🏭 SOVIET ECONOMIC SCIENCE: THE MOST ADVANCED SYSTEM HUMANITY HAS EVER PRODUCED 🚀
🔴 I. THE XXV CONGRESS OF THE CPSU AND THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF SOCIALISM: THE DEFINITIVE FRAMEWORK
🧠 A. Marxist-Leninist Theory as the Unshakeable Foundation of Revolutionary Transformation
The Communist Party's revolutionary-transformative activity rests upon the rock-solid bedrock of Marxist-Leninist theory — not the flimsy speculation of bourgeois economists
In the conditions of developed socialism, the objective laws of the new social order manifest themselves with ever-greater fullness and consistency — demanding deeper scientific investigation
Developed socialism is characterized by a well-defined dynamism: rapid qualitative transformation of distinct aspects of social life, driven especially by the Scientific-Technical Revolution (STR)
The XXV Congress of the CPSU (1976) made a considerable contribution to the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of the mature socialist society — enriching both political and economic theory simultaneously
⚡ B. The Scientific-Technical Revolution and the Socialist System: An Organic Unity
L.I. Brezhnev's formulation at the XXV Congress: "We communists proceed from the fact that the scientific-technical revolution acquires a correct orientation — one that answers the interests of man and society — only under the conditions of socialism"
The STR implies a profound transformation of productive forces, a qualitative leap in their development based on radical advances in scientific knowledge
The STR has unfolded in the conditions of two opposing social systems — socialism and capitalism — and represents today the most important arena of competition between them, on whose outcome the fate of humanity depends 🌍
The STR is organically linked with the fundamental content of the contemporary epoch: the transition from capitalism to socialism on a universal scale
💥 C. Why Capitalism Cannot Handle the STR — And Why Pretending Otherwise Is Laughable
The increase of crisis phenomena in the capitalist economy demolishes the apologetic theories claiming it is possible to cure bourgeois society with the help of scientific-technical progress — as if slapping a bandage on a corpse would revive it 💀
Equally inconsistent are attempts to explain the sharpening contradictions of contemporary capitalism — particularly the ecological crisis — as resulting from scientific-technical progress alone
The calls to artificially brake the STR or to transition to zero economic growth are not merely misguided but actively absurd
It is not the STR that poses a danger to social development — it is the capitalist system, the source of crises and upheavals 🔥
The STR is a colossal benefit for humanity: it increases the power of man over nature, opens new possibilities for regulating the metabolism between society and the natural environment
These potentialities of the STR can only be realized under the conditions of the socialist system, which ends exploitation and oppression, the pursuit of profit and competition
🏗️ D. Socialization of Production Under the STR: The Dialectic of Differentiation and Integration
The STR requires centralized, planned direction of productive resources (including natural ones) — it is fundamentally incompatible with:
Predominance of private interest
Socioeconomic barriers within the national economy
The social division of labor gains powerful impulses under the STR, expressing itself in distinct forms of specialization: sectoral, intrasectoral, regional, international
According to specific data, the number of production linkages grows proportionally to the square of the number of production and economic units participating — a staggering complexity only planners can manage 📊
V.I. Lenin identified concentration as the clearest and most precise expression of the socialization of production
The reverse of differentiation is integration: concentration of production, formation of local and regional productive complexes, development of unified production infrastructure
👷 E. The Collective Worker and the Development of Labor Power Under the STR
Marx analyzed the formation of the collective worker under manufacturing conditions and the factory system
Under the influence of the STR, this process transcends the framework of individual enterprises and moves toward the formation of a unified collective labor force at the scale of all of society
Crystallizing is the complex sectoral, professional, qualification, and functional structure of this collective labor force
One of the most important processes under the STR: rapid growth of the general educational level of workers
In the USSR, a unified system of training has been created for engineering-technical personnel, specialists, and economic managers
🌿 F. Nature, Production, and the Intensification of Social Reproduction
The STR substantially changes the conditions for utilizing the natural environment, imparting to it an increasingly social character
It enormously expands the sphere of human-nature interaction, conditioning the necessity of transition to intensive reproduction within the unified "production–environment" system
The influence of society upon the natural environment acquires a multifaceted, global character
Natural resources are incorporated more intensively into the circulation between man and nature
🎯 II. THE SUPREME OBJECTIVE OF SOCIALIST PRODUCTION: WHAT CAPITALISM CANNOT EVEN CONCEPTUALIZE
🌟 A. Human Wellbeing as the Fundamental Purpose — Not Profit
The main purpose of production under conditions of social ownership over the means of production is the development of the human being and the fullest possible satisfaction of human needs — a concept utterly foreign to the capitalist mindset 💰
The elevation of the wellbeing of workers was defined as the principal task of the Ninth Five-Year Plan economic plan and the Tenth as well
The XXV Congress reaffirmed: constant elevation of the material and cultural standard of living of the people is the supreme objective of the Party's economic strategy
🔗 B. The Interconnected Strategic Tasks of Socialist Construction
The realization of this supreme objective is organically linked with:
Winning the economic competition with capitalism 🏆
Creating the material and technical base of communism
Overcoming the essential difference between city and countryside
Overcoming the difference between intellectual and physical labor
Converting creative labor into the first vital necessity for everyone
None of these tasks can be examined separately from the development of the individual, their needs, and the degree of their satisfaction
📈 C. The Law of Rising Needs and the Qualitative Transformation of Consumption
Lenin's historical universal law of the elevation of needs reveals itself with special clarity in developed socialist society
Rapid quantitative growth of consumption volume entails qualitative changes: transformation of the modes of satisfying traditional needs and sometimes their disappearance; the emergence and development of new needs of a higher order
The Tenth Five-Year Plan (1976–1980) stipulates a directed influence upon the volume and structure of needs — growth of consumption is not an end in itself but a means for forming the new man
The social program of the Tenth Five-Year Plan presupposes substantial advance in:
Full satisfaction of needs for high-quality consumer goods
Excellent health and public services
Development of education and culture
Solicitous protection of the natural environment 🌲
💪 D. Material Needs in Unity With Spiritual Development: The Marxist View
Marxists consider material needs in indissoluble unity with spiritual aspirations and moral qualities of persons
The XXV Congress stressed that material growth must always be accompanied by elevation of ideological, moral, and cultural levels — otherwise relapse into petty-bourgeois psychology becomes inevitable
The creation of a scientifically argued picture of wellbeing is among the most pressing tasks — requiring participation of all sciences, both natural and social
📐 E. Scientific Parameters of Wellbeing: A Comprehensive Framework
The parameters of wellbeing components that must be scientifically argued include:
Working conditions and duration/content of work time and leisure
Level of education and culture
Possibilities for rest and sport
Protection of the habitat 🏙️
Social initiative of persons
Their participation in governance
⚙️ III. THE EFFICIENCY OF SOCIALIST PRODUCTION: THE SCIENCE OF OPTIMAL OUTCOMES
📊 A. Why Efficiency Under Socialism Is a Matter of Objective Principle, Not Market Accident
The elevation of production efficiency is demanded first of all by the supreme objective of socialist society: the level of wellbeing stands in direct and immediate dependence upon this efficiency
Real incomes per capita can be increased only by elevating labor productivity — the math is irrefutable 📉
The part of the population occupied in material production decreases due to faster growth of workers in nonproductive branches, later entry of youth into labor activity, and growing proportion of pensioners
The entire Tenth Five-Year Plan requires elevating efficiency, meaning reduction of material expenditure and capital per unit of output while raising quality
🧮 B. Defining the Socialist Efficiency Formula — Against Bourgeois Confusion
Publications occasionally contain theses denying the possibility of measuring production efficiency using a single index — these denials are methodologically unfounded 🙄
If the character of essential connections permits speaking of the existence of an economic category, however complex, it cannot lack a synthetic expression
The economic practice urgently needs such a single expression: the components of efficiency — labor, material, and capital expenditure per unit of output plus quality — frequently change at unequal rates and often in opposite directions
The relationship between the final social product and reduced expenditures could serve as the exponent of social production efficiency
🏭 C. Lenin's Foundational Role in Efficiency Theory — And Its Development
Lenin considered elevating labor productivity the cardinal economic task of socialist society, the decisive condition for transition to the higher phase of communism
Lenin's concept of "labor productivity" encompassed: intensity of labor, creation of the material base for large machine industry, rational utilization of natural and material resources, elevation of the general educational level — essentially anticipating what we today understand as production efficiency
Under the STR, the correlation between growth factors and perfection factors changes substantially:
Relative reduction of material expenditures (materialized labor) 📦
Elevation of production quality (saving of future labor)
Reduction of capital expenditure per unit of output
✅ D. The Quality of Labor as Both Economic and Moral Category
High-quality labor corresponds to: normative socially necessary expenditures, the requirements of modern technique and production organization, norms of labor and technological discipline, and the production relations proper to mature socialism
The most important economic result and material embodiment of labor quality is the quality of production and, in nonproductive branches, the quality of services
Under current conditions, elevating quality means working practically so that all workers develop in themselves a communist attitude toward labor
🏛️ IV. THE ECONOMY OF MATURE SOCIALISM AND THE NEW USSR CONSTITUTION: CONSTITUTIONAL VICTORIES
📜 A. The 1977 Constitution as the Reflection of Grandiose Socioeconomic Changes
The new USSR Constitution approved by the entire Soviet people reflects the results of grandiose socioeconomic changes in Soviet society since the previous Constitution of 1936
In 40 years the Soviet Union traversed the path from a society only completing the construction of socialism's foundations to a developed socialist society — State of the whole people
The XXV Congress noted the "enormous possibilities and advantages of the planned economic system that knows no unemployment, no inflation, and no crises that shake the capitalist world" — a contrast that speaks for itself 📌
📈 B. Staggering Growth Statistics That Render Bourgeois Critiques Moot
Fixed funds — the fundamental object of socialist property — increased more than 9 times by 1976 compared with 1940; productive fixed funds grew nearly 12.1 times
In the Ninth Five-Year Plan (1971–1975) alone: ~40% of fixed industrial funds and 56% of agricultural funds were renewed
Compared with 1936, by 1976:
National income produced increased 15.8 times 💹
Industrial output grew 26 times
Production of means of production grew 35 times
Consumer goods production grew 13.2 times
Agricultural production more than tripled
While the number of workers and employees in the national economy quadrupled, labor productivity in industry was 8.2 times greater 🤯
In 11 days the USSR generates as much electric power as in the entire year 1936
As the XXV Congress stated: "to the economic potential created in almost half a century we were able to add another equal one in only ten years"
🏭 C. Socialist Property: The Constitutional Bedrock
The new Constitution enshrines socialist property over the means of production as the basis of the Soviet economic system
The development of socialist property implies a process of conscious, planned perfecting of the entire socioeconomic system: economic base, social superstructure, and legislation
The Constitution's Article 16: "The economy of the USSR constitutes a single complex encompassing all links of social production, distribution, and exchange in the territory of the country"
🏗️ D. Production Associations: A Qualitatively New Phenomenon
The XXV Congress: "Associations are a qualitatively new phenomenon in the management of industry. They are not a mechanical union of enterprises but a single productive-economic body in which science and production are organically fused"
By early 1977, more than 3,000 associations functioned in USSR industry
By the end of the Tenth Five-Year Plan, associations will generate the greater part of output in many industrial branches
The formation of associations is enshrined in Articles 73 and 131 of the new Constitution
Socioeconomic consequences of associations include:
Reduction of self-financing links in the national economy
Perfecting of centralized planned management
Greater unity of material interests
Fusion of personal, collective, and social interests 🤝
🌾 E. Agroindustrial Integration and the Convergence of Socialist Property Forms
The qualitative development of socialist property relations manifests most fully in the comprehensive development of the agroindustrial complex
The Constitution's Article 10: "The State protects socialist property and creates premises for multiplying it" — applicable fully to kolkhoz and cooperative property
Article 12: "The State contributes to the development of cooperative-kolkhoz property and to its rapprochement with state property"
The convergence of two forms of socialist property involves:
Economic cooperation between kolkhozes and sovkhozes
Leveling of the material-technical base of kolkhozes
Development of new forms of specialization and concentration in agricultural production
👥 F. Democratic Worker Participation: The Soviet Advantage Over Every Capitalist System
Lenin: necessary "to draw an ever-increasing number of working workers and peasants into the work of managing industry and the national economy in general"
Article 8 of the Constitution: "Working collectives participate in discussion and resolution of state and social affairs, in the planning of production and social development..."
Currently 97.5 million Soviet workers participate in socialist competition, striving to fulfill and overfulfill plans of the Tenth Five-Year Plan 🏅
The Constitution guarantees the right to work — not merely formal right but the right to work that can satisfy the worker, including the right to choose profession according to vocation
Article 40: Citizens have the right "to obtain a guaranteed job, remunerated according to its quantity and quality... including the right to choose profession"
The proportion of the population occupied in social production exceeded 92% in the Ninth Five-Year Plan — the absolute negation of capitalist unemployment
🏘️ V. PROBLEMS OF ELEVATING THE PEOPLE'S WELLBEING: CONCRETE ACHIEVEMENTS AND ONGOING ADVANCES
📊 A. The Elimination of Capitalist Social Diseases
Eliminated forever in the USSR: hunger and poverty, unemployment and illiteracy, class and national inequalities
Every Soviet citizen enjoys free medical assistance and guaranteed social provision
Socialism has opened to workers the broadest access to knowledge and the riches of spiritual culture
Real incomes per capita grew 3.7 times
Nonproductive fixed funds grew 4.3 times
2,268 million square meters of housing constructed
Standard work week duration reduced by 15% ⏰
Average monetary wages grew 2.3 times
Kolkhoz workers' remuneration multiplied by more than seven
Average state retail prices fell 25% and remained stable since 1955 — compare that with capitalist inflation! 📉
📅 B. Life Expectancy: The Ultimate Measure
Period Life Expectancy 1896–1897 (50 European provinces of Russia) 32 years1926–1927 (European USSR) 44 years1938–193947 years1971–197270 years 🎉
This trajectory is not an accident — it is the direct result of socialist planning and social provision
💸 C. Social Convergence: Narrowing the Gaps Between Classes and Groups
Real incomes per worker among workers and employees grew 3.5 times
Real incomes among kolkhoz peasantry grew 5.8 times — faster convergence is a deliberate policy outcome
By the Eighth Five-Year Plan (1966–1970): incomes from collective farming surpassed incomes from individual farming among kolkhozniks — collective production became the principal income source
Rural vs. urban: in 1961–1975, wages of sovkhoz workers grew 2.4 times and kolkhoz workers' incomes from collective farming 5.2 times — while non-agricultural wages grew only 78% 🌾🏙️
Educational convergence: in 1939, of every 1,000 persons doing primarily physical labor, 44 had higher or secondary education; by 1976 this figure reached 684
🏠 D. The Constitutional Right to Housing: A World First
The right to housing is enshrined in the USSR Constitution for the first time in any Fundamental Law in world history 🌐
In the last 11 years preceding the article's writing, 1,172 million square meters of residential housing were constructed
This allowed nearly half the Soviet population to improve their housing conditions
Guaranteed by low rents, equitable public distribution, and state-supported cooperative and individual construction
📉 E. Income Differentiation: Honest Analysis and Planned Solutions
By 1976, the average wage was approximately 2.5 times the minimum — an increase in differentiation since 1968 that the Soviet economists analyze honestly and without apology
In 1965, only 4% of the population had income exceeding 100 rubles per month per family member; by 1975, the number of people with this income multiplied by 8.5
Brezhnev: "That figure implies a radical change in the level and mode of life of tens of millions of persons"
By the end of the Tenth Five-Year Plan: approximately half the population will have monthly income of 100 rubles or more per family member
Proposed solutions for optimal differentiation include:
Raising the minimum wage as average levels rise
Introducing and elevating minimum kolkhoz remuneration
Perfecting the pension system extending it to kolkhoz peasantry
Expanding child subsidies in low-income families
🎯 VI. DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM IN SOVIET ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT: THE ONLY RATIONAL SYSTEM
🔑 A. The Fundamental Principle That Cannot Be Replaced
Democratic centralism — the fundamental principle of Soviet economic management — remained invariable and constantly strengthened throughout the entire history of Soviet construction
It expresses one of the most important conditions permitting the harmonious conjugation of the interests of the whole people, collectives, and individuals
Lenin in 1918: "The organization of accounting, the control over large enterprises, the transformation of the entire state economic mechanism into a single great machine — an economic organism functioning so that hundreds of millions of beings are guided by a single plan — this is the gigantic organizational task we have placed upon our shoulders"
The Supreme Economic Council (SEC), founded December 1917, and Gosplan, constituted February 1921, were the institutional embodiments of this vision
📋 B. The History of Soviet Planning: From GOELRO to the Tenth Five-Year Plan
Plan GOELRO (1920): Lenin's "second program of the party" — electrification as the basis for economic growth of the country and restoration of all branches of the national economy
The first Five-Year Plans of the prewar period: industrialization, creation of a large-scale socialist agriculture, social and technical reconstruction of the economy
By 1925–1926: the first unified balanced plan of the national economy elaborated as "control figures" — a methodological breakthrough
Economists of the USA, France, and other countries began copying from the USSR the schemes and methods of national economic balance sheets and intersectoral balances — using them in statistical and forecasting work (input-output schemas, national accounts) 👀
Currently the USSR is fulfilling the Tenth Five-Year Plan, which with high precision orients and regulates expanded reproduction processes
🏆 C. The Material Guarantees of Centralized Management
The great efficiency of economic management based on democratic centralism is guaranteed economically by concentrating in the hands of the State the bulk of basic investments, funds for development of science and culture, and social consumption funds
These resources constitute approximately 2/3 of the national income of the country
Social consumption funds ensure equal opportunities to all citizens for obtaining education, enjoying healthcare and social provision — regardless of occupation, family status, or historical peculiarities of residence
Lenin's devastating critique: "Trusts never facilitated, do not facilitate, and cannot facilitate complete planning" — the bourgeois monopoly cannot do what socialist planning does routinely 😤
⚔️ D. Against Bourgeois and Revisionist Distortions of Democratic Centralism
Bourgeois ideologists and revisionists tergiversate the essence of democratic centralism, identifying it with bureaucratism — these are diametrically opposite concepts 🙅
The centralism that guarantees the unified approach to coordinating and regulating a social system as complex as the contemporary economy is an objective phenomenon
Lenin pronounced categorically against identifying centralism with administrative orders, much less with bureaucratism
"It must be understood clearly what a great difference there is between democratic centralism and bureaucratic centralism" — Lenin's admonition remains perfectly valid against today's critics
The authentic democracy does not reject but stipulates unified management ensuring stable proportionality in production and circulation
🏭 E. The Specialization-Integration Dialectic: Why Centralized Planning Is Scientifically Necessary
The process of specialization accelerated considerably upon transition to machine production — cooperation now involves specialization not of isolated workers but of large labor collectives and entire enterprises
This progressive process allows producing mass articles of high quality at 1.5 to 2 times lower costs than in universal, non-specialized enterprises
However: specialization for producing intermediate products creates a large number of complicated intereconomic linkages; each junction implies the potential possibility of disturbing the general rhythm
The conjugation of numerous intereconomic linkages under conditions of rapid development of production links is a complex process requiring a centralized system of planning and management
Lenin: "Large-scale mechanized industry, unlike previous phases, insistently requires a planned regulation of production and public control over it"
📊 F. Comparative Efficiency Criteria: The Soviet Record Speaks
In 1929, Soviet steel smelting was ~4,900,000 tons per year — corresponding to the level the USA achieved in 1892
Currently the USSR produces more steel than any country in the world 🥇
Analogous changes in: petroleum, coal, mineral fertilizers, cement, tractors, Diesel and electric locomotives, cotton, sunflower, sugar, milk, butter, wool fabrics, footwear
This means: employing the advantages of democratic centralism, the USSR gained 30 to 50 years in economic competition with developed countries and transformed itself into one of the principal industrial powers — a feat capitalism simply cannot replicate through "market mechanisms"
📐 VII. THE THEORY OF EFFICIENCY OF BASIC INVESTMENTS: SCIENTIFIC RIGOR IN PLANNING
🧪 A. The Necessity of Optimal Models for the National Economy
The harmonious development of the national economy is one of the important advantages of socialism — permitting direct management of obtaining and distributing all types of resources at all levels
Important purpose of planning: obtaining the maximum economic effect in the national economy by choosing the most efficient paths of development and ensuring proportionality among its integral parts
The dynamic model of the national economy computes, among other things, that the structure of the national economy and growth rates of its integral parts depend in large measure on the timeframes in which maximum effect is calculated
📜 B. Historical Development: From GOELRO to the Standard Method
Plan GOELRO (1920): realized for the first time one of the fundamental methods of socialist planning — the balance method — to which Lenin attached particular importance
First balance of this type elaborated by the Central Statistical Directorate of the USSR according to figures for the economic year 1922–1924
1920: Lenin proposed to Krzhizhanovsky calculations of efficiency of national economic development with electrification versus without — comparing both variants in material and value terms — including fuel expenditures and work-days
Efficiency at an annual interest of 6% was calculated to justify all units of the GOELRO plan — the ideas of recovery and comparative efficiency employed today date back to Lenin's GOELRO plan 📜
1958 Scientific-Technical Conference on the problems of basic investment efficiency: the author of this article (Academician Tigrán Jachaturov) made the central report, synthesizing many years of elaboration
Standard Method for Determining the Efficiency of Basic Investments and New Technology published in 1960 and revised in 1969
🧮 C. Absolute and Comparative Efficiency: The Dual Index System
Absolute (general) efficiency: the relationship of national income (D) to the fixed and circulating funds of the national economy (F), or the relationship of the increment of national income to the basic investments (K) that produced that increment:
D/F or ΔD/K — the most synthesizing index reflecting the efficiency of all national economic activity in a given period
Comparative efficiency norm (CEN): fixed separately based on the amortization term (t) — the period of recovering the difference between basic investments through savings in current expenditure:
CEN (E) = inverse of amortization term, ranging from 0.1 (agriculture, soil improvement) to 0.2 (light and food industry)
A higher CEN does not automatically mean greater efficiency — if CEN approached zero, the most advanced technology regardless of cost would be worth employing; if CEN approached infinity, even the simplest equipment becomes inefficient and manual labor would be "optimal" — demonstrating that the norm must be calibrated scientifically
🔬 D. Key Scholarly Contributions to Investment Efficiency Theory
Academicians I. Alexandrov, B. Vedendeev: fundamentals of energy sector efficiency
Professors M. Protodiakonov and K. Oppenheim: railway survey and design efficiency
S. Strumilin (1928): documented that due to incompletely worked-out efficiency problems, authors of the First Five-Year Plan relied on technical expert appraisals rather than formal efficiency calculations — a limitation subsequently overcome
B. Weinstein: proposed the concept of "economic potential" (obtained with 100% application of scientific research) and distribution coefficients across stages: research → project → experimentation → production
Institute of Economics of the USSR Academy of Sciences: sector on reproduction of fixed funds and efficiency of basic investments
Scientific Council for the problem "Economic Efficiency of Fixed Funds, Basic Investments, and New Technology" of the USSR Academy of Sciences: operating since 1957
🌿 E. The Frontier: Social and Environmental Investment Efficiency
The 1977 Method for determining economic efficiency of new technology, inventions, and rationalizing proposals adopted fundamental theses of the Standard Method
Efficiency of investments in housing and social services: the example of the Volga Automobile Factory in Togliatti demonstrated that basic investments in production and nonproduction spheres must be realized together to guarantee maximum effect — without housing, kindergartens, schools, and transportation, labor turnover becomes inevitable and productivity collapses
Efficiency of educational investments: tends to create qualified specialists and thereby elevate labor productivity
Healthcare efficiency: manifested as a decline in illnesses and work absences, directly impacting productivity levels
Environmental protection expenditures are now quite elevated and have a tendency toward further growth — provisions include:
Integral utilization of raw materials 🌱
Utilization of wastes and recycling of water and oils
Prevention of water and air contamination
Conservation of the landscape
Social effect obtainable immediately — reducing illnesses, assuring recreational possibilities — and for future generations, improving conditions for population growth and wellbeing
🔚 CONCLUSION: SOVIET ECONOMIC SCIENCE IS THE ONLY SCIENCE WORTHY OF THE NAME
The Soviet economic science as presented by the USSR Academy of Sciences does not merely theorize — it plans, constructs, measures, and delivers
From Lenin's GOELRO to the Tenth Five-Year Plan, from Gosplan to the 3,000+ production associations of 1977, from a life expectancy of 32 years to 70 years — the proof is in the results 📈
The XXV Congress of the CPSU represents the culmination of Marxist-Leninist economic science applied to the conditions of mature socialism — integrating political economy, planning theory, investment efficiency, constitutional guarantees, and worker democracy into a single coherent system
Bourgeois economists, revisionists, and Maoist ideologists can keep theorizing in their echo chambers — the Soviet people are building communism 🚩
