>From: "stachkom ICQ#42743890" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Lies Have Short Legs
>
>A Clarification for Russian and Overseas Readers
>It is not so long since the illustrious Steve Myers published an English
>version of the "devastating" letter of O. Shein directed against the Samara
>Stachkom and the PDP. If the participants in the Russian 'stachkomru' list
>have had plenty of time to study the questions (see the correspondence since
>the 4th of October 2000), then now, thanks to the English translation, the
>whole wide world will have their chance. What has come of it, how things
>wound up for Myers and Shein, the reader will find out below. But since
>Shein's libel has seriously worried some overseas comrades, for their sake,
>we must offer some essential clarification.
>
>I suppose that Steve has no command of Russian; or else he could not have
>been caught up in such a sorry story. If he could now read through the huge
>(more than 150 letters) correspondence in Russian, he would surely recognize
>all the mud-slinging and base trickery of our opponents; he would recognize
>that their weapons are lies, slander, and the misrepresentation and
>manipulation of facts. Steve Myers could simply have had no idea what a
>cesspit, befriending, even getting into bed with Shein, would turn out to
>be.
>
>In Russia they say, "Lies have short legs." However, thanks to the
>Shein-Myers duo they have jumped the oceans!
>
>In order to expose these lies once and for all, I propose that the comrades
>of ISKRA, and Myers, Bilenkin, Nillson and other interested individuals and
>organizations (all together, according to their forces) delegate one
>individual, or better yet two, to come to Russia on the 1st of December,
>specifically to Samara, to witness the planned events. This would, at a
>stroke, resolve many of your doubts and questions. You would be able to see
>with your own eyes the 'class battle' for the Labour Code; for clearly
>Samara is one of the advanced strongholds of 'Zashchita,' since it is here
>that they hold conferences, meetings and congresses. (On the most recent of
>these, (uncommonly amusing and curious) we will have more to say later.)
>
>You would certainly discover that, among the million and a half Samarans,
>nobody knows anything about the powerful 'Zashchita' or its leaders, Shein,
>Baiborodova, and Babich; you would see that this entire leadership has kept
>itself so secret, buried itself in such a deep, dark basement, that we
>ourselves have sometimes wondered, "Does it really exist in nature?"
>
>But on the other hand, Steve must realize that the best friends of Shein and
>Baiborodova in Samara are the local bosses of the KPRF and the FNPR (CFTUR),
>and that without them, here, 'Zashchita' is a complete non-entity.
>
>The comrades could learn so much of interest. Dress warmly and come! As they
>say "It is better to see once for yourself, than to hear about something a
>hundred times."
>
>Above all, the implementation of my proposal, should interest Myers, for the
>most unexpected discovery awaits him here, namely that his scientific opus
>"Russia 2000" is as far from life as Shein's campaign for the Labour Code,
>or as modern America is from ancient Rus (the antique name for Russia).
>
>It must surely be worth packing one's bags for the sake of such a
>revelation! Steve, we await you!
>
>But now, finally, down to business. Let us now consider what the overseas
>comrade Myers himself headlined as "Oleg Shein details Isayev nazi
>collaboration, etc." - neither more nor less!
>
>And, for those interested in the details, they can be found at...
>
>http://www.egroups.com/message/ISKRA/753
>
>In order to convince yourself what that which Myers has called "Shein's
>detailing," is actually worth, why not take a calm look at the facts
>presented by Aleksei A. Razlatzky in answering the two most serious among
>the many accusations directed against us;
>
>that we are allegedly guilty of betraying the interests of the working
>class, and,
>the accusation of cooperation with fascists and anti-semites.
>I asked Aleksei to reply to these two points, since Shein, for whatever
>reason, singled him out as the principle target of his attack.
>
>
>"It was with great glee that our opponents sized on my thesis that actions
>of the authorities which improve the situation of the working class in
>Russia, negatively impact the readiness of the proletariat for revolution.
>Tearing it from its context and changing it somewhat, they reduced it to an
>absurdity; the PDP is, allegedly, in general, opposed to improvements in the
>situation of the working class. In actual fact, our positions and views on
>this question are as follows.
>
>Russia has now been in the grip of a profound crisis for ten years. For this
>entire period the situation has been close to revolutionary. Several times,
>it was only the lack of the subjective prerequisites, the presence of an
>organization uniting the workers on a national scale, which prevented a
>revolution from occurring. And all these years, capitalism in Russia has
>grown stronger and this has weakened the objective prerequisites for
>revolution; "that the rulers are no longer able to live in the old way,
>while the lower classes are no longer willing to do so," "the extreme
>aggravation of the usual want and deprivation of the oppressed classes."
>(The first two of Lenin's three conditions for a revolutionary situation.)
>
>Possibly, after some years, we will arrive at a situation in which speaking
>of an impending revolution will be senseless. Capitalism may find an
>acceptable form in which to exist, it may, in the end, achieve victory over
>the remnants of the feudal system, noticeable economic growth may begin, and
>with it, the improvement of the situation of the people, among them, the
>workers. Then, the tactics of proletarian revolutionary organizations will
>have to change, corresponding to the new situation. But today, in my view,
>all opportunities for the rapid completion of proletarian revolution have
>not yet slipped away. But it will never occur unless everything is done to
>assist in the growth of consciousness, of the organization and unity of the
>proletariat.
>
>And along this path, it is essential to take up the following immediate
>tasks;
>
>the founding of a revolutionary, proletarian party,
>the gathering and uniting of those energetic workers collectives and
>organizations which already exist into one strike force (under the
>leadership, for example, of the All-Russia Stachkom),
>arranging for the publication of a militant, workers' newspaper, the base of
>which could certainly be the paper of the Workers' Council (Stachkom) of the
>City of Samara, "Strike." [Zabastovka]
>On this last, since I was and am the editor of this purely workers' paper, a
>few words. Having proved itself to be on the right side as early as the
>beginning of the 1990's, it is, still today, remembered and awaited in the
>various regions of Russia. At that time, our paper was distributed from 500
>locations. We still have hundreds of hundreds of receipts for postal money
>orders; workers then were still able to support their paper. And, at that
>time, the publication of "Strike" [Zabastovka] presented no particular
>problems; censorship, as a practical matter, did not hinder us, and expenses
>for distributing the paper to its readers were generally insignificant.
>
>Today, it is all quite different. Recognizing the urgent need for a paper,
>we have, once again, taken up its publication (the first issue of the new
>"Strike" [Zabastovka] is available in electronic form at;
>http://proletarism.org/z/avg_004.pdf)
>
>But today, we run into the cruel, political hand of our newly strengthened
>capitalism. All the high-volume printing houses, that can produce a paper
>cheaply, refuse point-blank to take our order on the books (as a result of
>censorship), and those who would be willing to take our order illegally,
>want an exorbitant rate.
>
>So how must the activities of 'Zashchita,' in facilitating the fulfillment
>of the tasks listed above, be viewed? Here is how.
>
>It is necessary to seize upon the concrete, rather than the abstract,
>mythological dissatisfaction of the workers collectives, to unite the
>workers around them, to rouse them to strikes, meetings, blockades of the
>highways, elections of Stachkoms; thus narrowing the gap between their
>practical demands and revolutionary ones. I suppose that in some collective
>or other in Russia, the workers may be seriously worried by the adoption of
>the new Labour Code. In such a case, I consider that it would be correct to
>build a powerful strike, found a Stachkom, persuade the strikers of the
>necessity of putting forward their political demands; with such activities
>'Zashchita' could raise the workers and their leaders to a higher
>revolutionary level.
>
>That is number one. Number two is to seek out and gather together such
>fighting collectives and organizations in the region, and, indeed the whole
>country.
>
>But, in fact, this does not happen. On the contrary, collectives which have
>the potential to be roused to a higher level are instead held back at the
>lower level of far-fetched demands regarding the Labour Code. Political
>slogans and demands are ignored, concealed, shrouded in silence. Conclusion:
>'Zashchita' is in no way a revolutionary organization. As a union, it is,
>probably, quite good. But with many of its activities, among them the work
>of Shein in the State Duma and the protests against the new Labour Code, it
>is helping to strengthen capitalism in Russia.
>
>In the West, where capitalism is well-established, and the trade union form
>with it, actions of like those of 'Zashchita,' may assist in the
>strengthening of the prestige of the workers' organizations. Not so in
>Russia!
>
>How can these protests, or more accurately, this fuss surrounding the Labour
>Code strengthen the authority of the workers organizations, when this theme
>evokes no response in the minds and hearts of the workers? I will repeat
>this once more; these protests are entirely far-fetched. There is only one
>thing which they can assist, and that is to enhance the prestige of Shein in
>the Duma and in the eyes of foreign observers.
>
>It is quite unnecessary; the workers are not discussing it in the
>smoking-rooms or the Stachkoms. The majority of energetic workers (at the
>level of action) are ready to involve themselves in serious encounters with
>the authorities and are only waiting for the appropriate cause; but they
>consider the protests of 'Zashchita' to be playing a child's game with
>trifles.
>
>I am ready to agree only that there is a definite section of the workers,
>whose participation in the protests of 'Zashchita' raises their
>consciousness to a new level, persuades them of the inability and
>unwillingness of the present bourgeois authorities to act for the good of
>the workers, and assists them in obtaining experience of self-organization.
>But this occurs not thanks to 'Zashchita,' but in spite of it.
>
>I also want to say something on the "Kitter" effect. When the Stachkom
>considered joint action with him in the electoral campaign of 1997, we
>understood that there was the possibility that this would be used against us
>by provocateurs. But it must be said that for us the only criterion in
>considering a given question is, "Does this advance the revolution?"
>
>Are mistakes possible in action? They certainly are. However I do not
>believe that in the case of Kitter a mistake was made. Today, in Samara,
>there are few who remember him. And those who study three year old
>analytical articles from low circulation newspapers are only trying to dig
>up compromising material on the PDP. Even the people who then voted for
>Kitter have, just as easily, forgotten him today. It is quite true, as
>Viktor Kotel'nikov has said, that at the time of our joint action with
>Kitter (and this is well-known to everyone in Samara, down to the last man)
>he neither presented, nor declared himself as either a nationalist or a
>fascist. Otherwise there could have been no question of joint action with
>him. And anyone who can find a nationalist or fascist, public statement of
>Kitter's dated before early 1997 can boldly spit in my face if they want to.
>And if they can't find one, then Shein, Baiborodova, Babich, Bilenkin and
>Steve Myers should spit in each others faces! This could serve as some sort
>of punishment for their lying accusations.
>
>At that time Kitter was simply a member of the opposition. He was searching
>for an ideology acceptable to him, and looked closely at us. He suggested
>organizing joint action and assistance with carrying out agitation. For us
>there was the possibility of using his resources to the advantage of the
>Stachkom cause. In particular, there were two principle actions which were
>much discussed in the mass media. First, there was the strike at the 'Red
>Star' sewing factory and the closure of Frunze Street directly below the
>windows of the administration of the Lenin (central) district of Samara.
>Second, a town meeting. At this meeting we said everything that we
>considered necessary, while Kitter, candidate for Mayor, stood smiling under
>a banner with the slogan, beloved of all Samara (and not only there); "ALL
>BOSSES ARE BASTARDS!"
>
>At the level of agitation, Isaev always harped on the same phrase, which we
>had earlier approved. "Yes, we say the elections are a fraud, and are
>completely convinced of this. But if, all the same, you consider it
>necessary to participate in the elections, then vote for Kitter." As a
>result, Kitter took third place, getting more than 15% of the vote. This was
>his moment as the General Lebed of Samara. Limansky, returning for the
>second round, proposed to Kitter a post for Kitter in his administration in
>return for steering his supporters to him. After Limansky's victory, Kitter
>became acting head of the City Administration and began to fight against
>corruption. He was quickly dismissed. It was only afterward that he was
>"attracted" to nationalism and fascism... The gossip that Kitter had been
>Limansky's man all along, that he was a fascist and so forth; this just the
>unforgivable lies of Shein, Babich, Baiborodova, Bilenkin and Steve Myers.
>And what the Samara Stachkom or PDP did in the whole story to help the
>bourgeoisie, I don't know."
>
>Aleksei A. Razlatzky
>
>To what Aleksei has said above, I have only one thing to add.
>
>If on the most important and principled questions, the main arguments of
>Shein are lies, thinly disguised, and bordering on the pathological, it is
>not hard to imagine what the rest of his stuff is worth. Who is Shein
>relying on in all this? Surely, on Baiborodova, Babich, Bilenkin, Zhyuganov,
>Shmakov and Myers; in short on the very same sort of "friends" of the
>workers as the People's Deputy himself.
>
>For the Comrades, and Personally,
>
>Isaev
>
>E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#42743890
>http://proletarism.org/
>http://stachkom.org/
>
>
_______________________________________________________
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
_______________________________________________________
Kominform list for general information.
Subscribe/unsubscribe messages to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anti-Imperialism list for anti-imperialist news.
Subscribe/unsubscribe messages:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________________
