[229] Judging from the knowledge readily available today V. Lenin was nearly the only party figure who recognized the great value Stalin’s pre-revolutionary theoretic works had for the cause of bolshevism, the work “Marxism and the national issue” among them. In this work J.V. Stalin provided a definition for the term «nation» which indicates that Hebrew is not a nation but something else what J.V. Stalin gave no definition for.

[230] Because he received a systematic (religious) education in a seminary J.V. Stalin was one of the few party leaders who had a thorough knowledge of the Biblical doctrine of global enslavement. This fact is likewise beyond the understanding of many of his modern opponents and supporters. But thanks to that systematic education he at least sensed that there is no difference between the Bible and Marxism on the level of their content: both are a means of enslaving the mankind.

One can find the grounds for this statement in the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR “It is Time I Should Start the Tale of Stalin…”, “The Sorrowful Legacy of Atlantis” (“Trotskyism is «Yesterday», but not «Tomorrow»”), “A review of possible ways post-1995 history might take” (separate editions and collected articles “Old scenarios in a different wording?”)

[231] As was made known as early as the years of Perestroika, the injury damaged one of the carotid arteries. Due its constriction the brain suffered a lack of blood circulation. This led to functional disorder, general disorder of nervous activity and subsequent death.

[232] This task has never been set out directly by the leaders of the RSDLP, CPSU and CPRF. The basis of party organization has always been thought to be the regulations and party discipline. This is what dooms CPRF to fail politically.

[233] «CC» means «Central Committee».

[234] Essentially implementing this scheme in a party of active and energetic people excluded the option of the CC’s functioning in a secret mafia-like way of «leadership» and was directed against crowd-“elitism”.

[235] A question naturally arises about the qualities not mentioned here: what else is Trotsky notable for except for his outstanding abilities?

[236] The ministry of transport.

[237] The national railway commissariat (NKPS) — the name of that ministry at the time.

[238] «Buharin is not only the most prominent and most valuable party theorist, he is also justly considered to be the party’s favorite. Yet it is very doubtful if his theories can be considered entirely Marxist, because there is something scholastic about him (he never studied and, I think, never understood dialectics)» (“Address to the convention”, records of December 25, 1922).

[239] «Pyatakov is certainly a man of unbending will and outstanding ability, yet he gets too much carried away by administrative work and the administrative side of our cause to be relied on in a serious political matter» (“Address to the convention”, records of December 25, 1922).

[240] Initially this was an important and demanding post yet of a purely technical nature. The person holding this post was in charge of the Central Committee’s secretariat which was to free the «leaders» of the routine bureaucratic work: preparing materials for the meeting of leaders, printing and mailing the resolutions passed on those meetings, etc.

[241] Behind some days before great October socialist revolution they have published in the newspaper the notice on forthcoming revolt.

[242] Essentially in ancient slave-owning societies working cattle and slaves had the same «legal status».

[243] This happened less than a month before he dictated the “Address to the convention”, which is several days before his health condition aggravated sharply. After that fit he was taken to Gorki (not Gorky) where he died in slightly more than a year. Yet V. Lenin’s demand of the Communist party members to leave Masonic lodges was silenced by the official cult history of the CPSU.

[244] It was one of the reasons why the prospect of the socialist revolution victory was not considered a feasible one by the ruling classes.

[245] For more information on these discrepancies see “The History of CPSU” text-books of the soviet period, works of Lenin and Bronstein (Trotsky), which cover the post-revolution subjects, those of the Civil War and of the early period of socialism building in the USSR.

[246] In the late 19th — early 20th century, socialism and communism were in fact propagated as the ideal just community. Historian V. Klyuchevski knew both his contemporary society and the projects of the socialist reorganization, which were popular among the up-in-the-cloud left intelligentsia of those years. Back in the late 19th century he characterized the prospects of Russia’s transfer to socialism in late 19th — early 20th century in just one phrase. This is a key phrase for understanding of the post-revolution decades of real and alleged socialist building: «The just community made up of scoundrels». It is obvious that the more persistent the scoundrels are in their scoundrelling, the more disastrous will be the imposing of socialism in this society, which was successfully proved by the history of the USSR.

[247] Such actions on behalf of the German social-democracy in 1918 resulted in Hitler’s coming to power in 1933 together with the National-Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP in German).

[248] To escape the bloodshed of the first half of the 20th century it was necessary during the second half of the 19th century to work out the global alternative to the Marxist scenario of the world socialist revolution. To do this we had to revise the history of the mankind and the history of the multinational Russian regional civilization in it. We had to change our attitude to the «holy writings» and to overcome the idealistic atheism of the existing religious cults, which pervert people’s understanding of God, of the relationship of each and every person with God, and of God’s Providence. But we also had to overcome the materialistic atheism of science, which rejects the existence of God. Only in this case might there have begun forming the culture, based on the honest faith in God and the conscious, above-the-riot dialogue with Him of every person throughout the life. But Russian intelligentsia turned out to be incapable of solving this problem in due time. As a result of this, we lost the alternative opportunity for development without external wars, revolutions, the Civil War and the abuse of power in the post-war years.

[249] One of leaders of the revolt on 14 (25) December of 1825 against the power of Russian Emperor Nicholas I.

[250] If this view on cause-and-effect relations in social life is accepted, the Great October socialist revolution in Russia, just like any other reform does, happened somewhere in the middle of the interval between two points at which the politically active part of the society finds a new understanding for their past and prospects, as well as for the past and prospects of the entire mankind.

[251] 19th century Russia inherited such an absence of aspiration to bright future from older days. K. Valishevsky provides an analysis of the era preceding the reign of Ivan the Terrible and his reign proper in his book “Ivan the Terrible” (Moscow, «IKPA» publishing house, 1989, a reprint of the 1912 edition). He notes that it was typical of Russian art (arts and crafts along with architecture were the prevalent activities of the time, unlike the genres serving to entertain, which prevail today) to imitate all the other cultures and accumulate completely different elements adopted from the outside.

Both Russian and foreign historians who came to discover this fact either left it without comment reporting it as a historically objective fact of life, or drew a conclusion on its grounds about the Russian spirit being creatively barren, sometimes implying this conclusion in the undercurrent.