Rhondda Records logo 1
Rhondda Records Home Page
Rhondda Records Cartoon Page
A page to help the Rhondda laugh
Quotations Page
Words said in truth or jest
Your Health Page
A page to help your health - be positive !
Peace Page
A Page from the Rhondda dedicated to Peace
One Union
A Page to help unity among working people
Penrhys, Rhondda Page
A page telling the story of a unique magical village - Penrhys, in the Rhondda !
Discussion Page
Let's open up and share (communicate)
Richard Gould's Page
Move over Titch Gwilym and Micky Gee, Richard Gould IS the new Welsh virtuoso
Efran Kaye's Page
The master of music, Efran Kaye is here!
Glynbyerful Male (voice) Choir's Very Own Page
a choir from all the Glyns of the Rhondda for nutters
Peace Events and leftwing events Page
Some activities you just might like to aid Peace
Rhondda History Page
A page to help those who want to know the Rhonddas past
Jobs in the Arts Page
News of opportunities in drama, music, dance in Wales
Rhondda Records' Top Ten Books Page
Great Thinkers point the way forward
A Page for those who DO care about true folk
Poetry and Literature in Wales Page
Poetry and Literature in Wales
Welsh Recipes Page
Food to honour from Wales' tradition for now
Siarad Gwmraeg?
Welsh language News
Rhondda Records' Shop
Stuff yew cun buy, frwm the Rhondda, innit
Poet's Page
music and opinion from Wales' wandering poet.
Business Support in the Rhondda and Wales
answers for start ups and established firms in a changing world

Discussion Page

Back to Stalingrad? Disputed poll 
claims TWO THIRDS of Russians 
want Volgograd to return name
used in legendary WW2 battle
July 30th, 10:13am (RT)

A majority of Russians support restoring the name of the 
country’s twelfth-largest city back to ‘Stalingrad,’ 60 
years after it was renamed Volgograd, in the Soviet 
program of de-Stalinization, a poll has revealed.
The survey, commissioned by the centre-left political party
 ‘A Fair Russia’, and made public on Thursday, revealed
 that 68% of Russians are in favour of returning to the
 title it bore from 1925 to 1961, with just 28%
to keep the current name.
Interestingly, in Volgograd itself, the poll discovered that
local residents are somewhat less supportive of a name 
change, with 48% backing a return to Stalingrad.
The last time Federov’s pollsters conducted a study on 
this topic was in 2005, and just 23.4% in Russia said 
then, that they supported a renaming.
However, most interestingly, the faction is now coming 
under attack from the Communist Party (CPRF), which 
has accused A Fair Russia of stealing one of its flag-
ship proposals. Speaking to the Moscow daily, 
Kommersant, Communist  Party Secretary 
for Elections, Sergey Obukhov, accused
''right-wing forces'' of using his party’s 
ideas to draw away voters. In 2013 
-- on the 70th anniversary of the 
Battle of Stalingrad -- the CPRF 
collected more than 100,000 
signatures in favour of 
the renaming. 

...What do YOU think?

Slovenian PM: EU’s ‘imaginary values’ 
could trigger ‘collapse’ of bloc, 
amid Hungary LGBT row
July 4th, 2:09pm (RT)
Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa has condemned
 the EU’s western states, for imposing “imaginary 
European values”, without respecting local 
cultures. Jansa supports Hungary, in its 
fight against LGBT content in
and TV.
Sandwiched between Italy, Austria, Hungary, and Croatia, 
Slovenia is a tiny country of 2.1 million people. However,
 for the next six months, it will set the agenda of the
 European Council. 
Speaking after his country assumed the council’s rotating 
presidency, last week, Jansa made it clear, that his 
priorities might not line up with those of the 
bloc’s western powers.
 Railing at the Slovenian “mainstream media” and its alleged
 allies in the country’s judiciary, Jansa also spoke out 
against the EU’s promotion of its liberal values in 
eastern and central Europe, LGBT causes
 among them.
Imposing “imaginary European values,” he argued, 
would be the “fastest road to collapse” for the bloc. 
“The European Union brings together countries with 
different traditions, with different cultures, there
 differences... that need to be taken into
account and
 respected,” he stated.
European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, 
openly disagreed with Jansa during the press briefing, 
saying that “freedom of expression, diversity and 
equality” are fundamental “European values” 
that need to be upheld.
The clash between Jansa and von der Leyen is just one 
more battle in a growing cultural conflict between the 
western swathe of the EU, and the centre and east. 
In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban has led the charge 
against Brussels in this conflict, angering the liberal West
 by passing a law forbidding the portrayal of 
homosexuality to children. 
The EU in return has threatened legal action against Hungary,
 and 17 western European leaders signed a letter last month 
condemning “discrimination towards the LGBTI community”
 and their “fundamental rights.”
Orban has insisted that the law does not discriminate against 
the LGBT community, but allows parents to decide what to
 teach their children, about matters of gender 
and sexuality.
Jansa has taken a similar line. Responding to von der Leyen 
on Friday, he said that the pair had “a sincere discussion on
 what human rights are,” but that he defended “the right of 
parents to educate their children” as they see fit. Von der 
Leyen responded that “the right of parents to educate 
their children was not at all disputed,” but “the 
question was … whether the amendments 
of existing laws discriminate against 
Jansa also proclaimed that Slovenia is not “a colony” of the EU
 to be dictated to, much like Orban last week decried the Dutch
 “colonial” mentality, after Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte 
declared earlier that Hungary “has no business being in
 the European Union any more” if it doesn’t submit to 
the bloc’s position on LGBT rights.
What do YOU think?
Think your friends would be interested? 
Share this story!

Save the Children has been captured 
by transgender ideology. It isn't 
protecting youngsters, it’s 
endangering them
by Debbie Hayton
July 2nd, (RT)
Debbie Hayton is a high school teacher and trade union 
officer. She teaches science to 11-18-year-olds, at a 
school in central England. As a transgender person, 
she has written extensively about what it means to 
be trans, and how trans people can be included in 
society without compromising the rights of other 
vulnerable groups. Her work can be read in 
publications from across the political 
spectrum, where rational scientific
debate is allowed and encouraged. 
Follow her on Twitter @DebbieHayton
The charity is supposed to help vulnerable children, which is 
why it rightly opposes FGM. So why is it promoting the idea 
that it’s OK for girls as young as seven to go down a path 
that leads to gender reassignment surgery?
Save the Children was established in the aftermath of the First 
World War by Eglantyne Jebb and Dorothy Buxton, two sisters
 from England who had been appalled by the impact of British
 government policy on children across Europe. The war may 
have been over, but the Royal Navy maintained a blockade 
of Germany until it signed the Treaty of Versailles. In cities 
like Berlin and Vienna, children were starving. 
In 1919, Jebb was arrested and convicted --- for distributing 
leaflets bearing shocking images of malnourished children.
 A hundred years later, their campaign has grown into a 
massive NGO with an annual turnover approaching 
£300 million. Enjoying royal patronage, it is now 
part of the British establishment. In the 2020 
annual report, Princess Anne wrote, “I 
thank you for everything you have 
done for children this year.”
Maybe Princess Anne should ask them about their 
campaign for Pride Month? Earlier this week, they 
shared some tips about how to raise a 
“transgender child.”
Judging by the video clip, Save the Children has been captured
 by transgender ideology – the idea that men and women are 
defined not by their sex but by some soul-like gender identity.
 With reckless abandon, they extend this idea to children. 
The lack of critical analysis is breathtaking. Each 
slide could and should have been pulled apart.
There is no need to pigeonhole children as ‘transgender’. 
We should let them be. Gender is not assigned at birth; 
sex is observed and recorded sometimes before birth.
Identifying as the opposite sex does not mean we are 
the opposite sex.Girls can have short hair; it’s fine!
Why do we need to validate feelings? What does it 
even mean to validate feelings? We are all 
vulnerable to the reactions of others, and 
all parents can help their children to 
respond constructively.
But behind the slogans, the cartoons, and the enchanting 
music, this campaign focuses on a real nine-year-old girl 
whose parents think she is a boy. They claim their 
daughter was “assigned a female gender at birth,” 
something she was questioning by the time she 
was five. Two years later, she apparently 
identified as a boy. In response, her 
parents cut her hair short and 
changed her name. In 
their words:
“As we move forwards and puberty looms, there 
will be problems to solve and decisions to take.”
These are problems of the parents’ making. The decision 
they should be making for their child is to return to reality. 
Despite their professed “moments of grief,” they still have
 a daughter. She never left. Girls can be masculine – they 
can cut their hair short, they can take a preferred name 
usually adopted by boys, they can climb trees and play 
football – and that is fine. But they are still female.
But rather than celebrate the diversity of humanity within 
each sex, Save the Children uses this family’s story to 
perpetuate the lie that girls can become boys. Worse, 
gender non-conforming children, and their parents, 
may get the impression that girls need to become 
boys to express their masculinity. The video ends 
with a link to Mermaids UK, an organisation that 
promotes puberty blockers, drugs that stunt 
natural development and lead to profound 
and irreversible damage. 
This is the same organisation that – rightly – condemns 
female genital mutilation. Their country director for 
Sudan said, “FGM is not only a violation of girl’s 
rights, it has serious consequences for a girl’s
 physical and mental health.” 
Why is the mutilation that results from puberty blockers, 
cross-sex-hormones, double mastectomies – for girls 
whose breasts developed before they started treat-
ment – and gender reassignment surgery any 
different? Abuse is abuse. 
Who told Save the Children that seven-year-olds have a 
gender identity that trumps their biological sex, and – 
more importantly – why did the charity believe them? 
Gender identity can be neither proved nor falsified, 
and it is not needed to explain transsexualism. 
I know that... as a trans person who 
transitioned as an adult. 
The fact that I am unhappy with my sex does not mean 
I am the opposite sex; I am simply unhappy with it. 
Further, I know that it is possible to be reconciled 
to my sex. That delivered peace and contentment 
within my own skin that I never experienced when 
I thought I was some sort of woman. These 
children’s lives are being built on folly, and 
that is no way for anyone to start out in life. 
Lies can never satisfy in the same way.
A hundred years ago, Eglantyne Jebb campaigned 
against policies that harmed children. Her modern
 successors are actively promoting harm.
Think your friends would be interested? 
Share this story!
...what do YOU think?

Did the Soviet Union collapse
because of a lack of love?

Or because it foolishly
trusted and looked up
to the West?

OR, PERHAPS, both.

What do YOU think?
Boris Yeltsin had entourage of 
‘hundreds’ of CIA agents, who 
instructed him on how to run 
Russia, claims the former 
parliamentary speaker
by Jonny Tickle
June 12th,  8:20am (RT)
The first Russian president, Boris Yeltsin, was surrounded 
by “hundreds” of CIA agents, who told him what to do 
throughout his tenure as leader. That’s according to 
Ruslan Khasbulatov, the former chairman of
 Russia’s parliament.
Speaking to radio station Govorit Moskva, Khasbulatov 
claimed Yeltsin’s entourage was full of Americans. In 
1991, he was elected to his leadership post, with 
Washington’s ''help'', it has been alleged, and it
still not yet known, to what extent the US 
remained the voice in his ear, through-
out his presidency.
“There must have been a hundred [CIA employees],” 
Khasbulatov said. “They determined everything.” 

He added that, after ''winning'' the presidential 
election, Yeltsin would send security officials 
and heads of departments to the US, so the 
Americans could “examine them” and
 “give conclusions.”
Khasbulatov’s statement comes after former Russian vice 
president Alexander Rutskoy told online outlet Lenta that 
12 full-time employees of the CIA helped carry out the 
landmark Yeltsin-Gaidar market reforms, system-
atically dismantling the centrally planned 
economic system --- and leading the
 into shock capitalism. 
However, according to Khasbulatov, everyone knew about 
Rutskoy’s links to the US, and American officials even 
influenced the former president to replace a 
considerable number of his appointees.
“On the whole, Rutskoy is absolutely right – Yeltsin was 
advised by foreigners,” he continued. “There is no 
secret here... and a great number of people know 
about it. I don’t have any detective stories about
 eavesdropping, but, in general, it’s well known. 
Yeltsin used to confer very closely, on all 
personnel matters, with foreign
Yeltsin left office in 1999, but not before creating a hyper-
presidential system, taking power away from a hostile 
parliament, and removing almost all the checks and 
balances. This move was supported by Washington,
which hoped to keep the 
Communist Party out of
power in the 
newly formed Russian state.
Now, Yeltsin has a mixed legacy, with many Russians 
believing he was a drunkard, who sold the country to 
Western capitalists. However...   in ''the West'', he is
compared to revolutionaries such as South Africa's 
Nelson Mandela, Poland’s Lech Walensa... and 
Czechoslovakia’s Václav Havel, with former
 US president, Bill Clinton, even having
 likened him to Abraham Lincoln.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Interview: ''Love for people'' 
makes Chinese communists 
source of strength, says 
French party chief
May  24th, 10:14am (Xinhua) 
Chinese communists... have accomplished great 
achievements in the country's development, by
 living up to their all-for-the-people commitment
 Jacques Cheminade, chairman of the French 
political party, Solidarity and Progress, 
recently told Xinhua, via video link.
For the Communist Party of China (CPC), loving people 
is not only a political commitment, but also its source 
of strength, said Cheminade.
In his view, a political party must know well about, and 
be linked to, the history of its own country, which is
 exactly what the CPC has been doing.
"In China, there is a vision of the future nourished by
 the past, by Chinese history," said the party leader,
referring to the Belt and Road Initiative, 
as a case in point.
In 2019, Cheminade visited China for the first time, and 
participated in the Euro-Asia Economic Forum in Xi'an, 
capital of northwest China's Shaanxi Province.
During the trip, he noticed that people's living standards
 in this country, had been growing incredibly fast, and 
that local people were more optimistic about their 
future, compared with people in the West.
Talking about relations between France & China 
Cheminade expressed his hope: that the two 
countries could forge... a more rational and 
active link in safeguarding multilateralism.
"It is by building multilateralism through 
different ways, that we will achieve the 
same commitment to the development
 of all," he said.
In March, Cheminade co-signed a declaration with 
experts from different countries, calling on the 
West to face up to China's development 
achievements - and to strengthen 
cooperation with the 
Asian country.
Denouncing the anti-China propaganda organized 
by some Western countries, Cheminade stressed 
that China has never imposed its own political 
system on other countries.
In dealing with adverse situations created by the West, 
China has, also, been showing patience and good 
political will, he added, expressing appreciation
 for "the sense of common welfare" of the
and the Chinese people.

Siege of Russia by
US and its Allies 
Offers a Lesson
for China
April 20th, 12:04pm
The US has rallied its European allies, to launch a new 
diplomatic expulsion campaign, and a public opinion 
crackdown against Russia.

In addition to the 
situation in eastern Ukraine, 
Alexei Navalny's
 hunger strike in prison - and
that he's "dying" - have now become
the latest focus of pressure on Russia.
It is noteworthy... that countries including the Czech 
Republic, Poland, Ukraine, and Bulgaria have joined 
the US in expelling Russian diplomats, mostly 
claiming that these Russian diplomats have 
conducted "activities incompatible with 
their status"
This is a highly ambiguous reason for expulsion. Once
members of the 
Warsaw Pact, or part of the Soviet 
Union, these countries are now often the first to
respond to the 
US' calls to confront Russia.
There are complex historical reasons for the Central & 
Eastern European countries tilting toward the US, and 
becoming "anti-Russia", that are difficult for outsiders 
to comment on. It is a pity that internal disintegration 
- rather than coercion from the US - had directly led
 the collapse of the Soviet Union.
 The Russian Federation was one of the main promoters 
of this disintegration.. and the original agreement to 
replace the Soviet Union with the Commonwealth of
Independent States (CIS), was signed by Russia, 
Ukraine and Belarus.  The Russian leaders who 
destroyed the Soviet Union, had no idea what 
would happen to their country afterwards.
The collapse of the Soviet Union has brought about 
geopolitical changes globally, and the evaluation
 the event is destined to vary from country to 
country, and from time to time. But it has 
become increasingly clear, that Russia 
has been the biggest loser from
 that collapse.
Many Russians once believed that when the Communist 
Party stepped down and the Soviet Union collapsed, the
 US and the West would embrace Russia and respect 
them, for taking the initiative to end the Cold War.
 reality, however, is harsh. Moscow has
received no 
gratitude or kindness,
from the West. 
From the moment the Soviet Union collapsed, the US has 
arrogantly treated Russia as a defeated country in the 
Cold War, engaging in all possible moves to suppress 
Russia, at will.
The collapse of the Soviet Union was a geopolitical disaster 
for Russia. As the dominant power in the Soviet Union, if it 
had chosen to support reforms to solve problems in the 
beginning, Russia could have paid a much smaller 
geopolitical price, than it would pay, over the 
following 30 years. Back then, Moscow had 
a broad sphere of influence and powerful 
capabilities; it could act independently 
and defiantly against Washington. But 
it has ceded those geopolitical 
resources, giving up its 
The US' vicious attitude toward Russia offers a glimpse into 
the brutality of great power competition and helps people 
see through Washington's geopolitical manipulation 
measures. The US portrayed its Cold War with the 
Soviet Union as an ideological confrontation --
conceal its intention -- to dominate the
world alone. 
Many people, including Russians, believed a political 
change of course, would fundamentally change their 
relationship with the US, and that Russia could thus 
integrate into the West, and become a dignified 
member of the Group of Eight.
Yet Russia is too large, with a nuclear arsenal on par 
with that of the US. It spans the Eurasian continent 
and advocates multi-polarity, with no possibility to 
becoming a new member of the West, that is 
submissive to Washington.
The US then took advantage of its "victory" - promoted the 
eastward expansion of NATO, squeezed Russia's strategic 
space at the fastest speed, and completely abandoned its 
verbal commitment that, after Germany was unified and 
remained a NATO member, the bloc would recruit no 
former Warsaw Pact countries, or former Soviet 
republics, as new members. 
The US is extremely untrustworthy. Its method of great power 
competition fully mobilises the ideological resources of its 
own, and in the West, and it is very good at infiltrating into 
other countries, which makes it very deceptive. Since the 
collapse of the Soviet Union, the world has witnessed 
other "colour revolutions" supported by the US. The 
destinies of countries that experienced subversion 
of state power, have proven tragic, as the US has 
neither the intention nor the ability to provide 
substantial assistance to those countries.
China, as a newly targeted "strategic competitor" of the US,
 is fortunate that we've witnessed all the colour revolutions
 in the world in the past 30 years. This is equivalent to 
having gotten politically vaccinated and receiving 
a boost shot to enhance the effectiveness. 
The Chinese people must protect the fruitful achievements 
of the People's Republic of China, & remain sober-minded 
about the US's repeated deceptive clamour that the 
strategic ''game'' between the US and China, is a 
battle between "democracies and autocracies".
China must continue to grow its national strength and weaken 
the ability of the US to pressure it "from a position of strength". 
China can only be a friend with whom the US has to coexist, 
because it cannot crush it. We must not bear any illusion
 that the US would embrace China, due to its changes. 
China is so big that we cannot try to get rid of the natural 
burden that comes with it. Since China is big, it should 
live with great courage and advantages.
This article originally appeared 
on the Global Times website.

 What do YOU think?

Is the US a friend
to the world ?

Or a psychopathic racist empire?


Justice or Hegemony...
what do you think?
China's Xi says world needs justice,
 not hegemony, in veiled reference
 to US
April 20th, 9:14 am (PressTV)
Chinese President Xi Jinping has called for a fairer 
world order in the face of the West’s unilateralism, 
warning hegemonic countries against “bossing 
others around.”
Speaking at the annual Boao Forum for Asia on 
Tuesday, Xi said that “the future destiny of the 
world should be decided by all countries.”
“One or a few countries shouldn’t impose their rules 
on others, and the world shouldn’t be led on by the 
unilateralism of a few countries,” Xi said.
Without singling out the US, the Chinese president 
warned against building barriers that are against
 market principles.
“Attempts to erect walls or decouple run counter to
the law of economics and market principles. They 
would hurt others’ interests without benefiting 
oneself,” Xi stated, in a ''veiled'' reference to 
Washington’s efforts to reduce dependence
 on Chinese supply chains and scrub the
export of products such as advanced 
computer chips to China.

“What we need in today’s world is justice, not hegemony...
 Bossing others around, or meddling in others’ internal 
affairs, will not get one any support,” Xi said, while
giving assurances that China will never engage 
in an arms race.
“A big country should look like a big country by showing
 that it is shouldering more responsibility," he added.
China has repeatedly criticized US hegemony and
 its projection of power in trade and geopolitics.
China and the US have been engaged in an intense
 trade war, kicked off under the Donald Trump 
The two world powers are also increasingly at odds over 
a range of issues, including alleged human rights abuse 
in the Xinjiang region, protests in Hong Kong, China’s
 territorial claims on the Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) 
and most of the South China Sea, as well as 
the COVID-19 origin.
Beijing hoped for an improvement in relations under 
President Joe Biden's administration. But the new 
president has, so far, shown no sign of backing 
down on hardline policies toward Beijing.
The Democratic president has even urged 
his allies, to harden their stance on China.
In the latest anti-Beijing move, Biden sought 
to present a united front with Japan, to 
counter “challenges” by China.
On Friday, he hosted Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshihide 
Suga in a meeting, in which China topped the agenda.
In a display of economic cooperation to the exclusion of 
China, Biden said Washington and Tokyo will jointly 
invest in areas such as 5G technology, artificial 
intelligence, quantum computing, genomics
 and semiconductor supply chains.
A Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson censured the 
US-Japan alliance and said the 2 were in fact ganging 
up to form cliques & fanning bloc confrontation, while 
talking about a “free and open” Indo-Pacific.
"It will only enable the world to see with increasing clarity
 the detrimental nature of the US-Japan alliance, which 
attempts to undermine regional peace and stability," 
the spokesperson said.


In Quest of a Multi-Polar World
March 28th, 2021

Michael Hudson and Pepe Escobar resume their 
conversation about a global monetary system 
that appears headed for divorce. 

Michael Hudson: Fifty ago, I wrote Super Imperialism about 
basically how America dominates the world financially and 
gets the free ride.

I wrote it right after America went off gold in 1971, when the 
Vietnam War, which was responsible for the entire balance 
of payments deficit, forced the country to go off gold. And 
everybody at that time worried the dollar was going to go
 down. There’d be hyperinflation. And what happened
 was something entirely different.

Once there was no gold, America strong-armed its allies to 
invest in U.S. Treasury bonds because their central banks
 don’t buy companies. They don’t buy raw materials. All 
they could buy is other central bank’s treasury bonds. 
So, all of a sudden, the only thing that other people 
could buy with all the dollars coming in were U.S. 
Treasury securities.

And the securities they bought essentially were to finance
 yet more war making and the balance of payments deficit
 from war, and the 800 military bases America has around 
the world. And the largest customer, I think we discussed
 it before, are the Defense Department and the CIA that 
looked at it [Super Imperialism] as a how-to-do it 
book. Well, that was 50 years ago.

And what I’ve done is not only re-edit the book and add more 
information that’s come out, but I’ve picked up the last 50 
years and how it’s absolutely transformed the whole 
world. And it’s a new kind of imperialism.

There was still a view 50 years ago that imperialism was 
[essentially] economic. And this is the view that there’s 
still a rivalry for instance, between America and China
 or America and Europe and other countries.

But I think the whole world has changed so much in the last 
50 years that what we have now is not really so much a 
conflict between America and China or America and 
Russia, but between a financial system economy
 run by finance and an economy run by 
governments — democratic or less 
democratic, but certainly a mixed 

Well, everything that made industrial capitalism rich, every-
thing that made the USA so strong in the 19th century, 
through its protective tariffs & through its public infra-
structure investment, all the way down through World 
War II & the aftermath. We had a mixed economy in
 America, and that was very balanced. Europe had a 
mixed economy. Every economy since Babylon and 
Rome, has been a mixed economy, but in America 
you’ve had, since 1980, something entirely

That was not foreseen by anybody
because it
 seemed to be
so disruptive.

And what that was, was the financial sector saying we need
iberty and by liberty, meaning we have to take planning and 
subsidy & economic policy and tax policy, out of the hands
 of government. And put it in the hands of Wall Street.

So libertarianism & a free market is a centralized economy
 which is centralized in the hands of the financial centres,
St, the City of London, the Paris Bourse. And what
 have today is the attempt of the financial sector to
take the 
role the landlord class had in Europe, from
feudal times 
through the 19th century.  It’s a kind
of resurgence.

If you look at the whole last 200 years of economic theory - 
from Adam Smith and, Henry George and Marx, onward - 
the whole idea was that everybody expected a mixed 
economy to become more and more productive and 
to free itself from the landlords, to free itself from
 banking - to make land a public utility.

That was the tax base to make finance basically something 
public, and government would decide who gets the funding 
and thus, the idea of finance in the public sector was going 
to be pretty much what it is in China. You create bank credit 
in order to finance capital investment in factories. It means 
the production of machinery, agricultural modernization, of
 transport, infrastructure of high-speed trains of ports and 
all of that.

But in the US & UK, you have finance becoming something
completely different.  Banks don’t lend money 
to factories.
They don’t want money to make the means of 
They make money to take over other assets. 
80% of bank
loans are mortgage loans to 
transfer the ownership of
real estate. And of course
 that’s what created a
middle class in the US.

The middle class was able to buy its own housing, it didn’t 
have to pay rent to landlords or absentee owners or war-
lords and their descendants in England and Europe. 
They could buy their own. What nobody realized is
 that if you borrow the money to take a mortgage, 
there’s still an economic rental value that is not 
paid to the landlords. It’s paid to the banks. 
And so, in the Western civilizations in 
America and Europe, the banks have 
played the role that the landlords 
played a hundred years ago.

And just as the landlord is trying to do everything they can 
through the House of Lords in England & the upper houses
 of government in Europe, they’re trying to block any kind of 
democratic government. And the fight really, is against 
governments that will do anything that isn't controlled 
by the 1 percent, by the banks. Essentially the merger 
between finance insurance and real estate; the FIRE 
sector. So, you have almost a relapse of capitalism 
in the West back into feudalism, but feudalism with 
a financialized twist, much more than it was in 
medieval times.

The fight against China, the fear of China is that you can’t do 
to China, what you did to Russia.  America would love for 
there to be a [former Russian President Boris] Yeltsin 
figure in China to say, just give all the railroads that 
you’ve built, the high-speed rail, the wealth, all the 
factories to individuals. And let the individuals run 
everything and, then we’ll lend them the money,
we’ll buy them out and then we can control

And China’s not letting that happen. & Russia stopped that 
from happening. And the fury in the West is that somehow,
American financial system is unable to take over
resources, foreign agriculture. It is left only
with military 
means of grabbing them, as we are
seeing in the near 
East. And you’re it seeing
in the Ukraine, right now.

Pepe Escobar: Well, as an introduction, Michael that was 
perfect because now we have the overall framework - 
geo-economic and historically - at least for the past 
70 years.

I have a series of questions for you. I was saving one of these 
for the end, but I think I should start really the Metallica way. 
Let’s go heavy metal for a start, right?

So considering  what you describe as a new kind of imperialism 
and the fact that this sort of extended free lunch cannot apply 
anymore because sovereigns around the world, especially 
Russia and China, I tried to formulate the idea that there are 
only three real sovereign powers on the planet, apart from
 the hegemon; Russia, China, and Iran, these three, which 
happen to be the main hub and the main focus of not only 
the New Silk Roads but of the Eurasia integration process, 
they are actively working for some sort of change of the 
rules that predominated for the past 70 years.

So my first question to you would be, do you see any realistic 
possibility of a, sort of a Bretton Woods 2.0, which would 
imply the end of the dollar hegemony as we know it, and 
petrodollar recycling on and on and on, with the very
 important presence of that oily hacienda in the lands 
of Arabia. Do you think this is possible considering
 President [Vladimir] Putin himself - only a few days
 ago reiterated once again that the US is no longer 
agreement-capable?  So that destroys already the 
possibility of the emergence of the new rules of 
the game. But do you think this is still 
realistically possible?

Michael: I certainly do not see any repetition of a Bretton Woods
 because as I described in Super Imperialism, the whole of 
Bretton Woods was designed to make American control 
over Britain, over Europe total. Bretton Woods was a U.S.
-centered system to prevent England from maintaining
its empire. That’s okay. To prevent France from maint-
aining its empire --- and for America to take over the 
sterling area and, essentially, with the World Bank, 
stop other countries from becoming independent 
and feeding themselves --- to make sure that they 
supported plantation agriculture, not land reform. 
The one single fight of the World Bank was to 
prevent land reform and to make sure that 
America and foreign investors, would take
over the agriculture of these countries.

And often, people think of capitalism, certainly in the sense 
that Marx described in Volume One, is exploitation of wage 
labour by employers. But capitalism also is appropriation 
of land rent, agricultural rent, natural resource rent, oil 
and mineral rent. And the idea of Bretton Woods was to 
make sure that other countries couldn't impose capital 
controls or prevent US finance from coming in and 
appropriating their resources, of making loans to 
foreign governments so that governments would 
not create their own money to promote their own 
social development, but would have to borrow 
from the World Bank & IMF, that essentially 
meant from the Pentagon and the State 
Department, in U.S. dollars.

And they would dollarize their economies and the economies 
would all be sucked. The economic rents from oil, agriculture, 
mining would all be sucked into the United States. That kind 
of Bretton Woods cannot be done again. And since Bretton 
Woods was an idea of centralizing the world’s economic 
surplus in a single country, the United States, no, that 
can never be done again.

What is happening? You mentioned the world of free lunch, 
and that’s what was a theme of Super Imperialism, when 
America issues dollars, for these all end up in central 
banks and they hold the dollars as a surplus. That 
means what can they do? All they can do is really 
lend them to the US. The US got a free lunch. It 
could spend and spend on its military, on 
bumping up corporate takeovers of other
countries. The dollars have come in, and 
foreign countries couldn’t cash them in 
for gold. They had nothing to cash them 
into. All they could do, is finance the US 
budget deficit, by buying Treasury bills.

That’s the irony now, what has happened in the last few years 
in the fight against Russia and China is America has killed the 
free lunch because it said, okay, now we’re going to have 
sanctions against Russia and China. We’re going to all of 
a sudden grab whatever money you have in foreign banks
like we grabbed Venezuela’s money. Let’s go, we’re going
to excommunicate you from the bank clearing system. So 
you can’t use banking. We’re going to put sanctions 
against banks that deal with you.

So obviously Russia and China said, okay, we can’t deal with 
the dollar anymore, because the US just creamed them. And 
if we do have dollars, we’re just going to hold everything in 
reserves * lending to the US, the dollars that it’s going to 
spend building more military bases around us to make us
 waste our money on monetary spending. And so America 
itself by the way, in fighting against China and Russia,
ended the free lunch.

“In America you’ve had since 1980 something entirely different. 
That was not foreseen by anybody because it seemed to be 
so disruptive.”

And now, Russia and China as you pointed out, are de-dollarizing,
they’re trading in each other’s currency. They’re being the exact
opposite of everything that Bretton Woods tried to create. They
are trying to create independence from the United States.

If Bretton Woods is this dependence on the US, a centralized 
system dependent ultimately on Wall Street financial planners
 then, what China & Russia are trying to create is an economy
 that’s not run by the financial sector, but it is run by, let’s say, 
industrial and economic engineering and saying, what kind 
of an economy do we need in order to raise living standards
& wages and self-sufficiency and preserve the environment, 
what is needed for the ideal world that we want?

Well, in order to do that, you’re going to have to have a lot of
 infrastructure. And in America, infrastructure is all privatized. 
You have to make a profit. And once you have infrastructure, 
a railroad or electric utility, like you see in Texas recently, it’s
 a monopoly. Infrastructure, for 5,000 years, Europe, the near 
East, Asia was always kept in the public domain that goes, if 
you give it to private owners, they’ll charge a monopoly rent.

Well, the idea that China has is, “OK, we’re going to provide
 the educational system freely and let everybody try to get 
an education.” In America if you have an education, you 
have to go into debt for the banks for between $50,000 
and $200,000. And whatever you make you’re going to
 end up paying the bank while in China, if you give free 
education, the money that they earned from education 
will be spent into the economy, buying the goods and 
services that they produce, and the economy will be 
expanding, not shrinking, not having it all sucked out 
into the financial banks financing your education, 
same thing with railroads, same things with 

If you provide healthcare freely then the employers do not 
have to pay for the healthcare because that’s provided free. 
In the United States, if the  corporation and the employees 
have to pay for healthcare, that means that the employees 
have to be paid a much higher wage in order to afford the 
healthcare, in order to afford the transportation that gets 
him to work, in order to afford the auto loans, in order to
 drive to work, all of this is free, or subsidized in other 
countries, who create their own credit.

In the United States and Europe, governments feel that they 
have to borrow from the wealthy people in a bond and pay 
interest. In China they say, “we don’t have to borrow from
 a wealthy class. We can simply print the money.” That’s 
Modern Monetary Theory. As Donald Trump explained in 
the United States, we can print whatever we want. Dick 
Cheney said, deficits don’t matter. We can just print it.  
And of course, Stephanie Kelton and my colleagues 
in MMT at Kansas City, for many years, have 
been saying.

“The economy has been saturated & Reaganized and 
the result is, a fight of economic systems against
and Russia.”

The banks fear this because they say, “Wait a minute, Modern
 Monetary Theory means it’s not feudal monetary theory. We
 want feudal monetary theory. We want the rich people to be
 able to have a choke point on the economy that you can’t 
survive unless you borrow from us and pay us interest. 
We want the choke points.” That’s called economic rent.

So, you have the West turning into a rent-extractive economy, 
a rent-seeking economy. And you’ll have the whole ideal of 
Russia, China, and other countries, being the ideal of not 
only Marx, but Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Ricardo. The 
whole of classical economics was to free economies from 
economic rent. & the US economy is all about extracting 
rent through the real estate sector, the financial sector,
health insurance sector, the monopolies and the
infrastructure sector.

The economy has been saturated and Reaganized and the 
result is a fight of economic systems against China and 
Russia. So, it’s not simply that, there’s a fight between 
who makes the best computer chips and iPhones. It’s: 
are we going to have a fallback of civilization back to
 feudalism, back into control by a narrow class at the
 top of the economy, that 1 percent? Or are we going 
to have the ideal of democratic industrialization that 
used to be called socialism - but it was also called 
capitalism. Industrial capitalism was socialism; it 
was socialized medicine, it was socialized infra-
structure, it was socialized schooling. And so, 
the fight against socialism is a fight against
 industrial capitalism, a fight against 
democracy, a fight against 

That’s why what you’re seeing now is a fight for what 
direction civilization will go into. And you can’t have
Bretton Woods for a single kind of organization...
because the US would never join that civilization. 
The US calls a country trying to make its labour 
force prosperous, educated and healthy,
 of sick with shorter lifespans,
they call it 
communism or socialism.

Well, it can call it whatever it wants, but 
that’s the dynamic we are talking about.

Pepe:  Well, you put it very, I would say starkly. Opposition 
between 2 completely different systems, what the Chinese
 are proposing, including, from productive capitalism to 
trade and investment all across Eurasia and beyond, 
including Africa, parts of Latin America as well. And 
the rentier obsession of the 0.01 percent that 
controls the U.S. financial system. In terms of 
facts on the ground, are we going slowly but 
surely and ominously, towards an absolute 
divorce --- by a system based on rentier, 
ultra-financialization, which is the US's
system and not productive capitalism 
at all.

I was going through a small list of what the U.S. exports, it’s
 not much as you know, better than I do. Agricultural products 
but always privileging U.S. farmers.  Hollywood, we are all 
hostages of Hollywood all over the world. Pop culture? 
That’s not the pop culture that used to be absolutely
 impregnable and omniscient during the ‘60s, the 70s, 
during the Madonna, Michael Jackson era in the ‘80s, 
right? Infotech. And that’s where a big bet comes in. 
And this is maybe the most important US export at 
the moment because American Big Tech controls
 social networks all over the planet. Big Pharma. 
Now we see the power of Big Pharma with the 
whole Covid operations, right?  But Boeing 
prefers to invest in financial engineering 
instead of building decent products. 

So, in terms of a major superpower, the hyperpower, that’s
 not much, and obviously buyers all over the world already 
noticed that. So, China is proposing the New Silk Roads, 
which is a foreign-policy strategy, & a trade, investment 
and sustainable development strategy. [It’s] applied not 
only to the whole of Eurasia, but Eurasia and beyond to 
grow a great deal of the Global South and that’s why we 
have Global South partners to the New Silk Roads — 
130-and-counting as we speak.

So, the dichotomy could not be clearer. What will the 0.001 
percent do? Because they don’t have anything seductive
 to sell. To all those nations in the Global South to start 
with; the new version of the Non-Aligned Movement, 
NAM, the countries that are already part of New Silk 
Road projects, not even to Europe and this, we 
could see by the end of last year when the 
China-European Union agreement... was 
more or less sealed. It’s probably going 
to be sealed in 2021 for good.

And at the same time, we had the Regional Economic 
Comprehensive Partnership, RCEP, with the ASEAN 
10, my neighbours here, the Association of South 
East Asian Nations, China, Japan, South Korea, 
Australia, and New Zealand. So, when you have
 the China-EU deal, and when you have RCEP, 
you have China as the number one trade 
partner on the planet, no competition 

And obviously every one of these players wants to do 
business with China. And they’re privileging doing 
business with China to doing business with the 
U.S., especially with a country that once again, 
according to President Putin, is non-agreement 
capable. So, Michael, what is your key geo-
economic view of the next steps? Are we 
going towards a divorce of the American 
financialization system and the Eurasia-
and-beyond integration system?

Michael: Well, you have made the whole point clear. 
There is incompatibility between a rentier society 
controlled by the finance and real estate interests 
& military interests - and an industrial democracy.

Industry in England and Europe in the 19th century — the 
whole fight for democratic reform to increase the role of 
the House of Commons against the House of Lords in
 England and the lower house in Europe — was a fight 
to get labour on the side of industry [and] to get rid
 the landlord class. And it was expected that … 
capitalism [would then be] free of the landlord 
class, free of something that wasn’t really 
capitalism at all, it was a carry-over from
 feudalism. Once you free capitalism, you 
wouldn’t have this overhead of the idle 
1 percent, only consuming resources 
and going to war, anymore.

And then World War I changed all of that . … Already, in the 
late 19th century, the landlords and the banks fought back, 
and they fought back largely through the Austrian School 
of individualism and the English marginalists and they 
called it freedom. They call it free markets. Free
meant giving power to monopolists,
oppressors, to violence. A free market
where armies can come, take your 
country, impose client dictatorships like
 [Gen. Augusto] Pinochet in Chile or the 
neo-Nazis in the Ukraine. And you call 
that, a free market.

The free world was a world centrally planned by the US 
military & finance, together. So, it’s Orwellian, and the
 dynamic of this world is shrinking since it’s polarizing 
- and you’ve seen with the Covid pandemic in the US - 
the economy has polarized much more sharply than 
ever before between the 1%, the 10% and the rest
of the economy.

Well, as opposed to that here, you have economies that are 
not run by a rentier class, that don't have a banking class 
and the landlord class controlling the economy, but a 
partnership. The kind of thing you had in Germany in 
the late 19th century, government industry & labour 
all working together to design how we provide the 
financing for industry, so that it can provide, not 
only industrial capital formation, but public 
funding for us to build infrastructure and
 uplift the population.

What China is doing is what made America rich in the 19th 
century, what made Germany rich. It’s exactly the same 
logical engineering plan. Now, this plan, because it’s
 based on economic expansion, and environmental 
preservation and economic balance instead of on
concentration, this is going to be a growing 
economy. So, you are having a growing 
economy outside of the USt - and a
shrinking economy in the States
 and its satellites in Europe.

Europe had a choice; either it could shrink, and be American, 
or it could join the growth. Europe has decided unanimously, 
we don’t want to grow. We want to be constant. We want our 
banks to take over just like in America. That’s a free market
 because Americans have found out, and I’m told by US 
officials we just buy the European politicians, they’re 
bribable. That’s why when president Putin says, 
America and Europe are not agreement capable,
 it means they’re just in it for the money. There 
is no ideology there. There is no idea of the 
overall social benefit. The system is “how 
can I get rich, and you can get rich, by 
being bribed?” That’s why you go into 
politics. As you can tell in the US with
 the Supreme Court's law saying that
can be personally financed.

So, you’re having two incompatible systems and, they’re 
on different trajectories & if you have a system that is 
shrinking, like the West, and growing in the East, you 
have resentment.  People who obtain their wealth in 
crooked ways, or without working - by inheritance, 
by crime, by exploitation - they will fight like any-
thing to keep that. Whereas people who actually 
create wealth, labour, capital, they, they’re not 
willing to fight, they just want to be creative. 
So you have a destructive military force, in 
the West...  And a productive, economic 
growth force. And in Eurasia, the clash 
now is occurring largely in Ukraine. 
You’re having the US back the 

Pepe: The old Nazi movement!

Michael: It’s the same swastika-carrying group that threatened 
Russia in World War II. And this is like waving a red flag before
 a bull. Putin continues to remind the Russians. We know what 
happened with the 22 million Russians that died in World War II 
with Europe coming in. We’re not going to let it happen again.

And you can be certain Russia is not going to be sucked into 
invading the Ukraine. The US has its military advisers in the 
Ukraine. Now, the Vineyard of the Saker has a very good 
report on that. America’s trying to needle Russia into
 fighting back against the terrorist groups and Russia 
has no desire at all to. There’s nothing that Russia 
has to gain by taking it over. It’s essentially a 
bankrupt country.

The US is trying to provoke a response so it can say Russia
is attacking the West. The result will probably be, that 
Russia will simply provide arms to the E. Ukrainians 
to fight back the invasion. And you’re going to have
a waste-
land in Western Ukraine and Poland. And
this wasteland will 
be a new buffer state with
Europe. Already you have, maybe, 
10% of the
Ukrainians having moved to Russia and the
 10% are now plumbers in England
and Europe, 

They are beginning to look like Latvia, and all the other 
neo-liberalized countries. Neo-liberalized countries? If 
you want to see the future, look at Latvia and Estonia. 
Look at Greece. That’s the American plan. Essentially, 
an emigration of skilled labour, a sharp reduction of 
living standards, a 20 percent decline in population. 
And although it may appear to have more income, 
all of this income and GDP is essentially interest 
collection and rents to the FIRE sector.

All US GDP growth is essentially payment to the bank, to
the landlords and the monopolist, it’s not the population -
 employees aren't sharing in the GDP. It’s all concentrated
the top. They make a desert, and they call it growth.

It hasn’t changed.  Rome was a predatory economy held by 
military force that ultimately collapsed and the US is on the 
same trajectory as Rome. And it knows this, I have spoken
to US policymakers & they say, “you know, we’re going to
be dead by then. It doesn’t matter if the West loses.
I’m going to be rich. I’m going to buy a farm in New
and make a big bomb shelter there, and
live underground, 
you know, like a cave dweller.”

The financial time frame * the predatory rentier time frame
 is short term. The Eurasian time frame, is long-term. So, 
you’ve got to have the short-term burning what wealth
 it has, as opposed to the longer-term building up.

[Consider the Biden Covid relief measure.] They call it a stimulus 
bill, but if you’re starving, if you haven’t been able to pay your 
rent, if you’re six months behind in your rent and you get 
enough money to pay the landlord, at least one month
 back rent, that’s not a stimulus, that’s a survival.  And 
it’s a one-time payment. This kind of stimulus checks
 that America’s sending out are sent out every month
 in Germany and parts of Europe.

The whole idea in Europe is: OK, you have a pandemic, you 
have business interrupted. What we’re going to do is we’re 
going to have a pause. You don’t pay the rent, but the land-
lords are not going to pay the banks. And the banks are 
not going to be in arrears. We’re just going to have a 
pause so that when it’s all over people will go back 
to normal. Well... China and Russia are already 
pretty much there and where you are [in Asia], 
and especially in Thailand, are already back 
to normal.

But in America anybody who’s renting or who’s bought a 
house on mortgage credit or who has credit card debt or 
personal debt or automobile debt they’re way behind. 

And all of these stimulus checks are just being used 
to pay the banks and the landlords - not to buy more 
goods and services.

All they’re trying to do is, is get out of the hole they’ve dug
in the last 12 months. That’s not a stimulus that’s a partial, 
desperation payment. This problem never existed in other
civilizations. You have the whole tradition of Greece and 
Babylonia --- that’s what my book Forgiving the Debt is 
all about. The whole idea is, when there's an economic 
interruption, you have an interruption, you don’t have 
people going into debt. You wipe out all the arrears 
that have mounted up. You wipe out the tax arrears,
the rent arrears, the debt of payment arrears. So,
once the crisis is over, you can start from a 
normal position again.

There’s no normalization in the US, there’s no normal position 
to start. You’re starting from a position, even more behind the
 financial problems than you were when you went in. The 
foreign economies of China and Russia don’t have that 
kind of problem, they don’t have any kind of deficit. So, 
the West is beginning with 99% of the population 
deeper and deeper into debt to the 1 percent.

Where is that whole polarization between the 1% and the
 99 %? It doesn’t exist, certainly in China and in Russia, 
Putin is trying to minimize it, given the legacy of kleptocracy 
that the neo-liberals put in, he’s still trying to deal with that, 
but you really have that. It’s a difference in economic 
systems, and the direction in which these systems 
are moving in.

Pepe: I’m really glad that you brought up Ukraine, Michael, 
because this, let’s say U.S. foreign policy, even before 
Trump and now with the Biden-Harris administration, 
basically more or less what it boils down to, is 
sanctions, sanctions, sanctions, as we know, 
and provocations --- which is what they’re 
doing, certainly, in Syria with that
 recent bombing.

In the case of Ukraine & Donbass, it’s absolutely crazy 
because NATO so-called strategists, when you talk to
them in 
Brussels, they know very, very well, about
each state or what
ever they weaponize and
financialize, to profit Kiev to mount 
sort of offensive against the Donbass:
and even if they would have l,300,000
soldiers against 30,000 in Donbass.

If the Russians see that this is going to get really heavy if they
intervene directly with their bombing, with their super missiles,
they could finish this story in one day. And if they want it, they 
could finish the whole story, including invading Ukraine, in 
three days, like they did in 2008 with Georgia, and still they 
keep the provocations, loosely acted on by people from
inside the Pentagon.

And so, we have sanctions, we have nonstop provocations, and
 we have also a sort of introducing a Fifth Column — elements 
inside or at the top of government — which brings me to, and 
I would love to have your personal analysis on the role of 
Mario (Goldman Sachs) Draghi now in Italy, which is 
something I had been discussing with my Italian 
friends. And, there’s more or less a consensus, 
among very well informed, independent Italian 
analysts that Draghi may be a perfect Trojan 
horse to accelerate the destruction of the 
Italian state, which will accelerate the 
globalist project of the European 
Union, which is absolutely non-
state centric.

Let’s put it this way, which is also part of the Great Reset,
so, if you could briefly talk to us about the role of Super 
Mario at the moment.

Michael: Well, Italy is a very good example to look at. It had 
strings for a long time. When you have a country that needs
 infrastructure, plus public, social democratic spending... 
you need a government to create the credit. But when the 
US and specifically the University of Chicago free market 
lobbyists created the the Eurozone financial system, their 
premise was that governments cannot create money. Only 
banks can create money. Only banks owned by the bond 
holders can create money for the benefit of their owners 
and bond holders. So, no European government, first of 
all, can run a budget deficit sufficient to cope with the 
coronavirus or with the problems that have been 
plaguing Italy for a decade. 

They can’t create their money to revive employment, to revive
 infrastructure, to revive the economy. The European Central 
Bank only lends to other central banks.

It’s created trillions of euros just to buy stocks and bonds, not 
to spend into the economy, not to hire labor, not to build infra-
structure, but just for the holders of the stocks and bonds. 
The 1% or 5% of the population gets richer. The function of 
the European Central Bank is to create money, to save the
 wealthiest 5% from losing a single penny on their stocks 
and bonds.

And the cost is to impoverish the economy and to basically 
make the economy end up looking like Greece, which was 
sort of, the dress rehearsal for how the Eurozone was 
going to just essentially reduce Europe to debt 
dependency, just like in feudalism, everybody
had to have access to the land by becoming
a serf.

Well now you’re in debt peonage. It’s the modern, finance 
capital’s version of serfdom. And so, in Italy we’re going 
to need government spending. We are going to need to 
do in our way what China’s doing in its way and what 
Russia is doing in its way. We’re going to have some 
kind of government program. And we can’t have the 
economy being impoverished, just because the 
University of Chicago has designed a plan for 
Europe to prevent the euro ever from being 
a rival to the U.S. dollar.

If there’s no 
European central bank to borrow,
 to pump euros into the world economy, then,
only dollars 
will be left for central bank 

The United States doesn’t ever want a rival. It wants satellites 
and so that’s what it’s basically turned Europe into. And I do
not see any response outside of Italy for an attempt to say 
we can’t be a part of this system. Let’s withdraw from 
the euro.

I know that the Greeks, when I was in Greece years ago, we all 
thought can’t we join with Italy and Portugal and Ireland and 
say look, the system isn’t working. Everybody else no, no,
 the Americans will just simply get us out of office one way 
or another. 

And in Italy, of course, if you look at what happened after World 
War II, the great threat was Italian communism.  You had the 
Americans essentially say well, we know the answer to 
communism, it’s fascism, and, you saw where they put 
the money. They essentially did every dirty trick in the 
book in order to fight any left- wing group in Italy, just 
as they did in Yugoslavia, just as they did in Greece, 
wiping out the partisans, all the leading anti-Nazi 
groups from Greece to Italy to elsewhere. All of 
a sudden, they were all either assassinated or 
moved out of office and replaced by the very 
people that the US had been fighting against
 during World War II.

Well, now Italy is finally coming to terms with this and trying 
to fight back and you’re having what’s happening there, 
between Northern Italy and Southern Italy. You’re 
having the same splits occur in other countries.

Pepe: Yeah. Well, I’m going to bring up, perhaps an even more 
extreme case now Michael, which is the case of Brazil, which 
at the moment is in the middle of an absolutely out of this 
world mix of telenovela and Kabuki theater that even for 
most Brazilians is absolutely incomprehensible. It’s like 
a fragmentation bomb exploding over and over again,
 a Groundhog Day of fragmentation bombs.

In fact, it’s completely crazy. Lula [former President Luiz Inácio 
Lula da Silva] is back in the picture as well. We still don’t know 
under which terms, we still don’t know how the guys who run
 the show, which are the Brazilian military, are going to deal 
with him or instrumentalize him, et cetera.

I bring up this case because …essentially it has convulsed 
Brazil completely and large parts of Latin America. It is a 
telenovela with one cliffhanger after another, sometimes 
in a matter of minutes, but it encompasses all the basic 
themes of what really interests the 0.01 percent, which
we can identify as a class war against labour which is 
what the system in Brazil, since the coup against the
Former President Dilma Rousseff has been waging. 

A war on mixed economies, economic sovereignty, 
which is something that the Masters of the Universe 
of the 0.01 percent cannot wage against Russia and 
China. But that was very successfully waged against 
Brazil and implemented in Brazil. In fact, in a matter 
of 2 years, they completely devastated the country 
in every possible sense, industrially, 
sociologically, you name it…

And of course, because the main objective is something that 
you keep stressing over and over again, unipolar rentier 
dominance, in fact.

Brazil, I would say is the extreme case in the world not only in 
the Global South, but in planetary terms of let’s say the last 
frontier of the rentier economy, when you manage to capture 
a country that was slowly emerging as a leader in the Global 
South, as an economic leader. Don’t forget that a few years 
ago, Brazil was the sixth-largest economy in the world and 
on the way to become the fifth. Now it’s the 12th and falling 
down nonstop and controlled by a mafia that includes not
 by accident, a Chicago Boy Pinochetista, Minister Paulo 
Guedes, who is implementing, in the 21st century, 
something that was implemented in Chile in the 
‘70s and ‘80s. And they were successful. 
Apparently, at least so far.

Brazil is so disorganized as a nation, so shattered, so fragmented 
& atomized as a nation that it depends on the re-emergence of a 
single political leader, in this case Lula to try to rebuild the nation 
from scratch. And even in a position where he cannot control the 
game he can interfere in the game, which is what happened, like 
you know, … when he gave a larger-than-life press conference, 
mixed with a representation of himself as a statesman and  said,
“Look  the whole thing is shattered, but there is some light at 
the end of the tunnel.”

But still, he cannot confront the real Masters of the Universe that 
have allowed this to happen in the first place. So just to give an 
example to many of you who are not familiar with some details 
of the Brazilian case, and it involves directly the Obama-Biden 
scheme or the Obama-Biden larger operation.  When Biden was 
vice president in 2013, in May 2013, he visited Brazil for three 
days and he met with President Dilma.

They discussed very touchy subjects, including the most important 
one, the absolutely enormous, pre-salt oil reserves, which obviously,
 the Americans wanted to be part of the whole thing, not by accident. 
You know what happened one week later? The start of the Brazilian 
colour revolution, and this thing kept rolling and rolling and rolling.

We got the coup against Dilma in 2016, we got to the Car Wash 
operation landing Lula in jail. And we got to the election of 
[President Jair] Bolsanaro. And now we are in a place where
 even if the military controls this whole process, even if 
Bolsanaro is becoming bad for business will he become 
bad for the rentier class business, for the 0.01 percent in
 the U.S. that has all the connections in their new, large
 neo-colony in the tropics, which has enormous 
strategic value, not to mention, unforeseen 
resources, wealth resources, right? 

So, this is an extreme case - and I know you follow Brazil 
relatively closely. So, your geo-economic and geopolitical 
input on the running telenovela I think would be priceless 
for all of us.

Michael: Well, this problem goes back 60 years. In 1965, the 
former president of Brazil came to New York and we met. He
 explained to me how the United States essentially got rid of
 him because he wasn’t representing the banking class. And
 he said that they built Brasilia because it’s apart from the big 
industrial cities, they wanted to prevent industry and 
democracy and the population from controlling 
the government.

So, they built Brasilia. He said maybe they’ll use it as an atom 
bomb site. It certainly doesn’t have an economic thing. Well, 
fast forward, in 1980, after Mexico defaulted on its foreign 
debt in 1972, nobody would invest in Latin America. And 
by 1990, Brazil was paying 45 % interest per year to 
borrow the dollars to be able to finance its deficit, 
which is mainly flight capital by the wealthy. 

Well I think I’d mentioned before, I was hired by Scudder, 
Stevens and Clark for the Third World bond fund. 45%: 
I mean, just imagine that. It’s a fortune every year. No 
American would buy it, no European would buy it. Who 
bought it? The Brazilians and Argentineans bought it, 
& I get it, they’re the government, they’re the central 
bankers. They’re the president’s family. They’re the 
1 percent, they’re the only people that are holding 
Brazil’s dollar debt.

So when Brazil pays its foreign dollar debt, it’s paying to its own 
1 percent who are holding, who are saying well, we’re holding it 
off shore in the Dutch West Indies where the fund was located 
for tax-exempt purposes and pretending to be American 
imperialists, but actually being local imperialists.

Well then, just towards the end of Lula’s reign, the Council of 
Economic Advisors brought Jamie Galbraith and Randy Wray 
and me down for a discussion. How do we, you know, we’re, 
we’re really worried because, Lula in order to get elected, 
had to meet with the banks and agree to give them what
 they wanted.

They said, look, we can see that, you know, you have the power 
to be elected. We don’t want to have to fight you in dirty ways, 
but will let you be elected, but you’re going to have to do the 
policies and certainly the financial policies that we want and 
Lula made a kind of a devil’s agreement with them because 
he didn’t want to be killed and he wanted to do some 
good things.

So, he was sort of like a Bernie Sanders-type character. Okay, 
you have to go along with a really bad system in order to get 
something good done, because Brazil really needs something 
good done. Well, the fact is that even the little bit he did the 
finance couldn’t take because one of the characteristics of
 financial wealth is it’s addictive. It’s not like diminishing 
marginal utility. If you give more food to an employee or 
to a worker you know, at the end of the meal, you’re 
satiated, you don’t want much more. If you give 
enough money you know, OK, they buy a few 
luxuries and then, OK, they save it. But if you 
give more money to a billionaire they want 
even more... and they grow... even more 
desperate. It’s like a cocaine-addicted 
person and the Brazilian ruling class 
wanted it so desperately that they 
framed up and controlled the 
utterly corrupt judiciary.  

The judiciary in Brazil is almost as 
corrupt as it is in New York City.

Pepe: More, even more.

Michael: They framed them up and they want totalitarian control. 
And that sort of is what free market is. Totalitarian control by the
 financial class. That’s freedom for the financial class, if the
 freedom to do what they want to do to the rest of the 
economy, that’s libertarianism, it’s a free market, 
it’s Austrian economics.

It’s the right wing’s fight against government, it’s a fight against 
any governments for long enough who resist the financial and 
real estate interests. That’s what the free market is. And Brazil 
is merely the most devastating example of this because it 
takes such a racial term there. Not only does Brazil want 
to make a fortune, tearing down the Amazon, cutting up 
the Amazon, selling the lumber to China, turning the 
Amazon into soy production to sell to China. But for 
that, you have to kill off the domestic population,
indigenous population that wants to use land
feed itself. So you see the kind of race war &
ethnic war that you have, not to mention the 
war against blacks in the Brazilian slums - 
that Lula tried so much to overcome.

So you have a resumption of the ethnic war there, and on Wall 
Street, I had discussions with money managers back in 1990. 
Well I wonder whether that’s going to be a model for what’s 
happening in the United States with the ethnic war here.

Essentially, it’s a tragedy what’s happening in Brazil, but it’s 
pretty much what happened in Chile under Pinochet which 
is why they have the Pinochetistas and the Chicago boys 
that you mentioned.

Pepe: Absolutely. Coming back to China, Michael, and the 
[recent] approval of the 5-Year Plan, which isn't actually
he 5-year plan. It’s actually three 5-year plans in one 
because they are already planning 2035, which is 
something absolutely unimaginable anywhere
 in the West. Right?

So, it’s a different strategy of productive investment, of the
expansion of social welfare and solidifying social welfare,
 technological improvements.  I would say by 2025 China 
will be very close to the same infotech level of the U.S., 
This is part of “Made in China 2025,” which is fantastic. 
They stopped talking about it, but they're still implement-
ing it, the technological drive in all those standard areas 
that they had codified a few years ago. And of course, 
this notion, which I found particularly fascinating 
because it is, in one sense, socialism with some
 Confucianist elements, but is also very Taoist:
 The dual development strategy, which is 
inversions and expansion of domestic 
investment and consumption and the
balancing all the time with projects 
across Eurasia, not only affiliated 
with the Belt and Road, with the 
New Silk Road, but all other 
projects as well. 

So, when you have a leadership that is capable of planning 
with this scope, amplitude breadth and reach, and when we 
compare it to the money managers in the West, which 
basically their planning goes, not even quarterly in 
many cases, it’s 24 hours.

So our dichotomy between rentier capitalism, financialization, 
or whatever we want to define it, and state planning with the 
view of social benefit is even starker in fact, and I’m not 
saying that the Chinese system can be exported to the 
rest of the world, but I’m sure that, all across the Global 
South, when people look at Chinese policies, long-term, 
how they are planning, how they are developed and how
hey are always fine tuning what they developed and 
discuss…. As you said in the beginning, this is a 
frontal shock of two systems and sooner or later 
we’re going to have the bulk of the Global South
 including nations which nowadays are still 
American vassals or satrapies or puppets 
or poodles, et cetera.

They’re going to see which way the wind is blowing. Right?

Michael: Why can’t the Chinese system be exported to the West?
 That’s a good question…. How would you make US industry able
 to follow the same productive path that China did? Well for one 
thing the biggest element in workers’ budget today is housing,
 40 percent. There was one way to get rid of it, get rid of the
 high housing prices that essentially, or whatever a bank 
would lend. And the banks lend essentially the economic 
rent. There’s a very simple way to keep housing prices 
down. You tax the land rent, you use your tax system, 
not on taxing labor, that increases the cost of labor, 
not increasing capital, that leaves less, industrial 
capital, but your tax of the land and the real 
estate and the banks.

Well, suppose you were to lower the price of housing in 
America from 40% to 10% like China has, and this is the 
big element in the cost structure difference. Well, if all 
of a sudden, people only had to pay 10% of their 
income for housing, then all the banks would
under, because 80% of the bank loans, 
are mortgage loans.

The whole idea is that the purpose of housing is to force how 
many buyers and renters go into debt to the banks so that the
 banks end up with all of the lend rent that the landlord class 
used to get. This is what’s preventing America from being like
 China. What if America would try to develop a high-speed 
railroad like China?

Well, then you need the right of way. You’d need to have the 
railroads go in a straight line. … They need a right of way 
and it doesn’t have a right of way because that conflicts 
with private property and most of the right of way is a
 very expensive real estate.

So, you can’t have high-speed rail in the United States, like in 
China.  Suppose you would have a low-cost education. Well 
then, you get rid of the whole means of siphoning off labor’s
 income to pay for education loans. You could go, suppose 
you had private healthcare and prevent Americans from 
getting sick like they do in China and Thailand, where 
you are.

Well, then the health insurance companies and pharmaceutical
 companies wouldn’t be able to make their rent. So you could
 not have America adopt a China type industrial program 
without what would be really a revolution against the 
legacy of the monopoly of private banking, of finance
 and all of the fortunes that have been built up 
financially really in the last 40 years 
since 1980.

Pepe: So, what’s going to happen in the, let’s say, short to
 mid-term in the U.S.? Michael, we are seeing the corrosion 
of the whole system, not only externally in terms of foreign 
policy & the end of the free lunch, but internally with those
 70-million-plus “deplorables” being, literally, canceled from 
public debate, the impoverishment of the middle classes, 
with over 50 million people in the US who are practically 
becoming literally poor. Obviously the American dream 
ended a few decades ago, maybe, but now there’s not
a glimpse of it, that there could be a renewal
of the 
American dream.

So, we have a larval civil war 
situation, degrading on a
daily basis.  What’s
the end game in fact? And what
exactly does 
Wall Street, the US ruling class - guys
have those lunches at the Harvard club -
what do they, ultimately, want?

Michael: Well, what you call a disaster for the economy, isn’t it 
a bonanza for the 1%?  This is a victory of finance. You look at
 it as a collapse of industrial capitalism. I look at it as the 
victory of rentier finance capitalism.  You’re having 
probably 10 million Americans that are going to be
 thrown out of their apartments and their homes in 
June when the moratorium on rents & mortgages 
ends. You’re going to have a vast increase in the 
homeless population. It will probably represent
 an increase in people who use the subways. 
Where else are they going to live? 

And all of this, there’s an immense amount of private capital 
firms that have all been created in the last year of just wealth
accumulations and they’re saying there are going to be such 
great opportunities to pick up real estate at bargain prices, 
all of this for the commercial real estate, that’s broken, all 
the buildings and the restaurants that have to be sold... 
because they can’t meet their mortgage payments and 
their rents, all the houses that are going to be under, 
private capital can come in and do what was done 
after the Obama evictions.

We can do what Blackstone did. We can buy them all out for 
pennies on the dollar. So, for them, they’re looking at their 
own 20-year plan. And their 20-year plan, is to grab 


The views of individual contributors 
do not necessarily represent those 
of Strategic Culture Foundation.



Recently, the British Board of Film Classification 
(BBFC), the body tasked with censoring and 
classifying the films released in the UK, 
announced that it has decided to get 
involved in educating parents:- on
 how to deal with one of the most
 controversial issues they face.

It has compiled a list of five movies that “explore 
transgender experiences” which it believes are 
fit for family discussions. It hopes that, as a 
result of this initiative, it can prompt a
discussion on this rather sensitive
between parents and
their children.

Although on its website the BBFC presents the
as an educational one, its real aim,
however, is not so 
much to educate,
as to advocate.

In this instance, the objective is to get families to 
educate themselves about “trans rights & trans 
people’s journeys”. It uses the term “educate”, 
in the sense that advocacy campaigners use it 
- which means encouraging families to accept 
and embrace the gender ideology promoted 
by the trans activists also involved in 
this initiative.

The BBFC’s ''partner'', is All About Trans, a project 
backed by charity On Road Media, which aims to
“change how the media understands & portrays
transgender people”. It clearly also wants to 
influence parents and children, so their 
outlook falls into line with its views.

In principle, there is nothing objectionable about groups
 of private individuals organising and launching an 
advocacy campaign. In a free and democratic 
society, advocating for different points of 
view is an important feature of
public life.

But matters are very different when supposedly neutral 
official institutions take it on themselves to serve as 
conduits for the agenda and ideology of 
campaigning groups. 

There is a problem when the official authority of the BBFC
is used to promote the views of one section of the 
community ---  particularly on a sensitive and 
contentious subject such as trans culture.

(Part of an article by Frank Furedi, author and 
social commentator. He's emeritus professor of
sociology at the University of Kent, Canterbury. 
Author of How Fear Works: The Culture of Fear 
in the 21st Century. Follow him on Twitter
@Furedibyte  The full article first
In RT)


This news item appeared in Fort Russ
4 months ago & was missed by many:
Belarusian President Lukashenko Says 
IMF Offered A Billion USD Bribe
To Impose Covid-19 Lockdown
by Joaquin Flores
September 10th, 2020 (Fort Russ)
Now we see another dimension to the German 
push to remove Belarus President Lukashenko!
Armstrong Economics –
Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said
last month, via Belarusian Telegraph Agency,
that the World Bank and IMF offered
him a bribe of 
$940 million USD, in the
form of “Covid Relief Aid.” 

In exchange for $940 million USD, the World 
Bank and IMF demanded that the President 
of Belarus:
• impose an “extreme lockdown on his people”
• force them to wear face masks
• impose very strict curfews
• impose a police state
• crash the economy

Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko refused the
and stated that he could not accept such an
offer and 
would put his people above the needs
of the IMF 
and World Bank. This fact can
be verified 
using most search engines.
Now the IMF and World Bank are bailing out failing airlines 
with billions of dollars, and in exchange, they are forcing 
airline CEOs to implement very strict policies such as 
forced face mask covers on everyone, including 
small children, whose health will suffer as a 
result of these policies.
And if it is true for Belarus, then it is true for the rest of the 
world. The IMF and World Bank want to crash every major 
economy, with the intention of buying over every nation’s
infrastructure, at cents on the dollar.
What do you think, gentle reader?

Chinese court orders man to 
pay ex-wife for housework
 in landmark ruling
February 24th (PressTV)
A Chinese man has been ordered to pay his ex-wife 
almost $8,000 for years of unpaid housework, in a 
landmark divorce case that has sparked furious 
debate in China.
Under the country's new civil code, which came into 
effect this year, divorcing spouses have the right 
for the first time to request compensation if 
they bore more responsibilities at home.
Ex-wife Wang told the Beijing court that during five years 
of marriage she "looked after the child and managed 
household chores, while (her husband) Chen did 
not care about, or participate in, any other 
household affairs besides going to work."
She filed a claim for extra compensation for housework 
and childcare duties, according to a February 4th
 court statement.
The court ruled that Wang had, indeed, taken on more 
household responsibilities and should receive 50,000 
yuan ($7,700) plus sole child custody and an 
additional 2,000 yuan in alimony per month.
But after local media reported this week that Wang had 
appealed — having originally requested 160,000 yuan 
compensation — the ruling sparked widespread 
online debate over the value of women's
domestic labour.
The trending hashtag "stay-at-home wife receives 50,000 
yuan housework compensation" gained over 570 million 
views on the Twitter-like platform Weibo by Wednesday.
The amount reflected the length of time the couple were 
married plus "the effort Wang put into housework, 
Chen's income and the local cost of living," 
according to one of the judges quoted 
on Monday in local media.
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 
(OECD) has estimated that Chinese women spend nearly four 
hours doing unpaid labour daily — 2.5 times that of men and
 higher than the average.
Marriage breakups have surged over the last two decades in 
China as divorce laws were liberalized and women became 
more financially independent — to the concern of Beijing, 
which is trying to boost birth rates, in an 
ageing population.
(Source: AFP)
What do you think?


Imam Khamenei: Enemies Can’t
 Do a Damn Thing against Iran
February 3rd (al Manar)
Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Sayyed 
Ali Khamenei, stressed that the enemies of the
 Islamic Republic are incapable of adopting 
anti-Iranian measures.
“Be aware, that enemies cannot do a damn thing against 
the Islamic Republic. Islam’s and the Islamic Republic’s 
power and authority is growing,” the Leader said on 
Wednesday during a videoconference with a group 
of Iranian eulogists in an annual ceremony marking 
the birth anniversary of Sayyeda Fatima Zahra (a.s.).
“Of course, there have been ups and downs, some individuals 
serve the country and some others lose this opportunity but 
all in all the movement is towards development,” Imam 
Khamenei said, as quoted by Mehr news agency.
His eminence congratulated Muslims on the birthday 
anniversary of Sayyeda Fatima Zahra (a.s.), as he 
pointed to some of her distinctive characteristics.
The Leader referred to the fundamental difference of Islam and 
the West towards women. “Islam’s and the Islamic Republic’s 
view towards women is based on respect, while the West 
views woman as a commodity and instrument,” he noted.
''Islam knows no difference between men and women with 
regards to divine and human values'', Imam Khamenei said.
“We are proud of the view of Islam and we protest
over the Western view of women and lifestyle.”
Referring to the Western propaganda - that claims Islam and the 
Islamic hijab hinder the growth of women, Imam Khamenei said 
“This is a clear lie and the obvious proof is the situation of 
women in the Islamic Republic.”
“Iran has not seen in its history this great a portion of educated 
women and women that are active in different social, cultural, 
artistic, scientific, political, and economic fields and this is
result of the Islamic Republic,” the Leader highlighted.
Source: Iranian media



The quantum leap forward:
On birthing 
the world’s fastest, most advanced 
internet network, China claims 
supremacy over the US
January 14th, 2021 (RT)
by Brian McGleenon,
A journalist who has worked for Fuji Television, 
The Daily Express, The Independent, KBS and 
Pear Video.
Beijing’s new quantum computer can solve mathematical 
problems in 200 seconds that it would take current super-
computers millions of years to solve – and the network 
around it, will revolutionise how we live and work.
China achieved “quantum supremacy” with the development 
of its Jiuzhang quantum computer, which last month surpassed 
Google’s Sycamore quantum device with its ability to calculate 
100 trillion times faster than the fastest classical supercomputer.
The development sent shock waves around the world. But before 
this news could be fully digested by rival players in the quantum 
race, Beijing announced it had also built the world’s first fully 
integrated quantum network. Earlier this month, a network of 
satellite relays and fiber optic cables between Shanghai and 
Beijing, was able to “teleport” huge amounts of data. 
The world is now witnessing the birth of a Chinese quantum 
internet that will revolutionize society by allowing unhackable 
transfers of data and optimizing machine learning for the 
‘internet of things’, and possibly leading to instantaneous
 communication when developed further. Quantum 
computing allows the evaluating of multiple 
possibilities at once and the performing
complex calculations not possible
normal computers. 
“Quantum computers aren’t just about doing things faster or 
more efficiently,” a Wired article explained last year. “They’ll 
let us do things that we couldn’t even have dreamed of 
without them. Things that even the best super-
computer just isn’t capable of.”
As the writer described it: “If you ask a normal computer to 
figure its way out of a maze, it will try every single branch 
in turn, ruling them all out individually until it finds the 
right one. A quantum computer can go down every 
path of the maze at once. It can hold uncertainty 
in its head.”
The Chinese scientists teleported quantum information 1,400km
 (870 miles) to two satellites then back to earth via receiver 
stations – a first step in creating a global-scale quantum 
internet. Together with the development of Jiuzhang, 
the recent developments have pushed the country 
to the forefront in the race to win the ‘quantum age’ 
– a development that will unnerve Washington 
and Silicon Valley.
According to Professor Lo Hoi-kwong, of the University of 
Hong Kong, China is now playing the leading role in the 
application of quantum communications. He predicted
hat the technology would have advanced applications
 for the Chinese military, its finance sector, and for 
the country’s overall communications.
One of the key architects of Jiuzhang, Professor Chao-Yang 
Lu, of the University of Science and Technology of China,
 told RT.com that the computer gained “quantum 
advantage” over the most advanced classic 
supercomputer through the use of photons 
of light to solve calculations, instead of the 
classical use of electrical binary signals 
in microprocessors. 
He claimed the revolutionary design would allow computations 
that would take conventional supercomputers hundreds of 
millions of years to solve to be executed in seconds. 
Speaking to RT.com from his office in Beijing, Professor Lu 
said the applications of the new technology would transform 
“the field of quantum chemistry and optimization, which can 
be helpful in designing new materials and machine learning”.
He explained how Jiuzhang could be deployed in China’s quantum
 internet development, “because it can be used as a node,” able to
 program and store information being communicated through the
 quantum network. The professor added that the Chinese device 
had an advantage over its competitors, such as Sycamore,as 
“it uses photons that are naturally compatible with the 
internet because obviously flying photons are the 
fastest and only sensible way to transfer 
information over long distances”.
 He added that “quantum computation and quantum communication
 using photons share a lot of techniques in common”. Sycamore 
relies on super-cold, superconducting metal, whereas the 
Chinese alternative can operate at room temperature.
One promising application for quantum computers is their ability 
to solve machine-learning optimization problems and quickly 
read huge data sets. This speeding up of machine-learning 
algorithms will allow much more advanced autonomous 
devices. The development of the internet of things will 
see vast scales of data gathered every second by 
devices, sensors and machines. Quantum 
computers would be ideal information-
processing systems. 
Professor Lu emphasized that the phrase “quantum supremacy” 
was not about political domination, but based on such devices 
outperforming classical supercomputers. He stressed: 
“Building quantum computer machines is a race between
nature and humans, not between countries... The whole 
international community should closely collaborate. 
We should encourage more open scientific 
exchange, in both knowledge and people.”
Since 2016, China's president Xi Jinping has been aggressively 
pushing the advancement of the nation’s research into quantum
 technology. The move is a key part of his blueprint to make 
China technologically self-reliant and a global leader in 
scientific research and development. He has set the 
nation a goal of achieving dominance in the area 
of quantum computing by 2030. 
Billions of dollars have been poured into the quest, and a new 
institute created: the Chinese National Laboratory for Quantum
 Information Sciences. The institute was behind the creation of 
the integrated quantum network, consisting of two satellites 
and thousands of kilometers of optical fiber cables linking 
key government facilities, power grids, military posts, and 
banks between Beijing and Shanghai. The whole system
 is claimed to be immune from disruptive cyber-attacks. 
According to the Global Times, president Xi announced at a CCP 
group study session in October 2020 that he wanted to strengthen 
“top-level design” in the field of quantum science and encouraged
 the acceleration of “breakthroughs in basic research”. Referring 
to the nation’s dedication to becoming dominant in the field, the 
state-run tabloid also reported that “China had nearly twice as 
many patent filings as the US for quantum technology overall
 in 2018”. 
The US has responded testily to China's ambitions in quantum
 computing, particularly fearing its military applications. In 2018,
 President Donald Trump placed his signature to the National 
Quantum Initiative Act, which pledged $1.2 billion for research 
in the field over five years. In the same year, the US military
 implicitly referred to China’s quantum advancements as a 
national security threat in a statement titled ‘Technologies 
for Threat Military Applications’. It read: “A global race has 
ensued to exploit and operationalize quantum technologies
 for the use of military effects. The race to conquer the 
quantum domain is among the most fiercely 
competitive in today’s world of technology.” 
Quantum computing can utilize two fundamental properties 
of quantum mechanics: superposition and entanglement. 
Superposition means the information held in ‘qubits’ can 
exist in two different states simultaneously. This could 
allow vast amounts of information to be stored in 
sections of code. 
The infinite variables allow the quantum computer vast 
amounts of processing power, because each qubit can 
perform multiple calculations at once. Superposition 
also greatly increases the speed by which a quantum 
computer can solve certain problems that would take 
classical computers millions of years. For instance, 
the computational advantage of China’s quantum 
computer can solve mathematical problems in 
seconds that the world’s fastest conventional 
computer, Japan’s Fugaku, would take an 
estimated 600 million years to solve.
Entanglement is another advantage of the quantum and is 
one of the strangest phenomena of quantum mechanics. 
Einstein called entanglement “spooky action at a distance”,
 in which subatomic particles that are nearby each other 
influence each other in some way, such as the direction 
they spin in. However, the strange effects of entangle-
ment mean that when these two particles are separated,
 no matter at how vast a distance, if one is changed, 
the other goes through the same changes at exactly
 the same time, meaning these two particles are 
intimately and forever connected. 
The principle of entanglement could be used by quantum 
devices for the exponentially faster communication of 
Think your friends would be interested? 
Share this story!

Since our youngsters accept the line that its all a con...
This article on RT seems to get it right...
what do you think?

Covid-19 was present in Italy as early as 
SEPTEMBER 2019, study of lung cancer 
screenings shows
November 15th, 2020   (RT)
The Covid-19 virus had been active in Italy months before it was
 first officially detected, new research has found, raising further
 questions about the true origins, extent and actual duration of 
the ongoing pandemic.
The new groundbreaking study, conducted by scientists 
with Milan Institute of Cancer & the University of Siena, 
was published this week, by the Tumori Journal. The 
research is based on the analysis of blood samples 
from 959 people, collected during lung cancer 
screening tests conducted between 
September 2019 and March 2020.
More than 11 percent of the tested – 111 people – turned out to 
have had coronavirus-specific antibodies. All the tested people 
were asymptomatic and were not showing any signs of the 
disease. Some 23 of the positive results date back to 
September 2019, suggesting that the virus was 
actually present in the country as early as 
during last summer – some six months 
before the pandemic ‘began’ and 
‘reached’ Italy.
The new research is poking new holes in the already well-battered 
belief that the novel coronavirus emerged from the Chinese city of 
Wuhan around December 2019 and that it turned into pandemic in
 January 2020. The data from Italian researchers is particularly 
valuable, as it’s based on actual blood samples, as compared 
to the earlier, less conclusive findings that also suggested
 that the established pandemic timeline could be wrong.
The study’s conclusions appear to be consistent with the reports 
of severe respiratory symptoms and “atypical flu” rampant among
 Italy’s elderly late in 2019. Another study, published by Italian 
scientists back in June, showed that traces of the 
coronavirus were found in sewage water 
analyzed as early as last December.
Similar findings have been made by scientists from other countries 
as well. Spanish researchers have claimed they have traced corona
- virus in sewage samples taken as early as March 2019.
Analysis of hospital records from late 2019 in the US has also 
suggested the unusual amount of ‘flu’ patients, many of whom
experienced heavy “coughing” ... and other severe
 respiratory symptoms.
Globally, the number of registered Covid-19 cases has gone past the
 54-million mark, while more than 1.3 million people have perished, 
the latest figures by the Johns Hopkins University show. With the
 mounting evidence that the outbreak began well before its 
‘official’ start, it’s becoming more likely that the true
 extent of the pandemic will, one day, be revised.

At a time when the ''pink tide'' in Latin America

has receded, and most see the US pivoting
to re-enact a Monroe Doctrine 2, this new
article from Fort Russ, is refresshing!

What do you think?

 China-Latin America
 Cooperation Signals
New Era
by Paul Antonopoulos
August 1st, 2018

A Chinese space research base located in central Patagonia,
Argentina, has sparked interest in The New York Times,
which labeled it “one of the most striking symbols”
 of Beijing’s transformative role in the region.

The US newspaper highlighted the story on the front cover
of its July 29 issue and dedicated an extensive report,
analyzing the reasons behind the colossal facility in
 the province of Neuquén. Under Chinese control,
the site is part of the ambitious project under-
taken by Beijing to land on the hidden side
of the moon.

According to The New York Times, this facility is only one of
 many pieces of evidence of China’s growing influence -- not
only in Argentina but in other countries in the region where
 it has invested in construction, or to which it has lent, in
exchange for holdings in hydrocarbon reserves.

“The base has a geographical position very close to the
 Argentine submarine platform facing the Atlantic and a
 strategic monitoring station in Antarctica, where China
 has the largest scientific base in the world,” Gustav
Cardozo, an analyst at Argentine Centre for
 International Studies (CAEI), explained.

The construction of the Chinese space complex on Argentine
 soil, which covers about 200 hectares, is the result of
negotiations between the government of Cristina
 Fernández de Kirchner (2007-2015), and the
administration of Xi Jinping and is intended
 to be a space for “astronomical research.”

In Cardozo’s opinion, the base “has an objective of military
monitoring” in a privileged space. In recent years, with
projects like this, China has demonstrated a policy of
 “space race” with a very strong investment and
 improved technology from Russia and the
former Soviet Union, to consolidate itself
as a leading player in the industry.

In fact, the base in question is part of the Deep Space
 Network, a set of communication resources to
support Chinese operations beyond Earth.

“China has a strong intention of exploring space and
competing strategically with the US. This military
 base not only allows us to monitor space, since
Argentine Patagonia and southern Chile are
geographically very good regions because
 of the visibility they offer, China’s
 fundamental interest has to do
with Antarctica,” said
the expert.

The white continent is “very strategic” area in the eyes of
Beijing due to the abundance of natural resources, in
addition to hydrocarbons and mining.  China is
moving in to take advantage of the US’ fragile
imperial reform period in which Washington
 is reassessing its commitments around
the world, such as in Antarctica and
Latin America, which have, until the
Trump presidency, seemed to have
taken a back seat to the European
 theatre of Atlanticism.

“With Donald Trump, that gap between Washington and
the rest of the Latin American countries has increased
 and China, with a strong investment, is occupying the
 space that the US is leaving behind,” Cardozo said.

In this way, “through scientific and technological means,”
the military presence of China is consolidating, because
 in facilities like Neuquén, “the work of Argentine
scientists is minimal.” Officials who control the
perimeter are Chinese and “people living in
 the area can not enter the perimeter.”

In any case, the Neuquén Space Station is a symbol of the
power of the Asian giant in Latin America. In the opinion
of CAEI’s expert, “in a decade, China will play an
extremely important role in the region”,
preponderant place that is already
observed, he says, due to the
strategic importance of Latin
 America, which is a supplier
of food, raw materials and

The examples cited by the analyst include control over
 the Panama Canal and investments in broadening it,
as well as the incentive to create new bi-oceanic
corridors to improve trade. This is part of the
Chinese project to include Latin America in
the New Silk Road, the ambitious infra-
structure investment project in the
 corridor that runs from South Asia
 to Eastern Europe and Africa.

The New York Times points to this Asian country’s strategy
 and mentions that the bond that formed during the era of
 progressive governments in Latin America (2005-2015)
has lasted even after the shift to the right in several
countries, as in the case of Argentina itself.

“China is taking a leading role, which will increase in the future
because it has sovereign funds to invest, and because it has
an interest in Latin America, an interest that no other extra-
continental power shows. I believe that, in a few years, in
 a decade, this will be something totally visible,” said
Gustavo Cardozo.

However, there is a difference between China and other powers
 that once were present in Latin America: the policy of treating
countries as partners, since, for Beijing, “self-determination
peoples is of great importance”, as is “respect for internal
sovereignty.” This is a policy of cooperation with “non-
interference in others’ domestic affairs” which,
according to Cardozo, might be explained by
 “China’s past suffering of unequal treatment”
 from the colonial powers.

According to Cardozo, at a time when the so-called “Washington
Consensus” dictated a package of rules to be followed by
countries receiving assistance from institutions under
the US umbrella, “today we could say that there is a
 ‘Beijing Consensus’ based on non-interference
internal affairs.”

This consensus “manifests itself in regions such as Africa
 and Latin America, where there are young countries that
attach much importance to the issues of sovereignty
self-determination,” said the expert.

As an example, he cited the case of Venezuela, a country
with which, China has maintained close ties, even when
other countries have imposed economic and diplomatic
sanctions. Beijing reiterated --- that the crisis of the
Caribbean nation “is something that its people
have to solve”.


War Crimes in Korea -
Guilty as Charged

With the world's press spending a great deal of its energy
on the rather fractious relationship between the United
States and North Korea, a look back in time gives us
some fascinating insight regarding the geopolitical
stresses that rule the region, particularly the
stresses that occurred during the
Korean War.

Thanks to the International Action Centre and the International
Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL), a Non-Governmental
Organization which was founded in 1946 and acts as a
consultative group to UNESCO, we have an interesting
document that outlines some of America's actions on
the Korean Peninsula during the early 1950s.

In March 1952, the IADL issued a Report on
 U.S. Crimes in Korea during the Korean War. 

In the early 1950s, the Government of the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea repeatedly asked the United Nations to
protest violations of international law by their enemies,
the United States-led international coalition.  These
requests were ignored by the United Nations &, as
such, the Council of the International Association
of Democratic Lawyers set up a Commission...
consisting of lawyers from several nations, to
investigate these allegations with a "boots on
the ground" trip to Korea, which took place
from March 3rd to March 19th, 1952, visiting
the provinces of North and South Piengan,
Hwang Hai, Kang Wan, including the towns
of Pyongyang, Nampo, Kaichen, Pek Dong,
Amju, Sinchon, Anak, Sariwon and Wonsan
among others. 

The IADL notes that, under United Nations rules, the U.S.
intervention on the Korean Peninsula was unlawful and
that President Truman's orders to the American Navy
and Air Force should be considered an "aggressive
act" that went against the United Nations Charter.

Here are some of the more interesting findings
of the IADL Commission:

1.) Bacteriological Warfare: The Commission investigated
the allegations that American forces in Korea were using
bacteriological weapons against both the DPRK armed
forces and the nation's civilian population.  Between
the 28th of January and the 12th of March (i.e. during
the dead of winter), 1952, the Commission found...
insects which carried bacteria, in many different

The Commission noted that many of the insect species had
not been found in Korea, prior to the arrival of American
forces and that many of them were found in mixed groups
or clusters that would not normally be found together, for
example, flies and spiders.  It also noted that the January
temperature was 1 degree Celsius (just above freezing)
to 5 degrees Celsius in February but that the prevailing
average temperature was far below the freezing level,
temperatures that are extremely hostile to insect life.

The insects were infected with the following bacteria
which include plague, cholera and typhus:

1.) Eberthella typhus
2.) Bacillus paratyphi A and B
3.) Shigella dysenteriae
4.) Vibrio cholera
5.) Pasturella pestis

In addition, a great quantity of fish of a species which live in
regions between fresh water and salt water, were found;
these fish were found in a half rotten state and were
 infected with cholera.

2.) Chemical Weapons: On various occasions since May 6th, 1951,
American planes used asphyxiating and other gases or chemical
weapons as follows:

In the first attack on Nampo City, there were 1,379 casualties
of which 480 died of suffocation and 647 others were
affected by gas.

3.) Mass Massacres:  According to witnesses, the commander of
the U.S. Forces in the region of Sinchon by the name of Harrison
ordered the mass killing of 35,383 civilians (19,149 men and
16,234 women) during the period between October 17th and
 December 7th, 1950.  The civilians were pushed into a deep
open grave, doused with fuel oil and set on fire.  Those who
 tried to escape were shot.  In another case, on October 20th,
2015, 500 men women and children were forced into an air
raid cave shelter, located in the city of Sinchon.  Harrison
ordered American soldiers to put explosives into the
shelter and seal it with sacks of earth, prior to the
 fuse being lit.

Here are other examples of mass murders:

4.) Attacks on Civilians:

Prior to the Korean War, the capital city of North Korea,
Pyongyang, had a population of 464,000.  As a result
of the war, the population had fallen to 181,000 by
December 31, 1951.  In the period between June
27, 1950 and the Commission's visit, more than
30,000 incendiary and explosive devices were
 dropped on the city, destroying 64,000 out of
 80,000 houses, 32 hospitals and dispensaries
(despite the fact that they were marked with
a red cross), 64 churches, 99 schools and
university buildings.

Here is the conclusion of the Commission:

The IADL Commission unanimously found that the United
States was guilty of crimes against humanity during the
Korean War and that there was a pattern of behaviour
which constitutes genocide.

Let's close this posting with the conclusion of the
2001 Korea International War Crimes Tribunal,
which examined the testimony of civilians
from both North Korea and South Korea,
over the period from 1945 to 2001:

The Members of the International War Crimes Tribunal find
the accused Guilty, on the basis of the evidence against
them: each of the nineteen separate crimes alleged in
the Initial Complaint has been established to have been
committed beyond a reasonable doubt. The Members
find these crimes to have occurred during three main
periods in the U.S. intervention in and occupation
 of, Korea.

1. The best-known period is from June 25, 1950, until July
27, 1953, the Korean War, when over 4.6 million Koreans
perished, according to conservative Western estimates,
including 3 million civilians in the north and 500,000
civilians in the south. The evidence of US war crimes
presented to this Tribunal, included eyewitness
testimony & documentary accounts of massacres
of thousands of civilians in southern Korea by
U.S. military forces during the war. Abundant
evidence was also presented, concerning
criminal and even genocidal U.S. conduct
in northern Korea, including the systematic
leveling of most buildings and dwellings by
U.S. artillery and aerial bombardment; wide-
spread atrocities committed by U.S. & R.O.K.
forces against civilians and prisoners of war;
the deliberate destruction of facilities essential
to civilian life and economic production; and
the use of illegal weapons and biological
and chemical warfare by the U.S. against
the people and the environment of
northern Korea. Documentary and
eyewitness evidence was also
presented showing gross and
systematic violence committed
against women in northern and
southern Korea, characterized
by mass rapes, sexual assaults
and murders.

2. Less known but of crucial importance in understanding
the war period, is the preceding five years, from the
landing of U.S. troops in Korea on September 8, 1945,
to the outbreak of the war. The Tribunal Members 
examined extensive evidence of US crimes against
peace, and crimes against humanity, in this period.

The Members conclude that the U.S. government
acted to divide Korea against the will of the vast
majority of the people, limit its sovereignty, create
a police state in southern Korea using many former
collaborators with Japanese rule, and provoke
tension and threats between southern and
northern Korea, opposing and disrupting any
plans for peaceful reunification. In this period
 the U.S. trained, directed and supported the
ROK in systematic murder, imprisonment,
torture, surveillance, harassment and
violations of human rights, of hundreds
of thousands of people, especially of
those individuals or groups considered
nationalists, leftists, peasants seeking
land reform, union organizers and/or
those sympathetic to the north.

3. The Members find that, in the period from July 1953, to
the present, the U.S. has continued to maintain a powerful
military force in southern Korea, backed by nuclear weapons,
in violation of international law and intended to obstruct the
will of the Korean people for reunification. Military occupation
has been accompanied by the organized sexual exploitation of
Korean women, frequently leading to violence and even murder
of women, by U.S. soldiers, who have felt above the law. U.S.-
imposed economic sanctions have impoverished and
debilitated the people of northern Korea, leading to a
reduction of life expectancy, widespread malnutrition
and even starvation, in a country that once exported
food. The refusal of the US government to grant visas
to a delegation from the Democratic Peoples Republic
of Korea, who planned to attend this Tribunal, only
confirms the criminal intent of the defendants - to
isolate those whom they have abused, to prevent
 them from telling their story to the world.

In all these 55 years, the U.S. government has systematically
manipulated, controlled, directed, misinformed and restricted
press and media coverage, to obtain consistent support for
its military intervention, occupation and crimes against the
people of Korea. It has also inculcated racist attitudes
within the US troops and general population, that
prepared them to commit and/or accept atrocities
and genocidal policies against the Korean people.

It has violated the Constitution of the United States, the
delegation of powers over war and the military, the Bill
of Rights, the UN Charter, international law and the
laws of the ROK, DPRK, Peoples Republic of China,
Japan and many others, in its lawless determination
to exercise its will over the Korean peninsula.

The Members of the Korea International War Crimes
Tribunal hold the United States government and its
leaders accountable for these criminal acts and
condemn those found guilty, in the strongest
possible terms."

And Washington wonders why the North Koreans are
so hostile toward the United States!  The irony of
Washington's criticism of other nations (i.e Syria)
and their use of chemical weapons is stunningly

Posted by A Political Junkie 

If any validity at all exists to the claims made in the
1952 IADL and the 2001 Korea International War
Crimes Tribunal reports, some of North Korea's
fear and distrust of America, becomes very
understandable. More about these claims
in the article below.


    PalJim1924June 11, 2018 at 8:20 PM

I'm so grateful for this information. Now how to get it
to every US and UK citizen? My country, UK, was
involved in this war too. I already knew Korea's
population was reduced by 20% but that's just
a number. Reading how the US managed it, is
vivid and sickening. They're not the good guys
handing out the Chocolate, are they? Would be
nice to think UK wasn't involved with US in
War Crimes/Genocide, but who knows.

(Source - Viable Opposition)


Few noted the essence of Putin's inauguration speech
and its implications. What do YOU think?

We welcome your thoughts: email us at

TALL ORDER? Russia aims to be
 world’s 5th largest economy
by Paul Antonopoulos
May 11th, 2018

The inauguration ceremony of Putin to the presidency
 took place on Monday, in which he also signed a
decree of instructions for the objectives on the
development of the country for the next
few years.

Putin has instructed the government to make the country
one of the five most powerful economies by 2024 . The
news was released by the Kremlin press service
on Monday.

“The Russian government was instructed to ensure the
following national goals for the development of Russia
in the period up to 2024 … Russia must become one of
 the five largest economies, ensuring rates of economic
growth above global standards, maintaining macro-
economic stability as well as inflation not
exceeding 4%,” the decree explains.

In addition, Putin instructed the government to create at
least 15 global science and education centres, through
the integration of universities and companies, by 2024.

Re-elected for a new six-year term as the Russian president,
Vladimir Putin took office as head of state on Monday. It
was the fourth presidential inauguration ceremony in
 his political career.

Putin was re-elected as Russia’s president in 2018 with
record support, receiving a vote of more than 56.4
million from people.

It must be noted though, that in 2007, Putin said it would
happen in 2017, and then, in 2008, he said it would be
achieved by 2020. Russia’s economy is currently
 ranked 12th, behind the likes of Canada and
South Korea.

Meanwhile, Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday, that he
was ready to do everything for Russia’s development
 if the parliament approved his candidacy as PM.

“I would like to thank President Vladimir Putin for the trust
placed in me and for the proposal to become the head of
the government. This is not only trust, but also a huge
responsibility, and in the case that the corresponding
decisions are made, I am ready to do everything
for the development of our country Russia,”
Medvedev told a plenary session of
State Duma.

Whether or not Russia is capable of growing to become one
 of the world’s top five economies in the next decade, is not
simply a technical one - it is an ideological & philosophical
 one. There is an active debate within Russia, about the
uses and utilities of market vs. planned economic
 structures, and secondly – though not entirely
separately – the utility and value of Russia
integrating into Western economies, and
how the costs vs. benefits of that, will
play out, in the middle to long term.

(Source - Fort Russ)


Don't Trust Putin's Kleptocrats
Russia Needs Socialism

November, 2017.

Veteran Russian communist DR SLAVA TETEKIN talks to
John Foster, about how Russians today view the former
Soviet Union and attitudes towards Vladimir Putin.

Asked about current support for communism in Russia,
Dr Slava Tetekin, veteran member of the Communist
Party of the Russian Federation, puts the figure at
around 30 per cent.

Tetekin, recently in London for the celebration of the
October Socialist Revolution, explained --- “our
parliamentary representation fell significantly
 in the most recent Duma elections, to just
over 12 per cent — largely as a result of
 a rigged electoral system.

“But the daily sale of the communist-supporting Pravda is
80,000 and of Sovetskaya Rossiya 120,000. Particularly
 among the young and the better-educated, interest in
 our party’s policies and the achievements of the
 Soviet Union, is increasing.

“This is because life,” says Tetekin, “is becoming increasingly
difficult for all in Russia, except the very rich. Real incomes
have been declining for three straight years. Twenty-two
illion people are classified as living in absolute
poverty —
struggling to get enough to eat.
Half the population
is classified as poor.

“Yet people still remember that things were not always like this.
 Less than 30 years ago there was universal free healthcare.

“Education was free, right through to university, and so was
childcare. There were full pensions. There was no
 unemployment. Housing, energy, transport
basic foods, were all heavily

“There is also a growing awareness - of the degradation of
Russia’s economy. Russia’s manufacturing industries are
 virtually dead. The economy is almost entirely dependent
 on extractive industries that sell to the West: oil,
natural gas.

“In 1990, the Soviet Union produced 1,000 aircraft. Last year...
 we produced 50. Our airlines lease from the West. Our motor
 industry is entirely dependent on imported technology and
 components. The same applies even more to IT and
computing. The technological base for independent
 economic development, has all but disappeared.

“These are some of the reasons why a new generation of
Russians are looking again at their own history and
particularly at the period following the revolution.
 In 1917 Russia had a backward, largely agrarian
economy. Within just 25 years the Soviet Union
 was outperforming Europe’s biggest economy,
Germany, both in output and the quality of its
 technology. It was in large part for this reason
 that the Soviet Union was able to defeat
Hitler fascism.”

Asked how he would describe Russia’s current
government under Vladimir Putin, Tetekin
denied that it should be seen as at all

“It is embedded in a layer of kleptocratic comprador
 oligarchs - who are dependent on the West for the
 sale of their raw materials, for the banking of their
money and for the technology needed for their
operations in Russia. Immediately below Putin
virtually all ministers are of this character.

“The government depends on the oligarchs
 and the oligarchs depend on the West.

“Putin,” he says, “has now been in power for a very
long time. His 18 years exceed those of Brezhnev.
 It is remarkable how little challenge he offered to
Nato and the US, for the great bulk of that time: 
years, that saw Nato’s eastward expansion into
central Europe, the Balkans and the Black Sea.
Russia even failed to oppose the invasion
 of Libya.

“It is only recently, in Crimea and in Syria, that Russia
 has set down markers against further US advances.
This may reflect the directness with which the US
was challenging Russia’s interests.”

But, says Tetekin, “there may well be other
 factors, which we need to consider.

“These might include: perceptions of a decline in the
global power of the US, of a shift towards China,
economic rivalries between the US and
the EU.

“Russia sells seven times as much to Germany as it
does to the US — and buys from Germany in the
same proportion.

“In turn, Germany’s own energy costs and international
competitiveness against the US depend very significantly
 on Russian oil and gas. US diplomatic action to impede
the construction of new gas pipelines from Russia to
Germany & banking sanctions on oligarch companies
-- match the increasing conflict between the EU and
US, over steel quotas and corporate taxation.”

Joking, Tetekin says he would be all in favour of
sanctions against Russia --- if they covered
and spare parts.

“It would force the Russian government to invest in
 the redevelopment of our productive economy.”

However, he adds, these rivalries also underlie attempts
to promote a “democratic opposition“ in Russia similar
to that funded by the US in Ukraine, prior to the
2014 coup.

“It has a smaller potential base. It is impeded by its
 neoliberal ideology. Unlike the time of Yeltsin’s
1991 coup, there are no illusions about free
markets. Russians have seen them, and
know the consequences. But regime
change is increasingly becoming a
goal of the US administration.”

This, he says, makes it all the more important to
 redevelop working-class mobilisation and to
ensure that the current reawakening of
enthusiasm for the October Revolution
 is converted into a wider political
movement for socialist change.

The young are already leading
 the way.

Dr Tetekin is currently chief policy adviser to the
general secretary of the Communist Party of the
 Russian Federation, was a communist member
 of the Duma and previously played an active
role in support for the anti-apartheid
movement in southern Africa.

(Source - Morning Star)


North Korea: Standing
 proud for Korea!
Few foreigners know this but here it is: most South Koreans
 admire their brothers and sisters in the North, the DPR Korea.
 The US does not know this, because such feelings are shared
 in private but then again what can you do if you have a foreign
 power on your soil controling your policy? Some react, others
 lie in bed with their master.

After all, the Japanese did it increasingly from 1876, then de
facto from 1910 until 1945, by which time the founder of the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Kim il-Sung, had
made a name for himself as an anti-Japanese guerrilla
fighter and commander. And hero. After all, the Japanese
 took five hundred thousand Korean girls and ladies and
turned them into "comfort women" to receive the dirty
water from tired Japanese imperial invaders. After all,
the Koreans provided half a million male slaves to the
 Japanese invader. It is this that Kim il-Sung was
fighting against and the South Koreans know this.

The South Koreans, or the citizens of the Republic of Korea,
know that South Koreans took part in the Sinchon Massacre
 which shows the torture and murder of civilians by mainly
South Korean military personnel but also US soldiers,
acting under the auspices of Washington. The South
Koreans know that the USA deployed 32,557 tons of
chemical weapons on North Korean civilians. The South
Koreans know that the US and its South Korean puppet
 planned to invade the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea in 1950. They know that these plans were seized
 by North Korean agents, and they know that these
documents counter the lies used by the US State
Department claiming that the war started when
 the North invaded the South. As was its right
under international law, the DPRK defended
itself. And so ensued the Korean War
between 1950 and 1953.
The South Koreans know that in this war, the Americans
dropped more bombs on North Korea than it used in the
 entire Pacific arena in the Second World War. They know
 that in this war, the United States of America dropped
635,000 tons of explosives as opposed to 503,000 in
the Pacific conflict. They know that in this war, the
United States of America deployed 32,557 tons of
Napalm, a chemical weapon, on N. Korean citizens.

 In this war, 3.5 million Koreans were killed.

 In this war, Pyongyang was bombed, it was carpet
bombed and after three years of day-and-night
humiliation, two buildings were left standing.

The South Koreans know that in this war, 20 per cent of
 the North Korean population was murdered by the United
 States of America and they know that American soldiers
carried out the most barbaric atrocities, strafing air-raid
shelters full of women and children, laughing as their
screams filled the air as they burned to death. They know
 that in this war, US soldiers poured gasoline on civilians
and stood back watching as they died a horrific death.
 The South Koreans know that in this war, US military
personnel decapitated political prisoners with Samurai
 swords and they know that in one shelter, nine hundred
 women and children were incinerated. Korean children.
 Incinerated. As US soldiers looked on and giggled.
Some say a few masturbated.

The South Koreans know that in one massacre of Koreans,
500 civilians were forced into a ditch and doused in gasoline
 before someone tossed in a match. The South Koreans know
 that American soldiers were seen pouring fuel down the air
vents and that they were seen setting fire to the civilians
 sheltering below.

The South Koreans know that the Partial Test Ban Treaty
(PTBT) bans nuclear tests in the atmosphere, outer space
 and under water. However, the DPR Korea is not a party
 to this treaty. Neither is underground testing banned
under the treaty, unless radiation is released into the
 atmosphere. The South Koreans know that the CTBT,
 or Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (1996) is not in
force and the DPR Korea is not a party to this treaty.

The South Koreans know that the DPR Korea did sign the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1985. This treaty
 expressly bans the manufacture and testing of nuclear
devices, under Article II. However, the DPR Korea with-
drew from the treaty in 2003, having given notice to the
 UNSC, as per Article X (I) which allows member states
 to withdraw from the treaty. The S. Koreans know this.

The South Koreans know that the Nuclear Disarmanent
Declaration made by the DPR Korea is taken by some to
 be legally binding. This statement was made under the
 fourth round of the Six-Party Talks on the DPRK nuclear
 weapons program (PR China, Japan, DPR Korea, Russia,
Rep. Korea, USA) in 2005. The declaration by Pyongyang
 was not a public declaration, but rather, an affirmation,
 made in private negotiations with five other nations and
 secondly, where is the evidence that Pyongyang intended
 to be bound by circumstances, especially after Iraq and
Libya spelled a clear lesson: that if you destroy your
weapons, then you are invaded.

And here we get to the crux of the matter. If you destroy
 your weapons, Washington invades you. Ask Iraq. Ask
 Libya. Ask Syria (proxy invasion by western-backed

And if someone tries to use the UNSC (United Nations
Security Council) as a legal entity or legal source, then
 let us ask Washington under which UN law did it invade
 Iraq? Or did the USA breach the UN Charter and breach
international law with its invasion?

And regarding nukes, if the DPR Korea cannot have them,
has anyone investigated Israel and found out whether the
 number of nukes it has is really 80 & with fissile material
 for a further 200 nuclear missiles?

The point is that the DPR Korea stands up against all these
 monumental injustices and these attempts to humiliate
Koreans. The DPR Korea wants foreign troops off Korean
 soil and wants peace and reconciliation with the South.

That is all they ask for. From a position of pride & dignity.
 The South Koreans know this and they also know, in
whose bed they lie.

by Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey

(Source - Pravda.Ru)

Twitter: @TimothyBHinchey




In this year of the 100th anniversary of the October Revolution,
and twenty years after the dissolution of the Soviet Union,
it seems that no media in Russia, or anywhere else, ever
quotes any serious news
or analysis, from or about,
the second most powerful
political party in Russia,
after Putin's
United Russia party!

The Communist Party of the Russian Federation
(CPRF), is mentioned less than the Russian
Communist Party, a fake party, in RT news
and other Russian media outlets...

So here's the latest report from the CPRF
itself, well worth ploughing through, for
what it reveals.

I wonder what you will think about it!

Please drop me a line, at

 Political Report of the Central Committee
to the XVII Congress of the CPRF

Delegates and guests of the Congress,

We have left behind us the report period, for which the start
was made by the XV Congress. This stage was full of highly
 important, sometimes dramatic events. The time has come
 to review the results of the work over the past four years
and set new benchmarks.

We are holding our XVII Congress in the year of the centenary
 of the Great October Revolution. The party started preparing
 for the jubilee in March 2015 at a special plenary session of
the Central Committee.

Human history has seen many great events, but only some of
them change the course of development of the whole world.
Proletarian revolution in our country, dramatically changed
 the face of the planet. It set Russia on the path to socialism.
It solved the national crisis, and saved the country from

The 'Great October Revolution' rid Russia of capitalist and
 national oppression. For the people of the Earth it became
 the lode star and the clarion call --- for the search for a
worthy of Mankind.

The era of the building of socialism, is written into the biography
 of our country in golden letters. The unique experience of Lenin-
Stalin modernization enabled the country to increase its industrial
potential seventy-fold within two decades, a rate of development
unprecedented in world history. That experience is still an
example of the successful creation of a society
 of social justice.

The Jubilee of the Great October Revolution is an excellent
 opportunity to remind the world of its significance and high-
light the achievements of socialism. To show an alternative
 to the omnipotence of capital. To mobilize all the forces,
struggle for the triumph of the bright ideas of
working people.

The crisis of capitalism: a sign of decay


The world is immersed in a profound systemic crisis which
engenders instability and threatens a new world war. This
 is the essence of the present stage of capitalism. The
 inherent contradictions of this system have not gone away:
the contradictions between Labour and Capital, between
the social character of production and the private form of
appropriation of the results of labour. On the contrary, the
inborn flaws of this system, have assumed a worldwide
character. There is no corner on Earth where the tentacles
 of the rapacious octopus have not reached. As Marx noted
 in his time, its very nature, forces it to scour the world
in search of maximum profits. Therefore the miasma
of over-
ripe and decaying capitalism, is poisoning
practically all
countries and continents.

Crises are an inseparable part of the capitalist economy.
Throughout its history capitalism has engendered several
major and tens of smaller crises. The current crisis is now
its tenth year. It is the biggest crisis since the Great
Depression in the USA and the Second World War. The
 crisis has affected, not just one individual sector, not
one tentacle of the octopus, but the entire system.

The current crisis is a direct consequence of neoliberalism.
The US Marxist, David Harvey, came to the conclusion that
 in the 1970s, speculative financial capital had finally gained
 an upper hand over industrial capital, so that not production,
but the market value of shares of stock, became the aim of
economic activity. Financial interests, “the power of the
accountants rather than the engineers”, prevailed among
 the ruling classes and the ruling elites. Indeed, capitalism
 is drifting further & further away from material production.
 The imploding financial bubbles, form a characteristic
feature of modern capitalism. You will remember that
the CPRF has described this phenomenon as financial
imperialism, and has provided its extended analysis.

Neoliberalism has led to a revision of the idea of a “social
state.” It has cast aside all the vestiges of democracy and
human rights. It is relentlessly asserting its class & even
 caste supremacy. According to Oxfam, the international
association of NGOs, 1% of the planet’s population
 owns more wealth, than the remaining 99 percent.
combined wealth of 62 of the richest people,
is comparable
to what the poorest half
of humankind owns, and that,
3.5 billion people.

It is impossible to challenge the English philosopher Terry
Eagleton, who predicted in his book Why Marx Was Right,
that “Capitalism will behave anti-socially, if it is profitable
 for it to do so, & that can now mean human devastation
 on an unimaginable scale.”

The number of billionaires increased six times - to 1,810 -
 between 2000 and 2016. At the same time, more than a
billion Earth people live in abject poverty. Nearly 400
 million children suffer from malnutrition. This is not
coincidence. There is a direct link between the
enrichment of the rich, & the impoverishment
 of the poor.

During the last crisis, the lower strata were ruined, lost
their jobs and dwellings, while banks and corporations
drew billions in assistance from governments. This isn't
surprising, considering that government institutions have
become no more than managers hired by Big Business.
While Apple pays, in Europe, a profit tax equal to five-
thousandths of a percentage point, ordinary people
choked by high taxes, prices and credits, low
and the dismantling of social rights.

The parasitic essence of world capitalism will not disappear
- unless capitalism is destroyed. In its quest for maximum
profits, the oligarchy stops at nothing: stepping up their
exploitation and financial speculation, the unleashing
 of wars, and the destruction of whole states.

Our XV Congress thus defined the main features
of the present-day capitalist system:

First, globalism is the highest form of imperialism.

Second, the world economic crisis is deepening.

Third, capitalism is mounting an attack against
human rights everywhere.

Fourth, imperialism is increasingly aggressive in the world
arena, and the threat of a new, major war, is growing.

Fifth, financial-oligarchic capital ever more openly puts
 its stake, on the most vicious and reactionary forces.

Life has vindicated our analysis. During the past four years
the beastly snarl of capitalism has manifested itself in all
its ugly cynicism. World capital does not tolerate
let alone rivals: it strangles and
destroys political regimes
that think
along national lines.

Over a hundred years ago Lenin drew attention to the crises
 connected with the transition from the “peaceful” to the non-
peaceful stage of the functioning of the bourgeois system.
The destruction of the Soviet Union, ushered in another
“peaceful” period. Not encountering any serious obstacles,
capitalism pursued a policy of globalization. The workers’
and communist movement was weakened. There was an
upsurge of opportunism. Absolute impoverishment of
the working people was taking place, even in
developed countries.

That period is now over. New trends have emerged.

First, imperialism is actively provoking internal conflicts
in various countries and is using military force to redraw
 the world map. Examples are Iraq, Libya and Syria.

Second, a tilt to the right is encouraged in the centres of
world capitalism. Even the European social-democrats
have given up their pacifism and embraced aggressive
 imperialistic attitudes. Seeing Russia as a competitor,
 the West is fomenting anti-Sovietism and Russophobia.

Third, right-wing forces, including Fascism, have moved
 to the forefront of the capitalist world.

We believe it is wrong to assert that Russia has immunity
to Fascism. The historical experience of Italy & Germany
 has shown that in the “weak links” of the capitalist chain,
 imperialism uses Fascization as an “antidote” to socialist
revolutions. That is why Russia is also vulnerable. We
communists have to be vigilant.

The scenario of the extreme right coming to power has
already been acted out in Ukraine. The Banderovites,
by the US and the European Union, staged a
government coup to establish a terrorist, reactionary
nationalist regime that cracks down on communists
and all dissenters. The proclamation of the Donetsk
& Lugansk People’s Republics was a logical reaction
 of millions of honest and courageous people. In spite
of the Minsk Agreements, the situation in Donbass is
extremely tense. Today the CPRF reaffirms: “Donbass,
we are by your side.” We come out for the recognition
of the independence of the Donetsk and Lugansk
People’s Republics, and for their further
rapprochement with Russia.

The decision of the people of Crimea on reunification with
Russia, was a landmark event. At the same time, it has
shown that world capitalism won't tolerate attempts by
our country, to protect its borders and interests. The
Western countries are turning Ukraine into an anti-
Russian bulwark. In July 2016, the NATO summit
in Warsaw declared Russia to be the main threat
-- and
“containing Moscow”, to be the key goal.

Having accused Russia of aggression, the North Atlantic
Alliance has stepped up the militarization of Eastern
Europe. NATO has deployed its military units in Poland,
 Romania and the Baltic states. NATO is strengthening
its presence on the Black Sea. Montenegro has been
 drawn into the Alliance.

The new US Administration has not renounced its
aggressive foreign policy. One of Trump’s early
directives was to increase the defense budget
by more than 50 billion dollars.

The USA has unleashed expansion in the Middle East
under the guise of fighting ISIL. Its aim is hegemony
over the key region rich in hydrocarbon resources.
The US strike on Shayrat air base on April the 7th
 shattered the myth of Trump’s “love of peace.”
put paid to Zhirinovsky’s Trumpomania.

While tirelessly instructing the world in democracy, US
imperialism is taking part in crimes against humanity.
Hundreds of civilians died, during the bombings of
Mosul in Iraq, the air strike on a hospital in Kunduz,
in Afghanistan, claimed tens of lives. The barbaric
operation in Yemen, in which Saudi Arabia has the
direct support of Washington, is into its third year.
The death toll has topped 10,000, two-thirds of the
country’s population are on the brink of starvation.

The process of the decay of imperialism, predicted by
Lenin, is unfolding. The link between world capital and
religious extremism has grown stronger. The USA and
its satellites support such brutal groups as Jabhat al-
Nusra and ISIL. Uigur separatist and Islamic groups
 whose chieftains are based in the US and Western
Europe are being used to destabilize China. It isn't
 surprising, that China is one of the main targets.
 Acting now by threats & now by cajolery, global
capital seeks to weaken the Celestial Kingdom.
 It is clearly scared of the successes of the new
world power. To “neutralize the Chinese threat”
 the US is cobbling together an alliance against
 the PRC, trying to drag into it, not only Japan &
South Korea, but also the Philippines, India and
some other countries. In April, the US military
close to unleashing war on the Korean
Pyongyang is denied the right
to strengthen its
national defense.

In Latin America capital continues to oppose “XXI-century
Socialism.” When it was embraced by Venezuela, Bolivia,
Ecuador and Nicaragua this put hope into the hearts of
millions of disfranchised citizens. In response, every trick
 in the book has been used: sanctions, threats of invasion,
 and the financing of subversive actions of the right-wing
opposition. The globalists have managed to bring about
an impeachment of Dilma Russeff in Brazil. They have
put Mauricio Macri, as the head of Argentina. Now,
these countries open the door to US corporations
and the rights of workers are under attack.

However “the right-wing revenge” has stalled. In Venezuela,
 attempts to depose Nicolas Maduro, the successor to the
legendary Hugo Chavez, are failing, although Washington
 has invested huge resources in it. In Ecuador the left-wing
candidate, Lenin Moreno, scored a victory. In Nicaragua,
 Daniel Ortega comfortably won another term. Late last
the world suffered a heavy loss. Fidel Castro, the
and banner of anti-imperialist struggle, died.
His like-minded
fellow fighters, carry on his
courageous cause.

Thus, the international situation is determined by the clash of
 two trends. The first is the offensive of the forces of capitalism.
It is doing all it can to shore up its global dominance. But there
 is also the second trend, and that is the growing resistance to
 capitalist hegemony, and the commitment to uphold the right
to independent and sovereign existence.

We are for a better world

Opposition to the forces of capital takes various forms.

First, a number of states reject the course imposed by the
ideologues of liberalism. The Communist Party of China
will hold its XIX Congress in the autumn. The Chinese
communists are moving steadily toward achieving their
 two main goals: to build a middle-level wealth society
 by the time of the Party’s centenary in 2021 and to
create “a powerful, affluent, democratic, civilized,
harmonious and modernized socialist state” by the
PRC's centenary in 2049. In the international arena
 Beijing comes out for peace & economic integration
and is promoting the One Belt, One Road, project.

Vietnam, Cuba, Laos and the DPRK are developing confidently.
Belarus is setting an example to the post-Soviet space. Leftist
governments in Latin America, united in the ALBA alliance, are
demonstrating staunchness. Their social programs have given
millions of people housing, jobs, medial care and education. All
 these countries prove, that there is an alternative to globalism.

Second, millions of working people are struggling for their rights.
In France last year the reform of labour laws involved hundreds
of thousands of citizens in protests. Millions of people regularly
 go on strike against liberal reforms in India. The people of Brazil
 and Argentina, are actively opposing the offensive of capitalism.

It has to be admitted that the crisis of capitalism tends to increase
 the influence both of the left and of the right parties. The ideas of
 euroscepticism are gaining popularity in Europe, as manifested by
Brexit, and the electoral success in France of Marine le Pen and
Jean-Luc Melanchon. In the heart of world capitalism, the USA,
socialist-leaning candidate Bernie Sanders, won active support
 before the presidential vote and Donald Trump also campaigned
on criticism of the dominance of Wall Street.

It is very important for the left to prevent a “right-wing march” on
the planet. Possibilities for that do exist. It is clear that after the
treacherous destruction of the Soviet Union no “end of history”
 and no “collapse of communism” have occurred. The influence
 of the left could not have disappeared, if only because poverty,
inequality and injustice did not go away. They force people to
 fight for a better life. The world communist movement, has
been destroyed. It is building up its strength.

Communists today form part of the ruling coalitions in Nepal,
Venezuela, Ecuador, Uruguay, and some other countries. In
recent years our comrades in Belarus & the Czech Republic
 have scored successes. The Labour Party in Belgium, has a
chance to win more seats in parliament. Communists have
nearly trebled their presence in the parliament of Japan.
These are just some examples.

The program of our party determines that the CPRF is part of
 the international communist and workers’ movement. We are
actively promoting cooperation with fraternal parties, pooling
our efforts in the struggle against imperialism, and for the
of the working people.

Socialism is the strategic goal of communists. In their struggle
for it, the communist parties are called upon to strengthen their
position in the grassroots with due account of the specificities
of each country. This task should be solved, through opposing
 both social-reformism and left-wing sectarianism.

The CPRF is actively involved in the analysis of the modern stage
 of class struggle, & in developing its forms and methods. During
 the report period, we initiated a number of academic-practical
conferences & round tables, including: International Communist
 Movement Today & Tomorrow, The Image of Socialism We Are
 Struggling For, The Party Press, & the Struggle of Communists
 under Current Conditions.

In May 2015 the CPRF organized in Moscow, a meeting of
international democratic organizations, to mark the 70th
Anniversary of the Victory Over Fascism. Taking part were...

The World Federation of Trade Unions, The World Peace Council,
The Women’s International Democratic Federation, The World
Federation of Democratic Youth, The International Federation
of Democratic Lawyers, The International Federation of Anti-
Fascists and Resistance Fighters. All of them have a
corresponding status at UNESCO, the International
 Labour Organization, and other UN agencies.

This year the activities of the world’s communist parties are
dominated by the 100th Anniversary of the Great October
Socialist Revolution. Resolutions have been passed,
 stressing its significance.

Our party takes an active part in International Meetings of
Communist and Workers’ Parties. Since 1998, these have
been held annually, at the initiative of the Communist Party
 of Greece. The last one, held in Vietnam last year, brought
 together 60 parties. In the year of the October Revolution
 jubilee, we will host the 19th International Meeting of
Communist & Workers’ Parties. It will be held in early
November in the City of Lenin (St. Petersburg). The
will set the agenda of the communist
movement, in the
struggle for socialism. Great
responsibility devolves on
us, to hold this
forum in a worthy manner.

The CPRF takes part in international meetings, seminars
& conferences and interacts with left-wing parties on a
bilateral basis. We took part in the congresses of the
communist parties of the Czech Republic & Moravia,
Portugal, Finland, Bangladesh & other countries, &
in events staged by left-wing parties. Cooperation
agreements have been signed with the communist
 parties of China and Vietnam. An agreement has
been signed with the Workers’ Party of Korea.

These agreements are being successfully implemented,
thanks to the efforts of L.I.Kalashnikov, K.K.Taisiyev,
V.M.Tetyokin and other Russian comrades.

A Russia-China meeting, '70 Years of Common Victory' was
held in Khabarovsk in September 2015. Delegations of young
 CPRF activists go to China every year to study the experience
 of reforms conducted in the PRC. Our comrades regularly take
 part in the festivals of the Portuguese Communist newspaper,
 Avante (Awake). A joint Russia-Korea photo exhibition,
'A History of Friendship' was held in three stages,
 in Pyongyang, Moscow and Minsk.

At all the international events the CPRF briefs fraternal
on its activities. Solidnet posts documents,
and other
information, about our party.

A great amount of work is being done in the framework of the
 UCP-CPSU. The Union brings together 17 parties. The high-
lights in the report period were: the celebration of the 20th
anniversary of the Union in Kiev before the Maidan coup,
 the XXXV Congress of the UCP-CPSU in Minsk, plenums
of the Union Council in Moscow, the opening of the
internet site, and so on.

Coordination of activities takes on an added importance,
considering that the authorities in some republics of the
 former USSR, persecute communists. At various times,
 pressure was brought to bear on the communists in
Georgia, Moldavia & Kazakhstan. In the Baltic States,
Uzbekistan & Turkmenistan communist parties have
to work practically underground. The UCP-CPSU
repeatedly come out in support of the
communists led by P.N.Simonenko.
Some of our
Ukrainian comrades had to be
rescued from
the hands of pro-fascist

On 29 May 2014 a headquarters for humanitarian aid to the
 citizens of the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics
 was set up. Their population is exposed to severe trials.
Within three years the CPRF has sent 60 convoys with
 humanitarian aid to these republics. This work goes on.
Over three thousand children from Donbass, went
the Snegiri complex outside Moscow, to rest
and improve
their health.

International work is covered in the Vestnik SKP-KPSS.
The newspaper Pravda carries a monthly feature devoted
 to the Union of Communist Parties. The newly opened
rubric “Communist Brotherhood” has already carried
talks with the leaders of the communist parties
Portugal, Lebanon, Cyprus, Britain and India.

The CPRF takes an active part in solidarity actions, with peoples
that have become the victims of imperialism's aggressive actions.
 The voice of our party was heard in joint statements against the
persecution of communist parties, manifestations of fascism
nationalism, and the offensive on the rights and
freedoms of
working people. We have come out
in defense of Libya and
Syria, and against
the US blockade of Cuba..

The cohesion of communist &workers’ parties is the guarantee
 of their success. It is an uphill struggle. Capitalism will never
resolve its inherent contradictions on its own. Imperialism
becoming more and more aggressive in the time of crisis.
Analyzing the ideas of Marx and Lenin, modern US academic
James Petras, writes that capitalism has proved convincingly
 and indisputably that it prospers thanks to the degradation of
tens of millions of workers, & is absolutely deaf to the endless
 pleas for reform & regulation. The capitalism that really exists
cannot, and does not want to, raise the living standards of
ordinary people, guarantee their employment, or provide a
decent life without fear and humiliation. Capitalism…
diametrically opposed to freedom, equality,
decision-making and
the common good.

There are only two paths for humanity: either socialism or further
decay, wars, instability, the moral degradation of society and the
destruction of the environment. Only the power of working people,
public ownership of the means of production, & rational planning
 in the economy, can set humankind on the path of all-round
development. It is the duty of our party to actively
these ideas among the grassroots.

Non-stop crisis

Comrades, after 1991 our country became part of world capitalism.
 The liberal traitors who came to power cherished the hope of joining
 the “golden billion.” They obediently followed the instructions of the
 International Monetary Fund and other global capitalist institutions.
 Even in the West, they considered the team of Yeltsin’s foreign
advisers to be ''economic murderers''.

The Russian bourgeoisie was accorded the dubious honour of
supplying the West with raw materials and fulfilling its whims.
Many upstart oligarchs raised on Gaidar’s “yeast” were quite
 comfortable with such a role. They treated Russia as “this
country,” in which they were “cowboy builders,” Russia was
 a place for business, while their safe landing sites were
 their mansions and hefty foreign bank accounts.

A regressive, parasitic, oligarchic, comprador capitalism established
 itself in the country. Its basis is the export of commodities and the
banking sectors. This proves that Russia is becoming a raw
 materials appendage, and a market for foreign goods.

However, part of the Russian bourgeoisie wants greater independence.
 Experessing the aspirations of this part of “the newest Russians”
government has ratcheted up patriotic rhetoric and taken some
 independent steps. The Crimea was brought back to where it
 belongs. Support was rendered to the legitimate government
of Syria. The people of Russia, tired of self-abasement,
welcomed these steps. This state of affairs was not
to the West’s liking. Sanctions were introduced, and
a massive information campaign, leavened with
Russophobia and anti-Sovietism, were launched
against Russia. If Russia's leadership does not
want to repeat the fate of Milosevic, Hussein
and Gaddafi, it has no other option, but to
strengthen the country’s sovereignty.

However, the Russian oligarchy has neither the strength nor
 the desire, to break with the system of global capitalism. It
 has still not recognized the DPR and LPR. “The pivot to the
East” policy is clearly marking time. Attacks continue on
Belarus, which undermine the process of a closer union
between our peoples. The process of integration of the
 post-Soviet space, which the CPRF has always
welcomed, is meeting with serious difficulties.

After the devastating Serdyukov “reforms” many, but not all
the problems of the Armed Forces combat ability have been
solved. The cuts in the defense budget which have started,
 run counter to the need to restore military education and
science. Our precision weapons still need imported
components, while the software built into them,
may be set in motion at any moment. It is not
possible to effectively protect the country’s
sovereignty, without a powerful defense
industry independent of foreign suppliers.

On the whole, the quarter century of liberal reforms in Russia
has produced an extremely cruel socio-economic model. A
 peripheral oligarchic-bureaucratic regime has taken shape
 in the country.

Russia’s joining the World Trade Organization, was a major
concession to global capital. Only the CPRF has consistently
opposed it. Restrictions on production, reduction of customs
duties and other novelties gave an edge to foreign “partners.”
During five years of WTO membership, the Russian budget
lost about 800 billion roubles due to lower customs duties.
 Indirect losses topped 4 trillion.

Big owners have been given a free hand in plundering Russia.
The economy is being deprived of vitally needed investments.
Today they account for a mere 18% of GDP, only half of what
they were in the RSFSR in 1990. But the authorities calmly
look on as the oligarchs transfer capital to offshore zones
and foreign banks. In the last 2 years alone, capital flight
 exceeded 70 billion dollars. And we are constantly being
called to make “civil peace” with those who are simply
 robbing Russia.

Dependence on foreign capital is beginning to threaten the
country’s sovereignty. Companies with foreign capital
account for 75% of the communications sphere, 56%
of the extractive industries and 49% of the processing

This is highly reminiscent of the situation in the early XX
century when Western capital dominated the industry and
 banking sector in the Russian Empire. That dependence
 cost Russia dearly: it was drawn into the First World War
 defending the interests of the Entente capitalists. Russia's
 GDP has been shrinking for over two years. Since 2014, it
has dropped by 8%. The state budget is losing trillions of
 roubles. Modernization and diversification of the economy
 have failed. The Government ministries in charge of the
economy and finances are unable to cope with the crisis.
They are misleading the country. The Ministry of Economic
Development reported a 0.4% growth of GDP at the end of
the first quarter. However, this data was promptly
challenged by Vneshekonombank analysts, who
proved that the GDP continues to fall.

The socio-economnic course followed by the government has
 turned the country into a society of mass poverty. According
 to official data, real income in Russia dropped by nearly 13%,
and consumption has gone down by 15%. The number of
paupers has increased by 3 million. Twenty million, one in
every seven citizens, live below the poverty line. The CPRF
 points out that the official living minimum, is 2-2.5 times
 lower, than the actual level.

Sociology confirms the picture of mass impoverishment. Last
year three quarters of citizens significantly cut consumption.
 Forty percent say they don't have enough money to buy food
 and clothing. Almost 30% need food stamps to survive.

Russia has become a country of appalling inequality. Dollar
millionaires own 62% of Russia’s wealth, and billionaires
own 29%. A handful of moneybags own nine tenths of the
 national wealth. The international research organization
The New World of Welfare has concluded that Russia
 ranks first in the world, in terms of wealth inequality.

During the past year alone the aggregate wealth of 200 of
Russia’s richest businessmen increased by 100 billion
 dollars. ”Income champions” own 460 billion dollars,
which is twice the annual budget of a country of
150 million people.

These then are the main problems of the Russian economy:

— its reliance on commodity production,

—the destruction of its industrial potential,

— poverty and the low purchasing power of its citizens,

— a flawed monetary policy,

— inefficient governance.

The sanctions compounded the situation.

The government’s regional policy is extremely ineffective.
 Receiving only 30 percent of the total national income,
the regions are struggling to maintain the social sphere.
There are only nine donor regions left. The debt of
regional budgets, has already reached 2.5 trillion
roubles, of which, over 50% are commercial credits.
The budgets are overburdened with commitments.

The CPRF is ready to change the situation drastically. We
maintain that the crisis in Russia is man-made. It is created
 by the government which has no coherent development
 program. Spinoza said that He who knows not where he
 is sailing, will never have a fair wind.” So, our government
is either full of bad navigators, or they are deliberately
 leading us into a dead end.

The Russian crisis is, at the same time, part of the global
crisis of capitalism. In the framework of this system, our
country has no favorable prospect. There is no room for
 such a Russia in the modern world: it will be torn to
pieces and simply swallowed by the sharks of world
capital. Our country lived through such an experience
 before. The brief period when a Provisional Government
 was in power, in 1917, nearly brought about the demise
 of Russia. It was rescued by the Red Project of the
 Great October Revolution. The Bolsheviks restored
 the country’s sovereignty, and prevented it being
“digested” in the insatiable stomach of world
capitalism. This lesson is still relevant to
 Russia today.

One of the main contradictions, is that between the interests
of the country and the interests of Russian capital. This can
only be resolved by a cardinal change of the socio-economic
system. Only a renewed socialism will be able to cope with
social inequality, economic disarray and create an effective
 governance system.

The working majority and false “class peace.”

The question arises, what are the driving forces of socialist change?
 We turned to this question more than once over the past years. The
 destruction of socialism and the Shock Therapy of the 1990s, had a
negative impact on the social class structure of society. The situation
 continued to worsen after 2000. The number of workers in industry,
 dropped by more than 2 million. The past few years alone have seen
 the closure of the Likhachev Plant in Moscow, the Nickel Plant in
Norilsk, the Khimprom chemical plant in Volgograd and other giants.
 Many enterprises dramatically cut production. The share of the
processing industry, fell to a pitiful 13%.

The main change that occurred in the life of the working class
 and the peasantry is their proletarization. Under the Soviet
 government the worker and the peasant were co-owners of
 the means of production and the national wealth. Now,
 almost two-thirds of the gainfully employed population
(64.6 percent), work for the benefit of private capital.

Workers have fewer and fewer chances to rise up the social “lifts.”
 The degree of class polarization in this country is among the
highest on the planet. It is impossible to achieve class peace
 under such conditions. The exploiters and the exploited have
 diametrically opposite opportunities and interests.

“The masters of the world” behave like time-servers. It is no
accident that capital flight increases. High-ranking officials
increasingly behave in a criminal way. More and more
governors are charged with corruption. The elite’s
inability to “rule in the old way” causes it to swing
 from liberalism to conservatism, from nationalism
 to a token crackdown on Russian nationalists, etc.

The past quarter century has seen a sharp growth in the
 number of those engaged in petty commodity production
 and speculative-usury sectors. A sizable stratum has
emerged of people who live by “gigs.” In the European
 Middle Ages these people were referred to as “free-
lancers.” Most of them are young people in the 20
to 45 age bracket. Their instrument of production
 is the computer. What they want out of life, is,
 above all, independence. These new
phenomena merit a very close study.

For all that, there are no grounds for saying that the working
class in Russia is disappearing. It numbers about 30 million.
 Does it mean many or few? Much fewer than in the RSFSR,
 but many times more, than in Russia in 1917.

“The proletariat of workers by brain,” as Engels called it, is
being exploited too. It has to get hired by the bourgeoisie
for meager pay. There are almost 20 million such people
 in modern Russia. To this, you have to add small business-
men and small farmers. The crisis ruins tens of thousands
 of small owners, which makes it easier for us to promote
 our ideology to them.

CPRF is for the working people

Esteemed delegates and guests of the Congress,

To achieve its goals the proletariat needs a political vanguard.
 Only a modern communist party can rise to this task. In turn,
the communists ”have no interests separate from the interests
 of the proletariat as a whole,” as Marx and Engels wrote.

It is the duty of the CPRF to staunchly adhere to the position
of defending the interests of the working class. We have to
regularly revisit the decisions of the October 2014 Plenum
 which was devoted entirely to our goal of increasing our
influence in the proletarian milieu. The decisions taken
 then, are highly concrete and are easily verifiable.

Two and a half years have passed since then. It is high time
 to ask ourselves, what has been accomplished? Have we
strengthened our positions in the midst of the working class?
 Can we report to the Congress an influx of workers into the
 CPRF? Let us answer this question looking the truth straight
in the face. For the workers’ issue is the key issue in our
political struggle for power.

The share of workers in the CPRF's ranks, has risen to 14 percent
during the report period. Yet no dramatic change has taken place.
Overall, the party influence on the working class is, obviously,
insufficient. We have to admit that on that issue, we are still
at the start of the road.

Thus, our tasks are directly linked with strengthening the party’s
 influence on the workers’ and trade union movement, the youth
and non-governmental groups.

We have to be more active in seeking freedom of political activity
 in the street. However, we should breathe new life into various
 forms of protest even within the existing framework. We value
 all those who form the nucleus of our actions. We are grateful
to them. But we must broaden our ranks if we are to be
reckoned with. Big politics is where the millions are.
The topics of our slogans should be relevant and
specific. We should “strike at the nerve” of the
social atmosphere, use the whole arsenal of
technologies, to arouse citizens in their
struggle for their rights.

About 60% of Russians prefer a “society of social equality” to
a “society of individual freedom.” So the ideological component
 of protest sentiments is growing, turning such actions into
class struggle.

The communists must prevent mass protests from being
hijacked by pro-Western anti-national forces. Under these
 conditions it is vital for the CPRF to formulate a clear-cut
class position.

The party and the young communist league must pay particular
attention to the youth. The youth has shown its readiness for
street action. It is not only that the liberals use inexperienced
 young people while keeping them in the dark. Today, young
 people are the most vulnerable social stratum. Even
pensioners are in a more secure situation, because
 of what remains of the Soviet system of
social guarantees.

Today’s young people are the first to have grown up after
the dismantling of the system of Soviet social guarantees.
 They are defenseless in the face of capitalist society.
These young people have no chance to study, work and
 raise families normally. Housing becomes an insuperable
problem for many of them. Feeling like outsiders, they are
 not ready to reconcile themselves to such a position and
 plunge into street protests without always understanding
 the slogans. In Ukraine, the bourgeoisie used popular wrath
 ...to establish a dictatorial regime. Russia faces a similar
danger. It is the task for the CPRF to go to the youth, to
help it transform the demand for social justice into
massive and resolute protest.

The prerequisites for success are there. According to the
Public Opinion Fund, less than 20% of young people are
infected with the ideas of liberalism. 73% come out for
state ownership of enterprises and natural resources.
 28% think of themselves as staunch supporters of
socialism. The share of those who support
capitalism, is even less among other
age groups.

We need to mobilize CPRF supporters to struggle to bring
the country back to the socialist path. Each of us must
 contribute to strengthening the party’s authority, as
the only force fighting to assert the people’s rule

Along with the development of the workers’, protest and
youth movements, we have often stressed the importance
of work with the trade unions, & non-governmental groups.

The nucleus of a new life

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that “stability”
in Russia does not have a solid basis. The number of poor
people has doubled compared to the pre-crisis period. The
dynamic of social inequality has intensified. The gap
between the richest 10% and the poorest 10% has
 reached 30 times. The inequality of access to quality
 healthcare and education, has deepened. Russian
society is in an anxious state, not knowing what
 the future holds in store for it.

The liberals in government continue to tighten the
financial noose around the people’s neck. The only
 alternative to this disastrous course is consolidation
 of the healthy forces on the basis of socialism and
 genuine patriotism. This nucleus will be able to
counter the destructive energy of any Maidan,
 and the ruinous experiments of the
“monetarists” in government.

People are having less and less hope that this power
will come up with a creative development project. Such
 a project was proposed by our party at the Oryol
Economic Forum in February of last year. Here is our
program: Ten Steps toward a Decent Life for a
Government of Popular Trust.

1. Russia’s wealth must serve the people. It is high time
 to rein in the oligarchs, to bring back to the state the oil
and gas industry, key banks, the power industry, railways,
and defense industries. A powerful state sector will protect
the economy from foreign capital pressure. The draft law
on nationalization, is ready. It will bring several trillion
roubles to the treasury every year. Planning will make
 the economy more competitive in the world.

2. To guarantee economic sovereignty. The CPRF wants Russia
to leave the WTO. We will create an independent financial
system, rid the country of the diktat of the dollar, and free
the Central Bank from the influence of the US Federal
Reserve System. State control over the banking system
and currency transactions, will stem the staggering
flight of capital. Small and medium-sized businesses
and people’s and collective enterprises, will get
active support.

3. To develop industry, science and technologies. Russia needs
 a new industrialization driven by micro-electronics, robotics,
 and machine tool building. Today the processing industry
accounts for 14% of the GDP. It is necessary to double that
 share within a short space of time. The decimation of the
Russian Academy of Sciences is a crime against the future.
Financing of science must be increased several times over.
We will be able to do away with unemployment.

4. A new life for rural Russia. Russia is not secure in terms of
food. It imports half of its food from abroad. A third of arable
land is overgrown with weeds. The task of the Government
of Popular Trust is to revive large-scale agricultural
production and the rural social infrastructure.
At least 10% of budget spending should go
into agriculture. We are ready to adopt new
Land, Forestry & Water Codes, and improve
the environmental situation.

5. Credits must be used to revive the country. Russia is in 48th
place in terms of transport infrastructure, and in 87th place in
terms of air transport. The regions are heavily in debt. The
Government complains about a shortage of resources, while
at the same time, crediting the US economy. We should direct
 investments into the development of the Russian economy.
 To help the regions, the Popular Trust Government will
 replace commercial loans with subsidies and
subventions out of the federal budget.

6. State control of prices and tariffs. As for living standards,
Russia has dropped to 90th place in the world, which puts
it in the same company with Guatemala and Namibia. The
 state must control prices. Housing and utilities rates
should not exceed 10% of a family's income. The
government must regulate the tariffs for
electricity, fuel and transportation.

7. The country must have fair and effective taxes. Russia has
a distorted tax system. The CPRF proposes to abolish VAT,
which will make domestic products cheaper. We are ready
to scrap the PLATON system and raise taxes on property
and settlement land. Budget losses will be compensated
for, by a progressive tax on the incomes of physical
persons. It will add an annual 3-4 trillion roubles to
 the treasury. State monopoly on the production of
alcohol will yield another 2-5 trillion. Russia will
 have a budget of development, not degradation.

8. People are the nation’s main value. The CPRF guarantees
 an accessible and high-quality education and health service.
A law on “war children” will be passed without delay. Youth,
 children and mothers, disabled people and old folks will
receive particular attention. Science, education and health-
care will get 7% of the budget each. The CPRF has the
corresponding package of laws. The state will build
social housing and will be responsible for the state
 of domestic infrastructure. Levies for the capital
 repair of housing, will be scrapped.

9. Strong power, secure life. Russia needs a strong defense.
It should go hand-in-hand with information and technological
security and defense against cyber-weapons. The CPRF is in
 favour of stronger EAEU, SCO, and BRICS, of integration in
 the post-Soviet space and protection of fellow-countrymen
abroad. We have to make governance more effective,
tighten oversight over the activities of government
officials, and curb corruption and crime.

10. A country of high culture. We will protect the people from
 anti-Sovietism, nationalism and Russophobia, from immorality,
vulgarity and cynicism. Culture will be reigned by talent, not
money. Writers and composers, the cinema and television,
 can multiply our cultural heritage. Our government will
surround us with care museums and theatres, Houses
 of Culture and philharmonics, libraries and archives.
Russian talents, the creativity of young people,
 physical culture and sport, will be supported.

Seeking to implement this program, the CPRF is engaged in
a constant dialog with the country’s citizens. Our proposals
have been approved during the course of many election
campaigns, over the past year. We held an All-Russia
Council of Work Collectives, attended by more than
600 representatives of factories, farms and trade
unions, from 82 regions. A program of rural
development was presented at the Congress
of Russian Agro-Industrial Complex Workers,
 held at Zvenigovsky centre. The All-Russia
Congress of Public-Sector Workers, has
approved proposals on how to preserve
 and develop social institutions.

Concrete steps to implement our programmatic ideas and
proposals are critical. Our Duma deputies have a special
role to play. In the previous Duma the CPRF deputies
secured the adoption of laws On Strategic Planning,
On State Defense, Order, and On Industrial Policy,
 in the RF. The Medvedev government is obviously
 dragging its feet over fulfilling them. In the meantime
we are pressing for the next step; the creation of a
State Committee for Strategic Planning.

Practice shows that the anti-crisis measures proposed by the
CPRF are highly effective. The key task is to go to the grass-
roots and explain this. It is our duty to demonstrate that the
results of the party’s work indicate that it has proved to be
 a credible nucleus of genuine power of the people.

To Struggle for Power

Comrades. The presidential election is fast approaching.
 It will be held in an atmosphere of growing public
discontent and alienation from power. The ruling
circles will have to press into service administrative
 resources and resort to other gimmicks. The regime
 may exhibit growing Bonapartist traits. Such a regime
is a dictatorship of big bourgeoisie, steering its course
between opposing classes. Its internal contradictions
 are mitigated, by foreign policy confrontations.

Russia today is a super-presidential republic. The number
one person has more powers than the Tsar and General
 Secretary combined. Power in the country has not
changed hands for more than seventeen years. In
 fact, a whole generation has grown up under one
president and one governing party. During this
 period the US & France had 4 presidents each.

What are the key features of the political regime in Russia?

First, monopolization of power in the hands of the president
and the narrow circle around him. Secrecy in taking key
decisions. The political process has turned into a
succession of special operations.

Second, the ruling United Russia party has merged with the
 bureaucratic apparatus. The party is merely the ”driving
 belt” and not the subject of making key decisions.

Third, opposition exists in and outside parliament, but on an
ever smaller limited scale. There is simulation of democratic
 institutions and procedures, in order to legitimize the
 ruling group.

Fourth, monopolization of the main media outlets and the
introduction of political censorship and “self-censorship.”

Fifth, the absence of truly independent justice coupled with
 pervasive corruption & political control over the law courts.

Sixth, liberal fundamentalism in the economy remains the
bedrock foundation of the current regime. The ruling elite
 dreads the prospect of being isolated from the Western
 world, and openly woos the centres of capitalism.

Seventh, the regime is not bound by any ideological principles,
its postulates changing, depending on the exigencies of the
day. Personal safety calls for a more patriotic policy, which
 we have been witnessing recently.

The figure of the president is at the centre of the political regime.
 Official propaganda is at pains to convince the masses of the
danger of his departure. However, elections remain as the
trappings of democracy. For us taking part in the elections
is like wrestling on a small patch of legal opposition
activities, and that opportunity should be
effectively used.

But, to repeat a well-known idea, it is naïve to put the stake
 on elections. They may only be crowned with victory when
 revolutionary sentiments grow. Only then would the party
 be able to hold on to its electoral victory with the support
of millions of activists. An electoral victory is only possible
 in the event of a major change in the balance of political
 forces and the active support of the street.

On the face of it, the protest potential among the population
is low and the president’s approval rating is high. But the
stability of a regime of personal power is not a given that
 is eternal. The situation may change quickly. The CPRF
 is duty-bound to use its participation in elections to
 promote its ideas, to strengthen its structures and
 attract new cadres and supporters.

In December you read my appeal “Time demands a new policy.”
 We agreed to thoroughly discuss all candidates for election,
 in the coming years. This work must continue. At the Central
Committee level it is coordinated by the CPRF Headquarters,
 headed by I.I.Melnikov.

In the report period the CPRF has preserved its status of the
 main opposition force. The party scored some high-profile
victories but also faced some difficulties in the elections.
 The setback in 2016 is due to the fact that the elections
 had been turned into a special operation against Russian
 society. They were not a free expression of the citizens’
will, but a criminal mechanism of delivering the pre-
determined result. This is witnessed, among other
things, by several dozen criminal cases opened
thanks to our activists.

When we brought our voters to the polling stations our candidates
 won by a comfortable margin. A.Lokot was elected Mayor of
Novosibirsk, V.Potomsky Mayor of the Oryol Region,
S.Levchenko Governor of the Irkutsk Region.

Seven of our comrades won seats in the State Duma in single-
mandate constituencies. They are V.Bortko (St.Petersburg),
 S.Kazankov (Mariy El), A.Kurinniy (Ulyanovsk Region),
D.Parfyonov (Moscow), O.Smolin (Omsk Region),
N.Kharitonov (Krasnodar Territory) and
M.Shchapov (Irkutsk Region).

In the elections to the Moscow City Duma in 2014, communists
 won five single-mandate constituencies. One of the highlights
 was the election of A.Klychkov, who defeated the prefect of
the South-Western Electoral District, Zotov.

On the whole, the party’s average result in elections in recent
 years is 15%. The CPRF never drops below 20-25% in Irkutsk,
Novosibirsk, Oryol regions and in North Ossetia where we are
contesting first place with the governing party, like in Mariy El
and the Omsk Region where our result is just shy of 30%. So,
it is possible to fight and win. On the other hand, there has
emerged a stable zone of election rigging in the Volga
 Area, and in the North Caucasus.

Our party comes out for democratization of the political system
 and for fair elections. The tactic of the ruling regime consists
 in constantly changing the rules of the game in the political
field in order to falsify results. Changing the election date to
 September, greatly affected the turnout. In general, trust in
the institution of elections has diminished. Turnout is
plummeting. All the parties are losing votes, in
absolute terms. The institution of debates has
been discredited. Neither the president, nor
governors, take part in them. On the whole,
the low turnout is the citizens’ indictment
of the unfair electoral system.

Power deliberately adjusts the political system in favour of
 the governing party. We for our part will insist on direct and
 free elections of the heads of regions. On electing municipal
deputies by party lists. On debarring from elections governors
 who ''retire'', in order to be able to take part in fresh elections.

Battling in parliament

Letters of citizens to the CPRF faction in the State Duma and to
 the Central Committee, are symptomatic of Russia's problems.
 They criticize government policy, complain about the plight of
 the people and about court rulings. Many complaints have to
do with the impossibility of getting housing, the unreasonable
 utilities rates & soliciting financial help for medical treatment.

Protecting the rights of working people is at the focus of our
deputies attention. At present, we have 42 deputies at the
State Duma and two members of the Federation Council
(V.Markhayev and V.Ikonnikov). The CPRF has 81 factions
(a total of 342 deputies) in regional legislatures. There are
 9,360 communist deputies in local government bodies.

Although the CPRF lost some seats in the State Duma it still
spearheads the struggle for the interests of the common
people in parliament. I.Melnikov is first deputy speaker of
 the Duma. Five communist deputies – V.Kashin,
 N.Kharitonov, L.Kalashnikov, T.Pletneva and
S. Gavrilov— head the key Duma committees.
 S.Reshulsky, N.Kolomeitsev and V.Shurchanov
 coordinate the work of the Duma deputies, on
 a day-to-day basis.

Communist deputies did not support the draft federal budgets.
Even with amendments, they lead to the degradation of the
country and the impoverishment of working people. The
 oligarchy relentlessly shifts the burden of the economic
crisis onto the ordinary working people & onto those who
 need social help: children, pensioners & disabled people.

For the CPRF, education policy is the key to building up human
potential. Without it, modernization in the XXI century, is
 impossible. At the initiative of deputy O.Smolin the CPRF
faction prepared a draft law On Education for Everyone.
 Although the draft was rejected, in recent years, we
managed to bring about a partial reform of the Unified
State Examination, the retention of preferential treatment
 when entering higher education institutions for disabled
 people, orphaned children and people who saw combat
 action, an adjustment of pay for places in student
dormitories, official fixing of teachers’ salaries at
a level not below the average pay in the region;
although 75 regions are known to have
 ignored these regulations.

The CPRF is categorically against raising the retirement age,
against dropping the indexation of the pensions of working
pensioners and the cut in monthly payments towards
accumulative pensions. A pro-government majority
stubbornly blocks our draft law On War Children,
but we have again submitted it to parliament.

Communists’ work in the regional legislatures
 is exceedingly important.

The CPRF has increased the number of local deputies by
15.5% to nearly ten thousand. Almost 200 heads of local
governments have been elected with the party’s support.

As part of strengthening the body of deputies, the CPRF CC
held two All-Russia Congresses of Communist Deputies and
 Heads of Executive Power Bodies in June 2013 & May 2016.
 Mandates of the deputies, and their duties to the citizens of
Russia, have been adopted.

Of all the parliamentary parties, the CPRF commands the
highest level of popular trust. United Russia is unable to
 hide its face of the party of oligarchs and bureaucrats.
The Just Russia party has never managed to shed its
 role of an appendage to the “governing party.” The
 LDPR plays a similar function, at the other end of
the spectrum

One of the CPRF’s tasks is protecting citizens against arbitrary
 rule and lawlessness. The profound crisis caused a degradation
 of the social environment, a criminalization of society, and
 diminished the level of people’s safety. Key human rights –
to life, work and healthcare – are not guaranteed. Over
 2 million crimes were registered in Russia, in the past
 year, and by no means, were all crimes registered.

100th anniversary of the Great October Revolution
 and our struggle

Esteemed participants in the Congress,

The 100th anniversary of the biggest event in human history,
the Great October Socialist Revolution, is drawing closer and
 closer. The Bolshevik victory in 1917 saved Russia from a
disastrous liberal experiment. It pulled our country away
from the edge of a precipice, paved the way for progress
in the economy, the social sphere, culture and education.

The anniversary is less than months away. It is our duty to
 celebrate it in a dignified, substantive and spectacular way.
Much has already been done. Enrolment of new members to
 mark the revolution jubilee continues. Mass actions on April
 12 and 22, May 1 and 9 were major political events. A Lenin
evening has been organized at the Gubenko Theatre. A
working group for the preparation of the 19th International
Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties has had its
meeting. The Lenin Prize has been brought back, in tribute
to those who are faithful to the working people.

A series of conferences and round tables has been held.
Important discussions took place, on Lenin’s theory of
imperialism and his April Theses, on the theme “From
 February to October” and on the experience of building
the Soviet Armed Forces. Some interesting films have
been released on the CPRF’s Red Line TV channel. To
 give but some examples, they include The Stalin Model,
The World Cabal, To Live without Lying, By Hook or by
Crook, Blind Leaders of the Blind, The Soviet Man,
Master of the Russian Land. They should be used
more actively in our propaganda work. Party media
outlets regularly publish materials devoted to the
 events of 1917, Lenin and Soviet history. Internet
projects specifically devoted to the 100th
Anniversary of the October Revolution
 have been launched.

The topic of the socialist revolution must be reflected at the
 World Festival of Youth and Students in Sochi. The LCYU of
 the RF is taking part in the preparations for the Festival.

The best proof of loyalty to the ideas of the October Revolution
is constant struggle for the interests of the working people, and
for a socialist transformation of Russia. However, practical work
 can only be effective if it rests on a strong, sound theoretical
foundation. We have such a foundation in the shape of the
Marxist-Leninist ideology, the dialectical materialist method
of cognition and the class analysis and assessment of,
 social facts and phenomena.

The programmatic goal of the CPRF is socialism. It can only be
 achieved by introducing advanced socialist consciousness
 into the ranks of the working people.

The crisis in Russia opens the eyes of the masses to the fact
 that bourgeois recipes for development do not work. This
tends to increase the activities of those who would like to
“improve capitalism,” to replace “savage” capitalism with
 a “civilized” market, to combine the best features of
capitalism and socialism. We resolutely reject these
 attempts to gloss over the flaws of globalism.

I would like to remind you of Lenin’s succinct formula, from
his book What Is to Be Done: ”It is either bourgeois or
 socialist ideology. There is no middle road here…
Therefore any belittling of socialist ideology, any
alienation from it, signifies the strengthening of
 the bourgeois ideology.”

The CPRF is convinced that socialism alone will save Russia
and the world from a catastrophe, a catastrophe that
capitalism is preparing by each new step it takes.
 Therefore a revision of communist ideas cannot be tolerated.
As history shows, this path leads to total capitulation to the
bourgeoisie. It is not by chance, that many leaders of the
Second International, ended up by viciously condemning
the October Revolution. Indeed, ineffectual representatives
at the top of the leadership of the CPSU, gave up the
communist ideology and went on to destroy the party
and the state. Some of them openly defected to the
anti-communist camp. French writer & philosopher,
Jean-Paul Sartre, was categorical: ”Every
 anti-communist, is a rascal.”

Ideological struggle never stops. Seeking to bolster its
positions the oligarchy fosters anti-communism, anti-S
ovietism and Russophobia. This reveals the genetic
 link of the liberal bureaucrats with Gorbachev and
Yeltsin on the one hand and with the “orange’
opposition, the Navalnys and others. Shying
 away from socialism, they all play the role
 of anti-national, anti-people forces.

Russophobia and anti-Sovietism are close relatives, as the
 CC CPRF proved convincingly at its latest Plenum. The
October Revolution and the Soviet system are inseparable
 from the historical destiny of the Russian people. A fierce
campaign is being waged against our history, against our
communist ideas. The Svanidzes, Gozmans & Zhirinovskys
 never tire of pouring venomous lies on the pages and
 images of our past that we hold sacred. The celebration
of the jubilee of Solzhenitsyn, the man who called for
aggression against his own country and actively
 backed the Banderovites, promises to be wider
 and wider. The building of the Yeltsin Centre
 in Yekaterinburg did not only “consume”
7 billion roubles of budget money.

It openly calls for the rehabilitation of Vlasov. Is it not because
of this, that the Centre has been awarded the 'Best European
Museum of 2017' prize?

Here and there, monuments and memorial plaques are put up
 to Kolchak, Krasnov, Mannerheim and the White Czechs. At
the same time Soviet monuments are pulled down or moved.
Streets and even cities, are being renamed.

Take the nationwide dictation test. This year the participants
were offered a text by the writer Yuzefovich, in which a White
general makes scathing remarks about a monument to Lenin.
How does that square with condemnation of the illegal Kiev
rulers, for vandalism and for dismantling Lenin monuments?.

The authorities cannot afford to ignore mass sentiments.
Sociologists have found that there are more supporters
of the Soviet political system in this country than there
 are admirers of the current political system and
Western democracy combined. The Immortal Regiment
 action sent a very clear political and cultural message.
The prevailing sentiment of this impressive march was
the victorious Soviet spirit. It remains to lament the fact
that the Immortal Regiment, unlike the regiments that
marched straight to the front in 1941, is marching past
the Lenin Mausoleum, that has been covered in drapes.

While resorting to patriotic slogans, the authorities seek
 to erase the positive perception of socialism from people’s
 consciousness. We, for our part, should confidently uphold
truth and justice, protect the historical memory and make
active use of our experience of combating anti-Sovietism,
anti-Communism & Russophobia and distortions of history.

Nationalism is another evil for which an antidote is needed.
Only the CPRF has a clear-cut program on the nationalities
 issue. It stresses the value of the friendship of the peoples
 and the multinational character of our country. Our position
 was accurately expressed by the October 2013 Plenary
Session of the Central Committee which stressed that
the main cause of the aggravation of inter-ethnic
relations, is the deepening of social & economic
problems. Big Capital uses the nationality card,
to distract people’s attention, from the
widening social schism.

We maintain that socialism alone can make the working
people masters of their land and of their destiny. Only
then will inter-ethnic conflicts vanish like a nightmare.

Mass events staged by the CPRF help to promote the
party’s ideas. A year ago Ufa hosted the All-Russia
Forum Friendship and Brotherhood of the Peoples:
Guarantee of Russia’s Resurgence in which guests
from Belarus, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s
Republics took part. Every year in June the party
holds Pushkin Days & Days of Russian Language
and Culture. The tradition was initiated by North
Ossetia's Republican Committee of the CPRF. A big
contribution to official recognition of Russian Language
Days, was made by the communists in the State Duma
and the Russky Lad movement. The CPRF’s proposal
to outlaw calls for the dismemberment of Russia,
has met with public approval.

The entire edifice of party propaganda should be built on
 a solid ideological foundation. People under the age of
40 did not study the basics of Marxism-Leninism, at
school or university. This is the generation that is
 joining the party and its consciousness is often
littered with pseudo-socialist rubbish. The party
education system is called on, to address this.

The CPRF Political Education Centre set up after the ХV
party Congress to train our activists has already had 21
enrolments. More than 700 young communists from all
the Russian regions as well as Transdniestria, Georgia,
South Ossetia, Kyrgyzstan, the DPR & LPR, attended.
Many of the Centre’s graduates have been elected as
secretaries of the regional and local CPRF branches
and head up Young Communist League organizations.
The journal Politicheskoye prosveshcheniye, helps
 the party members to build up their theoretical
luggage & train party activists in the provinces.

Lenin never tired of stressing the importance of the party's
 press and believed that the newspaper should not merely
 ‘disseminate ideas” but also act as a collective organizer.
 Important information outlets today are the newspapers
Pravda and Sovetskaya Rossiya. Oblast, region and city
 party branches put out more than a hundred periodicals.
Some good experience has been accumulated by the
editorial offices of many party newspapers, including
Podmoskovnaya Pravda, Krasniy Put’ (Omsk Oblast),
KPRF v Nizhnem Novgorode, Leviy marsh (Ulyanovsk
 Oblast), Priangarye (Irkutsk Oblast), Donskaya iskra
 (Rostov Oblast), Za narodnuyu vlast’ (Novosibirsk
 oblast) and Rodina (Stavropol Territory).

Party life is regularly reported on the Central Committee site,
 politpros.com, regional and local party sites. KPRF.RU has
 launched such internet projects as Narodnaya initsiativa,
Storonniki KPRF, Antikorruptsionniy komitet imeni Stalina.
At the end of 2016 the Central Committee site competed
convincingly with the United Russia resource. Even so,
we are still seriously losing out to the liberals in terms
of volume and presentation. That situation should be
urgently rectified.

The opening of the Krasnaya Liniya TV channel in the wake
of the XV CPRF Congress was a big step forward. Since 2015
it has been broadcast via satellite. This round-the-clock
channel is beamed to an audience of nearly 7 million.
 Krasnaya Liniya has an internet site and accounts
 in social networks. It puts out daily news bulletins.
Among its more popular programs are Special
Report, Viewpoint, Soviet-Era Brands, and
Politpros, to mention just some.

The Agitpunkt section of Political Education site carries
video, audio and photo materials and samples of printed
copy. This is particularly important in election campaigns.

To strengthen the party at all levels

Comrades, we must strengthen all the party links. The past
 four years have seen a growth of the number of primary
and local CPRF branches. Today the party has 162,173
members. During the report period, it enrolled over
 60,000 new members.

The biggest regional branches are: Moscow oblast — 7528
members, Volgograd oblast — 6536 members, Krasnoyarsk
Territory — 6153 members, Moscow City — 5712 members,
Dagestan Republic — 5547 members, Stavropol Territory—
 5510 members. Last year, we had no regional branches
 where the rate of admission of new members did not
 exceed 5 percent of the total membership.

Contrary to the allegations of our opponents, more than half
 of Russian communists are people of active working age.
They include14 percent — workers; 13 percent — salary
earners; almost 7 percent — unemployed people; 6.6% —
 farmers; 4.3 percent — students; 4.2 percent — engineers
 and technicians; 4 percent — members of the creative
 intelligentsia; 3 percent — entrepreneurs; 1.2percent
 — enterprise managers.

The percentage of workers who joined the party increased
somewhat. The average age of CPRF members is 55.6,
slightly less than the 2013 indicator. Thus the party has
 both experienced and young members. Still, the share
of older members is high. Our distinguished veterans
 form the party’s “golden fund.” There are 70,000
 of them, or 42.5 percent.

Many young people joined the party during the enrolment
campaigns to mark the 70th anniversary of Victory and
the 100th anniversary of the October Revolution. In the
period between the XV and XVII party congresses,
 almost two thousand people under 30 joined the
 CPRF to bring their total number to 11.6 percent.
Women account for 33 percent.

Our party operates in a society divided by class. Power in
 Russia is in the hands of oligarchic capital and the top
bureaucrats. This sets high demands on the ideological
 and moral character of its members.

The latest report-and-election campaign makes it possible to
 formulate the main challenges facing the CPRF organization.

1. Annual admission of 10 percent of the total membership
 barely keeps the size of membership constant. The figure
 must definitely increase if the CPRF is to increase its
influence in society.

2. Party branches should be more active among workers,
there should be more workers, professionals and farmers
 in the CPRF.

3. Full-scale training of party activists for participation in
 election campaigns needs to be improved.

4. Our priorities must include work with potential allies
and supporters of the CPRF, the creation of a data base
 of supporters in each regional party branch.

5. The quality of the training of the reserve cadres,
especially at the local and primary level, is still
 a challenge.

On the whole, much remains to be done to improve the
style and methods of party work. All these tasks need
 to be addressed now.

The material base of our work

Esteemed participants in the Congress,

Shortly after the 100th anniversary of the socialist revolution
we shall be marking the 25th anniversary of the re-creation
of our party. The architects and stewards of national betrayal
were aware that our people would still be drawn to the ideals
of socialism. That is why they tried to leave the CPRF without
its material and technical base and thus limit its influence at
a grassroots level. At the time the party was re-created, we
were deprived of the basic conditions for daily work, for
agitation, communications, and cadre training. And all
the while, we were in the authorities’ gunsights and
under fire from the left and the right.

In fact, we had to rebuild the economic base of the CPRF
from scratch, twice, the first time after the Gorbachev-
Yeltsin betrayal and the second time after attempts to
privatize the party’s property by the supporters of the
“wet congress.”

Today we have not only revived our party, but have provided it
 with considerable assets. In 2004 the party owned only two
buildings in Moscow and some built-in space in Cherkessk.
Since then we have acquired 109 offices for regional and
local branches. Only 10 regional committees still have to
rent space. I think we will be able to solve the problem
within two years.

The main sources for replenishing the party budget are:
party dues, donations to the party fund, budget financing
and 'other'. On the whole, more than 80% of the money
 goes to regional party branches. This enables them to
work more effectively and meaningfully.

The country’s future is the future of the party

One of our key tasks is work with the youth. Only one-third
of the people aged 18 to 22 are interested in politics. The
blows sustained by the education system, the decline of
young people’s educational levels, makes them easy
prey for political manipulation.

The state goes through the motions of pursuing a youth policy.
Youth councils and parliaments create an illusion of social lift.
64% of university graduates are unsure of their future. One in
every two of them cannot find a job for which he/she has been
 trained. More than 50% of unemployed people in Russia, are
citizens between 18 and 35.

For the CPRF the youth is not only the target of electoral battles.
It is the future of our country. The party pays particular attention
 to its youth policy.

The share of young people in the party is growing. Our opponents
 can no longer claim that the CPRF is a party of elderly people.
Leading positions are more and more often occupied by people
 of young and under middle age. Party cadres are becoming
younger due to new members who have gone through serious
schooling as members of the Komsomol. D.Novikov, Yu.Afonin
and K.Taysyev established themselves as politicians in the
past report periods. After the XV CPRF Congress, important
jobs at the Central Committee were entrusted to our young
workers, A.Klychkov,A.Korniyenko, M.Kostrikov & I.Makarov.

We have many young people who are willing and able to work.
Thanks to them we can safely say that the CPRF is a XXI-
century party, a party of the future. Let us recall that in
 1917, more than half of the Bolshevik party members
were under 35.

The LKSM (Leninist Communist Youth Union) is a youth
organization that preserves the Soviet traditions. Its
track record includes the protection of education
institutions from being closed, preventing a rise in
payment for student dormitories and transport
fares, and the fight against the curtailment
of social benefits.

The Leninist Komsomol is the reserve cadre of the party

The nationwide Komsomol action The Banner of Our Victory,
 is an example of the patriotic upbringing of young people. It
 included more than 18,000 school lessons where students
 were told about the heroic exploits of the Soviet people.
The project has a follow-up under the title, The October
Banner is the Banner of Victory.

Every year hundreds of children are enrolled in the Young
Pioneers at a ceremony in Red Square. Today more than
250,000 children and teenagers wear the Young Pioneer
red scarves.

On the agenda is the issue of uniting all the Young Pioneers
in a single Lenin Union of Young Pioneer Organizations.
 This end is to be served by the Second All-Russia
Meeting of Young Pioneer Guides in which the
 Party and the Komsomol will take part.

The Komsomol faces the challenging task of increasing our ranks
 and attracting new supporters. Party and Komsomol members
must conduct the difficult but very necessary educational work
with the young generation. Strong links with the working class
youth, are particularly important.

Next year sees the 100th anniversary of the Lenin Komsomol.
The organizing committee “Komsomol is 100” is already active.
This date is not only an occasion for remembering the
accomplishments of Soviet Power, the outstanding
role of the youth in developing and defending the
country, but also for encouraging the new
generations to uphold their rights and
a worthy future.

Keep in mind the main thing

Esteemed delegates and guests of the Congress,

A new stage of history began 100 years ago. The world’s first state
 of workers and peasants was formed. In the year of the 100th
anniversary of the Great October Revolution we recall more
 and more often the name of Lenin, the revolutionary and
statesman, a genuine romantic & an outstanding scholar.
 It was the great idea of social justice that enabled him
to translate a great theory into the practice of great

Lenin constantly stressed that at the end of the day the central
 issue of all politics is the economic issue. And today Russia is
faced with challenges that stem directly from its economic lag
 and its reliance on commodity production, from technological
degradation and a mass impoverishment of its citizens. This
 is the system that was established in this country ,after the
 collapse of the USSR.

The authorities are unable to meet these challenges. The
incomes of big Russian businessmen are growing at a f
antastic rate, even today. This means that the oligarchy
has no economic incentives to overcome the crisis. The
 anti-national essence of such an “elite”, is obvious.

At the beginning of the last century Lenin came to the conclusion
 that Russia was the weak link in the chain of capitalist states.
This fact set the stage for a revolution. Otherwise, Russia would
have remained a raw materials appendage of more developed
countries. This conviction was reaffirmed by Stalin at the XV
 Congress of the AUCP(B):

”We must make our country economically self-reliant, independent,
based on the internal market. We must build our economy in such
 a way as to prevent our country from becoming an appendage of
 the capitalist system.”

The supreme meaning of the socialist revolution was the embodiment
of the ideal of social justice. This was achieved through the building
of a truly independent state based on new economic relations. As
Stalin said, “Soviet power did not have to replace one form of
exploitation with another, as did the old revolutions, but to
liquidate all exploitation.”

A revolution is genuine only if it leads to a large-scale class
restructuring of society. Otherwise it is a “colour” simulation
 of one, which brings to power liberal “fighters against the
 regime” guided by foreign principals.

This was the kind of threat that hung over Russia in February 1917.
But Lenin came forward with convincing calls: Peace to the peoples,
 Bread to the hungry,” “Factories to the workers” and “Land to the
peasants.” These slogans arose from the deepest convictions of a
romantic and politician, a fighter and a scholar. The simplicity and
 clarity of Lenin’s slogans disguises deep insight into the problems.

Reread Lenin’s works “The Immediate Tasks of Soviet Power,”
 “On Cooperation,” and “On the Food Tax.” You will find there
 a massive scientific basis on which Lenin based his practice.
Those who run the country today are incapable of such vision.
Russia is reaping the bitter fruits of their economic illiteracy
 and irresponsibility.

Myth has it that by introducing the New Economic Policy, Lenin
 admitted the need to return to the capitalist market. Some even
say that Gorbachev’s line was a successor to the NEP. Only his
 perestroika led to a dismantling of socialism and the collapse
 of Russia, while the Soviet State grew stronger under the NEP.

After the First World War and the Civil War and foreign Intervention,
 production had shrunk by nearly five times and agriculture by half.
Crop failures and famine compounded the situation. The NEP saved
 the country. As for foreign companies, they were allowed at
 enterprises that accounted for less than 1% of the total
 industrial output.

The decisions taken then strengthened the state system of
controlling the socialist economy. In 1921 the State Central
Bank was founded in the country. It issued up to 70 percent
 of all the credits. The state invested in the economy. During
 the first five years of the NEP, agricultural output doubled
and industrial output trebled. The economy grew by 13% in
1927 and by 19% in 1928. National revenue increased at an
 annual rate of 18%. Between 1922 and 1929, the USSR built
 more than 200 big industrial enterprises. Prices were going
 down rapidly. The world had not ever known, such
 economic success.

This was Lenin’s New Economic Policy. It is a brilliant example
 of an anti-crisis program capable of rescuing the country from
 economic collapse. The CPRF program has echoes of Lenin’s
approach. It is becoming more relevant every day. The Moscow
 Economic Forum confirmed that more and more experts, are
proposing measures consonant with our approach.

Russia today needs a financial system that serves the interests
of the country and not of transnational capital. The banking
system must be put under state control. Only then will it be
able to provide effective loans to the national industry and
to small businesses. The country needs to replace the flat
income tax rate with a progressive one and to exempt the
 poor from all taxes. Without a fair distribution of national
 wealth the Soviet State could not have overcome mass
poverty and provide the economy with investments. The
 same is true of today.

Lenin passed away in 1924, but his economic policy lived on.
The foundation had been laid for a staggering breakthrough
 that was Stalin’s industrialization. Think of Stalin’s then
amazingly bold words: “We are 50-100 years behind the
advanced countries. We must run this distance within
ten years. Either we do it or we shall be crushed.”

 This appeal was imbued with the Lenin spirit. The titanic
task was fulfilled. In January 1932 the French newspaper
 Le Temps wrote: “The USSR has won the first round, it
industrialized without the aid of foreign capital.” This
 was recognition of the Soviet economic achievements,
recognition of the success of Lenin’s ideas and

Lenin’s economic policy is behind the colossal success
 of Stalin’s industrialization and total liquidation of
 unemployment by the beginning of the 1930s. The
great Victory over Fascism is also the result of
Lenin’s policy. So was the Soviet conquest of
outer space. So was the level of social
 guarantees, that one can only dream
 of, today.

Vladimir Lenin won the Great Socialist Victory which long
survived him. Today the country is suffering a crushing
capitalist defeat. It may turn out to be a catastrophe.
Today the experience of Lenin and Stalin stands in
contrast to the Yeltsin-Gaidar legacy of the 1990s.
We communists will do all we can to make sure that
the creative forces prevail. The number one task is
 to help the people to become aware of the need to
 restructure along socialist lines.

* * *

Dear comrades,

The October 1917 Revolution lit the dawn of a new life.
 Our legacy is grandiose. Next year sees the 200th
anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx. Great is the
power of Lenin’s ideas. The Bolsheviks have
 colossal experience of opposing capital.

The greatest achievement of Lenin and his comrades-
in-arms was the creation of the Bolshevik Party, a
party of a new type. Bolshevism linked the proletarian
 movement in Russia with scientific socialism. It
consistently implemented the teaching on the class
 struggle of the proletariat, on the socialist revolution,
on the building of socialism in one country surrounded
 by capitalism. The party of Lenin put the Russian
revolutionary movement in the vanguard of the
 struggle against capitalism and its leading
 force, the financial oligarchy.

The Bolshevik Party is the party of socialist revolution,
 of socialist creative endeavour and the communist

Bolshevism combines loyalty to principle and flexible
 tactics, the romanticism of lofty dreams, and
pragmatic actions.

Proletarian internationalism is a characteristic of
Bolshevism. However, it skillfully combined the
 general laws of the struggle for socialism with
 national-historical specificities.

Bolshevism rejects opportunism and revisionism. It
upholds the purity of the Marxist-Leninist theory and
 opposes the falsification of this theory. At the same
 time it rejects sectarianism and seeks to unite left-
wing forces in the struggle against the dictatorship
 of capital.

In October of 1917 the Russian Bolsheviks aroused the
 masses and won. They took up the slogan of Marx and
 Engels Proletarians of all lands, unite” and put it into
practice. After the victory Lenin said: “Our socialist
 republic of the Soviets will stand firm as the torch of
 international socialism and as an example to all the
working masses. There they have fighting, war and
bloodshed, here we have a genuine policy of peace
 and the socialist republic of the Soviets.” That was
 indeed the case. The Soviet country became a
bulwark and a beacon of hope for the working
 people of the whole planet.

The Soviet Union presented mankind with a unique
experience of socialist construction. Its Red Banner
became the main symbol of the fighters for justice
 in all the corners of the world. During the clash with
 Fascism this red flag called the Soviet warriors into
 battle and their heroism inspired the Resistance
fighters of Europe. The banner with a hammer and
 sickle was the main symbol of the Great Victory.

Russian communists are proud of their history. Our path
draws on the brilliant experience of many units of the
international left movement. The wealth of this
experience is our great heritage. The heritage of
Soviet socialism inspired the members of the
Comintern .It found its continuation in the Chinese
and Cuban revolutions, in the struggle of Korea and
Vietnam against the US military, in the daring exploits
 of Ernesto Che Guevara and the ХХI-century
socialism of Hugo Chavez.

The achievements of the Soviet era are our lode star in
the whirlpool of events. Building on the path covered,
 we have to go further in upholding social justice.
Remembering past victories the CPRF has to intensify
 its struggle against capitalist savagery and degradation.
The Party must establish itself as the vanguard of the
workers’ movement. It must help hired laborers to
 become aware of their basic interests, to acquire
socialist consciousness, to master the methods of
 class struggle –this is our task and this is our
political and civic duty.

Russia is living through an exceedingly complicated period.
 To protect the working people, our party has to prove itself
 day after day by its teamwork and convincing results.

The centuries-old dream of humanity about a better future
gives us faith in the triumph of good over evil, the triumph
of the values of peace and creative endeavour, justice
 and progress.

Let us be faithful to the cause of the October Revolution.

The race is won by the running.

Onward toward new heights.

This entry was posted in CPRF Congress,
Statements on June 2nd, 2017, by admin.


Stupid Butt-Hurt Millennials

(made me laugh out loud!)

What do YOU think, after watching this?


Please watch the video to the end.
This is why the world hates the US.


So we thought you'd like this
list of good news services...

 21st Century Wire
Moon of Alabama.org
The Saker
Dmitry Orlov's blogsite cluborlove
Dances with Bears
The Duran
Strategic Culture.org,
 filmsforaction.com (Native Americans),
Prensa Latina
The Morning Star
 Naked Capitalism.com

Jeremy Corbyn just announced a plan to end
one of the biggest scams in modern history
by James Wright

As part of his ‘Digital Democracy‘ manifesto, Jeremy
 Corbyn has unveiled plans to end one of the biggest
 scams in modern history.

At present, the British people are paying twice for
education and information. Once, to create research
(for example, through Research Council funding) and
 then again to buy back the research through online
journal subscriptions, university fees and public
library costs. Despite funding the research, the
 taxpayer must pay again for access.

An ‘Open Knowledge Library’, proposed in the
 manifesto, would stop us being charged twice
for academic research:

    The Open Knowledge Library will be the digital
 repository of lessons, lectures, curricula and student
work from Britain’s nurseries, schools, colleges and
universities. We will require the findings of all state-
funded research to be made available without charge
 to the general public through this learning portal.

In a move that will anger private digital libraries like
JSTOR, Corbyn’s Labour has vowed to end their
sneaky profiteering on the back of the taxpayer.
Publicly funded research would, accordingly,
become publicly available.

Without such access, we are currently paying
extortionate fees to expand our knowledge through
 research we have already funded. Single journals
on JSTOR can cost up to $50 to access without a
 university affiliation. If they are available at all.

If you happen to be a student at university, then
 you may sidestep the online paywalls, but not the
scam. Research funded publicly and by universities
themselves is then sold back to universities at
inflated prices. As Laura Mckenna writes in
The Atlantic:

    Step back and think about this picture. Universities
that created this academic content for free must pay
 to read it. Step back even further. The public —
which has indirectly funded this research with federal
 and state taxes that support our higher education
 system — has virtually no access to this material,
since neighbourhood libraries cannot afford to pay
those subscription costs.

Each UK university loses up to £3.38m (PDF, page 6)
per year buying back research they themselves have
funded. Meanwhile, access to digital libraries for
students costs universities an annual fortune.
Students therefore join the general people in forking
 out once again for publicly funded research, but
through tuition fees rather than paywalls.

Like students, if you happen to be at a public library
then you may sidestep the online paywalls, but not
 the scam. In 2008, access to journals and
subscriptions cost UK libraries £235m (PDF, page
 1) of taxpayer money. Hence, even if you are at
a library, the library has paid a second time for
publicly funded research.

Open access to information saves lives

The injustice of paying twice for research is not the
only reason we should adopt an open access model.
 All of us benefit from having doctors, teachers,
 academics & other well educated people in society.

Case in point: Jack Andraka, who was 15 years old
when he identified a revolutionary tool in recognising
 pancreatic cancer, would never have made his
 discovery without access to online journals.

Open source information is a no-brainer. As the rights
 to the research are bought by digital libraries like
 JSTOR, removing these companies and their
 paywalls does not mean that the researchers and
writers do not get paid. It only means huge profits
are not siphoned off by these unnecessary
 gatekeepers. It means we are not paying
twice for information.

And crucially, the more people who have access
 to research, the higher the chance we have of
scientific, philosophical and artistic breakthroughs.
150 million attempts to read JSTOR content are
denied every year. This is not including the other
private digital library giants. Imagine the expansion
 of human knowledge and progress should these
attempts have been granted.

Get involved!

Watch the documentary on Aaron Swartz, one of
greatest pioneers of internet freedom and open

 source information. He was the co-founder of Reddit,
 architect of Creative Commons, political activist,
and a key contributor to the first RSS feeds at 14.

These are just a few examples of his incredible
 achievements before he committed suicide in
the face of persecution by the US government
- aged just 26.

Sick to Death of the BBC
and MainStream Media Bias?

Try these alternative media outlets in the UK
(They deserve our support)

The Canary    
Media Diversified

Novara Media     Corporate Watch

Common Space     Media Lens

Bella Caledonia     Vox Political

Evolve Politics     Real Media

Reel News     STRIKE! magazine

The Bristol Cable     Manchester Mule

Salford Star     Scisco Media

Jeremy Corbyn has been accused by some of
being disconnected from the North of England.

Watch this amateur video !
(Where he mentions - briefly -
  the Work
Capability Assessment, damned below:)

 Courtesy of Liza Van Zyl on Facebook.

Liza is the lady who received a visit from police
 who claimed she had committed a criminal act
against the Department for Work & Pensions,

 just before midnight on October 26th, 2012 ---
that she'd been highlighting the deaths
of sick
& disabled people after reassessment
Atos and the DWP for Employment and

Support Allowance.

Fortunately for those who still have to undergo
 these assessments, she was not discouraged
 and has continued to fight for those who can
not stand up for themselves. However, she is
 currently suffering severe disenchantment
 with the Labour Party, as she says, below:

“We heard from Owen Smith MP today [Saturday,
 March 7] (a member of the left wing of the Labour
 Party leadership) that it is important for disabled
 people to continue to die, lest any commitment by
Labour to scrap the Work Capability
generate a negative response
in the press and
affect Labour’s
general election chances.

“He said, while he, personally, doesn’t like the
 WCA, his Labour colleagues will not support
 scrapping it because of fears it will play badly
 with the right wing press & damage Labour’s
 electoral chances… I’ve since been contacted
by other disabled people who’ve raised the issue
 with their Labour MPs, & the response has been:

Yes, the WCA isn’t nice but if Labour commits to
scrapping it, it would appear to be ‘soft on welfare’.

“The similarities of these responses (and given that
Owen Smith is a frontbench shadow sec of state and
 therefore presumably is up to date on party strategy)
 indicates that this is an agreed line or represents an
 actual decision. This is profoundly disturbing, given
that a great many Labour MPs know in detail exactly
 what suffering and deaths the WCA is responsible
 for among their own constituents: Tom Greatrex
organised a powerful meeting of Labour MPs with
Chris Grayling two years ago. Dame Anne Begg is
 herself a disabled person, as are other MPs.

“So: When was the decision taken by Labour MPs that
the opinion of the right wing press matters more than
 the suffering and deaths of disabled people? How
 was this decision made, and why didn’t the likes of
John McDonnell, Dennis Skinner, Jeremy Corbyn etc
kick up a holy fuss? I have put the WCA question to
parliamentary candidates Jo Stevens, Mari Williams,
 Chris Elmore and Elizabeth Evans and got the strong
 impression from them that they were committed to
scrapping the WCA… What is going on?”

What do you think -- is it right that people
have their disability benefits cut
and -- die as a result?

Write now to:



Follow up by the brilliant Voxpolitical

We know that the Work Capability Assessment has
 been a catastrophe for people all over the UK. It is
 based on a system evolved by the criminal US
 insurance firm Unum, designed to be hugely
difficult and stressful.

The stress of having to prepare for an assessment
 kills many, as does that of taking it. Some commit
suicide when they are refused benefit, some die
from the stress of having to appeal. Some who
are granted it, then die from its requirements –
 like trying to become ready for work in a year if
they’re in the work-related activity group of ESA.

Some who are granted benefit die from the strain
 of being re-assessed, sometimes at short notice.

Death surrounds the process. When Mr Smith said
 Labour would not oppose the WCA because of the
 right-wing press, he was tacitly saying Labour is
 willing to let these fatalities continue – even if
he wasn’t actually saying it.

It’s something that some people have found hard
to accept, but that is the message being put out
 to people across the UK by Labour’s unwillingness
to denounce the process and Liza just happened
 to be the one who stood up and said it.

As a result, it seems she has been hounded off
the Internet. She wrote: “Folks, if you don’t hear
from me for a while, don’t worry I’m ok. I’ve given
 my phone and all means of Internet access to a
friend, so that I don’t have to see all the horrible
messages I’m being bombarded with.”

If Mr Smith’s answer was a “fudge”, then he has
 no right to be scandalised by Liza’s response.
 On Twitter he claimed it was a “lie”. Perhaps
 he could apologise for creating misunder-
standing, and clarify what he really was
saying about Labour’s position, instead.

The last WCA data published – Nov. 2011 –
showed around 4 deaths every 3 hours,
or 220 a week. That’s a monstrous figure.

It's possible that the DWP may provide new
 figures soon, & we can hope the average
 will be lower ---- but the sheer weight of
punitive measures enacted since 2011
     suggests otherwise.

Just as shocking is Labour’s apparent
disinterest in changing it. The sheer
number of people who have contacted
 *Vox Political – via the comment column,
 Twitter or Facebook – to say they have
 tried, repeatedly, to engage Labour
luminaries on the subject, only to get
 cold-shouldered, is a scandal in itself.

We’ve already got enough political parties
whose leaders are only interested in what
 they can get for themselves – they’re called
 Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.

Labour needs to be better; Labour needs to
stand up and do what’s right for everybody.

And that's a big reason why this is so important.
Labour is the only party with a hope of kicking
 the Conservatives back into Opposition. People
all over the country want to support Labour –
but can’t, because they don’t believe Labour
will support them. That’s the ultimate reason
the WCA has to go; it doesn’t help people –
it kills them.

If the alternative to being “soft on welfare” is
causing the deaths of thousands of people
who only asked for the benefits their tax
 money is supposed to have funded, then
‘One Nation’ Labour cannot afford to
 have anything to do with it.

*Vox Political - the excellent site
that produced this wonderful
piece of expose journalism.


funny robert crumb

Try real news
--- why not? --- at:


Here's a recent interview there:

US imperialism the BREXIT culprit
by Michael

How Western Military Interventions
 Shaped the Brexit Vote

Michael Hudson argues that military interventions in
 the Middle East created refugee streams to Europe
that were in turn used by the anti-immigrant right
to stir up xenophobia

GREGORY WILPERT, TRNN: Welcome to the Real
 News Network. I’m Gregory Wilpert, coming to
you from Quito, Ecuador.

Britain’s referendum in favor of leaving, or exiting,
the European Union, the Brexit referendum, as the
 results are known, won with 52 percent of the vote
 on Thursday, June 23, stunning Europe’s political
establishment. One of the issues that has raised
concern for many is ...what does the Brexit
mean for Britain’s and Europe’s economy
politics. This was one of the main topics
up to the referendum, but a lot of
[reigned] in the discussion.

With us to discuss the economic and political
context of the Brexit is Michael Hudson. He is a
 research professor of economics at the University
 of Missouri-Kansas City, and author of Killing the
 Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Destroy
the Global Economy. Also, he is an economics
adviser to several governments, including
 Greece, Iceland, Latvia, and China. He
us right now from New York City.

Thanks, Michael, for joining us.

MICHAEL HUDSON: Good to be here again.

WILPERT: So let’s begin with the political context
 in which the Brexit vote took place. Aside from the
 right-wing arguments about immigrants, economic
 concerns, and about Britain’s ability to control its
 own economy, what would you say–what do you
see as being the main kind of political back-
in which this vote took place?

HUDSON: Well, almost all the Europeans know where
 the immigrants are coming from. And the ones that
they’re talking about are from the near East. And
they’re aware of the fact that most immigrants are
coming, as a result of NATO policies promoted

 by Hillary and by the Obama administration.

The problem began in Libya. Once Hillary pushed
 Obama to destroy Libya and wipe out the stable
 government there, she wiped out the arms–& Libya
 was a very heavily armed country. She turned over
 the arms to ISIS, to Al-Nusra, and Al-Qaeda. And Al-
Qaeda used these arms under U.S. organization, to
 attack Syria and Iraq. Now, the Syrian population,
the Iraqi population, have no choice but to
 either emigrate or get killed.

So when people talk about immigration to Europe,
the Europeans, the French, the Dutch, the English,
they’re all aware of the fact that this is the fact that
Brussels is really NATO, and NATO is really run by
 Washington, and that it’s America’s new Cold War
against Russia that’s been spurring all of this
demographic dislocation that’s spreading
England, spreading into Europe,
and is
destabilizing things.

So what you’re seeing with the Brexit is
the result of Obama's administration’s

pro-war, new Cold War policy.

WILPERT: So are you saying that people voted
or Brexit because they are really–that they were
 concerned about the influence of the USA? Or
 are you saying that it’s because of the backlash,
because of the immigration that happened, and
 the fact that the right wing took advantage of
 that [crosstalk].

HUDSON: It’s a combination. The right wing was,
 indeed, pushing the immigrant issue, saying wait
 a minute, they’re threatening our jobs. But the left
wing was just as vocal, and the left wing was
 saying, why are these immigrants coming here?
 They’re coming here because of Europe’s support
NATO, and NATOs war that’s bombing the near
that is destabilizing the whole Near East, and
 causing a flight of refugees not only from Syria, but
also from Ukraine. In England, many of the so-called
 Polish plumbers that came years ago have now gone
 back to Poland, because that country’s recovered.

But now the worry is that a whole new wave of
Ukrainians–and basically the US policy is one of
 destabilization–so even the right-wing, while they
 have talked about immigrants, they have also
 denounced the [inaudible] fact that the European
policy is run by the United States, and that you
 have both Marine Le Pen in France saying, we
 want to withdraw from NATO; we don’t want
confrontation with Russia. You have the left
wing in England saying, we don’t want  troop
concentrations to attack Russia. And last
week when I was in Germany you had the
Social Democratic Party leaders saying that
Russia should be invited back into the G8,
 that NATO was taking a warlike position
 and was hurting the European economy by
 breaking its ties with Russia and by forcing
 other sanctions against Russia.

So you have a convergence between the left and the
 right, and the question is, who is going to determine
 the terms on which Europe is broken up and put back
together? Will it simply be the right wing that’s anti-
immigrants? Or will it simply be the left saying we
 want to restructure the economy in a way that
 essentially avoids the austerity that is coming
rom Brussels, on the one hand, and from
UK Conservative Party, on the other.

And again, you have Geert Wilders, the leader of the
 Dutch nationalists, saying, we want Holland to have
 its own central bank. We want to be in charge of our
 own money. And under Brussels, we cannot be in
charge of our own money. That means we cannot
run a budget deficit and spend money into the
 economy & recover with a Keynesian-type policy.

So the whole withdrawal from Europe means
 withdrawing from austerity. If you look at the voting
 pattern in London, in England, you had London to
 stay in. You had the university centres, Oxford and
 Cambridge, voting to stay in. You had the working
 class, the old industrial areas of the north and the
 south. You had the middle class and the industrial
class saying, we’re getting a really bad deal from
Europe. We want to oppose austerity. And we don’t
want Brussels to give us not only the anti-labor, pro-
bank policies, but also the trade policy that Brussels
 was trying to push onto Europe, the Obama trade
 agreement, which essentially would take national
economic policy out of the hands of government
& put it into the hands of corporate bureaucracy,
corporation courts.The bureaucracy in Brussels,
then, is largely pro-bank, pro-corporate, and

WILPERT: That actually brings up the issue of the
 Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or
 the TTIP. It was one of the things that the Cameron
 government was really pushing for, this relationship
 between the European Union and the United States.
 Now that Britain is presumably going to be leaving
 the European Union, don’t you think that this might
 open the possibility of just a TTIP between Britain
 and the United States? In other words, that it will–it
 has been one of the arguments, actually, of those
 who were opposed to Britain leaving the EU, that it
 will tie Britain even closer to the United States than
 it was before, and by virtue of the fact that it’s
 leaving Europe.

HUDSON: I think just the opposite. I’ve gotten 'phone
 calls today from Britain, and I’ve been on radio with
 Britain. The whole feeling is that this makes the TTIP
 impossible, because you can’t do a TTIP just with
 Britain. You have to do it with all of Europe. & this
 prevents Europe - and I think Britain, too - from
making this kind of trade policy. The rejection of
 eurozone austerity is, essentially, a rejection of
neoliberal plan that the TTIP is supposed
to be
the capstone of.

WILPERT: And what do you think this means, then,
 in general for Europe’s future? One of the things
 that–one of the dangers that many perceive, is
 precisely that Europe, as a European Union, is
going to fall apart. Do you think that’s the
 likely scenario here? Or–.

HUDSON: I watched Marine Le Pen today in France,
 and you could see from her face that she was
 overjoyed. She thinks all of a sudden, almost every
European interview where the people–there was such
 unleashing of a feeling of freedom, a feeling of yes,
 we can do it. When Ireland voted not to join the
 European Union people just ignored the popular
 vote. But now it can’t be ignored anymore.

And I think that the British vote is a catalyst for
 moves in Spain, Italy, the Five Star movement in
 Italy, the Podemos in Spain, to say, we are–we have
 an alternative to Europe. Europe is sort of like the
 Soviet Union in the ’30s and ’40s. There was an
 argument, is it reformable or not? There is a feeling,
 and I think it’s correct, that the European Union, the
 eurozone, and the euro, is not reformable, as a result
 of the Lisbon treaties and the other treaties that
 have created the euro. Europe has to be taken apart
 in order to be put together not on a right-wing,
 neoliberal basis, but on a more social basis.

Now, ironically, the parties who call themselves
socialists are now moved to the ultra-right, to the
neoliberal. The French socialists, the German social
democrats. But you’re having real radical parties
arise in Italy, Spain, Portugal, and potentially in
Greece, again, that are going to say, well, the key
any government - of any national government -
has to
be the ability to issue our own money, to run
deficit, spending into the economy to make the
 economy recover. We cannot recover under the
Lisbon agreements, under the eurozone, where the
 central bank will only create money to give to banks,
not money to spend into the economy, to actually
 finance new investment and new employment. And
 we cannot be part of a eurozone that insists that
pensions have to be cut back in order to make the
banks whole and save the 1 percent losing money.

So for the first time you’re having the real left wing
 in Europe talking about financial issues, not about
 political philosophy, or the fact that countries are
 not going to go to war again. Nobody ever believes
that France, Germany, & other countries in Europe
 are going to go to military war again. There is a fear
that the countries in Europe may go to war against
Russia, pushed there by NATO, pushed by the
of the US stance towards Russia.

And so, all of a sudden, the eurozone that was
 supposed to be a bulwark of military peace has
 become belligerent, and even more so if Hillary
 would win in the United States. And there’s a
feeling we do want peace. That means we have
 to withdraw from the eurozone. And essentially
, withdrawing from Brussels means withdrawing
 from NATO & withdrawing from the United States.

So you could say that the vote to withdraw from
 Europe is, it’s really a vote of the British middle
 class, the working class, to withdraw from the
U.S. neoliberalism that has been running
 Europe for the last ten years.

WILPERT: Okay. Unfortunately we’ve run out of time,
 but thanks so much, Michael, for your insight on this.
 I’m sure we’ll come back to you again, as we always
 do. So thanks again for joining us.

HUDSON: Good to be here.

WILPERT: And thank you for watching
 the Real News Network.


eternal disgrace if you're for cruel austerity

UN’s condemnation of austerity UK
- is a national disgrace

by Charlotte Hughes

The United Nations committee on economic
 and cultural rights recently published a
 highly damning report.

It confirmed that the UK government’s austerity
 measures are in breach of its obligations to the
human rights of citizens living in Britain.

Although mentioned in the mainstream press,
it hasn’t been given enough attention. It’s an
 important issue that should not be swept
 under the carpet.

The report considers a number of areas, all of
which are drastically important to our every-
day lives and the lives of the poorest.

It covers foodbanks, unemployment rates,
the housing crisis, mental health care and
 discrimination against the vulnerable.

In its report the committee reminds the UK
government of its obligations and actively
calls upon it to make the changes required.

Sadly I fear this has fallen upon deaf ears,
 as no official acknowledgement has been
made, let alone a rush to tackle the issues.

The UN committee is “seriously concerned”
about the disproportionately adverse impact
 that UK austerity measures have forced upon
the poorest, who are already disadvantaged
and marginalised individuals and groups.
To put it simply, people are suffering,
 and it is completely unnecessary.

These are people who already had a bad deal
 in life and now can see no way of getting out
 of the situation that they are in.

Many are ill or disabled, some have children
and some are single parents. These people
 are being targeted time and time again. It’s
 an endless circle of suffering and poverty.

The committee also emphasised problems
with welfare reform. It said it was “deeply
concerned” about the various entitlement
changes & cuts in social security benefits
 that are constantly being made.

These include the reduction of the household
benefit cap, the four-year freeze on certain
benefits and a reduction in child tax credits.

The committee goes on to say that this will
 deeply affect “women, children, persons
with disabilities, low-income families and
 families with two or more children.”

Despite constant demonisation by the press,
 which labels these people as scroungers, the
 fact is, they're suffering and their children are
 suffering. So much so, that their schools are
 "concerned". This used to be unheard of.

The report goes on to tackle other issues, such
 as the unemployment rate, the high incidence
 of part-time, zero-hours contract work, people
 forced into precarious self-employment, the
 “persistent discrimination” against migrant
 workers, the low national minimum wage, the
new Trade Union Act, the limited availability
 of affordable childcare, the increased risk of
poverty for disabled people, ethnic minorities
and single parents, families with children,
the lack of affordable, accessible housing,
the significant rise in homelessness, and
 ever-increasing university tuition fees.

However, I would like to focus on one issue,
 the issue of sanctions relating to benefits
and the absence of due process or access
to justice --- for those affected by a benefit

Sanctions are handed out far too freely by
the government’s DWP workers. They are
given to mostly innocent people who are
 trying their best and are quite often