Li Shenming et al.: The Fundamental Causes, Lessons, and Inspirations of the Collapse of the Soviet Party and State (Part II)
II. Important Lessons from the Collapse of the Party and State in the Soviet Union
As previously stated, the most profound warning and lesson from the collapse of the Soviet Union is that problem arose within the Communist Party's own development, particularly within the Party's leadership group.
(1) The internal development of a major Party concerns not only the rise and fall of the Party itself, but also the future and destiny of the country, the people, and even humanity.
The Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) once created unprecedented and glorious achievements. It not only established the world's first socialist state but also vigorously developed the socialist cause, profoundly changing the global landscape and the direction of human social development. Consequently, Marxism-Leninism gained extensive international influence.
During the eras of Lenin and Stalin, the CPSU's efforts in political, ideological, organizational, stylistic, disciplinary, and institutional development enabled it to adapt to the needs of revolution, war, construction, and development. This propelled Soviet socialist construction and the international communist cause forward in great strides. Under the firm leadership of the CPSU, the Soviet people made enormous sacrifices and paid a heavy price to defeat foreign invasions and build a powerful nation. During World War II, they defeated the overbearing aggressive forces of German and Japanese fascism. Subsequently, the socialist revolution expanded from one country to many, forming a socialist camp headed by the Soviet Union.
Soviet power realized the people's management of their own country through the leadership of the CPSU. This meant that the task of the Party's own development was arduous; it had to consistently maintain its character as a servant of the people and keep firmly in mind its purpose of serving the people. To whatever stage the cause of the Party and the people developed, the Party’s development had to advance to that same stage. However, starting from the time Khrushchev served as the supreme leader, serious problems emerged in various aspects of the CPSU’s development—especially in ideology, politics, and work style [1]. Particularly during the latter period of Leonid Brezhnev’s leadership, bureaucratic phenomena spread within the Soviet Union and corruption became increasingly severe. A privileged bureaucratic stratum [2] formed in opposition to the fundamental interests of the masses. The image of the CPSU among the masses was seriously damaged, and the foundations of its governing legitimacy began to shake.
The privileged bureaucratic stratum was stuck in its ways, being unwilling to or opposing any reforms involving its own interests. More seriously, this stratum became completely detached from the broad masses, causing the prestige of the Party and the reputation of socialism to decline. This provided the soil for the growth of anti-communist and anti-socialist forces during the Gorbachev period. To legalize their illegally occupied state resources, the privileged stratum vigorously pushed for the evolution of the Soviet social system, while anti-communist and anti-socialist forces led the Soviet Union toward disintegration.
Marxism is a theory of the people; the people’s position is the fundamental political position of a Marxist party. Having weathered the trials of revolution and war, the CPSU led the people in socialist modernization, and the Party and the people established "flesh-and-blood ties" (血肉联系). However, during the years of peaceful development, the CPSU gradually neglected Party building. Party leaders sought fame and wealth, held themselves aloof, and were self-righteous. Forgetting their original aspiration and founding mission, they gradually became detached from the masses and alienated from them. Their ultimate abandonment by the people and by history was, therefore, within the logic of events.
The history of the CPSU’s defeat and fall shows that while it is relatively easy to establish a party and seize power, it is exceptionally difficult to attempt a resurgence once the party and state have collapsed and been overturned. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) participated in national political life through peaceful means, striving to restore socialism, and once played an important role. However, since entering the 21st century, the development of the CPRF has been unstable. In the seventh presidential election held in March 2018, CPRF leader Gennady Zyuganov, who had lost four times previously, did not run; the CPRF instead nominated the non-party figure Pavel Grudinin as its candidate. In September 2021, official Russian results for the eighth Duma elections showed United Russia receiving 49.82% of the vote and the CPRF 18.93%. However, the CPRF’s actual vote share was [reputedly] 30%, while United Russia’s was 35%. Both before and after the election, Putin sought out Zyuganov for talks to exert pressure on the CPRF.
After the transfer of political power, the situation for the general public and communists became extremely difficult. Ruslan Grinberg, a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences and a famous economist, offered this interpretation of Russia's economic development on the 25th anniversary of the Soviet collapse: "If there are many poor people, the economy will not succeed." He believes that contemporary Russia is experiencing large-scale poverty unprecedented since the collapse of the Soviet Union, which symbolizes the failure of Russia's 25-year economic transition. He argues that economic inequality is not only shameful but also extremely detrimental to national economic development. In 2019, Grinberg pointed out again that the wealthiest 3% of Russian citizens owned 89% of the country's financial assets, which was the result of a reckless rejection of Soviet justice and clearly showed that Russia had chosen a wrong path.
On December 8, 2021, Vyacheslav Volodin, Chairman of the Russian State Duma, recalled the collapse of the Soviet Union in a post, stating that top CPSU leaders chose to betray their ideals, the country, and the people during the nation’s most difficult period, while political elites reaped benefits from the state’s collapse. This allowed the United States and Europe to eliminate a powerful ideological rival and split the Soviet Union into different countries. However, in this process, not one of the 15 Soviet republics benefited from the collapse. Volodin emphasized that the economic and industrial links of these republics were severed and industrial capacity was lost; these factors combined led to a major crisis, the tragic consequences of which they are still bearing today.
In contrast, the United States—which used "unconventional warfare" (i.e., ideological war, economic and financial war) as its primary means to destroy the Soviet Union and the socialist countries of Eastern Europe—harvested enormous wealth from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the upheavals in Eastern Europe. High-tech industries such as computers and the Internet, originally used for military confrontation, were converted to civilian use. This further formed a synergy of financial capital and technological capital, jointly promoting high economic growth in the U.S. Economic globalization, based on dollar hegemony and dominated by the United States, reached a new peak. This was equivalent to the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries handing over their wealth to support their competitors.
(2) The leadership’s faith and convictions, theoretical cultivation, outlook on life, and values are directly related to the success or failure of the great cause of socialism.
From the lessons of the rise and fall of the CPSU, the leaders of a Marxist party must be, as Lenin said, "the most authoritative, influential, and experienced people, who are elected to the most important positions and called leaders." They must possess the political foresight to look far ahead and "steer the ship" (领航掌舵), a firm and extraordinary revolutionary courage that knows no fear, and an outstanding leadership ability to break new ground and navigate complex situations. More importantly, they must be able to stand consistently on the correct side of history and the times, leading the Party and the people along the right direction.
Since Lenin and Stalin, the ideological and political cultivation of the CPSU's main leaders declined, and their willpower and character deteriorated. Some even became stubborn defenders of the interests of the privileged stratum. As the saying goes, "The meat-eaters are shallow and lack vision" (肉食者鄙，未能远谋) [3]. They were more concerned with the interests of individuals, families, and small cliques. By the time of Gorbachev, the CPSU leadership group could not withstand the test of complex situations or the temptation of material interests. Their ideals, convictions, character, outlook on life, and values all underwent fundamental changes, making the downfall of the Soviet socialist cause unalterable.
History is the best teacher. During the periods of Lenin's and Stalin's leadership, the reason the CPSU grew from weak to strong and led the socialist cause to flourish was the existence of strong and capable leadership cores and collective leaderships. Conversely, after Stalin's death, the reason the CPSU declined and the socialist cause it led eventually collapsed was the lack of such strong leadership cores and collective leaderships. The Communist Party of China has grown from small to large and from weak to strong, achieving glorious successes through a century of storms precisely because it has had strong and capable leadership cores and collective leaderships—Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, and Xi Jinping. Consequently, the causes of Chinese revolution, construction, and reform have been invincible.
(3) Ideological, theoretical, and political confusion, incorrectness, or vacillation will inevitably lead the Party and the state astray or even down an evil path.
If the Party’s leaders and leadership collective lack scientific armament with Marxist ideology and theory, they will easily lose their direction and impetus in the face of complex and volatile domestic and international situations. The CPSU's lack of clarity, correctness, and firmness in ideology, theory, and politics greatly harmed the cause of the Party and the people.
During the periods when Khrushchev and Brezhnev served as supreme leaders, the CPSU failed to see the true nature of imperialism. They downplayed class struggle on an international scale and unilaterally proposed "peaceful coexistence," "peaceful competition," and "peaceful transition." Driven by the political need for "Soviet-American cooperation to dominate the world," they engaged in "Great-Partyism" and "Great-Power Chauvinism" within the socialist camp and pursued hegemonism globally. To strengthen control over Eastern European allies, Brezhnev put forward the so-called "Socialist Community Theory," "Limited Sovereignty Theory," and "International Dictatorship Theory" [4] to control brotherly countries, even openly launching an armed invasion of Czechoslovakia and engaging in aggressive expansion into the Third World under the banner of "supporting national liberation movements." These erroneous practices of the CPSU tarnished the reputation of Marxist parties and led to serious consequences, including the split of the international communist movement.
Gorbachev implemented "New Thinking" in diplomacy, advocating that "the interests of all humanity are above all else." He accepted Western values as "universal human values," abandoned Marxist theories of class struggle and methods of class analysis, and guided domestic reform according to Western values. In ideation and action, he completely threw his lot in with Western countries headed by the United States, even selling out core Soviet interests to gain Western trust. This resulted in the tragedy of the collapse of the Party and state, while the Western world "congratulated each other by adjusting their hats" (弹冠相庆) [5]. The lesson of the Soviet Union profoundly demonstrates that if a socialist country follows the path of making concessions and surrendering to Western nations—changing its flags and banners—it will inevitably bring about its own destruction.
To avoid taking the "evil path" (邪路) of changing flags and banners, one must adhere to the Marxist standpoint, viewpoint, and method. It must be fully recognized that in an era where socialist and capitalist systems coexist and compete, and where the international monopoly bourgeoisie still dominates the world, one must never yield to imperialist pressure or make unprincipled, reckless compromises and concessions. It should be clearly seen that since the emergence of socialist states, international reactionary forces have never abandoned their strategic plot to remain hostile to and subvert the socialist system. On the international stage, there has always been a struggle between penetration and anti-penetration, and between subversion and anti-subversion, which sometimes reaches a very sharp degree. Facing a complex and sharp international struggle, the governing party of a socialist country must be adept at seizing opportunities and adjusting policies to steer international relations toward peace, development, and human progress as much as possible. At the same time, it must maintain a clear and correct political mind at all times, adhere to principles, dare to struggle, and ensure domestic peace, stability, and development.
(4) The fundamental system embodying the people's will must be reflected in the text of the Constitution and implemented in practice; these fundamental principles must never be shaken, undermined in disguised form, or abolished.
The historical mission of the proletariat can only be gradually realized under the leadership of its vanguard organization. Therefore, after the proletariat seizes power, it must formulate a fundamental law reflecting the will of the working class and the laboring people. It must explicitly confirm and safeguard the socialist nature of the state’s people's democratic dictatorship and the central leadership position of the Communist Party in the socialist state through constitutional and legal texts. Furthermore, it must resolutely implement these fundamental systems across all aspects of the people's economic, political, cultural, and diplomatic lives through various basic and important systems. These fundamental systems must not be left hanging as empty legal provisions, nor should these unshakable principles be removed from legal texts altogether. Only in this way can the socialist nature of the Party and the state be ensured and the fundamental interests of the masses be protected. Otherwise, such a Party and state will surely be abandoned by the people.
After 1989, under the banners of political "pluralism" and social "democratization," Gorbachev adopted so-called "liberal" and "fair" methods to conduct direct elections for People's Deputies and members of the Supreme Soviet. The result was the election of a large number of radicals, leading anti-Soviet and anti-communist figures, and dissidents. The "Inter-Regional Deputies Group" [6] proposed that "all power belongs to the Soviets" and demanded the abolition of Article 6 of the Soviet Constitution concerning the leading role of the CPSU. In February 1990, the Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU decided to relinquish its status as the ruling party and implement a multi-party system in the Soviet Union. In March of the same year, the Congress of People's Deputies officially abolished Article 6, stipulating that the Soviet Union would implement a multi-party system and a presidential system while establishing a state political system based on the separation of powers. This fundamentally destroyed the legal-rational foundation of the CPSU's governance and dealt a fatal blow to Soviet power and the Soviet socialist system.
In a constitution, establishing and maintaining the ruling status of the Communist Party and establishing and maintaining the fundamental, basic, and important systems of socialism are of extreme importance. The lessons of the Soviet Union have sounded an alarm for us. For some time, a trend of so-called "constitutional democracy" [7] appeared in our country. Under the banners of "democracy" and the "rule of law," it demanded changes to the phrasing in our Constitution regarding the Party's leading position and urged us to draw on the experiences of the United States and other Western countries to implement "constitutional democracy." Its content included the so-called lifting of "bans on parties" and "bans on the press," the promotion of a multi-party system, parliamentary democracy, the separation of powers, "judicial independence," "political neutrality," and the "depoliticization" of the military, with the goal of "establishing a Chinese Federal Republic under the framework of democratic constitutionalism." These propositions are identical to the rhetoric used to "transform the CPSU" during the Gorbachev era. Their essence is to set the Party's leadership in opposition to the Constitution and the law, to negate the Party's leadership, and to abolish the people’s democratic dictatorship. In substance, this negates our country’s Constitution and the systems and principles it establishes, aiming ultimately to achieve a "change of flag" [8] by transplanting Western political system models to China. Our Constitution has always been clear in maintaining the leading and ruling status of the Communist Party of China. The 2018 Constitutional Amendment added the statement that "The leadership of the Communist Party of China is the defining feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics" to the first article of the main text; this was peerlessly correct. Facts demonstrate that it was not "constitutional democracy" that could save the Soviet Union—rather, it was precisely "constitutional democracy" that brought the Soviet Union down.
(5) Only by adhering to the lofty ideal of communism and firming up the conviction that socialism will inevitably prevail can the Party possess cohesion and combat effectiveness.
The fundamental reason the CPSU became weak and disorganized and lost its combat effectiveness was that it abandoned the nature, purpose, and goals of a Marxist party, as well as the sublime pursuit of seeking happiness for the people and liberation for humanity. In particular, the way CPSU leaders diluted, abandoned, and deviated from socialist and communist ideals and convictions served as a terrible "role model" for all Party members. The lesson is extremely painful.
Ideologically and politically, Khrushchev propagated the "party of the entire people" and the "state of the entire people" [9]—notions of class reconciliation. He preached an abstract, supra-class view of humanism, demanding that so-called "great humanism" be treated as "our ideology," thereby diluting the guiding position of Marxism-Leninism. During the latter part of Brezhnev's tenure as top leader, phenomena such as a discrepancy between words and deeds, formalism, grandstanding, and all talk and no action were widespread. This seriously weakened the Party's influence and caused the CPSU's prestige to decline continuously. By the Gorbachev era, the CPSU completely abandoned the guiding position of Marxism-Leninism; the Party fell into ideological chaos, factions proliferated, disorder was rampant, and people's hearts were scattered, eventually leading to the tragic fate of dissolution.
The tragic lessons of the Soviet Union show that firm ideals and convictions are of great significance for a Marxist party and for a socialist country. In a certain sense, whether ideals and convictions are firm is directly related to the life and death of the Party and the state. We must consistently persist in and strengthen education on the Party's ideals and convictions. Ideals and convictions are the political soul and spiritual pillar of Communists, and the ideological guarantee for overcoming all difficulties and achieving all successes. The Communist Party of China has persistently strengthened the Party's ideological and theoretical building, insisted on ideological Party building while promoting theoretical strengthening of the Party, attached great importance to socialist ideological work, strengthened the construction of ideological fronts, and firmly grasped the leadership over ideological work. This series of major measures is entirely correct.
(6) Abandoning the guiding position of Marxism and violating the principles of scientific socialism will inevitably lead to the evil consequences of "changing the flag" and the downfall of the Party and the state.
Regarding the issue of reform, two different views of reform have always existed. One views reform as the self-perfection and development of the socialist system, organically unifying the adherence to the fundamental and basic socialist systems with the perfection of specific systems that do not adapt to the requirements of the development of productive forces. This view treats reform as a revolutionary change to eradicate systemic and institutional defects and break through the barriers of solidified thinking and interests, while adhering to the basic principles of scientific socialism to ensure that reform always advances along the socialist direction and path. This is the Marxist view of reform that has been proven correct in practice. The other view of reform advocates changes that are not socialist in nature. Under the "banner of reform," it fundamentally negates the fundamental and basic socialist systems, transplants the capitalist social system, and realizes the capitalization of the country. Gorbachev’s reforms belong to this type.
Looking at Soviet history, if one says reform began with Khrushchev, then from Khrushchev until Gorbachev took power, the CPSU leadership group had already begun to deviate from and betray the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism and the fundamental socialist systems on the one hand, while on the other hand only taking remedial measures under the original system and mechanisms. From the time Gorbachev became the top leader until the collapse of the Soviet Union, what was implemented was a so-called "reform" that completely negated the socialist system and deviated from the principles of scientific socialism, directing its spearhead at the socialist system itself and fundamentally negating the fundamental and basic socialist systems.
From the lessons of the CPSU, regarding the issue of reform, we must neither take the old path of rigidity and isolation nor the crooked path of changing the flag. Among these, not taking the crooked path of changing the flag and avoiding subversive mistakes is particularly crucial. Since the 18th National Congress, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has emphasized that our country’s reform has a firm and correct political direction, position, and principle. The core of this is to persist in and improve the Party's leadership and to persist in and perfect the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics. It has been emphasized that we must enhance our political focus, hold fast to political principles and bottom lines, and must never allow reform to become a "change of direction" or a total abandonment [10] of the socialist system. These important judgments are entirely correct.
(7) Attach great importance to ideological work, respond timely to various non-Marxist and anti-Marxist trends of thought, and maintain the Party's revolutionary nature, advancement, and purity in ideological and political theory at all times.
Looking across the 70-plus years of history of Soviet Russia and the Soviet Union, the CPSU's ideological work underwent a process of evolution and degeneration. During the Lenin period, the Party adhered to Marxism as its guide and, through long-term revolutionary practice, established the principles, policies, and theoretical guidance for the Bolshevik Party’s ideological work, pioneering Marxist ideological work. Ideological work during the Stalin period achieved great successes but also saw deviations; however, the general direction was correct, and it persisted in and developed Marxism-Leninism. During the Lenin and Stalin periods, the CPSU's criticism and liquidation of various anti-Marxist trends were resolute and thorough, enabling the Party to consciously resist the erosion of various bourgeois trends of thought for a long historical period. In particular, its understanding of the essence of democratic socialism and its predecessor, social democracy, was profound and clear-headed. This was clearly directly related to the long-term resolute struggle Lenin and Stalin waged against the right-wing of the Second International.
Starting with Khrushchev, the CPSU's ideological work drifted further and further from the Marxist track, and various non-Marxist and anti-Marxist trends of thought in the Soviet Union began to resurge. Additionally, we must see that after World War II, the opposition and struggle between the two fundamentally different social systems of capitalism and socialism, and between the two great classes of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, eased somewhat worldwide. The then-popular democratic socialism and Western bourgeois ideas took advantage of Khrushchev's major attack on Stalin, as well as the anti-communist waves caused by the Hungarian [11] and Poznań events [12], to exert their influence to the utmost.
During the Khrushchev period, "humanization" appeared within the CPSU, and the Marxist convictions of Party members were greatly impacted. At that time, "neo-Marxist" factions appeared in Eastern European countries such as Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia. These factions negated Leninism and the principles of scientific socialism under the name of breaking free from the shackles of "traditional Marxism." Socialists in Western European countries held high the banner of democratic socialism to serve the imperialist need for implementing a strategy of peaceful evolution toward socialist countries. Khrushchev's "humanism" and his concepts of the "Three Peaces" and "Two Entires" [13] were formed in this international environment. This erroneous trend of thought went uncorrected within the CPSU for a long time, eventually evolving into the so-called "humane, democratic socialist" reform.
After the formalistic governance of the Brezhnev era, various erroneous trends of thought increased rather than decreased, significantly affecting the ideological purity of the CPSU and creating a breeding ground for anti-Marxist trends within the Party. By the Gorbachev period, the CPSU leadership group embarked on the erroneous road of completely and thoroughly negating Marxism-Leninism, and various erroneous trends of thought ran rampant.
Gorbachev abandoned the laws of human social development revealed by historical materialism and simply copied the abstract bourgeois theory of human nature to analyze the problems existing in Soviet society. He believed that Soviet socialism did not conform to so-called human nature and even devastated it, "castrating the humanistic essence of the socialist structure." He also misinterpreted the statement in the Communist Manifesto that "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all," considering it a "humanistic program" that embodied the "great principle of humanism." He further regarded humanism as the essential requirement of a socialist society, the goal and task of socialist reform, and the objective of Communists. This was a complete descent into the mire of historical idealism.
As a banner for the bourgeoisie against feudal autocracy and theological rule, "humanism" had its progressive significance in history. However, the human and human nature spoken of by the bourgeoisie are abstract—a so-called "natural and eternal" thing without class attributes, used as a "standard and yardstick to measure everything, including human history." Attributing the driving force of historical development and social progress to the kind nature or the rationality of humanity is a typical manifestation of historical idealism. An abstract theory of human nature can neither see the essence of Soviet social problems nor the laws of human social development. It caused the CPSU to lose its direction and stripped away the revolutionary nature, advancement, and purity of a Marxist party.
History has proven that the Communists of China, with Comrade Deng Xiaoping as their chief representative in the early 1980s, were entirely correct to fly a clear banner in the struggle to "clear away spiritual pollution" [14] and to criticize the abstract theory of human nature and abstract humanism. This played a huge role in helping our country escape the negative influence of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in Eastern Europe, and in pushing our country's reform forward in the right direction.
The lesson of the downfall of the Party and state in the Soviet Union shows that ideological work is valuable for "nipping problems in the bud" [15] and taking preventive measures. In the arena of ideology, if Marxism does not occupy the ground, non-Marxist and anti-Marxist trends of thought inevitably will. Socialist countries must attach great importance to ideological work, firmly grasp the leadership of ideological work, unswervingly adhere to the guiding position of Marxism, strengthen the Party's ideological and theoretical building, persistently temper Party spirit, and resolutely struggle against all anti-Marxist trends of thought, ensuring that the fields of thought and public opinion are firmly held in the hands of Marxists.
Social existence determines social consciousness. As long as capitalist private ownership exists, the social foundation for various non-Marxist and anti-Marxist trends of thought built upon private ownership will always exist. History shows that the struggle between Marxism and non-Marxism or anti-Marxism is long-term. Communists must maintain sufficient vigilance.
The Communist Party of China has always attached great importance to and strived to carry out ideological construction [16]. Especially since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has emphasized the extreme importance of ideological work. It has called upon the entire Party to fully recognize the long-term, arduous, and complex nature of ideological work, to firmly grasp the leadership over ideological work, to carry forward the spirit of struggle, to improve its ability to engage in struggle, and to build a socialist ideology with strong cohesive and guiding power to continuously seize new victories in the great struggle of the New Era. These major judgments and decisions are wise and correct.
(8) Unswervingly uphold the absolute leadership of the Party over the military; we must never sever our own backbone and be reduced to meat on the chopping block of reactionary forces.
From its founding, the Soviet Red Army followed Lenin's principles of army building, establishing the CPSU's absolute leadership over the Red Army and keeping the proletarian army firmly in the hands of the proletarian party. The historical experience and lessons of the international communist movement have proven time and again that it is of extreme importance to adhere to the fundamental principles and systems of the Party's absolute leadership over the military and to prioritize ideological and political construction in all aspects of military development.
During the "August 19 Incident" of 1991 in the Soviet Union, the paratrooper units and the KGB "Alpha" action group ordered into Moscow refused to follow superior orders, turned their guns around, and supported Yeltsin’s "Democratic Platform" faction. At a critical moment when the nation faced a life-and-death crisis, the very military created by the CPSU not only failed to fulfill its mission and responsibility but defected on the battlefield, accelerating the collapse of the CPSU and the disintegration of the state. The fundamental reason for this was the evil consequence of Gorbachev’s so-called "nationalization of the military" and "de-partyization of the military" under the guise of "reform," which caused the CPSU to completely relinquish leadership over the armed forces.
Ideologically, Gorbachev vigorously promoted the "depoliticization," "de-partyization," and "nationalization" of the military. The essence of this was to transfer the supreme command of the military from the CPSU Central Committee to the President of the Soviet Union. Politically, the General Political Department of the Army was abolished, political organs at all levels of the military were slashed, tens of thousands of officers were cut, and the political vetting system for officer promotion was canceled, leading to a rapid decline in the military's loyalty and reliability to the Party and the state. Furthermore, the "Law on the Establishment of the Post of President of the USSR and Amendments and Additions to the Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the USSR" enacted in March 1990 legally stripped the CPSU of its supreme power to lead and command the Soviet military.
To achieve the goal of wresting military leadership from the CPSU, the trend of historical nihilism [17] in the Soviet Union became even more rampant. Public opinion aimed at subverting the state began to be manufactured, directing the brunt of its negation toward the Soviet military and Soviet heroes. Anti-Soviet and anti-communist newspapers and extremist forces specialized in exposing and attacking the so-called "problems" of the Soviet Army, blaming the military for the consequences caused by Gorbachev's erroneous reforms. The Soviet Army became the "culprit" for tensions between the Soviet Union and other countries, and economic recession was portrayed as the result of the "monster" of the Soviet Army sucking the country's blood dry. Slandering Soviet soldiers and negating the history of the Soviet Army became fashionable. National heroes and heroic groups such as Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, Alexander Matrosov, Fyodor Kryuchkov, and the Young Guard [18] were subjected to vilification. The Soviet Army was framed as an accomplice to a "fascist regime," and the victory in the Great Patriotic War was reduced to a "large fascism" (the USSR) defeating a "small fascism" (Germany). On November 14, 1990, Marshal of the Soviet Union Sergei Akhromeyev published an article in Sovetskaya Rossiya pointing out that the entire anti-military campaign had ceased to be a local issue since the middle of that year. Separatist and anti-socialist forces combined the policy of discrediting the military with the practice of squeezing out the Communist Party and incited large-scale unrest demanding the resignation of the government.
At that time, Zoya was by no means the only hero defiled by lies. Hostile forces at home and abroad slandered and insulted almost all the heroic figures the Soviet people were proud of, such as Alexander Matveyevich Matrosov, a private in the Soviet Guards. On February 23, 1943, during the battle for the village of Chernushki near Velikiye Luki in the Pskov region, he used his own unyielding chest to block a machine gun port from which fire was spewing from a German bunker. Matrosov sacrificed his precious life at the age of only 19 for the sake of victory. On June 19, 1943, he was posthumously recognized as a "Hero of the Soviet Union." Nine years later, a Matrosov-style hero also appeared on the Korean battlefield—Huang Jiguang, a special-class hero and recipient of a special merit of the Chinese People's Volunteers. However, during the Gorbachev period, this "Soviet Huang Jiguang" was vilified as a "juvenile delinquent" and a "prisoner-soldier" who had gone to the front from a Gulag exile site. Rumor-mongers also slandered him by saying: Matrosov was short and weak, the German machine gun caliber reached 40mm, and multiple machine guns were firing, with the firing port reaching one and a half meters wide; it was impossible for him to block the port. Even the testimony of Hamza Tagirov, a comrade-in-arms who witnessed Matrosov’s sacrifice, was questioned, with claims that his memory was unreliable. How similar these statements are to the rumors and slanders that once appeared in our country against Huang Jiguang! It is just that these historical nihilist fallacies have been condemned by the masses like "rats crossing the street" [19] since the 18th National Congress of the Party. Meanwhile, our country has also enacted legislation to protect the reputation of heroes and strictly punish the defilement of people's heroes and role models.
A society that negates its heroes is destined to have no future. The lies, as numerous as "carp crossing the river" [20], not only disrupted public opinion and confused sight and hearing—causing the 5-million-strong Soviet Army to lose all its former glory and stripping the Soviet people of their strong shield for defending their own regime—but also led the CPSU, with its nearly 20 million members, toward disintegration along with the 70-plus-year history of Soviet Russia and the Soviet Union. The ultimate fate of the powerful Soviet Army is deeply sigh-inducing; this historical mirror is worth our forever remembering.
(9) We must be highly vigilant against the Western strategy of "peaceful evolution" and must never allow a "fifth column" to run rampant within the country or even within the Party; especially, we must prevent the phenomenon of "the dove seizing the magpie's nest" [21] within the Party's leadership groups, otherwise the subversion of the Party and the state will become inevitable.
"Peaceful evolution" is a strategic concept proposed by the brothers John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles for the US government to "contain" socialist countries from 1953 to 1961. In 1945, as World War II was drawing to a close, Allen Dulles, then a high-ranking official in the US intelligence department, outlined in detail how to use peaceful means to promote the evolution of the Soviet Union: "The war will end, everything will be settled and arranged. We will spend everything we have, all our gold, all our material power, to mold people into the way we need them to be, to make them listen to us." "Human brains and human consciousness can change. As long as we throw the brain into chaos, we can imperceptibly change people's values." "We must find people inside Russia who agree with our ideology, find our allies." "We will imperceptibly but actively and constantly promote the arbitrariness of officials, making them bottomlessly greedy and unprincipled." "We will gradually erase their social existence from literature and art." "With superb methods, we will sacralize all of this imperceptibly, let it bloom into a brilliant flower... Only a few, a very few, will be able to feel or recognize what is actually happening. But we will put these people in a position of isolation and helplessness, make them objects of public ridicule; we will find ways to slander them and declare them the dregs of society." On January 15, 1953, US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles claimed that to crush the socialist threat to the free world, peaceful methods must be used and are possible. Those who do not believe that spiritual pressure and propaganda pressure can produce results are too ignorant.
Western hostile forces implemented the strategy of peaceful evolution against the Soviet Union first by cultivating powerful internal forces in the Soviet Party and state leadership at all levels and in all walks of life—especially within the top leadership—known colloquially as the "fifth column." The West used channels such as cultural exchanges, economic activities, and personnel exchanges to conduct ideological and cultural infiltration and cultivate Western spokespersons in the Soviet Union. They primarily recruited experts and scholars from various disciplines and used means such as propaganda, mutual visits, reconnaissance, and espionage to carry out large-scale psychological warfare. Through support and bribery, they backed Soviet dissidents. They utilized ethnic contradictions to create ethnic divisions and incite dissatisfaction in Soviet society. By spreading political rumors, vilifying the images of Soviet leaders such as Lenin and Stalin, they incited the resentment and hatred of the masses toward the Soviet system and their yearning for Western society.
In September 1956, the US government decided to take the opportunity of Khrushchev’s advocacy of "peaceful coexistence" between socialism and capitalism to encourage "large-scale people-to-people exchanges" between the Soviet Union and the United States, advocating the invitation of 10,000 Soviet university students to study in the US with all expenses covered by the US government. They hoped that one day, this group of people cultivated by the United States would hold power in the Soviet Union. Subsequent facts proved that the Americans did not waste their efforts. By attracting a large number of young Soviets to study in the US, the United States conducted anti-communist propaganda among them and cultivated a group of pro-American, pro-Western anti-communist and anti-socialist forces. Yakovlev was a typical representative among them. According to disclosures by Vladimir Kryuchkov, former chairman of the KGB, Yakovlev was bribed by US intelligence agencies while studying at Columbia University in 1960 and received instructions from the US during the Soviet "reform" period.
The West also utilized the Nobel Prizes they controlled, various foundations, and various non-governmental organizations to influence and dominate the intellectual community of Soviet society, cultivating pro-Western "intellectual elites" to promote Western ideological theories and values. The Nobel Prizes in Literature, Peace, and even Economics all carry distinct Western ideological colors. The Soviet Union won the Nobel Prize in Literature five times and the Nobel Peace Prize twice. Except for the famous Soviet writer Mikhail Sholokhov, author of And Quiet Flows the Don, who won in 1965, the works of the other four literature winners were known for negating and vilifying the October Revolution and the Stalin era—the most famous being Solzhenitsyn, known for writing The Gulag Archipelago. Of the two Peace Prizes, one was given to the famous Soviet "dissident" and scientist Andrei Sakharov, who engaged in anti-Soviet and anti-communist political activities from the 1970s; his award in 1975 stemmed from the West's affirmation of his political activities. The other Peace Prize was given to Gorbachev in 1990 to reward his "outstanding contribution" in disintegrating the CPSU and promoting "democracy" in Eastern Europe. At this point, the black hand of the "Nobel Prize" being manipulated behind the scenes was finally exposed.
Western NGOs also played an important role in disintegrating the ideology of the CPSU and promoting the collapse of the Soviet Union. Friedrich Hayek, a representative of neoliberalism known for being anti-communist and anti-Marxist, used the Mont Pelerin Society [22] with the support of British financial syndicates to actively participate in the West's ideological infiltration of the Soviet Union in the 1980s. He focused on funding a group of Soviet scholars to study in the West, including Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais. Under the influence of Hayek and the Mont Pelerin Society, Gaidar and Chubais forcefully spread neoliberal ideas in the Soviet Union and Russia and implemented "shock therapy" based on neoliberal theory, becoming important drivers of the collapse of the Soviet and Russian economies.
In 1987, George Soros, the founder of the Open Society Foundations (USA), established the Soros Foundation-Soviet Union in Moscow. He actively funded liberal elements hostile to the Soviet Union and the Communist Party to engage in political activities aimed at disintegrating the USSR—for instance, the famous "dissident" and historian Yuri Afanasyev. Beyond this, in 1990, the Soros Foundation funded a working group composed of Grigory Yavlinsky and others to formulate a plan for the Soviet Union’s transition to a free-market economy (the "500 Days Program"). The foundation also sponsored a large number of journalists and television anchors, cultivating a cohort of so-called independent media experts to act as mouthpieces against the Soviet Union and Communism, actively engaging in subversive activities.
The Western powers, led by the United States, placed particular importance on cultivating agents within the various levels of the Soviet leadership. Mystical Western organizations, such as the Freemasons, also played a significant catalytic role in promoting the collapse of the Soviet Union. According to revelations by Russian historian Oleg Platonov in his book Russia’s Crown of Thorns: The History of Freemasonry (1731–1995), between 1945 and 1994, more than 400 high-ranking party and government officials within the former Soviet system joined Freemasonry or international organizations affiliated with it (such as the "Bilderberg Club," the "Great Europe" Commission, and the "International Russian Club"). These included high-level CPSU leaders such as Gorbachev, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze, and Yeltsin.
The General Secretary of a great party and a great power like the Soviet Union should have been a firm and clear-headed Marxist-Leninist dedicated to wholeheartedly serving the vast majority of people in his own country and the world—that is, possessing the spirit of "I will stay selfless for the sake of the people" [23]. Tragically, however, this critical and essential post was gradually subjected to the bizarre phenomenon of "the dove seizing the magpie's nest" [24], occupied by degenerate elements within the Party and traitors to the cause of communism. While the emergence of this phenomenon certainly had extremely complex internal Party and domestic causes, it was also directly linked to extremely complex international factors. A wealth of ironclad evidence proves that Gorbachev—a man who had completely lost his communist faith—was able to be elected General Secretary of the CC CPSU because of the inducement and cultivation of Western powers led by the United States. The famous Soviet dissident Alexander Zinoviev claimed that around 1979, he spoke with a staff member of British intelligence who told him: "Soon they (the Western powers) will place their own person on the Soviet throne." Although the staff member did not mention Gorbachev by name, Zinoviev concluded that this prophecy had foresight. Long before 1983, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had gathered extensive intelligence on Gorbachev, which led US intelligence services to believe that "he could be used to serve their own political interests." Subsequently, the Western powers led by the US tried multiple times to establish secret contacts with Gorbachev and viewed him as the best candidate for the leadership of the CPSU. Margaret Thatcher also spoke bluntly: "It was we who made Gorbachev General Secretary." Some commentators believe that London approved Gorbachev’s election as General Secretary even before Moscow did. In fact, while studying at Moscow University in 1953, Gorbachev became close friends with a Czech student, Zdeněk Mlynář. Mlynář was a "dissident" whom the United States had long been cultivating in Czechoslovakia. In 1968, Mlynář served as a Secretary of the CC CPCz and a member of the Presidium, being one of the leaders of the "Prague Spring"; he was expelled from the Party in 1970. In 1977, Mlynář, along with 240 other Czechoslovak intellectuals and figures from other sectors and strata, signed and released Charter 77, a manifesto demanding the protection of so-called basic human rights, challenging the so-called Stalinist autocratic rule. On the surface, Gorbachev had almost no contact with Mlynář, but Gorbachev’s biographer Andrei Grachev quoted Gorbachev telling Komsomolskaya Pravda in 1994: "Zdeněk was my closest friend, closer than anyone else." In 2002, Gorbachev further confirmed: "I had a friend named Zdeněk Mlynář; we maintained a friendly relationship until the final moments of his life." After being elected General Secretary, Gorbachev immediately invited Mlynář to Moscow, though his meeting with him was not made public.
In his book The Art of Intelligence, published in the mid-1960s, senior CIA official Allen Dulles admitted that Western intelligence agencies closely monitored "Communist Party members at all levels, from the highest to the grassroots, in socialist countries, carefully establishing dossiers and recording their activities, speeches, and details of their personal and social lives." Soviet KGB General Andrei Sidorenko recalled: "In the mid-1960s, the KGB obtained the first intelligence from its sources regarding the CIA and other US intelligence agencies shifting toward recruiting so-called 'agents of influence' [25]." "The recruitment of these agents of influence was for future use, in the hope that at some unknown point in the future, they would rise to positions in Party and state organs, influential social institutions, and the Soviet military." Russian historian Alexander Ostrovsky, in his book Who Helped Gorbachev to Power?, proposed: "The time Gorbachev’s name appeared on CIA biographical data cards was no later than 1968, when he was serving as the Second Secretary of the Stavropol Krai Party Committee."
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, CIA Director Robert Gates walked through Moscow’s Red Square and remarked with no small amount of pride: "We knew that whether through economic pressure, the arms race, or even the use of force, we could not take it down. It could only be destroyed through an internal explosion." Nikolai Ryzhkov, former Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, said: "If there were not a 'fifth column' inside that actually pursued the goals set by the enemies of the Soviet Union, no external force could have done anything to our country." Former Soviet Defense Minister Dmitry Yazov said: "There was a so-called 'fifth column'; these people relied on the Americans for their bread. There were not many of them, but it was precisely they who crippled the Soviet Union."
Following Gorbachev’s death, Biden and other Western leaders gave him extremely high praise, unstintingly offering various words of eulogy. US President Biden stated: "Gorbachev was a man of remarkable vision. When he came to power, the Cold War had gone on for nearly 40 years and communism even longer, with devastating consequences. Few high-level Soviet officials had the courage to admit that things needed to change. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I saw him do that and more." British Prime Minister Boris Johnson stated: "I am saddened to hear of Gorbachev's death. I always admired the courage and integrity he showed in bringing the Cold War to a peaceful conclusion."
The existence of a "fifth column" allowed the US-led Western strategy of "peaceful evolution" [26] to achieve a comprehensive "victory." This was a "victory" the West had never secured since the establishment of socialist states. The harm caused by the Soviet "fifth column" tells us that battles on the military field are often soul-stirring because they are visible; however, battles on the invisible battlefields of the economy, ideology, and culture—while appearing calm on the surface—often become more lethal due to their high degree of concealment and deceptiveness.
It is an indisputable fact that the "fifth column" incited and installed by the US-led West in the Soviet Union—including Gorbachev, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze, Yeltsin, and others—worked in coordination with Western anti-Soviet forces from both inside and outside to bring down the Soviet Party and state. This process was shocking and is well worth our study. (To be continued)
(Author: Li Shenming, Honorary Dean of the School of Politics and Public Management at Zhengzhou University and Director of the World Socialism Research Center at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)
(Project: This article is a staged result of the National Social Science Fund of China's specially commissioned research topic "New Changes in Capitalism, the Essence and Development Trends of Imperialism, and Our Strategic Response." Project Leader: Li Shenming; Project Members: Liu Shulin, Wang Tingyou, Li Ruiqin, Zhang Shuhua, Fan Jianxin, Zhao Dingqi.)
Online Editor: Tong Xin Source: World Socialism Research, 2022, No. 10