The Fabricated Zinoniev Letter – How the British Establishment Brought-Down the 1924 Labour Party

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Winston Churchill and His Close Personal Friend Major Desmond Morton

In the 1930’s, the conservative (bourgeois) establishment in the UK made much of Adolf Hitler’s rise to power. Indeed, the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph continued to support Hitler’s policies and military adventures right up until the eve of war between the UK and Nazi Germany, whilst Winston Churchill made glowing written comments about Hitler, and the British royal family (including Queen Elizabeth II) were photographed making straight-armed (fascist) salutes! The rightwing proclivities of the British middle and upper classes are quite clear for all to see, and are active today in the British State’s support for the ‘Madan’ neo-Nazi government, currently active in Western Ukraine. What many are unaware of, however, is that whilst the conservative British establishment harps on about the merits of ‘liberal democracy’, it has historically behaved in a distinctly ‘illiberal’ and ‘non-democratic’ manner on a number of notable occasions.

The ‘minority’ Labour government of 1923 was established with the cooperation of the Liberals – this was the first Labour government and the Liberals only allowed it access to power as a means to discredit and bring-down this working class movement. In this respect, the Liberals were acting in concordance with the Conservatives and the British State. Just ten months later, the Labour Party (under Ramsey MacDonald) lost the October, 1924 General Election to a landslide Tory victory. In November, 1924, a delegation of British trade unions arrived in Moscow, and subsequently published a report stating that its representatives had studied the minutes of the meetings of the Executive Committee of the Comintern and had not found traces of anti-British activity. However, it is believed that the Labour Party was ousted from its tenuous grip on power by a plot perpetuated by White Russians, MI5, MI6, the Daily Mail, the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, Winston Churchill and Major Desmond Morton (amongst many other colluding individuals in positions of power and influence). This notorious episode in British politics has become known as the ‘Zinoniev Letter’ scandal, but is highly disturbing in its non-democratic and rightwing nature. I am researching from contemporary Russian language sources, but include a short English language video for reference purposes.

Although the Soviet Union was allegedly involved in this plot to incite a Socialist Revolution in the UK (by exporting the idea of armed worker uprisings via the various branches of the Communist Party), very little direct reference is made in Western sources to Soviet thoughts on this matter. Georgy Zinoniev (1883-1936) was the head of the ‘Communist International’ (i.e. ‘Comintern’) during the 1920’s, which served as the coordinating hub for all the Communist Parties of the world. Georgy Zinoniev (originally supported Joseph Stalin against Trotsky’s attempt to bring-down the Soviet System (following Lenin’s death in 1924), but slowly gravitated toward the Trotskyite Insurgency after this date.  This ideological about-face eventually led to his arrest, trial and execution for ‘Treason’ in 1936. However, in September, 1924, the British MI6 stated that one of its operatives (in Latvia) had been handed a letter signed by Georgy Zinoniev on behalf of the Comintern, which was directed toward the Communist Party of Great Britain, and suggested that the Labour Party could be used to incite an armed uprising in the UK. The letter was handed to the British MI5, and subsequently found its way to Ramsey MacDonald – the Labour Prime Minister. However, British Secret Intelligence Services also took matters into their own hands (despite being instructed by the Prime Minister to keep this letter ‘secret’), and distributed copies to the heads of the army and navy, as well as to the rightwing press and various other establishment figures – without the knowledge or consent of the British Labour Prime Minister. The motivation for this underhand (and non-democratic) activity stemmed from the Labour Party’s willingness to recognise the existence of the Soviet Union, and enter into formal trade agreements.

As the Labour Party struggled to hold on to power, the rightwing and racist British newspaper the Daily Mail published the ‘Zinoniev Letter’ under the alarmist headline ‘Civil War Plot by Socialist Masters’ four days before the 1924 General Election (on the 25.10.1924). The Daily Mail falsely stated that if the UK became a Socialist State, it would directly fund the development of the USSR. In the meantime, in the Soviet Union an investigation was underway with Georgy Zinoniev denying any involvement and pointing-out obvious structural and rhetorical errors in the text. The Soviet Government had not issued any orders for such a letter to have been written, and it was proven through investigation that Georgy Zinoniev had not written this letter. Despite Soviet denials, and the fact that Georgy Zinoniev wrote an open letter exposing the fake letter that carried his name, the British press conspired not to publish Zinoniev’s ‘real’ letter until a month after the 1924 General Election. By that time the Tories had won power and had cancelled all previous diplomatic and trade agreements with the USSR, and nobody in the government was listening. In 1925, however, the German Language newspaper entitled ‘Red Flag’ published an article exposing the White Russian emigre named ‘Sergei Druzhilovsky’ (Сергей Дружиловский), who was immediately expelled from Germany. In 1926 he was arrested by the Soviet Border Guards after illegally crossing the Latvian-Soviet border. After an open trial held in Moscow (by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR) Sergei Druzhilovsky was sentenced to be shot. Soviet sources make it very clear that the ‘Zinoniev Letter’ episode in the UK was the work of intelligence operative Major Desmond Morton, and that in the shadows behind him was the nefarious Winston Churchill.

The original letter was discovered in 1965, resulting in a book-investigation entitled ‘Zinoviev’s Letter’ and written by three journalists of the British newspaper The Sunday Times.  In February, 1968, The Sunday Times published an article stating that photocopies of the original ‘Zinoniev Letter’ had been inexplicably found in the archives of Harvard University. The graphological analysis carried-out by the expert John Conway, suggested that the hand-writing within the ‘letter’ belonged to the British spy Sidney Reilly, who thus also was involved in fabricating the fake letter. Interestingly, Soviet Intelligence lured Sidney Reilly into the USSR in 1925, under the pretension of him contacting a fictitious anti-Soviet underground movement. Two stories then compete for attention, one is that Sidney Reilly was ‘shot’ for spying, whilst the other story suggests that he changed sides and started spying for the USSR. In the late 1990’s, Robin Cook, Foreign Minister of the Labour Government of Tony Blair, ordered the opening of certain archives. According to these files, the Zinoniev Letter was transferred to the Riga residence (in Latvia) by a Russian emigrant from Berlin, who earned money by creating such fakes. The research was conducted by Dr. Jill Bennett, and although placating the British establishment (whilst ‘hinting’ at impropriety), it nevertheless falsely claims that the exact identity of the original forger cannot be known. This demonstrates how the Labour Party had moved to the right, and how it was willing to ‘ignore’ the Soviet research on this subject.

Perhaps a lasting testimony to the corruption of the bourgeois British State and the Conservative Party, lies in the Labour Party’s rejection of true Socialism, and the 1925 pogrom aimed at the 12 leading Members of the Communist Party of Great Britain by the Tories, all of whom were put on trial and found guilty of seditious libel and incitement to mutiny – before being sentenced to various prison terms. All this was allowed to happen due to the anti-Socialist (and anti-Russian) atmosphere created in the UK by the fake ‘Zinoniev Letter’.

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Of course, this entire episode is bizarre and indicative of an inverted bourgeois mind-set. Why would a letter addressed to the headquarters of the CPGB situated in London, be ‘discovered’ in Latvia? Logic dictates that if it was genuine, it would have been openly published by the Comintern and thereby made public. The Comintern made no secret of its Marxist-Leninist ideology, or the idea of its preference for a world-wide Socialist Revolution. However, such a Revolution arises from indigenous and spontaneous Workers’ Movements, and cannot be imposed ‘from above’ so to speak (as the fake ‘Zinoniev Letter’ and distorting bourgeois rhetoric suggests).

Russian Language Reference:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Письмо_Зиновьева

Tate Modern: Red Star Over Russia (19.11.2017)

DSC_1387

DSC_1404

Many, if not all Western exhibitions purporting to commemorate the 100th Anniversary of the Russian October Revolution, are merely excuses for the prevailing bourgeois, capitalist system to continue to attack and denigrate the reputation of the Soviet Union, as a means to discredit Marxist-Leninism, and influence the working class away from positively relating to Soviet (Bolshevik) Socialism. It is perhaps ironic that the Tate Modern, a complex of art galleries constructed within an old (and huge) Central London factory, should host such a poorly conceived, badly organised and thoroughly ‘revisionist’ exhibition designed to convey not only the prevailing bourgeois negative view of the Soviet Union, but compounds this error by dedicating an entire room to the criminal Leon Trotsky! As the bourgeoisie has a tendency to ‘fetishize’ Trotsky, this exhibition focuses upon the removal of his image from all Soviet documentation, and completely ignores Trotsky’s open collaboration fascist Italy, fascist Spain, fascist Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany throughout the 1930s! Furthermore, this exhibition (based upon the collection of Soviet propaganda posters formerly owned by the British Trotskyite David King), has a number of historical facts incorrect. The 1905 Revolution had nothing to do with the Bolsheviks, and the February Revolution of 1917 also had nothing to do with Lenin. Stalin died in 1953 and not 1955, and Leon Trotsky was expelled from the Soviet Union in 1929 and not 1927! Lenin is treated as a potential criminal, whilst Stalin is treated as an actual criminal. Lenin disagreed with Trotsky but thought that he could be reformed through labour – but Trotsky always remained a bourgeois leftist and self-serving careerist. Whilst dedicating the last 11 years of his life to trying to destroy Lenin’s masterpiece creation of the Soviet Union – the Tate Modern commentary laughingly insists that Trotsky was Lenin’s greatest supporter! I have photographed a number of interesting Soviet posters because their original purpose was to express an entirely ‘new’ and ‘proletariat’ way of viewing the world, but I reject the Trotskyite viewpoints of David King, and the ludicrous bourgeois interpretation of events as conveyed by the Tate Modern. Nothing positive is said about the Soviet Union, and just as Trotsky’s dalliance with world fascism is ignored, so too is the Soviet Sacrifice in its war with, and subsequent victory over Nazi Germany (where the USSR lost between 27-40 million men, women and children killed and wounded). David King erroneously makes much of police photographs of suspected and/or convicted criminals which he gathered from the USSR, but the fact remains that if capitalism ever collapsed in the West, there would be millions of similar photographs ‘liberated’ from the bourgeois police archives!

DSC_1406

DSC_1409

DSC_1411

DSC_1412

DSC_1413

DSC_1416

DSC_1410

DSC_1402

The following is the official Tate Modern propaganda:

RED STAR OVER RUSSIA A REVOLUTION IN VISUAL CULTURE 1905–55

A dramatic visual history of Russia and the Soviet Union from 1905 to the death of Stalin – seen through the eyes of artists, designers and photographers

2017 marks the centenary of the October Revolution. Rebellion brought hope, chaos, heroism and tragedy as the Russian Empire became the Soviet Union, endured revolutions, civil war, famine, dictatorship and Nazi invasion. A new visual culture arose and transformed the fabric of everyday life.

The core of this exhibition comes from the extraordinary collection of photographer and graphic designer David King (1943–2016). He started his collection of over 250,000 items relating to this period while working for The Sunday Times Magazine in the 1970s. The collection was acquired by Tate in 2016.

This show is an opportunity to see the rare propaganda posters, prints and photographs collected by King – some bearing traces of state censorship. Including work by El Lissitzky, Gustav Klutsis, Dmitri Moor, Aleksandr Deineka, Nina Vatolina and Yevgeny Khaldei, it is a thrilling journey through a momentous period in world history.

Photographer Unknown, Preparing for May Day in the Railway Workers' Club 1929. Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate
Photographer Unknown, Preparing for May Day in the Railway Workers’ Club 1929. Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate
Aleksandr Rodchenko, USSR in Construction, Issue 8 1936, Journal, Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate
Aleksandr Rodchenko, USSR in Construction, Issue 8 1936, Journal, Purchased 2016. The David King Collection at Tate

Celebrating the 100th Anniversary of the Russian October Revolution (2017) – Trust in the Communist Party!

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

The USSR lives on in memory and in material fact. It collapsed from the combined pressures of Trotsky, Khrushchev, Gorbachev and Western capitalism. What the USSR represented – as the first Workers’ State – is a tremendously powerful psychological and physical image that serves as a rallying point for millions of oppressed peoples around the globe. The 1917 October Revolution will always be significant because it signalled the successful rising of the Working Class and the smashing of predatory capitalism! Although there is much lying and disinformation in the West about the USSR, nevertheless, the internet allows opportunities to study that by-pass the bourgeois educational facilities, and which allows individuals and groups to find more reliable and authentic sources of information. The Cold War lies are still very much in operation, but as time goes by, and the work of people like Grover Furr, Andrew Alexander and Alexander Werth (and many others), become better known, the wholesome truth about the USSR (and its vital importance for the evolution of humanity) will move ever more to the fore-front of general perception. This positive counter-swing is strengthened by the presence of the Collected Works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao (amongst others) being readily (and freely) available on the internet. As usual, the greatest challenges above and beyond the confrontation with predatory capitalism for the Communist Party is that of successfully countering Trotskyism (i.e. ‘pseudo-Socialism’), and the crippling forces of revisionism from the left. There is a wealth of legitimate proletariat literature available in the public domain which must be logically studied from a Scientific Socialist point of view. Even if certain ‘expedient’ compromises must be made with the Bourgeois State on the surface (due to prevailing socio-economic conditions), the true (and non-inverted) underpinnings of Marxist-Leninism must always serve as the dialectical ‘prime mover’ of any Communist Movement. The Working Class must always trust the Communist Party which is a collective expression of its proletariat ‘will’. The Communist Party came to power through a wave of Revolutionary activity in 1917 – and the same Communist Party exists throughout the world today, always representing and leading the ordinary people, and continuously agitating against the capitalist system. The ‘Communist Party’ in principle did not begin with the 1917 Russian Revolution, and did not end with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. It is an ongoing and unfolding process of historical materialism. Trust in the Communist Party and support it with all your proletariat being!

Joseph Stalin as Proletarian Fact

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

If an individual walks into an average book-shop in the UK, around 80%-90% of all books available pertaining to cover Soviet history, will not be worth the paper they are printed upon. This is because these books carry the preferred ‘capitalist’ interpretation of Soviet history, which whilst packaging its content as ‘history’, is in fact a tissue of lies. This is not a matter of opinion whereby this observation needs to be debated, but rather is a matter of provable fact. The preferred capitalist narrative is nothing but an ‘ahistorical’ exercise in Trotskyite ‘disinformation’, one that is easily dispelled through even a cursory attempt to establish the observable facts. A particular vitriol is reserved for the biographies of Joseph Stalin – which are by and large fictionalised diatribes containing no academic merit. The problem is that young or impressionable people who are genuinely seeking-out knowledge about the USSR and Joseph Stalin run into this wall of institutional lies and deceit. It is better to carry-out more indepth research before subjecting the human-mind to this kind of bourgeois brain-washing. Seek-out books and articles that expose people like Trotsky, Khrushchev and Orwell, and learn to discern the difference between a proletarian fact and a bourgeois lie. Learn to understand the Cold War mentality in the West, and its facade will come tumbling down. Dialectical truth can be found in the strangest of places (take Andrew Alexander’s ‘America and the Imperialism of Ignorance: US Foreign Policy Since 1945’, for instance), and when assessing the place of Joseph Stalin in world history it is logical to begin with his Collected Works (available ‘free’ online). This research must also coincide with a study of the collective psychology of the USA, which exposes its immature and violent nature. Remember that Joseph Stalin was a great Socialist leader who represented the Working Class in a very strong and robust manner – this explains why the capitalist West hates him, and seeks to sully his good historical reputation with bizarre lies delivered through the agency of rightwing mythology. Communists use logic and reason to progress society and to develop their characters – this is what Joseph Stalin did – and this is how a progressive student of history should behave. The lies about the USSR and Joseph Stalin must not be confronted with bourgeois sentimentalism, but rather countered with the strict use of proletarian fact. This is the manner in which Joseph Stalin handled an ever increasingly hostile USA and belligerent West under its control and influence. It is also the basis of the manner in which Joseph Stalin led the USSR in its decisive war against Nazi Germany. Do not be afraid of stating proletariat fact, after-all it is part of the process of establishing the truth. Of course, the capitalists and the Trotskyites will ‘knee-jerk’ respond with simply re-stating their lies – as if the exercise of the agency of ‘repetition’ somehow adds ‘truth’ and ‘gravitas’ to their fallacious arguments. In reality a Trotskyite lie only has to be exposed once, even if those brain-washed by Trotskyite ideology feel the need to ‘repeat’ that lie. Remember that capitalism and Trotskyism are actually ‘cult-mentalities’, within which people are psychologically and physically ‘trapped’. See this situation clearly for what it is, and relay this understanding to the Working Class. If dialectical truth can be firmly established, then the millions of words used by liars will come tumbling down – this is the nature of Scientific Socialism.

Chen Duxiu: How Trotskyism Infiltrated China

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Left: Chen Duxiu  (陈独秀) Right: Leon Trotsky

Author’s Note: Trotsky was causing trouble in Russia a long-time before the successful Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. He was a bourgeois political careerist, who associated himself with the Revolutionary left, whilst propagating distinctly ‘rightwing’ dogmas. Not only did he establish a ‘Communist Party’ in opposition to Lenin’s Bolshevik Movement years prior to the October Revolution, but it is also known that Trotsky received ample funding for his political intrigues from the International Zionist Movement (particularly from within the USA). The purpose for this bizarre blend of Revolutionary leftism and rightwing Zionist racism, appears to have been for the purpose of disrupting and over-throwing the old Czarist regime in Russia, whilst simultaneously sabotaging any Marxist-Leninist Movement that might emerge to fill the vacuum. This was probably in the service of the Zionists, who had their eyes on Russia as a ‘New Israel’. Trotsky’s deception and racism was identified by Lenin, and finally defeated in the USSR by Stalin, but it has survived in the world through its migration out of Russia, where it today masquerades as a ‘Socialist Movement’, which still refuses to condemn the racist Zionism perpetuated by the modern State of Israel. Chen Duxiu is an enigma who is suspected by a number of Chinese intellectuals to have been a ‘spy’ for Imperial Japan. This allegation stems from his time in Japan as a student, and has led many to assume that he positioned himself at key places within Chinese history, so as to cause the maximum damage and disruption to the Chinese Government and to Chinese culture. By associating himself with the early Marxist-Leninist Movement in China, he is considered one of the founders of the Communist Party of China (CPC). However, rather illogically, Chen Duxiu ideologically opposed and confronted the Soviet Union under both Lenin and Stalin, and refused to accept Mao Zedong’s Revolutionary ideas. He also refused to maintain the ‘alliance’ between the originally leftwing Kuo Ming Tang (KMT) and the CPC – and is considered historically responsible for the breaking of that alliance, and the rise of the rightwing Chiang Kai-Shek. Following Trotsky’s exile from the Soviet Union in 1929, Chen Duxiu found an outlet for his peculiar form of reactionary politics, and it is through his efforts that the ideas of Trotsky gained a foot-hold in China. The point is that Chen Duxui acted in a very ‘non-Chinese’ manner in his handling of political affairs, and this observation certainly gives credence to the allegation of him ‘spying’ for Japan. Whatever the case, when Trotsky called upon the Imperial Japanese to strive onward to victory in China – even Chen Duxiu was taken aback.  ACW 9.11.2017

Just as Leon Trotsky lead the international community of ‘Trotskyites’, Chen Duxiu (1879-1942) led the Chinese faction of this organisation. Although very much a minority movement within China, this faction was commonly known as the ‘Trotskyite Opposition’ (托洛茨基反对派 – Tuo Luo Ci Ji Fan Dui Pai). It had arisen in China during the early 1930’s in opposition to Joseph Stalin’s leadership of the Soviet Union, and acted in support of the exiled Leon Trotsky. Trotsky had been exiled from the Soviet Union in 1929 for the crime of ‘Treason’, and attempting to bring-down the USSR. His expulsion from the USSR marked the end of Trotsky’s direct power-struggle with Joseph Stalin for leadership of the Soviet Union, and the entering of a new international phase of anti-Soviet agitation, which saw Trotsky reveal his true bourgeois motivations. Whilst busy creating a ‘mirror’ organisation to oppose the legitimate International Communist Party (now administered by Stalin), in 1938 Trotsky bizarrely called for all his followers around the world to ‘co-operate’ with the forces of International Fascism – and in so doing – help destroy the Soviet Union. Although Mao Zedong was an ardent Marxist-Leninist, people like Chen Duxiu, however, defined their political position as being in opposition to the leadership of Joseph Stalin. This is why Chen Duxiu was the leader of the Chinese faction of Trotskyites, but how and why did he manage to acquire such a politically damaging and disruptive position?

Born in poverty, and later educated in Japan, Chen Duxiu was one of the key founders of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in 1921 – soon being elected as its first General Secretary. However, despite referring to himself as a ‘Marxist’, and an admirer of Lenin (and the Russian Revolution), Chen Duxiu opposed the concept of ‘Internationalism’ as advocated by the ‘Communist International’ (the ‘Comintern’, or international collective of Communist Parties from around the world, administered from Moscow), and did not agree with the principle of co-operating with the Soviet Union (either under Lenin or Stalin). In 1921, as General Secretary of the CPC, Chen Duxiu refused accept large sums of money (and other support) from the Soviet Union. Chen Duxiu also disagreed with the Comintern’s policy that insisted that the CPC co-operate with the Nationalists (KMT), and due to this disruptive and regressive attitude that split this alliance, Chen Duxiu was eventually stripped of the Leadership of the CPC in 1927. In 1929, the Chinese Warlord Zhang Xueliang annexed the Chinese Eastern Railway (under orders from the Nationalist Government of China). Prior to this, the Chinese Eastern Railway had been jointly administered by the USSR and the Chinese Government. The Soviet Red Army entered north-east China and swept away all Chinese military forces before it. At this time, the CPC called upon all Chinese Communists to ‘support’ the Soviet military action against the bourgeois Nationalist Government – but Chen Duxiu refused to heed this call. Instead, he voiced his opposition, and immediately assumed the ‘Trotskyite’ position of confronting and opposing the USSR at every-turn. The Soviets, however, were successful and its military victory secured a return to the joint administration of the Chinese Eastern Railway, and Chen Duxiu was expelled from the CPC (in 1929).

Between 1929 and 1931, Chen Duxiu pursued a purely Trotskyite political path, and actively campaigned to sabotage the CPC in all its work. This effort eventually led to Chen Daxiu assisting in the founding the ‘Leftist Opposition to the Communist Party of China’ (中国共产党左派反对派 – Zhong Guo Gong Chan Dang Zuo Pai Fan Dui Pai), an act which immediately attracted the attention of the exiled Trotsky. Indeed, Chen’s organisation facilitated Trotsky’s direct and disruptive interference within China’s domestic political situation, and between 1931 and 1945 undoubtedly contributed to the 60 million casualties China suffered in her battle against fascist Imperial Japan, and the Nationalist forces of Chiang Kai-Shek. The Japanese began to militarily agitate in the Manchurian area of north-east China from 1931 onwards, and this became all-out war in 1937. As the Imperial Japanese military forces raped and pillaged their way across China, Trotsky called for all Chinese people to ‘stop resisting’ the Japanese advance, and instead facilitate its progress. Although Chen Duxiu loyally followed Trotsky, and had implemented Trotsky’s call to resist the Nationalists and the CPC in equal measure, he stopped short of fully endorsing Trotsky’s policy of leaving the Chinese people defenceless in the face of brutal Japanese violence. Whereas Mao Zedong had formulated a method of mobilising and empowering the masses of peasants in his interpretation of Marxist-Leninist Thought, Chen Duxui steadfastly refused to accept this thinking. In an unusual twist of fate, Chen Duxui was eventually arrested by the government of the Shanghai International Settlement – an Anglo-American imperialist and colonial presence in China. It is ironic to think that Chen Duxiu’s deceptive Trotskyite activities would attract the negative attraction of the imperialist West – when after WWII – Trotskyism would be fully embraced by the capitalist West as the foundation of its (false) anti-Soviet Cold War rhetoric! Chen Duxui was arrested during October 1932, and handed over to the Nationalist Authorities. He was tried for generating ‘propaganda of a treasonous nature’, for which he was found ‘guilty’ in 1933, and sentenced to 13 years imprisonment. In 1937, he was released early and made statements appearing to now support the CPC and oppose the Japanese invasion of China. However, as he failed to condemn Trotsky, many within the CPC view him as a ‘traitor’ who could not be trusted. This attitude was compounded by the rumour that Chen Duxui may have been in the paid employment of the Japanese Military. Chen Duxiu died in 1942.

Chinese Language References:

http://view.news.qq.com/a/20140521/010848.htm

https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hans/陈独秀

 

 

USSR: Judicial Death Penalty (1917-1991)

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

‘The theoreticians of socialism have never denied the necessity for strict and consistent legal regulation of all aspects of political life. On the contrary, they have emphasised that the socialist state can function only on condition that there is perfect legislation and that the laws are observed by all officials and ordinary citizens, and by all organisations and institutions.’

(Vladimir Terebilov – The Soviet Court)

Ten days following the 1917 February Revolution (in early March), the Provisional Government abolished the judicial Death Penalty throughout Russia. This enactment was short-lived, however, as upon July 12th, 1917 (old style), the Provisional Government re-instated the Death Penalty to be used on any frontline troops refusing to follow orders. This was a response to the collapse of the earlier July Offensive, which saw a civilian government give-in to pressure from the military authorities. Lenin and the Bolsheviks immediately protested this reversal – stating that it was wrong to kill Russian soldiers just because they thought the war not to be in their best class interests. As the Bolsheviks had refused to participate in the Provisional Government, Lenin remained untainted by this return to oppressive Czarist methods. Lenin stated that this Death Penalty was obviously a weapon in the hands of the Bourgeois State which was used against the masses. It would be different, Lenin said, if the same Death Penalty was used against landowners and capitalists. Together with the Socialist Revolutionaries, Lenin and the Bolsheviks continuously agitated against the use of the judicial Death Penalty at the time in both civil and military society – but Lenin did state that the working class would defend itself whenever attacked by the bourgeoisie. From a Scientific Socialist point of view, a Socialist State might use the Death Penalty if it was under internal or external attack from the bourgeoisie, but would not otherwise use the Death Penalty. The history of the Soviet Union is the observation of the unwavering application of that policy. There is no double-standards, hypocrisy or misuse, as bourgeois historians would have the world believe. The Socialist Death Penalty is not religiously derived, and exists merely to remove a physical threat to the workers and their well-being. When a social condition arises whereby the bourgeoisie and its tainting elements no longer function in society is reached, then there would be no need for existence or use of a judicial Death Sentence.

It is an irony of history to observe that Joseph Stalin abolished the Death Penalty of the USSR in 1947, whilst the (Trotskyite) Nikita Khrushchev (whilst accusing Stalin of all kinds of imagined ‘excesses’) re-introduced it in 1954. Of course, many countries in the world have practised the judicial Death Penalty at various times throughout their histories, and many modern so-called ‘democratic’ countries – such as the US, Japan, India and Sri Lanka, etc – still adhere to the principle of judicial ‘death’. The judicial Death Penalty is applied to an individual where and when it has been legally ‘proven’ he or she has participated in actions that have broken the laws that attract the application of capital punishment. This is decided by judicial process involving (where applicable) military authorities, civil law enforcement agencies, official courts, juries and/or the conclusions of investigative committees. Once sentence is passed, the condemned individual concerned forfeits his or her life via the legally defined method of despatch. For the US ally of Saudi Arabia, this amounts to beheadings (carried-out in local car-parks) on Friday night, whilst in the US-devastated Afghanistan, the feudalistic practice of ‘stoning’ is still practised. The modern Zionist State of Israel possesses the facility of the ‘Death Sentence’ in its law – but prefers not to use it. Instead, the troops of this other ally of the US, routinely kill and wound unarmed Palestinian men, women and children on a daily basis, operating in the occupied lands of Palestine. It is only across the EU that the judicial Death Penalty is formally ‘banned’, although historically, many European countries had voluntarily given-up the practice prior to EU membership. Other than in Western Europe, it is clear to see that the judicial Death Sentence remains popular throughout the world, and in many countries that would otherwise consider themselves to be both culturally advanced and ‘civilised’.

During the October-November Russian Revolution, Lenin, acting through the auspices of the Soviet Government of Russia (i.e. the Second Congress of Soviets on November 7th [new style] 1917), abolished in its entirety, the old Czarist legal system (Decree 1). This was necessary because Russia’s backward and oppressive feudalistic society was encapsulated in laws that were hundreds, if not thousands of years old. This meant specifically, that the Czarist Death Penalty (which Lenin’s brother – Aleksandr Ulyanov – had been subjected to in 1887), was abolished. Therefore, the judicial Death Penalty was abolished within Revolutionary Russia, not as a special concession, but merely as an incidental effect of rendering null and void the legal code. This is an important distinction, as Lenin and the Bolsheviks did not apply an opposed morality to the principle of the Death Penalty when establishing a completely ‘new’ way of structuring human society. Of course, Karl Marx was opposed to the use of the Death Penalty within bourgeois countries – stating that the Bourgeois State had no right to harm his body in any way. On the other hand, Marx also stated, the working class possessed the right to defend itself against bourgeois aggression. This was exactly Lenin’s opinion – the Death Penalty should not be used by the bourgeoisie against the oppressed working class – and neither should it be used by the working class against the workers. However, as the working class has the right to ‘protect itself’ in all areas of existence, a Workers’ State could conceivably have the right to use the judicial Death Penalty against anyone deemed a ‘class enemy’. A ‘class enemy’ is anyone legally proven to be acting on behalf of the international bourgeoisie. This method of punishment is designed to counter the bourgeois habit of assassination, terror, and traitorous behaviour. Many bourgeois commentators (including Trotsky) who are antagonistic to Communism often mention these facts as if they have discovered (or revealed) a great hidden contradiction within Marxist thought, whilst simultaneously expressing their ignorance of Marxist thought, and the fact that the working class is under a continuous psychological, emotional and physical attack from the bourgeoisie. This anti-working class ‘violence’ is practised both within capitalist societies and between capitalist societies, and is designed to prevent the domestic and international working class from effectively ‘uniting’ and formulating methods of Revolution. Part of this systemic bourgeois oppression is the recourse to the judicial Death Sentence applied asymmetrically to the poorest sections of society, as it is these poorest areas of society that stand the most to gain from any Revolution.

Whilst WWI was brought to an end for Russia, the immense task of re-structuring society was commenced by the Bolsheviks. All foreign finance (and other assets) had been withdrawn from Russia by the West, soon to be followed by the insertion into Russia of troops from 14 capitalist countries (including the USA, UK, Japan, China, and Germany, etc). This large-scale invasion (known as the ‘Russian Civil War’) sought to destroy the Russian Revolution and restore Czarist rule. It is a little known fact that before the UK and Germany finished fighting one another in France, British and German soldiers fought side by side in Russia to end Bolshevism in early 1918. As much of the Russian territory had fallen under foreign domination at this time, and considering that the Western allies were encouraging terrorism, murder and sabotage behind Bolshevik lines, the Death Penalty was re-introduced in mid-1918. On January 17th, 1920, the Bolsheviks again abolished the Death Penalty, however, as Baron Wrangel was still active in Crimea, and the bourgeois Poles were advancing into the Ukraine, the Death Penalty was re-introduced on May 4th, 1920. This demonstrates how the Bolsheviks applied the Death Penalty purely upon practical grounds, and the ebb and flow of war-time conditions. The Death Penalty would be in effect in one way or another in the Soviet Union, until its abolishment in 1947. What has to be understood is that between 1917 and 1926, Revolutionary Russia had no formal legal code (with the Soviet Union not being founded until December 30th, 1922). Instead, the various Soviet bodies responsible for ensuring public safety through law and order, were advised by Lenin to make decisions on the ground in accordance with local conditions, and motivated by the spirit of Socialist thinking. This process was regulated with the formation of various legal codes all designed to eventually feed into a ‘new’ Soviet Constitution (which was ratified in 1926). This suggests that the principle of the Death Penalty was not necessarily intended to be a regular or permanent feature of Soviet judicial life, despite the fact that on May 17th, 1922, Lenin wrote to Commissar of Justice – DI Kurskii – suggesting that the Death Penalty be retained for ‘political’ crimes.

Unlike previous epochs within Russian history, Lenin demanded that all minors and pregnant women be permanently ‘exempt’ from any instigation of the Death Penalty, and that this sentence should not be routinely resorted to, but be part of a selection of possible punishments available, depending upon the severity of the crime in question. As the bourgeois class continuously advocated death and destruction at every turn toward any Socialist Movement, the retaining of the Death Penalty within the USSR was viewed by Lenin as an act of judicial self-defence. As the Soviet State had no intention of engaging in the cruel and unnecessary practice of prolonging ordinary judicial executions, the quickest method of despatch was considered ‘shooting’. Within the military this could involve a traditional ‘firing squad’, but in the case of civilians, a single shot to the back of the head (whilst sat on a chair) was the preferred method. Unlike in the bourgeois West, Death Sentences in the Soviet Union (when carried-out), were administered quickly after sentencing to reduce stress and suffering for the condemned. However, the kind of crimes that attracted the Death Penalty were not ‘ordinary’, but purely political in nature and involved sabotage, terrorism, assisting the bourgeoisie, treason, counter-revolution, armed uprising, aiding foreign governments against the USSR, undermining State institutions, assisting the Czarist regime, crimes committed against another Workers’ State, inducing a foreign attack, espionage, anti-Soviet propaganda and agitation, wrecking, unauthorised return from exile, terrorist acts against foreign officials, and using religious prejudice to over-throw the government. As can be seen, none of these categories generally applied to everyday ‘civilian’ life in the USSR, and suggests that for ordinary and law-abiding Soviet citizens, the Death Penalty did not exist in practice. When ‘civil’ crimes were committed (including murder and rape), long-term prison sentences coupled with hard labour were usually the preferred methods of punishment, although in 1954 (and possibly in mimicry of the bourgeois West), Khrushchev’s legal reforms extended the existing Soviet Death Penalty legislation to include ‘pre-meditated murder’. This demonstrates Khruschev’s muddled thinking, and how he confused ‘civil’ crimes with ‘political’ crimes.

Following the end of WWII, and the NKVD crushing of the neo-Nazi Movement in the Ukraine, Joseph Stalin decided that the time was now right for the Soviet Union to completely abolish the judicial Death Penalty for ALL categories of crimes. However, as the US initiated its highly aggressive Cold War policy at around this time, an exception to this abolition was made in January 1950, which stated that those convicted as being traitors, spies and saboteurs would be subject to the judicial Death Penalty. Following Stalin’s death in 1953, the rise of the Trotskyite Nikita Khrushchev led to a reactionary period in Soviet legal history where the clear thinking of Lenin and Stalin was replaced with the bourgeois thinking of a counter-revolutionary.  In 1954, Khrushchev re-introduced the judicial Death Penalty and this remained in-place until the collapse of the USSR in 1991. Under Nikita Khrushchev, the clear line established by Lenin and Stalin regarding the difference between ‘civil’ and ‘political’ crimes was ‘blurred’, with the Death Penalty being used to infiltrate Soviet civilian law – a situation Lenin never intended.

Russian Language Reference:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Смертная_казнь_в_России

English Language Reference:

On he Road to Communism: By RE Kanet & I Volgyes (1972), University Press of Kansas

The Soviet Court: By Vladimir Terebilov, (1986), Progress Publishers

 

 

 

Expunging Trotsky from ‘Socialist’ History – a Dialectical Necessity

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Even before he was expelled for treasonous activities from the Soviet Union in 1929, Trotsky’s distorted version of ‘Socialism’ had attracted the attention of the anti-Soviet ideologues in the USA. Indeed, there is much evidence to suggest that after WWII, what had by then become referred to as ‘Trotskyism’ was used as the basis for the US anti-Soviet (and anti-Communist) Cold War rhetoric. This is why most people are confused by ‘Trotskyism’ and the many organisations that follow his anti-Soviet ideology – whilst still insisting on calling themselves ‘Socialist’. Trotsky, for many, is known the wrong way around back to front, and in many ways ‘ahistorically’. What must be understood is that Trotsky was not a true Revolutionary, but rather a political ‘opportunist’ of the worst kind. He temporarily aligned himself with Revolutionary Movements to further his own political career, and as a means for him to attain influence and personal power at any cost. In this regard, he certainly was not a Marxist or Marxist-Leninist, and had no theoretical interest in those ideologies.

Trotsky was criticised by Lenin – and later by Stalin – for continuously failing to understand and interpret history from a Marxist perspective. This led to Trotsky attempting to undermine the hard-earned Soviet System from within, by advocating a thoroughly ‘bourgeois’ counter-revolution, with himself at the helm. For this treachery, he (and many of his followers) were expelled from the Soviet Union in 1929 – but a number of his followers remained behind ‘undetected’ within the Soviet System to spread their particular brand of ‘unrest’ and ‘discontent’. Many, as the years went by, attempted acts of sabotage against the Soviet State, destroying technology and machinery, and interfering with scientific research. Some even attempted to undermine the morale of the Red Army, and turn its officers against the Soviet State it had helped to build.

As Trotsky became the darling of the West, he attracted a great attention from the supporters of capitalism – which included many members of the rightwing and far-right political establishment in America, Europe and Asia.  This inspired Trotsky to actively call for all of his supposedly ‘Socialist’ supporters to enter into an alliance with Nazi Germany and fascist Imperialist Japan in 1938, and work to over-throw the Soviet Union AND the liberal democracies of the West! A year before (in 1937), many of Trotsky’s ‘sleeper cells’ in the USSR had become active, and were immediately identified by the NKVD and ‘neutralised’. This policing action was necessary to prevent what would today be interpreted as a comprehensive ‘terrorist’ attack on a sovereign government and the country it administers. If Trotsky had been successful, the Soviet Union would have collapsed prior to WWII, and the Red Army would not have existed to confront and eventually destroy the military forces of Nazi Germany.

As it is now the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution (2017), it is important that Trotsky is nolonger viewed as a legitimate ‘Revolutionary’, and that his path of ideology (which he and his followers deceptively term ‘Socialism’), not be associated with either Marxism-Engelsism, or Marxism-Leninism. Trotsky’s work must be historically ‘re-oriented’ and removed from the glittering history of Revolutionary Struggle, and placed firmly within the realms of capitalist-supporting, bourgeois counter-revolutionary thought. Trotsky’s duplicity cost the lives of immeasurable numbers of people due to the Nazi German invasion of the Soviet Union – despite this beginning a year after Trotsky’s death. Presumably Hitler was of the opinion that Trotsky’s followers had carried-out enough damage to the infrastructure of the USSR, and that the time was now ripe to invade. Of course, the distorted history of the capitalist West blames all this on Stalin – as Trotsky demanded. Indeed, in 1925, just one year after the death of Lenin, the US Time magazine already began to exhibit the interfering-style of developed US Cold War rhetoric – by implying that Trotsky (and his ‘distorted’ Socialism) should now run the USSR – over Joseph Stalin. The myth here, is that Soviet citizens did not vote. In fact, ‘voting’ in a proletariat society is a central activity to every citizen’s life, but of course, proletariat democracy is not liberal democracy, and does not favour or privilege the bourgeoisie. The point continuously omitted in Trotskyite accounts of the USSR, is that from 1924 until his death in 1953, Comrade Stalin was continuously re-elected into office – despite trying to resign ‘twice’ after 1945. The citizenry of the USSR was organised around the trade union model, where from lowest to the highest in society – everyone voted for representatives on numerous committees. This organisational model did allow the bourgeoisie to manifest and/or exercise power within a Socialist society. Trotsky wanted to reverse this Revolutionary change, and allow the resurgence of capitalism in the USSR, and along with it the predatory capitalist system.

The very idea that Stalin had millions, or hundreds of thousands sent to the gulags – and/or executed – is an ‘ahistorical’ lie perpetuated by Leon Trotsky and his followers. Alexander Werth was a British BBC correspondent who was of Russian parentage. He was with the Red Army virtually throughout the entirety of the ‘Great Patriotic War’ (1941-1945), and was allowed at the frontline. During August, 1944, Alexander Werth was with the Red Army when it liberated the Majdanek Concentration Camp in Poland – built by the Nazi Germans. His initial reports to the BBC in London were the first to reach the allies regarding the Nazi German holocaust of the Jews and other minorities. Winston Churchill, still looking for ways of absolving the Hitlerite regime, had Werth’s reports quashed – stating that they were Soviet lies about Nazi Germany. As a result, Werth spent much of his later life repudiating US and UK anti-Soviet propaganda, proving it to be ‘untrue’. In 1959, Werth visited the Soviet Union once again, and met-up with a number of American friends who lived and worked in the USSR. As incredible as it seems, and despite the rabid anti-Soviet propaganda in the US, American people still travelled to the USSR, with some making their homes there. When Werth asked one or two prominent Americans about the supposed ‘purges’ of the late 1930’s, he was usually met with laughter! The general consensus was that a Trotskyite plot was uncovered that involved around 10,000 traitors. Many were sent to prison, whilst a minority were executed for treason. There were not hundred of thousands, or millions of people involved – Trotsky was just not that popular in the USSR – where life was very good for most people!

The Nazi German holocaust cost the lives of around 11 million people (6 million Jews, and 5 millions of other ethnicities, political and sexual orientations, the disabled, and anyone who disagreed with fascism). Meanwhile, Imperial Japan is estimated to have caused around 60 million deaths in China, a figure that does not include those killed throughout other parts of Asia by Japanese troops. When the Nazi German forces invaded the Soviet Union, between 27-40 million casualties were suffered (both military and civilian). The conquered Ukraine area of the USSR saw some of the worst Nazi German excesses of the holocaust – aided and abetted by a minority of rightist Ukrainians – the political (and in some cases ‘biological’) descendents of whom comprise the contemporary ‘Madan’ neo-Nazi government of Western Ukraine. All this anti-Socialist death and destruction is exactly the political policies that Trotsky advised his followers to embrace in 1938. A question worth asking is why the Trotskyite Movement today, remains entirely ‘free’ of any criticism from the bourgeois press. The answer, of course, is that the Trotskyites support capitalism, and are not averse to fascism, or fascist atrocity.

 

Distorting Soviet History – The Case of Soviet Physicist Matvei Bronstein (1906-1938)

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Soviet Physicist Matvei Bronstein

In 1953, the US Government executed Julius and Ethel Rosenberg for being Members of the Communist Party of the USA (a legal entity then as now), and by extension, because they were thought to be spies working for the Soviet Union. The then President of the United States offered the Rosenberg’s a deal whereby if they renounced their Communist beliefs, and ‘admitted’ their guilt – their respective Death Sentences (via the electric chair) would be commuted to ‘life imprisonment’ – both steadfastly refused, and they died within minutes of one another on June 19th, 1953. The mainstream media of the democratic West remained ‘silent’, and was generally supportive of a US that had just suffered numerous military defeats at the hands of Communist China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA), as it expelled the US-led Western forces from North Korea. Of course, Socialists had been attacked, maimed and killed in the US before, but following the crushing Soviet victory over Nazi Germany during WWII, the US Government, controlled as it is by the demands of big business, had developed a hysteria and paranoia against the Communist Bloc, the like of which could easily be described as a ‘group psychosis’. The capitalists that run America feared their own working class, and were afraid that it would rise-up and sweep away their corruption and class privilege. As a means to counter any working class grassroots movement that looked toward the Soviet Union for inspiration and perhaps material support, the US Government initiated a Cold War ‘disinformation’ campaign designed to turn the Western working class firmly away from any association with the USSR. The basic premise was a simple sleight of hand and inversion of thought; as the Soviet Union viewed itself as the ‘Socialist’ conquering force over Nazi German fascism, the US ideologues generated the lie that there was no difference between the brutal Soviet Union (an ally of the US during WWII), and the maniacal Nazi Germany. Ironically, the country that the US had dropped two atomic bombs upon at the end of WWII – fascist Japan – was quickly ‘rehabilitated’ and suddenly packaged to the world as America’s new best friend.

This all has to be mentioned, because another key aspect of Soviet misrepresentation is to mis-report segments of Soviet history with no historical context whatsoever – as if the Soviet Union was so corrupt that it possessed the ability to exist outside of space and time! Much of how the Soviet Union is interpreted prior to WWII, actually emerged as part of a continuously unfolding anti-Soviet Cold War rhetoric, manufactured after WWII. The false impression is that the post-WWII attitude of the US toward the USSR was exactly the same pre-WWII attitude of the US toward the USSR – an illusion that only holds true if the entirety of the WWII collaboration between the US and USSR is completely omitted from the historical record. Another important issue is the embracing by the West of Leon Trotsky and his peculiar form of collaboration with capitalism which he termed ‘Socialism’ (but never ‘Communism’) following his expulsion from the USSR in 1929. Trotsky sought to destroy the Soviet Union and instigate a system of bourgeois-left leaning capitalism in its place. Western Governments liked this form of ‘Trotskyite’ deception, and encouraged its presence throughout (and within) the Union and Labour Movements of the West. Trotskyism is essentially an anti-Marxist-Leninism ideology, and was viewed by the Western Governments as a preferred alternative for the workers to follow – due to its anti-Soviet underpinnings. From 1929 until his death in 1940, Leon Trotsky received all kinds of support from Western Governments in a bid to undermine the Soviet Union. This included the establishing of ‘cells’ within the Soviet Union linked not only to the Western Democracies, but also with Nazi Germany and fascist Italy. Trotskyism was (and still is) a counter-revolutionary and anti-workers’ movement, that permeates the Labour Movement, and which psychologically and physically leads workers away from Socialist Revolution, and toward a continued collaboration with capitalism and its oppressive forces throughout society. Trotskyism destroys Labour Movements from within, and is designed to completely disempower the working class on every front.

In 1938, at a Conference representing his ‘Socialist’ ideology, Trotsky called for the victory of the forces of World Fascism over not only the Soviet Union, but also over the Western Democracies as well! In his deluded thinking, this victory of Adolf Hitler would be good for the well-being and freedom of the International Working Class! In the case of Matvei Bronstein – a Soviet physicist specialising in quantum mechanics and nuclear power – he became embroiled with a Trotskyite group operating in the USSR that had direct links to Nazi Germany. As usual, the English wikipedia page is inaccurate and missing vital information, but steadfastly supports the US anti-Soviet position. The Russian language wikipedia page has more official information, but still omits ‘what’ Matvei Bronstein had been found guilty of. The English wikipedia page portrays Bronstein ‘ahistorically’ as a lovable ‘genius’ who spent his spare-time writing children’s books. The implication is that his execution was unjust and an act of barbarism. The Russian Language wikipage – although lacking a crucial piece of information – does provide the following ‘historical’ details:

‘Arrested on August 6, 1937 in Kiev, in his parents’ house, and transported to Leningrad. Included in the firing list “Leningrad region” on February 3, 1938, approved by the signatures of Stalin, Voroshilov, Molotov, Kaganovich.
February 18, 1938 sentenced by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR under the chairmanship of Corveneurist Matulevich to be shot under Article 58-8-11 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR – was shot on the same day. Presumably buried in the Levashovskaya wasteland, where L. Chukovskaya in the 1990’s installed a monument. He was rehabilitated posthumously by order No. 44-028 603/56 of the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR of May 9, 1957.’

Bronstein was ‘rehabilitated posthumously’ by Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev who was himself a Trotskyite. What surprised me was that Bronstein’s Death Sentence was tested and approved by ‘four’ different Soviet legal departments – Stalin’s signature being added last. I had to look in other Russian language sources to discover exactly ‘why’ this action was taken against Bronstein by the Soviet State. Six months had elapsed since his arrest and trial, and every indication is that this was a thorough investigation. Bronstein, of course, experienced every assistance and freedom the Soviet State could give prior to his arrest, and it was known that he had contact with Niel Bohr – the Danish physicist – who is often portrayed in Western literature as opposing Nazism, but Denmark as a nation openly collaborated with Nazi Germany and did not resist the Nazi invasion of 1940 etc, but this association is not the reason Bronstein was arrested. Interestingly, the English wikipedia (designed in the US) omits all details of the trial, whereas the Russian (modern) wikipedia text omits the following (crucial) line of information which explains ‘why’ Bronstein was arrested, tried and executed:

‘Active participation in a counter-revolutionary, fascist-terrorist organization.’

(активное участие в контрреволюционной фашистской террористической организации)

Another Russian language text adds even more information:

‘According to the indictment of January 24, 1938, as part of his “practical anti-Soviet work” the scientist “prepared terrorist acts” and carried-out harmful activities “in the field of subsoil and water resources exploration.”‘

‘Согласно обвинительному заключению от 24 января 1938 года, в своей «практической антисоветской работе» ученый «готовил террористические акты» и вредил «в области разведки недр и водного хозяйства». ‘

Writing in the UK in 2017, I can say that I was not present during these times, and have no way of knowing whether Bronstein was ‘guilty’ or not. Furthermore, like Karl Marx, I disagree with the judicial Death Sentence, whilst equally recognising that the working class has a right to defend itself. The British BBC correspondent Alexander Werth (who was of Russian parentage), spent many years in the USSR, and dedicated much of his later years to providing good quality, first-hand accounts of life in the Soviet Union. Obviously, almost by default, his work continuously counters the false US anti-Soviet propaganda – proving it wrong at every turn. Even Americans living in the USSR in the 1940’s and 1950’s stated that there was no ‘great purge’, and neither were millions of people sent to gulags. Instead, it was admitted that there was perhaps around 10,000 people arrested throughout the USSR in the late 1930’s, with only a small percentage receiving the Death Sentence for spying or collaborating with Nazi Germany, etc. From what I am told by Russian colleagues, it is suspected that Bronstein was preparing to hand-over his work on nuclear studies to a ‘fascist’ enemy – thought to be Nazi Germany.

From the viewpoint of US anti-Soviet propaganda – which a priori assumes the utter corruption of the Soviet State at every turn – why was it considered necessary to ‘omit’ Bronstein’s criminal charge from Western narratives about his life? The English-language wikipedia is a good barometer of US political opinion, as its pages are ‘edited’ to keep this often inaccurate encyclopaedia very much representative of America’s anti-Socialist position. This bias can be seen in the racist attitude employed by wikipedia toward Communist China and North Korea, and its continuous censoring of any critique of the Zionist State of modern Israel. It is interesting that the wikipedia editors chose not to include Bronstein’s criminal charge in their general anti-Soviet narrative.Why would they fail to include a charge, if they thought the charge itself was unjust? Surely the inclusion of such a charge would work in favour of their anti-Soviet cause? The only viable reason I can see for omitting Bronstein’s criminal charge, is that the US Establishment does not want the general reader to know about it. If this is the case, then why would the US Establishment not want the general reader to know ‘exactly’ what Bronstein was charged with? Could it be that Bronstein’s charge can be easily proven to be ‘true’ by accessing other historical records? Or could it include the fact that US espionage was behind Bronstein’s collaboration with fascism? Whatever the reasons may be, it is obvious that in the case of Bronstein, the US Establishment does not want his charge to be widely known.

Finally, whilst at Leningrad University (from 1923-1929), Matvei Bronstein made friends with three other people who would go on to become well-known Soviet scientists. One of these was named ‘Georgiy Gamov’. Despite having a privileged lifestyle and career as a Soviet physicist, Gamov sought to ‘defect’ to the capitalist West at his earliest convenience. This he did (with his wife) in 1933 – after two years of continuous effort. He then ingratiated himself with the Western (capitalist) Establishment, immediately sharing all his previously confidential Soviet science with the enemies of Socialism. His work, which involved Cosmology, quantum tunneling and molecular genetics, was then integrated into the capitalist ‘scientific’ narrative, giving the false impression that ‘greed’ had triumphed over egalitarianism. It is interesting, from a historical point of view, that Bronstein was associated with Gamov. Two of Bronstein’s other friends at the time were Dmitri Ivanenko and Lev Landau, both of whom went on to have glittering scientific careers in the USSR, and remain loyal to the Socialist cause.

English Language Reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matvei_Petrovich_Bronstein

Russian Language Reference:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Бронштейн,_Матвей_Петрович

http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/rinagit/post298964829

http://polit.ru/news/2016/12/02/bronshtein/

Socialist Action (社會主義行動 ): Beware of Trotskyite Racism & Corruption in Hong Kong (PRC)!

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

During the run-up to the UK handing-back the colony of Hong Kong to the People’s Republic of China in 1997, the British imperialists demanded that China agree to not making any sweeping and/or systemic political reforms for 50 years. This agreement has not prevented a natural shift in education, business, culture and political allegiance toward the Mainland Chinese government, but it has meant that the disruptive and exploitative forces of liberalism and capitalism have been able to retain an imperialist foot-hold on the island. The point of this, or so the British thought, was that colonial influence could be continued to be exercised in this part of China, with the intention of eventually bringing down the Communist Party of China (CPC) and ending its Revolutionary governance of Mainland China – replacing Socialist Revolution with a capitalist counter-revolution. This would be disastrous for the Chinese people, as it would turn Mainland China into one gigantic Western colony, and the Chinese people into the slaves of US-style free market economics and liberal democracy.  Obviously, this backward step is not likely to happen, as the ordinary Chinese people are now self-determining and building an advanced and modern society premised upon the thinking of Marxist-Leninism and Scientific Socialism.

It is also true, however, that the US, UK and EU use Taiwan and Hong Kong as a potential spring-board to politically ‘destabilise’ Communist China. The idea is simple in design, create a ‘fifth column’ of pro-capitalist insurgents in these areas and package their preference for ‘greed’ as a heart-felt call for ‘liberal democracy’. This strategy is aided and abetted in the West by the propagation of an insidious anti-China racism, and such Western generated pseudo-cultural entities as the Falun Gong Cult and the Pro-Tibetan Movement. Racism is the foundation of these movements, with White Europeans pulling the strings somewhere in the murky background. These movements are merely parodies of Chinese culture, and are designed to keep the poorly educated and exploited masses in the West from understanding modern ‘Communist’ China, and striving to make Revolutionary links and connections, In other words, the Western capitalist powers do not want a Communist Revolution spreading from China to the West and freeing all the workers! To prevent this, the average European worker must be kept ignorant and brain-washed against Communist China. China’s good reputation must be continuously sullied and presented as corrupt. Communist China has to be presented as just another ‘Nazi German’ regime that invades other countries, violates Human Rights, progresses economically through the use of sweat shops, oppresses women, brutalises children, and retains its political power through military force. It is interesting to consider that these ‘capitalist’ misrepresentations of Communist China ARE EXACTLY the same criticisms levelled at China by the bourgeois Trotskyite Movement! This demonstrates that the  bourgeois Trotskyite Movement is nothing more than a capitalist stooge masquerading as a ‘Socialist’ movement.

Whilst searching the Chinese-language internet (on Google), I came across ‘Socialist Action’ (社會主義行動 – She Hui Zhu Hui Xing Dong), primarily through a ‘fake’ Chinese-language wikipedia page that has not been generated from within the Mainland of China, and does not exist on ‘Baidu’ – the mainland China, Chinese-language internet search-engine. The US is behind the creation of a number of ‘mirroring’ Chinese-language wikipedia pages that are designed to convey anti-China racism, and anti-Communist propaganda. The Trotskyite ‘Socialist Action’ entry is just one of many such pages, but its central message is pro-capitalist and anti-Communist. The only element of falsehood and prejudice that it adds to the pro-capitalist critique of modern China is the false allegation that Stalinism was a diversion away from the true spirit of Marxist-Leninism, and that therefore, Mao Zedong (the Communist founder of modern China), as an admirer of Joseph Stalin, perpetuated a ‘corrupt’ dictatorship upon the people of China. This is exactly the same racially motivated and philosophically flawed message that ALL Trotskyite so-called ‘Socialist’ groups in the West perpetuate and propagate against China. This is inaccordance with Leon Trotsky’s bourgeois background, and his preference for co-operation with the forces of capitalism. This false wiki-page states that ‘Socialist Action’ started within Mainland China in 2009 – before its magazine was ‘banned’ and the movement forced to relocate to Hong Kong. This is untrue – there are no ‘Trotskyite’ movements in Mainland China because every Chinese person understands that Trotsky was a racist who held profoundly anti-Chinese attitudes (as expressed throughout his works). The Chinese people would never look to a White racist for political liberation and support, particularly as the Chinese people are already free from the oppression of White capitalism and White imperialism.

False Chinese Language Wikipedia Page:

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/社会主义行动

USSR: Institute for the Study of Buddhist Culture (1928)

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Author: Stcherbatskay F.I. – Title: Theory of knowledge and logic according to the teachings of later Buddhists. Part 1: Dharmakirti’s “Textbook of Logic” with Dharmottara interpretation.

The Soviet Institute for the Study of Buddhist Culture (INSBC) was first proposed in 1927 as a coordinated academic project by scholar FI Stcherbatsky, and supported by his fellow academics SF Oldenburg and MI Tubyansky – all of whom professed an in-depth interest in Buddhist thought.  On April 4th, 1928, at the 7th meeting of the Department of Humanities of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, FI Stcherbatsky reported that the Council of People’s Commissars (responsible for the creation, development and function of Academic Institutions within the Socialist State), had formally approved the establishment of the Institute for the Study of Buddhist Culture (a decision included in the Decree of the Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR dated March 13, 1928 – entitled “On the Composition of Scientific Institutions of the Academy of Sciences USSR”) and discussed the desirability of taking measures to immediately start the organizational work of academically developing the Institute. When discussing the report, it was supposed to FI Stcherbatsky that he assume the temporary duties of the Director of the Institute (a post he accepted and held between 1928-1930). During its academic activity of developing a sound interpretation and understanding of Buddhist philosophy and practice throughout the Soviet Union (and the world), the INSBC organized a number of important scientific expeditions, and produced many ground-breaking papers, books and journals, etc.. In 1930, the INSBC was structurally incorporated into the Institute of Oriental Studies, as part of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR.

Russian Language Source Article:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Институт_буддийской_культуры

Институт буддийской культуры (ИНБУК) был создан как скоординированный проект, предложенный академиком Ф. И. Щербатским совместно с академиком С. Ф. Ольденбургом и М. И. Тубянским в 1927 году. «4 апреля 1928 года на VII заседании Отделения гуманитарных наук Академии наук СССР Ф. И. Щербатской доложил об утверждении Советом Народных Комиссаров в составе Академических учреждений Института по Изучению Буддийской Культуры (Постановление СНК СССР от 13 марта 1928 года “О составе научных учреждений Академии Наук СССР”) и о желательности принять меры к началу организационных работ Института. При обсуждении доклада было положено просить Ф. И. Щербатского взять на себя временно исполнение обязанностей Директора. За время своей деятельности ИНБУК организовал ряд научных экспедиций. В 1930 году ИНБУК структурно был включён в состав Института востоковедения АН СС

 

 

%d bloggers like this: