For Bolshevism - May 2015

For Bolshevism - May 2015

Workers of all countries, unite!

FOR BOLSHEVISM INSIDE THE COMMUNIST AND WORKERS’ MOVEMENT

No 05 (146) MAY 2015

A.A. MAYEVSKY NEEDS HELP!
The fascist Ukrainian authorities continue to prosecute our comrade, Secretary of the Central Committee of the AUCPB, editor of the Bolshevik newspaper"Workers' and Peasants' truth' Anatoly Arkardevich Mayevwsky.
The criminal case was filed against him in the summer of 2014 after the searches were conducted by the SBU at the editorial of the newspaper. A.A. Mayevsky is charged under Art. 110 of the Criminal Code "violation of territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine" and Art. 161 of the Criminal Code "Violation of citizens' equality based on their race, nationality or religion." Since November 28, 2014 Mayevsky has been held in custody in Uzhgorod. The tenure of his detention has been repeatedly extended (the latest - until May 25).
The sole reason for all this is because our comrade has a consistent position with regard to Kiev fascist junta crimes which were exposed more than once in the pages of "RKP" and for his support for the anti-fascist, anti-capitalist struggle of the working people of Donbass.
The hearing on the closure of "Workers' and Peasants truth", scheduled for 21 April, has once again been postponed indefinitely.
Mayevsky needs your help and support. We invite all concerned citizens, all Soviet patriots to provide material support to the political prisoner.
Those wishing to help A.A. Mayevsky can send remittances to the address: 119454, Moscow, p / 5, Khristenko Sergei Vasilievich (In Russian 119454, Москва, а/я 5, Христенко Сергею Васильевичу). This address is used only to help the prisoners held by the Kiev junta, so additional notes in the transfer forms are not required.
In addition, also available are funds transfer by electronic bank transfer "Golden Crown". The telephone number for this is- 8-917-520-05-04 ; also us the address of Khristenko Sergei Vasilievich.

Information buro of the CC AUCPB
-----------------------------------------------------
THE PEOPLES ENTERPRISE
UNDER GLOBALIST POLITICS
Vladimir Ryabov
Almost a hundred years ago, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin presented a form of society which was sought by the Bolsheviks. This model of society came after the bloody wars organized by imperialism which in its new life was to achieve the disappearance of classes and class struggle. The desire to build a society without classes suffered by victims of the First World War, who gave their lives for the interests of the world's biggest tycoons of Capital. Therefore, to reduce the appetites of the imperialists for spheres of influence at the expense of ordinary soldiers cannon fodder, in Lenin's definition could only be a society that was called "communism". And the means to achieve his ideals were reduced to two programs of the Party, the first of them named as "Soviet power" and determiedn its own political policy, and the second added on to it as an economic program "electrification of the whole country." Due to the interaction of these two programs, the state was dissolved in a single peoples enterprise, the effect of which would be done on the basis of the use of energy. The economic phenomenon of cost accounting for energy, under the rule of the Soviet regime, came to replace the monetary system, the system of global power of imperialism.
The scientific essence of the Great October Socialist Revolution was realised through the "electrification of the whole country," as revolutionary practice of the working class - to express in the peoples enterprise the capabilities of the productive forces. It was that same emancipation of labor, the real purpose of which went far beyond the projected communism and spread to the needs of the human being to live and develop in terms of energy consumption. Energy use inherent in the conditions of existence in the universe.
Today no one remembers those tumultuous applauses, which delegates at the eighth Congress of Soviets gave in December 1920 at Lenin's speech on the "electrification of the whole country," as the second program of the party. The thirty-year rise of industrialization of the country, based on the Leninist electrification was replaced by half a century of anti-Stalin hysteria that led to the denial of the struggle of the labor force for the ideals of of their revolution, based on the power of the Soviets and Leninist electrification. Thirst for private property, which the partocracy manifested themselves in together with a raised wave of anti-Stalinism, firstly directed at scrapping Leninist electrification, after which the Soviet government by then could not resist and had to take the political position of the army Capital.
In recent decades, it was possible to observe the results of scrapping the peoples enterprise, firstly by the introduced anti-Stalinism in stagnant planning, and then leading the partocracy to outright robbery as a result of capitalist perestroika (restructuring). High tempo of the industrial era made the men of perestroika appear as being somewhat stupid, and in the 1990s they were trampled in the dirt of the greedy crowd of bourgeois democracy, dossing along the corridors of the Russian authorities in the search for property. But the objective laws of development of the productive forces are forced to sprout anew, which now grow through the layers of the rotting crisis of capitalism. In the language of the "mirror of the Russian revolution," i.e., Leo Tolstoy, that spring takes on its own, industrial relations takes on its own, reviving sprouts for development in the deepest crisis of the peoples enterprise.
Almost a hundred years have past, and the descendants have forgotten all about what Lenin said at the end of December 1920. At best, the descendants celebrate December 22 of each year as the Day of Energy, sincerely believing that it boils only down to the electrification plan, as an industry development program of the energy sector. They even can not imagine the Plan of electrification, in alliance with the "second program of the Party" concerned all national economic prospects of their companies and their future life, because in the long term, planning paved the way for the departure from the monetary system. For this plan in its development aimed towards the death of the monetary system based on a policy of lowering prices to zero. From which the building of a new society, people of the Soviet Union had to fix price tags in stores, and not by the reasoning of partocrats.
The second party program built the policy of reducing prices to zero only on the basis of increased productivity, as the creative mission of the working class. But, as is well known, high rates of labor productivity in the Soviet Union were beautifully demonstrated in the military confrontation with Nazism, and only after breaking the military machine, almost the whole of Europe, working for Nazi Germany, the productive forces in the USSR shows how Lenin's electrification should manifest itself in the interests of the redistribution of profit in favor of the working class. That is, the Soviet government at the state level was a guarantor of profit distribution in favor of its hegemon, implementing this policy in the form of lower prices and with that to raise the living standards of the whole army of labor and its allies. Because the lowering of prices in the country increased the purchasing power of all employees in the peoples enterprise, called the peoples economy. And the increase in the purchasing power of the population raised the living standards of all. For comparison, we can give you an example of surplus value under capitalism, the profit from which is implemented by the banking system in favor of the owners of the means of production. In this case, the profit is realized in the interests of the purchasing power of the owners of the means of production.
Delegates of the eighth Congress not only applauded Lenin, but also created a single industrial complex of the country, guided by the basis of Lenin's peaceful development of the world revolution, which began in Soviet Russia, and by the 1950-s covered half the world. As a result of the peaceful development of the socialist revolution in the Soviet Union it was possible, even in the imperialist encirclement to achieve second place in the world, demonstrating the highest rate of labor productivity.
Of course, the imperialist strategists did not sit idly by, but did everything to stop the rapid pace of development, and if possible, to lead them to be scrapped. For that, it was enough just to put in the USSR into the leadership, people with bourgeois ideas. In addition in the Central Committee of the CPSU there were very few people who were able to put into practice the basics of peaceful development of Leninist electrification. Therefore, anti-Stalinism immediately led to a preponderance of power in favor of anarcho-syndicalism, which was expressed by the tradition of Makhno, destroying his opponents and encouraging self baiting by thrown out large dollar amounts.
The collapse of the peoples enterprise in the USSR was carried out by the hands of its own partocrats with the imperialists acting as the pimps. By the hands of these partocrats, Leninist electrification was crossed out, and in its place, industrial stagnation matured. By their hands the economic base of electrification drifted towards connection with financial laws of the world market, and the productive forces degraded in conditions of bourgeois norms of equity. This put socialism dependent on the laws of the global market, serving the interests of world imperialism. But it would be a profound mistake to believe that the imposed by the partocracy capitalist foundations allow Russia to live and grow.
All that capitalism could express in the vast modern Russia, is - a return to the events during the collapse of the economy since the end of World War I. From which, the productive capacity of the country increasingly finds itself in a state of collapse, and the monetary system moving to the position of the pre-revolutionary "kerenok." Naturally, this does not apply to the condition of the economy of the "oil and gas pipeline", working for dollars.
The irony for Russia unwittingly brings to the agenda the forgotten issue of full depreciation of the monetary system. If a century ago the French and British banks were ready to take onto their balance sheet the entire devalued Russian economy, they are now ready to repeat the same thing in alliance with the United States. Western banks are willing to rule Russia, and all that is needed is the dominance of the dollar and the euro in the economy. Of course, these banks are willing to buy for next to nothing all of Russia's national wealth, and constantly make bankrupt. And the country has sufficient forces ready all the national wealth to sell for a pittance. But in the country are even more forces prepared to place these same riches at the service of the broad Russian masses. The only problem is how to organize these very productive forces, so the Russian banking system works in the interests of their own people rather than foreign banks. And to solve the problem of "bad money and good bourgeoisie" in the country, the structure of a peoples enterprise can change in the interests of the masses.
However, the concept of "peoples enterprise" is now so confused by the ideologues of capitalism that every nationalization of capitalist property involuntarily transforms "the bourgeois state into an aggregate capitalist." However, this dilemma has the criterion of productivity, which does not allow productive forces to sink in the swamp of the "aggregate capitalist", in which share capital is ready to jostle each resident.
A completely different situation in formation of the peoples enterprise took place in Soviet Russia, based on the criteria of a single national economic plan. In 1920, Lenin had to start with the economic process addressing trade between town and country. It was necessary to get away from the norms of life of military communism and through the struggle of opposites of the electrification plan and NEP, restore the monetary system, and then, through the stages of labor productivity, to achieve a natural withering away of the monetary system itself. This process demanded the revival of the devalued in kerenki monetary system. It was necessary to recover the looted gold reserves and financial system so that a peoples enterprise could receive credits for trade. Under these conditions began to operate the economic base of Lenin's electrification, which possessed the property to keep to the "black gold", to this basis of functioning based on the modern monetary system. "Black gold" was a universal economic parity, on the basis of which the uneducated proletariat could begin to increase productivity at a pace which bourgeois theorists never dreamed of. As a result, began the process of the withering away of the monetary system itself, being the main indicator of share capital. And the Soviet proletariat exited on the position of the working class, conscious of its position in the transition of the global economy over to a more progressive method of economic accounting, expanding reproduction in energy costs.
As you know, all world-historical events are repeated twice. At one time, considering Bonapartism as a burp on the French Revolution, Marx said that the first time, these events are expressed as a tragedy, the second time - as a farce. Our parallel the Great October Revolution, having stopped by the tragedy of the collapse of Russia, today tends to be combined with the destruction of the capitalist farce, the output of which lies within the framework of solving problems with a peoples enterprise. Of course, for the revival of the USSR, the peoples enterprise needs to be put on the Leninist "electrification of the whole country." Although, of course, the communists should not lose sight of attempted armed onslaughts by the oligarchic bourgeoisie, defending their "western partners" economy of the "pipeline". But now even the native bourgeoisie forced to look suspicious at the economy of the "pipeline".
Therefore, in the current situation of crisis it makes sense to consider the peaceful development of the revolution. In this case, the problem should be solved of the withdrawal of Russia from a deep economic crisis, naturally dumping Russia under the control of the notorious "kerenok." And then there is the need to establish a wide network of peoples enterprises, able to take the economy back from the brink and save Russia from collapse. Today we see the result of the global economic crisis in the destruction and loss of life in a slow smoldering fire of World War III. In these circumstances, it is difficult to determine the time when the masses will show activity towards the creation of the peoples enterprise on the basis of a single national economic plan. However, to know the way out onto the rails of Leninist electrification is needed today so that tomorrow, be able to put into practice the forgotten experience of restoring the economy and the subsequent industrialization.
Exiting collapsed industry is possible only through the structure of the peoples enterprise that should not get bogged down in the swamp of the share capital of modern imperialism, similarly adapting to the enterprise of the peoples type. And at such peoples enterprises, accounting and control should be by the people.
Here it is necessary to make a correction and set clear, referring to the work of Lenin's "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism." In the imperialist structures run by equity, the concept of "people's enterprise" can act only as some economic toys, which are beneficial to be played with by big capital. For the imperialist model, all the levers of management are held in the hands of the financial oligarchy and their decisions on the allocation of credit to any enterprise are taken according to their own benefit. Therefore, in this financial field, banks act as judges, who determine the cost of who can still live and who should die.
The peoples enterprise in the management of the army of labor and in running the army of capital
During the formation of imperialist control structures, in this case were the active involvement of trade unions, proposing to make the enterprise employees its owners, and providing for some part of the shares to wage labor out of the total amount of the share capital of the company. This required an increase in the authorized capital of companies through shares of the ESOP trust to be redeemed by employees or provided to them with free and protected by trade unions. This form of people's enterprise has spread to closed joint-stock companies. The economic essence of the formed peoples enterprises has been reduced to the fact that they provide complete protection against external influences and even possible to control the working of financial flows. But this protection was dictated by the need to cover up the weak links in the chain of equity, which labor-intensive production presented of much attention from the side. The artificially created "transparency" effected the possibility to avoid mergers and acquisitions on the part of a stronger predator. The specificity of the national enterprises became widespread due to factors that outside shareholders could not put into them a great deal of capital and did not get more than 5% of the shares of the share capital. For 75% of the share capital in the national enterprise remained for its employees.
Of course, employers went for promotion of wage labor only under the conditions that the created national enterprise, in fact – a Closed Joint Stock Company, is a subordinate structure in the system of child or grandchild stock units. A simple venture under the management of the higher status of the stock company, under the auspices of the peoples enterprise became reliably protected from a hostile takeover. Most often, such a national enterprise turned out as some time-consuming process, where within it could have been avoided antagonism of workers and implemented standards of corporate governance actions. From which such an enterprise was not afraid of "transparency" of their accountancy, and even acquired through this, the attraction for investors.
Accordingly, bank capital also avoids confrontation with the peoples enterprises, well aware in this case, the inevitability of conflict with unions. This provision has also been beneficial for higher parent structures of share capital, as people's enterprises have accumulated most difficult questions. In addition, the share of companies of this kind in the developed world does not exceed 10 - 15% of share capital.
Here we should draw on the experience of the GDR (German Democratic Republic), where people's enterprises (Volkseigener Betrieb) had the legal form of industrial enterprises and public institutions. This form of national enterprise in the East German state operated on the model of enterprises in the USSR. Their structures were the basic economic units of the centralized economy of Socialist Germany, within which their financing went in accordance with the requirements of socialist competition. In 1989, the peoples enterprises of the GDR employed almost 80% of the population. With the unification of Germany and the transition to world market conditions in 1990, about 8,000 factories and peoples enterprises were privatized by the Trust Agency (Treuhand) on the property of the former GDR. Under privatization, several million jobs were lost. Then entered into force norms of equity financing, according to which peoples enterprises had to act only as props for large maternity capital, unless such companies would receive funding for their livelihood.
The main feature of allowing peoples enterprises to exist in industrialized countries is their compliance with state interests. Russian Federal Law of 19 July 1998. № 115-FZ "On the specifics of the legal status of joint stock companies (peoples enterprise)" in civil law introduced a new organizational-legal form of business - company employees (peoples enterprise). In doing so, the peoples enterprise use the requirements of the Russian Law "On Joint Stock Companies" of the closed joint-stock companies, unless otherwise provided by federal law on people's enterprises. Modern open or closed joint stock companies in Russia transformed into peoples enterprises according to 115-FZ and work within this law. And of course, for the functioning of the peoples enterprises, they face the problem of their financing from the banking institutions. But funding is only possible if there is a profit, which is extracted from people's enterprises financial institutions, including higher status equity.
But speaking of the peoples enterprise in Russia, it is impossible not to pay attention to something similar in Ukraine, immediately taking the form of the Makhnovshchina. Kalyuzhny economists who call themselves representatives of the National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine, see people's enterprises "as a tool to stimulate the growth of the national economy." However, they are based on the experience of the US mid-twentieth century, when American banks reformed farming by bridging the gap between productive force of the "employees of capital" and the productive force of "workers of labor." In this motivation, the concepts of "labor workers" and "workers' of capital" Ukrainian economists in third place place the concept of "the presence of a certain economic base." As a result, in place to administer the affairs of the large financial capital, by Kiev measures, there blooms a small anarcho-syndicalism, which "labour", "capital" and "the existence of a certain economic base," as three thimbles, are trying to circumvent the actual financial oligarchs’ established norms of behavior. In their reasoning, in place of the dictate of big capital, romantic funds start to bring order. Their analysis is as simple as the economic foundations of the initial period of Yeltsin in Russia, so the system of payment and incentives swims in a statement: "Instead of having to turn on the self-interest of social groups of state enterprises through improved systems of motivation, the problem is solved by their privatization, i.e. by connecting the private-economic motivation. " Here is why the state as a bulwark of private property should be abolished ...
On the economic field of economic theorists of Ukraine lacks understanding of the leading role of financial monopoly, and in their place there are only "certain difficulties" associated with "the transformation of the employee into the owner", which is brought about by "fundraising". As a lifeline they throw in concepts of the various funds, from self-insurance funds of business risks in the company, to soft loans. In their imagination in Ukraine, the same order of magnitude as in the United States half a century ago. Therefore, the "interest on loans and credits themselves would be returned to the shareholders at the expense of profits, which in part would be used along with the development of production and for this purpose." As a result, Ukrainian economists’ imagination takes their motivation to work on the base of various funds, which, in their opinion, are true people's enterprises. And they wonder and then ask why they need to search for something, if they already have ready funds ...
Here is the most striking in their naivete purpose of work motivation, which could take place somewhere in the XIX century, but certainly not in the XXI century. If pub visitors reasoned this way then one would be interested. But when economists talk about it at leading public research institutions, the question arises about their understanding of at least some minimum state interest in the economy. All arguments are based on three thimbles of Makhno, two of which are work motivation of the owner and hired labor, and in the latter - the sources of funding. At first glance, these men from the economy of Ukraine remind us of Americans of the 1950-s, concerned with problems regarding the expansion of agriculture in the United States based on allocation of funds. But in real life, such arguments Ukraine unwittingly promote anarchy arising on the policy of modern US share capital, supported by votes from Kiev on the "right" motivation to work and the infallibility of US funds.
So when we talk about a people’s enterprise, it is necessary to take into account the state interest in their survival. Moreover, state interest does not arise by itself, but should be based on the solution of a time-consuming process, where it is necessary to involve at least some interested workers. And when we see in Ukraine the dictates of American capital, supported by arguments about work motivation, then somewhere state interest disappears and in its place grows the arguments of fascist Bandera. At the same time in Ukraine, a critical look at the problem was itself lost, while at the side of the eye, country collapses into small fiefdoms. There is no doubt that the bacilli of economic disease of anarcho-syndicalism will eventually penetrate to the Russian peoples enterprise. Ukrainians themselves are not interested in this export of Makhnovism from Ukraine, but are interested in US funds financing fascist Bandera. And you have to be prepared for this.
The problems of transforming in Russia a people’s capitalist enterprise into non-capitalist peoples enterprise
The main problem of the crisis of Russian capitalism consists in the fact that its leading equity serves not so much the interests of the state, but the interests of foreign monopolies. The exception is perhaps that the military-industrial complex, is becoming isolated in the state interests.
Speaking of equity, reference should be made to the work of Lenin's "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism," in which the leader gives a description of the newly formed association of capitalists, due to which these organizations were monopolistic in nature and began to fight among themselves for the global redistribution of spheres of influence. Such a structure of monopoly capitalism, Lenin pointed to in the example of the energy syndicate "AEG" in Germany, and the subjugation of leading coal and iron companies. In turn, the daughter joint stock companies of monopolist "AEG” relied on grandchild companies and further on, the pyramid grew along the same lines, merging under itself nearly two hundred companies of great-great-great grand-daughter type. The significance of such joint-stock companies was established by charter capital, the financial value corrected by banking structures. And leading Deutsche Bank controlled the equity of "A E G", setting the size of lending in all its activities.
The main impetus for the development of such an imperialist structure was the ownership of energy resources and metals, which allowed for the planning of mass commodity production, and, depending on this, formed the world market price of shares established in the whole chain of share capital. With this, the value of the share capital may lag significantly behind its shareholding amounts in the stock market, which increased the chances of the company taking to a higher level in the pyramid of monopoly power. The purpose of this struggle was due to an internal rivalry for resources, spilling over into outward expansion, which passes over into armed seizure of foreign resources. All of this scramble for resources expressed a desire to take the place of the parent company that, at the height of the financial power to then decide who is to live in this structure of monopoly, and who no longer needs to live.
A similar situation developed after the Second World War in Europe. France, in collaboration with Germany began the creation of the European Union, having hooked interests of the parties towards the concentration of share capital, and having a controlling stake in the metals and energy. This allows one to plan the organization of commodity production output and perform research and development in a wide range. In addition, European capital sought to create a monopoly that could resist the expansion of the United States to the European continent. This made it possible to create the imperialist European Union, able to withstand leading US conglomerates in the global arena. Then, a leading American economist John Galbraith said: "The US economy is 60% planned and 40% market. Japan's economy is even more planned. " And here we should elaborate on the concept of the planned economy, as the emasculation of the concept, as it was in the Soviet Union, is the surrender of national wealth without a fight.
The planned economy is not only the allocation of resources between industrial structures, product accounting, its transportation to the consumer with its subsequent realization, but it is also a constant increase in labor productivity. Moreover, without the continuous improvement of productivity, resources are meaningless in their destination. In the language of "Capital" of Marx, without an increase in productivity that same self-expansion is lost, which the reproduction process must endeavor towards. Therefore, imperialism seeks through the export of capital to boost productivity in the underdeveloped world, from where like a scoop it takes the profit and sells it at home. But socialism is forced to find economic incentives to increase productivity in the midst of its own productive forces that for the bureaucracy becomes unbearable work. And on this topic of productivity already in 1920 Lenin met with strong resistance from the bureaucracy itself.
Lenin called this whole process of expanded reproduction in Soviet Russia "electrification of the whole country." Lenin's electrification was aimed at a single national economic plan based on the electrification plan. This Plan concentrated all available resources and distributed them according to the planned targets. But the main requirement of the planned work was to increase productivity at every workplace, "in every workshop, in every parish." It was not enough just to get the planned production, it was necessary to get it at the lowest energy consumption. Leading economist of Bolshevism (he is a translator of "Capital" Marx into Russian) I.I.Skvortsov-Stepanov in his book "The electrification of the RSFSR in connection with the transition phase of the world economy", received in March 1922, the highest estimate of Lenin, brings "electrification of the whole country" to the concept of "fuel"(p.108), i.e., energy consumption. And this is the whole point of Lenin's electrification because through the continuous improvement of the production process, the socialist enterprise turned into a peoples’ enterprise, which went from cost accounting in monetary terms over to the cost of energy, ie, the very fuel that Skvortsov-Stepanov placed at the heart of everything.
The criteria of productivity in the Soviet Union were defined during Stalin and, oddly enough, remained there. The essence of high productivity was expressed by miner Alexei Stakhanov, increasing the production of coal in a shift from 7 tons to 102 tonn. Production rate was increased 14-fold and 14-fold by Stakhanov, as the founder of the method of side walling of coal, which in turn increased wages. Other miners also began to adopt the Stakhanov method, but their wages did not increase as rapidly. Why did other miners adopt the methods of Stakhanov, which was heavier? The thing is, that they began to receive compensation in the form of lower prices for consumer goods. Commodity prices, due to energy savings, went to the bottom, resulting in increased productivity and the transfer of some of the profit into lowering prices in the shops. And in this action of the socialist state, workers had personally seen how the profits begin to be redistributed in their favor, thereby increasing their purchasing power, thus increasing their standard of living.
Therefore, speaking of the peoples enterprise, the modern-day communist offer for communication with the staff of such an enterprise only the language of energy consumption. Without entering into the life of the enterprise the negotiation language of energy consumption, all hopes of the “peopleness” of the enterprise are meaningless, because a fiction “peopleness” will be offset by private interests through the monetary system. And the people can only keep a record of the workplace according to consumption of resources and the amount of their reduction to count savings. By saving resources in tons, the worker is able to calculate their value in rubles and then equalise the received compensation in the form of lower prices in the shops.
In the current context, the fiction of the peoples enterprise appears on the world market with all prices tied to the price of oil. And it may give the impression that the imperialist conglomerates communicate with the masses through the language of energy consumption. The focus of the market is that imperialism through the mediation of the dollar, i.e. tying the price of each barrel of oil to the US dollar equivalent, trades in dollars. This is a comfortable position of leading monopolists to balance oil prices and thereby swinging the world market to absorb weaker rivals and take possession of the released spheres of influence. The more oil is under the supervision of the leading conglomerates of the West, the more financial control they have over the world. And the sale of oil for dollars allows the US to print dollars on such a scale, as if all the "black gold" is controlled by the Fed.
Russian oligarchs are not trying to violate, these rules of conduct on the world market, and are in obedience to the dictates of the dollar. Although the authorities are able to somehow protect the sovereignty of Russia, even creating a customs union or BRICS community, Russian politicians are not capable of oppossing the policies of the dollar. They just say, "restrain the blow" to their partners. However, this one blow hits the living standards of Russians the hardest, whose national wealth the oligarchs so shamelessly ship to the West, there creaming off much of the petrodollars. The result is that the model of Russian Capital is entirely subordinated to Western banks, allowing only taxes on exported capital to cover social needs, so that mass protest by the “lowers” did not go beyond the permissible dissent.
Nevertheless, Russian productive forces have not lost the ability to pass through the economic crisis and placing the people's enterprise onto the economic base of Lenin's electrification. In fact, there is no other way to save Russia. Either drown in the stormy waters of a systemic crisis of capitalism and be absorbed by the expansion of the Western financial system, or transfer the productive potential of the country meanwhile onto the bourgeois rails of people's enterprises and provide them with life-support system resources, and then go over to the priority of energy metering. The barometer of this movement will remain Russia's banking system, which should not lose control. The delay in the transition to the priority of energy metering, as well as financial loss of control, will force the country to fall into a tailspin of anarchy.

Towards a peoples enterprise on the economic basis of electrification
Under these conditions, the existence of Russian capitalism poses the problem of the translation of the peoples enterprise into the language of resource accounting is at least premature. In Russia, despite the saturation of the territory with resources, on the world market are established commitments that reduce availability of the resource base to nothing. And though this apparently sounds naive - as in how a country with all the resource bases of the periodic table there can be no resource base, nevertheless, the economic field is cleansed from widespread use of the resource itself in Russia. Simply put, in the country there is no parent of the share capital consisting of energy and metals, due to which it would be possible to start independent planning. In the interior of the country it's all there, but after extracting resources there, they are to live by the rules that force these resources to be sold for dollars. And to ensure that these resources could come into their own production and evaluated for rubles, such a Russian economy can not afford this under the current circumstances,.
Why can the Russian economy not to establish a centralized production at home and sell products to the masses for roubles? The problem is that the Central Committee CPSU was involved in collapse of the economic base of electrification in the Soviet Union and the transfer of the economy over to capitalism. Therefore everything was done to make a return to socialism as difficult as possible. Therefore the gentlemen partocrats placed the interests of the dollar onto the Russian economic field, just as their predecessors the White Guard troops invaders were introduced into the territory of Soviet Russia, to prevent the "peasant" getting his hands on property.
The partocrats prepared for themselves in the Gorbachev Komsomol a worthy replacement, who in the Gaidar and Chubais filters, and under the watchful eye of the CIA, passed the test of strength to get into the leading financial-industrial groups (FIGs). In these FIGs the peoples property was carved up according to branch of industry. Of course, all the guardians of ownership were provided with a voucher for possession, and here only the banking system strictly monitored to ensure that the basic carved up pieces of property from industrial production went into the right hands, for which were issued interest-free loans, which very soon devalued as a result of runaway inflation. As a result of such privatization, the national wealth remained in the hands of former Komsomol "leaders", and debts on loans dissolved as percentages of hyperinflation. And how deft these Komsomol "leaders" were, who were able to immediately turn the wealth that had fallen on their heads into the currency of the world market, causing the share capital to fix immediately in dollar terms. As a result, the share capital of the modern Russian oligarchs went to leading banks of imperialism, becoming their props in the struggle for world domination.
However, moving share capital of the leading manufactures of the Soviet industrialization period to Western banks, pro-Western leaders of the Russian market did not consider the foundations of the national question. Yes, they did not try to learn and understand, as the basis of the solution of the national question was developed and brought into life under Stalin. Therefore, the "big heart" privatizers of the national wealth expressed their love for the dollar, which led them to the centre of national contradictions. And Russian capital had to sacrifice the Gorbachev Komsomol leaders in order to preserve national identity, and with it the property that had fallen on their heads.
The resulting turbulence with share capital from Russia's "black gold" from the world market responded with a drop in oil prices, which sharply polarized the situation in Russia. The national bourgeoisie began rushing between "western partners" and deep feelings toward their own people that led to distrust towards "western partners" and their own citizens. The civil war in Ukraine, with claims of the transfer of its to the territory of Russia, exacerbated the situation of Russian business to the limit. Part of big business felt it best to unite near the military-industrial complex and expressed patriotism with the interests of Russia, the undecided part of business began to lose significant equity, and someone found it necessary to move to the west forks and steer production from there. Anyway the Russian government was in a difficult situation with the national question and the economic crisis circumstances would threaten the collapse of Russia itself. Moreover, the authorities do not have real economic program to get out of this difficult situation.
And this turn of events already allows us to pose the question of nationalization of the leading companies in energy and metals to create in Russia a leading motherboard monopoly with planning capabilities in the amount of not less than 60% of the total production. And such a turn of affairs would put the peoples enterprise at the forefront of domestic production. And this raises the question of the concentration of the share capital in the domestic leading domestic bank obligated to lend to the Russian monopoly. Moreover, financing should be made only in rubles. Therefore, the turnover of commodity production faces the need for a centralized planned monopoly. Accordingly, the structures within the national plan will have to take care of the rate of increase in labor productivity. So, on the agenda the question will be on accounting and distribution of profits in the State by those who increase productivity.
But the question arises. And who will carry out the nationalization of the domestic resource base? Of course, it would be better if it was carried out by the current government. However, to rely on the fact that they dare to take this step - the chances are small. They are too connected with the export of capital from Russia, so to believe in the possibility of cutting off this gold mine with their own hands is equal to - zero. Would the Western partners really contribute to this or rather than that, freeze bank accounts or to impose humiliating sanctions against their "Russian partners."
Of course, the nationalization of the resource base occurs in times of crisis, when normal development of the productive forces ceases. Here, as they say, it is necessary either to hand everything over at the mercy of a stronger monopoly, or concentrate production funds in the main develop direction and emerge from the crisis with productive forces that control energy consumption. Therefore, the concentration of fixed assets nationalized by the state, is a means of saving the national economy and can be implemented by the patriotic bourgeoisie as well as the power of the Soviets, if with the bourgeoisie it does not work. The main thing that is required by the process of nationalization is to start planning their production on the basis of the ruble and ensure uninterrupted financing of this production.
Here is the time to remember the experience of the development of production in Soviet Russia, when it really was possible to express only in terms of electrification and the ten-years following while the entire industry had been worn to the limit and would require complete replacement. Then they had to move to a policy of concessions to the West, and only by getting their taxes from concessionaires for the oil and timber exported from Russia, could funding derived from taxes begin on financing the purchased power equipment. Therefore, Lenin, after the approval of a plan of electrification and the beginning of its implementation, set the primary task "to establish turnover between town and country." This required a change in tax policy. First of all, it was necessary to abandon the introduced in wartime and the Provisional Government surplus food and transfer over to the normal tax. This step allowed the middle peasant farmer to receive part of the revenue, which he was able to realize in trade with the city. And while the main national economic plan only just making its way to the expanses of Russia, in the economy the New Economic Policy (NEP) was introduced, which allowed the urban bourgeoisie to accelerate the exchange of goods between town and country. At the same time we must not forget that the local departments acted to implement the Plan of electrification, which started under the turnover to fulfil its task. The first power plants were launched, although they had very low output, but in alliance with the first tractors that began to arrive, Soviet Russia began to solve the issue on raising productivity through energy savings. The golden ducat was introduced, and Soviet Russia launched an internal system of funding.
The question on the participation of the bourgeoisie in the present conditions of nationalization should depend on its patriotism and ability to participate in improving productivity in domestic industry. At this time, the key to success can only be a way of transferring the peoples enterprise established into the working conditions of production and operation of the monetary system. And the transfer of people's enterprises in Russia can be the start of construction on the model of the economy of the GDR on the basis of the collapsed system of Nazi Germany. It was then that the people of the GDR enterprises were able to take a leading position in the economy, and that this example should serve as a basis to start work on nationalized industry in Russia. When the bourgeoisie deviates from the transfer people's enterprises, this role must be performed by the Soviets, the importance of which in the transitional period will increase by an order of magnitude.
In these circumstances, the question of trade turnover between town and country will be a key. And in fact - it will be the need to provide urban residents with food. Obviously "western partners" will block immediately all food supplies to Russia under the pretext of saving "democracy." Therefore, in anticipation of the growth of these sanctions in the process of Russian nationalization, it is necessary to transfer the purchase of food to the BRICS countries and to sharply increase our own agriculture. Moreover, our agriculture will have to close in not ona number of farmers or restore collective farms, but by placing direct dependence on the creation of large complexes, uniting collective farms and farmers under them. The aim of such systems lies in the release of the final products to the consumer. And in this case it is important in the first place to put energy costs on agricultural products, to decide questions of return on assets of rural systems and predict ways of increasing productivity in the countryside. And the city will have to take care of both farmers and farms, and on the basis of agricultural production systems. Here the peoples enterprise in the image of the GDR should serve as an example. Of course, building of complexes must pursue the objective of minimizing transport costs and ensuring the safety of products.
In the initial period of nationalization, somewhere around 40% of the Russian economy will remain in the functioning of the global market. But what will this look like? It will be small and medium businesses that need to switch to work within the ruble area. The share of this business in the share capital is very low. In modern conditions, the medium and small businesses are already operating within the domestic financial system, so problems with them will not occur here. The main thing that is required by the state in its work with this business is the exclusion from using their accounts as sites for kickbacks for officials and avoidance on the part of small and medium-sized businesses of inflationary promotion. In working with this business we need strict fiscal policy and financial audit. For medium-sized companies of state interest, but parting with their obligations, then they need to apply for bankruptcy with the appointment of external control. That is, in this business, during the transition period of nationalization, the state has the right to offer the conditions of a peoples enterprise, ensuring reliable operation and protection from outside intrusion.
However, all of the conditions of nationalization and its associated complications are only a transitional period. As Lenin said, "productivity is the most important, the most important victory of the new social order." The success of the business should be underpinned by high rates of industrial activity, the essence of which can manifest itself only in the policy of reducing the price of consumer goods.
To talk about productivity - is to fully consider the "second program of the Party", known as "the electrification of the whole country." Here in Lenin's electrification we need see manufacturing weapon of the world revolution of the working class. For the second party program aims to expand socialist reproduction and aimed at its own pace of increasing productivity at the conquest of world power by the working class, which is comparable only with the attempts of imperialism to take over world power on the basis of increasing the surplus value and the resource base. Nationalization of resources in the crisis of capitalism definitely raises the question of the revival of the USSR and the transfer of people's enterprises in the framework of socialism, as a prerequisite for the preservation of the community of Soviet people. And then the recognised productivity at peoples enterprises will be able to come up with a demand for the replacement of surplus value under capitalism with the category of raising labour productivity under socialism. Because only by increasing the stages of productive labour, can the working class put into practice the mission of replacing cash equivalent of value with the equivalent in energy consumption. Of course, profit would have to work on a new hegemon.
Therefore, tuning in the transition period towards the nationalization of the resource base, communists will have to make their next step, which is to nominate the front economic line of the Stakhanov method that will need to be aligned with the conditions of modern production. Although in this case it is necessary to focus not so much on domestic experience but to take examples from the Western bourgeoisie. The Western bourgeoisie is using the innovation of the Stakhanov method in their production, knowing well how it can be transformed into surplus value.
In capitalist production, the Stakhanov method was developed in circles relating to quality, where the increase in labor productivity is achieved by energy savings, but the results of such savings translates to money, and some of it is paid directly to members of the quality circles. It's all built on simple learning from a book on electrification by Skvortsov-Stepanov, where to each student is clearly explained that if he or she switches off the light in their room, it immediately reduces power plant coal consumption by 300 grams, since that amount of "black gold" is needed to generate the power to light up one lightbulb. And students to continue to learn from this example, and nurture a careful attitude to national resources.
We should consider one of the examples of actions of quality circles on a western conveyor for the production of cars and compare it to a similar example on a domestic conveyor. Here, for example, TV shows a separate section of a conveyor in the West, where the worker lies back in a chair like device similar in shape to a cupped human palm on which he floats via robotic arm easily into the vehicle cab being assembled and, quickly swivelling on this device, with automatic screwdrivers secures the wiring in the upper corners of the cab. On a domestic Russian conveyor, we can also see this procedure for mounting the wiring on the top corners of the cab, the difference being in only the worker has to climb into the cab / front seat area and then has to twist and turn in there to get the same work done. What is the difference then in these approaches when working on two different conveyors? The difference is expressed outwardly in time. The worker in the West does his or her job on the line in a few seconds, but a worker on an assembly line in Russia may spend on this same operation up to several minutes. But if we look at the inner side of the economic affairs of these two workers, it can be stated that while the worker in the West fulfils the work, the energy consumption for the operation of the conveyor will be expressed at a power plant in hundreds of kilograms of energy resource used to generate the energy. If we calculate the energy consumption for the same procedure on the Russian conveyor, then a few minutes of the conveyor will pull behind itself a burning at the power plant of several tons of energy resources. And, I suppose, now the reader picks up the difference in the productivity of the two workers, expressed in energy consumption ...
Why is it that on a Western conveyor, the worker is allowed almost anything, as long as it uses less energy in the workplace, but on the Russian conveyor, this does not work? The fact is that at a Russian enterprise, only the owner has freehand, as he is the owner, and the owner will not tolerate his company having someone else with a freehand. This is the mentality. But in the company of the West, the banker is the owner, and this banker does not care what anyone out there is doing, whether or not someone is standing on his head at all, the main thing - is to grow profits.
Therefore, at the peoples enterprise in Russia during the nationalization period, its own bourgeoisie is a bad ally. The most reliable ally in the peoples enterprise can only be a Soviet government, through which it is possible to create an economic base of electrification and implementation of national control over the economic life of the country. The process of nationalization and the creation of a single monopoly require sharp centralization of power and strengthening the planning principle in the economy that the restoration of Soviet power drags along with it, as the legitimate representative of the interests of the enterprise, managed by the people. Only centralized Soviet power can unite banks and production on the unity of the set time-bound targets and integrate their work with high rates of labour.
One has to say that the criterion of productivity in the hands of a class manufacturers among other things, is also an indicator of supply and demand. This property of offering products in the hands of the worker will find an increase on the grounds that to boost productivity, it will be when on the outside of the workplace will be felt the need to increase the demand for what the worker produces. No one will that make that fuss in the workplace that simply. However, the worker keeping records on increased productivity may only be done on the basis of energy consumption. Since the financial costs for the worker are clear and tangible in terms of purchasing power.
The specifics of the transition period will express the great differences in the models of functioning global market of capitalism and newly formed socialist market model. These differences are expressed in multi-directional objectives, since the capitalist model seeks to expand the monetary system and the absorption of a weak competitor, but the socialist model is locked to consumer cooperation and striving for a narrowing of the monetary system, expressed in lowering prices and increasing purchasing power. And in this development, the socialist economy looks a tasty morsel for swallowing up by an imperialist predator. Therefore, contact with the outside world market, the socialist economic model must be securely protected from imperialist penetration and management.
The socialist economy during the transition period of nationalization of resources can quickly develop only after the passing the phase of the Great fracture, which occurred in 1930. This change in practice means the ability of the working class to declare itself as the hegemony that can keep records of all energy consumption in the country and to save resources. Conscious work occurs at the elementary human desire to transform their world for a better habitat, to leave on the world a progressive track from human life. And if by the results of their work there is more satisfaction from the increasing productivity of labor, which finds expression in the distribution of income in their favor, the worker is ready to participate in planning for further expanded reproduction and lower prices policy for consumer goods. Then he feels hegemony and will support the power of the Soviets. And the power of the Soviets is able to defend the interests of the working class until the prices on the price tags of shops will not fall to zero, by which then, society will be forced to accept the abolition of classes and class struggle.
Such a society should be called communism. But former partocrats perverted communism so much, that it has become almost a household name. Bourgeois sentiments in the partocratic environment did everything to ensure its power through the mediation of the monetary system, even if this monetary system is a foreign country. In this quest for domination of bourgeois power, the resource base reserves leaves behind a kind of lifeless desert, and nature threatens an environmental catastrophe and the general loss of population. And only the working class, led by its political vanguard able to manage the life processes on the basis of energy metering can stop all this orgy of rampant economic capitalism. Only such an accounting system allows humanity to actively search on their own Earth, spreading the energy potential search beyond Earth and on the basis of these already, newly discovered energy, build their own future. This opens up the prospect of saving mankind from self-destruction, and the planet Earth - from looting.
The designated path may not be easy. It will meet familiar characters in traditional dress, but shielding themselves under American helmets. Their task is to convince the staff of people's enterprises in the high revelations of anarcho-syndicalism, or to reinforce the reliability of bellicose words arguments of the seasoned leader Makhno. Along this path there will be huge difficulties with central planning and, as recently recalled the deceased Commissar and Minister Baybakov, even for a wedding and arranging one’s personal life one can give just two hours, because the rest of the time it is necessary to plan production. But learning the difficult economic knowledge base of electrification today provides a bridge to mastering it beyond Earth tomorrow. And this road can be handled by just going along it, because there is no other way of knowing.
=======================================
The Day of the Sun in London
By New Worker correspondent
Millions of Koreans recalled the life and times of great leader Kim Il Sung this week. Kim Il Sung was born on 15th April 1912 and his birthday has long been celebrated as the Day of the Sun in the DPR Korea and by everyone who stands by the DPRK .
The Day of the Sun is the biggest public holiday of the year in the DPRK, the culmination of a series of sporting events and arts festivals that are held annually to celebrate the outstanding achievements of the founder of the Korean communist movement. Democratic Korean leader Kim Jong Un headed the tributes at the great leader’s mausoleum in Pyongyang and across the country millions of workers took part in cultural and sports events held to mark the 103rd anniversary of the birth of Kim Il Sung.
Across the world communists and friends of the Korean revolution took part in similar events or held their own commemorations of the Day of the Sun and London was no exception.
The first was at the Democratic Korean embassy where comrades, including Daphne Liddle from the New Communist Party, brought floral tributes at the opening of a reception to honour the country’s eternal president and heard Hyon Hak Bong, the ambassador, made a brief but passionate speech about the life and achievements of Kim Il Sung.


Kim Il Sung was born when the Koreans were under the heel of the brutal Japanese colonialists. His father, a patriot, had already been arrested by the Japanese. When Kim Il Sung formed the Down with Imperialism Union at the age of 14 no one, least of all the Japanese imperialists, could have dreamt that within 20 years Korea would be free.
Kim Il Sung saw the hopelessness of the sectarians, flunkeyists, dogmatists and factionalists who called themselves communists in the 1920s. So he decided to form a communist movement from the youth and the grass-roots of the villages and factories, and surprised everyone with the emergence of the mighty Korean communist movement that led the people to victory in 1945.
When Kim Il Sung gathered a small band of heroes to form the first guerrilla units to take on the Japanese Army no one could have imagined that this would become the People’s Army that brought the American imperialists to their knees begging for an armistice in 1953.
Kim Il Sung developed and advanced Marxist-Leninist theory and led the struggle against Japanese colonialism and US aggression. He was a fighter, a thinker and a leader, Kim Il Sung was an outstanding communist of the 20th century whose name will forever be remembered as the founder of the modern Korean communist movement that began amongst the patriotic youth of Korea when he was a student in the 1920s.
Kim Il Sung founded the communist movement that liberated the country from Japanese colonialism, defeated the might of US-led imperialism in the Korean War and led the drive to build the modern, socialist republic that exists today in the north of the divided peninsula.
Kim Il Sung was a great commander in war and a great leader in peace. In the north of Korea, so brutally partitioned by imperialism, he built a modern communist movement dedicated to serving the working people of Korea and he led the people in the mass struggle to build a new life after they had won their freedom in 1945.
The Workers’ Party of Korea, with Kim Il Sung at the helm, led the battle for land reform, education and socialist construction in the 1950s and 60s and then pushed forward on the engineering, technical and scientific fronts to raise living standards and the quality of life for the millions of workers and peasants who had fought for a better tomorrow.
Over the weekend friends and comrades took part in a lively and upbeat meeting in central London called by Korean Friendship Association and the Juche Idea Study Group to hear openings by Dermot Hudson and Shaun Pickford on socialist construction in the DPRK and the essence of the Juché Idea that is the ultimate expression of Kim Il Sung’s thinking.

Daphne Liddle said that the NCP remembered and respected great leader Kim Il Sung and recalled the meetings between the great Korean leader and Andy Brooks and the late Eric Trevett while Yu Kwang Song from the DPRK embassy reported on the latest developments on the peninsula and thanked all the activists who had taken part in the recent picket of the south Korean puppet embassy in March.
In western Europe communists understood the economic case for scientific socialism but ignored the philosophical aspects of the teachings of Marx and Engels. Though the role of mass action was clearly understood, the role of the individual was often ignored. Though the achievements of the Soviet Union led by Lenin and Stalin were studied, they were often not properly understood.
Kim Il Sung not only grasped Marxism-Leninism but he applied it to the concrete conditions of the Korean people. He knew that once the masses realised their own strength they would become unstoppable. He knew that serving the people was the be-all and end-all for the Korean communists and for the Workers’ Party of Korea that he launched in 1945. He developed Korean style socialism and the Juché idea – which elevates the philosophical principles of Marxism-Leninism as well as its economic theories – and focuses on the development of each individual worker, who can only be truly free as part of the collective will of the masses.
In the western world Juché is simply described as “self-reliance” but it is much more than that. Kim Il Sung said that working people could only become genuinely emancipated if they stood on their own feet. But the Juché idea doesn’t negate proletarian internationalism. The Soviet Union, People’s China and the people’s democracies of eastern Europe all closed ranks behind Democratic Korea during the Korean war.
The Korean people responded with their trade and assistance whenever they could, while Korean experts and advisers helped the Vietnamese, the Arabs and the Africans struggling to break the chains of colonialism and they continue to do so today. And Kim Il Sung’s successors, dear leader Kim Jong Il and leader Kim Jong Un have followed his footsteps to build a modern socialist republic, where every individual worker is master of his or her own life.


Finally on Monday the leaders of all the major Korean solidarity movements in Britain met for a celebration called by the Friends of Korea committee at the John Buckle Centre in south London. NCP leader Andy Brooks opened the formal part of the meeting which heard brief tributes from Dermot Hudson and Michael Chant of the RCPB (ML) and guest of honour Ambassador. Hyon Hak Bong before adjourning for a film on the Spring Festival in Korea and refreshments to drink to the health of the DPRK’s leaders and the country’s heroic people.


Representatives of the DPRK Visit the North East of England

In April, the Northern Region Society for Friendship with Korea welcomed to north east England Thae Yongho, Minister at the DPRK Embassy, and Yu Kwang-Song, First Secretary, DPRK Embassy. The purpose of the visit was to strengthen the friendship between our two peoples and oppose the demonisation of the DPRK by the British government and media which is being done to try and isolate the country internationally and justify the hostile acts by the US and Britain that threaten the sovereignty of the north Korean people and their choice of social system.
The Society arranged a meeting in Newcastle at which members of the society and the Korean guests spoke. In particular the society wants to highlight the dangerous situation created on the Korean peninsula with the massive military presence of the US which includes nuclear weapons and the carrying out of aggressive military exercises on the border of the DPRK which also has British military involvement. The meeting also highlighted the 103rd anniversary of the birth of Kim Il Sung, legendary revolutionary leader of the Korean people which is being celebrated in the DPRK.
Meetings were arranged by the Society in the North East with trade union activists and representatives as well as visits to significant sites that show the history of the working class and people of the North East. The Society was extremely pleased to meet with Dave Hopper, General Secretary of the Durham Miners' Association (DMA), who gave the society’s guests an inspiring tour of the DMA headquarters, Redhills, and in relating the history of the miners of the Durham area. The international work of the DMA is renowned in the working class and trade union movement and the society is very pleased that this meeting will enable contact between the DMA and the miners' trade
Workers Weekly

Tuesday, 7 April 2015
Down with the puppet fascist regime!

by New Worker correspondent
KOREAN solidarity activists returned to the south Korean embassy in London last week to protest against the US military exercises in the occupied south and the current imperialist hate campaign that the Americans are focusing against Democratic Korea.
New Communist Party leader Andy Brooks joined comrades and friends protesting outside the puppet regime embassy in Westminster against the “Foal Eagle” and “Key Resolve” drills that have heightened tension on the divided Korean peninsula.
The second picket of the embassy this year was organised by the UK Korean Friendship Association and its numbers were boosted by members of the NCP and the Korean Friendship Association as well as some young Spanish KFA members living in London.
Taking the microphone, KFA chair Dermot Hudson denounced the latest imperialist provocations against the homeland of Juché pointing out that at the beginning of the year the DPRK had made sincere, patient and painstaking efforts to reduce tension with the US, even offering to suspend holding nuclear tests if the Americans and their lackeys called off their war-games. But these efforts were casually brushed aside by the US and the imperialists have steamed ahead with holding the exercises.
These imperialist war games will last for over six weeks and are massive in scale. Over 11,000 US troops and more that 200,000 south Korean puppet soldiers are taking part in annual drills that simulate the invasion and occupation of the socialist north.
Two comrades held up a DPRK flag, another two displayed the large KFA banner that always accompanies these demonstrations while others maintained a constant commentary on the microphone or gave out leaflets on the street. Over a 100 leaflets, specially produced for the picket, were handed out calling for the immediate cancellation of Foal Eagle and Key Resolve and the unconditional withdrawal of all US troops from Korea.
The UK Korean Friendship Association (KFA) organises solidarity meetings and protest pickets in London throughout the year. The KFA also works side by side with the Friends of Korea committee which also holds regular events in London.
--------------------------------------------------------------------