Crisis in the Kremlin - Our 1988 USSR
1.I support ruffino’s plan
2. In fact, why not try to influence Solidarity through negotiations? I know that there are enough people within Solidarity who are actually left-wing syndicalists that perhaps through negotiation we can get Solidarity (or, part of Solidarity's membership) to move away from Walesa's neoliberal leadership.
3. I support Kriss's plan
2. In fact, why not try to influence Solidarity through negotiations? I know that there are enough people within Solidarity who are actually left-wing syndicalists that perhaps through negotiation we can get Solidarity (or, part of Solidarity's membership) to move away from Walesa's neoliberal leadership.
3. I support Kriss's plan
1. I agree with @panpiotr .
2. I agree with @Kriss and @ruffino . Also the idea of @Hall should be taken in consideration. The Solidarity is not a monolith, we should use it. Let the left wing of the Solidarity have a say in politics and integrate them into the state apparatus as legal trade union and a kind of safety valve. They could be useful to fight bureaucracy and corruption at least.
3. I support @Kriss
2. I agree with @Kriss and @ruffino . Also the idea of @Hall should be taken in consideration. The Solidarity is not a monolith, we should use it. Let the left wing of the Solidarity have a say in politics and integrate them into the state apparatus as legal trade union and a kind of safety valve. They could be useful to fight bureaucracy and corruption at least.
3. I support @Kriss
The USSR has begun increasing it's funding to PASOK, the consequences of which will be revealed later after the Greek elections : )
Lol. I was gone for a bit and now we deem beauty pageants to be socialist?! These peagents are used to commodify women and the best looking (fair skinned, blonde, blue eyed) commodity wins.
We have also decided to attract foreign companies to set up manufacturing in USSR. Why is this required? We are not China, we are already a manufacturing superpower at this time. The only issue was that we spend too much on the military instead of light-industry due to the threat of an invasion by NATO. Our heavy industries should already be very robust and developed. We just need to dedicate more funds to the consumer sector.
1. Do not send an envoy. Japan still has not apologized over raping and killing hundreds of thousands of our Chinese brothers and sisters.
2. Solidarity's leaders are taking funds from the CIA. Have the KGB investigate the leaders wealth and spread evidence of their corruption through newspapers/journals or anything that is not affiliated with the communist party so it gives more credibility. We must support our allies in Poland and ensure the party maintains it's monopoly of power.
3. The party failed in leading the proloteriat of Burma in achieving socialism. Continue support for the party but replace their leadership with more committed cadres.
We have also decided to attract foreign companies to set up manufacturing in USSR. Why is this required? We are not China, we are already a manufacturing superpower at this time. The only issue was that we spend too much on the military instead of light-industry due to the threat of an invasion by NATO. Our heavy industries should already be very robust and developed. We just need to dedicate more funds to the consumer sector.
1. Do not send an envoy. Japan still has not apologized over raping and killing hundreds of thousands of our Chinese brothers and sisters.
2. Solidarity's leaders are taking funds from the CIA. Have the KGB investigate the leaders wealth and spread evidence of their corruption through newspapers/journals or anything that is not affiliated with the communist party so it gives more credibility. We must support our allies in Poland and ensure the party maintains it's monopoly of power.
3. The party failed in leading the proloteriat of Burma in achieving socialism. Continue support for the party but replace their leadership with more committed cadres.
Last edited:
Italians and Yugoslavs have a different opinion (in fact, in Italy, in addition to national ones, political parties were also held - and the communists had their own). Moreover, in the USSR there was an analogue - a television show called “A nu-ka, devushki” (Come on, girls). At first glance, these are competitions for representatives of different professions, but with an emphasis on external charisma - that is, the appearance should preferably (Sic!) “homely”, and should be based on charisma and professionalism.
To be honest, I’m not a supporter of beauty contests (beauty means a lot to me, although that’s probably why I’m not interested in them). However, let's look at the whole picture. If you look at the entire competition, everything is not limited to looking good, and not even to posing well - the responses of the contestants also play a role. Please note that no one answers the question honestly (often this is a certain formula that needs to be repeated - for example, “World peace”). Parameters such as diction and so on are important. This is not a beauty contest - it is a presentability contest.
Now look at the situation - the USSR only recently began to fill the consumer basket, and even within the country, young people are too focused on America. In fact, the eighties were the peak of “Westernophilia” (although for the most part, citizens of the USSR were oriented toward a romanticized Europe rather than toward the “anti-spiritual USA”). We need, firstly, to raise the prestige of Soviet brands, and secondly, to raise the prestige of the Soviet Union abroad. And these girls can help us if we play our cards right.
Also we need to consider that next beauty contest will organized by Companies and organizations affiliated with USSR.
IMHO - by the way, I would prepare the contestants not for the role of models, but for the role of representatives of humanitarian and public organizations (at least those who win).
I was watching a video last night, I learned about the Soviet's Kharkovchanka and it's first and second generation in the late 1950s and early 1970s for the Antarctic exploration, I also learned there was gonna be a third generation during the 80s but was stopped due to budget and economic reasons but I do wonder if it's still possible with our economy and budget getting better.
1. Should the USSR send a delegation to the funeral of Emperor Showa?
yes, but make sure it is clear we have no praise for the actions he alowed in the past and treat him as the last of the "hitlerist" leaders to finaly fall
2. How Should the USSR respond to the Polish government's decision to negotiate with Solidarity? What, if any, concessions should be made to the group?
alow the negoitations on union reform to be conducted as sean fit and alow reprochment with the papial faith, but make it clear the communist's party still holds the reigns in poland
3. Should the USSR continue it's support for the CPB in Burma? If so, what methods of support should take priority?
we should consult chiefly with india on it and defere to them
i also saport the desire to consolodate politabureo control and reverse the economic capitalization
yes, but make sure it is clear we have no praise for the actions he alowed in the past and treat him as the last of the "hitlerist" leaders to finaly fall
2. How Should the USSR respond to the Polish government's decision to negotiate with Solidarity? What, if any, concessions should be made to the group?
alow the negoitations on union reform to be conducted as sean fit and alow reprochment with the papial faith, but make it clear the communist's party still holds the reigns in poland
3. Should the USSR continue it's support for the CPB in Burma? If so, what methods of support should take priority?
we should consult chiefly with india on it and defere to them
i also saport the desire to consolodate politabureo control and reverse the economic capitalization
Last edited:
Comrades! I apologise for my lateness in attending these essential meetings. But having newly been promoted to the privilege and duty of taking part in our Great Union of Soviet Socialist Republics most crucial decisions. I have had to study and catch up to the many important dossiers of the recent past, and present.
To make up for this I have, after careful deliberation and thought, assembled a document on what I believe to be the best path forward, not just in the contemporary crisis and challenges, but into the new decade and millennium. For the latest development internally, among the nations of the block, and foreign, call I believe for a new doctrine: United (Socialism) on the Outside; Debate (and Adaptation to Different Conditions) on the Inside.
Socialism at the onset of a new decade, finds itself in an era of mortal danger, yet also great opportunity, to right the wrongs of the past, fasten the march to final victory and World Liberation. Our Great Union, birthplace of Leninism, Vanguard and First of the Revolution. Has through pragmatic compromise, open mindness to new solution, willpower of its people, the Workers, and competence of its leadership, the Party. Been steered away from the brink, for now.
While Lenin isn't exactly Young Again as much as we may like. More, not as Old as we may dislike. Even if not a Second October, once more if not the youth, new exicting dynamic faces and ideas, are taking charge of State and Party. The people feel once more a modicum of hope for the future, and that their voices, actions, choices have an influence on what it may be. The floodgates on debate and ideas have been opened, some constructive even when criticism others... less so. Caution is still needed, as is a constant watch on those who would end all achieved for personal gain, no matter what they say they believe in.
But not all is as well, in the worldwide socialist movement. Our Fraternal Republics face now many of the same challenges, yet for many reasons, not all appear to face them with the same vigour and success as our Union. While of course, all Republics material conditions are unique, and what the Soviet Workers and Party have found to be best for themselves, may not be for all People. It is the Privilege and Duty, of any socialist People in health, like ourselves, to aid their Comrades in need and difficulty. Lest the Union trades knowing now the true joys of socialism, for remaining alone in the world. As the traps of capitalism tear apart the People's friendship, otherwise above such futile national borders.
As such, I will now expose my humble proposals on the current issues in the agenda, to then use them as examples, of how I believe our Great Union of Soviet Socialist Republics can best serve the defense and spread of World Revolution.
1. Should the USSR send a delegation to the funeral of Emperor Showa?
Yes, of the highest possible rank. While unpleasant to attend the celebration of such an imperialist criminal, our Union, and international socialism, is at the current juncture weakened by the last decades of struggle with global capitalism. And in the wise words of Lenin, such shows of deference to capitalism may buy us not just time to recover, but also the rope with which to hang it. Or less metaphorically, open the door to further trade to strengthen our economy, the technology sector in particular.
2. How Should the USSR respond to the Polish government's decision to negotiate with Solidarity? What, if any, concessions should be made to the group?
We should advise the Polish Government to enter negotiations, if nothing else to avoid a further escalation and need to resort to more... unsavory solutions. However, we should also suggest these measures:
Firstly, the inclusion of Soviet observers and aides, not in the negotiations themselves of course, as they are an affair for the representatives Polish people alone to determine. But, to the Polish government and Party sessions, where the latest round of negotiations are the obvious agenda. So they may swiftly provide, to the limits of their autonomy and knowledge of course, an estimation of our position on any request that may involve us. Such as trade deals, strategic cooperation, migration. And in general, report with haste results and moods, to Moscow. All to ensure the greatest coordination and cooperation, as given for Fraternal Internationalist Communist Parties.
Secondly, that among matters to be discussed, not all must be approached with equal flexibility and willingness to compromise.
The main focus of the negotiations, must remain about independent trade unions and indipendent parties role in the bright future of the Polish People’s Republic. Autonomy, degree of scrutiny, censorship and freedom of the ideals exposed, regulations of formation, splits and dissolutions, electoral law. After all, while Solidarity has demonstrated a surprising degree of support among the population, it remains to be seen if the majority has rejected the Vanguard role of the Polish United Workers' Party. They can be allowed to try, but until then, they have little legitimacy to dictate policy.
A lower but still substantial degree of compromise can be sought, in other internal issues. In particular matters of freedom of speech, press or media in general. However, we should suggest that even in the event of full freedom of the press and media, no state distribution, funding, support or even spaces be allowed for any private, trade union or party press or media, but only for the state's own. More cynically, the latter should, if in a more muted manner now to simulate objectivity, echo the Polish United Workers' Party own press and media apparatus. As the sole proven Vanguard and genuine socialist party, they must enjoy a position of privilege to protect the Polish Socialist achievements. Only parties able to adopt similar policies, can enjoy even indirectly, such state support.
The status of religion can also be negotiated. While a futile superstition, there exist many comrades who yet find solance in the opiate of the masses. In Poland, it appears rehabilitation from its use has been less than effective, so any change would be but an acknowledgement of facts on the ground. Of course, while abandoning atheism in favour of a degree of secularism can still be compatible with the socialist nature of the People's Republic. No more than freedom of religion may be agreed, and possibly, inspired by our French liberal predecessors, Freedom from Religion seeked as a compromise.
On matters of the economy too, compromise can be sought on Solidarity proposals. Being a trade union, as representatives of atleast part the workers, who make up said economy, it represents a legitimate interest. However, apart for workers rights in general. Any request regarding the directions of a particular industry, should singularly negotiated by representatives of said industry, not necessarily with the Government but definitely with the Planning Committee in charge. As well, restrictions must be made on what compromises may be sought, in strategic industries, such as infrastructure, military-industrial complex. But also more loosely affiliated education, healthcare, state bureaucracy, police.
The greatest limits must involve foreign affairs. We should in particular strongly suggest, no revisions be unilaterally made, on the Polish People's Republic adherence to the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, or to the Council of Mutual Economic Assistance. Such decisions must be made by a Sejm majority representing such among the people, and should involve anyway a long negotiation between all members. Otherwise too sudden unilateral changes, may result in an inability to adapt, and unforseen grave consequences for the Polish People's Republic strategic defense or economy.
Thirdly and finally, that channels, official or not, be opened to negotiate directly with the various movements making up Solidarity. Not just by the Polish government, but by the Fraternal Socialist Parties International Forum too. While it would be easy to paint all opponents of our Comrades Polish Vanguard, as a monolith out to restore liberal capitalism, if not the vilest of reaction and fascism. This is untrue. Among their ranks, are many misguided would be comrades or atleast fellow travelers. Who proclaim to oppose socialism yet support it in facts, or proclaim their allegiance to it only to be tricked into opposing its Vanguard. Trade unionists, socialists of other schools, Marxists of various stripes. Even syndicalists and anarchists. Seeking greater understandings with these groups, will not just bolster the Polish United Workers' Party and international socialism popularity. But also potentially shatter Solidarity's unity, neutralising the threat of succesful counterrevolution. While this may result in compromises or even the loss of Marxist-Leninism monopoly in Polish political discourse. This is but temporary. And a misguided but still genuinely socialist Poland inside our Treaties, a preferable outcome to the return of a bastion of reaction or NATO, threatening to severe the Fraternal People from eachother.
3. Should the USSR continue it's support for the CPB in Burma? If so, what methods of support should take priority?
Yes. While instability in Burma is not in the interest of us or our hopefully ally India, neither is the current military regime. Moreover, the BSPP has clearly shown to be neither genuine in its adherence to socialism, nor able to govern with competence. As such, we should not let such a good crisis go to waste, and with it the opportunity to advance the cause of socialism worldwide.
However, we should edge our bets, and anyway exclusive support for the CPB could invoke the spectre of Western intervention. As such, we should advise and encourage the formation of a United Front with other socialist or sympathetic forces, possibly able to survive an eventual defeat of the military Junta. And if approached by non socialist or rightist forces, opposing the coupists too, also of a temporary Popular Front. However, this latter major compromise should be heavily vetted and scrutinised, ready to be dropped the moment it impairs revolutionary momentum in CPB or socialist held territory.
As for the specific form of aid, we shall respect Indian and Burmese initiative. However, considering the Burmese army willingness to use force, arms and trainers should join general observers, aides, supplies and funds in ample quantities. Particularly, as discovered in Afghanistan, any form of portable, possibly by infantry, anti air system. To even the playing field. Training in the use of Soviet weapons may be conducted in camps generously leased deep in Indian territory, away from eyes, ears and unfortunate raids of military forces. If necessary, special forces may be dispatched, but this could again invite the West ire.
India and the CPB should also be consulted on how to best answer China's support for the Junta. Diplomatic condemnation at the very least may be on the table.
I hope my aims with my proposed United on the Outside; Debate on the Inside Doctrine, have become clear from my answers to the existing troubles.
It's first seeds and steps have already been laid with our actions in Greece. As we all have agreed, that it is better a socialist if misguided and neutral Greece, than one capitalist and enemy of all revolutions.
While eventually all will see the errors of their ways, and the superiority of Marxism-Leninism. We shouldn't oppose our misguided comrades so viciously, as to push them into puppets of capitalism. But instead, seek to work with them, if necessary, and tolerate them even when they are eventually defeated by us Marxist-Leninists in the race for leadership.
This doctrine may be pointed inward too. I propose, to satiate our understandably paranoid critics from the left, as well as to aid our scientists, researchers, economists and planners. The formation specularly to the recent free-market Special Economic Zones, of Experimental Economics Zones. Ones where with scientific rigour, economic theories and models of organising agriculture or industry can be tested. Where our leftists critics can for example, attempt to match our own liberalisation reforms with better forms of socialised or collectivised means of production. To weed out the unworkable proposals and discover the best ones. And, after for future tests on a wider scale indicate the best possible model, ensure the Union economy be ever dynamic and cutting edge.
To make up for this I have, after careful deliberation and thought, assembled a document on what I believe to be the best path forward, not just in the contemporary crisis and challenges, but into the new decade and millennium. For the latest development internally, among the nations of the block, and foreign, call I believe for a new doctrine: United (Socialism) on the Outside; Debate (and Adaptation to Different Conditions) on the Inside.
Socialism at the onset of a new decade, finds itself in an era of mortal danger, yet also great opportunity, to right the wrongs of the past, fasten the march to final victory and World Liberation. Our Great Union, birthplace of Leninism, Vanguard and First of the Revolution. Has through pragmatic compromise, open mindness to new solution, willpower of its people, the Workers, and competence of its leadership, the Party. Been steered away from the brink, for now.
While Lenin isn't exactly Young Again as much as we may like. More, not as Old as we may dislike. Even if not a Second October, once more if not the youth, new exicting dynamic faces and ideas, are taking charge of State and Party. The people feel once more a modicum of hope for the future, and that their voices, actions, choices have an influence on what it may be. The floodgates on debate and ideas have been opened, some constructive even when criticism others... less so. Caution is still needed, as is a constant watch on those who would end all achieved for personal gain, no matter what they say they believe in.
But not all is as well, in the worldwide socialist movement. Our Fraternal Republics face now many of the same challenges, yet for many reasons, not all appear to face them with the same vigour and success as our Union. While of course, all Republics material conditions are unique, and what the Soviet Workers and Party have found to be best for themselves, may not be for all People. It is the Privilege and Duty, of any socialist People in health, like ourselves, to aid their Comrades in need and difficulty. Lest the Union trades knowing now the true joys of socialism, for remaining alone in the world. As the traps of capitalism tear apart the People's friendship, otherwise above such futile national borders.
As such, I will now expose my humble proposals on the current issues in the agenda, to then use them as examples, of how I believe our Great Union of Soviet Socialist Republics can best serve the defense and spread of World Revolution.
1. Should the USSR send a delegation to the funeral of Emperor Showa?
Yes, of the highest possible rank. While unpleasant to attend the celebration of such an imperialist criminal, our Union, and international socialism, is at the current juncture weakened by the last decades of struggle with global capitalism. And in the wise words of Lenin, such shows of deference to capitalism may buy us not just time to recover, but also the rope with which to hang it. Or less metaphorically, open the door to further trade to strengthen our economy, the technology sector in particular.
2. How Should the USSR respond to the Polish government's decision to negotiate with Solidarity? What, if any, concessions should be made to the group?
We should advise the Polish Government to enter negotiations, if nothing else to avoid a further escalation and need to resort to more... unsavory solutions. However, we should also suggest these measures:
Firstly, the inclusion of Soviet observers and aides, not in the negotiations themselves of course, as they are an affair for the representatives Polish people alone to determine. But, to the Polish government and Party sessions, where the latest round of negotiations are the obvious agenda. So they may swiftly provide, to the limits of their autonomy and knowledge of course, an estimation of our position on any request that may involve us. Such as trade deals, strategic cooperation, migration. And in general, report with haste results and moods, to Moscow. All to ensure the greatest coordination and cooperation, as given for Fraternal Internationalist Communist Parties.
Secondly, that among matters to be discussed, not all must be approached with equal flexibility and willingness to compromise.
The main focus of the negotiations, must remain about independent trade unions and indipendent parties role in the bright future of the Polish People’s Republic. Autonomy, degree of scrutiny, censorship and freedom of the ideals exposed, regulations of formation, splits and dissolutions, electoral law. After all, while Solidarity has demonstrated a surprising degree of support among the population, it remains to be seen if the majority has rejected the Vanguard role of the Polish United Workers' Party. They can be allowed to try, but until then, they have little legitimacy to dictate policy.
A lower but still substantial degree of compromise can be sought, in other internal issues. In particular matters of freedom of speech, press or media in general. However, we should suggest that even in the event of full freedom of the press and media, no state distribution, funding, support or even spaces be allowed for any private, trade union or party press or media, but only for the state's own. More cynically, the latter should, if in a more muted manner now to simulate objectivity, echo the Polish United Workers' Party own press and media apparatus. As the sole proven Vanguard and genuine socialist party, they must enjoy a position of privilege to protect the Polish Socialist achievements. Only parties able to adopt similar policies, can enjoy even indirectly, such state support.
The status of religion can also be negotiated. While a futile superstition, there exist many comrades who yet find solance in the opiate of the masses. In Poland, it appears rehabilitation from its use has been less than effective, so any change would be but an acknowledgement of facts on the ground. Of course, while abandoning atheism in favour of a degree of secularism can still be compatible with the socialist nature of the People's Republic. No more than freedom of religion may be agreed, and possibly, inspired by our French liberal predecessors, Freedom from Religion seeked as a compromise.
On matters of the economy too, compromise can be sought on Solidarity proposals. Being a trade union, as representatives of atleast part the workers, who make up said economy, it represents a legitimate interest. However, apart for workers rights in general. Any request regarding the directions of a particular industry, should singularly negotiated by representatives of said industry, not necessarily with the Government but definitely with the Planning Committee in charge. As well, restrictions must be made on what compromises may be sought, in strategic industries, such as infrastructure, military-industrial complex. But also more loosely affiliated education, healthcare, state bureaucracy, police.
The greatest limits must involve foreign affairs. We should in particular strongly suggest, no revisions be unilaterally made, on the Polish People's Republic adherence to the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, or to the Council of Mutual Economic Assistance. Such decisions must be made by a Sejm majority representing such among the people, and should involve anyway a long negotiation between all members. Otherwise too sudden unilateral changes, may result in an inability to adapt, and unforseen grave consequences for the Polish People's Republic strategic defense or economy.
Thirdly and finally, that channels, official or not, be opened to negotiate directly with the various movements making up Solidarity. Not just by the Polish government, but by the Fraternal Socialist Parties International Forum too. While it would be easy to paint all opponents of our Comrades Polish Vanguard, as a monolith out to restore liberal capitalism, if not the vilest of reaction and fascism. This is untrue. Among their ranks, are many misguided would be comrades or atleast fellow travelers. Who proclaim to oppose socialism yet support it in facts, or proclaim their allegiance to it only to be tricked into opposing its Vanguard. Trade unionists, socialists of other schools, Marxists of various stripes. Even syndicalists and anarchists. Seeking greater understandings with these groups, will not just bolster the Polish United Workers' Party and international socialism popularity. But also potentially shatter Solidarity's unity, neutralising the threat of succesful counterrevolution. While this may result in compromises or even the loss of Marxist-Leninism monopoly in Polish political discourse. This is but temporary. And a misguided but still genuinely socialist Poland inside our Treaties, a preferable outcome to the return of a bastion of reaction or NATO, threatening to severe the Fraternal People from eachother.
3. Should the USSR continue it's support for the CPB in Burma? If so, what methods of support should take priority?
Yes. While instability in Burma is not in the interest of us or our hopefully ally India, neither is the current military regime. Moreover, the BSPP has clearly shown to be neither genuine in its adherence to socialism, nor able to govern with competence. As such, we should not let such a good crisis go to waste, and with it the opportunity to advance the cause of socialism worldwide.
However, we should edge our bets, and anyway exclusive support for the CPB could invoke the spectre of Western intervention. As such, we should advise and encourage the formation of a United Front with other socialist or sympathetic forces, possibly able to survive an eventual defeat of the military Junta. And if approached by non socialist or rightist forces, opposing the coupists too, also of a temporary Popular Front. However, this latter major compromise should be heavily vetted and scrutinised, ready to be dropped the moment it impairs revolutionary momentum in CPB or socialist held territory.
As for the specific form of aid, we shall respect Indian and Burmese initiative. However, considering the Burmese army willingness to use force, arms and trainers should join general observers, aides, supplies and funds in ample quantities. Particularly, as discovered in Afghanistan, any form of portable, possibly by infantry, anti air system. To even the playing field. Training in the use of Soviet weapons may be conducted in camps generously leased deep in Indian territory, away from eyes, ears and unfortunate raids of military forces. If necessary, special forces may be dispatched, but this could again invite the West ire.
India and the CPB should also be consulted on how to best answer China's support for the Junta. Diplomatic condemnation at the very least may be on the table.
I hope my aims with my proposed United on the Outside; Debate on the Inside Doctrine, have become clear from my answers to the existing troubles.
It's first seeds and steps have already been laid with our actions in Greece. As we all have agreed, that it is better a socialist if misguided and neutral Greece, than one capitalist and enemy of all revolutions.
While eventually all will see the errors of their ways, and the superiority of Marxism-Leninism. We shouldn't oppose our misguided comrades so viciously, as to push them into puppets of capitalism. But instead, seek to work with them, if necessary, and tolerate them even when they are eventually defeated by us Marxist-Leninists in the race for leadership.
This doctrine may be pointed inward too. I propose, to satiate our understandably paranoid critics from the left, as well as to aid our scientists, researchers, economists and planners. The formation specularly to the recent free-market Special Economic Zones, of Experimental Economics Zones. Ones where with scientific rigour, economic theories and models of organising agriculture or industry can be tested. Where our leftists critics can for example, attempt to match our own liberalisation reforms with better forms of socialised or collectivised means of production. To weed out the unworkable proposals and discover the best ones. And, after for future tests on a wider scale indicate the best possible model, ensure the Union economy be ever dynamic and cutting edge.
Last edited:
I echo our newly arrived Comrade @Cato_Sicarius' positions on topics 1, 2 and 3.
Additionally, for 2, I would add our need to support and propel Catholic priests with a positive view of Communism to the forefront of discourse to better link people's (often misguided) desire for religious succour with Marxist-Leninist ideals. We need to restrict the influence the Papacy can yield on our fellow brother nation. We must also be open to, and advise the current Polish Sejm to be as well, open to treading a path of Communism with Polish Characteristics. The people of Poland have seemingly had somewhat of an adversarial relation with Communist ideals of late - we must encourage the process of them coming back around to these ideals but with a Polish flair to better reflect the realities on the ground. After all, we too are pushing toward evolving our ideals.
Additionally, for 2, I would add our need to support and propel Catholic priests with a positive view of Communism to the forefront of discourse to better link people's (often misguided) desire for religious succour with Marxist-Leninist ideals. We need to restrict the influence the Papacy can yield on our fellow brother nation. We must also be open to, and advise the current Polish Sejm to be as well, open to treading a path of Communism with Polish Characteristics. The people of Poland have seemingly had somewhat of an adversarial relation with Communist ideals of late - we must encourage the process of them coming back around to these ideals but with a Polish flair to better reflect the realities on the ground. After all, we too are pushing toward evolving our ideals.
I wish to thank esteemed Comrade @Imp for the most helpful contribution in developing and expanding my own proposal scope. As well as fully grasping my own intentions, that is a view of each socialist experiment and so republic or people, as having its own unique material conditions. And so necessarily, while sharing core socialist values with all others, expressing and adapting them through equally unique caratheristics.
In this particular case, I believe an important distinction should be made in how such support should be expressed.
If only media appearance of otherwise private citizens' remarks should be amplified.
If they should be explicitly presented by the Polish State and employed by Polish United Workers' Party propaganda as experts in the interpretation of their religion.
If they should be allowed state employment.
If they should be allowed political participation, as in ability to be elected to the Sejm as indipendents or other parties.
If they should be allowed Polish United Workers' Party membership, and if yes, if only as observers, fellow travellers, non voting members. Or full voting members, with the risk of such an awkward event as an ordained priest becoming General Secretary.
It is my humble proposal that, in the spirit of Marxist-Leninism Enlightened Atheism yet also, of a new doctrine of tolerance of other socialist strains.
Support for communist or sympathetic Polish catholic priests, should not be allowed to escalate to the point of state employment and our Comrades Marxist-Leninist Vanguard Party membership. Afterall, a faithful will never be a true Marxist-Leninist, and a minister of faith is already employed, if in the service of the Church to work on what they believe the spiritual. But can be best seen, as the psychological, moral and ethical wellbeing, of the people. When not working outright to better the people's material conditions.
However, if truly in dire straits, such restrictions may be dropped to only, no priest be ever given voting membership in the Polish United Workers' Party. This is a red line in the sand, for if crossed, would mark the degeneration from Marxist-Leninist comrades, to not even revisionists, but outright abandonment of Marxism.
In this particular case, I believe an important distinction should be made in how such support should be expressed.
If only media appearance of otherwise private citizens' remarks should be amplified.
If they should be explicitly presented by the Polish State and employed by Polish United Workers' Party propaganda as experts in the interpretation of their religion.
If they should be allowed state employment.
If they should be allowed political participation, as in ability to be elected to the Sejm as indipendents or other parties.
If they should be allowed Polish United Workers' Party membership, and if yes, if only as observers, fellow travellers, non voting members. Or full voting members, with the risk of such an awkward event as an ordained priest becoming General Secretary.
It is my humble proposal that, in the spirit of Marxist-Leninism Enlightened Atheism yet also, of a new doctrine of tolerance of other socialist strains.
Support for communist or sympathetic Polish catholic priests, should not be allowed to escalate to the point of state employment and our Comrades Marxist-Leninist Vanguard Party membership. Afterall, a faithful will never be a true Marxist-Leninist, and a minister of faith is already employed, if in the service of the Church to work on what they believe the spiritual. But can be best seen, as the psychological, moral and ethical wellbeing, of the people. When not working outright to better the people's material conditions.
However, if truly in dire straits, such restrictions may be dropped to only, no priest be ever given voting membership in the Polish United Workers' Party. This is a red line in the sand, for if crossed, would mark the degeneration from Marxist-Leninist comrades, to not even revisionists, but outright abandonment of Marxism.
i belive comrad sicarius has perhaps the most comprihencive plan to poland and the papacy and endorce it to the letter, but i must insist that state planing in poland only be losend if workers coops and outher sochialist ecanomic vehicals are alowed, western profitmongers must be kept out, and naturaly power must be maintained within the comunist party
Comrades , Will there be a tiananmen square massacre-like event in this timeline? If so, we should to make every effort to worsen the ties between the West and the PRC. We should try to form some new organization after overcoming the crisis of coming decade.
The Warsaw alliance, which includes the PRC and Yugoslavia, has to be renewed and reformed when the current situation passes. ( Something comparable to "Gorbachev is assassinated" TL's Shanghai pact).
.
The Warsaw alliance, which includes the PRC and Yugoslavia, has to be renewed and reformed when the current situation passes. ( Something comparable to "Gorbachev is assassinated" TL's Shanghai pact).
.
Last edited:
While a mending of the Sino-Soviet Split is as inevitable as victory of the World Revolution, and indeed is the cleared path to its rapid achievement as of now. I suggest we avoid any too overtly manipulative and clandestine action.
The People’s Republic of China of the split was misguided, ideological, unpragmatic and overall, of dubious competence. Yet still the Party and People mostly unmistakably genuine in their commitment to some form of socialism. Indeed, they split because of our predecessor badly planned reforms appearing as if a surrender of our Great Union to revisionism and capitalism. As well as more generally, the arrogance to assume the worldwide socialist movement should be subordinate without appeal to Moscow directives. A doctrine of some value during the 30s, but most clearly outdated ever since the Revolution was successfully exported following the Great Patriotic War and victory against the pseudo-fascist Right Kuomintang in China.
The current People’s Republic of China meanwhile, has been led astray by decades of parallel development. It now stands on a very thin line, between necessary reformism to extract the capitalist rope, and outright revisionism. It may profess a political structure closer to that of October, of nested Soviet Democracy, if unfortunately still in need of cautionary measures much like our own. But we all know Soviet or even professing adherence to Socialism is not synonym to genuine Socialism, from the very first days of our Party, from the revisionist majority of Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries refusal to overthrow the bourgeoisie Revolution before October.
The unrest against the CPC, contains not just revisionists or even liberals, fascists, reactionaries. But also Maoists, genuine Marxist Leninists, other strains of socialism.
Their violent suppression could result in the PRC complete abandonment of Socialism, especially if our attempts to influence such a crucial juncture in discourse became too heavy handed or underhanded in character. Potentially leading to the opposite effect, an explosion of mere nationalism against perceived foreign interference, masking the surrender of the CPC to the Core of Capital Attack Dog, Washington.
Whilst Sino-Soviet relations have been repaired and stand stronger then ever, the Chinese have absolutely no intention of joining the WPO or a successor to it. Right now, as OTL, the focus of the Chinese state is rapid development and market liberalisation under Deng Xiaoping's program. They do not wish to challenge either the West or the East, as they seek investment and cooperation with both to realise China's full potential. The "June 4th Incidient" will thus still occur as OTL, however how the USSR might take the situation into it's own advantage is to be seen.