[uploadedimage:115119]

　　 一个国家的稳定与否在于它的宪政是否是稳定的，而苏联在早期权力斗争遗留的问题过于严重，尤其是斯大林大清洗红色恐怖给苏联造成不可忽视的影响（一九三四年是斯大林执政方式的转折点）。

　　 而另外两位长期执政的领导者，赫鲁晓夫与勃列日涅夫都有一个致命的问题，他们都是政变夺权的。这导致了他们都需要推翻前任的政策来维护自己的统治合法性。这一点在尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫的去斯大林化政策中最为明显，这一政策依靠知识分子的支持来推翻约瑟夫·斯大林的过度统治。这一支持并非始终如一，随着20世纪60年代新左派的崛起，知识分子中的异见越来越多。

　　 勃列日涅夫执政后又推翻赫鲁晓夫的部分政策，部分恢复斯大林历史形象。他还借此机会清除了前任的效忠者，其中包括当时许多最有声望的学者。结果是，知识分子不再有强烈的声音支持勃列日涅夫或赫鲁晓夫的政策，因此他们统治的合法性受到了破坏。

　　 同时，赫鲁晓夫与勃列日涅夫对其他主权国家进行的军事霸权干预严重破坏了苏联与社会主义面对世界的形象。这导致了冷战意识形态斗争的部分失败。在接下来的几十年中，苏联在意识形态斗争中失败，它取得的胜利付出了高昂的代价。

　　 他们解决的社会问题远远小于他们制造的社会矛盾，更重要的是，赫鲁晓夫与勃列日涅夫推翻前任政策的行为不仅破坏苏联宪政的稳定，还破坏了资源建设。

　　 例如，赫鲁晓夫上台削减了斯大林在苏联南部地区（伏尔加地区、北高加索地区、乌克兰）建造水库进行的国家工程自然改造计划（建设8条国家巨型森林保护带以改善生态环境、防止水土流失、沙尘暴与农业发展，计划是在1950-1965年间创建一系列防护林、水库与灌溉系统。国家巨型森林保护带总长5320公里，人工林面积11.79万公顷）又进行了处女地运动把防护林进行开垦为耕地，短期内增加了粮食产量。即使传统产粮区产量下降，新产粮区也能保证粮食产量。但1962-1963年出现因为削减该计划并采用广泛的增加耕地方法的后果之一：新耕地上发生了一场与土壤侵蚀有关的生态灾难，苏联爆发了粮食危机。1963年秋天，面包和面粉突然从商店货架上消失了，糖和黄油也停产了。1962年，宣布肉类价格上涨30%，黄油上涨25%。1963年，由于国内收成不好与粮食储备不足，苏联战后第一次从国外购买了约1300万吨粮食。由于物价上涨，之后爆发了新切尔卡斯克事件…苏联解体后，整个生态防护系统开始崩溃，全部森林带都无人管理，灌溉系统瘫痪。直到2006年，俄罗斯农业部门才开始重新统计与维护防护林。

　　 这是苏联政治局犯下的错误，一方面不禁止个人崇拜，另一方面又对前任领导人反攻倒算；这破坏了稳定与人们的信仰。许多人的思想都在青年时期定型，因此宣传与教育才如此重要。

　　 正如戈尔巴乔夫一样，苏共二十大对他的影响远远大于之后的一切；他能熟背列宁著作的每一句话，却不会真正相信它。尽管如此，他还是对苏斯洛夫保持尊重；在苏联即将解体时，他也尝试制造一个放弃社会主义与邦联制概念的苏维埃主权共和国联盟来保留苏联（讽刺的是，列宁一开始希望建立一个邦联制度的苏联）。

　　 遗憾的是，像谢列平与苏斯洛夫一样清廉的人是没有办法维持国家的。或许，戈尔巴乔夫只是贪婪与无能；但他因此害死了很多人，无论是谢尔比茨基这样的官僚还是其他无辜的人民。他将王冠扔在地上，让叶利钦拿起王冠使用权力。

　　 罗曼诺夫不能这样做，他必须维护前几任领导人的形象来维护整个国家与稳定宪政。这就是他被选为中央委员会总书记的原因。

　　 他突然想到了什么，时间锁！为什么伊斯兰教经历了几千年依然相信古兰经？因为默罕默德设置了一个时间锁让后来的所有人都只能遵守可兰经（古兰经是安拉的言语，将一直存在到世界末日）。历史上的邓小平面对引进的资本主义与市场经济也做出了类似的时间锁（基本路线要管一百年，动摇不得），通过设定一个时间范围让继任者在框架内不能更改与否定发展的路线方向。

　　 这种手段是有效的，只要继任者依然在框架内就不可能否认。尽管好奇者做出了努力，伊斯兰世界已经成功地使用这种方法来维护其对《古兰经》和先知穆罕默德的信仰。

　　 对比一下赫鲁晓夫在1961年声称要7年内超过美国的生产水平…与实现共产主义社会。按需分配原则将实现：从1975年起免费供应午餐，1980年起一日三餐免费吃饭。我不明白，赫鲁晓夫马克思理论得差到什么地步才能这么说…（虽然他的理想很好，但执政时期的一系列做法太激进与愚蠢了。）最后，到了1971年勃列日涅夫只能人造一个“发达社会主义”概念来解决这个问题。这个词本身就是一种宣传工具，而这个体系根本不是。

　　 这并不是说罗曼诺夫是个坏人，也不是说他不想为国家做必要的事情；这是因为当前的苏联领导层对这一体系没有信心，也不愿意采取必要措施来维持这一体系。这个系统濒临崩溃。罗曼诺夫被迫用每一寸意志力说服党和国家，这是唯一的办法。

　　 所以，他不能也不会像历史上的戈尔巴乔夫利用改革派与地方民族主义者来替换官僚集团（戈尔巴乔夫上台后进行的经济改革真是一言难尽），这很危险会失去官僚阶层的支持，因为所有人都想要的是稳定。更不要说所谓改革派任职马上就同样使用特权甚至更加腐败。

　　 推翻前任领导者的历史形象是一件极度愚蠢的事情，即使斯大林几乎完全改变了列宁的政策，也不会抹黑列宁的形象。即使是邓小平，他也只是将华国锋的形象边缘化让人们遗忘掉他。

　　 所以，选择与答案很明显。改革主义将导致失去支持并导致政府垮台。政府的倒台无疑将导致无政府状态和资本主义的胜利。这将意味着任何社会主义革命机会的终结，这场革命将导致大屠杀和数十万人死亡。

　　 血腥革命不是一件好事。

　　 罗曼诺夫作出了决定。

　　 ------

　　 苏联共产党第二十七次代表大会于国家克里姆林宫内举行，来自苏联最高苏维埃的750名联盟院与750名民族院代表与几乎全球社会主义国家代表、社会主义政党代表坐满了席位。大会以举手方式开幕。苏联共产党党旗升起，所有人起立歌唱国际歌。大会开始了。

　　 罗曼诺夫在国会讲话时引用了卡尔·马克思（Karl Marx）的一句话（他几乎一字不差地读过）“所有以前社会的历史都是阶级斗争的历史”。然后他继续批评现政府没有实现革命的理想。

　　 他的演讲的问题在于，它过于依赖旧政党的陈词滥调，因此变得越来越无关紧要，与普通工人面临的问题脱节。

　　 “是时候打破过去的方法和原则了。是时候让世界进入一个人类历史的新时代了。一个人民统治的时代，一个地球和平的时代，一个大多数人的生活条件不是饥饿，而是富裕的时代。这是社会主义的目标。

　　 现在是为一个更美好的世界采取立场的时候了。一个工人幸福、繁荣、劳动成果在社会所有成员之间公平分配的世界。这就是马克思主义的观点。

　　 在这成为现实之前，我们不会停止。我们不会停止，除非地球上有和平，世界上所有的人都能生活在自由和富足之中。这是共产党的使命。我们主张一个和平、平等和富足的世界，在这个世界上，每一个人都因其必须作出的贡献而受到尊重。

　　 如果建设这个世界呢？马克思已经给出了答案，只有生产力极大发展，物质极大丰富时才是到达真正的共产主义社会！革命理应是年轻的革命，而不是旧的革命！只有先进的科技创新与稳定的社会秩序才能确保经济高速发展。只有这样，世界人民才能真正受益于他们的劳动成果。只有这样，共产主义革命的目标才能实现。我们只能一起建设一个更美好的世界！

　　 因此，在勃列日涅夫同志领导之后，我们应该如何建设发达社会主义呢？信息化！正如列宁同志所说共产主义就是苏维埃政权加全国电气化，信息化社会就是社会主义建设的下一个阶段！现在我们必须继续在党的领导与人民的意志下建设信息化科学发达社会主义。科学发达社会主义就是苏维埃政权加全国信息化！”

　　 这项决议毫无争议地获得通过。大会在苏联国歌的歌声中结束，随后升起了俄罗斯国旗。国歌的歌唱声引起了起立鼓掌。代表们离开舞台，前往招待会。大会结束，最高苏维埃的代表们前往招待会。

　　 招待会首先由密特朗总统致辞，他祝贺大会取得成功。他表示希望，这次大会将促进世界和平与革命。

　　 接下来，美国参议院代表团作了介绍，并谈到了美国对苏联的支持。这篇演讲是由参议员弗兰克·米拉德（Frank A.Millard）发表的，他赞扬了铁幕的建设，并表示，苏联和美国之间的合作带来了无与伦比的经济和科学进步，这一进步将在新共产党的领导下继续下去。

　　 下一次演讲由英国代表约瑟林·戈德温（Joscelyn Godwin）发表，他说，鉴于苏联在维持全球经济体系中的作用，新的苏联政府负有很大的责任。他列举了苏联的经济贡献，如核能的巨大发展，使地球的工业化成为可能。

　　 演讲结束后，播放了一段视频，展示了世界从穴居人到太空时代的演变，最后描绘了共产主义社会可能出现的和平、科技的未来。这段视频描绘了社会主义下世界的一幅积极的、理想化的画像。

　　 ------

　　 第二天，在新的信息化科学发达社会主义理论由各级行政组织结构传达到各级组织机构之前，苏联共产党第二十七次代表大会开始讨论议程。

　　 苏共中央意识形态委员会书记科索拉波夫开始发言，他希望恢复斯大林的历史形象说：“我们不能也不会消除过去的罪行。然而，我们将要做的是向前迈进，建设一个更美好的未来！我们不会允许过去的错误定义我们当前和未来在世界上的角色，我们不会允许单个个人的个人失败定义整个国家的公共使命。大清洗的时代结束了。这一罪恶行为的受害者已被处决或改过自新。没有人会因为他们的意见而受到迫害。诽谤的时代已经结束。我们是一个法治的法治国家。我们是一个真理和进步的国家，而不是谣言和政治迫害的国家。我们生活在一个信息和启蒙的时代，而不是恐惧和偏执。个人崇拜的时代已经结束。我们的个性不再是由单个个体的行为塑造的，而是由集体塑造的。我们今天的国家是全体人民共同的历史经验的产物。我们应该恢复斯大林同志真正的形象与让人民了解历史的教科书正确认识到历史人物的复杂与观点。我们不会回到大清洗的时代。我们不会重蹈覆辙。我们不会活在过去。我们将活在当下，我们将继续前进。我们是伟大遗产的继承人。没有回头路。我们要完成革命；我们将建设一个新世界。”

　　 科索拉波夫发言结束后，苏共最高苏维埃代表们与其他社会主义政党代表团、外国代表对此感到震惊。他们要求科索拉波夫为他的讲话辩护。

　　 科索拉波夫提到了一些历史人物，如罗曼诺夫家族，声称历史书歪曲了他们的形象。然而，他宣布修正主义历史的时代已经结束，并声称所有的过去都在被改写。苏联的历史将被改写，以颂扬社会主义的理想。

　　 科索拉波夫引用乔治·奥威尔（George Orwell）的著名文章《政治与英语》（Politics and the English Language）为自己的立场辩护。在这篇文章中，奥威尔解释说，政治和说服离不开修辞艺术，宣传往往依赖于利用情感和激情操纵公众。

　　 一位社会民主党代表举手提问说。

　　 “我认为我们不能同意历史是以社会主义的名义被改写的。毕竟，写历史的目的不是要记录实际发生的事情，这样我们才能避免将来犯同样的错误吗？唯一的方法是保持准确的记录。这不正是你演讲的目的吗？”

　　 科索拉波夫笑着说：“这里的提问者似乎对我评价不高。我想请他/她澄清原因。”

　　 提问者是德国社会民主党的另一位代表。他说：“看来你在试图描绘一幅充满野蛮元素的过去的美好画面，并呈现一个纯粹愚蠢的未来的政治正确形象。世界历史上充斥着这些理想主义主张，但这些主张都没有实现。你能实现你所提出的崇高理想吗？”

　　 科索拉波夫说：“你似乎是社会主义历史和理论方面的专家，我很想听听你对这个问题的看法。”

　　 提问者说：“我认为你不可能在猪身上涂口红。你可能会画出一张漂亮的图片，但它仍然是猪。”

　　 “这是一种很粗鄙的观点，我想问一下，你夫人今天涂口红了吗？”

　　 提问者看着他的脚说：“不。”

　　 科索拉波夫微笑地说：“那么，为什么要指责绘制理想主义画卷的作为？难道，因为现实生活难以实现就要放弃向伟大理想的描绘？人类正是依靠对理想的向往与实现才得以生存与发展。”

　　 “是的，但问题是理想会阻碍现实。理想就像是对应该是什么的完美愿景，而不是什么是什么。”

　　 “那么你是说一幅画，即使是一幅漂亮的画，也能掩盖真相？”

　　 “是的。”

　　 \"这是一种非常愤世嫉俗的看待方式。但是，如果你提出的乌托邦式的愿景中没有美，那么为之奋斗的意义何在？真正的真相是不会被掩盖的，相反，它只会被遗忘。同志，你认为人们更容易记住在宣传攻势下的事物还是政府刻意忽略的事物？”

　　 代表说：“我想你是对的。但我认为这是政府的责任，而不是历史学家的责任。毕竟，法国大革命的发生不是因为历史学家弄错了吗？”

　　 “并不是，历史学家有责任努力教授人民真正的历史观点。这样说吧，在美国、西欧成长与教育的年轻人他们对社会主义的第一印象与概念是什么形象？而真正的社会主义与共产主义概念是什么？他们能区别马克思主义与列宁主义的区别吗？他们能像苏联年轻人一样普遍阅读过马克吐温与陀思妥耶夫斯基的作品吗？是美国年轻人自身没有办法接受更好的教育还是他们被刻意回避与引导了？”

　　 “我不确定。教育系统似乎是为了让人们为工业工作做好准备，而不是为了学习。”

　　 科索拉波夫严肃地说：“这才是资本主义的真正面目！它奴役着全人类的思想，它所希望的教育是让极少数具有良好出身的人接受私立教育，而让大多数人去公立教育来为进入工业系统服务！因为资本市场需要工人来促使它的资本主义发展，这让资本主义统治下的无产者无法接受更好的教育来实现阶层跨越。但真正的社会主义国家是为了让全部儿童接受尽可能平等的全面教育，苏联的每一任最高领导人都是工人或者农民出身，最高苏维埃代表里有60%都是工农出身。相反，美国总统与议员有多少是普通家庭出身？”（注：苏联官僚子女都不会从政，而是从事科技、学术、商业与医学等。比如戈尔巴乔夫的女儿伊琳娜是医生，罗曼诺夫的女儿瓦伦蒂娜在莫斯科国立大学力学和数学系任教。这也是苏联解体时官僚没有发动民众保卫政权的部分原因，没有官僚会保卫无法世袭政治权力的政权。）

　　 科索拉波夫停下来说：“在我们的斗争中没有愤世嫉俗的余地。我们必须利用我们所掌握的一切方法来实现一个无阶级、无种族和无性别的社会。只有通过动员、无阶级和团结的社会，我们才能实现真正共产主义未来的巨大飞跃。”

　　 ---

　　 一些辩论后，罗曼诺夫总书记做出决定说：“关于正视历史与恢复斯大林历史形象的决定，成立正视历史及平反调查委员会。要对斯大林、赫鲁晓夫与勃列日涅夫的功绩与错误正确批判性对待，即要批评斯大林时期的红色恐怖错误也要正视他领导工业化与卫国战争的功绩；同时，对于赫鲁晓夫违反集体原则与勃列日涅夫军事行动的错误也要承认。因此，我们需要重新修改教科书恢复真正的形象，并且要对贝利亚等历史人物重新调查与平反。举手表决。”

　　 1500名最高苏维埃代表开始表决，绝大多数（1381人）投了赞成票。

　　 “下一个提议，关于阿富汗撤军的准备。阿富汗国际主义援助任务已经进行了近六年，我们已经完成了阿富汗人民民主党的援助请求；应该从1986年3月开始在1987年4月前完成撤离阿富汗的准备。”

　　 代表们再次投票，决议以1383票赞成、21票反对、96票弃权获得通过。

　　 “关于从阿富汗撤军的决议获得批准。”

　　 对这些决定的反应好坏参半。从长远来看，每个人都知道，继续战争只会导致更多的流血和更多的破坏。有些人认为这是对苏联人民在战争中牺牲的背叛，特别是因为红军在战争中的作用是解放，而不是发动征服战争。另一方面，恢复斯大林和苏维埃领导人在学校的形象将是政府的宣传胜利。

　　 军事人员中也有一些不满。许多人认为苏联在阿富汗战争中的作用仅仅是取代英国的殖民统治，而英国的殖民统治是所有形式统治中最具压迫性的。尽管红军身穿苏联的军装，但他们中的许多人秘密效忠于在一次大战中与他们一起服役的苏联同志，并对苏联日益退出世界怀恨在心。

　　 他们希望的是解放人民的苏联红军而不是入侵其他国家的苏联武装力量，无论如何，在等待里根任期结束之前罗曼诺夫都需要稳定政治与发展科技。这需要打破美国的科技封锁与粮食禁运。

　　 “同时，我们要坚决反对错误的崇拜。我们不应该让政治局委员的肖像遍布国家的每一面墙壁，这违反了社会主义。我提议，应该禁止所有现任与没有战争功绩的领导干部建筑铜像、雕像或者肖像印刷在除了书籍与教科书、博物馆的任何印刷物上，禁止以领导人名字命名地点、建筑物等。但是，应该恢复斯大林时期的地名；比如斯大林格勒等，以铭记卫国战争人民的惨痛创伤。”

　　 进行了一些讨论，但绝大多数人同意。

　　 “斯大林的名字将被恢复，”这是许多人的坚定声明。

　　 “斯大林的名字应该恢复”，这也是一份支持该决议的声明。

　　 “斯大林的名字是一种耻辱，应该恢复，”他说，愤怒多于热情。

　　 大多数代表（确切地说是1300人）已经就此问题发表了意见，现在由总书记决定。

　　 “我向你们保证，行动胜于雄辩。我们鼓励希望恢复斯大林名誉的同志们这样做。我敦促你们大家避免争论，集中精力解决更重要的问题。恢复城市、街道等的名称时应格外小心。我还要提醒大家，我们不是生活在一个历史时期，而是一个向共产主义社会过渡的时期。因此这是一个漫长的过渡阶段，我们可能需要几代人或者十几代人。但我们将永远坚持发达社会主义路线，在未来数百年之内不改变社会主义路线，坚持一切权力归于苏维埃与共产党的领导。我们应当恢复斯大林时期的地名与禁止没有十月革命与卫国战争功绩领导干部的崇拜。我还想提请大家注意保护言论自由权的必要性。我们生活在危险的时代，在行使这项权利时，我们再谨慎也不为过。近年来，对这种自由的压制越来越普遍，我们需要提高警惕，尽可能地保护这种自由。言论与艺术创作应该监督而不是禁止，我们应该接受善意的批评与反映社会现象的作品，但绝不会允许抹黑社会主义革命牺牲者的无意义咒骂。我们不能允许回到过去常见的审查和控制。我们需要使用新的和改进的创造性工具来推进我们的事业，而不是压制它们。”

　　 有一些人私下表示不同意，但总的来说，这篇演讲很受欢迎。

　　 “我们不是任何形式的独裁，我们也不想成为独裁，我们是民主国家。人民的意愿是我们决策的指南。这些是指导我们行动的原则，也是我作为总书记将用来指导我们行动的原则。”

　　 “但是，正如我所说的，我鼓励那些对这项事业感兴趣的同志恢复名誉。我欢迎这项事业将引起的关注。这不是一项容易的任务。有大量的工作要做。但我相信，我可以依靠在座的每一位同志的帮助来实现这一目标。我希望你们都同意我的看法。我希望我们大家在这项事业中共同努力。我希望我们都能在这方面取得成功。但是，最重要的是，我希望我们保持警惕，不要被个人崇拜所诱惑，他们想利用我们的历史来达到自己的自私目的。同志们，前面还有很多工作要做，但我相信我们能够胜任。”

　　 还有一些抱怨，但大多数人似乎支持书记。他已经做出了决定，现在已经没有回头路了。

　　 “然后，为了开始我们的工作，我需要最有能力和最有能力的工作人员的帮助。我想建立一个中央信息室，我们的顶尖研究人员可以在这里获取所有最新信息。我想组织一个团队来研究当前世界各地的政治和经济形势。我还想设立一个国际部，负责协调与国际共产党的关系。我想在国际关系部设立一个新的部门，专门研究电影和电视等新媒体。最后，我想成立一个特别小组，调查历史问题，特别是有关十月革命的问题。我希望你们都同意这些立场，因为如果有什么不同的话，它们将增加成功的机会。现在，我相信还有其他同志愿意作出贡献，我希望他们也能作出贡献。我很高兴听到大家的建议。”

　　 当房间里的人消化这些信息时，沉默了一会儿。接着响起了一阵掌声，几个人站在座位上为其他职位提出了各种想法。

　　 接下来的几次会议讨论了各种项目、职位的设立以及某些人填补这些职位的批准。在那些被建议加入政府的人中，有一大批年轻的共产党员，他们渴望产生影响。

　　 此外，罗曼诺夫提出了禁止苏联共产党党员与共青团团员经营私营商业的提议（个体经营者与合作社不包括在内）。该建议的目的是迫使党做出决定，并吸引党员进入公众视线。

　　 这项建议遭到了不同的反应。一方面，它被视为向公众揭露党员的一种方式，这将增加他们的合法性。另一方面，这被视为损害该党声誉的一种方式。

　　 这项禁令在经过一些小的修改后获得通过，首先受到影响的是党员的企业。

　　 党的声誉受到严重损害，许多党员看到他们的商业活动陷于停顿。然而，政府中的党员却过得轻松多了。

　　 月底，一封信被送到了共产党中央委员会，并被张贴在全市的公告栏上。

　　 这是关于对入党申请的共青团团员号召劳动的指令，申请入党的共青团团员们被号召到中亚进行建设新自然改造计划植树造林。他们将执行这项任务，直到树木成熟到可以收割为止，然后他们将留在该地区协助维护树木。

　　 与此同时，政治局势开始恶化。

　　 最初的异议迹象开始出现，少数党员公开表示对政治局的决定不满。作为回应，政治局增加了权力，使中央委员会成员更难竞选党的主席。

　　 中央委员会决定对这些异议者采取行动。

　　 政治犯名单已经公布，有150多个名字。这些名字包括许多最直言不讳的党员，以及一些知名人士。罗曼诺夫将这些人驱逐出境并销毁了他们的苏联国籍。这包括剥夺囚犯获得的任何奖章，在某些情况下，取消未来领取养老金的权利。

　　 罗曼诺夫还开始将该党与过去十年中一些较为极端的立场拉开距离。该党所采取的新路线被公开作为保持共产党“革命纯洁性”和反对“托洛茨基主义者”对该党的“右翼”和“修正主义”渗透的“唯一途径”。

　　 该党继续赢得选举，并成为苏联治理中更可靠的合作伙伴。罗曼诺夫继续为了他认为理应实现的乌托邦蓝图奋斗，但最后的结果会是什么呢？

　　 [newpage]

　　 [uploadedimage:115119]

　　 The stability of a country lies in whether its constitutional government is stable or not, and the Soviet Union had too many problems left over from its early power struggles, especially the Stalinist purges of the Red Scare that had an unmistakable impact on the Soviet Union (1934 was a turning point in Stalin\u0027s way of governing).

　　 The other two long-ruling leaders, Khrushchev and Brezhnev, both had a fatal problem; they both seized power by coup d\u0027état. This led to the need for them both to overturn the policies of their predecessors to maintain the legitimacy of their rule. This was most apparent with Nikita Khrushchev\u0027s policy of de-Stalinization, a policy that relied on the support of the intelligentsia to overturn the excesses of Joseph Stalin\u0027s rule. This support was not unwavering, and with the rise of the New Left in the 1960s, dissent among intellectuals grew. Brezhnev came to power and then reversed some of Khrushchev\u0027s policies and partially restored Stalin\u0027s historical image. He also took the opportunity to purge his predecessor\u0027s loyalists, which included many of the most prestigious academics of the day. The result was that the intelligentsia no longer had a strong voice in favor of Brezhnev\u0027s or Khrushchev\u0027s policies, and thus the legitimacy of their rule was undermined.

　　 At the same time, Khrushchev and Brezhnev\u0027s hegemonic military interventions against other sovereign states seriously damaged the image of the Soviet Union and socialism vis-à-vis the world. This led to the partial failure of the ideological struggle of the Cold War. In the decades to follow, the USSR lost the ideological battles, and those victories that it did achieve came at a high cost.

　　 They solved far fewer social problems than the social contradictions they created, and more importantly, Khrushchev\u0027s and Brezhnev\u0027s reversal of their predecessors\u0027 policies not only destabilized Soviet constitutionalism, but also undermined resource building.

　　 For example, Khrushchev\u0027s rise to power curtailed Stalin\u0027s program of natural transformation of state projects for the construction of reservoirs in the southern regions of the Soviet Union (Volga, North Caucasus, Ukraine) (the construction of eight state mega-forest reserves to improve the ecological environment, prevent soil erosion, dust storms, and agricultural development, the plan was to create a series of protective forests, reservoirs, and irrigation systems between 1950 and 1965. (The total length of the National Mega-Forest Reserve was 5,320 kilometers, with 117,900 hectares of planted forests.) The virgin land movement was also carried out to reclaim protected forests for cultivation, which increased food production in the short term. Even if the production of traditional grain-producing areas declined, the new grain-producing areas were able to ensure grain production. In the fall of 1963, bread and flour suddenly disappeared from store shelves, sugar and butter were discontinued, and in 1962, a 30% increase in the price of meat and a 25% increase in the price of butter were announced. In 1963, for the first time since the war, the Soviet Union bought about 13 million tons of grain from abroad due to a poor domestic harvest and insufficient grain reserves. As a result of the price increase, the Novocherkassk affair broke out afterwards... After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the entire ecological protection system began to collapse, the entire forest belt was left unmanaged and the irrigation system was paralyzed. It was only in 2006 that the Russian agricultural sector started to recount and maintain the protected forests.

　　 This was a mistake made by the Soviet Politburo, which on the one hand did not prohibit the cult of the individual and on the other hand turned against the former leaders; this destabilized and destroyed the faith of the people. Many people\u0027s minds are set in their youth, which is why propaganda and education are so important.

　　 As with Gorbachev, the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union had a far greater impact on him than anything that followed; he could know every word of Lenin\u0027s work by heart without really believing it. Nonetheless, he maintained respect for Suslov; he also tried to preserve the Soviet Union by creating a union of sovereign Soviet republics that abandoned the concepts of socialism and confederalism when the Soviet Union was about to disintegrate (ironically, Lenin initially wanted a confederate Soviet Union).

　　 Unfortunately, there is no way to maintain the state with people as clean as Serepin and Suslov. Perhaps Gorbachev was simply greedy and incompetent; but he got a lot of people killed as a result, whether it was bureaucrats like Serpitsky or other innocent people. He threw the crown on the ground and let Yeltsin pick it up and use the power.

　　 Romanov could not do that, he had to preserve the image of the previous leaders to preserve the whole country with a stable constitutional government. And that is why he was chosen as the General Secretary of the Central Committee.

　　 Romanov could not do this, he had to preserve the image of the previous leaders to preserve the whole country with a stable constitutional government. That\u0027s why he was chosen as the General Secretary of the Central Committee.

　　 He suddenly thought of something, time lock! Why does Islam still believe in the Qur\u0027an after thousands of years? Because Mohammed set a time lock for all subsequent generations to follow only the Koran (the Koran is the word of Allah and will remain until the end of the world). The historical Deng Xiaoping made a similar time lock in the face of the introduction of capitalism and market economy (the basic line should be governed for 100 years and cannot be shaken), by setting a time frame within which the successor could not change or deny the direction of development.

　　 This tactic is effective, as long as the successor remains within the framework it is impossible to deny. The Islamic world has successfully used this method to preserve its faith in the Qur\u0027an and Prophet Mohammed despite the efforts of the inquisitives.

　　 Contrast Khrushchev\u0027s claim in 1961 to surpass the production level of the United States in seven years...with the achievement of a communist society. The principle of distribution according to need would be realized: free lunch from 1975 and free meals three times a day from 1980. I don\u0027t understand how bad Khrushchev\u0027s Marxian theory had to be to say that... (While his ideals were good, the series of practices during his reign were too radical & stupid.) Finally, in 1971 Brezhnev could only create a concept of \"developed socialism\" to solve the problem. The term itself was a propaganda tool and the system was anything but.

　　 It\u0027s not that Romanov was a bad man or didn\u0027t want to do what was necessary for the nation; it was that the current Soviet leadership had no faith in this system and no willingness to do what was necessary to maintain it. The system was on the verge of collapse. Romanov was forced to use every ounce of willpower to convince the party and the nation that this was the only way.

　　 So he cannot and will not use the reformists and local nationalists to replace the bureaucracy, as Gorbachev did historically, which would dangerously lose the support of the bureaucratic class, because what everyone wants is stability. Not to mention the fact that the so-called reformers immediately use the same privileges or even become more corrupt.

　　 To overturn the historical image of a former leader is an extremely stupid thing to do, even if Stalin almost completely changed Lenin\u0027s policies, he would not discredit Lenin\u0027s image. Even Deng Xiaoping, who only marginalized the image of Hua Guofeng to make people forget him.

　　 So the choice and answer is obvious. Reformism will result in the loss of support and subsequent fall of the government. The fall of the government would undoubtedly lead to anarchy and the triumph of capitalism. That would spell the end of any chance of a socialist revolution, a revolution that would result in a bloodbath and hundreds of thousands of deaths.

　　 A bloody revolution would not be a good thing.

　　 Romanov made his decision.

　　 The 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was held in the State Kremlin, where 750 deputies of the Union House and 750 deputies of the House of Peoples from the Supreme Soviet of the USSR filled the seats with representatives of almost global socialist countries and socialist parties. The congress was opened with a show of hands. The flag of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was raised and everyone stood up to sing the International Anthem. The congress began.

　　 Romanov addressed the congress, starting with a quote from Karl Marx (that he read nearly verbatim) \"The history of all previous societies is a history of class struggle.\" Then he went on to criticize the current government for not living up to the ideals of the revolution.

　　 The problem with his speech is that it relies too heavily on the tired rhetoric of the old political parties, thus it becomes increasingly irrelevant and disconnected from the problems that the average worker faces.

　　 \"It is high time to break with the methods and principles of the past. It is high time to launch the world into a new era of human history. An era where the people rule, where there is peace on earth, where the conditions of life for the majority is not hunger, but abundance. That is the goal of socialism.

　　 It is high time to take a stand for a better world. A world where the workers are happy, prosperous, and where the fruits of their labor are distributed equitably among all members of society. That is the vision of Marxism.

　　 We will not stop until that is a reality. We will not stop until there is peace on earth, and all the people of the world can live in freedom and plenty. That is the mission of the Communist Party. We stand for a world of peace, equality, and abundance, where each and every person is respected for the contribution that they have to make.

　　 What if we build this world? Marx has already given the answer, that the only way to reach a real communist society is when the productive forces are greatly developed and material goods are greatly enriched! The revolution deserves to be a young revolution, not an old one! Only advanced technological innovation and a stable social order can ensure high economic development. Only then can the people of the world really benefit from the fruits of their labor. Only then can the goals of a communist revolution be achieved. We can only build a better world together!

　　 Therefore, how should we build developed socialism after the leadership of Comrade Brezhnev? Informatization! Just as Comrade Lenin said that communism is Soviet power plus national electrification, informational society is the next stage of socialist construction! Now we must continue to build informationalized scientifically developed socialism under the leadership of the Party and the will of the people. Scientifically developed socialism is Soviet power plus national electrification!\"

　　 The resolution was approved with little argument. The congress ended with the singing of the Soviet National anthem, followed by the raising of the Russian flag. The singing of the national anthem resulted in a standing ovation. The delegates exited the stage, heading to the reception. The Congress ended, the deputies of the Supreme Soviet heading to the reception.

　　 The reception started with a speech by President Mitterand, who congratulated the congress for its success. He expressed the hope that the congress would serve as a stimulus for world peace and revolution.

　　 Next, the delegation from the United States Senate made a presentation and spoke about America\u0027s support for the USSR. The speech was given by Senator Frank A. Millard, who praised the construction of the Iron Curtain, and said that the cooperation between the USSR and America had resulted in unparalleled economic and scientific advances, which would continue under the new Communist Party.

　　 The next speech was given by Joscelyn Godwin, a British delegate, who said that the new Soviet government had a great deal of responsibility, given the role of the Soviet Union in sustaining the global economic system. He cited the economic contributions of the Soviet Union, such as the vast development of nuclear energy, which had made possible the industrialization of the planet.

　　 After the speech, a video was shown displaying the evolution of the world from caveman to space age, concluding with a depiction of the peaceful, technological future that was possible with a communist society. The video painted a positive, idealized portrait of the world under socialism.

　　 ------

　　 The next day, before the new informational scientific developed socialist theory was transmitted from all levels of administrative organizational structures to all levels, the 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the USSR began to discuss the agenda.

　　 Kossolapov, secretary of the Ideological Committee of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, began his speech, wishing to restore the historical image of Stalin saying, \"We cannot, and we will not, eliminate the crimes of the past. What we will do, however, is to move forward, to build a better future! We will not allow the mistakes of the past to define our current and future role in the world, we will not allow the personal failures of a single individual to define the public mission of an entire nation. The era of the Great Purge is over. The victims of that evil act have been executed or rehabilitated. No one else will be persecuted for their opinions. The era of slander is over. We are a nation of law and order that follows the rule of law. We are a nation of truth and progress, not of false rumors and witch hunts. We live in an era of information and enlightenment, not fear and paranoia. The era of the personality cult is over. Our personality is no longer shaped by the actions of a single individual, but by the collective. The nation that we are today is the product of the common, historical experience of all its people. We should restore the true image of Comrade Stalin with the textbooks that allow the people to understand history with a correct understanding of the complexities and perspectives of historical figures. We will not go back to the days of the Great Purge. We will not repeat the mistakes of the past. We will not live in the past. We will live in the present, and we will move forward. We are the inheritors of a great legacy. There is no turning back. We will complete the revolution; we will build a new world.\"

　　 After Kosolapov\u0027s speech, the deputies of the Supreme Soviet of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, together with the delegations of other socialist parties and foreign delegates, were shocked by it. They demanded that Kossolapov justify his speech.

　　 Kossolapov referred to a few historical figures, such as the Romanov family, claiming that the history books distorted their image. However, he declared the era of revisionist history to be over and claimed that all of the past was being rewritten. The history of the USSR would be rewritten to glorify the ideals of socialism.

　　 Kossolapov cited George Orwell\u0027s famous essay \"Politics and the English Language\" to defend his position. In the essay, Orwell explains that politics and persuasion are inseparable from the art of rhetoric, and that propaganda often relies on manipulating the public with appeals to emotion and passion.

　　 A Social Democrat delegate raised his hand to ask a question and said.

　　 \"I don\u0027t think that we can agree that history is being rewritten in the name of socialism. After all, isn\u0027t the point of writing history is to record what actually happened so we can avoid making the same mistakes in the future? The only way to do that is to keep an accurate record. Isn\u0027t that what you\u0027re trying to do with your speech?\"

　　 Kossolapov smiled and said, \"It seems the questioner here doesn\u0027t think very highly of me. I would like to ask him/her to clarify why.\"

　　 The questioner was another delegate of the Social Democratic Party of Germany. He said, \"It seems that you\u0027re attempting to paint a flattering picture of a past that had elements of savagery, and present a politically correct image of a future that is pure folly. The history of the world is filled with these idealistic claims that go unfulfilled. Will you be able to live up to the lofty ideals that you set forth?\"

　　 Kossolapov said, \"You seem to be an expert on the history and theory of socialism. I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on this matter.\"

　　 The questioner said, \"I don\u0027t think you will be able to put lipstick on a pig. You might create a pretty picture of one, but it\u0027s still a pig nevertheless.\"

　　 \"That\u0027s a very crude way of looking at it, and I\u0027d like to ask, is your wife wearing lipstick today?\"

　　 The questioner looked at his feet and said, \"No.\"

　　 Kosolapov smiled and said. \"So, why accuse the act of painting an idealistic picture? Is it possible to give up painting a picture of a great ideal because real life is difficult to achieve? Human beings survive and develop precisely by aspiring to and realizing ideals.\"

　　 \"Yes, but the problem is that ideals can get in the way of reality. Ideals are like the perfect vision of what should be, instead of what is.\"

　　 \"So you\u0027re saying that a picture, even a pretty one, can obscure the truth?\"

　　 \"Yes.\"

　　 \"That\u0027s a very cynical way of looking at it. But if there is no beauty in the utopian vision that you\u0027re proposing, then what is the point of striving towards it? The real truth will not be covered up; instead, it will only be forgotten. Comrade, do you think people are more likely to remember things that are under a propaganda campaign or things that the government deliberately ignores?\"

　　 The delegate said, \"I suppose you\u0027re right. But I think that\u0027s the responsibility of the government. Not of the historians. After all, didn\u0027t the French Revolution happen because the historians got it wrong?\"

　　 \"No, it is the duty of historians to try to teach people the true historical perspective. Let\u0027s put it this way, what is the image of the first impression and concept of socialism that young people growing up and educated in the United States and Western Europe they have? And what is the real concept of socialism and communism? Can they distinguish the difference between Marxism and Leninism? Can they read the works of Mark Twain and Dostoevsky as commonly as Soviet young people did? Are young Americans themselves incapable of receiving a better education or are they being deliberately avoided and directed?\"

　　 \"I\u0027m not sure. The education system seems geared towards preparing people for work in industry, not exactly towards learning.\"

　　 Kosolapov said seriously: \"This is the true face of capitalism! It enslaves the minds of all mankind, and the education it desires is for the very few with good birth to receive a private education, while leaving the majority to go to public education to serve the entry into the industrial system! Because the capitalist market needs workers to facilitate his capitalist development, this prevents the proletarians under capitalism from getting a better education to make the class leap. But a true socialist state is designed to give all children the most comprehensive education possible, and every top leader of the Soviet Union was of worker or peasant origin, and 60% of the top Soviet deputies were of worker and peasant origin. In contrast, how many American presidents and congressmen come from ordinary families?\" (Note: The children of Soviet bureaucrats do not go into politics, but into science and technology, academia, business and medicine, etc.) For example, Gorbachev\u0027s daughter Irina is a doctor, and Romanov\u0027s daughter Valentina teaches at the Department of Mechanics and Mathematics at Moscow State University. (This is part of the reason why the bureaucrats did not mobilize the population to defend the regime when the Soviet Union collapsed; no bureaucrat would defend a regime that could not hereditary political power.)

　　 Kosolapov paused and said, \"There is no place for cynicism in our struggle. We must use all the methods at our disposal to achieve a classless, a race-free, and a gender-free society. It is only through a mobilized, classless, and united society that we can make the quantum leap to a truly Communist future.\"

　　 After some debates, General Secretary Romanov made a decision: \"On the decision to face up to history and restore Stalin\u0027s historical image, to set up a Commission for the investigation of the face up to history and its rehabilitation. It is necessary to critically examine the achievements and mistakes of Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev, to criticize the mistakes of the Red Terror during Stalin\u0027s time and to recognize the achievements of his leadership in the industrialization and the Patriotic War, and to recognize the mistakes of Khrushchev\u0027s violation of the collective principle and Brezhnev\u0027s military actions. Therefore, we need to revise textbooks to restore the true image, and to reinvestigate and rehabilitate historical figures such as Beria. Vote by a show of hands.\"

　　 The 1,500 deputies of the Supreme Soviet began to vote, and the vast majority (1,381) voted in favor.

　　 \"The next proposal, on preparations for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. The internationalist assistance mission in Afghanistan has been underway for almost six years, and we have completed the request for assistance from the Afghan People\u0027s Democratic Party; preparations for withdrawal from Afghanistan should be completed by April 1987, beginning in March 1986.\"

　　 The deputies voted again, and the resolution passed with 1,383 in favor, 21 opposed and 96 abstentions.

　　 \"The resolution on the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan is approved.\"

　　 There were mixed responses to the decisions. In the long term, everyone knew that continuing the war would only lead to more bloodshed and more destruction. Some saw this as a betrayal of the Soviet people\u0027s sacrifices during the war, especially since the Red Army\u0027s role in the war had been to liberate not to wage a war of conquest. On the other hand, restoring Stalin and restoring the images of the Soviet leaders in school would be a propaganda victory for the government.

　　 There was also some unhappiness among the military personnel. Many felt that the Soviet Union\u0027s role in the Afghan War was to simply replace British colonial rule, which had been the most repressive of all forms of rule. Although the Red Army wore the uniform of the Soviet Union, many of them held a secret loyalty to the Soviet comrades they\u0027d served with in the Great War, and resented the Soviet Union\u0027s growing withdrawal from the world.

　　 They wanted a Soviet Red Army that liberated the people not Soviet armed forces that invaded other countries, and in any case Romanov needed to stabilize politics and develop science and technology before waiting for Reagan\u0027s term to end. This required breaking the U.S. technological blockade and food embargo.

　　 \"At the same time, we need to stand firm against the cult of error. We should not have portraits of Politburo members on every wall of the country, which is against socialism. I propose that it should be forbidden to build bronze statues, statues or portraits of all current and non-war-worthy leaders printed on any printed materials except books and textbooks, museums, and to name places, buildings, etc. after leaders. However, the names of places from the Stalinist period should be restored; for example, Stalingrad, etc., in order to remember the painful wounds of the people of the Patriotic War.\"

　　 There was some discussion, but the vast majority agreed.

　　 \"Stalin\u0027s name will be restored,\" was a firm statement made by many.

　　 \"Stalin\u0027s name should be restored,\" was also a statement made in support of the resolution.

　　 \"Stalin\u0027s name is a disgrace and should be restored,\" was said with more outrage than enthusiasm.

　　 A majority of the deputies (1,300 to be exact) had expressed their opinion on the issue, and now it was up to the General Secretary to decide.

　　 \"Actions will speak louder than words, I assure you. The comrades who want to restore Stalin\u0027s name are encouraged to do so. I urge you all to avoid controversy and to focus on more important issues. The restoration of the names of cities, streets, and the like, should be undertaken with the utmost care. I would also like to remind you all that we are not living in a historical period, but in a period of transition to a communist society. So this is a long transitional phase, and we may need several generations or a dozen generations. But we will always adhere to the developed socialist line and will not change it for centuries to come, insisting that all power be vested in the leadership of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party. We should restore the names of places from the Stalinist period and prohibit the cult of leaders without the merits of the October Revolution and the Patriotic War. I would also like to call your attention to the need to protect the right to freedom of speech. We are living in dangerous times, and we cannot be too careful in exercising this right. The suppression of this freedom has become increasingly common in recent years, and we need to be vigilant in protecting this freedom as much as possible. Speech and artistic creation should be monitored, not banned. We should accept well-intentioned criticism and works that reflect social phenomena, but never allow meaningless curses that smear the sacrifices of the socialist revolution. We cannot allow a return to the censorship and control that was common in the past. We need to use new and improved creative tools to advance our cause, not suppress them.\"

　　 There were some murmurs of disagreement, but, on the whole, the speech was well-received.

　　 \"We are not a dictatorship of any kind, and we do not want to be one. We are a democracy. The will of the people is what guides our decisions. These are the principles that should guide our actions, and they are the same principles that I will be using to guide our actions as General Secretary.\"

　　 \"However, as I said, I encourage those comrades who are interested in the cause to undertake the restoration of names. I welcome the attention that this cause will bring. This will not be an easy task. There is an enormous amount of work to be done. But I am confident that I can rely on the help of every comrade in this room to achieve this goal. I hope that you will all agree with me in this. I hope that we will all work together in this cause. And I hope that we will all be successful in this effort. But, above all, I hope that we will remain vigilant and we will not be seduced by the cult of personalities, who want to exploit our history for their own selfish ends. Comrades, a great deal of work lies ahead, but I believe that we are up to the task.\"

　　 There were some more murmurs, but the majority seemed to support the General Secretary. He had made his decision, and now there was no turning back.

　　 \"Then, to begin our work, I will need the help of the most capable and capable staff. I would like to create a central information office, where our top researchers can access all the latest information. I would like to organize a team to research the current political and economic situation around the world. I would also like to create an International Department, which will coordinate relations with the international Communist parties. I would like to create a new division of the Department of International Relations, which will be dedicated to the study of new media, such as film and television. Lastly, I would like to create a special unit that will investigate historical questions, particularly regarding the October Revolution. I hope you will all agree to these positions, as, if anything, they will increase the chances of success. Now, I\u0027m sure there are other comrades who would like to contribute, and I hope that they will as well. I would be very happy to hear suggestions from you all.\"

　　 There was silence for a short time, as the room digested this information. Then there was a round of applause, and several people stood on their seats to propose various ideas for the rest of the positions.

　　 The next few meetings were filled with the discussion of various projects, the creation of positions, and the approval of certain people to fill those positions. Among the people suggested to be part of the government, there was a large contingent of young communists, eager to make an impact.

　　 In addition, Romanov put forward a proposal to prohibit members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and members of the Komsomolskaya Komsomolets from operating private businesses. The goal of the suggestion was to force a decision from the party, and to draw party members into the public eye.

　　 The proposal was met with mixed reactions. On the one hand, it was seen as a way to expose party members to the public, which would increase their legitimacy. On the other, it was seen as a way to hurt the party\u0027s reputation.

　　 The ban was passed with a few minor amendments, and the first businesses to be affected were those belonging to party members.

　　 The party\u0027s reputation suffered greatly, and many party members saw their business ventures come to a standstill. However, party members in government had a much easier time of it.

　　 The end of the month, a letter was sent to the Central Committee of the Communist Party, and was also posted on bulletin boards throughout the city.

　　 This is an instruction to the members of the Communist Youth League who applied for membership in the Party to work, and they were called to Central Asia to plant trees for the construction of a new natural transformation program. They were to carry out this task until the trees were old enough to be harvested, then they were to remain in the region to assist in the maintenance of the trees.

　　 In the meantime, the political situation was beginning to deteriorate.

　　 The first signs of dissent began appearing, with a small minority of party members publicly expressing dissatisfaction with the decisions being made by the Politburo. The Politburo responded by increasing its power, and making it more difficult for members of the Central Committee to run for the Presidency of the Party.

　　 The Central Committee decided to take action against these dissenters.

　　 The list of political prisoners was revealed, with over 150 names. The names included many of the most vocal party members, as well as some high-profile public figures. Romanov deported these people and destroyed their Soviet citizenship. This included stripping away any medals that the prisoners had been awarded, and in some cases, revoking the right to a future pension.

　　 Romanov also began to distance the party from some of its more extreme positions of the past decade.

　　 The new line that the party was taking was presented to the public as the \"only way\" to preserve the Communist Party\u0027s \"revolutionary purity\", and to counter the \"right wing\" and \"revisionist\" infiltration of the party by \"Trotskyists\".

　　 The party continued to win elections, and became a much more reliable partner in governing the Soviet Union. Romanov continues to fight for the utopian blueprint he believes should be realized, but what will be the end result?