly greet the leader of the peoples, the luminary of science, the great Stalin on the occasion of his 70th birthday.
Long live the greatest man of our days, wise Stalin!