And those who really were ready to lick Stalin’s boots devoutly didn’t care for his thoughts, but for the chance to lick his boot at least once in life — it’s such a good after which you could die happy. Such kinds of moral-psychological types are at enmity with each other just because of the disputes about problem whose boots to lick and about the queue and frequency of licking their idols’ boots.

2 If there’s no understanding of the global history course, then Stalin’s mentioned work is a collection of platitudes and senseless Marxist jabber — this thought is emotionally expressed by B. Khazanov in the extract from his article, which is cited above.

In order to show vivid consistency of our understanding of the «Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR» and absurdness of different opinions about Stalin’s intellectual primitivism, we had to premise parts 6.1 — 6.7 devoted to the USSR history and global politics history of the 20th century, to the present part, in which we analyze Stalin’s work.

[356] During a generation’s life the nation made its way from almost overall illiteracy, plough and splinter to the best education in the world, to industry based on advanced constructions and technologies, was getting ready to the first space flights.

[357] In other words whether God — Creator of Nature (Universe)— exists, or not, and there is just fiction about Him?

[358] The head of state and ruling party leader while during a quarter of the century personally considering almost every project of five-year or annual USSR social and economic development plan, setting tasks for the authors of the plans and projects, he can’t but notice and understand that Marxian Political Economy is a separate entity, and is neither connected with plan working-out process nor with the control process of the plans carrying out.

But if the leader just poses problems «in general» and signs documents worked up by others, putting signature where clerks show, he won’t it even during several decades, as all following USSR leaders didn’t realize that.

[359] I.e. besides people of authority there may be authoritative sources including ones without any definite authorship (for example, the Bible).

[360] On the other hand, Marxism teachers also didn’t like this question, which had no answer in Marxism. As far as they didn’t know the answer, they automatically found themselves in the opposition to Stalin’s version of life interpretation through Marxism.

[361] «Value transfer from means of production to produce» — this is a Marxist Political Economy notion. There’s no such an objective phenomenon in the real life, but there is an accounting procedure of attribution of amortised deductions, which are a legal part of means of production value, to the production price.

[362] Even now, 11 years after the USSR break-up, when Marxism is no more the dogma, many economists and ordinary people support Marxist Political Economy conceptual mechanism: how come there’s no «necessary» labor time? How come there’s no «surplus value»?

[363] Underbelly — due to the fact that the issue concerning the conceptual categories he named is comprehensible for the most general strata of society without any special education.

[364] This institution replaced Political Bureau. Central Committee Presidium was established by the 19th convention and was to control the party in the interim between conventions and preliminary sessions. It was abolished by the Khrushchev regime after J.V. Stalin had been murdered.

[365] One of Lenin’s utterances.

[366] This is real and is happening in Russia now (2002).

[367] Those who think that in Stalin’s epoch there was terrible tyranny should admit that all the named comrades wished to express their views on this or that problem themselves without fear of falling under the article 58 for counter-revolutionary actions, if the «tyrant» didn’t agree with their opinions. None of them was exiled to the concentration camps. L. Yaroshenko, who lived till the Reorganization (Perestroika), even was interviewed and said that Stalin hadn’t understood national economy and economic science problems.

This fact as well as evidences of those who really had worked with Stalin solving different country problems proves that the following Khrushchev’s statement is lie and slander: «Stalin didn’t act by persuasion, explanation and patient cooperation with people, but by thrusting his ideas on them and demanding strict obedience to his opinion. Those who opposed his opinion or tried to prove their point of view and correctness of their line, were doomed to be dismissed from the office…» (from N. Khrushchev’s «secret» report at the 20 Congress of CPSU convention, which 6 months after was published in the USA, but was concealed from the USSR peoples until Perestroika when «struggle against stalinshchina» (the Stalin’s heritage) began).

But if Khrushchev and the like were ignorant and so pusillanimous, that fear bound their minds to such a degree that it was impossible to convince them of something; and if Socialism and Communism ideals provoked in them subconscious abhorrence and unmotivational aversion, which were directed towards his decisions’ implementation, it’s mean to lay the blame on Stalin for their own ignorance, moral perversity, cowardice and stupidity.

[368] See the «Explanation for the Last Paragraph», which finishes part 6.6.

[369] Central Committee

[370] But if to recollect what H. Ford wrote about the organization of «Ford Motors», it was all the same at his company.

[371] But the reasons can’t be of common sense if there is no definiteness in understanding the terms and in their interrelation with life and with each other, which are the basis for reasoning. And defining the terms is exactly what L.D.Yaroshenko evades.

[372] Footnote to the edition used by Stalin.

[373] In other place Stalin gives the following quotation of Yaroshenko: «Comrade Yaroshenko declares that in his "Political Economy of Socialism," "the categories of political economy — value, commodity, money, credit, etc., — are replaced by a healthy discussion of the rational organization of the productive forces in social production» …»

[374] But there is the third possibility: there are experts of the “common-sense” reasoning whose speeches are intended to confuse others, forming false figurative conceptions about Life phenomena, as a result, those people find themselves dependant on these experts of the “common-sense” reasoning whose figurative conceptions in spite of their words are still consonant to the objective Life phenomena.

[375] At this time in the USSR one could be discontent about one of the two things:

either that socialism was being built in the country;

or that the process of building socialism proceeds along with barbarism and abuse of citizens and authorities, that pervert the essence of the socialism.

The first dissidents destroyed the USSR and started reforms of a bourgeois character. The second wave of «dissidents» finishes the reformations and draws the bottom-line.

[376] Out of the window there are trashcans. In the summer flies skit around them. This anti-sanitary is the built-in part of the architectural-urban style of «khrushchevki» (blocks of tiny low-cost flats that were erected during the time of Khrushchev), it represents the «concern about people» of psychical-Trotsky Khrushchev and Brezhnev’s regime.

The fact that now from sunrise until sunrise these trashcans are watched and investigated by «free» «proprietors» is an accomplishment of Gorbachev’s regime and reforms of Yeltsin and Gaidar. Of course, the tertiary treatment and reprocessing urban ore branch is necessary but we cannot agree that it should be organized in such a way by means of forcing people out of life to the scrap-heap.