Church told us that God made men-and all life on earth-about 5-10 thousands years ago. Than came the fossils of Dinosaurs. Well, the prophets of the God did not know of them, therefore did not even mention them. So what? God did not say it. It is the medieval church’s fault. God made them all. Than there came the theory of evolution. God did not make things as we see them, they have evolved from the simple forms of life. Rubbish. God made them all, and even if they evolved, who made the life that evolved? And how there you say we come from the monkeys? Engels said that chemistry would solve the problem of the beginning of life etc. Chemistry did solve it. Life has began as amino acids. So what? Who made the amino acids? It is a chemical reaction. So what, who made the atoms and molecules that react chemically to form the amino acids? Universe as we know it began with the big bang and all the atoms etc. began to form after that. So what, who made the big bang? Especially with our professors who for a cool million quid will tell you that there was no time and space before the big bang, that time and space began with the big bang, we can show that it is the God Almighty who was, is and will be who made the big bang. In other words, the very development of natural sciences has been pushing the God out of creation and has pushed him now right back to and beyond the big bang.

No worries. God still exists in the timeless and spaceless something before the big bang.

What a relief.

Time and space was is and will be. Their unity is motion. The most simple differentiation of motion is that of attraction and repulsion. If matter is to be comprehended as distinct from motion, then it is the unity of differentiated motion. Unity of attraction and repulsion is matter. There is nothing in the universe but time and space, infinite and infinitely changing giving rise to all other forms of matter, including life, that we know and we will find out in future as our knowledge of matter develop. Big bang and the developments since the big bang is nothing but a passing moment in the movement of the infinite time and space. Time and space has no beginning and no end. They were, are and will be.

Any clever idealist who wants to preserve God first of all deviates attention from the study of human history. For the real solution to God’s coming into being is to be sought in the human history, in the history of the development of knowledge, not in the history of nature. There we can determine more or less exactly when the idea of one God was created by men. Secondly, the clever idealist knows that the question that has to be answered is that of infinity. For even a fool is bound to ask that if the God exists before time and space, how is that possible, what kind of existence is this without time and space and who the hell made him? The answer has to refer to infinity. God was, is and will be ....Where?

Infinitely. But still, where and when? Infinitely say the man, did you not here? God is the infinite spirit. That spirit was, is and will be. He made everything from nothing. Now that we know of the big bang, he, this infinite spirit made the big bang.

Here is the choice which has always faced us. Either matter is infinite: Was, is and will be. Or this spirit which, 96 as our knowledge of matter develops, ends up being pushed back and back in time and space. We all have to choose between the two. There really is no other choice. Give us a few million quid, and we will choose the spirit even though we are “a man of science”. And why should someone give us a few million quid to choose the infinity of the spirit instead of the proven infinity of matter? If everything changes, so must the social conditions we live in, the private property is nothing immutable. It will come to pass. Those who have the millions cannot have that, and the idea of the infinite spirit in all its cultural mutations-Islamic, Christian etc., help these very finite gentlemen preserve their very finite private property which by the very logic of finite things is doomed. Everything is finite and thus has a limit. Everything that is born, must die. Even God will end up dying, for men has made him after his own image as is proved by the human history.

When the men needs him no more to explain things, he will die. He is dying in front of our eyes right now. There is no place for him before the big bang. Time and space did not start with the big bang. They have changed and gave rise to the conditions which resulted in the big bang. When the expanding universe starts to collapse, it will create similar conditions which will give rise to another big bang. Circular motion is a most general law of motion which is dialectical. Circular motion give us the form of infinity of motion and thus of space and time. Only the idiots with a million quid in their pocket and claim to be a men of science knows not this law of motion.

What is the connection between the true believers of the God and the so-called Marxist, whom we are told do not believe in God (don’t you believe it. Their theory always leads to idealism which do not believe in god and 97 that is the last refuge of the God Almighty). The connection is that, I may sit down and prove the fact that Khrushchev, Mao and Enver were all Trotskyite, Bukharinist traitors, following the every step they took. The true believer will always find an escape route to defend them.

Some of them, after being pushed quite a lot, came up with the theory of the big Marxists who commit big mistakes. When you ask them why is it that Mao or Enver are big Marxists who made big mistakes but not Khrushchev, they refer to the defence of the latter of Stalin. Than you show them that Khrushchev, and particularly Brezhnev “defended” Stalin just like these people, while distorting Stalin’s teachings on building communism, they come up with the theory of the latter ones being revolutionary. As if we are discussing “being revolutionary”. We are discussing Marxism here “comrade”. When you show them that what makes them “revolutionary” is nothing special, nothing more than a rhetoric of revolutionary violence etc., and that such verbal garbage is common to all sorts of “revolutionaries”, that these are no grounds that separate Marxists from anti-Marxists, they come up with the theory of the “bridge”! Mao and Enver, by fighting the Khrushchevites, on revolutionary grounds, formed a bridge from the Khrushchevite revisionism to Leninism. This theory of bridge is borrowed from the Luxemburgists. They used to claim that Luxemburgism at least formed a bridge between the Social Democracy and Leninism. They were answered: bridge? What bridge you are talking about.

If one leg of this bridge is in Social Democracy and the other is Leninism, to build such a bridge, you must first have Leninism. And once you have Leninism who on earth need such a bridge that unites the Leninists with the Social Democrats. Luxemburgists first fight Lenin, fight the formation of Leninism, and now wants to be a bridge that unites Leninism to Social Democracy. No thank you. First rule of Leninism is to break such bridges. Whoever does not fight such bridges, ends up in Social Democracy.

Well, our true believers will never give up their bridge made up of rotten woods of Mao and Enver. They are the true believers indeed. This is the connection between God and our “revolutionary” opportunists—the true believers of a fight against Stalin, of a fight against our motherland. Whatever we do, however we expose their “God”, however we push their Gods beyond the big bang, they will find a way to defend them even beyond the big bang. Such is the logic of class struggle. These people cannot give up the bridges that connect them to the bourgeoisie.

Or, as quoted by Marx when he was talking of Proudhon:
“wo Begriffe fehlen Da stellt zur rechten Zeit ein Wort sich ein”
(Where ideas fail (When an idea fails)
There at the right time a new idea turns up.)
Capital V.I. P. 74. English Edition. Lawrence & Wishart, London. 1974.

From the booklet ; “What’s in a Priority”