It is useful to re-read N. Bukharin`s article of the period of the New Economic Policy?
the Theorist of Bolshevik Party Bukharin brings the base under a question of the relations with the capitalist world. Considers: The Soviet Russia will reject policy of self-isolation, opposition of to the whole world. Advances with the western neighbors will become alternative. Sale “ spheres and branches of influence “ from auction. The New Economic Policy - an indicative sign of it. For what reason to Lausanne invited the Russian Bolsheviks? It is a sign and the proof of abrupt turn of domestic and foreign policy. In domestic policy experiments were not successful yet. Indirect sign: Bolsheviks should refuse radical restructuring, experimenting in foreign policy. The Soviet Russia refuses aiming at world revolution in the world scale. So or approximately the governments of other countries so have to think. At conclusions and these predictions there is a common sense. It is impossible to consider the assumption for truth so far.
Over time, the Bolshevism will degenerate: it constantly happens in the history to any political ideas: they were perfected, adapted to life. Departed from initial own calculations of radical and resolute transformation.
One of authoritative party ideologists Nikolay Bukharin considers:
“ … the proletarian government can conclude, under the known conditions, agreements with the bourgeois states … “ It something new: it is not comparable with
the previous tverdokamennost. Recently it or something similar could only be meant: did not consider decent to state aloud - forbidden today Bukharin states publicly. It does the reservation: “ they (these agreements) will aim at interests of revolution “. Such is its explanation in domestic market, at the same time the warning to the bourgeois governments also specifies: are ready for mutually advantageous trade. Dogmatic nonsense does not allow Bukharin to understand or introduce the idea yet: any relations between the states can normally develop at reciprocity, mutual benefit. Capitalists are not so silly: to maintain the relations with carrying out “ interests of revolution “ the state, but does not allow capitalists to earn from this revolution.
Bukharin continues: “ The agreement of the Soviet Russia with Turkey directed against the western imperialism as it at the same time threatens with defeat of the Russian revolution and colonial enslavement of Turkey is correct or wrong?... Such agreement quite appropriate is also admissible “.
It is admissible! Even we will agree: “ communists of all countries are obliged the agreement it to support, explaining its sense to working masses “ … But Turkey - one. And the logic prompts: under such circumstances Russia actually the relations has nobody to establish also old policy of self-isolation, transformation of into something of
unnatural, resisting to the whole world - conservative in promotion, democratically limited, comes back to the primitive attires. Bukharin has one guesses, assumptions - the imagination takes away him far from the truth modern to him reality: “ If in Germany revolution broke out and Poland would strike Germany from the East … “ Yes, one “ if “ … Let`s assume: in Germany by some miracle revolution will break out: it in it already happened in 1848 and 1918. But never Poland struck from the East. However, in 1848 - Poland was in structure of the Russian Empire. In 1918 Poland found independence, but could not act on the weakness. She got stronger a little and with unusual arrogance opposed the Soviet Russia. Poland is small, unfortunate, backward, poor - even if democratic on sense of traditions - is able to revive suddenly in a rank of the giant. Considerable part of the European history, especially the last centuries, built on a political, national enslavement of this unfortunate nation. Enslaved it - swallowed statehood and democracy. Even as a part of the Russian Empire - the people of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth showed arrogance, unreasonable neglect in relation to neighbors. The Polish society conflicts tore apart intra national and shlyakhetsky nonsenses. Poles did not want and could not reckon with a real situation, historic facts - formed policy on the invented vanities sophistications, even during independent
existence. Nowadays it exists independently: let the good will be not forgotten - Versailles helped. What danger will constitute to the giant of Germany - the small country: Poland?
The French weapon and the marshal Pilsudsky turned Poland into the strong power: sustained an adventurous campaign of Red army. Russia exposed a mobile cavalry - met tanks. Poland fought back - even shot ahead, expanded the possession a little. Bolshevist promotion: built the Polish army in a superlative degree. Carries Poland nearly to world powers. Does not surprise. Here what role of tanks, modern military equipment.
The Russian heads sleep and rave: expect proletarian revolution in Germany - this huge force: it is capable to rely on power of the first-class industry. Excellent heads, organizers will direct this force - still weak-willed Poland with scanty equipment does not constitute it powerful danger. Pin pricks … Danger of Germany can threaten - from the West, from France. From the North - from Great Britain. In the country - from own Vendee. And Poland? Only in the union with someone it is capable … to strike a stab in the back. Separately - you joke?! What in that case? “ Russia would probably be forced to oppose Poland. (And in this case revolutionary workers of the whole world would be obliged to support both the German revolution, and war of Russia against Poland) “.
The statement confirms: among the mighty of this world and disposing of the power there is no actual agreement of opinion from the Polish defeat: sparks of revenge dim mind and appeal to activity. Were necessary fictional
of circumstance about possible German revolution for the requirement of the fifth perhaps partition of Poland. The thought about " is here too put; right “ to interfere with any action - from Russia: let will only find it necessary. Today on
of turn there is Poland, but tomorrow … The whole world is under continuous threat while Russia lips of the ideologists openly propagandizes the right for intervention. Under the corresponding favorable circumstances she will not fail this right to use.
Bukharin continues: “ And in this case revolutionary workers of the whole world would be obliged to support both the German revolution, and war of Russia against Poland “. Who, when and as is interested in opinion “ revolutionary workers “? The Komintern stamps any resolution of the Bolshevist management. Further - it is even more interesting: “ The Soviet republic offers with all persistence of Menshevist Georgia the union against imperialism Western European, seeking to seize the Caucasus … “ The destiny of modern Georgia - at " Is known; " union; appearance of bloodless capitulation. Georgia refused to exchange independence of the country for the benefits of the Russian military power, equivalent military occupation. The business was carried out by Red army: flooded the country with blood. Forced a brute force to give up the thought of the right of the Georgian people for independent development. Raises rhetorical and so ridiculous question: “ Whether this offer (about the union) Contradicted interests of revolution? At all! On the contrary, it was directed to revolutionary protection “.
Nearby: new thoughts, rather sensible: lift the main dogma and do not refuse it at all:
“ The Social revolution in Europe and around the world lasts for many years and will come to the end within decades “. Thoughts of a fast, easy victory in world scale do not reign over minds
of theorists. The humdrum of life convinced: many theories have only book appeal and abstract value. But they not in forces to refuse theories: became slaves them the invented imaginations. These blind men continue to carry out the former decision - to build life according to recipes and strict templates. Do not deviate from in advance chosen way at a size of more admissible. The policy of the leading party of the Soviet Russia is turned into fate: conducts to irreparable consequences. Their thoughts, expectation are danced from bases - attract uncontrollably to vigorous activity. Motives of active natures are directed to inflating of proletarian revolution, the world kingdom of work.
These fanatics of class idea become fools. Do not see a simple thing: any society consists not only of the making classes. Fast and uninterrupted development of society will force to create the mass of managers. These people directly do not participate in productive work - the activity promote its production and development, distribution of products. Logically: society on justice uses the huge mass of managers for the benefit of the proletariat. Operation of these layers will not manage to construct a celebration of the proletariat in practice.
At Bukharin: “ many (!!!) the proletarian states can be forced to conclude interim agreements with oppressed or a floor - the oppressed bourgeois states, with weaker and oppressed states against stronger and menacing: each such agreement has to be strictly weighed, thought over and estimated. Such agreements which directly or indirectly, would turn the working states into the tool of imperialism, tools of oppression of other people cannot be allowed, certainly. Agreements have to be shown … from an assessment of interests of the world proletariat and his whole body of such international control and which the Komintern " is;. In the spacious quote original thoughts are put. “ Many proletarian states … “ What does it mean? This situation will become suitable during remote dates and decades - in the long-term future: the proletarian states then will appear on a map. The author self-appointedly speaks on behalf of existing and future “ proletarian states “. Plural in this case is not a real-life state of affairs. Nowadays existing proletarian states are formed in the territory of the former Russia - are united in the union of the republics with the uniform center, with the general domestic and foreign policy. Any of the republics will not give the right to independently conclude agreements without the permission of the center. This is fictitious “ " union;: the competent and all-knowing author has to know.
Divides the bourgeois states: “ oppressed “ “ semi-oppressed “ “ weak “ “ strong “ “ menacing “. Blows as spirit of scholasticism, fantastic division of the world, room division - it is torn off from reality. The post-war world divides the states into winners and won having a shameful role. From the moment of emergence: The Soviet Russia makes advances to won. The first International agreement is concluded with is unceasing Germany going to defeat in Brest. Without big insight and judiciousness it is clear: there is no full equality, identity - between the capitalist states and capitalists.
The specified division is necessary for the power and the author - for self-complacency and a self-justification. Prove the fact: there are illusive relations with the certain capitalist states - they “ oppressed “ “ weak “
“ semi-oppressed. “ Strong “ and “ menacing “ the capitalist countries are not suitable for the relations. We do not want! In the phrase short-sightedness, Bukharin`s komchvanstvo is brightly shown. “ such agreement needs to be weighed, estimated strictly “. The governments of the capitalist countries excessively strictly weigh, think over, estimate: are right. The Soviet Russia - the state original with widespread idea of world revolution, the right to interfere with any field of activity of the foreign states. This doubtful harmful activity caused suspiciousness. Its threats remained mere words.
Creation of International, the management of subversive activities, supply with money - turned Moscow into the center of blasting danger. The governments of the different countries were quickly realized: similar activity breaks stability of the world and the kind relations between the countries and the people.
The author opposes agreements: can “ to turn the working states into the imperialism tool, into the tool of oppression of other people “. You should not share with anybody responsibility for similar policy. To conduct it independently - it well proved an example with Georgia. The term won the right of nationality:
“ Soviet imperialism “. Russia always showed aggression, essence aggressive. Modern Russia - Romanovskaya`s right successor. To absurdity terms changed, got new sounding of the word: the essence
remained invariable. Under a screen of Komintern appetites expanded. The gut - is still thin: in it an essence of not shown adventurism. Russia in the future will show all the merits and destructive properties.
During this period the Soviet Russia only made the way on the international scene. Interfered “ Georgian question “...