[uploadedimage:115119]

　　 一個國家的穩定與否在於它的憲政是否是穩定的，而蘇聯在早期權力斗爭遺留的問題過於嚴重，尤其是斯大林大清洗紅色恐怖給蘇聯造成不可忽視的影響（一九三四年是斯大林執政方式的轉折點）。

　　 而另外兩位長期執政的領導者，赫魯曉夫與勃列日涅夫都有一個致命的問題，他們都是政變奪權的。這導致了他們都需要推翻前任的政策來維護自己的統治合法性。這一點在尼基塔·赫魯曉夫的去斯大林化政策中最為明顯，這一政策依靠知識分子的支持來推翻約瑟夫·斯大林的過度統治。這一支持並非始終如一，隨著20世紀60年代新左派的崛起，知識分子中的異見越來越多。

　　 勃列日涅夫執政後又推翻赫魯曉夫的部分政策，部分恢復斯大林歷史形象。他還借此機會清除了前任的效忠者，其中包括當時許多最有聲望的學者。結果是，知識分子不再有強烈的聲音支持勃列日涅夫或赫魯曉夫的政策，因此他們統治的合法性受到了破壞。

　　 同時，赫魯曉夫與勃列日涅夫對其他主權國家進行的軍事霸權干預嚴重破壞了蘇聯與社會主義面對世界的形象。這導致了冷戰意識形態斗爭的部分失敗。在接下來的幾十年中，蘇聯在意識形態斗爭中失敗，它取得的勝利付出了高昂的代價。

　　 他們解決的社會問題遠遠小於他們制造的社會矛盾，更重要的是，赫魯曉夫與勃列日涅夫推翻前任政策的行為不僅破壞蘇聯憲政的穩定，還破壞了資源建設。

　　 例如，赫魯曉夫上台削減了斯大林在蘇聯南部地區（伏爾加地區、北高加索地區、烏克蘭）建造水庫進行的國家工程自然改造計劃（建設8條國家巨型森林保護帶以改善生態環境、防止水土流失、沙塵暴與農業發展，計劃是在1950-1965年間創建一系列防護林、水庫與灌溉系統。國家巨型森林保護帶總長5320公里，人工林面積11.79萬公頃）又進行了處女地運動把防護林進行開墾為耕地，短期內增加了糧食產量。即使傳統產糧區產量下降，新產糧區也能保證糧食產量。但1962-1963年出現因為削減該計劃並采用廣泛的增加耕地方法的後果之一：新耕地上發生了一場與土壤侵蝕有關的生態災難，蘇聯爆發了糧食危機。1963年秋天，面包和面粉突然從商店貨架上消失了，糖和黃油也停產了。1962年，宣布肉類價格上漲30%，黃油上漲25%。1963年，由於國內收成不好與糧食儲備不足，蘇聯戰後第一次從國外購買了約1300萬噸糧食。由於物價上漲，之後爆發了新切爾卡斯克事件…蘇聯解體後，整個生態防護系統開始崩潰，全部森林帶都無人管理，灌溉系統癱瘓。直到2006年，俄羅斯農業部門才開始重新統計與維護防護林。

　　 這是蘇聯政治局犯下的錯誤，一方面不禁止個人崇拜，另一方面又對前任領導人反攻倒算；這破壞了穩定與人們的信仰。許多人的思想都在青年時期定型，因此宣傳與教育才如此重要。

　　 正如戈爾巴喬夫一樣，蘇共二十大對他的影響遠遠大於之後的一切；他能熟背列寧著作的每一句話，卻不會真正相信它。盡管如此，他還是對蘇斯洛夫保持尊重；在蘇聯即將解體時，他也嘗試制造一個放棄社會主義與邦聯制概念的蘇維埃主權共和國聯盟來保留蘇聯（諷刺的是，列寧一開始希望建立一個邦聯制度的蘇聯）。

　　 遺憾的是，像謝列平與蘇斯洛夫一樣清廉的人是沒有辦法維持國家的。或許，戈爾巴喬夫只是貪婪與無能；但他因此害死了很多人，無論是謝爾比茨基這樣的官僚還是其他無辜的人民。他將王冠扔在地上，讓葉利欽拿起王冠使用權力。

　　 羅曼諾夫不能這樣做，他必須維護前幾任領導人的形象來維護整個國家與穩定憲政。這就是他被選為中央委員會總書記的原因。

　　 他突然想到了什麼，時間鎖！為什麼伊斯蘭教經歷了幾千年依然相信古蘭經？因為默罕默德設置了一個時間鎖讓後來的所有人都只能遵守可蘭經（古蘭經是安拉的言語，將一直存在到世界末日）。歷史上的鄧小平面對引進的資本主義與市場經濟也做出了類似的時間鎖（基本路线要管一百年，動搖不得），通過設定一個時間范圍讓繼任者在框架內不能更改與否定發展的路线方向。

　　 這種手段是有效的，只要繼任者依然在框架內就不可能否認。盡管好奇者做出了努力，伊斯蘭世界已經成功地使用這種方法來維護其對《古蘭經》和先知穆罕默德的信仰。

　　 對比一下赫魯曉夫在1961年聲稱要7年內超過美國的生產水平…與實現共產主義社會。按需分配原則將實現：從1975年起免費供應午餐，1980年起一日三餐免費吃飯。我不明白，赫魯曉夫馬克思理論得差到什麼地步才能這麼說…（雖然他的理想很好，但執政時期的一系列做法太激進與愚蠢了。）最後，到了1971年勃列日涅夫只能人造一個“發達社會主義”概念來解決這個問題。這個詞本身就是一種宣傳工具，而這個體系根本不是。

　　 這並不是說羅曼諾夫是個壞人，也不是說他不想為國家做必要的事情；這是因為當前的蘇聯領導層對這一體系沒有信心，也不願意采取必要措施來維持這一體系。這個系統瀕臨崩潰。羅曼諾夫被迫用每一寸意志力說服黨和國家，這是唯一的辦法。

　　 所以，他不能也不會像歷史上的戈爾巴喬夫利用改革派與地方民族主義者來替換官僚集團（戈爾巴喬夫上台後進行的經濟改革真是一言難盡），這很危險會失去官僚階層的支持，因為所有人都想要的是穩定。更不要說所謂改革派任職馬上就同樣使用特權甚至更加腐敗。

　　 推翻前任領導者的歷史形象是一件極度愚蠢的事情，即使斯大林幾乎完全改變了列寧的政策，也不會抹黑列寧的形象。即使是鄧小平，他也只是將華國鋒的形象邊緣化讓人們遺忘掉他。

　　 所以，選擇與答案很明顯。改革主義將導致失去支持並導致政府垮台。政府的倒台無疑將導致無政府狀態和資本主義的勝利。這將意味著任何社會主義革命機會的終結，這場革命將導致大屠殺和數十萬人死亡。

　　 血腥革命不是一件好事。

　　 羅曼諾夫作出了決定。

　　 ------

　　 蘇聯共產黨第二十七次代表大會於國家克里姆林宮內舉行，來自蘇聯最高蘇維埃的750名聯盟院與750名民族院代表與幾乎全球社會主義國家代表、社會主義政黨代表坐滿了席位。大會以舉手方式開幕。蘇聯共產黨黨旗升起，所有人起立歌唱國際歌。大會開始了。

　　 羅曼諾夫在國會講話時引用了卡爾·馬克思（Karl Marx）的一句話（他幾乎一字不差地讀過）“所有以前社會的歷史都是階級斗爭的歷史”。然後他繼續批評現政府沒有實現革命的理想。

　　 他的演講的問題在於，它過於依賴舊政黨的陳詞濫調，因此變得越來越無關緊要，與普通工人面臨的問題脫節。

　　 “是時候打破過去的方法和原則了。是時候讓世界進入一個人類歷史的新時代了。一個人民統治的時代，一個地球和平的時代，一個大多數人的生活條件不是飢餓，而是富裕的時代。這是社會主義的目標。

　　 現在是為一個更美好的世界采取立場的時候了。一個工人幸福、繁榮、勞動成果在社會所有成員之間公平分配的世界。這就是馬克思主義的觀點。

　　 在這成為現實之前，我們不會停止。我們不會停止，除非地球上有和平，世界上所有的人都能生活在自由和富足之中。這是共產黨的使命。我們主張一個和平、平等和富足的世界，在這個世界上，每一個人都因其必須作出的貢獻而受到尊重。

　　 如果建設這個世界呢？馬克思已經給出了答案，只有生產力極大發展，物質極大豐富時才是到達真正的共產主義社會！革命理應是年輕的革命，而不是舊的革命！只有先進的科技創新與穩定的社會秩序才能確保經濟高速發展。只有這樣，世界人民才能真正受益於他們的勞動成果。只有這樣，共產主義革命的目標才能實現。我們只能一起建設一個更美好的世界！

　　 因此，在勃列日涅夫同志領導之後，我們應該如何建設發達社會主義呢？信息化！正如列寧同志所說共產主義就是蘇維埃政權加全國電氣化，信息化社會就是社會主義建設的下一個階段！現在我們必須繼續在黨的領導與人民的意志下建設信息化科學發達社會主義。科學發達社會主義就是蘇維埃政權加全國信息化！”

　　 這項決議毫無爭議地獲得通過。大會在蘇聯國歌的歌聲中結束，隨後升起了俄羅斯國旗。國歌的歌唱聲引起了起立鼓掌。代表們離開舞台，前往招待會。大會結束，最高蘇維埃的代表們前往招待會。

　　 招待會首先由密特朗總統致辭，他祝賀大會取得成功。他表示希望，這次大會將促進世界和平與革命。

　　 接下來，美國參議院代表團作了介紹，並談到了美國對蘇聯的支持。這篇演講是由參議員弗蘭克·米拉德（Frank A.Millard）發表的，他贊揚了鐵幕的建設，並表示，蘇聯和美國之間的合作帶來了無與倫比的經濟和科學進步，這一進步將在新共產黨的領導下繼續下去。

　　 下一次演講由英國代表約瑟林·戈德溫（Joscelyn Godwin）發表，他說，鑒於蘇聯在維持全球經濟體系中的作用，新的蘇聯政府負有很大的責任。他列舉了蘇聯的經濟貢獻，如核能的巨大發展，使地球的工業化成為可能。

　　 演講結束後，播放了一段視頻，展示了世界從穴居人到太空時代的演變，最後描繪了共產主義社會可能出現的和平、科技的未來。這段視頻描繪了社會主義下世界的一幅積極的、理想化的畫像。

　　 ------

　　 第二天，在新的信息化科學發達社會主義理論由各級行政組織結構傳達到各級組織機構之前，蘇聯共產黨第二十七次代表大會開始討論議程。

　　 蘇共中央意識形態委員會書記科索拉波夫開始發言，他希望恢復斯大林的歷史形象說：“我們不能也不會消除過去的罪行。然而，我們將要做的是向前邁進，建設一個更美好的未來！我們不會允許過去的錯誤定義我們當前和未來在世界上的角色，我們不會允許單個個人的個人失敗定義整個國家的公共使命。大清洗的時代結束了。這一罪惡行為的受害者已被處決或改過自新。沒有人會因為他們的意見而受到迫害。誹謗的時代已經結束。我們是一個法治的法治國家。我們是一個真理和進步的國家，而不是謠言和政治迫害的國家。我們生活在一個信息和啟蒙的時代，而不是恐懼和偏執。個人崇拜的時代已經結束。我們的個性不再是由單個個體的行為塑造的，而是由集體塑造的。我們今天的國家是全體人民共同的歷史經驗的產物。我們應該恢復斯大林同志真正的形象與讓人民了解歷史的教科書正確認識到歷史人物的復雜與觀點。我們不會回到大清洗的時代。我們不會重蹈覆轍。我們不會活在過去。我們將活在當下，我們將繼續前進。我們是偉大遺產的繼承人。沒有回頭路。我們要完成革命；我們將建設一個新世界。”

　　 科索拉波夫發言結束後，蘇共最高蘇維埃代表們與其他社會主義政黨代表團、外國代表對此感到震驚。他們要求科索拉波夫為他的講話辯護。

　　 科索拉波夫提到了一些歷史人物，如羅曼諾夫家族，聲稱歷史書歪曲了他們的形象。然而，他宣布修正主義歷史的時代已經結束，並聲稱所有的過去都在被改寫。蘇聯的歷史將被改寫，以頌揚社會主義的理想。

　　 科索拉波夫引用喬治·奧威爾（George Orwell）的著名文章《政治與英語》（Politics and the English Language）為自己的立場辯護。在這篇文章中，奧威爾解釋說，政治和說服離不開修辭藝術，宣傳往往依賴於利用情感和激情操縱公眾。

　　 一位社會民主黨代表舉手提問說。

　　 “我認為我們不能同意歷史是以社會主義的名義被改寫的。畢竟，寫歷史的目的不是要記錄實際發生的事情，這樣我們才能避免將來犯同樣的錯誤嗎？唯一的方法是保持准確的記錄。這不正是你演講的目的嗎？”

　　 科索拉波夫笑著說：“這里的提問者似乎對我評價不高。我想請他/她澄清原因。”

　　 提問者是德國社會民主黨的另一位代表。他說：“看來你在試圖描繪一幅充滿野蠻元素的過去的美好畫面，並呈現一個純粹愚蠢的未來的政治正確形象。世界歷史上充斥著這些理想主義主張，但這些主張都沒有實現。你能實現你所提出的崇高理想嗎？”

　　 科索拉波夫說：“你似乎是社會主義歷史和理論方面的專家，我很想聽聽你對這個問題的看法。”

　　 提問者說：“我認為你不可能在豬身上塗口紅。你可能會畫出一張漂亮的圖片，但它仍然是豬。”

　　 “這是一種很粗鄙的觀點，我想問一下，你夫人今天塗口紅了嗎？”

　　 提問者看著他的腳說：“不。”

　　 科索拉波夫微笑地說：“那麼，為什麼要指責繪制理想主義畫卷的作為？難道，因為現實生活難以實現就要放棄向偉大理想的描繪？人類正是依靠對理想的向往與實現才得以生存與發展。”

　　 “是的，但問題是理想會阻礙現實。理想就像是對應該是什麼的完美願景，而不是什麼是什麼。”

　　 “那麼你是說一幅畫，即使是一幅漂亮的畫，也能掩蓋真相？”

　　 “是的。”

　　 \"這是一種非常憤世嫉俗的看待方式。但是，如果你提出的烏托邦式的願景中沒有美，那麼為之奮斗的意義何在？真正的真相是不會被掩蓋的，相反，它只會被遺忘。同志，你認為人們更容易記住在宣傳攻勢下的事物還是政府刻意忽略的事物？”

　　 代表說：“我想你是對的。但我認為這是政府的責任，而不是歷史學家的責任。畢竟，法國大革命的發生不是因為歷史學家弄錯了嗎？”

　　 “並不是，歷史學家有責任努力教授人民真正的歷史觀點。這樣說吧，在美國、西歐成長與教育的年輕人他們對社會主義的第一印象與概念是什麼形象？而真正的社會主義與共產主義概念是什麼？他們能區別馬克思主義與列寧主義的區別嗎？他們能像蘇聯年輕人一樣普遍閱讀過馬克吐溫與陀思妥耶夫斯基的作品嗎？是美國年輕人自身沒有辦法接受更好的教育還是他們被刻意回避與引導了？”

　　 “我不確定。教育系統似乎是為了讓人們為工業工作做好准備，而不是為了學習。”

　　 科索拉波夫嚴肅地說：“這才是資本主義的真正面目！它奴役著全人類的思想，它所希望的教育是讓極少數具有良好出身的人接受私立教育，而讓大多數人去公立教育來為進入工業系統服務！因為資本市場需要工人來促使它的資本主義發展，這讓資本主義統治下的無產者無法接受更好的教育來實現階層跨越。但真正的社會主義國家是為了讓全部兒童接受盡可能平等的全面教育，蘇聯的每一任最高領導人都是工人或者農民出身，最高蘇維埃代表里有60%都是工農出身。相反，美國總統與議員有多少是普通家庭出身？”（注：蘇聯官僚子女都不會從政，而是從事科技、學術、商業與醫學等。比如戈爾巴喬夫的女兒伊琳娜是醫生，羅曼諾夫的女兒瓦倫蒂娜在莫斯科國立大學力學和數學系任教。這也是蘇聯解體時官僚沒有發動民眾保衛政權的部分原因，沒有官僚會保衛無法世襲政治權力的政權。）

　　 科索拉波夫停下來說：“在我們的斗爭中沒有憤世嫉俗的余地。我們必須利用我們所掌握的一切方法來實現一個無階級、無種族和無性別的社會。只有通過動員、無階級和團結的社會，我們才能實現真正共產主義未來的巨大飛躍。”

　　 ---

　　 一些辯論後，羅曼諾夫總書記做出決定說：“關於正視歷史與恢復斯大林歷史形象的決定，成立正視歷史及平反調查委員會。要對斯大林、赫魯曉夫與勃列日涅夫的功績與錯誤正確批判性對待，即要批評斯大林時期的紅色恐怖錯誤也要正視他領導工業化與衛國戰爭的功績；同時，對於赫魯曉夫違反集體原則與勃列日涅夫軍事行動的錯誤也要承認。因此，我們需要重新修改教科書恢復真正的形象，並且要對貝利亞等歷史人物重新調查與平反。舉手表決。”

　　 1500名最高蘇維埃代表開始表決，絕大多數（1381人）投了贊成票。

　　 “下一個提議，關於阿富汗撤軍的准備。阿富汗國際主義援助任務已經進行了近六年，我們已經完成了阿富汗人民民主黨的援助請求；應該從1986年3月開始在1987年4月前完成撤離阿富汗的准備。”

　　 代表們再次投票，決議以1383票贊成、21票反對、96票棄權獲得通過。

　　 “關於從阿富汗撤軍的決議獲得批准。”

　　 對這些決定的反應好壞參半。從長遠來看，每個人都知道，繼續戰爭只會導致更多的流血和更多的破壞。有些人認為這是對蘇聯人民在戰爭中犧牲的背叛，特別是因為紅軍在戰爭中的作用是解放，而不是發動征服戰爭。另一方面，恢復斯大林和蘇維埃領導人在學校的形象將是政府的宣傳勝利。

　　 軍事人員中也有一些不滿。許多人認為蘇聯在阿富汗戰爭中的作用僅僅是取代英國的殖民統治，而英國的殖民統治是所有形式統治中最具壓迫性的。盡管紅軍身穿蘇聯的軍裝，但他們中的許多人秘密效忠於在一次大戰中與他們一起服役的蘇聯同志，並對蘇聯日益退出世界懷恨在心。

　　 他們希望的是解放人民的蘇聯紅軍而不是入侵其他國家的蘇聯武裝力量，無論如何，在等待里根任期結束之前羅曼諾夫都需要穩定政治與發展科技。這需要打破美國的科技封鎖與糧食禁運。

　　 “同時，我們要堅決反對錯誤的崇拜。我們不應該讓政治局委員的肖像遍布國家的每一面牆壁，這違反了社會主義。我提議，應該禁止所有現任與沒有戰爭功績的領導干部建築銅像、雕像或者肖像印刷在除了書籍與教科書、博物館的任何印刷物上，禁止以領導人名字命名地點、建築物等。但是，應該恢復斯大林時期的地名；比如斯大林格勒等，以銘記衛國戰爭人民的慘痛創傷。”

　　 進行了一些討論，但絕大多數人同意。

　　 “斯大林的名字將被恢復，”這是許多人的堅定聲明。

　　 “斯大林的名字應該恢復”，這也是一份支持該決議的聲明。

　　 “斯大林的名字是一種恥辱，應該恢復，”他說，憤怒多於熱情。

　　 大多數代表（確切地說是1300人）已經就此問題發表了意見，現在由總書記決定。

　　 “我向你們保證，行動勝於雄辯。我們鼓勵希望恢復斯大林名譽的同志們這樣做。我敦促你們大家避免爭論，集中精力解決更重要的問題。恢復城市、街道等的名稱時應格外小心。我還要提醒大家，我們不是生活在一個歷史時期，而是一個向共產主義社會過渡的時期。因此這是一個漫長的過渡階段，我們可能需要幾代人或者十幾代人。但我們將永遠堅持發達社會主義路线，在未來數百年之內不改變社會主義路线，堅持一切權力歸於蘇維埃與共產黨的領導。我們應當恢復斯大林時期的地名與禁止沒有十月革命與衛國戰爭功績領導干部的崇拜。我還想提請大家注意保護言論自由權的必要性。我們生活在危險的時代，在行使這項權利時，我們再謹慎也不為過。近年來，對這種自由的壓制越來越普遍，我們需要提高警惕，盡可能地保護這種自由。言論與藝術創作應該監督而不是禁止，我們應該接受善意的批評與反映社會現象的作品，但絕不會允許抹黑社會主義革命犧牲者的無意義咒罵。我們不能允許回到過去常見的審查和控制。我們需要使用新的和改進的創造性工具來推進我們的事業，而不是壓制它們。”

　　 有一些人私下表示不同意，但總的來說，這篇演講很受歡迎。

　　 “我們不是任何形式的獨裁，我們也不想成為獨裁，我們是民主國家。人民的意願是我們決策的指南。這些是指導我們行動的原則，也是我作為總書記將用來指導我們行動的原則。”

　　 “但是，正如我所說的，我鼓勵那些對這項事業感興趣的同志恢復名譽。我歡迎這項事業將引起的關注。這不是一項容易的任務。有大量的工作要做。但我相信，我可以依靠在座的每一位同志的幫助來實現這一目標。我希望你們都同意我的看法。我希望我們大家在這項事業中共同努力。我希望我們都能在這方面取得成功。但是，最重要的是，我希望我們保持警惕，不要被個人崇拜所誘惑，他們想利用我們的歷史來達到自己的自私目的。同志們，前面還有很多工作要做，但我相信我們能夠勝任。”

　　 還有一些抱怨，但大多數人似乎支持書記。他已經做出了決定，現在已經沒有回頭路了。

　　 “然後，為了開始我們的工作，我需要最有能力和最有能力的工作人員的幫助。我想建立一個中央信息室，我們的頂尖研究人員可以在這里獲取所有最新信息。我想組織一個團隊來研究當前世界各地的政治和經濟形勢。我還想設立一個國際部，負責協調與國際共產黨的關系。我想在國際關系部設立一個新的部門，專門研究電影和電視等新媒體。最後，我想成立一個特別小組，調查歷史問題，特別是有關十月革命的問題。我希望你們都同意這些立場，因為如果有什麼不同的話，它們將增加成功的機會。現在，我相信還有其他同志願意作出貢獻，我希望他們也能作出貢獻。我很高興聽到大家的建議。”

　　 當房間里的人消化這些信息時，沉默了一會兒。接著響起了一陣掌聲，幾個人站在座位上為其他職位提出了各種想法。

　　 接下來的幾次會議討論了各種項目、職位的設立以及某些人填補這些職位的批准。在那些被建議加入政府的人中，有一大批年輕的共產黨員，他們渴望產生影響。

　　 此外，羅曼諾夫提出了禁止蘇聯共產黨黨員與共青團團員經營私營商業的提議（個體經營者與合作社不包括在內）。該建議的目的是迫使黨做出決定，並吸引黨員進入公眾視线。

　　 這項建議遭到了不同的反應。一方面，它被視為向公眾揭露黨員的一種方式，這將增加他們的合法性。另一方面，這被視為損害該黨聲譽的一種方式。

　　 這項禁令在經過一些小的修改後獲得通過，首先受到影響的是黨員的企業。

　　 黨的聲譽受到嚴重損害，許多黨員看到他們的商業活動陷於停頓。然而，政府中的黨員卻過得輕松多了。

　　 月底，一封信被送到了共產黨中央委員會，並被張貼在全市的公告欄上。

　　 這是關於對入黨申請的共青團團員號召勞動的指令，申請入黨的共青團團員們被號召到中亞進行建設新自然改造計劃植樹造林。他們將執行這項任務，直到樹木成熟到可以收割為止，然後他們將留在該地區協助維護樹木。

　　 與此同時，政治局勢開始惡化。

　　 最初的異議跡象開始出現，少數黨員公開表示對政治局的決定不滿。作為回應，政治局增加了權力，使中央委員會成員更難競選黨的主席。

　　 中央委員會決定對這些異議者采取行動。

　　 政治犯名單已經公布，有150多個名字。這些名字包括許多最直言不諱的黨員，以及一些知名人士。羅曼諾夫將這些人驅逐出境並銷毀了他們的蘇聯國籍。這包括剝奪囚犯獲得的任何獎章，在某些情況下，取消未來領取養老金的權利。

　　 羅曼諾夫還開始將該黨與過去十年中一些較為極端的立場拉開距離。該黨所采取的新路线被公開作為保持共產黨“革命純潔性”和反對“托洛茨基主義者”對該黨的“右翼”和“修正主義”滲透的“唯一途徑”。

　　 該黨繼續贏得選舉，並成為蘇聯治理中更可靠的合作伙伴。羅曼諾夫繼續為了他認為理應實現的烏托邦藍圖奮斗，但最後的結果會是什麼呢？

　　 [newpage]

　　 [uploadedimage:115119]

　　 The stability of a country lies in whether its constitutional government is stable or not, and the Soviet Union had too many problems left over from its early power struggles, especially the Stalinist purges of the Red Scare that had an unmistakable impact on the Soviet Union (1934 was a turning point in Stalin\u0027s way of governing).

　　 The other two long-ruling leaders, Khrushchev and Brezhnev, both had a fatal problem; they both seized power by coup d\u0027état. This led to the need for them both to overturn the policies of their predecessors to maintain the legitimacy of their rule. This was most apparent with Nikita Khrushchev\u0027s policy of de-Stalinization, a policy that relied on the support of the intelligentsia to overturn the excesses of Joseph Stalin\u0027s rule. This support was not unwavering, and with the rise of the New Left in the 1960s, dissent among intellectuals grew. Brezhnev came to power and then reversed some of Khrushchev\u0027s policies and partially restored Stalin\u0027s historical image. He also took the opportunity to purge his predecessor\u0027s loyalists, which included many of the most prestigious academics of the day. The result was that the intelligentsia no longer had a strong voice in favor of Brezhnev\u0027s or Khrushchev\u0027s policies, and thus the legitimacy of their rule was undermined.

　　 At the same time, Khrushchev and Brezhnev\u0027s hegemonic military interventions against other sovereign states seriously damaged the image of the Soviet Union and socialism vis-à-vis the world. This led to the partial failure of the ideological struggle of the Cold War. In the decades to follow, the USSR lost the ideological battles, and those victories that it did achieve came at a high cost.

　　 They solved far fewer social problems than the social contradictions they created, and more importantly, Khrushchev\u0027s and Brezhnev\u0027s reversal of their predecessors\u0027 policies not only destabilized Soviet constitutionalism, but also undermined resource building.

　　 For example, Khrushchev\u0027s rise to power curtailed Stalin\u0027s program of natural transformation of state projects for the construction of reservoirs in the southern regions of the Soviet Union (Volga, North Caucasus, Ukraine) (the construction of eight state mega-forest reserves to improve the ecological environment, prevent soil erosion, dust storms, and agricultural development, the plan was to create a series of protective forests, reservoirs, and irrigation systems between 1950 and 1965. (The total length of the National Mega-Forest Reserve was 5,320 kilometers, with 117,900 hectares of planted forests.) The virgin land movement was also carried out to reclaim protected forests for cultivation, which increased food production in the short term. Even if the production of traditional grain-producing areas declined, the new grain-producing areas were able to ensure grain production. In the fall of 1963, bread and flour suddenly disappeared from store shelves, sugar and butter were discontinued, and in 1962, a 30% increase in the price of meat and a 25% increase in the price of butter were announced. In 1963, for the first time since the war, the Soviet Union bought about 13 million tons of grain from abroad due to a poor domestic harvest and insufficient grain reserves. As a result of the price increase, the Novocherkassk affair broke out afterwards... After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the entire ecological protection system began to collapse, the entire forest belt was left unmanaged and the irrigation system was paralyzed. It was only in 2006 that the Russian agricultural sector started to recount and maintain the protected forests.

　　 This was a mistake made by the Soviet Politburo, which on the one hand did not prohibit the cult of the individual and on the other hand turned against the former leaders; this destabilized and destroyed the faith of the people. Many people\u0027s minds are set in their youth, which is why propaganda and education are so important.

　　 As with Gorbachev, the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union had a far greater impact on him than anything that followed; he could know every word of Lenin\u0027s work by heart without really believing it. Nonetheless, he maintained respect for Suslov; he also tried to preserve the Soviet Union by creating a union of sovereign Soviet republics that abandoned the concepts of socialism and confederalism when the Soviet Union was about to disintegrate (ironically, Lenin initially wanted a confederate Soviet Union).

　　 Unfortunately, there is no way to maintain the state with people as clean as Serepin and Suslov. Perhaps Gorbachev was simply greedy and incompetent; but he got a lot of people killed as a result, whether it was bureaucrats like Serpitsky or other innocent people. He threw the crown on the ground and let Yeltsin pick it up and use the power.

　　 Romanov could not do that, he had to preserve the image of the previous leaders to preserve the whole country with a stable constitutional government. And that is why he was chosen as the General Secretary of the Central Committee.

　　 Romanov could not do this, he had to preserve the image of the previous leaders to preserve the whole country with a stable constitutional government. That\u0027s why he was chosen as the General Secretary of the Central Committee.

　　 He suddenly thought of something, time lock! Why does Islam still believe in the Qur\u0027an after thousands of years? Because Mohammed set a time lock for all subsequent generations to follow only the Koran (the Koran is the word of Allah and will remain until the end of the world). The historical Deng Xiaoping made a similar time lock in the face of the introduction of capitalism and market economy (the basic line should be governed for 100 years and cannot be shaken), by setting a time frame within which the successor could not change or deny the direction of development.

　　 This tactic is effective, as long as the successor remains within the framework it is impossible to deny. The Islamic world has successfully used this method to preserve its faith in the Qur\u0027an and Prophet Mohammed despite the efforts of the inquisitives.

　　 Contrast Khrushchev\u0027s claim in 1961 to surpass the production level of the United States in seven years...with the achievement of a communist society. The principle of distribution according to need would be realized: free lunch from 1975 and free meals three times a day from 1980. I don\u0027t understand how bad Khrushchev\u0027s Marxian theory had to be to say that... (While his ideals were good, the series of practices during his reign were too radical & stupid.) Finally, in 1971 Brezhnev could only create a concept of \"developed socialism\" to solve the problem. The term itself was a propaganda tool and the system was anything but.

　　 It\u0027s not that Romanov was a bad man or didn\u0027t want to do what was necessary for the nation; it was that the current Soviet leadership had no faith in this system and no willingness to do what was necessary to maintain it. The system was on the verge of collapse. Romanov was forced to use every ounce of willpower to convince the party and the nation that this was the only way.

　　 So he cannot and will not use the reformists and local nationalists to replace the bureaucracy, as Gorbachev did historically, which would dangerously lose the support of the bureaucratic class, because what everyone wants is stability. Not to mention the fact that the so-called reformers immediately use the same privileges or even become more corrupt.

　　 To overturn the historical image of a former leader is an extremely stupid thing to do, even if Stalin almost completely changed Lenin\u0027s policies, he would not discredit Lenin\u0027s image. Even Deng Xiaoping, who only marginalized the image of Hua Guofeng to make people forget him.

　　 So the choice and answer is obvious. Reformism will result in the loss of support and subsequent fall of the government. The fall of the government would undoubtedly lead to anarchy and the triumph of capitalism. That would spell the end of any chance of a socialist revolution, a revolution that would result in a bloodbath and hundreds of thousands of deaths.

　　 A bloody revolution would not be a good thing.

　　 Romanov made his decision.

　　 The 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was held in the State Kremlin, where 750 deputies of the Union House and 750 deputies of the House of Peoples from the Supreme Soviet of the USSR filled the seats with representatives of almost global socialist countries and socialist parties. The congress was opened with a show of hands. The flag of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was raised and everyone stood up to sing the International Anthem. The congress began.

　　 Romanov addressed the congress, starting with a quote from Karl Marx (that he read nearly verbatim) \"The history of all previous societies is a history of class struggle.\" Then he went on to criticize the current government for not living up to the ideals of the revolution.

　　 The problem with his speech is that it relies too heavily on the tired rhetoric of the old political parties, thus it becomes increasingly irrelevant and disconnected from the problems that the average worker faces.

　　 \"It is high time to break with the methods and principles of the past. It is high time to launch the world into a new era of human history. An era where the people rule, where there is peace on earth, where the conditions of life for the majority is not hunger, but abundance. That is the goal of socialism.

　　 It is high time to take a stand for a better world. A world where the workers are happy, prosperous, and where the fruits of their labor are distributed equitably among all members of society. That is the vision of Marxism.

　　 We will not stop until that is a reality. We will not stop until there is peace on earth, and all the people of the world can live in freedom and plenty. That is the mission of the Communist Party. We stand for a world of peace, equality, and abundance, where each and every person is respected for the contribution that they have to make.

　　 What if we build this world? Marx has already given the answer, that the only way to reach a real communist society is when the productive forces are greatly developed and material goods are greatly enriched! The revolution deserves to be a young revolution, not an old one! Only advanced technological innovation and a stable social order can ensure high economic development. Only then can the people of the world really benefit from the fruits of their labor. Only then can the goals of a communist revolution be achieved. We can only build a better world together!

　　 Therefore, how should we build developed socialism after the leadership of Comrade Brezhnev? Informatization! Just as Comrade Lenin said that communism is Soviet power plus national electrification, informational society is the next stage of socialist construction! Now we must continue to build informationalized scientifically developed socialism under the leadership of the Party and the will of the people. Scientifically developed socialism is Soviet power plus national electrification!\"

　　 The resolution was approved with little argument. The congress ended with the singing of the Soviet National anthem, followed by the raising of the Russian flag. The singing of the national anthem resulted in a standing ovation. The delegates exited the stage, heading to the reception. The Congress ended, the deputies of the Supreme Soviet heading to the reception.

　　 The reception started with a speech by President Mitterand, who congratulated the congress for its success. He expressed the hope that the congress would serve as a stimulus for world peace and revolution.

　　 Next, the delegation from the United States Senate made a presentation and spoke about America\u0027s support for the USSR. The speech was given by Senator Frank A. Millard, who praised the construction of the Iron Curtain, and said that the cooperation between the USSR and America had resulted in unparalleled economic and scientific advances, which would continue under the new Communist Party.

　　 The next speech was given by Joscelyn Godwin, a British delegate, who said that the new Soviet government had a great deal of responsibility, given the role of the Soviet Union in sustaining the global economic system. He cited the economic contributions of the Soviet Union, such as the vast development of nuclear energy, which had made possible the industrialization of the planet.

　　 After the speech, a video was shown displaying the evolution of the world from caveman to space age, concluding with a depiction of the peaceful, technological future that was possible with a communist society. The video painted a positive, idealized portrait of the world under socialism.

　　 ------

　　 The next day, before the new informational scientific developed socialist theory was transmitted from all levels of administrative organizational structures to all levels, the 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the USSR began to discuss the agenda.

　　 Kossolapov, secretary of the Ideological Committee of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, began his speech, wishing to restore the historical image of Stalin saying, \"We cannot, and we will not, eliminate the crimes of the past. What we will do, however, is to move forward, to build a better future! We will not allow the mistakes of the past to define our current and future role in the world, we will not allow the personal failures of a single individual to define the public mission of an entire nation. The era of the Great Purge is over. The victims of that evil act have been executed or rehabilitated. No one else will be persecuted for their opinions. The era of slander is over. We are a nation of law and order that follows the rule of law. We are a nation of truth and progress, not of false rumors and witch hunts. We live in an era of information and enlightenment, not fear and paranoia. The era of the personality cult is over. Our personality is no longer shaped by the actions of a single individual, but by the collective. The nation that we are today is the product of the common, historical experience of all its people. We should restore the true image of Comrade Stalin with the textbooks that allow the people to understand history with a correct understanding of the complexities and perspectives of historical figures. We will not go back to the days of the Great Purge. We will not repeat the mistakes of the past. We will not live in the past. We will live in the present, and we will move forward. We are the inheritors of a great legacy. There is no turning back. We will complete the revolution; we will build a new world.\"

　　 After Kosolapov\u0027s speech, the deputies of the Supreme Soviet of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, together with the delegations of other socialist parties and foreign delegates, were shocked by it. They demanded that Kossolapov justify his speech.

　　 Kossolapov referred to a few historical figures, such as the Romanov family, claiming that the history books distorted their image. However, he declared the era of revisionist history to be over and claimed that all of the past was being rewritten. The history of the USSR would be rewritten to glorify the ideals of socialism.

　　 Kossolapov cited George Orwell\u0027s famous essay \"Politics and the English Language\" to defend his position. In the essay, Orwell explains that politics and persuasion are inseparable from the art of rhetoric, and that propaganda often relies on manipulating the public with appeals to emotion and passion.

　　 A Social Democrat delegate raised his hand to ask a question and said.

　　 \"I don\u0027t think that we can agree that history is being rewritten in the name of socialism. After all, isn\u0027t the point of writing history is to record what actually happened so we can avoid making the same mistakes in the future? The only way to do that is to keep an accurate record. Isn\u0027t that what you\u0027re trying to do with your speech?\"

　　 Kossolapov smiled and said, \"It seems the questioner here doesn\u0027t think very highly of me. I would like to ask him/her to clarify why.\"

　　 The questioner was another delegate of the Social Democratic Party of Germany. He said, \"It seems that you\u0027re attempting to paint a flattering picture of a past that had elements of savagery, and present a politically correct image of a future that is pure folly. The history of the world is filled with these idealistic claims that go unfulfilled. Will you be able to live up to the lofty ideals that you set forth?\"

　　 Kossolapov said, \"You seem to be an expert on the history and theory of socialism. I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on this matter.\"

　　 The questioner said, \"I don\u0027t think you will be able to put lipstick on a pig. You might create a pretty picture of one, but it\u0027s still a pig nevertheless.\"

　　 \"That\u0027s a very crude way of looking at it, and I\u0027d like to ask, is your wife wearing lipstick today?\"

　　 The questioner looked at his feet and said, \"No.\"

　　 Kosolapov smiled and said. \"So, why accuse the act of painting an idealistic picture? Is it possible to give up painting a picture of a great ideal because real life is difficult to achieve? Human beings survive and develop precisely by aspiring to and realizing ideals.\"

　　 \"Yes, but the problem is that ideals can get in the way of reality. Ideals are like the perfect vision of what should be, instead of what is.\"

　　 \"So you\u0027re saying that a picture, even a pretty one, can obscure the truth?\"

　　 \"Yes.\"

　　 \"That\u0027s a very cynical way of looking at it. But if there is no beauty in the utopian vision that you\u0027re proposing, then what is the point of striving towards it? The real truth will not be covered up; instead, it will only be forgotten. Comrade, do you think people are more likely to remember things that are under a propaganda campaign or things that the government deliberately ignores?\"

　　 The delegate said, \"I suppose you\u0027re right. But I think that\u0027s the responsibility of the government. Not of the historians. After all, didn\u0027t the French Revolution happen because the historians got it wrong?\"

　　 \"No, it is the duty of historians to try to teach people the true historical perspective. Let\u0027s put it this way, what is the image of the first impression and concept of socialism that young people growing up and educated in the United States and Western Europe they have? And what is the real concept of socialism and communism? Can they distinguish the difference between Marxism and Leninism? Can they read the works of Mark Twain and Dostoevsky as commonly as Soviet young people did? Are young Americans themselves incapable of receiving a better education or are they being deliberately avoided and directed?\"

　　 \"I\u0027m not sure. The education system seems geared towards preparing people for work in industry, not exactly towards learning.\"

　　 Kosolapov said seriously: \"This is the true face of capitalism! It enslaves the minds of all mankind, and the education it desires is for the very few with good birth to receive a private education, while leaving the majority to go to public education to serve the entry into the industrial system! Because the capitalist market needs workers to facilitate his capitalist development, this prevents the proletarians under capitalism from getting a better education to make the class leap. But a true socialist state is designed to give all children the most comprehensive education possible, and every top leader of the Soviet Union was of worker or peasant origin, and 60% of the top Soviet deputies were of worker and peasant origin. In contrast, how many American presidents and congressmen come from ordinary families?\" (Note: The children of Soviet bureaucrats do not go into politics, but into science and technology, academia, business and medicine, etc.) For example, Gorbachev\u0027s daughter Irina is a doctor, and Romanov\u0027s daughter Valentina teaches at the Department of Mechanics and Mathematics at Moscow State University. (This is part of the reason why the bureaucrats did not mobilize the population to defend the regime when the Soviet Union collapsed; no bureaucrat would defend a regime that could not hereditary political power.)

　　 Kosolapov paused and said, \"There is no place for cynicism in our struggle. We must use all the methods at our disposal to achieve a classless, a race-free, and a gender-free society. It is only through a mobilized, classless, and united society that we can make the quantum leap to a truly Communist future.\"

　　 After some debates, General Secretary Romanov made a decision: \"On the decision to face up to history and restore Stalin\u0027s historical image, to set up a Commission for the investigation of the face up to history and its rehabilitation. It is necessary to critically examine the achievements and mistakes of Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev, to criticize the mistakes of the Red Terror during Stalin\u0027s time and to recognize the achievements of his leadership in the industrialization and the Patriotic War, and to recognize the mistakes of Khrushchev\u0027s violation of the collective principle and Brezhnev\u0027s military actions. Therefore, we need to revise textbooks to restore the true image, and to reinvestigate and rehabilitate historical figures such as Beria. Vote by a show of hands.\"

　　 The 1,500 deputies of the Supreme Soviet began to vote, and the vast majority (1,381) voted in favor.

　　 \"The next proposal, on preparations for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. The internationalist assistance mission in Afghanistan has been underway for almost six years, and we have completed the request for assistance from the Afghan People\u0027s Democratic Party; preparations for withdrawal from Afghanistan should be completed by April 1987, beginning in March 1986.\"

　　 The deputies voted again, and the resolution passed with 1,383 in favor, 21 opposed and 96 abstentions.

　　 \"The resolution on the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan is approved.\"

　　 There were mixed responses to the decisions. In the long term, everyone knew that continuing the war would only lead to more bloodshed and more destruction. Some saw this as a betrayal of the Soviet people\u0027s sacrifices during the war, especially since the Red Army\u0027s role in the war had been to liberate not to wage a war of conquest. On the other hand, restoring Stalin and restoring the images of the Soviet leaders in school would be a propaganda victory for the government.

　　 There was also some unhappiness among the military personnel. Many felt that the Soviet Union\u0027s role in the Afghan War was to simply replace British colonial rule, which had been the most repressive of all forms of rule. Although the Red Army wore the uniform of the Soviet Union, many of them held a secret loyalty to the Soviet comrades they\u0027d served with in the Great War, and resented the Soviet Union\u0027s growing withdrawal from the world.

　　 They wanted a Soviet Red Army that liberated the people not Soviet armed forces that invaded other countries, and in any case Romanov needed to stabilize politics and develop science and technology before waiting for Reagan\u0027s term to end. This required breaking the U.S. technological blockade and food embargo.

　　 \"At the same time, we need to stand firm against the cult of error. We should not have portraits of Politburo members on every wall of the country, which is against socialism. I propose that it should be forbidden to build bronze statues, statues or portraits of all current and non-war-worthy leaders printed on any printed materials except books and textbooks, museums, and to name places, buildings, etc. after leaders. However, the names of places from the Stalinist period should be restored; for example, Stalingrad, etc., in order to remember the painful wounds of the people of the Patriotic War.\"

　　 There was some discussion, but the vast majority agreed.

　　 \"Stalin\u0027s name will be restored,\" was a firm statement made by many.

　　 \"Stalin\u0027s name should be restored,\" was also a statement made in support of the resolution.

　　 \"Stalin\u0027s name is a disgrace and should be restored,\" was said with more outrage than enthusiasm.

　　 A majority of the deputies (1,300 to be exact) had expressed their opinion on the issue, and now it was up to the General Secretary to decide.

　　 \"Actions will speak louder than words, I assure you. The comrades who want to restore Stalin\u0027s name are encouraged to do so. I urge you all to avoid controversy and to focus on more important issues. The restoration of the names of cities, streets, and the like, should be undertaken with the utmost care. I would also like to remind you all that we are not living in a historical period, but in a period of transition to a communist society. So this is a long transitional phase, and we may need several generations or a dozen generations. But we will always adhere to the developed socialist line and will not change it for centuries to come, insisting that all power be vested in the leadership of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party. We should restore the names of places from the Stalinist period and prohibit the cult of leaders without the merits of the October Revolution and the Patriotic War. I would also like to call your attention to the need to protect the right to freedom of speech. We are living in dangerous times, and we cannot be too careful in exercising this right. The suppression of this freedom has become increasingly common in recent years, and we need to be vigilant in protecting this freedom as much as possible. Speech and artistic creation should be monitored, not banned. We should accept well-intentioned criticism and works that reflect social phenomena, but never allow meaningless curses that smear the sacrifices of the socialist revolution. We cannot allow a return to the censorship and control that was common in the past. We need to use new and improved creative tools to advance our cause, not suppress them.\"

　　 There were some murmurs of disagreement, but, on the whole, the speech was well-received.

　　 \"We are not a dictatorship of any kind, and we do not want to be one. We are a democracy. The will of the people is what guides our decisions. These are the principles that should guide our actions, and they are the same principles that I will be using to guide our actions as General Secretary.\"

　　 \"However, as I said, I encourage those comrades who are interested in the cause to undertake the restoration of names. I welcome the attention that this cause will bring. This will not be an easy task. There is an enormous amount of work to be done. But I am confident that I can rely on the help of every comrade in this room to achieve this goal. I hope that you will all agree with me in this. I hope that we will all work together in this cause. And I hope that we will all be successful in this effort. But, above all, I hope that we will remain vigilant and we will not be seduced by the cult of personalities, who want to exploit our history for their own selfish ends. Comrades, a great deal of work lies ahead, but I believe that we are up to the task.\"

　　 There were some more murmurs, but the majority seemed to support the General Secretary. He had made his decision, and now there was no turning back.

　　 \"Then, to begin our work, I will need the help of the most capable and capable staff. I would like to create a central information office, where our top researchers can access all the latest information. I would like to organize a team to research the current political and economic situation around the world. I would also like to create an International Department, which will coordinate relations with the international Communist parties. I would like to create a new division of the Department of International Relations, which will be dedicated to the study of new media, such as film and television. Lastly, I would like to create a special unit that will investigate historical questions, particularly regarding the October Revolution. I hope you will all agree to these positions, as, if anything, they will increase the chances of success. Now, I\u0027m sure there are other comrades who would like to contribute, and I hope that they will as well. I would be very happy to hear suggestions from you all.\"

　　 There was silence for a short time, as the room digested this information. Then there was a round of applause, and several people stood on their seats to propose various ideas for the rest of the positions.

　　 The next few meetings were filled with the discussion of various projects, the creation of positions, and the approval of certain people to fill those positions. Among the people suggested to be part of the government, there was a large contingent of young communists, eager to make an impact.

　　 In addition, Romanov put forward a proposal to prohibit members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and members of the Komsomolskaya Komsomolets from operating private businesses. The goal of the suggestion was to force a decision from the party, and to draw party members into the public eye.

　　 The proposal was met with mixed reactions. On the one hand, it was seen as a way to expose party members to the public, which would increase their legitimacy. On the other, it was seen as a way to hurt the party\u0027s reputation.

　　 The ban was passed with a few minor amendments, and the first businesses to be affected were those belonging to party members.

　　 The party\u0027s reputation suffered greatly, and many party members saw their business ventures come to a standstill. However, party members in government had a much easier time of it.

　　 The end of the month, a letter was sent to the Central Committee of the Communist Party, and was also posted on bulletin boards throughout the city.

　　 This is an instruction to the members of the Communist Youth League who applied for membership in the Party to work, and they were called to Central Asia to plant trees for the construction of a new natural transformation program. They were to carry out this task until the trees were old enough to be harvested, then they were to remain in the region to assist in the maintenance of the trees.

　　 In the meantime, the political situation was beginning to deteriorate.

　　 The first signs of dissent began appearing, with a small minority of party members publicly expressing dissatisfaction with the decisions being made by the Politburo. The Politburo responded by increasing its power, and making it more difficult for members of the Central Committee to run for the Presidency of the Party.

　　 The Central Committee decided to take action against these dissenters.

　　 The list of political prisoners was revealed, with over 150 names. The names included many of the most vocal party members, as well as some high-profile public figures. Romanov deported these people and destroyed their Soviet citizenship. This included stripping away any medals that the prisoners had been awarded, and in some cases, revoking the right to a future pension.

　　 Romanov also began to distance the party from some of its more extreme positions of the past decade.

　　 The new line that the party was taking was presented to the public as the \"only way\" to preserve the Communist Party\u0027s \"revolutionary purity\", and to counter the \"right wing\" and \"revisionist\" infiltration of the party by \"Trotskyists\".

　　 The party continued to win elections, and became a much more reliable partner in governing the Soviet Union. Romanov continues to fight for the utopian blueprint he believes should be realized, but what will be the end result?