The idea that the central state contradicts democracy is a policy that is opposed to all economic and political development, and hence to the Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism.

As regards production, economic development is in the direction of large scale production. At the same time, due to the ever increasing product diversity and the division of labor and the interdependence of all products and production units in this division of labor, a nationwide - increasingly worldwide - unity requires a unity (centralization) that complies with the laws of the economy. This is a necessity. It is a necessity of developing and multiplying the economy, the production. If this necessity is not complied with, the development of industry in production, mechanization, electrification and computerization, that is, full automation of industry and industrialization of agriculture on this basis, its intensification and automation that respects nature, and thus the production of abundance of products in every field becomes impossible. And this inevitably entails economic planning throughout the country - increasingly worldwide - that complies with the requirements of the laws of the economy. In other words, it requires centralization in the economy throughout the country - and increasingly throughout the world.

This also requires centralization in politics. Only in this way is it possible to obtain direct democracy through the internet, that is, every citizen has both knowledge and decision-making power in all areas of life, and thus obtain the broadest of all democracies.

Strengthening and broadening of local democracy is only possible through a localism and local democracy that knows and is subject to the needs of the center. Each local democracy, which is not subject to the needs of the center (that is, the whole), is not developed in close connection with the center, and which is dealt with as a self-entity in itself and as a self-sufficient entity, becomes a type of democracy that makes it impossible for it to develop itself, for it break down centralism and damage the centralized development and leads to self-defeat of local democracy. Each local democracy, which is considered as disconnected from the need of the center, deemed sufficient and necessary by itself, detached from the center and which develops in contradiction to the center, reflects a development contrary to the needs of the economy and production. This approach makes it impossible to obtain an abundance of products that cannot be obtained without centralization; if an abundance of products is not achieved it becomes impossible for everyone to have enough time and opportunity to be active in all areas of life; it becomes impossible to achieve the developed culture - primarily the ability to run and govern the state -without which taking an active part by all in all areas of democratic life would become impossible.

This policy of decentralization, which was declared as the way and method of democracy and proposed as in opposition to centralization rather than as subservient to centralization, is also presented as the antidote to bureaucracy. However, for the reasons we have discussed above, this approach makes it impossible to develop democracy and to reach direct democracy and does not harm the bureaucracy. Because it is the relative backwardness of the economy compared to communism, not the backwardness of the economy itself, which inevitably makes it rise again and again despite all the political measures taken and can only be overcome through a central structure and planning. As we have seen above, this kind of locality policy is not a means of economic development, abundance of production, thus cultural perfection, it is not the policy of directing and executing the state by each individual, direct democracy, thus making the bureaucracy impossible. It can only play a role to prevent the application of this policy.

Here, we do not mention that the existence of the war-maker imperialists surrounding communism necessitates secrecy and imposes the organization of armed forces and intelligence organization, which is a structure open to bureaucracy and all these will create inevitable difficulties- but again the fastest way to overcome these challenges is to build communism as quickly as possible.

In relation to democracy and bureaucracy, the problem is not centralization and the development of locality in the center and in harmony with it. The problem is with whom centralism -meanwhile localism too- is exercised, ie for what purpose. A centralism that is directed only by the workers and thus a centralism which develops the locality that is subservient to the center will be fruitful. A centralism directed by the bourgeoisie, the imperialist bourgeoisie and their feudal allies is always completely reactionary in today's conditions. First and foremost, this centralism is far from providing unity and solidarity, even in the ranks of the oppressor-dominant nation, because it exacerbates class differences and conflicts. This is a factor that weakens their central structure. This centralism is also a means of coercion and oppression for the oppressed nation in multinational countries. It inevitably leads to the rebellion of oppressed nations against the center (the oppressing nation), the wars within the country, the impossibility of the central unity on the basis of voluntariness, and thus the weakening of the center. Different imperialist powers can exploit the weakness of the multinational (multi-religious, multi-sect) bourgeois-feudal states they wish to weaken at any time. The same applies to the use of class (and all) differences in the ranks of the dominant nation. Like all the great imperialist states, all bourgeois states want to weaken their neighbors and weaken their neighbors, from the strongest to the weakest. At this point, using all kinds of differences in the country and provoking national (tribal-religious) hostilities in the ranks of a multinational rival (neighbor) is a policy that they all love and adopt and implement. As long as the central states remain as bourgeois (feudal) states, this policy will continue to exist.The misuse of all kinds of differences in the country as well as national (religious) hostilities and thus the deterioration and gradual collapse of the central structure cannot be prevented. To try to solve this problem by preserving the structure of the bourgeois state, or to drown in blood the inevitable rebellions of the oppressed classes, nations-religions (these rightful revolts, which the enemy neighbors and great imperialist powers will not stop from encouraging and using ) is to engage with the impossible for the central bourgeois-feudal states. This means a continuous agitation and a continuous weakening. It means not the reduction of the barbarism and bureaucratism of the central state, but its increase. That means the reaction against it is increased. That means that those reactions are used by those who want to use them. Do not laugh at your neighbor for it will happen to you too.

In order to ensure the unity of the individual nations, it is necessary to implement a policy that will destroy the class conflicts in their ranks, that is, to destroy the classes, in order to ensure a voluntary and conscious union among all members of the nation. In order to achieve unity between nations, it is necessary to implement a policy that will eliminate conflicts between them that is to ensure equality and cooperation and solidarity between nations, in order to ensure voluntary and conscious union among nations. This type of state is inevitably centralized and thus a single-centered and multinational federal state governed by workers, which makes locality (and local nationality) not only possible but also mandatory.

In this regard, the approach of Comrade G. Furr, who has very helpful and useful writings in defense of Stalin, that tie up with localism the development of democracy and making the bureaucracy impossible is opposed and detrimental approach to the Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism, to their plan of developing democracy and making bureaucracy impossible. Moreover, since it is unable to rule the world, the US has developed and implements as an inevitable part of imperialism's plans to rule the world, the use of all kinds of differences, including class differences, to create chaos in the entire world and to use the breaking points in all countries to weaken those countries, using the policy of inciting and using national and religious hostilities as a breaking point in such countries. This p;olicy of localism helps this policy of USA to divide countries. It is to be noted that all communist and anti-democracy currents are, in one way or another, whether or not but surely supporters of this policy. In this area, Trotskyists and anarchists share a common position with comrade G. Furr. It is a pity that Comrade G. Furr, who had to face many attacks to defend Stalin, found himself together with such partners.

In the face of the unbearable pressures of the representatives of the oppressed nations, the oppressor nation, and if the communists, the workers and peasants of the oppressor nation cannot come to their aid, against these violent attacks and to prevent the violence of the central bourgeois-feudal state of the oppressing nations, and to find a solution to their problems, albeit slightly, under bourgeois conditions may put forward a demand for local democracy, which they formulate as a peaceful method, while the domination of the oppressed nation, while the bourgeois conditions continuous. But this approach does not contribute to the problem of the development and victory of communism in these countries. It will do harm. Seeking solutions to the national question under bourgeois-imperialist conditions and providing solutions based on false theories for this purpose, and trying to impose these false theories on workers will lead to harmful consequences, not beneficial for the oppressed nations in question. Under these circumstances, nowadays, when the barbarism is getting worse and worse, and the barbarism over the oppressed and weak nations is increasing, the oppressed nations must tie their futures even more to the victory of communism and they must find ways to contribute to this victory. Apart from the triumph of communism, life will provide an ever more barbaric life for all nations and for oppressing nations too. Especially if the oppressing nations themselves are the toys of great powers!