u/vajan1

DP-ova deklaracija je u ovom slučaju zapravo izraz hrvatskog imperijalizma u BiH. Pod krinkom borbe za politička prava Hrvata u BiH, guraju interese hrvatskih kapitalista koji bi u novostvorenoj zasebnoj izbornoj jedinici imali kud i kamo oslobođenije ruke za svoje sudjelovanje na projektima poput ovog. Upravo zbog toga im je potrebna zasebna jedinica s ovlastima poput onih što ima Republika Srpska, a s kojom bi oni upravljali

Jel popratio neko ovu analizu o crnom scenariju možda? Kako to da u ovom "nesavršenom, ali nejboljem što imamo" sistemu stalno dolazi do kriza?

Since there was a question today that was later deleted by its author, I want to leave, for future considerations, a quote from Stalin that I think answers very well regarding the Stakhanovite movement:

"What stands out first and foremost is the fact that he, this movement, began spontaneously, almost elementally, from below, without any pressure from the administration of our enterprises. What’s more, this movement was born and began to spread to a certain extent against the will of our enterprises’ administration, indeed in struggle with it. Comrade Molotov has already spoken about the ordeals Comrade Musinski, a woodworker in Arkhangelsk, went through when he secretly worked out new, higher technical norms behind the backs of the management and inspectors. Stakhanov’s own fate was no better, because in his advance he had to defend himself not only from some members of the administration, but also from some workers who mocked and undermined his “innovations.” As for Busygin, it’s known that he nearly paid for his “innovations” by losing his job at the factory, and only the intervention of the plant superintendent, Comrade Sokolinsky, helped him stay. So, as you see, if there was any influence from the side of our factories’ administration, it did not meet the Stakhanov movement halfway, but rather went against it. It is therefore clear that the Stakhanov movement was born and developed from below. And precisely because it arose spontaneously, and precisely because it comes from below, it represents the most vital and most solid movement of our time.

Furthermore, we must dwell on another characteristic feature of the Stakhanov movement. This feature consists in the fact that the Stakhanov movement did not spread gradually throughout our country, but with an unprecedented speed, like a hurricane. What’s at issue here? Stakhanov raised the technical norm for coal production five or six times, if not more. Busygin and Smetanin did the same, one in the engineering field, the other in the footwear industry. The newspapers reported these facts. And suddenly, the flame of the Stakhanov movement engulfed the whole country. What’s happening here? Where does this speed of the Stakhanov movement’s spread come from? Perhaps Stakhanov and Busygin are great organizers with good connections in the regions and districts of the USSR, and they organized it themselves? No, of course not. Perhaps Stakhanov and Busygin aspire to become great figures in our country, and so they themselves spread the sparks of the Stakhanov movement across it? That, too, is incorrect. You have all seen Stakhanov and Busygin here. They spoke at the conferences. They are simple and modest people, without any ambition to seize laurels on a nationwide scale. In fact, it seems to me that they are somewhat bewildered by the momentum of the movement, which spread contrary to their expectations. And if, despite that, the matches that Stakhanov and Busygin threw proved sufficient to turn everything into a flame, then that means the Stakhanov movement represents a process that has already matured. Only a movement that has fully matured and is waiting for an impulse to set it in motion – only such a movement could spread so quickly and grow like a snowball.

How to explain the fact that the Stakhanov movement proved to be fully mature? Where lie the reasons for its such rapid spread? What are the roots of the Stakhanov movement? There are at least four of these reasons.

1. The basis of the Stakhanov movement was, first and foremost, a radical improvement in the material conditions of the workers. Life has begun to improve, comrades. Life has become more joyful. And when life is joyful, work progresses well. Hence the high production norms. Hence the heroes and heroines of labor. In this, first of all, lies the root of the Stakhanov movement. If we had a crisis, if we had unemployment – the scourge of the working class – if life were bad, ugly, and cheerless, then we would have no Stakhanov movement at all. Our proletarian revolution is the only revolution in the world that has succeeded in showing the people not only political but also material results. (…) Of course, it is good to expel the capitalists, expel the landowners, expel the tsarist gendarmes, take power and gain freedom. That is very good. But unfortunately, freedom alone is not enough. If there is not enough bread, not enough industrial goods, if housing conditions are bad, then with freedom alone you won’t get far. It is very difficult, comrades, to live on freedom alone. In order to live well and joyfully, it is necessary that the benefits of political freedom be supplemented by material well-being. (…)

2. The second source of the Stakhanov movement is the absence of exploitation in our country. Here, people do not work for exploiters, do not work so that parasites may grow rich, but for themselves, for their own class, for their own Soviet society, where the best people of the working class are in power. That is why, for us, labor has social significance; it is a matter of honor and glory. Under capitalism, labor has a private, personal character. You produce more – you get more and live as you see fit. No one knows you or wants to know you. You work for the capitalists, you enrich them? How else? That’s why they hired you – to enrich the exploiters. If you don’t agree, join the ranks of the unemployed and eke out an existence as best you can; we’ll find others, more compliant. That is why labor is not valued under capitalism. It is clear that under such conditions there is no place for a Stakhanov movement. It is different under the Soviet system. Here, the working person enjoys respect. Here, he does not work for an exploiter, but for himself, for his own class, his own society. Here, the working person cannot feel abandoned and alone. On the contrary, the working person here feels like a free citizen of his country, a kind of social activist. And if he works well and gives society all he can, he is a hero of labor, crowned with glory. It is clear that only under such conditions could the Stakhanov movement be born.

3. The third source of the Stakhanov movement should be considered the existence of new technology in our country. The Stakhanov movement is organically linked to new technology. Without new technology, without new factories, without new equipment, the Stakhanov movement could not have been born here. Without new technology, it is possible to raise technical norms at most twofold. If the Stakhanovites have raised technical norms five or six times, that means they are relying entirely on new technology. (…)

4. But with new technology alone, you won’t get far. You can have first-class technology, first-class factories, but if you lack people capable of mastering that technology, then technology remains mere technology. For new technology to yield results, you need people – workers, men and women – capable of setting that technology in motion and managing it. The birth and growth of the Stakhanov movement signifies that such cadres among the workers have already been created here. Two years ago, the Party said that building new factories with new equipment was only half the job. The Party said then that the enthusiasm for building factories must be supplemented by the enthusiasm for operating them, and that only in this way could the work be brought to completion. Evidently, these two years have seen the mastering of that new technology and the birth of new cadres. Now it is clear that such cadres exist among us. It is clear that without these cadres, without these new people, there would be no Stakhanov movement at all. Thus, new people – workers, men and women – having mastered the new technology, have served as that force which created and set in motion the Stakhanov movement.”