Марк Бойков - Почему не состоялся коммунизм? (Кто виноват? Что делать? Куда идти?) / Why has the communism still not turned out? (Who is guilty? What should be done? Where to go?)

It was so in the past and so is nowadays but if the mankind proceeds in the same direction in future the mankind will inevitably be lost. The Consumers are “a dark hole” of a human society. Despite of huge growth of productive power of mankind, this mouth is insatiable. The world supremacy of consumers approaches the hour of the Globe Catastrophe. The nature has no strength any more to cope with their appetites. Unfortunately it is not the forecast, it is already the diagnosis.

Meanwhile the existing level of production and labor productivity allows the communism actually would be widespread by the decree worldwide right now. And the only thing we need for it – a world government. Look, what enormous riches are concentrated in some states, in some strata, in the hands of some persons, what a huge army of well paid militaries and policemen, protect this Pyramid of Riches! Still in reality this protection is totally useless, in fact it’s a grandiose waste of resources. What a crowd of bureaucrats and representatives of mass-media, more exactly, footmen-journalists, produce new and new different cultural and scientific fictions to justify the order of things favourable to consumers! Let’s summarize and understand that just reorganization (including the general disarmament, the balanced reorientation of manufacture, redistribution of investments and products) would make it possible all over the world! This could be an important a step to general maintenance of needs, to 2–3 hour working day with two or three working days a once a week.

Again I speak not about “everything should be to taken away and divided”, certainly no. The Marxism never preached this platitude that different «nemtsovs and hakamadas» ( T: – Russian politicians of sharp-liberal orientation)try to attribute to Marxism for to look more clever themselves. The mankind needs less it produces nowadays for to live in situation of permanent glover. That is why the communism is not only possible – in fact it is comprehensively provided.

And was it a real reason why no Communism is now? Why it hasn’t appeared, hasn’t been built – choose any term you like – hasn’t appeared for everybody?I think because it has been again appropriated by some elite. It had been taken away from people by exploiters before the 1917, it also has been stolen by political elite, by nomenclature and bureaucracy in Soviet epoch after the Great Revolution. They also had no need for Communism as their own consumer ambitions were much more closer to them than any social needs.

Though the privileges which the Soviet elite had possessed could hardly be compared to that great robbery that was committed by the same elite under a pretext of so-called liberal reforms.

Those who should bear burden of the responsibility for safety of the public property has appeared to be its main thief. They had knowledge, official and personal communications, acquaintances, the access to special and secret information, the right of signature, and the most important, they had time to carry out their intentions and plans. At the same time the worker had to work all day long and could hardly find time to restore himself. Therefore Chubays’s ( T: A. Chubays was of the key figures in Russian politics in 1991–2008, the “father” of Russian privatization) assurances about equal starting opportunities during privatization were not simple lie of bad-qualified economist, but do the street swindler’ dirty tricks. While “reforming” the nomenclature has shown its true face and has proved thus it represents far from being the moral leader of a society.

In a sense, certainly, everybody was guilty. Still the fault of the ordinary worker and the top-manager’s one differs greatly. The worker pressed and limited by system in many cases is compelled to act definitely.

Here is an example of former “order”. It would help to understand better who and how is responsible for our failure.

Suppose there is a daily work-quota or rate of output (WQ). The worker who carries out WQ produces 100 pieces of something and gets suppose 100 rubbles a month. Still such wages is not sufficient for a worker and he wants to overcome the task producing 120 pieces and so getting 110 rubles (100 daily + 10 for the exceeding). Everybody wants to live better and so the exceeding of WQ becomes the mass phenomenon. Then the factory management raised rates of output and accordingly reduced quotations so that work-quota was up to 120 pieces. Things’ going that way meant the worker returned to previous earning (100 rubles).

At the same time however person’s commodities have rather grown than decreased. The person matures, marries, that marriage brings children and those children begun also maturing. With those circumstances’ pressure the person adapts for the set work-quotas and starts exceeding the rates of output again. And once more the factory management was not appeased, and again the old norms and quotations had been revised and reset. In some places it took place more often, in other ones – more seldom, somewhere the process appeared to be very sharp, somewhere as just moderate. But it was the practice which to result in bloody accidents in Novocherkassk (T: – the city in the south of Russia where the workers demonstration against price-rising was shooted down)in 1962. The common intensity inevitably should blow up in any local place where the negative energy had been for some reason focused. So the elements of the protest and force of the weapon intrude into economy.

It seemed to be quite time for economists to reflect. However the scientists who serve the policy and the politicians sing chorus: “The wages shouldn’t grows faster than labor productivity”. Actually such scientists confuse labor productivity to simple mechanical performance and thus aspire to receive greater result due to relative reduction of wages. Reducing payment they intensify work, instead of raising its productivity. V. Lenin wrote: “We had seen how in 80-th (T: – of XIX century) our manufacturers have surpassed themselves in matter of ugly oppressions of workers as they have transformed penalties into means of downturn of wages, not having satisfied with downturn of quotations itself. (Lenin V. I., Complete works, v. 2, p. 59).That’s the way: Lenin’s ideological successors have gone on a way of cruel capitalists of XIX century. As a result actual depreciation of the work that quite often led workers to nervous failures and stresses has begun.

The quality of a product has been negatively influenced also. The time couldn’t be compressed. As if your rate of output or WQ has been increased, first, without technical improvement of the manufacturing, second, relying only on impellent acceleration so you can improve your skill only in the limits of labor intensification. And sooner or later the limit of human opportunities is reached, and the worker should or endow the interests, either search for another way out of situation. That’s why the more “accelerated” is the worker himself the more the worker’s sub-consciousness forces him to spend his energy less intensively. He leaves unfinished something in a product, worsens quality. The result is a decreasing of quality at the same time while the production output grows. Thus the worker compensates his loss, he met the increasing of work rates with diminishing of his labor efforts.

Still the worker suffers once more. Passing trough the checkpoint doors, he turns into the consumer, the buyer of very that product of the lowered quality that has been the result of their subquality work. Naturally as the consumer our worker doesn’t like this product. The quality decrease was accompanied therefore by deficiency increase – the goods of high quality become a rarity. The money received by the worker as extra earnings for “over-performance”, he has been compelled to pay to the speculators or to the state for the deficit qualitative goods. That is why the life of people didn’t depend on labor efforts any more.