danieleugpaquet@yahoo.cavol. 5, no. 1, January 3rd, 2012
Si vous désirez lire en français:
http://www.laviereelle.blogspot.com/“The Khrushchev School of Falsification:”
“The fiftieth anniversary of Nikita s. Khrushchev’s ‘Secret Speech, delivered on February 25, 1956, elicited predictable comment. An article in the London (UK)
Telegraph called it ‘the 20th century’s most influential speech'. (Furr, Grover,
Khrushchev Lied, Erythros Press and Media, Kettering - Ohio, 2011, p. 2)
So, I suspected that today, in the light of the many documents from formerly secret Soviet archives now available, serious research might discoverer that even more of Khrushchev’s ‘revelations’ about Stalin were false. In fact, I made a far different discovery. Not one specific statement of ‘revelation’ that Khrushchev made about either Stalin or Beria turned out to be true. The entire ‘Secret Speech’ is made up of fabrications. (
Ibidem, p. 3)
The most influential speech of the 20th century – if not of all time – a complete fraud? The notion was too monstrous. Who would want to come to grips with the revision of Soviet, Comintern, and even world history that the logic of such a conclusion would demand? It would be infinitely easier for everyone to believe that I had ‘cooked the books,’ shaded the truth – that I was falsifying things, just as I was accusing Khrushchev of doing. Then my work could be safely ignored, and the problem would ‘go away.’ Especially since I am known to have sympathy towards the world wide communist movement of which Stalin was the recognized leader. When a researcher comes to conclusions that suspiciously appear to support his own preconceived ideas, it is only prudent to suspect him of some lack of objectivity, if not worse.” (
Ibidem, p. 4)
“In December 1922, in a letter to the Party Congress, Vladimir Il’ich wrote: ‘After taking over the position of Secretary General, Comrade Stalin accumulated in his hands immeasurable power and I am not certain whether he will be always able to use this power with the required care.’
He also said:
“Stalin is excessively rude, and this defect, which can be freely tolerated in our midst and in contacts among us Communists, becomes a defect which cannot be tolerated in one holding the position of the Secretary General. Because of this, I propose that the comrades consider the method by which Stalin would be removed from this position and by which another man would be selected for it, a man who, above all, would differ from Stalin in only one quality, namely greater tolerance, greater loyalty, greater kindness and more considerate attitude toward the comrades, a less capricious temper, etc.” (
Ibidem, pp. 237-238)
On December 19, 1927, Stalin declared to the CC Plenum:
“Comrades! For three years I have been asking the CC to free me from the obligations of General Secretary of the CC. Each time the Plenum has refused me. I admit that until recently conditions did exist such that the Party had need of me in this post as a person more or less severe, one who acted as a certain kind of antidote to the dangers posed by the Opposition. I admit that this necessity existed, despite comrade Lenin’s well-known letter, to keep me at the post of General Secretary. But those conditions exist no longer. They have vanished, since the Opposition is now smashed. It seems that the Opposition has never before suffered such a defeat since they have not only been smashed, but have been expelled from the Party. It follows that now no bases exist any longer that could be considered correct when the Plenum refused to honor my request and free me of the duties of General Secretary. Meanwhile you have comrade Lenin’s directive which we are obliged to consider and which, in my opinion, it is necessary to put into effect. I admit that the Party was compelled to disregard this directive until recently, compelled by well-known conditions of inter-Party development. But I repeat that these conditions have now vanished and it is time, in my view to take comrade Lenin’s directive to the leadership. Therefore I request the Plenum to free me of the post of General Secretary of the CC. I assure you, comrades that the Party can only gain from doing this.” (
Ibidem, p. 251)
A few years before, the young workers and peasants Republic had witnessed the Socialist Revolution.
“If I were asked what was the greatest, the most memorable moment of my life, I would answer without any hesitation: it was when Soviet power was proclaimed.
Nothing could compare to the pride and joy that filled us as we heard pronounced from the tribune of the Second Congress of Soviets at Smolny the simple and impressive words of the historic resolution: “All power has passed to the Soviets of Workers’ Soldiers and Peasants Deputies!’
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin was unforgettable at that moment! It was amazing and unforgettable, this inspired concentration of Vladimir Ilyich as he stood on the platform of the presidium of the first Soviet legislative assembly as the Bolsheviks, in the first few hours after taking power, began socialist construction, the construction of a new world.” (Kollontaï, Alexandra,
Lenin at Smolny, Selected Articles and Speeches, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1984)
During World War 2, soldiers of the Red Army when they had the opportunity, used to meet, especially to celebrate New Year, and would toast to Stalin:
“La première santé, selon la coutume des hommes soviétiques, fut portée au camarade Staline; on lui souhaita une santé florissante dans l’année nouvelle et une longue vie. Puis on but à la victoire…” (Polévoï, Boris,
Nous autres Soviétiques, Un rêve réalisé, Édition électronique réalisée par Vincent Gouysse à partir de l'ouvrage publié en 1949 aux Éditions en langues étrangères de Moscou, p. 152)
Soviet people were then defending their motherland and the achievements of the socialist revolution against Nazi Germany.
(Photo Internet: April 1945, the Red Army in Berlin; complete victory over Nazi Germany which costed 20 millions Soviet lives)
“In 1917 the chain of the imperialist world front proved to be weaker in Russia than in the other countries. It was there that the chain broke and provided an outlet for the proletarian revolution. Why? Because in Russia a great popular revolution was unfolding and at is head marched the revolutionary proletariat, which had such an important ally as the vast mass of the peasantry, which was oppressed and exploited by the landlords. Because of the revolution there was opposed by such a hideous representative of imperialism as tsarism, which lacked all moral prestige and was deservedly hated by the whole population. The chain proved to be weaker in Russia, although Russia was less developed in a capitalist sense that, say, France or Germany, Britain or America.” (Stalin, J.V.,
The Foundations of Leninism, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1975, p. 27)
History teaches us that we must base ourselves on concrete facts. We cannot write it according to the tastes and fashions of the day. Yes, Joseph Stalin is not popular among the populations of the Western World. For most of these people he is a barbarian butcher. Such is not the appreciation for the older generations of the Russian people who benefited from the realizations of the Soviet power. This explains why –and television coverage shows it – the peoples of former Soviet Union are not ashamed to demonstrate with banners proclaiming their faith in Stalin.
Meanwhile, workers around the world are invited to join Communist parties, even if they don’t acknowledge the contribution of Stalin for world peace and advancements in the area of culture, economy and social progress in general.
Soviet people realized even the differences in the economic regime after the death of Joseph Stalin; such is also the case for the friends of Soviet Union in Europe, for instance by the Communist Party of Greece (KKE):
“… we regard, as mistaken the political choice, that held sway after the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of Soviet Union (CPSU,-Ed) and especially after 1965, regarding utilization of mechanisms and laws of the market for correction of mistakes and overcoming of shortcomings in the central planning (e.g. enterprise profits, establishment of enterprises’ self-management, etc.)”
(Papariga, Aleka, The importance of the critical assessment of the socialist construction in the 20th century for the strengthening of the labor movement and for an effective counter-attack, International Communist Review, # 2, Athens, 2010-2011, p. 30)
-30-