2. Important lessons from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the state

As mentioned earlier, the most profound warning and lesson of the collapse of the Soviet Union’s party and state was the internal construction of the Communist Party, especially the problems within the party’s leading group.

(1) The self-construction of a party not only relates to the survival of the party; it relates to the future and destiny of the state, the people, and even mankind

The Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) once achieved unprecedented brilliance. It not only established the world’s first socialist state, but also vigorously developed the cause of socialism, profoundly changing the global order and the development direction of human society, such that Marxism-Leninism gained extensive global influence.

In the era of Lenin and Stalin, the construction of the CPSU, in terms of politics, ideology, organization, work style, discipline, and systems, allowed it to adapt to the needs of revolution and war, construction, and development and promoted great strides in the socialist construction of the Soviet Union and the cause of international communism. Under the strong leadership of the CPSU, the Soviet people paid a huge sacrifice and price to defeat the invasion of foreign enemies and build a powerful country. In  World War II, the invincible German fascist and Japanese fascist forces were defeated. After that, the socialist revolution developed from one country to many countries, and the socialist camp headed by the Soviet Union was formed.

The Soviet regime achieved people ruling their own country through the leadership of the CPSU. This means that the party’s self-construction task would be arduous, that it must always act as a public servant of the people, keeping in mind its purpose of serving the people. Toward what stage the cause of the party and the people develops determines to what stage the party’s construction will advance. However, from the time of Khrushchev’s tenure as supreme leader onward, serious problems arose in the construction of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in all aspects, especially in the construction of ideology, politics, and style of work. This was especially so in the later period of Brezhnev’s tenure as the supreme leader, during which the phenomenon of bureaucracy in the Soviet Union spread, and the problem of corruption became ever more serious, forming a privileged bureaucratic class that opposed the fundamental interests of the people. The image of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union among the people was seriously damaged, and the foundation for the legitimacy of its rule began to be shaken.

The privileged bureaucratic class was conservative and opposed to any changes involving their own interests. Of greater severity is that the privileged bureaucratic class was completely divorced from the masses, reducing the prestige of the party and the reputation of socialism while cultivating the soil for the growth of anti-communist and anti-socialist forces during the Gorbachev period. In order to legalize the illegally seized state resources, the privileged class tried their best to promote the evolution of the Soviet social system, and the anti-communist and anti-socialist forces led the Soviet Union to its disintegration.

Marxism is the theory of the people, and the standpoint of the people is the fundamental political standpoint of a Marxist party. The CPSU was tested by the revolution and war, led the people to carry out socialist modernization, and the Party and the people established a flesh-and-blood relationship. However, in the era of peaceful development, the CPSU gradually neglected party building. Party leaders were chasing fame and gain, were aloof and self-righteous, and forgot their original mission. It is no wonder that they were abandoned by history.

The history of the collapse of the CPSU shows that it is relatively easy to establish a political party and seize power, but it is extremely difficult to rise up after the collapse of a party and a state. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation participated in the state’s political life in a peaceful manner and strived for the restoration of socialism, which once played an important role. However, since entering the 21st century, the development of the Russian Communist Party has not been stable. In March 2018, Russia held its seventh presidential election. The leader of the Russian Communist Party Zyuganov, who had been defeated four times, did not run in the election. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation elected Grudinin (Павел Грудинин) as its candidate. In September 2021, Russia officially announced the results of the eighth Duma election. The “United Russia” party won 49.82% of the votes, and the Russian Communist Party got 18.93%. However, the actual vote rate of the Russian Communist Party was 30%, and that of the United Russia Party was 35%.¹ Putin talked to Zyuganov before and after the election to put pressure on the Russian Communist Party.

After the regime changed hands, the situation of ordinary people and Communists became very difficult. Ruslan Grinberg (Руслан Гринберг), a corresponding academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences and a well-known economist, once interpreted the development of the Russian economy 25 years after the disintegration of the Soviet Union: “If there are many poor people, the economy will not succeed.” He believes that contemporary Russia is experiencing unprecedented large-scale poverty after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, which is a symbol of the failure of Russia’s 25-year economic transformation; economic inequality is not only shameful, but also extremely detrimental to the country’s economic development.² Ruslan Grinberg pointed out again in 2019 that the 3% of the richest Russian citizens owned 89% of the country’s financial assets in 2018. This is the result of a reckless rejection of Soviet justice, clearly showing that Russia has chosen a wrong path.³

On December 8, 2021, Volodin (Вячеслав Володин), Chairman of the Russian State Duma, published an article recalling the disintegration of the Soviet Union, saying that the senior leaders of the CPSU chose to betray their ideals, the state, and the people during the country’s most difficult period. In turn, the political elites profited from the collapse of the state. The United States and Europe were thus able to eliminate a powerful ideological opponent, splitting the USSR into different countries. And yet, in the process, none of the 15 republics of the Soviet Union benefited from the collapse of the state. Volodin emphasized that the economic and industrial ties of these member countries were severed, and the industrial capacity was lost. All these factors combined led to a major crisis, and even today, they still suffer the consequences of this tragedy.⁴

On the contrary, the United States, which destroyed the Soviet Union and Eastern European socialist states by means of “unconventional warfare,” that is, ideological, economic, and financial warfare, harvested great wealth from the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the upheavals in Eastern Europe. High-tech industries such as those in computing and the internet that were originally used for military confrontation, were converted to civilian use, further forming financial capital and technical capital. Together, they have fueled the fast growth of the U.S. economy. As a result, economic globalization based on the hegemony of the U.S. dollar and led by the U.S. has reached a new peak. This is also equivalent to the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries handing over their wealth and supporting their competitors.

(2) The leader’s beliefs, theoretical accomplishments, outlook on life, and values are directly related to the success or failure of the great cause of socialism

Judging from the experience and lessons of the rise and fall of the CPSU, the leaders of Marxist political parties must be as Lenin said: “only the most authoritative, most influential, and most experienced people who have been elected to the most important positions can be called leaders.”⁵ It is necessary for them to have the political foresight to take the lead and steer the ship. With unwavering, extraordinary, and fearless revolutionary courage, pioneering spirit, and innovative and excellent leadership for managing complex situations, they must be capable of always standing on the right side of history and the development of the times to lead the party and the people to always move in the right direction.

After Lenin and Stalin, the ideological and political quality of the major leaders of the CPSU declined, their morale was low, and some even became stubborn defenders of the interests of the privileged class. “Meat eaters are contemptuous. They are not far-sighted.” They are more concerned about the interests of individuals, families, and small groups. During the Gorbachev period, the leadership of the CPSU could not stand the test of the complicated situation and the temptation of material interests. Fundamental changes took place in ideals, beliefs, will, character, outlook on life, and values, and the fate of the collapse of the socialist cause of the Soviet Union could not be changed.

History is the best teacher. During the leadership period of Lenin and Stalin, the reason why the CPSU was able to grow from weak to strong and lead the cause of socialism to flourish was because of the existence of strong leadership cores and leadership collectives in Lenin and Stalin. After the death of Stalin, the reason why the CPSU turned from prosperity to decline and the cause of socialism led by him was finally destroyed, was also because the CPSU lacked a strong leadership core and collective leadership. The Chinese Communist Party has grown from small to large, from weak to strong, and has made brilliant achievements after a century of ups and downs precisely because of the strong leadership core and collective leadership of Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, and Xi Jinping. The cause of Chinese revolution, construction and reform is therefore invincible.

(3) Ideologically, theoretically, and politically unclear, incorrect, and unstable leadership is bound to lead the party and the state astray or even to doom

If the party’s leaders and leading collectives lack the scientific armament of Marxist ideology and theory, they will easily lose their way and lose motivation in the face of complex and ever-changing domestic and foreign situations. The CPSU was ideologically, theoretically, and politically unclear, incorrect, and unstable, greatly jeopardizing the cause of the party and the people.

When Khrushchev and Brezhnev were the senior leaders, the CPSU failed to clearly see the nature of imperialism and downplayed class struggle on an international scale. With wishful thinking, they proposed “peaceful coexistence,” “peaceful competition,” and “peaceful transition” and even proposed the political need for “Soviet-U.S. cooperation to dominate the world,” leading to Party chauvinism and world power chauvinism in the socialist camp while promoting hegemony around the world. In order to strengthen the control over Eastern European countries, Brezhnev threw out the so-called “socialist family theory,” “limited sovereignty theory,” and “international dictatorship theory” to control other fraternal countries and even openly carried out an armed invasion of Czechoslovakia. He also carried out aggression and expansion against the third world under the banner of “supporting the national liberation movement.” These erroneous practices of the CPSU have tarnished the reputation of the Marxist party and led to serious consequences such as the split of the international communist movement.

Gorbachev promoted “new thinking” in diplomacy, advocating that “the interests of all mankind are above all else” and agreeing with Western values as the “values of all mankind,” abandoning the Marxist theory of class struggle and the method of class analysis. Guiding domestic reforms in accordance with Western values, completely relying on Western countries headed by the United States in terms of ideology and actions, he even sold the core interests of the Soviet Union in exchange for the trust of the West. What Russia got in return, however, was a tragedy for the party and the state and a celebration for the Western world. The lesson of the Soviet Union profoundly shows that if a socialist state takes the road of surrendering to Western countries by abandoning socialism, it will inevitably perish.

To avoid taking an erroneous path by abandoning socialism, we must adhere to Marxist standpoints, viewpoints, and methods. We must be fully aware that in the era when the socialist system and the capitalist system coexist and compete and the international monopolist bourgeoisie still dominates the world, we must not yield to the pressure of imperialism with compromise and concessions that are not based on principles and are given regardless of consequences. We should be soberly aware that since the emergence of socialist states, international reactionary forces have never given up their strategic plots of hostility and subversion of the socialist system. On the international stage, there is always a struggle between infiltration and reverse osmosis and subversion and anti-subversion, sometimes reaching a very acute level. Facing the complex and acute situation of international struggle, the ruling party of a socialist state must excel at grasping the opportunity. To adjust policies to guide international relations as far as possible in a direction that is conducive to peace, development, and the cause of human progress, we must also always maintain a clear and correct political mind, adhere to principles, and dare to fight to ensure domestic peace, stability, and development.

(4) The fundamental system that embodies the will of the people must be embodied in the text of the Constitution and in its implementation. These fundamental principles must not be shaken or even canceled in a disguised form.

The historical mission of the proletariat can only be gradually realized under the leadership of its vanguard organization. Therefore, once the proletariat seizes power, it must enact fundamental laws to reflect the will of the working class and working people. The socialist nature of the people’s democratic dictatorship and the core leadership of the Communist Party in socialist states must be clearly confirmed and safeguarded through the text of constitutions and laws. These fundamental systems must be resolutely implemented through various basic systems and important systems in all aspects of the people’s economy, politics, culture, and diplomacy. These fundamental systems must not be suspended in legal provisions through various basic and important systems. Furthermore, these unshakable principles must never be directly removed from the legal provisions. Only in this way can we ensure the socialist nature of the party and the state and safeguard the fundamental interests of the broad masses of the people. Otherwise, such a party and state will be abandoned by the people.

After 1989, under the banner of political “diversification” and social “democratization,” Gorbachev adopted so-called “free” and “fair” methods to directly elect people’s deputies and representatives of the Supreme Soviet (members). As a result, a large number of radicals, anti-Soviet and anti-Communist leaders, and dissidents were elected. The “cross-regional parliamentarian group” proposed that “all powers belong to the Soviets” and demanded the abolition of Article 6 of the Soviet Constitution on the leadership of the CPSU. In 1990, the February Plenary Session of the CPSU Central Committee decided to abandon the ruling status of the CPSU and implement a multi-party system in the Soviet Union. The Soviet People’s Congress held in March of the same year officially abolished Article 6 of the Soviet Constitution, stipulating that the Soviet Union should implement a multi-party system, a presidential system, and establish a national political system with separation of powers. This fundamentally destroyed the jurisprudence of the CPSU’s governance foundation and dealt a fatal blow to the Soviet regime and the Soviet socialist system.

In the Constitution, it is extremely important to establish and maintain the ruling status of the Communist Party and to establish and maintain the fundamental systems, basic systems, and important systems of socialism. The lessons of the Soviet Union sounded the alarm for us. For a period of time, there has been a trend of so-called “constitutional democracy” in our country. Under the banner of “democracy” and “rule of law,” they demanded an amendment to the expression of the leadership of the Communist Party in our country’s constitution, learning from the experience of the United States and other Western countries to implement “constitutional democracy.” The content included the so-called liberalization of a “party ban” and “media ban” as well as the implementation of a multi-party system, parliamentary democracy, and separation of powers. They also hoped to promote “judicial independence,” “political neutrality,” and “non-partyization” of the military and even to “establish the Federal Republic of China under the framework of democratic constitutionalism.” These propositions are exactly the same as Gorbachev’s speech of “transforming the CPSU,” the crux of which is to put party leadership in opposition to the constitution and laws, negating the leadership of the party and abolishing the people’s democratic dictatorship. The essence is to negate the Chinese constitution and its established systems and principles and ultimately abandon socialism, introducing the Western political system to China. The Chinese constitution has always clarified and safeguarded the leadership and ruling status of the Communist Party of China. The 2018 Constitutional Amendment added the content “The leadership of the Communist Party of China is the most essential feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics” to the first article of the text, which is absolutely correct. Facts have shown that it was not “constitutional democracy” that could save the Soviet Union, but it was precisely “constitutional democracy” that brought down the Soviet Union.

(5) Only by adhering to the lofty ideal of communism and a firm belief in the victory of socialism can the party have cohesion and fighting strength

The fundamental reason for the weakness and disintegration of the CPSU and its loss of fighting strength is that it abandoned the nature, purpose, and goal of a Marxist political party, as well as the lofty pursuit of seeking happiness for the people and liberation for mankind. In particular, the leaders of the CPSU played down, abandoned, and deviated from the ideals and beliefs of socialism and communism, which provided a bad example for all Party members, and the lessons were extremely painful.

In terms of ideology and politics, Khrushchev advocated the “Party of the Whole People” and “State of the Whole People” of class reconciliation, advocated an abstract, supra-class humanist view, and demanded that the so-called “great humanism” be “our ideology,” downplaying the guiding position of Marxism-Leninism. In the late period of Brezhnev’s tenure as the supreme leader, the CPSU generally had inconsistencies between words and deeds, characterized by formalism, rhetoric, and talking but not doing, which seriously weakened the Party’s influence and caused the CPSU’s prestige to continue to decline. During Gorbachev’s period, the CPSU completely abandoned the guiding position of Marxism-Leninism. The party was ideologically chaotic, there were many factions, chaos abounded, people’s hearts grew lax, and it was eventually disbanded.

The painful lessons of the Soviet Union show that firm ideals and beliefs are of great significance to a Marxist party and to a socialist state. In a certain sense, whether the ideals and beliefs are firm or not is directly related to the life and death of the party and the state, and we must consistently uphold and strengthen the party’s ideals and beliefs education. Ideals and beliefs are the political soul and spiritual pillar of Communists, and the ideological guarantee for overcoming all difficulties and securing all achievements. The Chinese Communist Party has persevered in strengthening the Party’s ideological and theoretical construction, insisting on building the Party ideologically, promoting the theoretical strengthening of the Party, attaching great importance to socialist ideology, strengthening the construction of ideological positions, and firmly grasping the leadership of ideology. This series of major moves is absolutely correct.

(6) Abandoning the guiding position of Marxism and violating the principles of scientific socialism will inevitably lead to the fateful consequences of abandoning socialism and a destruction of the party and the state

There have always been two different views on the issue of reform: One is to regard reform as the self-improvement and development of the socialist system, organically unifying the adherence to the fundamental and basic systems of socialism, and the improvement of specific systems that do not meet the requirements of the development of productive forces. This not only regards reform as a revolutionary change to eradicate the shortcomings of systems and mechanisms, breaks through the barriers of thinking, and solidifies interests. Furthermore, it also adheres to the basic principles of scientific socialism to ensure that reforms always advance along the direction and path of socialism. This is a Marxist view of reform that has been proven correct in practice. Another view advocates reforms that are not socialist in nature. It uses the name of reform and the banner of “reform” to fundamentally deny the fundamental and basic systems of socialism and transplant the capitalist social system. This ultimately realizes the capitalization of the country, and Gorbachev’s reforms can be categorized as such.

Throughout the history of the Soviet Union, if it is said that reforms began with Khrushchev, then from Khrushchev to before Gorbachev came to power, on the one hand, the leading group of the CPSU began to deviate ideologically and politically from the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism and the fundamental and basic systems of socialism. On the other hand, only some repair measures had been taken under the original institutional mechanisms. However, from Gorbachev’s tenure as the supreme leader to the disintegration of the Soviet Union, so-called “reforms” that completely negated the socialist system and deviated from the principles of scientific socialism were implemented, pointing the finger at the socialist system itself and fundamentally denying the fundamental and basic systems of socialism.

Judging from the lessons of the CPSU, on the issue of reform, we must neither follow the old path of a rigid closed-door policy, nor an erroneous path by abandoning socialism. Specifically, it is particularly crucial not to take an erroneous path of abandoning socialism and avoid making subversive mistakes. Since the 18th Party Congress, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping as the core has emphasized that our country’s reform has a firm and correct political direction, stance and principles. The core is to uphold and improve the party’s leadership, and uphold and improve the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, emphasizing that we must strengthen political determination, stick to political principles and bottom lines, and must not turn reform into a “reversal” or a change of the socialist system. These important conclusions are completely correct.

(7) Attaching great importance to ideological work, counteracting various non-Marxist and anti-Marxist thought trends in a timely manner, and always maintaining the revolutionary, advanced and pure nature of the party in terms of ideological and political theory

Throughout the over 70 years of history of Soviet Russia and the Soviet Union, the ideological work of the CPSU underwent a process of evolution and transformation. During Lenin’s period, he insisted on taking Marxism as the guide, established the principles, guidelines, and theoretical guidance of ideological work for the Bolshevik Party in the long-term revolutionary practice, and created a precedent for Marxist ideological work. The ideological work during the Stalin period had both major achievements and deviations, but the direction generally was correct, and Marxism-Leninism was upheld and developed. During the period of Lenin and Stalin, the CPSU’s criticism and political reckoning of various anti-Marxist ideological trends were resolute and thorough, enabling the Party to consciously resist the erosion of various bourgeois ideological trends for a long historical period. In particular, its understanding of the nature of democratic socialism and its predecessor, social democracy, was profound and sober. This is obviously directly related to Lenin and Stalin’s long-term insistence on resolute struggle with the right wing of the Second International.

Starting from Khrushchev, the ideological work of the CPSU had strayed farther and farther away from Marxism, and various non-Marxist and anti-Marxist ideological trends in the Soviet Union had begun to revive. In addition, we must also see that after World War II, the confrontation and struggle between the two fundamentally different social systems of capitalism and socialism and the two major classes of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat have eased worldwide. At that time, the popular democratic socialism and Western bourgeois thought took advantage of Khrushchev’s revolt against Stalin and the anti-communist wave caused by the Hungarian and Poznan incidents to expand their influence.

During the Khrushchev period, “humanism” appeared in CPSU, and the Marxist beliefs of Party members were greatly impacted. At that time, some Eastern European countries such as Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and other “new Marxist” factions emerged. These factions denied Leninism and the principles of scientific socialism in the name of getting rid of the shackles of “traditional Marxism.” Socialists in Western European countries held high the banner of democratic socialism to serve the needs of imperialism in promoting the strategy of peaceful evolution to socialist states. It was in this international environment that Khrushchev’s ideas of “humanism” and “three harmonies” and “two completeness” were formed. This erroneous thought trend had not been corrected in the CPSU for a long time, so that it evolved into the so-called “humane and democratic socialist” reform. After Brezhnev’s formalist governance, various erroneous thought trends continued unabatedly, greatly affecting the ideological purity of the CPSU and forming a hotbed for breeding anti-Marxist thoughts within the Party. During the Gorbachev period, the leading group of the CPSU embarked on the erroneous path of completely and utterly negating Marxism-Leninism, and various erroneous thought trends permeated far and wide.

Gorbachev abandoned the law of human social development revealed by historical materialism, copied the bourgeois abstract theory of human nature to analyze the problems existing in Soviet society, believed that Soviet socialism did not conform to so-called humanity, and even destroyed the so-called humanity, “castrating the humanity of the socialist structure.” He also misinterpreted the assertion in the Communist Manifesto that “the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all,” believing that it is a “humanist program” that embodies “great humanist principles.” He also regarded humanism as the essential requirement of a socialist society, as the goal and task of socialist reform, and as the goal of the Communists, completely falling into the historical quagmire of idealism.

“Humanism,” as a banner of the bourgeoisie against feudal autocracy and theological rule, has progressive significance in history, but what the bourgeoisie calls humans and humanity are abstract humans and abstract humanity. They are so-called “natural and eternal” things without class attributes and are so-called “standards and measures for measuring everything including human history.” Attributing the driving force of historical development and social progress to human kindness or human rationality is a typical manifestation of the idealist view of history. The abstract theory of human nature could neither clearly see the essence of Soviet social problems nor the law of human social development, which made the CPSU lose its way and also caused the disappearance of the revolutionary, advanced, and pure nature of the Marxist party.

History has proved that the Chinese Communists, mainly represented by Comrade Deng Xiaoping, launched a clear-cut struggle to eliminate spiritual pollution in the early 1980s, and it was completely correct to criticize the abstract theory of human nature and abstract humanism This has played a huge role in getting China out of the negative impact of the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in Eastern Europe, promoting China’s reforms in the right direction.

The lessons of the collapse of the Soviet Union’s Party and state show that the most important thing in ideological work is to prevent erroneous things from happening and prevent problems before they can happen. If Marxism does not occupy the ideological position, non-Marxist and anti-Marxist trends of thought will inevitably occupy it. Socialist states must attach great importance to ideological work and firmly grasp the leadership of ideological work. We must unswervingly adhere to the guiding position of Marxism, strengthen the ideological and theoretical construction of the party, and persevere in tempering the cultivation of party spirit. We must fight resolutely against all anti-Marxist trends of thought so that ideological and public opinion positions are firmly in the hands of Marxists.

Social existence determines social consciousness. As long as capitalist private ownership still exists, the social foundations of various non-Marxist and anti-Marxist ideological trends based on private ownership will always exist. History shows that the struggle between Marxism and non-Marxism and anti-Marxism is long-term, and communists must remain vigilant.

The Chinese Communist Party has always attached great importance to and worked hard to carry out ideological construction, especially since the 18th Party Congress. The Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core emphasizes the extreme importance of ideological work and calls on the entire Party to fully understand the long-term nature, arduousness, and complexity of ideological work, firmly grasp the leadership of ideological work, carry forward the spirit of struggle, and improve the ability to fight. The Party must build a socialist ideology with strong cohesion and leadership in order to constantly win new victories in the great struggle of the new era. These major judgments and decisions are wise and correct.

(8) Unswervingly adhering to the Party’s absolute leadership over the military and never breaking our resolve so as to not become fish under the knife of reactionary forces

Since its inception, the Soviet Red Army followed Lenin’s principles of army building, established the absolute leadership of the CPSU over the Red Army, and firmly held the proletarian army in the hands of the proletarian Party. The experience and lessons of the history of the international communist movement have repeatedly proved that it is extremely important to uphold the fundamental principles and systems of the party’s absolute leadership over the military and to put ideological and political construction at the top of all military constructions. During the Soviet Union’s “August 19” incident in 1991, the airborne troops and the KGB Alpha action group ordered to enter Moscow refused to implement the orders of their superiors, turned their guns, and supported the “pro-democracy” Yeltsin. At the critical moment of the country’s life and death, the army created by the CPSU not only failed to fulfill its mission and responsibility but turned on the Party, accelerating the collapse of the CPSU and the state. In the name of the so-called “nationalization of the military” and “non-partyization of the military,” the CPSU completely gave up its leadership over the military.

Ideologically, Gorbachev tried his best to promote the “depoliticization,” “non-partyization,” and “nationalization” of the military. In essence, he transferred the supreme command of the army from the Central Committee of the CPSU to the President of the Soviet Union. Politically, the General Political Department of the army was abolished, political organs at all levels of the army were cut down, tens of thousands of officers were removed, and the political review system for officer promotion was abolished, so that the loyalty and reliability of the army to the Party and the state rapidly declined. In addition, the Supplementary Law on the Establishment of the President of the Soviet Union and the Amendment to the Constitution of the Soviet Union (Fundamental Law) enacted in March 1990 legally deprived the CPSU of its supreme power to lead and command the Soviet army.

In order to wrest the power to lead the army from the hands of the CPSU, the trend of historical nihilism in the Soviet Union became more widespread and began to foment public opinion aimed at subverting the state, pointing the finger of negation at the Soviet army and Soviet heroes. Anti-Soviet and anti-communist newspapers and extremist forces exclusively exposed and criticized the so-called problems of the Soviet army and blamed the consequences of Gorbachev’s wrong reforms on the army. It was the result of the “monster” of the Soviet army sucking up the blood and sweat of the country. It became fashionable to slander Soviet soldiers and deny the history of the Soviet army. Zoya (Зоя Космодемьянская), Matrosov (Александр Матросов), Klochkov (Федор Крючков), the Young Guards, and other Soviet national heroes and hero groups were slandered. The Soviet army became an accomplice of the “fascist regime,” and the victory in the Great Patriotic War was nothing more than the defeat of the “little fascist” in Germany by the “big fascist” of the Soviet Union. On November 14, 1990, Marshal Akhromeyev (Сергей Ахромеев) of the Soviet Union published an article in Soviet Russia, pointing out that since the middle of that year, all anti-military activities ceased to be local issues. Separatist and anti-socialist forces combined a policy of discrediting the military with crowding out the Communist Party and sparked mass unrest calling for the resignation of the government.

It was not just Zoya, a hero, who was tainted by lies at that time. Hostile forces at home and abroad in the Soviet Union slandered and insulted almost all heroes the Soviet people were proud of, such as Private Alexander Matveyevich Matrosov (Александр Матвеевич Матросов) of the Soviet Guards. On February 23, 1943, during the battle for the village of Chernushki, near Velikiye Luki, in the Pskov Oblast, he used his unyielding chest to block the machine gun slot of a German pillbox. Matrosov dedicated his precious life at the age of 19 to the victory. On June 19, 1943, he was posthumously recognized as a “Hero of the Soviet Union.” Nine years later, a Matrosov-style hero also appeared on the Korean battlefield—Huang Jiguang, a special hero of the Chinese People’s Volunteers. However, this “Huang Jiguang of the Soviet Union” was vilified during the Gorbachev period as a “juvenile delinquent” and a “prisoner soldier” who went to the front line from exile in a gulag. The rumormongers also slanderously claimed that Matrosov was short and thin. As the German machine gun has a caliber of 40mm and as multiple machine guns were likely used in a pillbox slot that was one and a half meters wide, it would have been impossible for him to block the slot. Even the testimony of Tajirov (Хамза Тагиров), a comrade-in-arms who witnessed Matrosov’s death, was questioned, claiming his memory was unreliable. How similar are these statements to the rumors around slandered Huang Jiguang that once appeared in our country! It is simply that since the 18th Party Congress, these historical nihilist heresies have been all but run out of town. At the same time, China has also made legislation to safeguard the reputation of heroes, severely punishing any tarnishing of the people’s heroes and models.

A society that denies heroes is destined to have no future. Such a torrent of lies not only disturbed public opinion and confused the masses, but it deprived the 5 million Soviet troops of all former glory and deprived the Soviet people of their strong backing to defend their regime. Moreover, as a result, the CPSU, which had nearly 20 million Party members, and the Soviet Union, which had a history of more than 70 years, were pushed towards disintegration. The ultimate fate of the powerful Soviet army is embarrassing, and the historical mirror is worth remembering forever.

(9) We must be highly vigilant against the Western strategy of peaceful evolution, and we must not allow the fifth column to run amok in our country or even within the Party, especially within the Party’s leadership. Otherwise, an overthrow of the Party and the state will become inevitable.

“Peaceful evolution” is a strategic idea put forward by brothers John and Allen Dulles for the U.S. government to “contain” socialist states from 1953 to 1961. As World War II was drawing to a close in 1945, Allen Dulles, then a senior U.S. intelligence official, outlined in detail how the Soviet Union would evolve through peaceful means: “The war will be over. Everything will be settled down and put in order. We shall spend everything we have (all gold, all economic power and resources) on duping and fooling people.” “Human brains and consciences can be changed. Having wreaked havoc there, we will insensibly replace people’s values with false ones…” “We will find like-minded people—allies and supporters—in Russia itself.” “We shall insensibly, but actively and constantly, promote abuse of power by state officials, bribe taking, and unscrupulousness.” “We shall gradually exterminate the social substance in literature and art.” “We shall smartly and insensibly cultivate and all of this will thrive… And only a few, a very few people will guess and understand what is happening. But we shall put those people in a helpless position, make a mockery of them, find ways to belie them and declare them to be the scum of society.”⁶ January 15, 1953, U.S. Secretary of State John Dulles claimed that the way to destroy socialism’s threat to the free world must be, and could be, peaceful. Those who do not believe that mental pressure and propaganda pressure can have an effect are too ignorant.

Western hostile forces pursued a strategy of peaceful evolution against the Soviet Union, first of all by cultivating a strong internal Western force among the leadership of the Soviet Party and state at all levels and all walks of life, especially within senior leadership. This is commonly known as the “fifth column.”⁷ The West used cultural exchanges, economic activities, and personnel exchanges to infiltrate ideas and cultures, fostering spokesmen of the West in the USSR. Primarily through extensive recruitment of experts and scholars from various disciplines, the West used means such as propaganda, mutual visits, reconnaissance, and espionage to conduct large-scale psychological warfare. Through solidarity and bribery, they supported Soviet dissidents. Taking advantage of ethnic conflicts, they created ethnic divisions and incited dissatisfaction in Soviet society. By spreading political rumors and vilifying the images of Soviet leaders such as Lenin and Stalin, they incited resentment and hatred of the Soviet system in the masses and kindled a yearning for Western society.

In September 1956, the U.S. government decided to take advantage of Khrushchev’s advocacy of “peaceful coexistence” between socialism and capitalism to encourage “large-scale people-to-people exchanges” between the Soviet Union and the United States and proposed inviting 10,000 Soviet college students to the United States, all expenses for which were borne by the U.S. government. This was in the hopes that, one day, this group of people cultivated by the United States would take power in the Soviet Union. Later, facts proved that the Americans did not waste their efforts. By attracting a large number of Soviet young people to study in the United States, the United States carried out anti-communist propaganda on them and cultivated a group of anti-communist, anti-socialist, pro-American, pro-Western forces. Yakovlev was one such subject. According to Kryuchkov (Владимир Крючков), the former chairman of the National Security Council of the Soviet Union, Yakovlev was bought by the U.S. Secret Service during his studies at Columbia University in the United States in 1960 and received instructions from the United States during the “reform” period of the Soviet Union.

The West also used its own Nobel Prize, various foundations, and various non-governmental organizations to influence and dominate intellectual groups in Soviet society, cultivate pro-Western “intellectual elites,” and let them promote Western ideology and values. The Nobel Prize for Literature, the Peace Prize, and the Prize for Economics, all have distinct Western ideological overtones. The Soviet Union has won 5 Nobel Prizes in Literature and 2 Nobel Peace Prizes. In addition to the famous Soviet writer Sholokhov (Михаил Шолохов), who won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1965 and is the author of And Quiet Flows the Don, the works of the other four winners are all famous for denying and vilifying the October Revolution and the Stalin period, the most famous of which is Solzhenitsyn (Александр Солженицын), known for writing The Gulag Archipelago. One of the two Peace prizes was awarded to the famous Soviet “dissident” and scientist Sakharov (Андрей Сахаров), who had been engaged in anti-Soviet and anti-communist political activities since the 1970s. His award in 1975 came from Western affirmation of his political activities. Another Nobel Peace Prize was given to Gorbachev in 1990 for his “outstanding contribution” to the disintegration of the Soviet Communist Party and the promotion of “democracy” in Eastern Europe. At this point, the black hand manipulating the Nobel Prize was exposed.

Western non-governmental organizations also played an important role in disintegrating the ideology of the Soviet Communist Party and promoting the disintegration of the Soviet Union. The representative of neoliberalism known for his anti-communist and anti-Marxist beliefs ——British economist and political scientist Friedrich Hayek—— with the help of the British consortium, used the Monteplee Foundation to actively participate in the ideological infiltration of the Soviet Union by the West and focused on funding a group of Soviet scholars to study in the West, including Gaidar (Егор Гайдар) and Chubais (Анатолий Чубайс). Under the influence of the Hayek and Monteplee Foundations, Gaidar and Chubais tried their best to spread neoliberal ideas in the Soviet Union and Russia and promoted “shock therapy” based on neoliberalism, which became the leading cause and major driver of the collapse of the Soviet and Russian economies.

Soros, the founder of the Open Society Foundations of the United States, established the Soviet Soros Foundation in Moscow in 1987, actively funding anti-Soviet and anti-communist liberals to engage in political activities for the disintegration of the Soviet Union, such as the famous “dissident” and historian Yuri Afanasyev (Юрий Афанасьев). In addition, the Soros Foundation also funded a working group composed of Yavlinsky (Григорий Явлинский) and others in 1990 to formulate the Soviet Union’s transition plan to a free market economy (the “500-day Plan”). The foundation also funded a large number of journalists and TV anchors, trained a group of so-called independent TV media experts, acted as anti-Soviet and anti-communist mouthpieces, and actively engaged in anti-Soviet and anti-communist activities.

The West, led by the United States, paid special attention to seeking and cultivating agents at all levels of the Soviet Union’s leadership. Freemasonry, a mysterious organization in the West, also played an important catalytic role in promoting the disintegration of the Soviet Union. According to Russian historian Platonov (Олег Платонов) in the book Russia’s Crown of Thorns: The Secret History of Freemasonry 1731-1996, from 1945 to 1994, more than 400 senior party and government officials in the former Soviet system joined Freemasonry or international organizations affiliated to Freemasonry (such as the Petersburg Club, Great Europe Committee, and International Russia clubs). Among them were Gorbachev, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze, Yeltsin and other senior leaders of the CPSU.⁸

As the general secretary of a major power and Party like the Soviet Union, he should have been a firm and sober Marxist-Leninist who wholeheartedly served the vast majority of people in his country and the world, that is, “have no self and live up to the people.” The strange phenomenon of “doves occupying magpie’s nests” gradually appeared in key and important positions, and they were controlled by degenerate elements in the Party and traitors of the communist cause. The emergence of this peculiar phenomenon, of course, has extremely complicated domestic and internal reasons within the Party, but it is also directly related to extremely complicated international factors. Many conclusive materials prove that the reason why Gorbachev, who had completely lost his communist beliefs, was elected as the general secretary of the CPSU Central Committee was closely related to the induction and support of Western forces headed by the United States. A well-known Soviet dissident Alexander Zinoviev (Александр Зиновьев) stated that around 1979 he had a conversation with a British intelligence officer who told him: “Soon they (that is, the Western powers) will put their own people on the throne of the Soviet Union.”⁹ Although the staff member did not mention Gorbachev’s name, Zinoviev concluded from this that the prophecy was prescient. As early as 1983, the CIA had a lot of information about Gorbachev, which convinced the U.S. Secret Service that “it could use him to serve its own political interests.”¹⁰ Since then, the West, led by the United States, tried many times to establish a secret relationship with Gorbachev and regarded him as the best candidate for the leadership of the CPSU. Mrs. Thatcher also said bluntly: “We made Gorbachev the general secretary.”¹¹ Some commentators believe that London approved Gorbachev’s election as General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee before Moscow. In fact, when he was studying at Moscow State University in 1953, Gorbachev became good friends with Czech student Zdenek Mlinaz (Зденек Млынарж). However, Zdenek was a “dissident” that the United States had worked hard to cultivate in the Czech Republic. Zdenek served as Secretary of the Central Committee of the Czech Communist Party and a member of the Presidium in 1968. He was one of the leaders of the Prague Spring and was expelled from the Party in 1970. In 1977, Zdenek and 240 other Czechoslovakian intellectuals and people from other fields and classes signed and issued the Charter 77 declaration demanding the protection of the so-called basic human rights, launching a campaign against the so-called Stalinist autocratic rule. Gorbachev apparently had little contact with Zdenek, but Gorbachev’s biographer Grachev (Андрей Грачев) quoted Gorbachev in 1994 to Komsomolskaya Pravda: “Zdenek is my closest friend, closer than anyone.” Gorbachev also confirmed in 2002: “I have a friend named Zdenek Mlinaz, and we maintained friendly relations until the last moments of his life.” Immediately after being elected general secretary, Gorbachev invited Zdenek to Moscow, but the meeting with him was kept private.¹²

Allen Dulles, a senior CIA official, acknowledged in his book The Craft of Intelligence published in the mid-1960s that Western intelligence agencies kept tabs on socialist states “with communist party members at every level, from the top down to the grassroots, carefully archiving and detailing their activities and speeches as well as the relevant circumstances of their personal and social lives.” Soviet KGB General Sidorenko (Андрей Сидоренко) recalled: “In the mid-1960s, the KGB got the first information from its sources about the move of the CIA and other American intelligence agencies to recruit so-called agents of interest.” “The purpose of recruiting these agents of interest was to use them in the future, that is, to expect that at an unknown moment in the future, they would be able to be promoted to Party and state organs, influential social institutions, and the Soviet army and then work there.”¹³ Russian historian Ostrovsky (Александр Островский) proposed in the book Who Supported Gorbachev? that, “Gorbachev’s name appeared on the CIA profile card no later than 1968, when he was the second secretary of the Stavropol Krai Party Committee.”¹⁴

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, CIA Director Robert Gates took a proud walk in Moscow’s Red Square and said: “We know that neither economic pressure nor an arms race can bring it down, even by force. It can only be destroyed by an internal implosion.”¹⁵ Former USSR Council of Ministers Nikolai Ryzhkov said: “If it were not for the “fifth column” inside that actually fully pursued the goals set by the enemies of the Soviet Union, no one would be able to do anything to our country with external forces alone.”¹⁶ Former Soviet Defense Minister Dmitry Yazov said: “There is a so-called ‘fifth column,’ people who depend on the Americans for sustenance. There are not many of these people, but they were the ones who crippled the Soviet Union.”¹⁷

After Gorbachev’s death, leaders of Western countries such as Biden spoke highly of him and offered him various compliments without hesitation. U.S. President Joe Biden said: “Gorbachev was a man of extraordinary vision. When he came to power, the Cold War had been raging for nearly 40 years, and communism had existed even longer, with devastating consequences. Few of the top Soviet leaders had the courage to admit that change was needed. As a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I watched as Gorbachev did this and more.”¹⁸ British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said: “I am saddened by the news of Mikhail Gorbachev’s death. I have always admired his courage and honesty in bringing the Cold War to a peaceful end.”¹⁹

The existence of the “fifth column” has enabled the U.S.-Western strategy peaceful evolution to achieve a comprehensive “victory.” This is a “victory” that the West has never had since the establishment of the socialist states. The harm of the Soviet Union’s “fifth column” tells us that battles on military battlefields are often thrilling because they can be seen, but battles on invisible battlefields such as economics, ideology, and culture are calm on the surface, but because of their level of concealment and subterfuge often become more deadly.

The “fifth column” of the West, headed by the United States, instigated rebellion in the Soviet Union, including by the likes of Gorbachev, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze, and Yeltsin, and Western anti-Soviet forces worked together internally and externally to bring down the Party and state of the Soviet Union. That is an indisputable fact, and the process is shocking, making it worthy of our study. (To be continued)