PLATON (POST-SOVIET LEFT MOVEMENT) TO ME THE FRIEND, BUT THE TRUE IS MORE EXPENSIVE
(POST-SOVIET LEFT MOVEMENT)
TO ME THE FRIEND, BUT THE TRUE IS MORE EXPENSIVE
«We aspire to discussion, to an exchange of opinions between Communist
Parties. We support joint working out of modern theoretical questions».
COMMUNISM - SYSTEM OF PHASES AND STAGES FROM CAPITALISM TO UNCONDITIONAL НАРОДОПРАВИЯ
Representative КПГ, member of the Central Committee and Managing the international department of Central Committee KPG Eliseos Vagenas (see here), acting at the international seminar organised by Communist party of the Russian Federation (Communist Party of the Russian Federation) on a theme: «the International communistic movement today and tomorrow», has noticed, that powerful approach of the capital was outlined in the world (I, the author of the given material, has told: violent revelry, extreme degree of a feast of the capital). «Its purpose - is even more to reduce the price of a labour, to increase profit of monopolies and charge with burdens of capitalist crisis the people … National requirements cannot to be satisfied because of capitalism!"." In any case the people pay for consequences, for: fall of salaries and pensions, for a high rate of unemployment, for liquidation of the labour, socially-insurance rights, for коммерциализацию formation and other social services, privatisation and rigid tax measures ». The fault lays on« a capitalist way of manufacture … the system which breathes is guilty and lives working class operation, surplus value extraction, a pursuit of profit and a competition for access to the new markets "." The Life shows, that carrying out of a policy for the blessing is impossible for workers while the power, economic tools and riches remain in capital hands "." … Only the worker, people's power expresses interests of the majority ». The economy will be организованна for satisfaction of national requirements … will develop according to plan and can guarantee the right to work and free social services for all» when «… means of production and riches become the property of those who makes them and creates». «Communistic movement meets the big difficulties … Working out of revolutionary strategy and tactics corresponding to it - … it is a unique way».
In many respects we, Initiative group «New Communists» on creation of Uniform political force of workers of Russia (YOKES НК), completely agree with opinion Элисеоса Вагенаса: communistic movement worries today deep ideological, political and organizational crisis. The epoch of building of socialism-communism as the USSR has ended. Practice of Soviet Union has not managed to bring down capitalist system. On the contrary, world capitalism has taken up mankind road to socialism confirming a life. Therefore the first problem of communists is the objective diagnosis of illness of growth in which result there has come crisis: the socialism-communism is between a life and death. New revolutionary strategy and corresponding tactics is necessary.
Without objective revealing of sources of rupture of the USSR (and it was negatively reflected in the relation of the majority of people to the most Marxist concept of socialism and has forced to doubt its utility for mankind in general) not to find an exit of socialism-communism from crisis and not to get rid of the capitalism conducting mankind to destruction. Capitalism can fail in itself, but by destruction of all mankind.
So, what original sources of rupture of Soviet Union - a leader of building of socialism on the earth?
The CPSU nomenclature has convinced all world, that it builds socialism. In it the advanced people doubted the countries which built socialism, and Communist Parties of the countries where capitalism dominated did not doubt.
Investigating «the reasons of a victory of counterrevolution in the USSR», КПГ correctly, in our opinion, are done by an emphasis on deviations «from principles of construction of socialism». We Agree and that «the socialism was will dethrone from above and from within, owing to gradual opportunistic decomposition of Communist Parties». But to be limited to that «reforms of 50 and 60th years have strengthened commodity relations and have gradually created the public forces interested in overthrow of socialism», and also «erroneous concepts: about« the national state », and in the international relations - about« peace competition »two political systems», - it it will be small.
The CPSU nomenclature has refused what principles of construction of socialism? In what sense of the opportunism which has captured Communist Party? What is the strengthening of commodity relations?
In due time F.Engels has written work «communism Principles». These principles have been specified and accurately formulated in teamwork of Engels-Marx «the communist party Manifesto». The beginning of practical realisation of these principles was necessary to V.I.Leninym in 1917 in Russia. Two phases of transition from capitalism to socialism have objectively been designated: 1) the property and the power of the state working under communistic slogans for the people; 2) the property and the power of the people working for.
The nomenclature of the CPSU has not translated a state ownership in the people property, proletariat dictatorship - in national self-management. It has translated proletariat dictatorship in dictatorship of the nomenclature of the CPSU. The nomenclature began to strengthen a state ownership and the political domination.
With occurrence and fastening of the Soviet state ownership there was a new form of operation of workers. Private-capitalist operation of the person by the person has turned to operation of the person by the state as it there was «the state-capitalist monopoly turned on advantage of all people … ceased (therefore) to be by capitalist monopoly» (Lenin, «Threatening accident and as with it to struggle»), that is «the State capitalism at communism» (Lenin).
The nomenclature of the CPSU did not search for a way of full clearing of proletariat from operation, because Stalin (the leader!) declared in the late thirties, that the socialism in the USSR basically is constructed. Stalin has waved away from the main opening of Marxism what exactly assignment, somebody (the private capitalist, the state), that, «that (surplus value) turns out in the enterprise over wages», and there is an operation being. It also is operation of manufacturers of a surplus value and profit. The owner of means of production does not cease to be the exploiter on the ground that it kind and humane (an example with Оуэном). Stalin hastened to construct socialism in summary the Soviet state capitalism which the CPSU nomenclature has pushed off in 90th years in a track of classical private capitalism was erected.
On Lenin: the first phase is a transition period from capitalism to socialism («the state capitalism at communism»). It is the proletarian state - the proprietor of means of production and all national riches; all are hired workers of the proletarian state; money, wages, forms of the bourgeois right remain; «All citizens turn here to employees on hiring at the state … one national, state« syndicate ». All business in that they worked fifty-fifty, correctly observing a work measure, and received fifty-fifty. The account of it, the control over it is simplified by capitalism to чрезвычайности, to unusually simple, to any competent person of accessible operations … All society will be one office and one factory with equality of work and equality of payment» (V.I.Lenin, «the State and revolution»).
Stalin and the CPSU have not wanted to understand, that "this" factory »discipline which won capitalists, свергнувший the proletariat will extend exploiters to all society, at all is not neither our ideal, nor our ultimate goal, but only a step necessary for radical cleaning of a society from foulness and nasty things of capitalist operation and for the further advance» (V.I.Lenin, the State and revolution »).
The second phase of communistic development follows a transition period. It is not reached yet. It is Socialism. It is manufacture public organisation, the general possession of means of production, absence of a private property on them, absence of a public inequality, class domination and operation. Differently: means of production is a property of all people, and, hence, its each representative. Each former hired worker of the state becomes the proprietor-co-owner of the general property. Everyone just because it the proprietor-co-owner, appropriates results of the work according to the made superfluous cost, with the account of the deductions defined legislatively. The maintenance and the form here vary.
The third phase - postsocialist public formation.
Said, that it is Communism. I quote Engels-Marx: «Communism for us not a condition which should be established, not an ideal with which should сообразовываться the validity. We name communism real movement, which destroys a present condition», (the citation end) («Marx's Archive and Engels, т. 1, p. 223). That is destroys capitalism.
The third phase is a statement and constant development of a new (noncapitalistic) society without classes and operation.
According to Soviet marksistov-lenintsev which could not be pulled out from a circle of Stalin definition of the "socialist" state, it turned out, that to "communism" (in their opinion of a-certain ideal society) a hand a tax. It is necessary to CPSU party in power to carry out and provide:
1) all-round development of productive forces, systematic manufacture and systematic distribution as much as possible to satisfy increasing requirements of a society and its each member;
2) transition from commodity manufacture to not commodity, it is direct to a social production
3) gradual overcoming of action of the law of a public division of labour;
4) wage labour abolition;
5) gradual dying off of attributes of the state and transition to the centralised self-management;
6) overcoming of a cost commodity-money exchange and an establishment of the direct impecunious assignment based on reasonable requirements of each member of a society.
It is necessary to carry out and provide all it, and here it - communism.
It is superficial and consequently false representation about "communism". To comprehend Марксово definition of the following phase of the real movement definitively destroying capitalism, it is necessary to use concepts on their essence in a context of all doctrine.
What is «disappearance of the enthralling person of submission to its division of labour»?
What is «submission enthralling the person to its division of labour»?
What is «disappearance together with it contrasts intellectual and physical work»?
What is «work will cease to be only means by a life, and becomes itself the first requirement of a life»?
What is «together with an all-around development of individuals productive forces» will grow also?
What is «all sources of public riches»?
Thanks to what they «will pour down a full stream»?
What is «to everyone on the abilities, everyone on requirements»?
It is impossible to cancel a natural division of labour on a floor: for example, the man - осеменяет, the woman - gives birth. It is possible to be and швецом, and the reaper, and on дуде игрецом, but it is impossible объять immense and never diverse kinds of industrial activity will disappear, on the contrary, the division of labour will proceed, as it is connected with labour productivity.
Abundantly clear, that at Marx is a question of a class division of labour, about work of the original proprietor (the private capitalist, the state-proprietor in the name of its power structures and околовластных officials), forcing to obey and, thus, enthralling hired worker. Thus it is clear, about what disappearance of a division of labour there is a speech. About disappearance of work of the capitalist and work of the hired worker, about labour and capital connection.
When the worker becomes the proprietor, will disappear and submission enthralling it to a division of labour.
Clear business: together with it will disappear both contrast between intellectual and physical work. If the hired worker, not thinking, to carry out installation of the capitalist (state-proprietor) and their managers the worker-proprietor, in whatever economic-legal form it worked, first of all, самореализуется, and should think not only of, that, for example, not запороть a detail. It should plan work, search and offer ways of increase of labour productivity, think of the manufacture organisation, say, about everything of what the proprietor thinks, that assumes personal benefit which in the conditions of directly public property is inconceivable without benefit of collective and a society as a whole.
The contrast between brainwork of the managing director, the engineer, the member of parliament, the scientist and physical work of the turner, пекаря, телятницы, дояра will disappear. They cannot simply manage the friend without the friend because everyone - the proprietor because work of each proprietor depends on work of other proprietor and consequently any brainwork (as it depends on results of physical work) and any physical work (as it depends on results of brainwork) is directed to one purpose - the productivity benefiting the author and the enterprise, and a society.
Only in this sense there can be a speech about contrast disappearance between intellectual and physical work, instead of in that sense as has written Majakovsky: «daddies, everyone - хитр sit: the earth попашут, попишут verses» though, of course, exceptions, in the most improbable combinations, always will be.
What is «work will cease to be only means by a life, and becomes itself the first requirement of a life»? It means, that work always will be means by a life: to make the life (to exist and produce similar), it is necessary to work.
But work will be not only means, and and desire to work because work of the worker-proprietor is самомотивированный the work allowing the person самореализоваться without fear to be robed, and, on the contrary, with consciousness of that to it will be rendered wholly according to result of its work. It is not possible in a society where the person is the hired worker of other person (or the states - of the proprietor).
What is «together with an all-around development of individuals productive forces» will grow also? For this purpose the individual, first of all, should wish to develop comprehensively and the nobility for what it is necessary to it. If it is necessary for growth of profits of the capitalist (state) alienating and redistributing profits on understanding of the imperious nomenclature the hired individual in overwhelming majority of cases to waste time and energy on an all-around development is simple to what.
When the person is the proprietor by definition and actually, he understands, that the all-around development is first of all growth of its personal productive labour directed first of all on its realisation personal, and through it of collective and public interests. Such person himself aspires to formation and self-education and children brings up and accustoms properly.
In the USSR ways for an all-around development of the person but as it was the hired worker dependent on the state by the person have been opened and internally as that itself felt, so far as, in the bulk, he studied on Pushkin: «… gradually to something and somehow».
Here when together with an all-around development of interested individuals productive forces then also all sources of public riches will pour down a full stream will grow.
What is «all sources of public riches»? It first of all comprehensively developed working (the interested persons, aspiring to work) the people co-operating with the nature and the means of production. They will pour down a full stream because these people will work, first of all, for itself and is inevitable (!!!) for collectives and a society as a whole.
So, only after the state capitalism at communism, the property and the "syndicate" power, i.e. the states, will turn to the property and the power of the people in the name of its each representative, only after that «the society can write on the banner:« Everyone on the abilities, everyone on requirements! ». And it any more will not be how understand Soviet marksisty-lenintsy: an establishment of the direct impecunious assignment based on reasonable requirements of each member of a society. It will be how the economy and as will understand the homing people will tell.
TRANSITIVE PHASE AND ITS DURATION
We divide this phase conditionally into some periods. The first period is, figuratively speaking, the period of preservation new лесопосадки («one office … one factory with equality of work and equality of payment»), the landed wood, the new state, its strengthening where did not reckon with separate trees, rooted out what mismatched a kind, to a grade, the size, were beaten out from the general file. The second period - the bogging period, захиревания new wood, growth delay, заплесневения. The third period - attempt of improvement which has turned back a tree felling.
We and a today's communistic eclipse (in literal sense of this word) consider as continuation of a transition period which should end (whether эволюционно, whether in a revolutionary way) with an exit on a socialist way of development, because other way at Russia, and at a planet are not present. About it does not speak, and cries out both Russia, and all world reality.
DISTRIBUTION RELATIONS IN THE USSR,
THE DEFEAT REASONS
Distribution connects manufacture and consumption. Character of distribution and its form, as is known, are defined by dominating way of manufacture. In the USSR the state-capitalist way of manufacture dominated at communistic ideology. Means of production belonged to the state. The national income was appropriated by the state. The cumulative public product was distributed by the state in the name of the nomenclature of the CPSU which distributed to all on reasonable, from its point of view, to requirements.
Yes, from a cumulative product the means of production spent in the previous cycle first of all were compensated.
Yes, approximately the fourth part of the national income formed fund of the accumulation used for nation-wide needs (manufacture expansion, capital construction of cultural and community appointment, public reserves and insurance).
Yes, about three quarters of the national income formed consumption fund of which were formed: payment fund on work of workers of sphere of production of goods; fund of a science, education, public health services, art; social security fund; government and defence fund.
But in distribution capitalist character of a way of manufacture existing in the USSR was accurately shown.
The state operated the nomenclature of the CPSU, concerned workers, including to rank-and-file members of party, as the capitalist: Work was in advance тарифицирован (tariffing of workers and works). At the heart of tariffing - a payment principle «on work» («on work» I take in inverted commas as on work the wages established already were distributed. «The wages should be earned» are words of one of our main "classics" from the Kremlin). In a word, the wages according to tariffing of workers, works and tariff rates were paid to each worker
As a matter of fact it differs nothing from the capitalist price of a labour which after the conclusion of the contract with the employer turns to the wages cut down or lengthened by the employer at own discretion (on circumstances and a sight of the employer at the worker).
The surplus value (and it was inevitably made in the USSR because without surplus of a product of work over costs of maintenance of work (the salary) it is impossible to count on progress) was completely appropriated by the state and was redistributed by it inattentively. People (each person) have been aloof from means of production, from results of the work, from the power.
Falling of the USSR is completely connected with social injustice in economy.
What is the alienation in economy? This steady isolation (isolation) from the person of conditions and results of its economic activities. The state was the proprietor of means of production. The power was in hands of the nomenclature of the CPSU, workers (workers, peasants, labour intelligency) were, on a way of a payment and surplus value alienation, hired workers of state machinery. The state, as a matter of fact, was the cumulative capitalist with communistic ideology.
Being aloof, the person loses interest in work, that conducts to low (in comparison with potentially possible) labour productivity, falling of efficiency of economy as a whole.
The person loses interest and to such state (which holds down путами the developed relations of production dictated by the nomenclature of the CPSU, its aspiration to self-motivation). It, proceeding from Marxist materialistic understanding of history, has led to destruction of the USSR.
Alienation of each person from means of production, from results of work, from the power demanded the permission. That is it was necessary to translate social injustice in economy in its contrast: to transfer means of production and results of work, and together with them and the power, - to people. Instead the CPSU nomenclature has disorganised the USSR.
WAY OF OVERCOMING OF ALIENATION OF THE WORKER
FROM MEANS OF PRODUCTION
The socialist way of manufacture arises from practice of the state capitalism at communism of the USSR and from Marxist exposure of secret of capitalist manufacture by means of a surplus value.
Thanks to the state capitalism at communism which was characterised by a state ownership, was uniform syndicate, in the USSR possibility of transformation of hired workers of this state-syndicate in its proprietors-co-owners was created.
The maintenance and the form here have changed (I quote Marx): «nobody can give something, except the work, and nothing can arrive in the property of separate persons except individual means of consumption. As to their distribution among separate manufacturers the same principle here dominates, as at an exchange of the goods. The known quantity of work in one form exchanges on equal quantity of work in another … Measurement here occurs to the help of an equal criterion … work … to serve as a criterion, work should be defined on duration or on intensity, differently it would cease to serve as a criterion» (the citation end) (К.М., criticism of the Gothic program)
Further Marx says, that this equal criterion for all is the equal right of everyone to have an identical share from public fund of consumption. I quote: «But one person surpasses another in the physical or intellectual relation and, hence, at a time makes more …» (the citation end). And this equal for all has measured and the equal right based on him silently recognises as the natural privilege I (quote) «an inequality of individual endowments, that is why also working capacity (therefore as) it is possible to measure unequal individuals only by an identical measure» (the citation end) (Criticism of the Gothic program).
That it has occurred, the equal criterion which is objectively formed in economic process is necessary, to find and meaningly to enter into an industrial turn, it should be both the right and concrete relations of production. It is size of socially necessary work necessary for an average labour for manufacture of average quantity of any goods in unit of time at an average in the given society level of skill and intensity of work.
Only such criterion we can estimate work of everyone, including necessary average costs of maintenance of work from public fund of consumption and superfluous work over costs of maintenance of the work, delivered «individual endowments and working capacity».
The given equal criterion is not malicious or good will of the private capitalist or the state-syndicate. It is the objective size developing in the course of manufacture and an exchange.
In the Constitution of the USSR of 1936 (article 12) it has been written down: «In the USSR the socialism principle is carried out:« From everyone - on its ability, everyone - on its work »».
Let's understand concepts.
What is in the modern world of ability of the person and what such work of the person? Work in Marxist understanding is a useful activity, the process, which result is the blessing (потребительная cost) for the consumer of this blessing and cost (an exchange value expressed in money) for the manufacturer of this blessing. That the result of work has turned for one to the blessing, and for another in money, this blessing should become the goods, i.e. should be realised in the market, обменено on money of the buyer.
When we speak: the grain market, the sugar market, the market of cars, we mean, first of all, the grain price, the sugar price, the price of cars. Thus, the market, inherently, is the developed price and a place of realisation for the manufacturer (intermediaries I lower) and the buyer. As a result one gets (does not get) the blessing (consumer goods), another gets (does not get) - money.
Ability to work, or labour, in the modern world is the definiteness certified by documents on a speciality and qualification. Therefore the sense of the first part of a principle is that: «from everyone - on its speciality and qualification». That is each worker at socialism gives to a society that and so many that and how many is capable to give according to the received knowledge and professionalism degree. But «is capable to give» means only one: the person can do that and that, and does not mean: "has given" to the full, that is capable to give actually. Therefore in the first part of a principle speech can go only about average skill of the person and in a definitive kind it should sound: «from everyone - on a speciality and qualification (average skill) …».
The Soviet scientific economists asserted, that work at socialism creates only потребительные costs (blessing). Work in such definition is an infinite variety. Its results in a material and spiritual kind are not comparable and are not comparable. Therefore the work maintenance was considered through variety of quantitative and qualitative characteristics. From here: «to everyone - according to quantity and quality of its activity in a social production». So the Soviet cathedral economy treated the second part of a principle «to everyone - on work». But it mismatches true.
To understand original sense of the second part of the formula and a principle as a whole, it is necessary clearly to itself to represent, that mankind, including the future socialist mankind, at the given stage of the development, makes (and will make) not the consumer goods distributed on a kind (malicious) will by one another, and the goods realised by manufacturers to consumers, - according to objective laws of the market.
In «the Critic of the Gothic program» K.Marks says, that at socialism I (quote) «the same principle which regulates an exchange of the goods as last is an exchange of equal costs» dominates.
«Everyone knows, - Marx in« the Capital »(с.54) writes, - if he even knows nothing, - that the goods possess the general to all of them the cost form … namely: possess the monetary form of cost» (the citation end).
Differently, not the bourgeois right fixing and protecting a capitalist order of a payment of hired workers, underlies a socialist principle of distribution of the blessings, and the learnt principle of an exchange of equal costs (I quote K.Marksa, Criticism of the Gothic program): «the same principle here dominates, as at an exchange of commodity equivalents: the known quantity of work in one form exchanges on equal quantity of work in another» (the citation end).
What does it amount to?
In the modern world «process of consumption of a labour» (work, activity) «is at the same time process of manufacture of the goods and a surplus value» (K.Marks, the Capital). If, for example, actions экскаваторщика, the miner - the visible party, the form of concrete activity, manufacture of the goods by them and a surplus value - its being.
Let's remind, that «surplus of a product of work over costs of maintenance of work (surplus value) and formation and accumulation from this surplus of public industrial and reserve fund - all it was and remains a basis of any public, political and intellectual progress» (F.Engels, Anti-Djuring), that the surplus value acts originally in a stage of two-unity "goods", lays in the general commodity weight.
Modern manufacture is commodity because makes subjects for an exchange: «to become the goods, the product should be transferred in hands of the one to whom it serves потребительной as cost, by means of an exchange» (K.Marks, the Capital). «The one who satisfies with a work product own requirement, creates only потребительную cost, but not the goods» (K.Marks, the Capital). «Each goods are represented from the double point of view: as потребительная cost and as an exchange value» (K.Marks, To political economy criticism). Hence, making the goods, everyone makes it the blessing for the consumer and cost (in the form of the price and the future money) for itself(himself) as the direct manufacturer. That is made, but mismatches consumer requirements (quality, for example) and the manufacturer (not обменено on money), - not the goods.
As the goods are of value for the manufacturer and exist only as cost so far as it is original result of each concrete activity. Work is manufacture of cost for the direct manufacturer. «Work creates cost» (V.I.Lenin, Three sources and three components of Marxism).
Let's substitute this definition of result of work in the formula of a fundamental principle of socialism. We will receive: from everyone - on its speciality and qualification (average skill), everyone - at the cost made by it. In it, and only in it, - essence of a socialist principle of distribution of the blessings: not on a work product, not on an end result as потребительной costs, not on set of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of activity and so on, and at the made cost and to tell more correctly, - on the made surplus value.
The cost made by everyone worker as the cost made by an industrial site, shop, the enterprise, branch, the state, consists of three parts. One part corresponds to cost of the consumed means of production, the second - costs of a labour in the form of salaries (guarantees), the third part makes a surplus value. First two parts in socialist system of manufacture - an indisputable accessory of all proprietors-co-owners (the general owner) accessible to each citizen of means of production and consumer goods.
Who posesses a surplus value (profit)? All doctrine of Engels-Marx, including a principle of socialist distribution (assignment), specify accurately: to its direct manufacturer who has voluntary spent over socially necessary measure the physical, nervous, brain energy, and - to the socialist society of the proprietors-co-owners which have expended rests that is necessary for the general manufacture and sale of goods, for its transformation, on the one hand, in property of the consumer, with another - in monetary result of the manufacturer. The general part of a surplus value (profit) is distributed according to public necessity and spent for development of productive forces and improvement of well-being of all members of a society. The part of a surplus value (profit) belonging to the direct manufacturer, serves it in quality «means of living and to pleasure» over the necessary (guaranteed) fund of vital means.
I underline: this part of a surplus value (profit) belongs to the worker owing to that it, first, the proprietor-co-owner of means of production, and secondly because the surplus value grows out of exclusively personal initiative, creativity, features of everyone, its supernecessary efforts.
In told - distinction of capitalist and socialist ways of distribution of the blessings: the capitalist system to the overwhelming majority establishes the price of a labour and renders within the limits of this price which have been put in pawn in the form of a wage fund, and имущему to minority - under the capital.
The original socialism renders to each worker, the working proprietor-co-owner, - on its work (on the made surplus value), that is at all how in the capital world where the surplus value is alienated at those who creates it, at whom in hands of means of production. In distribution (assignment) on the made surplus value - essence and socialism sources as way of the higher labour productivity: everyone is interested directly. Capitalism interests only units.
What occurred in the USSR in practice?
The surplus value (profit) did not belong to its direct manufacturer. It was alienated at workers in the same way what capitalists all over the world withdraw it from hired workers. The profit completely belonged to the state - to the new owner of means of production. The new owner preached socialism and communism, and owned, used and disposed of the property and behaved at distribution of the blessings, as the capitalist. The state in words recognised workers as equal organizers of a new socialist society, and in practice concerned them, as to hired workers.
So, the socialism fundamental principle «from everyone - on its abilities, everyone - on its work» means, in essence, «from everyone - on a speciality and qualification (average skill), everyone - on the made surplus value».
To understand a principle definitively, we will look attentively at «Criticism of the Gothic program» in a part, a concerning theme of distribution. On Лассалю: «in … a communistic society each worker should receive …« not cut down income »». Marx convincingly proves, that Лассаль is not right. Having listed a number of necessary deductions from the labour income in favour of a society, Marx speaks I (quote): « Only now we approach … to that part of consumer goods which shares between individual manufacturers of collective … Each separate manufacturer receives back from a society behind all deductions exactly so much, how many has given to it »(the citation end). And what (how many) gives to a society everyone? Certain quantity of the goods in cost«C+V+M». Hence, to receive back from a society should not only the salary«V»(on type: the wages should be earned), and from this full result, including«M». Hence, a part«M»- an accessory of the direct manufacturer of a surplus value. The absolute size of this part depends on size«M»: has made the greatest surplus value - receive from profit much; has a little given - a little and receive; has not made a surplus value at all - be content with a necessary guarantee.
At distribution «individual consumer goods between separate manufacturers … the same principle here dominates, as at an exchange of commodity equivalents: the known quantity of work in one form exchanges on equal quantity of work in another». That is the known quantity of money (the guaranteed salary plus a part have arrived to conformity with the made surplus value), received, for example, Sidorov within a year after production realisation, for example, mittens which it has made, exchanges it on quantity of the blessings equal at cost at own discretion.
The given way of distribution - in the nature of things (I quote K.Marksa): «One person physically and intellectually surpasses another and, so, delivers for same time большее quantity of work. The equal right is the unequal right for unequal work. It does not recognise any class distinctions because everyone is only the worker, as well as all others, but it silently recognises unequal individual endowments, and, hence, and unequal working capacity as natural privileges» (the citation end).
The formula «from everyone - on a speciality and qualification (average skill), everyone - on the made surplus value» - in the given perusal is is unique true from the point of view of Marxism, dialectics, logic and common sense a fundamental principle of original socialism.
At socialism «Distribution as it copes purely economic reasons, will be regulated by interests of manufacture, manufacture development is most of all stimulated in such a way distributions which allows all members of a society, as more as possible comprehensively to develop, support and show the abilities» (Engels, Marx, соч., т.20, p. 206).
The socialist way of manufacture is not economy of the USSR. It is other economy following economy of the USSR. It is economic персонализм in which basis lay:
- An equal criterion (size of socially necessary work) which is objectively formed in economic process and according to which wages, and a guarantee are paid to each worker not;
- Assignment by everyone have arrived according to a principle: «from everyone - on a speciality and qualification (average skill), everyone - at the made superfluous cost»;
- The Soviet experience of uniform indivisible managing.
Detailed workings out lay in articles and books: Magazine "Non-Black Earth Region" (June 1988 г, «to Pay for work»; January, 1989, «to Work on profit - new model of economic relations»), the Edition of Ministry of Agriculture and Food Production of RSFSR (1991 «the Package of the specifications and technical documentation for working off of new relations of the property in economy and at the processing enterprises of Ministry of Agriculture and Food Production of RSFSR»), the Tabloid «the Sickle and a hammer» (September 1993 г, «the Concept of an exit from crisis and construction of a civil society of social justice and steady dynamical development of Russia»), Moscow State University Publishing house (1995, the book «Thread Ариадны»), magazine «File of the bookkeeper» (1996 г, №23, «Where to conduct« the Russian Locomotive? » »), Publishing centre" Mirror "(1998 г, the book« Management of 21 centuries »), Publishing house« Moscow writer »(2009, the book« History and the economy future »). And also on the Internet on sites: the Tula regional branch of YOKES PRKR-NK http://www.tulaignk.ucoz.ru, Fund" Center of Marxist researches "http://www.centrmarxissled.ucoz.ru, Petruhina Victor Semenovicha's Personal site http://www.21-petrukhin.ucoz.ru.
The president Fund «Center of Marxist Researches» of A.V.Chizhikov The adviser-adviser Fund «Center of Marxist Researches» of V.S.Petruhin