Report on the trip to St. Petersburg and meetings with V. Volkov, April - May 2001

Part 2

The discussion lasted from around 2 in the afternoon until about 11.30 p.m. The topics included: 1) what is the revolutionary force in the modern society? Volkov, giving a traditional marxist answer, said it was a proletariat. By that he means both those who work mostly with their hands, and those who work mostly with their heads. My position should be obvious from what was said on the first day of discussions. I believe in people who are gaining modern knowledge to organize all aspects of production necessary the global economy. I believe it is incorrect to call these people "proletariat", just like it would be incorrect to call by the name "slaves" serfs who worked for feudal masters. For example, none of modern information specialists considers him/herself "a proletarian". They all believe that they have a great control over modern productions, although Volkov believes this is an illusion. I believe that these, and similar kind of people, are getting ready to get rid of all middlemen in all aspects of production. This includes organization of production, administration, etc. Teleworking cuts down need in these "organization specialists".

Positions of Volkov in general appear to me quite traditional. Reciting a marxist answer these days is no more revolutionary than reciting Aristotle in the days of Renaissance.

2) Next, we considered a civil war. I argued that this is what's coming, considering the scenario we see in Yugoslavia and in Chechnya. Volkov took the position that these are not examples of civil wars. Rather, he believes these are wars between elites. As to the civil war, he doesn't deny that it will be an aspect of a modern revolution, but he argues (somewhat like Sergei Bietz, in Moscow) that it will be "almost virtual". On the other hand, I pointed out that every revolution, and hence civil war, starts like an argument within the ruling elites. Thus, in the days of the French revolution (period of General Estates), the king and some nobility sided with the Third Estate in order to implement financial reforms against the tops of aristocracy and the clergy. Similarly in Chechnya: here we see contradictions between regional and central bureaucracy. The cause of the fighting is a division of property rights over the oil of the region. Hence, both sides, but especially the Chechen leaders, attempt to enlist the civil population onto its side, in order to win the war.

Thus, one prominent contradiction of the modern era is that between regional and central bureaucracies over the ownership rights. The other prominent contradiction is that of between bureaucracy and those who actually function in the capitalist fashion, i.e. the "New Russians". However, here the bureaucracy appears to be much stronger than its opponent, as we see in the example of Gusinsky. The U.S. is of course covering him up.

Thus, I believe that both Yugoslavia and Chechnya are examples of a civil war. The most prominent contradictions of the modern era in our region are destroying our respective countries. These are centrifugal forces which are pulling the state apart. They are helped on by the high level of corruption, both within the civil and military.

The role of the U.S. and NATO in this conflict we have most sharply so far seen in the bombing of Yugoslavia in the spring of 1999. The cowardly role of Moscow bureaucracy we have seen in the intense negotiations which the bureaucracy was conducting with the U.S. at that time. 

All in all, we see that U.S. basically has had its way, despite oppositions to bombing coming from within NATO (Greece and Italy). Already, we see a similar scenario being prepared for Chechnya. C. Powell is concerned for "human rights" in the region. Americans are only waiting for the right political moment to put an ultimatum to Russia. What will be the cowardly response of Russian bureaucracy? Are we to expect an appearance of an anti-NATO, anti-bureaucratic party, like we see in Yugoslavia? The picture on the right suggests that.

3) The third topic of our conversations was the character of the post-WWII period. Again, Volkov thinks, along with marxists, that the main contradiction of the epoch was that between the working class and the capitalists. In my opinion, this is very traditional and very abstract. In reality, we have seen the contradictions between non-capitalist and capitalist countries as dominating the events of the period. These contradictions are called "the Cold War", and today, more than ever, we see that it is not over. The same policy advocated by Kennan in 1947 (opposition to the Soviet Russia on each and every geopolitical point) we see today.

Volkov accuses me of judging by "external signs", while he claims to see deeper. To support his view, he brings up the events like those in Paris in 1968. To this I answer that those events were dominated by students, and only supported by workers. Similar scheme we saw in China in 1989. In China the most prominent slogan was that of democracy, i.e. right to speak out one's mind without being put in jail. But political content of these democratic manifestations was anti-socialist, anti-marxist.

I believe that WWIII is already being fought, in a "peaceful" form, under the guise of a continuing Cold war. Currently, we see it under the guise of a false U.S. concern for "human rights" in Russia and in China. Within this major contradiction of our epoch, we find secondary contradictions between defenders of status quo within each state, and those opposed to it, either from democratic or socialist positions.

If we're to be concerned with a strategy to winning a war against both an internal and an external enemy, we must say that both must be fought simultaneously. Both international capital and domestic bureacracy must be fought.

May 1st is a holiday - An International Workers' Day. We, as marxists, used to spend this day trying to join demonstrations, distributing literature, trying to recruit members into our organizations. However, both I and Yulia got disappointed with such an activity. We only saw old people at the demonstrations (in the former USSR). They were hostile to any fresh word. And so, on this May 1st, due to the initiative of Lena, we decided to go together to Kronstadt, famous for its revolutionary sailors in 1917, and also for the uprising against Bolsheviks in 1921. On the right you can see Yulia with the background of the emblem of Kronstadt (click to enlarge).

Also, Volkov took a picture of me, Yulia, and Nikita, with the ships serving as a background. This is a picture which Yulia must like:

Then five of us - Lena and I, Vladimir, Yulia, and their son Nikita - went walking around the city. It was one of the first days of spring in this northern region, and so to convey the feeling I took the following picture (with my newly acquired Olympus C-990Zoom Digital Camera, many thanks to my mother and relatives).

On that day, we returned home rather tired, at around 8 in the evening. But still, I felt freshness and spring. And so to capture the feeling, I took the following picture near the house where I was staying with Lena:

Next: part 3