What is communism? Its definition, moral code, ideas, principles. What is All Common Communism?

People who grew up and were educated during the Soviet years do not need to be explained what communism is. This is a socio-economic formation in which everyone strives to do everything they can for society, and at the same time receives all the material and spiritual benefits that they want. For 74 years, a large-scale experiment took place in our country, the goal of which was to build a society of universal equality. Similar attempts have been made in many other countries.

Marxism as a science

The practical construction of communism began immediately after October 1917 (old style). Before this, theoretical study of methods and goals was carried out, and it continued during the years of dominance of the most advanced ideology in the world. The “Manifesto of the Communist Party” (1848), composed by Marx and Engels, listed in detail all the injustices of the capitalist system and indicated the method of combating them. The leading role in this process was assigned to the proletariat, as the most conscious and united class. Subsequently, Marxism itself became the subject of study; first, a few adherents, and then, after the revolution, entire institutions understood the intricacies of the “science of all sciences.” In universities, students were taught scientific communism. This was supposed to bring closer the bright moment of achieving universal justice, after which there was nowhere to move.

Has it already happened?

But once upon a time, at the dawn of humanity, it already existed. In prehistoric tribes, everyone enjoyed equal rights, the leader was elected in a completely central democratic manner, they strived for survival together, and divided the spoils according to needs. This social structure was designated by the historical and sociological term “primitive communism.” This did not mean that it was necessary to return to the era of stone axes and cave life; on the contrary, the fact of the existence of such a system in the past corrected Hegelian dialectics in the aspect of the “spiral of development.” If people already lived once, distributing goods jointly and fairly, what could prevent the establishment of similar orders at a different, higher level of science, technology and technology? This is how the first Marxists reasoned. Perhaps they somewhat idealized the primitive communal system.

Phases of communism

Humanity, according to Marx and his followers, changed various formations in a certain sequence in the process of its development. Feudalism was replaced by capitalism, monarchies were supplanted by republican rule, and then the proletariat inevitably emerged. After the emergence of the working class, the bourgeoisie was already doomed; it itself raised its own executioners and gravediggers. Next came the turn of the socialist revolution, in which, as Marxist V.I. Ulyanov (aka Lenin) determined, the reluctance of the lower classes to live in the old way entered into a kind of resonance with the inability of the upper classes to maintain the status quo. But communism could not come immediately. This was hampered by many inertial phenomena, namely private property instincts, backward national identity and even the institution of family. For universal socialization it was necessary to overcome all these atavisms. And the production base must be created in such a way that it will be possible to distribute everything and everyone in abundance for free. In general, for subsequent generations a task was formulated, called the “triune” (J.V. Stalin, “Questions of Leninism”, 1930). And the period of its implementation was called socialism, after which communism was supposed to come directly. This time has been somewhat delayed.

Sometimes there is a military man

Revolutionary phenomena were accompanied by devastation. This word means mass destruction of people and their property. Since market self-regulation ceased to operate due to the destruction of the economic foundations of Russia, the new authorities began to pursue a policy of war communism. This meant that all the material goods and human resources available at that time were at the disposal of the proletarian state, whose bodies carried out their distribution. Trade was prohibited and declared speculation, all citizens were obliged to work forcibly, receiving a standard ration (there were others for the leadership, according to categories). Money as such has lost not only its payment function, but also all meaning, however, temporarily. The peasants were subjected to food rationing, in other words, everything was taken from them. During the Civil War of 1918-1921, according to the authors of the book “History of the CPSU,” it was the policy of war communism that was necessary. This monstrous time ended after the Kronstadt uprising. Then the NEP was introduced.

Old New Politics as a Temporary Departure

There was actually nothing new in the New Economic Policy. Allowing limited private initiative under the slogan “Get rich!” became a forced measure designed to “let off the accumulated steam” of popular indignation, which threatened the very existence of Soviet power. At the same time, the creation of an industrial and energy base continued for the further spread of Marxism to more and more countries. The leaders of the RSFSR, and after 1922 of the USSR, were aware that as long as the capitalist encirclement existed, it was impossible to build communism. This provision was recorded in many party documents. There were only two options. Either the capitalists of all countries will unite and suppress the sprouts of a new society in a single country, or vice versa, socialism will win. In any case, war was inevitable.

To the current generation

Communism has been given many definitions. To the Leninist formula “communism is Soviet power plus electrification” in the fifties, the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee N.S. Khrushchev added one more term, chemicalization. By that time, the world socialist system had already been created, uniting many countries on different continents, Victory had been won over Nazi Germany and its allies, significant achievements in the field of space research and the arts had been demonstrated, and socialism had been declared finally built. Communism is the highest phase in the development of social relations. The end of its construction was announced at the XXII Congress of the CPSU and even the approximate date of the offensive was named. "Current Generation" was in 1980. But communism never came.

The Triune Challenge

The number “3” has always been in our special regard. Three heroes, the father had three sons, the Far Far Away Kingdom, the Holy Trinity... Theorists of scientific communism did not ignore it either. The task of building a fundamentally new society consisted of three equally important points. Firstly, about the earthly. While residents of the socialist camp compared their life with the living conditions of workers in developed capitalist countries (they didn’t want to compare with backward ones) and complained about the constant shortage of many goods, low wages and miserable pensions, some advantages (and, by the way, they existed) could only be broadcast from high stands. In a sense, the policy of war communism is the first attempt, at the cost of incredible efforts, to overcome the decline in production that arose after the Civil War. And without the successful development of the material base, it is impossible to talk about progress at all. This time.

The second part of the triune task was to create some kind of special relations in society, in which the very idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe possibility of mutual exploitation would be disgusting to all its members. And if the development of the material sphere seemed problematic, then the socio-economic aspect was much more complicated.

And the third, main problem seemed the most difficult. A new person was needed. Where can you get it if everyone around you, even very young people, is already hopelessly old? The communists had an answer to this question: “Educate!” We developed pedagogical methods and defended dissertations. Did not work out.

Was it possible?

And today there is an opinion that the idea itself is not bad, one might say good, but its implementation is unsuccessful. Now, if in 1937 the Leninist guard had not been exterminated, or there had been no war, or Khrushchev would not have planted the Arctic with corn, or Trotsky would have taken the helm... But Lev Davydovich had his own ideas about what a proletarian state should be, and according to Compared to them, Stalin's methods look very soft. So, in particular, he proposed to recruit the entire population of the country to work in the labor armies, that is, in fact, to maintain permanent military communism in the country until the complete victory of the world revolution.

This definition is quite suitable for the actions of Pol Pot, and Mao, and Enver Hoxha, and many other figures who went down in history as outstanding fanatics. There were also softer regimes, with “human faces,” but the more they softened, the more they moved away from their cherished goal, becoming ordinary revisionists. After all, the main thing that distinguishes a true communist is a complete rejection of private ownership of the means of production. In today's "red" China there are hundreds of thousands of private enterprises...

1. When and where did the first communists appear? What was the name of their organization?

The first international communist organization was the Union of Communists, founded in 1847 by K. Marx and F. Engels. The “Union of Communists” proclaimed as its main goals “the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, the rule of the proletariat, the destruction of the old bourgeois society based on class antagonism and the founding of a new society, without classes and without private property.” The main goals and objectives of the international communist movement received more specific expression in the famous “Manifesto of the Communist Party” (1848).

Members of the "Communist League" took an active part in the German revolution of 1848-1849, proving themselves to be the most consistent fighters for the unity and democratization of the country. The main printed tribune of the communists at this time became the Neue Rhenish Newspaper published by K. Marx and F. Engels. After the defeat of the revolution and the process against the UK, inspired by the Prussian government, the union ceased to exist, announcing its dissolution on November 17, 1852.

The "Union of Communists" became the first form of international unification of the proletariat, the predecessor of the First International.

2. When was the Communist Party created in Russia?

V.I. Lenin considered the predecessors of Russian Social Democracy to be the noble revolutionaries - the Decembrists, who advocated the abolition of autocracy and serfdom, and democratic transformations in Russia; revolutionary democrats and revolutionary populists of the 70s - early 80s. XIX century, who saw the salvation of Russia in the peasant revolution.

The formation of the labor movement in Russia was associated with the emergence in the 70s and 80s. the first workers' unions: the South Russian Union of Workers (1875), the Northern Union of Russian Workers (1878). In the 80s, the first social democratic circles and groups appeared: the “Emancipation of Labor” group, founded by G.V. Plekhanov in Geneva, Party of Russian Social Democrats (1883), Association of St. Petersburg Craftsmen (1885).

The rapid industrial boom and intensive development of capitalism in Russia prepared the transition of the liberation movement from the stage of circleism to the stage of creating a single proletarian party. The first congress of such a party (the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party) was convened in March 1898 in Minsk. The congress, although it proclaimed the creation of the RSDLP, was unable to fulfill the task of actually uniting the fragmented groups. This task was accomplished by the Second Party Congress, held in 1903.

The Second Congress of the RSDLP marked, on the one hand, the formation of the labor movement into a political party, and on the other hand, it became the beginning of the demarcation of two currents in Russian Social Democracy: revolutionary (Bolshevism) and conciliatory (Menshevism). The final act of organizational separation of Menshevism and Bolshevism was the 6th All-Russian (Prague) Conference of the RSDLP (1912), during which the leaders of the Menshevik liquidators were expelled from the party. The name "Communist Party" is associated with the division of international social democracy. European social democratic parties (with the exception of their left wings) supported their governments in the imperialist world war, thereby taking the path of compromise with the bourgeoisie.

In 1917, the Bolsheviks decided to rename their party to the Communist Party. In 1919, at the VII Congress of the RSDLP(b) party, it was renamed the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks).

3. What was the essence of the disagreement between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks?

The concepts of “Mensheviks” and “Bolsheviks” arose at the Second Congress of the RSDLP during elections to the party’s governing bodies, when supporters of V.I. Lenin received a majority in the Central Committee and the editorial office of the newspaper Iskra. Lenin's main opponent at the congress was Yu.O. Martov, who insisted on a more liberal approach to party membership and believed that to join the party it was enough to share its program goals. Lenin believed that a party member was obliged to constantly work in one of its organizations.

Subsequently, disagreements between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks moved into the stage of a deep ideological and political split. In fact, there were two social democratic parties in Russia.

Menshevism perceived Marxism dogmatically, not understanding either its dialectics or the special Russian conditions. The Mensheviks considered Western European social democracy to be their role model. They rejected the revolutionary potential of the Russian peasantry and assigned the leading role to the bourgeoisie in the future revolution. Menshevism denied the validity of the peasant thesis about the confiscation of landowners' lands and advocated the municipalization of the land, which did not meet the sentiments of the rural poor.

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks built their parliamentary tactics differently. The Bolsheviks saw in the State Duma only an instrument for organizing the working masses outside the walls of parliament. The Mensheviks, on the other hand, harbored constitutional illusions and advocated a bloc with the liberal intelligentsia; some of the Menshevik leaders insisted on the elimination of illegal work and the creation of a law-abiding parliamentary party.

During the First World War, the Mensheviks took the position of “defencists” and “defenders of the fatherland” allied with the ruling regime. The Bolsheviks demanded an end to the global massacre, the victims of which were workers from different countries.

Gradually, Menshevism increasingly lost its historical initiative, the trust of the workers and the right to power. By October 1917, Menshevism as a trend in the labor movement had virtually ceased to exist: in the elections to the Constituent Assembly, the Mensheviks in Petrograd and Moscow received only 3% of the votes (Bolsheviks in Petrograd - 45%, in Moscow - 56%). During the Civil War, a significant part of the Mensheviks took the position of fighting the Soviet regime. Some, on the contrary, joined the ranks of the RCP(b). The complete ideological, political and organizational collapse of Menshevism became a fait accompli.

4. What did the Bolsheviks of Tsarist Russia fight for?

The Bolsheviks considered the ultimate goal of their struggle to be the transition to socialist relations, to a society in which the means of production are placed at the service of the working people, where there is no exploitation of man by man. Defending the future of this slogan, the Bolsheviks fought for the democratization of the Russian political system, for the socio-economic rights of workers and peasants.

The RSDLP(b) put forward demands for the elimination of autocracy, the establishment of a democratic republic, and the convening of a Constituent Assembly to develop a Constitution. The party fought for universal suffrage; freedom of speech, unions, strikes, movement; equality of citizens before the law; freedom of religion; national equality.

The Bolsheviks sought the introduction of an 8-hour working day, a ban on night and child labor, and independence of factory inspection; opposed the payment of wages in kind and for health insurance for workers. The Bolsheviks supported the demands of the rural masses, which consisted in the need to confiscate all landowners', appanage, cabinet and monastic lands in favor of the peasants.

With the outbreak of the First World War of 1914-1918. The Bolsheviks are leading the fight for an immediate end to the war and the conclusion of a democratic peace without annexations and indemnities.

Since the autumn of 1917, the most important slogan of the RSDLP(b) has become the slogan of transferring all power to the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies.

All the demands and program provisions with which the Bolsheviks came to the working masses for many years were fulfilled by them in the first days of Soviet power and were reflected in its documents: Decrees on Peace and Land, the Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia, the first Soviet Constitution.

5. Why did civil war break out in Russia after the Bolsheviks came to power?

The Soviet government, elected by the Second Congress of Soviets, did everything possible to avoid civil war. All the first decrees and steps of the new government were aimed at developing peaceful construction. A clear confirmation of this are: an unprecedented campaign to eliminate illiteracy, the opening of 33 (!) scientific institutes in 1918, the organization of a number of geological expeditions, the beginning of construction of a network of power plants, and the “Monuments of the Republic” program. The government, preparing for war, does not begin such large-scale measures.

Facts indicate that White Guard actions became possible only after the start of foreign intervention. In the spring of 1918, the RSFSR found itself in a ring of fire: Entente troops landed in Murmansk, the Japanese occupied Vladivostok, the French occupied Odessa, the Turks entered Transcaucasia, and in May a mutiny of the Czechoslovak corps began. And only after these foreign actions did the Civil War turn into an all-Russian conflagration - the Savinkovites rebelled in Yaroslavl, the Left Socialist Revolutionaries - in Moscow, then there were Kolchak, Denikin, Yudenich, Wrangel.

The leaders of the white armies, driven by hatred of the working people who had established their power and property, committed open betrayal of the people's interests. Dressed in the clothes of “Russian patriots,” they sold them wholesale and retail. Agreements on territorial concessions to the Entente countries in the event of the success of the White movement are not a myth, but a reality of anti-Soviet policy. The white generals did not consider it necessary to hide these facts even in their memoirs.

The civil war turned into an almost four-year nightmare for Russia of murders, hunger, epidemics, and almost complete destruction. Of course, the communists also bear their share of responsibility for the horrors and lawlessness of those years. The class struggle, in its bloody manifestations, knows almost no pity for man. But the guilt of those who unleashed this anti-people massacre is incomparable with the guilt of those who stopped this massacre.

6. Why did the Bolsheviks advocate the defeat of their own government in the First World War?

In fact, the Bolshevik slogan was different. They advocated the defeat of the governments of all countries participating in the war and the escalation of the imperialist war into a civil war.

The First World War was not a just war of national liberation. It was a worldwide massacre unleashed by the leading capitalist powers - Germany and Austria-Hungary, on the one hand, Great Britain, France, Russia, on the other. The goals of both coalitions were obvious to everyone: further redistribution of resources and colonies, spheres of influence and investment of capital. The price for achieving these goals was thousands of human lives - ordinary workers and peasants from all the warring countries. In addition, Russia found itself drawn into a global massacre without being in the least interested in it. It did not have firm guarantees of satisfying its territorial claims, and the Entente countries did everything to ensure that the main material and human losses were borne by Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary. While trench warfare could go on for months in the western direction without any significant losses, the Russian army, taking the brunt of the attack, became increasingly bogged down in bloody battles.

IN AND. Lenin noted: “The war brought unprecedented hardships and suffering to humanity, general hunger and ruin, brought all of humanity “... to the edge of the abyss, the death of an entire culture, savagery...” During the war, over 9 were killed and died from wounds. 5 million people. The loss of the Russian population as a result of famine and other disasters caused by the war amounted to about 5 million people. At the same time, the war provided fabulous profits for the capitalists. The income of the American monopolies alone amounted to more than 3 billion dollars.

The Bolsheviks and other European internationalists well understood the predatory nature of the world war. They considered it a crime to agitate workers of different countries for mutual extermination. It was they who made every effort to stop this war.

7. Why did the Bolsheviks start the “Red Terror”?

Historically objective and proven is the fact that the “red” terror was a response to the “white” terror. From the very first days of its birth, the Soviet government tried to prevent a further escalation of violence and took many conciliatory steps. Eloquent evidence of this was the first acts of the new government: the abolition of the death penalty, the release without punishment of the leaders of the first anti-Soviet riots - Kornilov, Krasnov, Kaledin; renunciation of repressions against members of the Provisional Government and deputies of the Constituent Assembly; amnesty to commemorate the first anniversary of the October Revolution.

The Soviet state raised the issue of mass revolutionary violence after the head of the city Cheka, M. Uritsky, was killed in Petrograd on August 30, 1918, and on the same day an attempt was made on V.I. Lenin. Terrorist acts were coordinated from abroad, and even the British Ambassador Lockhart admitted this in his memoirs. In response to this, the Council of People's Commissars adopted a decree on September 5, which went down in history as the resolution on the Red Terror. The decree set the task of isolating “class enemies” in concentration camps and introduced execution as the main measure against members of White Guard organizations. The largest action of the “Red Terror” was the execution in Petrograd of 512 representatives of the upper bourgeois elite - former tsarist dignitaries. Despite the ongoing civil war, the terror was effectively ended by the fall of 1918.

The “Red Terror” set itself the task of clearing the rear from accomplices of the White Guard and puppets of Western capital, internal collaborators, the “fifth column” on Soviet territory. He was cruel, harsh, but a necessary dictate of the times.

8. Why did the Bolsheviks agree to conclude the Brest-Litovsk Peace, which was shameful for Russia?

By 1918, Russia approached in a state of extreme economic ruin. The old army collapsed, and no new one was created. The front actually lost control. The process of sovereignization of the outskirts grew. The broad masses of soldiers and peasants experienced extreme dissatisfaction with the war. The people sincerely did not understand whose interests they were fighting for. People were forced to die while fulfilling their “allied duty” to the Entente countries, which had very clear selfish goals in the war.

Well aware of this fact, the Second Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies adopted a decree on October 26, 1917, inviting all warring countries to begin immediate peace negotiations. Since the Entente ignored this proposal, Soviet Russia had to conduct separate negotiations with Germany. The negotiations were accompanied by numerous difficulties, demarches on the part of the Germans, and opposition to the peace process on the part of the “left-communist” and Socialist-Revolutionary opposition in Russia. In the end, the Soviet government, thanks to the insistence of V.I. Lenin, accepted the conditions of the Kaiser's Germany.

Under these conditions, significant territories were torn away from Russia (Poland, Lithuania, part of Belarus and Latvia) - only about 1 million km2. Russia was obliged to pay Germany in various forms an indemnity in the amount of 6 billion marks.

V.I. Lenin considered the conclusion of peace a difficult, but tactically correct step. It was necessary to give the country a break: to preserve the gains of the October Revolution, strengthen Soviet power, and create the Red Army. The Brest-Litovsk Treaty preserved the main thing: the independence of the country, and ensured its exit from the imperialist war.

Lenin prophetically pointed out the temporary nature of the peace concluded in Brest-Litovsk. The November Revolution of 1918 in Germany overthrew the power of Emperor Wilhelm II. The Soviet government recognized the Brest-Litovsk Treaty as annulled.

9. Why did the Bolsheviks establish a dictatorship of one party?

Let's start with the fact that any government is a dictatorship - the dictatorship of the class in whose hands the national wealth of the country is. In a capitalist society, power is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, in a socialist society it is the dictatorship of the proletariat, the dictatorship of the working masses. Bourgeois dictatorship, no matter in what form it is implemented (liberal republic, monarchy, fascist tyranny), is the power of the minority over the majority, the power of owners over hired workers. The dictatorship of the working people is, on the contrary, the domination of the majority over the minority; it is the power of those who, with their own hands and minds, create the material and spiritual wealth of the country.

After the victory of the October Revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat was established in the country in the form of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies. The fact that the Communists won the majority in these Soviets suggests that it was their program and practical actions that enjoyed the greatest support of the working people. At the same time, the Bolsheviks did not at all strive to establish a one-party system. In 1917-1918 The government included members of the Left Socialist Revolutionary Party. In the apparatus of the Supreme Economic Council, the Cheka, and in councils at various levels until the beginning of the 20s, there were representatives of the Mensheviks. During the Civil War, the Bolsheviks were supported by the Socialist-Revolutionaries-maximalists and anarchists. However, without receiving any significant mandate of trust from the working people, these parties took the path of armed struggle against Soviet power and unleashed terror against activists of the RCP (b). Thus, the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, aiming to disrupt the Brest-Litovsk Peace, killed the German ambassador Mirbach and raised an armed rebellion in Moscow. At the 7th Congress in May 1918, the Right Socialist Revolutionaries proclaimed their official line to be preparing for an uprising against Soviet power. In 1920, the head of the Moscow City Committee of the RCP(b), Zagorsky, was killed by the hands of anarchists. Thus, the one-party system in our country developed not thanks to the Bolsheviks, but thanks to the irresponsible and criminal actions of their opponents.

10.Why did the Bolsheviks destroy churches and persecute citizens on religious grounds?

The question of the relationship between the Orthodox Church and the Bolshevik leadership in the first years of Soviet power is one of the most difficult issues in our history. The aggravation of these relations began at the end of 1917 and reached its greatest extent during the Civil War. We understand the difficult feelings of believers that grew out of the confrontation of those years and are ready for a broad dialogue with the Orthodox community. But an objective dialogue today is possible only on the basis of an objective view of history.

In the first months, the general confidence in the fragility of the Bolshevik regime pushed the church to openly oppose Soviet power. In December 1917, the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church adopted a document according to which the Orthodox Church was declared primacy in the state, only persons of the Orthodox faith could be the head of state and the Minister of Education, and the teaching of the Law of God in schools for children of Orthodox parents was mandatory. Obviously, this document ran counter to the secular character of the new society. On January 19, 1918, Patriarch Tikhon anathematized Soviet power, and most of the clergy began to collaborate with the whites. In 1921, during a terrible famine in the Volga region, a significant number of priests refused to donate church valuables to a fund to help the dying. The Karlovac Cathedral, assembled by clergy in exile, addressed the Genoa Conference with a call to declare a crusade against the Soviet state.

The government reacted harshly to such facts. The “Decree on the separation of church and state” was adopted, some of the clergy were subjected to repression, and valuables were forcibly confiscated. Many temples were closed, destroyed or converted. Subsequently, Patriarch Tikhon realized the fallacy of the anti-Soviet position of the church hierarchy and made the only right decision - to prevent the politicization of religion during a period of severe social cataclysm. In June 1923, he sent a message that said: “I strongly condemn any encroachment on Soviet power, no matter where it comes from... I understood all the lies and slander that Soviet power is subjected to from its compatriots and foreign enemies.” .

This position reflected the priest’s sound approach to issues of the relationship between church and state, which is secular in nature. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation believes that even today the principle of mutual respect and non-interference could form the basis of state-church relations.

11. Is it true that communism and Nazism (fascism) are similar?

“Communism and Nazism are two varieties of the same totalitarian type of society. They are similar in their ideological essence and methods” - hearing such nonsense today is not uncommon.

In fact, there is nothing more opposite than the communist and Nazi views on man, society and history. The ideological foundation of Nazism is social Darwinism, which preaches the division of humanity into “supermen” and pariahs, into “superior” and “racially inferior.” The fate of some is domination, the fate of others is eternal slavery and humiliating labor. Communism, on the contrary, points to the biological equality of people, the universality of man. People are not born capable or limited, mean or decent, they become so due to social conditions. The task of fascism is to perpetuate inequality, the task of communism is to achieve a social order in which class antagonisms remain a thing of the past, and the competitive struggle between people is replaced by an association of free individuals.

The views of communists and fascists on the history of mankind are polar opposite. From the point of view of scientific communism, history is a natural process subject to objective laws and created by the masses. For the Nazi, history is a collection of individual wills, where the strongest wins. Communism is based on rationalism, a scientific approach to understanding reality. In the fascist concept, science is replaced by Nietzscheanism and irrationalism.

Communism advocates socialization, nationalization of the economy, and the elimination of the discrepancy between the social nature of production and the private nature of appropriation. The ideal of fascism is a state-corporation that serves, first of all, the interests of large owners. Communists proceed from the principle of proletarian solidarity, peace and friendship between peoples. Fascists proclaim the right of individual nations to world domination with the subjugation and destruction of other peoples.

Communism and Nazism are antipodes. The Communist parties of Europe became the center of the Brown Plague Resistance during World War II, and the Soviet Union played a decisive role in the defeat of fascism in Europe and Asia. This is the truth of history.

12. Why did the Bolsheviks plunder the village and pursue a surplus appropriation policy?

The current assertion that emergency food measures and surplus appropriation were created by the Bolsheviks is fundamentally incorrect. Back in 1915, the tsarist government established fixed prices for bread, introduced a ban on speculation, and began to confiscate food surpluses from peasants. In December 1916, surplus appropriation was announced. In 1917, this policy failed due to the weakness of the apparatus, sabotage and corruption of officials. The provisional government, like the tsarist government, tried to solve the problem through emergency measures and also suffered defeat. Only the Bolsheviks managed to save the country from famine.

In order to correctly comprehend the use of such unpopular measures by the authorities, it is necessary to clearly understand the situation in which Russia found itself by 1918. For the fifth year, the country was at war with Germany. The threat of a new war - a civil one - was becoming real. Industry was almost completely militarized - the front needed rifles, shells, greatcoats, etc. For obvious reasons, normal trade between city and countryside was disrupted. Already unprofitable, peasant farms completely stopped providing bread for the army and workers. Speculation, the “black market” and “bag-bags” flourished. During 1916, the price of rye bread increased by 170%, between February and October 1917 - by 258%, and between the October Revolution and May 1918 - by 181%. The starvation of soldiers and townspeople was becoming a reality.

There was no talk of any free grain market here. By decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of May 9, 1918, a food dictatorship was introduced in the country. Per capita consumption standards were established for peasants: 12 poods of grain, 1 pood of cereals per year, etc. Beyond this, all grain was considered surplus and subject to confiscation. These measures have produced significant results. If in 1917/18 only 30 million poods of grain were procured, then in 1918/19 - 110 million poods, and in 1919/20 - 260 million poods. Almost the entire urban population and some rural artisans were provided with food rations.

It should be noted that the peasantry, which received land from the Bolsheviks and freedom from debts to the state and landowners, did not enter into a serious conflict with Soviet power. Later, when the need for emergency measures disappeared, the surplus appropriation system was replaced by a softer taxation system.

13. What was the essence of the new economic policy (NEP) in the 20s of the last century?

After the end of the Civil War, the state was faced with the task of peaceful construction. The forced policy of “food dictatorship” ceased to be tolerable for the majority of the peasantry, devastated by wars and exhausted by crop failure. The ban on the commercial circulation of agricultural products led to a reduction in acreage by peasants. Spontaneous unrest and uprisings began, threatening the preservation of Soviet power. Hunger and general fatigue gripped the working class. In 1920, heavy industry output was only about 15% of pre-war output.

Under these conditions, the start of a new economic policy was announced. Its essence was the limited introduction of market mechanisms for managing the national economy while maintaining state control over the “commanding heights”: large-scale industry, foreign trade, political and social gains of workers. In accordance with this attitude, a whole range of economic measures was implemented during the 1920s. In March 1921, the surplus appropriation system was replaced by a tax in kind, the size of which was almost 2 times smaller. A number of small enterprises were denationalized. Commercial and cooperative banks were created under state control. Concessions with the participation of foreign capital received the right to exist. Free distribution of rations stopped.

The NEP made it possible to solve a number of problems related to meeting the demands of the peasantry, saturating the domestic market with goods, etc. At the same time, it brought many difficulties. A new Soviet bourgeoisie (NEPmen) emerged and strengthened, unemployment appeared, and the use of hired labor resumed. The NEP did not, and could not, solve the problems of industrializing Russia, creating defense potential, and agricultural cooperation. The country approached the solution of these problems only at the end of the 20s.

14. How does the Communist Party of the Russian Federation feel about the personality of I.V. Stalin?

We believe that the name of Stalin is inseparable from the history of the Soviet Union. Under the leadership of this man, our country has made a giant leap in its development, in 10 years it has covered a path that took capitalist countries centuries to achieve.

In the USSR, the power of the working majority was established, and the transition to planned management of the national economy on the basis of public ownership was carried out. The Soviet people ended unemployment, achieved previously unimaginable social gains, and carried out a cultural revolution. And the industrialization and collectivization of agriculture was carried out in the shortest possible time. The Victory of our people in the Great Patriotic War and the post-war restoration of the economic power of the Soviet state are inextricably linked with the name of Stalin. Stalin left a rich philosophical legacy.

We are not at all trying to mythologize the stage in the development of the USSR that was passed through under the leadership of Stalin. There were mistakes, miscalculations, and violations of the law. However, these mistakes were growing pains. For the first time in the history of mankind, communists tried to build a society in which there is no exploitation of man by man, no humiliating division into “upper and lower.” No one left recipes for building such a society; there was no beaten path.

The fiercest resistance of external and internal opponents of socialism required the centralization and nationalization of many spheres of public life. Victory in the Great Patriotic War and the successful restoration of the national economy proved the historical justification of this path of development. Subsequently, this path was wrongfully elevated to an absolute. But this is I.V.’s fault. Stalin was no longer there.

15. How do you assess the policy of mass repression against Soviet citizens in the 30-50s?

The term “repression” usually refers to the persecution and execution of Soviet citizens for political reasons. The basis for the repression was the famous 58th article of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, which provided for punishment for “counter-revolutionary crimes”. In liberal literature it is believed that the repressions were massive, illegal and unjustified. Let's try to understand the validity of these statements.

On the issue of the massive scale of repression, a lot of fables have been invented recently. The sheer number of people allegedly “exterminated in Soviet camps” is sometimes staggering. 7 million, 20 million, 100 million... If we look at the archival data, we can see that the picture was different. In February 1954, N.S. Khrushchev was given a certificate signed by the Prosecutor General, the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Minister of Justice of the USSR, according to which from 1921 to 1954 3,777,380 people were convicted of counter-revolutionary crimes. Of these, 642,980 people were sentenced to capital punishment (according to the anti-Soviet society "Memorial" - 799,455 people). As we see, there can be no talk of millions of people being executed.

Were the repressions of the 30-50s legal? In most cases, yes. They complied with the letter and spirit of the laws of the time. Without understanding that every law is dictated by its time and the nature of the social system, it is impossible to comprehend and correctly understand such a phenomenon as repression. What was legal then seems illegal today. A striking example of this is the presence in Soviet criminal legislation of norms of liability for speculation, trade intermediation, currency fraud, and sodomy. In modern Russia, everything is different, the word “speculator” has been replaced by the word “businessman”, the latter is considered a respected and respectable citizen. But we must not forget that Vlasovites and policemen were also charged under Article 58 of espionage, sabotage at industrial and agricultural facilities, terrorism.

The repressions reflected the dramatic emergence of the world's first socialist state. The flywheel of the punitive authorities affected many honest and loyal people to the country. Many of them died. But many were rehabilitated during the Stalin years. Suffice it to recall the legendary Marshal Rokossovsky, the outstanding scientists Korolev and Tupolev.

We do not seek to justify the mistakes made in those years. But we refuse to consider all those repressed during Stalin’s time as “innocent victims of the totalitarian system.”

16. What was the essence of the policy of industrialization and collectivization carried out in the 30s?

The XIV Congress of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, held in December 1925, decided to set a course for accelerated industrialization of the country. Speaker at the congress I.V. Stalin motivated the party’s decision in the following way: “We are 50-100 years behind the advanced countries; we must cover this distance in 10-15 years, otherwise we will be crushed.”

Forced industrialization pursued two objectives. First, to create a powerful, technically equipped state that could provide guarantees against the enslavement of the Soviet people by foreign powers. Secondly, to significantly increase the material and cultural standard of living of citizens. Industrialization required the release of a huge number of workers. It was possible to take them only from the peasantry, because... The USSR was 84% ​​an agricultural country. The essence of collectivization carried out in the interests of socialism was the creation in the countryside of large-scale enterprises - collective farms, based on joint cultivation of the land, socialization of production tools, natural distribution of products based on the results of labor.

Industrialization and collectivization allowed the Soviet Union to achieve unprecedented results in the shortest possible time. During the years of the first five-year plan (1927-1931) alone, the industrial potential of the USSR doubled. By the end of the 30s, 6 thousand new enterprises came into operation. The work culture of millions of people has changed radically. By the beginning of the forties, the literacy level of the people was over 80%. Hundreds of thousands of young people, coming from working and peasant backgrounds, passed through universities, technical schools, and workers' schools. The establishment of the collective farm system in rural areas led to a sharp increase in labor productivity. During the Second Five-Year Plan alone, collective farms received more than 500 thousand tractors and about 124 thousand combines. In a matter of years, about 5 million peasants received the profession of machine operators. People now have free time, which means they have the opportunity to study and relax.

The industrialization and collectivization of the USSR required enormous effort from Soviet citizens. The authorities had to face sabotage and sabotage. Major mistakes were made by overly zealous party workers. But strategically this course turned out to be absolutely correct.

Communism, according to the definition given by one of the greatest people in the history of mankind, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, “is the highest stage of development of socialism, when people work from the consciousness of the need to work for the common good.” A very brief and succinct definition that conveys the basic essence of the concept of “communism”. Yes, it is work for the common good, and not the satisfaction of one’s selfish, selfish interests, as under capitalism.

One of the main aspects of the communist idea is collectivism. The interests of the collective must prevail over personal egoistic interests in a communist society. Well, supporters of liberal values ​​put the individual and the satisfaction of his needs at the forefront, while communism is society and work for the public good. That is, in essence, liberalism asserts that satisfying the needs of an individual cell brings benefit to the entire organism - through the particular to the general, and communism, that by satisfying the needs of the whole organism, the needs of each individual cell are satisfied - from the general to the particular. The latter, in my opinion, looks more logical, since in the first case the body’s resources will inevitably be distributed unevenly, that is, in some cells there will be an excess of them, and in some there will be a lack of resources and an acute need, and as a result, hypertrophy and degeneration of individual cells. In addition, the emergence of cancer cells is also inevitable, which will only strive to consume without giving anything in return.

Imagine such an organism in which its cells compete for resources among themselves. Of course, disease, degradation and death. The distribution must be uniform; the cells of a single organism cannot compete with each other.

This is acceptable in the animal world (natural selection), but destructive in human society. In the animal world, it’s every man for himself, and if you don’t eat, they’ll eat you, but we’re not animals.

In defiance of liberalist competition for goods in the “beastly” world of the market, communist doctrine postulates the principle “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Of course, the application of this principle in life, to a sufficient extent, is possible only at a certain level of spiritual and moral development of society, when “work for the good of society will become for everyone the first need of life, a conscious necessity.” In this, communist teaching largely echoes the Teaching of Christ, who called on man to give all of himself to the service of God and people. In general, communism and Christian teaching have many common features. Even Patriarch Kirill of the Russian Orthodox Church spoke about this in one of his television programs. He pointed out the abundance of similarities between Christian ethics and communist morality, which diverged only in the atheistic component that took place in the communist teaching of the Soviet era.

It is atheism, in my opinion, that is the main reason for the fragility of the Soviet project and the failure to build a communist society in it. Because the cornerstone of building communism was then, first of all, placed on the material aspect, class struggle and the construction of a highly developed industrial society; at that time, the spiritual and moral improvement of people and society as a whole should have been in the first place, but in an atmosphere of crude materialism, denying the existence of God (Higher Powers) and higher worlds beyond the scope of gross matter, the construction of a communist society, it seems to me, is hardly feasible.

Communism sets as its goal the construction of a classless society, because division into classes is the root cause of inequality among people. And equality is one of the basic principles of communist society. Anticipating the indignant cries of liberals or people misled by them, I want to say that equality does not mean equalization and a gray homogeneous mass. Each person is a unique individual with his own unique traits, abilities and needs. And a developed communist society will be interested in the fact that each such individual can fully reveal and demonstrate his best qualities and fully serve for the benefit of society. And for this it will try to create the most favorable conditions for each individual member. The unity of a communist society will lie in the diversity of individual traits of the people who make it up, and not in a set of monotonous dummies.

Speaking about communism, one cannot fail to mention the attitude towards private property (not to be confused with individual property) in the light of communist teaching. While under capitalism private property is a sacred cow, the infringement of which is considered the worst sacrilege, according to communism it is the root of all evils, such as inequality of people, exploitation of man by man, profiteering, crime. It is because of the desire to possess something (money, things, property) that the worst qualities develop in a person - greed, self-interest, envy, greed, and the vast majority of crimes are committed. This is especially noticeable now, when there is a horrifying increase in cases where even the closest relatives mercilessly kill each other or hire killers for money, apartments, and other property. These are typical diseases of the inevitably ugly liberal-capitalist consumer society. Its decomposition and death are inevitable, just as inevitably humanity will come to the construction of a communist society. Communism is inevitable!

What is Communism

Communism is a utopian philosophical idea about the ideal economic and social arrangement of a state where equality and justice flourish. In practice, this idea turned out to be unviable and unrealizable for many reasons.

What is Communism in simple words - briefly.

In simple words, communism is the idea of ​​​​creating a society in which people will be provided with everything they need, regardless of their abilities. Ideally, under a communist system, there should not be a poor and a rich class, and all the country's resources should be evenly distributed among all citizens equally. In this scheme, there is no private property as such, and all people work to create the common good. Naturally, this ideology belongs to the category of utopian due to the nature of man himself.

The essence of communism.

Before you begin to understand the essence of communism, you should understand the fact that the original idea and its practical implementation are completely different things. If the idea itself, in principle, can be called completely idealistic, then the method of its implementation clearly cannot be called so. Thus, this expensive and large-scale social experiment to build an ideal society consisted of a complete reformation of power and strengthening the role of the state. The implementation of the plan included the following items:

• Abolition of private property;
• Cancellation of inheritance rights;
• Confiscation of property;
• Heavy progressive income tax;
• Creation of the only state bank;
• Government ownership of communications and transport;
• Government ownership of factories and agriculture;
• State labor control;
• Corporate farms (collective farms) and regional planning;
• State control of education.

As can be seen from this far from complete list of reforms, civil society was limited in many rights, and the state took control of almost all aspects of human life. From this we can conclude that despite the stated high ideals, the essence of communism was the transformation of citizens into a weak-willed population under the control of the state.

Who invented communism. The origin of the theory of communism and basic principles.

Karl Marx, a Prussian sociologist, philosopher, economist and journalist, is considered the father of communism. In collaboration with Friedrich Engels, Marx published several works, including the most famous one called “Communist” (1848). According to Marx, a utopian society will only be achieved when there is a single “civilless” and classless society. He even described three steps to achieve this state.

• First, a revolution is needed to overthrow the existing regime and completely eradicate the old system.
• Secondly, it must come to power and act as a single body on all issues, including the personal affairs of the public. The dictator would then be responsible for forcing everyone to follow the ideals of communism, as well as ensuring that property or possessions are not privately owned.
• The final stage would be the achievement of a utopian state (although this stage was never achieved). As a result, greater equality would be achieved and everyone would willingly share their wealth and benefits with others in society.

According to Marx, in an ideal communist society the banking system would be centralized and the government would control education and labor. All infrastructure facilities, agricultural assets and industries will be state owned. Private property rights and inheritance rights would be abolished, and heavy income taxes would be levied on everyone.

Lenin's role in building communism and War communism.

At a time when many countries in the world were moving towards democracy, Russia was still a monarchy where the Tsar held full power. In addition, the First World War led to great economic losses for the country and people. Thus, the king, who continued to live in luxury, became an extremely unpopular character among the common people.

All this tension and chaos led to the February Revolution on February 19, when workers of a closed factory and soldiers in revolt together raised slogans against the unjust regime. The revolution spread like wildfire and forced the Tsar to abdicate the throne. The quickly formed Russian Provisional Government now replaced the monarch.

Taking advantage of the chaos in Russia, Vladimir Lenin, with the help of Leon Trotsky, formed the Bolshevik pro-communist “party”. As the Russian Provisional Government continued to support the war effort during World War I, it also became unpopular with the masses. This sparked the Bolshevik Revolution, which helped Lenin overthrow the government and seize the Winter Palace. Between 1917 and 1920, Lenin initiated “war communism” to further his political goals.

Extreme measures were used to establish communism in Russia, which marked the beginning of the Civil War (1918-1922). After which the USSR was created, which included Russia and 15 neighboring countries.

Communist leaders and their policies.

To establish communism in the USSR, the leaders did not disdain absolutely no methods. The tools Lenin used to achieve his goals included man-made famine, slave labor camps, and the execution of detractors during the Red Terror. The famines were caused by forcing peasants to sell their crops without profit, which in turn affected agriculture. Slave labor camps were places to punish those who disagreed with Lenin's rule. Millions of people died in such camps. During the Red Terror, the voices of innocent civilians, White Army prisoners of war, and Tsarist supporters were drowned out by massacres. Essentially it was its own people.

After Lenin's death in 1924, his successor, Joseph Stalin, followed the policies set by Lenin, but also went a step further by ensuring the execution of fellow communists who did not support him 100%. grew up. After the end of World War II, the Cold War period began, when democratic society resisted with all its might the spread of communism in the world. The arms race and energy prices greatly shook the imperfect planned economy of the USSR, which greatly affected the lives of the population.

Thus, when Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in 1985, he adopted new principles to rejuvenate the Soviet economy and reduce tensions with the United States. The Cold War ended and communist governments in Russia's border countries began to fail due to Gorbachev's softer policies. Finally, in 1991, during the presidency of Boris Yeltsin, the Soviet Union formally disintegrated into Russia and several independent countries. This is how the most significant era of communism in the world ended, not taking into account several modern countries living in a similar system.

The results of communism.

It is quite difficult to talk about the results of communism if you approach it from the point of view of its citizens’ perception of the “scoop”. For some, these were the times of hell on earth, while others remember the scoop as something good and warm. Most likely, differences of opinion are caused by various factors: class, political preferences, economic status, memories of youth and health, and the like. However, the bottom line is that we can only rely on the language of numbers. The communist regime was economically untenable. In addition, it brought millions of people killed and repressed. In some ways, the building of communism can be called the most expensive and bloody social experiment on earth, which should not be repeated.

Communism(from Latin commūnis - “common”) - in Marxism, the organization of society in which the economy is based on public ownership of the means of production.

After the 19th century, the term is often used to refer to the socio-economic formation predicted in the theoretical works of Marxists, based on public ownership of the means of production. Such a formation, according to the works of the founders of Marxism, assumed the presence of highly developed productive forces, the absence of division into social classes, the abolition of the state, a change in functions and the gradual withering away of money. According to the classics of Marxism, in a communist society the principle “To each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!” is implemented!

Various definitions of communism

Friedrich Engels in the draft program of the Union of Communists “Principles of Communism” (late October 1847): “Communism is the doctrine of the conditions for the liberation of the proletariat.<…>Question 14: What should this new social order be like? Answer: First of all, the management of industry and all branches of production in general will be taken out of the hands of individual individuals competing with each other. Instead, all branches of production will be under the control of the whole society, that is, they will be carried out in the public interest, according to a public plan and with the participation of all members of society. Thus, this new social order will destroy competition and put association in its place.<…>Private property is inseparable from the individual conduct of industry and from competition. Consequently, private property must also be abolished, and its place will be taken by the common use of all instruments of production and the distribution of products by general agreement, or the so-called community of property.”

Karl Marx (1844): «<…>communism is the positive expression of the abolition of private property; at first it appears as universal private property.” “Communism as the positive abolition of private property - this self-alienation of man -<…>there is a real resolution of the contradiction between man and nature, man and man, a true resolution of the dispute between existence and essence, between objectification and self-affirmation, between freedom and necessity, between the individual and the race. He is the solution to the riddle of history, and he knows that he is the solution.”

Dictionary Vl. Dahl(1881, original spelling): “Communism, the political doctrine of equality of fortune, community of possessions, and the rights of everyone to other people’s property.”

Philosophical Dictionary(1911): “Communism is a doctrine that rejects private property in the name of human welfare.
All evil in social and state relations stems from the unequal distribution of goods.
To eliminate this evil, communism advises that property rights be reserved only for the state, and not for private individuals. The first to recommend the communist ideal was Plato (cf. his “Polity”).”

Handbook for priests and clergy(1913): “Communism preaches the forced communication of property, denying all types of private property. By extending the principle of collectivism, that is, community, not only to production and distribution, but also to the very use of manufactured products, or to their consumption, and subordinating all this to public control, communism thereby destroys individual freedom even in the smallest details of everyday life.<…>The communication of property preached by communism leads to the overthrow of all justice and to the complete destruction of the well-being and order of the family and society.”

Errico Malatesta in the book “A Brief System of Anarchism in 10 Conversations” (1917): “Communism is a form of social organization in which<…>people will unite and enter into a mutual agreement, with the goal of ensuring for everyone the greatest possible well-being. Based on the principle that land, mines and all natural forces, as well as accumulated wealth and everything created by the labor of past generations, belongs to everyone, people under a communist system will agree to work together in order to produce everything necessary for everyone.”

V. I. Lenin(December 1919): “Communism is the highest stage of development of socialism, when people work out of consciousness of the need to work for the common benefit.”

Philosophical Dictionary. edited by I. T. Frolova (1987): communism is “a socio-economic formation, the features of which are determined by public ownership of the means of production, corresponding to highly developed social productive forces; the highest phase of the communist formation (full communism), the ultimate goal of the communist movement."

Dictionary of foreign words(1988): “1) a socio-economic formation replacing capitalism, based on public ownership of the means of production; 2) the second, highest phase of the communist social formation, the first phase of which is socialism.”

Merriam-Webster English Dictionary(one of several meanings): “a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls the publicly owned means of production.” Since the 1990s, the term has also been used in this meaning in Russian-language literature in Russia and other countries of the former USSR.

Sociological Dictionary N. Abercrombie, S. Hill and B. S. Turner (2004): “Communism is understood not as an actual practice, but as a certain doctrine. This concept refers to societies in which there is no private property, social classes and division of labor.”

Etymology

In its modern form, the word was borrowed in the 40s of the 19th century from the French language, where communisme is derived from commun - “common, public.” The word was finally formed into a term after the publication of the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” (1848). Before this, the word “commune” was used, but it did not characterize the entire society, but a part of it, a group whose members used common property and the common labor of all its members.

History of communist ideas

In the early stages of development, primitive communism based on community of property was the only form of human society. As a result of the property and social stratification of the primitive communal system and the emergence of a class society, communism moved from a really existing practice into the category of a dream existing in culture about a just society, a Golden Age and the like.

Communist views at their inception were based on the demand for social equality based on common property. Some of the first formulations of communism in medieval Europe were attempts to modernize Christian theology and politics in the form of a philosophy of poverty (not to be confused with misery). In the XIII-XIV centuries, representatives of the radical wing of the Franciscans developed it and tried to put it into practice. They were equally opposed to mystical or monastic asceticism and the absolutization of private property. In poverty they saw the conditions for justice in the world and the salvation of society. It was not so much about common property as about a common renunciation of property. At the same time, the ideology of communism was Christian-religious.

Slogans of the revolutionary struggle for radical participants in the Hussite movement in the Czech Republic in the 15th century. (Jan Hus), Peasant War in Germany in the 16th century. (T. Münzer) there were calls for the overthrow of the power of things and money, for the construction of a fair society based on the equality of people, including with common property. These ideas can well be considered communist, although their basis was purely religious - everyone is equal before God and the possession or non-possession of property should not violate this; equality in religious rituals was required. Several centuries later, egalitarian communism appeared - the main component of the “bourgeois revolutions” of the 17th-18th centuries, in particular in England in the 17th century. (J. Winstanley) and France at the end of the 18th century. (G. Babeuf). The secular ideology of communism emerges. The idea of ​​creating a community is being developed in which the freedom and equality of people before each other is realized through common communal ownership of property (or by resolving the conflict between individual and collective property in an egalitarian way). Property is no longer denied, but an attempt is made to subjugate it for the benefit of the entire community.

The theoretical development of the first systematized ideas about the communist way of life was based on the ideology of humanism of the 16th-17th centuries. (T. More, T. Campanella) and the French Enlightenment of the 18th century. (Morelli, G. Mably). Early communist literature was characterized by the preaching of general asceticism and egalitarianism, which made it aimed at counteracting progress in the field of material production. The main problem of society was seen not in economics, but in politics and morality.

The next concept of communism appeared in the context of workers' socialism - from C. Fourier to K. Marx and F. Engels. There is an awareness of the economic contradictions of society. Labor and its subordination to capital are placed at the center of the problems of society.

In the first half of the 19th century. the works of A. Saint-Simon, C. Fourier, R. Owen and a number of other utopian socialists appeared. In accordance with their ideas, in a fair social order, ideas about work as pleasure, the flourishing of human abilities, the desire to provide for all his needs, centralized planning, and distribution in proportion to work should play an important role. Robert Owen not only worked on developing a theoretical model of a socialist society, but also in practice carried out a number of social experiments to implement such ideas in life. In the early 1800s, in the manufacturing village of New Lenark (Scotland), serving a paper mill where Owen was director, he carried out a number of successful measures to technically reorganize production and provide social guarantees to workers. In 1825, in Indiana (USA), Owen founded the New Harmony labor commune, whose activities ended in failure.

The early utopian socialists saw the need to introduce into communist society a developed apparatus for suppressing individual freedom in relation to those who, in one sense or another, show a desire to rise above the general level or take initiative that violates the order established from above, and therefore the communist state must necessarily be founded on the principles of totalitarianism, including autocracy (T. Campanella).

These and other utopian socialists enriched the idea of ​​a just social order with ideas about work as pleasure, the flourishing of human abilities, the desire to provide for all his needs, centralized planning, and distribution in proportion to work. At the same time, in a utopian society, the preservation of private property and property inequality was allowed. In Russia, the most prominent representatives of utopian socialism were A. I. Herzen and N. G. Chernyshevsky.

In the 40s of the 19th century, the class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie came to the fore in the most developed countries of Europe (the uprisings of the Lyon weavers in 1831 and 1834, the rise of the English Chartist movement in the mid-30s - early 50s, the weavers' revolt in Silesia in 1844).

During this period, the German thinkers K. Marx and F. Engels in the spring of 1847 joined the secret propaganda society “Communist League”, organized by German emigrants whom Marx met in London. On behalf of the society, they compiled the famous “Manifesto of the Communist Party,” published on February 21, 1848. In it, they proclaimed the inevitability of the death of capitalism at the hands of the proletariat and presented a brief program for the transition from a capitalist social formation to a communist one:
The proletariat uses its political dominance in order to wrest all capital from the bourgeoisie step by step, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state, that is, the proletariat organized as the ruling class, and to increase the sum of the productive forces as quickly as possible.

This can, of course, happen at first only with the help of despotic intervention in the right of property and in bourgeois relations of production, that is, with the help of measures that economically seem insufficient and untenable, but which in the course of the movement outgrow themselves and are inevitable as a means for a revolution throughout the entire production process.

The program itself contains 10 points:
These arrangements will, of course, vary from country to country.

However, in the most advanced countries the following measures can be applied almost universally:
1. Expropriation of land property and conversion of land rent to cover government expenses.
2. High progressive tax.
3. Cancellation of the right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of all transport in the hands of the state.
7. Increasing the number of state factories, production tools, clearing for arable land and improving land according to a general plan.
8. Equal compulsory labor for everyone, the establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Connecting agriculture with industry, promoting the gradual elimination of the distinction between city and countryside.
10. Public and free education of all children. Elimination of factory labor of children in its modern form. Connecting education with material production, etc.

This is how Marxism arose. Karl Marx, however, harshly criticized the utopian "crude and ill-conceived communism" of those who simply extended the principle of private property to everyone ("common private property"). Crude communism, according to Marx, is the product of “worldwide envy.”

Many of Marx's anarchist contemporaries also advocated communal ownership (Peter Kropotkin called his system "anarcho-communism"), but they rejected the centralization advocated in Marxism because of its restrictions on individual freedom. In turn, anarcho-communism leans towards individualism in matters of freedom.

In 1864 the Marxist First International was created. Marxists founded social democratic parties, in which both a radical, revolutionary direction and a moderate, reformist one emerged. The ideologist of the latter was the German Social Democrat E. Bernstein. Created in 1889, the Second International was dominated by a revolutionary point of view until the early 1900s. At the congresses, decisions were made on the impossibility of an alliance with the bourgeoisie, the inadmissibility of joining bourgeois governments, protests against militarism and war, etc. Later, however, reformists began to play a more significant role in the International, which led to accusations from radicals of opportunism.

In the first half of the 20th century, communist parties emerged from the most radical wing of social democracy. Social Democrats have traditionally advocated the expansion of democracy and political freedoms, and the communists, who came to power first in Russia in 1917 (Bolsheviks), and then in a number of other countries, were opponents of democracy and political freedoms (despite the fact that formally declared their support) and supporters of state intervention in all spheres of society.

Therefore, already in 1918, Luxemburgism arose, opposing on the one hand the pro-bourgeois policy of revisionist social democracy, and on the other, Bolshevism. Its founder was the German radical social democrat Rosa Luxemburg.

On March 4, 1919, on the initiative of the RCP (b) and personally its leader V. Lenin, the Communist International was created to develop and disseminate the ideas of revolutionary international socialism, as a counterweight to the reformist socialism of the Second International.

The views of a number of theoreticians of communism, who recognized the progressive significance of the October Revolution in Russia, but criticized its development, and some even rejected the socialist character of Bolshevism, seeing in it state capitalism, began to be called left communism. The left opposition in the RCP(b) and the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks in the 1920s advocated inner-party democracy, against the “NEPman, kulak and bureaucrat.”
The “Left Opposition” in the USSR ceased to exist as a result of repression, but the ideology of its leader Leonid Trotsky, who was expelled from the country, (Trotskyism) became quite popular abroad.

Communist ideology in the form in which it became dominant in the USSR in the 1920s was called “Marxism-Leninism.”

The revelations of Stalinism at the 20th Congress of the CPSU and the Soviet course towards economic development under the policy of “Peaceful Coexistence” displeased the leader of the Chinese communists, Mao Zedong. He was supported by the leader of the Albanian Labor Party, Enver Hoxha. The policy of Soviet leader N.S. Khrushchev was called revisionist. Many communist parties in Europe and Latin America, following the Soviet-Chinese conflict, split into groups oriented towards the USSR, etc. "anti-revisionist" groups focused on China and Albania. In the 1960s and 1970s, Maoism enjoyed considerable popularity among leftist intellectuals in the West. The leader of the DPRK Kim Il Sung, maneuvering between the USSR and China, in 1955 proclaimed the Juche ideology, which is presented as a harmonious transformation of the ideas of Marxism-Leninism based on ancient Korean philosophical thought.

The policy and theoretical basis for the activities of a number of communist parties in Western Europe, which in the 1970s and 1980s criticized the leadership of the CPSU in the world communist movement, the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the lack of political freedoms in countries that adopted the Soviet model of socialism, was called “Eurocommunism.”

"Scientific communism"

A concept introduced in the USSR in the 1960s, which designated “one of the three components of Marxism-Leninism, revealing the general patterns, paths and forms of the class struggle of the proletariat, the socialist revolution, the construction of socialism and communism. The term “scientific communism” (“scientific socialism”) is also used in a broad sense to designate Marxism-Leninism as a whole.”

Also the name of an academic subject in USSR universities since 1963. It was compulsory for students of all universities along with “history of the CPSU” and “Marxist-Leninist philosophy” until June 1990.

Within the framework of scientific communism, the necessity of the dictatorship of the proletariat to achieve communism was argued, although the idea of ​​communism as a society based on common property does not indicate the political structure of such a society.

The term "Scientific Communism" appeared at the end of the 19th century to distinguish Marxist communist ideas from others. The addition of “scientific” arose because K. Marx and F. Engels substantiated the need for changes in the social structure by changes in methods of production. They emphasized the objective nature of the historical movement towards communism. G.V. Plekhanov wrote that scientific communism does not invent a new society; he studies the trends of the present in order to understand their development in the future.

Friedrich Engels predicted a number of basic features of a communist society: anarchy in production is replaced by a planned organization of production on the scale of the entire society, the accelerating development of productive forces begins, the division of labor disappears, the opposition between mental and physical labor disappears, labor turns from a heavy burden into a vital need - self-realization, class differences are destroyed and the state itself dies away, instead of managing people, production processes will be managed, the family will radically change, religion disappears, people become masters of nature, humanity becomes free. Engels foresaw unprecedented scientific, technical and social progress in the future. He predicts that in a new historical era, “people, and with them all branches of their activity, will make such progress that they will eclipse everything that has been done so far.”
Concepts formed using the term “communism”

Primitive communism

According to Engels, the most ancient human societies of hunter-gatherers, which existed before the emergence of classes, can be called “primitive communism.” Primitive, or primitive, communism is characteristic of all peoples at the early stages of development (the so-called primitive communal system, which according to archaeological periodization coincides mainly with the Stone Age). Primitive communism is characterized by the same attitude of all members of society to the means of production, and, accordingly, the same way for everyone to receive a share of the social product. There is no private property, classes or state.
In such societies, the food obtained is distributed among the members of the society in accordance with the need for the survival of the society, that is, according to the needs of the members for individual survival. Things produced by each person for himself were in the public domain - public property. In the early stages, there was no individual marriage: group marriage was not just the main, but the only form of regulation of relations between the sexes. The development of tools led to the division of labor, which caused the emergence of individual property and the emergence of some property inequality between people.

Utopian communism

The classic expression of this type of communism is Thomas More's Utopia (1516), which paints an idyllic picture of primitive communism contrasted with feudalism. By the 17th century, new, more developed versions of utopian communism were being formed, expressed in the views of Meslier, Morelli, Babeuf, and Winstanley. Utopian communism reached its apogee in the 19th century in the concepts of Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen, and Chernyshevsky.

War communism

The official name of economic practice in Russia during the Civil War on the territory of Soviet Russia in 1918-1921. Elements of war communism were introduced by most countries participating in World Wars 1 and 2. The main goal was to provide the population of industrial cities and the Army with weapons, food and other necessary resources in conditions when all previously existing economic mechanisms and relations were destroyed by the war. The main measures of war communism were: the nationalization of banks and industry, the introduction of labor conscription, a food dictatorship based on surplus appropriation and the introduction of a ration system, and a monopoly on foreign trade. The decision to end war communism was made on March 21, 1921, when the NEP was introduced at the X Congress of the RCP(b).

Eurocommunism

Eurocommunism is the conventional name for the policy of some communist parties in Western Europe (such as French, Italian, Spanish), which criticized the lack of political freedoms and the alienation of the party and authorities, in their opinion, existing in countries that adopted the Soviet model of socialism. The transition to socialism, according to supporters of Eurocommunism, should be carried out in a “democratic, multi-party, parliamentary” way. In its rejection of the dictatorship of the proletariat, Eurocommunism was close to social democracy (although the Eurocommunists did not identify themselves with them). Russian followers of Eurocommunism, or non-authoritarian communism, are often mistakenly called Trotskyists, despite the authoritarianism of Trotsky himself and the absence in the ideology of the non-authoritarian left of any traces of preference for the Trotskyist branch of Marxism.

Anarcho-communism

Socio-economic and political doctrine about the establishment of a stateless society based on the principles of decentralization, freedom, equality and mutual assistance. The ideological foundations of anarcho-communism were laid by the famous scientist and revolutionary Pyotr Alekseevich Kropotkin. The most famous milestones in the history of the anarcho-communist movement were the insurgency of Nestor Makhno during the Russian Civil War, as well as the actions of the Spanish anarcho-syndicalists during the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939. In addition, it should be noted that anarcho-communism is the ideological basis of the anarcho-syndicalist International that exists to this day, founded in the winter of 1922-1923.

Projected dates of transition to a communist form of society

2009 May Day demonstration in Severodvinsk

V.I. Lenin in 1920 attributed the building of communism to the 30s - 40s of the 20th century:
The First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee N. S. Khrushchev announced in October 1961 at the XXII Congress of the CPSU that by 1980 the material base of communism would be created in the USSR - “The current generation of Soviet people will live under communism!”

Full communism as the highest phase of the communist formation

According to Marxism, the “communist socio-economic formation”, or, briefly, “communism” consists of two phases: the lower - which in Marxism is called socialism and the highest - the so-called “full communism”. Under socialism there is a state, and state power is stronger than under other formations, elements of bourgeois law and other remnants of the capitalist formation. Also, under socialism there is personal property, there is small private production (garden plots) and small private trade (markets). However, large private property is also absent under socialism. Since the means of production become common property, the word “communism” is already applicable to this phase.

According to Marx,

…In the highest phase of communist society, after the subordination of man to the division of labor that enslaves him has disappeared; when the opposition between mental and physical labor disappears along with it; when work will cease to be only a means of living, but will itself become the first need of life; when, along with the all-round development of individuals, the productive forces also grow and all sources of social wealth flow in full flow, only then will it be possible to completely overcome the narrow horizon of bourgeois law, and society will be able to write on its banner: “To each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”.

Anarcho-communists do not agree with the concept of two phases and believe that for the onset of complete communism and the elimination of the state, a preliminary stage of strengthening the state is not necessary.

Many authors have repeatedly noted that human needs are limitless, therefore, even the highest labor productivity requires distribution mechanisms and restrictions, for example, money. To this the Marxists responded as follows:
The state will be able to die out completely when society implements the rule: “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” that is, when people are so accustomed to observing the basic rules of community life and when their work is so productive that they will voluntarily work according to their abilities. The “narrow horizon of bourgeois law”, which forces one to calculate, with the callousness of Shylock, not to work an extra half hour against another, not to receive less pay than another - this narrow horizon will then be crossed. The distribution of products will then not require rationing on the part of society of the amount of products received by each person; everyone will freely take “according to need.”

From a bourgeois point of view, it is easy to declare such a social system a “pure utopia” and scoff at the fact that socialists promise everyone the right to receive from society, without any control over the work of an individual citizen, any number of truffles, cars, pianos, etc....
...to “promise” that the highest phase of the development of communism would come did not occur to any socialist, and the prediction of the great socialists that it would come does not presuppose the current productivity of labor and not the current average person who is capable “in vain” - sort of like the students in Pomyalovsky - spoil the warehouses of public wealth and demand the impossible.

In fiction

The communists are paving the way to the stars. Postal block USSR 1964

In the Soviet Union, communist motifs in science fiction were of paramount importance from the very beginning of the genre in the country.

Our job is to turn Soviet science fiction into a weapon in the fight for communism and for the spread of communist ideas throughout the world by increasing the artistry and ideological content of the works.

However, from the 1930s to the 1950s, it was mostly “short-range fiction,” describing the transition to a communist society, but not the society itself.

I. A. Efremov vividly and positively described the humane communist society of the future in his famous novel “The Andromeda Nebula,” on which the film of the same name was based. The development of this author’s ideas about people of the communist future is given in the story The Heart of the Snake and the novel The Hour of the Ox.

A. Bogdanov (“Red Star”), the Strugatsky brothers (“World of Noon”), G. Martynov (“Gianea”, “Guest from the Abyss”), G. Altov (“Scorching Mind”), V. Savchenko (“Beyond the Pass”), V. Nazarov (“Green Doors of the Earth”) V. Voinovich (“Moscow 2042”).

The description of communist society in Western fiction is presented in the Star Trek series. In addition, the communist society of the future was described by H. Wells (“Men Like Gods”, “The Time Machine”, W. Le Guin “The Dispossessed”, T. Sturgeon (“The Artificers of the Planet Xanadu”).