The world bourgeoisie is not only declaring communism to be dead but also blaming Stalin for what is happening in the USSR today.

Obviously, they and their comrades in the USSR do not like Stalin no more than Trotsky and Bukharin liked him.

This is all very understandable: Stalin means building of communism and communism means the destruction of capitalism.

Even the best technique of production by itself cannot build socialism. It needs to be used for communist aims. Bourgeoisie cannot do this. Only the proletariat, because of its communist aims can fully utilise the capacity of the available technique.

That is how it was in the USSR under Stalin.

Proletariat of the USSR assumed power in a country where the technique of production was relatively backward. But proletarian power through its communist aim is able to utilise productive forces to its full potential. This coupled with the untold sacrifices of the proletariat of the USSR, has produced "miracles".

By 1938, the USSR has already built socialism and was headed towards communism! Just before the death of Stalin our motherland was the second industrial power in the world, had the largest scale of agriculture and the best technique of production in the world. The USSR had the most developed factory techniques in the whole wide world. The world was already talking about the fully automated piston factory that was built in the USSR in 1951 and more, a computer factory - the precursors of the micro-chips, second in the world, the first in Europe was also built in the USSR by 1952.

Fully automated factories and computers, even before they were made up of micro-chips, at the service of the proletarian power....

All of these, coupled with the Stalin Plan of Transformation of Nature clearly points to this: that the year J.V. Stalin has died coincides with clear signs of matured communist society. When Stalin died, communist society was on the verge of realisation in the USSR, it was clearly kicking in her mother’s womb.


This is nothing but a lie that is being put forward by the imperialist bourgeoisie and the traitors to the U.S.S.R. to achieve their political aim of belittling communism in the eyes of the world proletariat and demoralising the Soviet peoples.

The U.S.S.R. had the best factory technique in the whole world by the time Stalin has died. Let us read an example of this from an ardent opponent of communism, Dr. A. D. Booth;

".. A spectacular example of a modern automatic factory which is often quoted is the Russian piston factory completed in 1951. In this the raw material, in the form of ingots, is received and melted under controlled conditions. A completely automatic process then produces castings which are 'fettled' (that is, the risers and the pouring spout are removed). These castings are heat treated and automatically tested for hardness, imperfect members being rejected; they are then machined, gauged for weight, and tin plated. Lastly a completely automatic inspection grades the finished products into size (this is important because the output of a factory of this type will not be completely perfect and it is therefore convenient to produce a range of sizes which can be used as replacement for engines in various states of wear) and finally the whole operation of protective coating, wrapping and packing the castings into crates is performed in an automatic manner. Here again, as in the case of early windmills, the components start at the top of the building and work their way steadily to the bottom to emerge as finished products and it is a nice commentary on progress that the most recent and the earliest of our automatic processes resemble one another so closely."

Andrew D. Booth, D.Sc., Ph.D. Automation and Computing. P. 18.

Staples Press. London. 1958

And from a sort of a socialist, Dr. S. Lilley:

"...But the two most complete examples of automation (that I know of) are both in the U.S.S.R. In one of them, aluminium ingots are fed in at one end of the line, and at the other end there emerge every day 3,500 fully finished car pistons, wrapped and packed. In the other, the greater part of the process of making ball and roller-bearings is done automatically.

The latter is to be found at the Kaganovitch First State Ball-bearing Factory in Moscow, a factory with a very progressive technical policy....


The piston plant started work in I950 a remarkably early date in the history of automation. Since it is probably still the most completely automatic plant in the world, it will be worth while to describe it in some detail. The process of converting aluminium ingots into packed pistons is completely automatic with only two exceptions. At the start of the process, in the I950 model, a labourer loaded the ingots on to a conveyor. But a second plant, which came into operation in I954 or I955, eliminates that piece of work; the ingots are now tipped into a hopper, from which they are automatically loaded on to the conveyor. That leaves only one manual operation, namely a visual inspection of the castings for flaws. The details of the process may be followed from Figures I and 3, while Figure 2 shows part of the line.


... The paradox looks even more startling when we recall that the piston plant started work in I950. The work of designing and building it must have been done in the last two or three years of the nineteen forties—that is to say, at a time when even transfer machines were known only theoretically in Britain and even in America they were only just beginning to be seriously developed....


But they knew that in a few years' time, after a great effort of reconstruction, they would be able to put far larger resources into automating industry on a large scale. And so they decided to plan ahead for that time. They would spend the next few years gaining experience, so that when they were ready they could go ahead with automation at the maximum possible speed. Mere building of transfer machines would give only very limited experience. A modest programme on those lines would continue, but the main emphasis was to be on a project, useful in itself of course, which would give them wide experience in automation techniques. And so they decided to aim at the completely automatic manufacture of car pistons, precisely because it was complicated and difficult, because that one project would force them to master the automation of practically every basic process in engineering production."

(Automation and Social Progress. S. Lilley. London. Lawrence & Wishart. 1957. P. 43-51)

Further, let us read from the pages of the " Political Economy ", the preparations of which book is discussed by Stalin in his "Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R.", and which came out just after his death.

"The highest stage of mechanisation is the automation of production, which is the use of self-regulating automatic machines. Closely connected with automation is the system of telemechanics, which is the remote management and control of working machines. Where the entire complex of machinery covering a production process as a whole is self-regulated, there is an automatic system of machinery. An automatic system of machinery carries out all the production processes required for the working up of raw material into finished product, without direct human interference, and only requires supervision by the worker."

(Political Economy, 1957, Lawrance & Wishart, London. P 504 )

"All-round automation of production means a higher level of development of large-scale machine production and constitutes a characteristic feature of material production basis of communism. It leads to the replacement of unskilled labour by skilled, and provides the technical basis for finally abolishing the essential distinctions between mental and physicall labour. The transition from partial automation of production processes to an automatic system of machines ensures an enormous increase in the productivity of labour.

The creation of enterprises with complete complex mechanisation and automatic production lines of machine tools, as well as of automatic factories is among the achievements of the Soviet engineering industry.

The automation of already-operating hydro-electric stations has been carried out in the U.S S R. Hydro-electric stations under construction are all to be automatically operated. The control of many power stations is exercised from a distance by means of telemechanisms. In metallurgical enterprises newly-devised rolling-mills, tube-mills and blooming-mills which are mechanised with automatic controls are in use. Automatic control of locks is being introduced in hydro-technical installations. Automatic factories for the production of concrete have been built, in which the automation of production embraces all processes, beginning with the feeding-in and weighing of the raw materials and ending with the emergence of the finished concrete.

If, at the present time, automation of labour processes is no more than a herald of the new technical basis of communism, in time this great achievement of science and technique will be introduced into all branches of production" ( ibid. P 742-743)


Let us read from "the Report by N. A. Bulganin to the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U.":

"One of the most important and urgent tasks of the instrument-making industry is to satisfy the needs of science and production for sufficient quantities of rapid computation machines, which are a new means of automating mathematical computation and production processes.

The radio engineering industry must pay particular attention to developing high-quality semi-conductor instruments, which in many cases are effective substitutes for radio valves. Semi-conductor instruments are of much smaller size and weight than radio valves, and increase the reliability of radio apparatus, computation machines and other appliances.


The next and higher stage after mechanisation, in the process of technical development, is automation.

The essence of automation is that the production is carried out with a minimum expenditure of physical labour; the worker is freed from heavy labour and his duties are chiefly regulation. Thanks to automation, one worker, or a few workers, can tend a large number of machines. Automation changes the nature of the worker's labour, and the more extensively it is introduced the more will his labour approximate to that of the technician and the engineer.

Large-scale automation opens up prospects for an unprecedented increase in the labour productivity, and, under socialism, makes for a rise in the cultural and technical standards of the working people. In addition, it leads to better quality and lower cost of production; furthermore, it brings greater reliability and continuity in production.

The control of operations in atomic installations, and also in a number of the chemical and other industries where the work cannot be regulated directly by the personnel, is possible only with the help of automation.

The results of automation may be seen from the example of Dnieper hydro-electric station, whose nine hydro-turbines with a total capacity of 650,000 kilowatts, and a number of other machines, are serviced by shifts of only six operatives. At the Ordjonikidze cascade in Uzbekistan, two or three operatives control four hydro-electric stations from a single panel.

The economic effect of automation in engineering works is high. Our up-to-date automatic production lines make it possible to reduce the number of workers to between one-fifth and one tenth of what it was and to curtail working time in processing to the same extent. Automation must be widely employed in all industries. This task confronts the heavy, light and food industries alike.

Automatic computing machines which can themselves determine the most advantageous regimen of production process and maintain it, and also establish and control quality assignments, must play a particularly important role in carrying automation.

The development of automation is thus of great importance to our country. The Ministries and departments are not yet paying proper attention to it, however.

The draft directives set the task of introducing automation in industry on a large scale, of proceeding more rapidly from the automation of machines and operations to the automation of factory departments and technological processes, and the construction of fully automated plants, which will make for an incalculable rise in labour productivity."

Report by N. I. Bulganin to the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U.

Soviet News Booklet No. 5. London, March 1956.

Need we say anymore!


A plan of computerisation was presented to the Titoite/Khruschevite leadership of CP of USSR at the beginning of 1960’s. This was to record all productive and finantial activities at each productive and finantial unit and then centralize it, thus providing for direct control of all these activities. Those who came up with the plan had no problem as regards the economic activities of the Titoite-Trotskyite leadership of the party and did not oppose them. But in spite of that the plan was refused. This was because application of the computerization plan would have made their plan of restoration of capitalism in the USSR extremely difficult, if not impossible.

This refusal of computerization is a technical proof of the fact that the leadership of the CP of USSR were enemies of the Lenin-Stalin plan of building communism in the USSR.

The fact that this plan is never mentioned by Maoists and Enverists (and all others) is another proof of the fact that all these were also enemies of the Lenin-Stalin plan of building communism in the USSR.


" A Plan for Planting Shelter Belts, Introducing Travopolye Crop Rotation and Digging Ponds and Reservoirs for the Purpose of Ensuring High and Stable Crop Yields in the Steppe and Wooded- Steppe Districts of the European Part of the U.S.S.R. " promulgamated on October 24, 1948.

( V. Safonov. Land in Bloom. P 495. Foreign Languages Publishing House. Moskow 1951.)

"Irrigation and shelter belt planting are important factors in the continued development of agriculture. Already before the war, many large irrigation systems, equipped with modern machinery, were built and existing systems overhauled. The result was a 50 per cent increase in effective irrigated area in the Central Asian Republics and other parts of the U.S.S.R., and this enabled us to accomplish so momentous a task as substantially increasing cotton output. Work was likewise begun on the planting of shelter belts.

The construction of irrigation canals and shelter-belt planting were launched on an even bigger scale after the war. Large irrigation systems are now under construction in the Transcaucasian Republics, and in the next few years, when they are completed, the effective irrigated area here will be increased by 50 per cent and more. In 1947 work was begun on the irrigation of the highly fertile but drought-affected areas in the central black-earth zone—the Kursk, Orel, Voronezh and Tambov regions—the aim being to attain stable harvests of grain, industrial and other crops. In 1948 extensive work was started on the planting of large national forest shelter belts in the steppe and forest-steppe areas of the European part of the U.S.S.R., of shelter belts in collective and state farms, and on the construction of ponds and reservoirs. In the past three and a half years, the collective farms, state farms and forestries have afforestated 2.6 million hectares and have built over 12,000 ponds and reservoirs. In excessive humidity areas, primarily Byelorussia and the Baltic Republics, extensive work is now in progress, as before the war, for the draining of marshes and bogland.

Construction of the huge hydropower plants and irrigation systems on the Volga, the Don, the Dnieper and the Amu Darya and the commissioning of the Lenin Volga-Don Shipping Canal open up immense prospects for agricultural development. These power plants and water systems will irrigate over 6 million hectares and supply water and sectional irrigation to grazing land on another 22 million hectares. Vast opportunities are thus created for the electrification of agriculture, for the introduction of electrical ploughing, electrical-powered combines and other electrical agricultural machinery.

Large-scale construction of irrigation canals goes hand in hand with the introduction of a new system of irrigation. Under it, the irrigated plots are much larger, the field irrigation ditches are more rationally arranged and the number of permanent irrigation canals in the fields reduced, their place being taken by temporary canals. This makes it possible more fully to utilize irrigated areas and irrigation water, and creates better conditions for the mechanization of irrigated agriculture.

The completion of these broad irrigation schemes, the planting of shelter belts and the draining of bog-land, are raising our agriculture to a higher plane, and our country will be guaranteed, once and for all, against any fortuities of the weather. (Applause.) The task now is to complete the irrigation, shelter-belt and drainage projects in the appointed time, and Party, Soviet and economic organizations must concentrate special attention on this. "

( G. Melenkov. Report To The Nineteenth Party Congress on The Work of The Central Committee of The C.P.S.U.(B.). October 5, 1952 P. 72-73. Foreign Languages Publishing House. Moscow 1952)

Plant trees to form forest shelter belts to prevent the land from scorching winds; control rivers flow to stop flooding and built reservoirs for irrigation; preserve and further develop the structure of soil in conjunction with crop rotation as the main means of fertilisation, using minimal amount of chemical fertilisers that can be fruitfully utilised by crops; further develop the species of crops through a program of cross breading, selective breeding, conditioning. Specialized agriculture to be restricted and mixed agriculture to be promoted combined with husbandry which shall provide natural fertilisers; electrical machinery to be utilised, the latest the technique can make available is to be utilised within this context, etc., etc..

Any Environmentalist or Green friend of the earth who close their eyes to this, the Stalin Plan of Transformation of Nature, is nothing but a bourgeois windbag.

Stalin Plan of Transformation of Nature coupled with an industrial base able to provide all the industrial needs of this plan. Such were the conditions of agriculture.

It is this plan that has been thrown overboard and replaced with the virgin lands program of Khrushchev and later by specialist agriculture of Brezhnev both of which relied on chemical fertilisers and total negation of natures requirements,- let alone the requirements of socialist economy.


At critical moments in history all is forced to choose between the horns of a dilemma: either this/ or that; it is impossible to say neither this/ nor that, but both.

The necessity to choose either this, or that path of development gives rise to a sharpening of class-struggle. All the turning points in the history are a witness to a sharpening of class-struggle, which bring forth the proponents of the paths to be chosen.

When the urban-bourgeoisie was being eliminated in the USSR, Trotskyism reared its head in defence of the urban-bourgeoisie; when rural bourgeoisie was being eliminated in the USSR Bukharinism reared its head in defence of rural-bourgeoisie and they all had their connections with the world bourgeoisie.

The years around Stalin's death coincides with the appearance of embryos of a fully matured communist society in technique of production. This could not but demand important changes in the economic, social and political life of the society i.e.; USSR was at another cross-roads, at another turning point of its history.

The very basis of social life is its economy; the very content of the political life and struggle is the economic life of society. Therefore the sharpest, clearest and by the nature of the subject matter the empirical examples of the class-struggle this historic turn in the life of USSR has brought about can be observed in Stalin's "Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR ".

Either this or that. A line has to be chosen. Proponents of these lines have to come forward and do come forward. Struggle and only struggle decides as to who, as to what line shall succeed.

Either, Stalin's Plan of Transition to Communism as put forward by him in "The Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R." or, the plan of those opposed to this plan who have already came forward and got a trashing from Stalin.


It is not that revisionists assumed power when Stalin died, it is that a turning point in history was in the making when he died. Coincidence of these two is something accidental, not a necessity.

Would the results been otherwise had Stalin not died?

Possible. But then, everything is possible.

What was unavoidable was the struggle to choose a line.

It could be that Stalin was assassinated as part of this struggle.

Listen to one of them who claims to love Stalin.

"Among other things, Mikoyan spoke about Mao and compared him with Stalin, saying:

"The only difference between Mao Zedong and Stalin is that Mao does not cut off the heads of his opponents, while Stalin did. That is why we could not oppose Stalin," continued this revisionist. "At one time, together with Khrushchev we had considered organizing a pokushenie * against him, but we gave up the idea because we were afraid that the people and the party would not understand"

*assassination attempt (Russian in the original)

Enver Hoxha. The Khrushchevites, Memoirs. P. 389.

Workers Publishing House. London.

Some Communists are like this one? They can share opinions with those who even dare think of assassinating their leader.

This is not the issue here though. What matter is that the need for change in the USSR be comprehended, that we were but a few years away from Communism be comprehended. Therefore, what matter is that, all the traitors be hated without exception and absolutely! And they must be defeated absolutely-not here and there, not with words while they are allowed to get on with their practice! They must be defeated thoroughly-their ideas and their practice must be vanquished!



Was the capitalist restoration that occurred in the USSR foreseen before?

Below we shall present for the reader the plans of these traitor which were exposed during their trials. Reader will easily see that it is these plans that more or less been realized today. (See sections A and B)

Further down we shall present to the reader the very roots of the plans of Trotskyites to transform our socialist economy into a consistent part of the world capitalist economy. The reader will readily appreciate the importance of this plan for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR. (See section C)

The traitors who restored capitalism in the USSR are the Trotskyite traitors to the socialist motherland. What has been applied in practice after the death of Stalin in the USSR was not his plan of building communism in the USSR, but Trotsky-Buharin plan of restoration of capitalism in the USSR. This plan of traitors have now been realised.


We have always said that the “Lefts” are in fact Rights who mask their Rightness by Left phrases. Now the “Lefts” themselves confirm the correctness of our statement. Take last year’s issues of the Trotskyist Bulletin. What do Messieurs the Trotskyists demand, what do they write about, in what does their “Left” programme find expression? They demand: the dissolution of the state farms, on the grounds that they do not pay; the dissolution of the majority of the collective farms, on the grounds that they are fictitious; the abandonment of the policy of eliminating the kulaks; reversion to the policy of concessions, and the leasing to concessionaires of a number of our industrial enterprises, on the grounds that they do not pay.



At the trial in 1937, Pyatakov, Radek and Sokolnikov took a different line. They did not deny that the Trotskyites and Zinovievites had a political platform. They admitted that they had a definite political platform, admitted it and unfolded it in their evidence. But they unfolded it not in order to call upon the working class, to call upon the people, to support the Trotskyite platform, but in order to curse and brand it as an anti-people and anti-proletarian platform. The restoration of capitalism, the liquidation of the collective farms and state farms, the restoration of the system of exploitation, alliance with the fascist forces of Germany and Japan to bring nearer war against the Soviet Union, the fight for war and against the policy of peace, the territorial dismemberment of the Soviet Union in which the Ukraine was to be surrendered to the Germans and the Maritime Region to the Japanese, preparation for the military defeat of the Soviet Union in the event of an attack on her by hostile states and, as a means of achieving these aims, wrecking, diversion, individual acts of terrorism against the leaders of the Soviet government, espionage on behalf of the Japano-German fascist forces - such was the political platform of present-day Trotskyism unfolded by Pyatakov, Radek and Sokolnikov. Naturally the Trotskyites could not but hide such a platform from the people, from the working class. And they hid it not only from the working class, but also from the rank and- file Trotskyites, and not only from the rank and- file Trotskyites, but even from the leading Trotskyite group consisting of a small clique of thirty or forty people. When Radek and Pyatakov demanded from Trotsky permission to convene a small conference of thirty or forty Trotskyites for the purpose of informing them about the character of this platform, Trotsky forbade them on the ground that it was inexpedient to tell even a small clique of Trotskyites about the real character of this platform, for such an "operation" might cause a split.


Let us read from V. M. Molotov's report to the XVII. Party Congress about another one of Trotsky’s prophesies which has now become a reality:

"This brings to mind Lenin's slogan, "To overtake and surpass the technically and economically advanced countries." We are still far from having realised this slogan. But we shall make considerable progress in this respect during the Second Five-Year Plan.

The theses state that by the end of the Second Five-Year Plan the U. S. S. R. ought to occupy first place in Europe in technical development. It must be conceded that the task is immense and that this criterion is of extreme importance to us.

We do not undertake to overtake and surpass technically and economically the advanced capitalist countries in every respect during the Second-Five Year Plan. However, the theses state that in a number of branches of economy we can and ought to overtake and surpass the technical and economic development of the advanced capitalist countries. It is clear that here too the application of the international criterion is of great political and enormous practical importance.


On the other hand, we must not fail to mention the manner in which the Trotskyists presented this question. Trotsky's line which was permeated by disbelief in the possibility of victory for socialism in the U. S. S. R. embodied also in this sphere quite a different, an anti-Bolshevik meaning.

I shall illustrate this point by quoting a passage from what Trotsky said at the Seventh Plenum of the E.C.C.I. in December, 1926:

"The rate of development is a decisive factor, as we are not the only ones on this globe. The isolated socialist state exists so far only in the fantasies of journalists and authors of resolutions. In reality our socialist state is always, directly or indirectly under the relative control of the world market. This is the crux of the matter. The rate of development is not arbitrary. It is fixed by world development in general because, in the final analysis, world economy controls every one of its parts, even if that part is under proletarian dictatorship and is building socialist economy." (Our emphasis—V. M.)

Thus Trotsky, already at that time emphasised that our Soviet economy is "under the control" of the world market. As early as 1926 there was a fundamental discrepancy in Trotsky's formulation; the contrast between Soviet economy and the economy of the capitalist countries was glossed over in a purely Menshevik way.

In his pamphlet Towards Socialism or Capitalism Trotsky wrote in 1925:

"The more we become involved in the system of international division of labour the more directly and immediately such elements of our domestic economy as prices and quality of commodities become dependent upon the corresponding elements of the world market"

In that Trotsky went so far as to say that the prices of our commodities "become dependent upon the corresponding elements of the world market" which plainly meant that when there are crises in capitalist countries, prices in the U.S.S.R. must fall and vice versa. It suffices to mention this line of argument to show the obvious absurdity of it especially under the conditions that prevail today.

Finally, in the same pamphlet Trotsky wrote:

"But the situation radically changes with the rapid growth of exports and imports. We are becoming a component part of the world market, although that part is in a very special class by itself. This means that the universal factors of the world market, in refracted and modified form, must find reflection in one way or another in our economy. The given economic phase is always best expressed in the way the market buys and sells. We are entering the world market both as buyers and sellers. Thus we are affected to a greater or lesser extent by the commercial and industrial ebb and flow of the world market."

And further:

"Our independence of the fluctuation of the world market is disappearing. All the main processes of our economy are not only making contact with the corresponding processes but are to a greater or less extent affected by the operation of the laws governing capitalist development, including the vagaries of the market. "

Thus Trotsky, even at that early date, advance the idea of our being affected by the action of the laws of capitalist development, including the fluctuations of the market; advanced the idea of the U. S. S. R. being dependent upon the "ebb and flow" of the world market.

Notwithstanding the slippery and tricky character of these formulations, the Menshevik tendency of Trotsky's writings was already quite clear even then. His desire to obliterate the fundamental difference between world capitalist economy and socialist economy in the U. S. S. R. stands out boldly in all of his arguments. Trotsky's profound prophecies concerning the dependence of our economy on the "ebb and flow" of world capitalist economy sound especially ridiculous and stupid now, in view of the crisis in the capitalist countries and the gigantic economic progress in the Soviet Union.

The political meaning of Trotsky's formulation lies, of course, in his petty-bourgeois capitulation before imperialism, in his philistine disbelief in the victory of socialism in the U. S. S. R., which he regarded as a hopeless case, as something without a leg to stand on. That is now the political basis of Trotskyism.

Well, let Trotsky take care of his business. We shall take care of ours, with unshaken belief in the victory of our cause, in the triumph of socialism."




The Trotskyists are still defending these rotten theories so much so that they consider the late collapse of the USSR to be the result of capitalisms pressures in line with above views:

"The structural crises of capitalism is now revealed in mass unemployment and large areas of social and political breakdown.

But capitalism's globalisation and its relative expansion brought tremendous pressure- economic, political and military- on the economy and society of 'socialism in one country', the Soviet Union.

Together with the resistance of Stalinism of the working class in the USSR and eastern Europe, this brought the collapse of the main pillar of continued capitalist rule in the world since the 1920's, Stalinism."

Workers Press Saturday 18 March 1995. p 4.

Towards a New Workers' Party by WRP Secretary Cliff Slaughter

Leaving aside the most obvious distortion of the rulers of USSR being Stalinist, rather than Titoite-Trotskyites, these views are another formulation of the above views of Trotsky. Here it is clearly formulated that the crises of capitalism has effected socialism so much that it brought about its collapse. These people have no shame!

The fact of the matter is that, Trotskyism and Buharinism leads to the collapse of a socialist country even if it was the technologically most developed country in the world, as USSR was in 1953. It took them 40 years to finish it off, but note, they still cannot make it a proper part of the world market.


So far as Trotskyism is concerned all the experiences of the USSR are negative. To the extent that they take a look at this experience, their approach can be reduced to the following simple determination: How can I negate this experience, how can I belittle this experience. Stuck within this frame of mind, Trotskyism is an extremely backward theory, for our theory is based on the study of the life, the experience of the world proletariat. It is a summery of this experience. But Trotskyism is utterly and totally incapable of utilizing this experience. They cannot learn how an economic formation should be comprehended, determined; forget about all the economic laws that come into being under socialism, they can not comprehend even the basic economic law of socialism-they do not know what it is and cannot possibly learn it due to their above mentioned prejudice. A group of people who live in the past, are incapable of following the developments of sciences, nay more, declare such a development of sciences to be impossible, are nothing but a sect. Just like religious sect. Modern Trotskyite movement is such a thing. They have become long time ago an anti-communist, reactionary sect. Their approach to the Soviet experience is a simple proof of this fact.

Titoites, Khurshchevites, Maoists, Enverists, Castroists, Kim-il Zungists, Ho Chi-minists etc., are all affected by Trotskyism and Buharinism. They, just like their Trotskyist comrades, are all determined not to learn from this experience, not to use it in their own practice. But in this world which is divided into the proletariat and bourgeoisie, there is no third road other than the Blairite third road.

One other proof of backward and reactionary nature of Trotskyism and its sister ideologies based on present day experience and life of the proletariat is their approach to micro-chips. Just as many a “people’s war” supporting “people’s warrior” cannot see a people’s war when it is being put into practice by others and propagates against it, all the so-called communist political tendencies that claim Stalin was bureaucratic, when all the conditions to get rid of all possibilities of bureaucratism is created and clearly visible for all to see, cannot see it and start to propagate against it. We are talking of computerization of the society. A society built on the basis of computerized automated production by Stalin’s students, by communists, by the proletariat is communism, and makes bureaucratization impossible!

Important thing is that we have been able to bring into the open the determining points about micro-chips, their role in the fight against bureaucratism thanks to comrade Stalin. Only those who have Marxism can bring out into the open in a correct way what ever is new in the movement, what ever is new in the life of the proletariat.


"Consequently, according to Khrushchev, the Soviet Union was going over to "a higher phase of communism", at a time when, in reality, that country was still backward in industry and agriculture and its markets were empty."The Soviet Union was going over to the phase of communism" only in the declarations of the Khrushchvites, because the reality testified to the opposite......"

Enver Hoxha. The Khrushchevites, Memoirs. P. 340.

Workers Publishing House. London.

With friends like these who needs enemies. This traitor has supported and applied all the policies of his comrade Khrushchev, policies which made it impossible for the USSR to pass into full automation, to communism. And yet he blames the industrial basis of our motherland instead of his and his comrades' traitorous policies. As is well known, Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev never believed U.S.S.R. could built socialism without the technically developed capitalist countries. At least they existed when U.S.S.R. was technically backward. This one distorts the facts of technical superiority of our motherland over the capitalist countries of 1950s and 1960s.



Certain traitors like the "old man of Austrian Marxist-Leninist Party" cry that they did not know about the attacks upon Stalin at the 20th Congress. Their leaders lied to them. Everything was kept secret from them, etc.

To these, the defence of Stalin is to put names to him, not the defence of his policies. For, these policies were openly being changed, discarded. They had no objections to these changes. They can watch and indeed support policies opposed to Stalin's and yet they can also defend Stalin? They are capable opportunists indeed. By the way, Khrushchev who called Stalin names had also praised him. In this there is not much difference amongst the so called defenders and opponents of Stalin: see, "History of the USSR." revised version as well as the documents of CP of China and Albanian LP.

How could one defend Stalin and Communism after Stalin?

This could only be done by defending and putting into practice Stalin's plan of building socialism-Communism. This means the defence of Stalin's " Economic Problems of Socialism in the U.S.S.R. "; The Fifth Five Year Plan that was formulated when Stalin was alive and the deviation from which is a crime against the Soviet Law, a crime against the Motherland; the views of the 19th Congress which was the last one attended by Stalin; and the " Stalin Plan of Transforming Nature " which again was a Soviet Law deviation from which is a crime against the Motherland.

Without defending all of these neigh more, by watching quietly the negation of these and furthermore, by defending the very negation of these in theory and practice, Stalin and the building of communism cannot be defended.

Those who stand on such positions and claim to support Stalin and the building of Communism are liars. Politically speaking they are revisionists who have participated in the revision of the Stalin's Program; they are the traitors who are opposed to the line of Stalin i.e., to Communism.

The only certain criterion of a policy's class content is the determination of the classes its economic policies serve. The very content, the very essence of a political struggle is the economic struggle of classes. That is, a policy that does not defend the economic needs of the proletariat is not a proletarian policy. All the polemics produced by such a political line on proletariat, proletarian revolution, proletarian dictatorship, socialism, communism etc., in spite of their appearances, in spite of their rhetoric and because their very content does not defend the economic needs of the proletariat, does not defend its aim of communism are not the defence of proletarian policies. Those who trample underfoot the economic needs of the proletariat and rely on such bourgeois economic policies, by shouting high and laud in political matters in the name of the proletariat, in the name of communism can only cheat the ignorant masses and those who are willing to be cheated.

In the U.S.S.R., the policies that have begun to be put into practice under Malenkov and Khrushchev are known as the negation of Stalin's line formulated in the above mentioned works, or rather are said to be known as such.

For, a wide range of political cheats who have reduced the defence of Stalin to the defence of his personality and to political rhetoric claim that CPC and ALP and their followers were communist and defenders of Stalin and thus were not revisionist traitors.

This is an empty claim or rather a claim filled with bourgeois content.

The defenders of these views, to the extent that they claim CPC and ALP were building socialism after Stalin have to prove that these parties have practiced Stalin's teaching on building socialism. They can not do so. "Exactly opposite" is obvious though.

The defenders of these views have to prove that after Stalin CPC and ALP have opposed and exposed the economic policies that were the negation of the Laws of our Motherland, the negation of Stalin’s Plan of Building Communism. They cannot do so. "Exactly opposite" is known to be the truth. And more. The traitorous practices of Malenkov and Khrushchev have been glorified by these parties, these theories and practices have been accepted and put into practice by these parties or their own traitorous theories pushed forward and put into practice. And all of these are not to be found in "secrete speeches" but in open documents of the parties.

These traitors, in spite of all their apparent oppositions to each other, in essence, in their enmity to the proletariat’s aim of communism are one and the same.

These traitors, Tito, CPC, ALP, Malenkov, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and their followers are the students of Trotsky who praise the Party and its leaders while in practice are engaged in digging their grave in collaboration with the world bourgeoisie.


Trotskyite traitors have gone into, in detail, all the real and imaginary possibilities of degeneration of communism; racked their brains as to how to amplify these possibilities and thereby turn them into realities and even built theoretical models of degenerate communism and declared these to be the reality of the U.S.S.R.. Such theories of possibilities faced by a real building of socialism and communism had to be and therefore were very adaptable to changes. For, as their possibilities of degeneration are smashed to the ground they have to find reasons for their destruction and dig still deeper into the new conditions to find new and even more minute possibilities to work upon.

Theories, of course, are valid if they are proven in reality. Faced with the successful building of socialism and communism, preachers of these theories are forced into practical opposition to this successful building of socialism and communism: in practice they have to become saboteurs, wreckers of what we built and the spies of the world bourgeoisie. And as they are routed as spies, saboteurs and wreckers, they become outright double dealers.

It is as such that although they have been putting their bourgeois traitorous line into practice since the death of Stalin, they have not come out owning up to it and as their theories and practices are giving their disgusting fruits they blame it on Stalin with the full and whole hearted co-operation of the world bourgeoisie, their masters without whom they, the rotten petty- bourgeois, bureaucratic slime could not have survived.

All the theories of "social imperialism" of CPC and PLA have their roots in these theories and are nothing but a further development of these theories.


CPC began talking of new bourgeoisie, its existence during Stalin's time and therefore after Stalin's death, no sooner than Stalin died. These people were not talking of the new bourgeoisie of NEP period. They were talking of the new bourgeoisie that exists after socialism has been built.

These people cannot even imagine a socialism that shall destroy and not create the bourgeoisie and therefore will have no bourgeoisie. All this makes sense for their socialism. For their socialism does not get rid of the bourgeoisie and cannot but create new bourgeoisie; for this socialism does not destroy the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie and the commodity production. For this socialism does not create the industrial and economic basis to get rid of the bourgeoisie and the commodity production.

And these petty bourgeois socialists try to pretend that Stalin's socialism is the same as theirs.

Not for nothing these and Albanians have praised the destruction of Stalin's economic policies and adopted them in their own way. Not for nothing they attack Stalin with bureaucratism, not staging a cultural revolution etc., etc..

Not for nothing they raise huge cries concerning the names given to Stalin while do not open their mouth in defence of his policies.

Not for nothing they love talking about war, proletarian dictatorship, people’s state, parliamentarian road etc., while watching with pleasure the devastation of socialism in practice and partaking in it.

Theories of the existence of bourgeoisie under socialism which goes hand in hand with the theories of building socialism without first building an industrial base for it which are further developed with what is called the theories of Cultural Revolution which has to be waged periodically and in perpetual succession to get rid of the bourgeoisie that inevitably rears its head, are the theories of the petty bourgeois socialists. These have served as another prong of attack on Stalin's line after Stalin's death and the fact that the defenders of this socialism were pretending to defend Stalin's name, his person, his past contributions made them only more of a traitorous tendency in the movement. They have been and are the rear guard of Khrushchevites-Titoites.



The more "radical" section of Trotskyism has produced this theory on the basis of Trotsky's declaration that U.S.S.R. is run by Stalinist bureaucracy. Yet, Trotsky himself oppose this and in his attempts to find a possible explanation for the real developments of the U.S.S.R. comes up with many a different theories. These are what we have called the theories of possibilities.

This division amongst the Trotskyites have continued after the usurpation of power by Khrushchevites. Well, these people have never owned up to nothing. Their comrades do not own up to them, nor do they own up to him. It is impossible for them to do so. Double dealing is a necessity of life and death for them and a necessary means of achieving their aim.

Victory of Khrushchevites-Trotskyites- did not mean the restoration of capitalism in the U.S.S.R. Nor could they have done this in a few years. They had to bring the country and the people to its knees, so much so that socialism could not have remained as an alternative. It took them 40 years to achieve this. Country is now ready to be transformed into capitalism, and even than only with the open support of world imperialism. Without this open support it was impossible for them to achieve this aim.

Either capitalism or communism. If you do not believe in communism in one country, even if you have not become a spy for the imperialists, you cannot choose communism. Neither can you go to capitalism straight away for Socialism has been built. The bourgeoisie, even the petty bourgeoisie has disappeared. One has to choose a third line. The state is capable of this, especially in a country where almost everything is owned by the working people through their state.

Even if you do not want to go towards capitalism, but if you are also determined not to go towards communism, - as the Trotskyites always claim: socialism can not be built in one country- what can be built than. Well, country can be developed but it is not socialism. Even if your "honest" view is such, even if you are not a spy, a double dealer, a traitor, you have no chance of hanging on to your third line. Either capitalism or communism. As they did not want communism, they had to work for restoring capitalism. This is what they did. They have worked to create the conditions for the restoration of capitalism. These people were Titoite-Trotskyites.

The CPC and PLA who claimed to have opposed these Trotskyites have actually helped them win and consolidate their power. Not only did they agree to the Titoite-Trotskyite policies of Khrushchev they also applied it themselves. The moment they broke from them, Khrushchevites became restorers of capitalism. U.S.S.R. became capitalist. Therefore, social imperialist.

The fact of the matter is that Trotskyites of CPC and PLA were not building socialism, while the Trotskyites of C.P.S.U. were doing everything to prepare the ground for the restoration of capitalism. They have been able to take real steps in this direction only after the so-called coup d’état against Gorbachove.

What was the economy of the U.S.S.R. before 1991 December: look at Trotsky's country where the working class assumes power but cannot built socialism. That's what it was.



The danger of bureaucratisation, the danger of degeneration, these are already taken up by Stalin and the Comintern program. Those who know these know these dangers and what gives rise to these dangers, therefore work to destroy the reasons that give rise to these possibilities;( division of proletariat into advanced and backward sections- inability of the masses to take active part in political life due to their need to work long hours, due to cultural backwardness- division of forms of ownership and necessity for commodity circulation etc.).

But it is otherwise with Trotsky. What he propose make it impossible for the proletariat to destroy these reasons of possible degeneration and bureaucratisation: the need to follow world prices and unavoidability of crises in the USSR if there are crises in capitalist world; call to collectivisation when conditions are not ripe, attack collectivisation that is being carried out when they are; demand bureaucratic control of T.U.s; declare the building of socialism in the U.S.S.R. impossible and engage in sabotage and spying for imperial powers to insure that it is impossible.

And yet, he declares that this possibility of bureaucratisation and degeneration has already became a reality, and that because of this U.S.S.R. is about to collapse.

U.S.S.R. does not collapse, in spite of these prophesies it does not collapse. Nay more, develops by leaps and bounds and builds socialism. But no worries. He and his gang certainly works to bring that about. And now that they did bring this possibility into reality, Stalin can be blamed. Fine theory this. Exactly same as his permanent revolution, which foresaw the struggle of proletariat against the bourgeois nation before Lenin's April thesis.



"..Thus, in so far as they promote from their ranks leaders in the work of construction, drawn into this work of construction broad sections of the proletariat and aim at combatting bureaucracy, which inevitably arises as a result of the operation of class influences alien to the proletariat and of the inadequate cultural development of the masses, the trade unions become the backbone of the proletarian economic and State organisations as a whole. (p. 35. )

Only to the extent that the proletariat promotes from its own ranks a body of men and women capable of occupying the key positions of socialist construction, only to the extent that this body grows, and draws increasing numbers of the working class into the process of revolutionary-cultural transformation and gradually obliterates the line that divides the proletariat into an "advanced" and a "backward" section will the guarantees be created for successful socialist construction and against bureaucratic decay and class degeneracy. ( P. 38. )

.. The steady attraction of the masses into the process of socialist construction, the constant renovation of the entire State, economic, trade union and Party apparatus with men and women fresh from the ranks of the proletariat, the systematic training in the higher educational establishments and at special courses of workers generally and young workers in particular as new socialist experts in all branches of construction- all these together serve as one of the principle guarantees against the bureaucratic ossification or social degeneration of the stratum of the proletariat directly engaged in administration. ( P. 47. )


In our movement, some have forgotten Marxism so much that they begin to huff and puff when one starts with the economy, declaring that this style puts the class struggle, the most important thing in Marxism, into the background. They forget this simple fact; The class struggle, perceived as a political struggle, the struggle of the classes in the political sphere isstudies relations of production, that is, the relationship of classes to the ownership and control of the means of production, not the means of production. Political Economy examines the means of production as it passes through and examines it as a reference to its main field of activity. Political economy reveals the essence of the class struggle, and the real class struggle, demonstrating where this struggle is heading. Political class struggle can only be guided by the consciousness of this essence and reality, and in accordance with its demands. Otherwise it becomes the class struggle not of the proletariat, but its enemies. The best proof of this fact are the enemies of the people who are misdirecting the economics of USSR in order to destroy it.

But what are the characteristic of these policies that huff and puff when the economy is mentioned? These are the socialist movements that became hostile to scientific socialism, which became scientific socialism after Marx, based on the scientific knowledge of the economic structure as the scientific basis of the science of socialism. They want to establish the proletarian party, before the revolution, in villages, not cities. They don't want anyone to object to this. They want to establish socialism through the peasant's labor and, moreover, achieve communism without establishing the industrial basis of post-revolutionary socialism. They don't want anyone to object to this. For this reason, they invented this 'revolutionary' phraseology as a way of preventing the knowledge of political economy and the knowledge of what needs to be done in economy to be able to pass into communism. That is why they embrace Trotsky's theses for the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union so eagerly!


This form of property, proletarian state property, inevitably constitutes the first form of socialist property. So far, no one has been able to formulate a form of ownership other than this as a form of transitional ownership - except in dreams! Collective farm ownership as a subordinate type of common ownership becomes possible and valid only through the proletarian state ownership of industry and so on. As for the communes in agriculture, they are not the product of the development of the productive forces, but of their underdevelopment, and when the industry reaches a level that can meet the needs of agriculture, then they immediately become a collective farm type that appears to be a less developed form of ownership.

The proclamation of proletarian state property as state capitalist, the proclamation of it as a means of exploitation of workers by bureaucrats, is a common aspect of Trotskyism and Anarchism. In this area, they sink so low as to equate self-sacrificing production activities of the Soviet proletariat with slavery. And, of course, what kind of ownership should be created to build socialism, what forms the ownership will take during transition to communism, never enter into their field of view.

As regards the types of property ownership-control, it is likely that the type of property ownership after proletarian state ownership, will be the ownership-control of a central economic body, such as the planning organization, with branches in every region of the country, in the smallest economic, social and military etc., unit. And this will be achieved through the computerization of the country of socialism. The last form of property ownership-control that can be foreseen from today will be the control by each and every citizens of this central economic body thanks to computerisation and the removal of the need for secrecy through the abolition of the imperialist siege, and thus the negation of the lines of separation between the central-economic body and the citizens.


A. STALIN, HITLER AND CTP (RPP) YOUTH (Sister Group of AKEL Youth- Cyprus)

The CTP youth issued a magazine that equates Stalin and Hitler, declaring that they are both vicious killers. Yeni Duzen (The New Order-Turkish Language Paper in North Cyprus) also put this magazine in its newspaper and distributed it!

We're sorry! We are sorry that Hollywood propaganda, bourgeois-imperialist propaganda can be so effective in the CTP and CTP Youth ranks!

We're sorry that they have deviated from the class war theory’s abc to such an extent! We're sorry that they have been cut off from the idea of ​​power the working class to such an extent!


The concept of equality does not descend from that sky. Two things with a difference in quality cannot be equalized. If you are going to equate two things despite the difference in quality, you have to find a common characteristic in them.

For example weight. One pound of fertilizer is equal to one pound of diamond in weight.

The CTP Youth must also find such a common characteristic when equalizing Stalin and Hitler. And they found it. Killing of millions of people!

  1. The common characteristic of Stalin and Hitler killing millions of people.

It is said that Stalin massacred 20 million people!

We shall accept this bourgeois propaganda propagated by the CTP Youth. After all, we have also grown up watching films that have as their heroes, murderers, gangsters, scums that despises humanity. We acknowledge that Stalin killed 20 million people. In fact, others claim this amount to be 40 million. We accept their claim too. (It is impossible to accept Ümit Gökçe's figures. He did not leave any living people in the Soviet country-but if the CTP Youth wishes, we will accept his numbers too !?)

Stalin killed 20-40 million people in between 1917-53 (36 years).

Hitler killed 50 million people in between 1933-1945 (12 years).

So, with the logic of the CTP youth, Stalin and Hitler are equal because they killed millions of people. Black Hundreds. Villains. Bruts!

Well, today, every God's year 40-50 million people (and more and more each passing year) die in wars, due to simple illnesses, and starvation. Who kills them?

IMF, World Bank, all big banks, big corporations, bourgeois who implement their politics all over the world and in their own countries. The great imperialist powers, especially USA-England, Germany, France, Japan, today’s Russia, all other big and small bourgeois ruling classes, bourgeois countries and their bourgeois soldiers, diplomats, bureaucrats and politicians-that is, a flock of murderers, brut, black faces, gangsters!

If killing millions of people automatically makes a person a black-face, brut, murderer, and if the CTP and CTP youth are therefore equalizing Stalin and Hitler, what is the name of today's world’s rulers in this equation of equality? They kill 40 million people every year! What is their name? Why arethey not mentioned? Why don't they equal Hitler and Stalin?

So the common characteristic used in equating Hitler and Stalin cannot be the killing of millions of people, planned, obvious to all slaughter of millions of people. Because every year 40 million people are slaughtered in such a planned way by the present day bourgoisie. If the massacre of millions of people was the common characteristic used in this equalization, today's bourgeois rulers would be one of the main black faces, main bruts. They would be equated to Hitler too. However, the CTP Youth proclaims them as defenders of human rights, as democrats.

Thus the CTP Youth is rather selective in the use of the common characteristics of killing millions of people. Today, people who kill 40 million people every year do not see to them as black faces. But Stalin is a black face. Villain. Brut!

In other words, it is impossible for the CTP youth to move from the common characteristic of the massacre of millions of people in the Stalin-Hitler equalization. It doesn't fit.

Especially if we look at to another language that these figures speak:

Stalin kills 20-40 million in 36 years! 1 million a year!

Hitler 50 million in 12 years! Five million a year!

Today's bourgeois are killing 40-50 million (and rising) every year!

As can be seen, despite all efforts, it is impossible to equalize the number of people killed by Stalin with number of people killed by Hitler and by today's bourgeois-imperialist rulers. Stalin killed so much fewer people?! Never mind Stalin, even Hitler is an angle compared to today's bourgeois rulers! But CTP Youth thinks otherwise!

If the CTP Youth wants to equalize Stalin and Hitler, they have to find other common characteristics than the common characteristic that they killed millions of people. Or they should declare the bourgeois rulers of today as black faces, murderers, due to this common characteristic of killing millions. Otherwise, and if they will not do so, they can't be consistent.

It is understandable that they are not consistent. They have to choose. Either you side with the gangsters or the humanity! Either the bourgeoisie or the proletariat. Either the bourgeois imperialist order or communism.

Unfortunately, it is impossible to prevent people from dying in their millions while the bourgeoisie is in power!

We shouldn't have had to explain this. But let's explain.

  1. Contradictions of the common characteristic of Stalin and Hitler killing millions of people.

In the Second World War, Hitler ordered millions of Germans (meanwhile, Romanian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Croatian, Latvian, Estonian, Lithuanian, Tatar, Chechen, Hungarian, Ukrainian,…) to fight against the Soviets, and sent them to kill and die in their millions.

In the same way, Stalin sent millions of Soviet youth to kill and to be killed in their millions in the war against Hitler's fascist flocks!

There is no difference between these two as regards the ​​characteristic of sending millions to death. Both Stalin and Hitler sent millions of young people to die in the Second World War.

So Stalin and Hitler are black faces because they killed millions in this war! They're killers, murderers!

Is this it CTP Youth?

Not even the most filthy, most infamous, the most disgusting reactionary, the most traitorous enemy of Stalin, the Trotskyist traitors to motherland did not make the mistake that the CTP Youth made on this score! It's a shame!

The whole world knows that simple truth. When Hitler attacked the Soviets in World War II, he committed a crime against humanity. It waged an imperialist, fascist, slavery war. It is for THIS PURPOSE that he sent the youth to kill and die. Stalin's position is the exact opposite. He sent the Soviet youth to kill and die to free humanity from slavery, from the persecution of fascism, to free our Soviet homeland and the nations of the world.

In other words, in the world we live in, the common characteristic of sending millions to death under the conditions of bourgeois imperialism may have opposite goals.

Do you have any objections on this matter, CTP Youth?

50 million people were killed in the Second World War. 25 million of them were Soviet people. These 25 million Soviet people died because they fought against Hitler's fascist herds that is as a result of Stalin's orders. Thus they were “sent to their death" by Stalin!

Old, young, female, male Soviet people who died in this war, were they killed by Hitler, by imperialism, by fascism, or by Stalin, who organized and triumphed the war against Hitler's fascist herds, and sent millions of Soviet people to death for this purpose.

We think that this is enough to understand the contradiction in equalizing Stalin to Hitler because he sent millions to death.

Let's make a small reminder at this point. When Stalin was in power, Stalin's Soviet Union declared that war against other countries and nations, and even propaganda for the war, is a crime against humanity. Come on CTP Youth, KSP adopted this principle of Stalin. You accept it too. And what's more, get those very humanitarian bourgeois of yours to accept it. Stalin could not do it. But in your opinion, Stalin is a murderer, not those who imposed war on us, on the Soviets, on our Motherland, and Stalin, our leader, those who commit crimes of crimes against humanity against humanity and the Soviets, those are protectors of human life? Are you not informed about the work of the Soviets before the Second World War to prevent fascism and to maintain peace? Are you not provided any as well as German fascism? What's happening to the CTP?

The problem is that of class struggle. It is the problem of humanity. It is the question of respect for human life. It is a problem of resentment, the problem of hate against the loss of one human life, the murder of a single person let alone the massacre of millions of people. And babbling here leads to more deaths. It makes the babbler a partner in the death of these people!


Did the CTP Youth gone so far as declaring Lenin a black face? Wait, young people (together with “Umit bey” ) you will soon say these things for Lenin too. You will declare him a murderer, brut. To go to the village that can be seen one doesn't not need a guide.

Let us talk Lenin. Do you know what Lenin says about civil war? It is impossible that you know.

The Bolsheviks are attacked from all sides from the ranks of social democrats. They're killing people in civil war, barbarians, murderers, cruel bastards. (Read your “Umit bey” and learn)…

Lenin's answer is simple. We need to achieve victory in this civil war as soon as possible. We must conduct and conclude the war in a determined and consistent manner. It is the bourgeoisie who wants to prolong the war and want to lead to the murder of more and more people!

Or take a look at the Commune in France. Bourgeois France and Germany are at war. A matter of power in Europe. Millions are dying. Germany prevails. The French army is being disarmed. It so happens that, that grim, murderous team the Communards take power in Paris. “Not many people die”, but of course there is death. We said the Communards were cruel, villain. What is happening because of this development? Does CTP Youth not know? Let us tell them. The Germans give their weapons back to the French armies. The French army, the bourgeois army, surrounds Paris and bombard it. They organise massacres from one barricade to another barricade, meanwhile, slaughtering women who are among the most heroic fighters of the Communards, and thus defeats the Commune. End the massacre? Of course not. The remaining Communards are killed by the firing squad!

Examples from today? What's the point? CTP and CTP Youth are realistic. Knows the real situation. So does AKEL. They don't get stuck in formulas like we do!

But in short: 40 million died and will die. Every year. Even more will die. Who's in power? Bourgeoisie. The amount spent on arms guarantees that all people can live in abundance. But spending goes to arms. Expenditure goes to the preparation of coups against the workers who refuse to implement IMF policies and to the massacre of the peasants who want land. Would this be the case if Stalin's principle, the principle of declaring war to be a crime against humanity was agreed? No, it would not. Is all this spending for war carry on? No it would not. Could it be that there are people who make propaganda for the war, could it be that Rambo of the Hollywood or others who propagate for their countries to make war against other countries, or to draw other countries to war? Oh, no. But they exist! And, they're in power!

Against them, there or here, now or another day, workers, peasants, nations, countries will rebel. Somebody, hopefully, the communists will take the lead in this rebellion. This or that party, this or that organization will take over. People will die during this rebellion. The rebels will also kill people. Are the rebels gonna be murderous and cruel? Will their leader be murderous and cruel? Or are they the ones who want to stop the death of people, to prevent people from killing each other, stop nations and countries fighting against each other, and stop them killing each other? Will the bourgeoisie, which lost power when the rebels triumphed and came to power, change their existing politics and become humanitarian? Will the war and even its propaganda be declared an enemy of humanity? Is the bourgeoisie going to stop imposing the policies that cause mass death of people due to starvation and stop preparing wars, coups and death squads to enforce these policies?

To contribute to the protection of the power of the bourgeoisie in today's world means to partner with the crimes against humanity that the bourgeoisie commits every day and every hour. It means contributing to the death of more people. And today, to work for the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, to be persistent and stubborn in this means to ensure that fewer people die. It's impossible to guarantee that nobody dies. To achieve that result, it is necessary to put an end to the rule of the bourgeoisie on the world. And that's what communism means.

Komünistler tek bir insanın bile ölümünü önlemek için barbar burjuvaziye karşı kararlı ve can bedeli bir çalışmanın gerekliliğini bilen, bunu herkese kavratan insanlardır. Onlar, her yıl 40milyon insanın ölüsü üzerinde insanlık edebiyatı yapan burjuva kuyrukçusu, burjuvazinin insanlık düşmanı suçlarının suç ortağı değildirler

Communists are people who know the necessity of a determined and costly work against the barbarian bourgeoisie in order to prevent the death of even a single person. Communists are not bourgeois lackeys who talk of humanity over the dead bodies of 40 million who die every year, they are not the accomplice of the bourgeois’ crimes against humanity.

Let us repeat: Stalin's Soviet Union declared war against other countries and nations, and moreover, making propaganda for war as a crime against humanity. (Stalin’s USSR also proposed a complete disarmament!) Today, those who call Stalin a mass murderer, are the ones who reject this principle, and declare that not their wars but only “not protecting civilians” during a war is a “war crime” while all those who die during a war be it through bombing and through hunger, thirst and disease caused by the war are but “collateral damage” an “inevitable consequence of war”, and that war, and death due to war especially the death of our young people in uniform is necessary, acceptable and all right. These animals are enemies of humanity. They don't care about human life. Those who agree with these barbarians, with these animals, are the ones who are mass murderers, criminals, bruts. Those who slander communists hand in glove with these mass murderers are the mass murderers. No amount of number crunching can change this simple fact!

Stalin? Stalin was a communist who has devoted his whole life to preventing the death of people, preventing them from being slaughtered by the bourgeoisie, ensuring that they live in peace and abundance. Stalin declares war-makers to be barbarians who commit crimes against humanity; he declares those who throws foodstuffs into the sea, prohibits farmers’ production of food while people starve to death, mad dogs, animals, barbarians. He is the propagandist of the view that one must hate the organisers of the death of the people! He is the propagandist of the fact that love of humanity has to go hand in hand with the hatred of fascism, hatred of the barbarian bourgeoisie, he is the propagandist of the spirit of love and sacrifice for all humanity-he did not trade his own son against the Nazi general for all sons in uniform were his sons. He has done all that can be done in order to defeat fascism and thus guarantee the death of fewer people. He's was a Communist. He knew communism and the bourgeoisie well! He is not a bourgeois, or a bourgeois lackey talking human rights and human lives over the bodies of 40 million people who die every year! He knew the villains well. He knew well that one should finish them off! He was a warrior in the class war of the proletariat, with the proletariat, that is, with the humanity!

Death to the makers of war! This is Stalin, this is us!


Have humans got rid of the remnants of the characteristics of animal kingdom from which they originated?

Unfortunately not!

The most obvious example are the capitalists. The most brutal example of the principle of killing of the weakest by the strongest to survive (survival of the fittest, this law of the jungle, this law of the animal kingdom, is very much alive and living amongst the capitalists, amongst the bourgeoisie. The powerful capitalist kills the weak capitalist. He destroy the other. This is what is called competition between capitalists. This is achieved economically, diplomatically, in the final analysis it is achieved by war.

In today's world, a constant competition is organized by the capitalists in the ranks of the poor classes. In order to find a job, for a better job there is a constant competition amongst the lower classes. Nowadays, there is also the type of competition organized between the workers of the backward countries who work cheaper and those of the developed countries who work for more wages. Thus, wages are reduced to below the hunger limit. There are currently workers in slave conditions around the world. They produce goods for the most famous monopolies of developed countries. Slave women, including former Soviet women, are selling their bodies. One hopes CTP Youth know about it-after all Cyprus is center of this trade in human flesh? At least they've heard of the latest campaign in connection with Coca Cola? Instead of giving food to their children, mothers who are starved to death are eating that piece of food themselves. Cannibalism, that is, eating human flesh, has become a viable means of life for many people facing such conditions.

That is, and unfortunately, humanity is far from living in conditions that is suitable for humanity, both as material living conditions and as human consciousness.

Who fights for a life worthy of humanity? Communists. How do we get people to live a life worthy of humanity and thus to have a complete and definite understanding of humanity? By building communism!

Well, to achieve this result, we have to have a proper consciousness and a determined political structure in the class struggle. Consciousness for respect for each other, to protect each other, not to take human life does not falls from the sky. If these conditions do not exist today, if in the midst of plenty people are broken with wars, hunger, thirst and diseases through abundance of poverty, if the competition of life struggle brings them back to where we came from, the animal kingdom, then how can we achieve human conditions and human consciousness without eliminating these existing conditions? How will we put an end to competition to death amongst peoples, and how will we gain the ethics and understanding of cooperation between people? Does the power of the bourgeoisie allow it?

No it does not!

To become conscious of ones humanity means to become aware of the necessity of eliminating classes. No one who does not have this consciousness, and does not have a political effort and lifestyle in accordance with this consciousness could not fully comprehend the concept of humanity, what humanity means. He will do and say things that advocate the animal world and harm humanity in his works and words in the name of defending humanity.

There is no option in this matter. Either you will fight to destroy the bourgeoisie and its order that leads to the massacre of millions of people, you will approach everything with this view, or you will contribute to prolonging the life of the bourgeoisie, prolonging the life of the bourgeois order, and thus contributing to the murder of millions of people. This is how politics works. Each person involved in politics is either a black-faced brutal murderer, a bourgeois, or contributes to the bourgeoisie, thus contributing to the murder of 40 million people each year (or are they not counted as human beings?), Or trying hard to defeat the bourgeoisie, and thus preventing the deaths of millions of people. Meanwhile, those in this work cannot guarantee that the bourgeoisie will not fight against them. On the contrary, they are aware that the bourgeoisie fights and will fight against them. Like Stalin!


It is difficult to understand why CTP youth consider only the murder of millions of people. Isn't a human life valuable? Isn't killing a human being from the animal kingdom?

For the Communists, every human life is precious. Can't be taken lightly. The lives of millions are worth millions of times more. It cannot be taken lightly either. If someone comes out and accuses the Communists, our leader Stalin, of killing millions, killing even one person, what we tell him is to watch and to close his mouth.

40 million people were killed last year. 40 million people are being killed this year. More people will be killed next year. Thus, in a world where communists have no practical activity, more people die than in a world where communists were active. In other words, under the conditions of imperialism, the choice is not to slaughter people by millions or to kill no one. The option is to ensure that fewer people are killed and no one is killed at the end of the process. Fine, but how is that to be done? How will this result be achieved?

When Stalin and the Soviet Communists, Soviet workers and peasants tried to build communism in the Soviet Union, did the bourgeois at home and imperialists in other countries say, build your communism, we will not touch you. Or have they become even fiercer in the face of every victory of communism? And what could Stalin and the communists, and the Soviet people, do against their rage? Shouldn't they fight back? Then they would be slaughtered. They would be enslaved. They would end up in worse condition than today's Russia. Or isn't the situation of today's Russia infamous enough and is it not against humanity? That is not all. Who and what sacrifices saved the whole world from the slavery of Fascism? In which Hollywood film did you see the price paid and sacrifices made by the Soviet people? Their saving of humanity? Their heroism in building their industries by working full heartedly and most sacrificially to prepare for the fight against fascism?

How many times has the Soviet Union under Stalin called for the destruction of all weapons! For common resistance to fascist attacks? Who joined them? Who has declared war against other countries and nations and war propaganda a crime against humanity? Do you know who CTP Youth? STALIN!

Who said that those who throw food to the sea, those who ban farmers’ from planting while people starve to death, are not human beings but barbarians? STALIN!

Do you know who prohibited slaughter and castration of people because they are physically or mentally handicapped or black or another race using the hereditary theory –today they want to use the GEN theory- and exposed their inhumanity? STALIN!

Do you know what were the last words of the Soviet youth who sacrificed their lives killing the tanks of the fascists using Molotov cocktails? Long live Stalin!

It's impossible to prevent people from dying. 40 million people will die this year. It seems that CTP Youth doesn't count them as people, as human! As these lines are written, one billion people are hungry! Millions will starve to death. It seems that CTP Youth doesn't count them as people, as human! This year, ten million children will die from the disease that they will get from the water they drink. It seems that CTP Youth doesn't count them as people, as human! Millions of workers and peasants will be killed by weapons. Dozens of nations will face extinction. It seems that CTP Youth doesn't count them as people, as human! If they are people, if they are human who and how to prevent them from being killed?

If Stalin and Stalin's Soviet Union existed, would these people die?

If Stalin and Stalin's Soviet Union existed, fewer millions of people would die each year, and much earlier all people's lives would be guaranteed. How will you guarantee human life in a world ruled by imperialist bourgeoisie CTP Youth? Tell us. We're not saying how to guarantee your own life. We're talking about people's lives. We're talking about humanity.

The best thing the communists can do under the current circumstances is to find ways to minimize the number of people killed. This way is to put an end to the power of the bourgeoisie as quickly as possible. Or we're moving towards barbarism. In fact, we are in the heart of barbarism! Oh, sorry. 40 million did not count as humans did they? We forgot!

Communism is the only order that respect humanity, has respect for human life, can guarantee the lives of the people, can prevent humanity from being destroyed by the bourgeoisie through wars, hunger, diseases and so on. Every person who claim to defend humanity but does not work for communism damage the victory of communism and in practice is a partner of the ongoing human massacres. He is responsible for the lives of people dying because of the power of the bourgeoisie each passing year.

Those who actively fight against communism are actively committing crimes against humanity. They practically support the killing of millions by the bourgeoisie. The slaughter of millions of people cannot be prevented through empty talk. But those who back this massacre with their policies will not be able to get rid of being called as murderers who have committed crimes against humanity, their hands covered with human blood, and being treated as such!

Every human life is precious!

Those who with their policies contribute to the continuation of the massacre of the people rather than preventing the massacre of people are the barbarians who commit crimes against humanity

Lenin's words are in our minds. We don't want a civil war. We don't want people to die in civil war. This is why we want to end this civil war as quickly as possible!

In the world of barbarian and murderous bourgeois, it is that animal, that son of a butcher who condemns the communists for the death of humans!

We don't want people to die. That is why we will destroy the bourgeoisie, and in the process of this destruction we will do our best to ensure that as little a number of people as possible die due to the barbarism of the bourgeoisie. And we will continue to fight until we achieve this result all over the world to prevent people from being killed by the barbarian bourgeoisie, thus preventing people from being killed. The sooner we get this result, the sooner we end the slaughter of the people. Or the massacre of people will continue. More people will be slaughtered every day. And this truth we know. Those who want to prolong the timescale of this are not those who value human life, but those who do not value human life at all.

The sun cannot be plastered with mud.

Stalin is the savior of humanity.

He is a bloody murderer who insults Stalin and thus contributes to prolonging the life of the bourgeoisie.

Every year it contributes to the murder of 40 million people!

This is no joke!

One cannot play games with human life!