Perhaps there is no person who would look into the dictionary for the definition of the word «love» even when he is seized by the power of love during his teenage years, for example.

Love is considered the subject of poetry, daydreaming, sentimental judgment, but not of science. In the youth environment, the Kama Sutra is more likely to be considered a scientific manual on love than Marxism-Leninism. Although in reality it was Marxist-Leninist science that revealed more about the secrets of love than all the lyricists, psychologists, and physiologists combined.

The great thinkers and revolutionaries Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin today are the most frequent objects of slander, lies, and perversion, not only in terms of their theoretical and practical heritage, but also in terms of their life path. Meanwhile, Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin were not only exemplary, highly moral victorious revolutionaries, but also experts in the field of love.

The friendly love of Marx and Engels is a unique example in world history of a comradely alliance of like-minded people. Is it necessary to say how much dirt and lies were invented by bourgeois hacks to discredit this friendship?

The romantic love of Karl and Jenny Marx, sung in the poetry of the Moor, the love reigning in their beautiful, strong family, is a clear example of the fact that the family is a cell of communism even in the darkest conditions of class society. Jenny was not just a life partner, but also a reliable assistant to Karl in his scientific work and political struggle. Subsequently, the children of Marx also joined the communist work. Is it necessary to say how much dirt and lies were invented by bourgeois hacks to discredit this family?

Lenin’s large family, soldered by family love and the duty of revolutionary struggle, was another example of the communist community, which gave the homeland five wonderful fighters.

Lenin and Krupskaya are no less remarkable than the Marxes, the love union of two great revolutionaries. Is it necessary to remember how much dirt and lies were invented by bourgeois hacks in order to discredit them and discredit Lenin’s relatives?

Lenin’s love for Marx and Engels, like the love of a student for his teachers and older predecessors, is felt in many of his works.

Young Lenin also fell in love with Plekhanov as the first propagandist of Marxism on Russian soil, until he began working with him in the same party and diverged ideologically. The disappointment in Plekhanov was hard for Lenin.

The love of Stalin for Lenin, of a student for his teacher, which was most vividly embodied in the famous oath at the coffin of the leader, is generally a world-historical example of sincere respect for the great comrade and mentor.

We have little reliable information about the relationship between Stalin and Nadezhda Alliluyeva, but there are all signs that there was great romantic love between them, despite the difference in age. The tragic death of Alliluyeva, tormented by an incurable illness, at the dawn of her strength, according to all evidence, was a severe blow to the leader. How many lies and slander invented by paid hacks to discredit Stalin! The CIA recruited the weak and hysterical daughter of Stalin, Svetlana, who had fled the USSR, to publish a book that was monstrous in its lies on her behalf. It should be understood that, unlike the Marxes, Stalin objectively did not have enough time to raise his children, so Svetlana became the embodiment of the saying «however, the family has its black sheep.»

A lot of lies and slander have been brought down on Vasily Stalin, he is presented as a drunkard and almost a «major,» although there is no reliable evidence of this, in contrast to his merits and achievements.

Following the German fascists, stories are being written about Stalin’s son from his first marriage, Yakov, who died on the fronts of World War II.

Stalin was surrounded by loving fellow-comrades-in-arms: Artyom, Kirov, Ordzhonikidze, Kaganovich, Voroshilov, and Molotov. Stalin accepted Artyom’s son into his family after the death of the comrade.

Of course, enemies such as Yenukidze and Mikoyan also ingratiated themselves with Stalin. In exactly the same way, Zinoviev and Bukharin ingratiate themselves with Lenin. But all the evidence about the alleged friendship of the leaders with the enemies of the people is nothing more than another slander.

Thus, the life of the greatest revolutionaries Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin was filled with romantic, friendly, and comradely love. This is not to mention their highest love for humanity, the people, the working people, the Motherland, the Party, and the cause of the struggle for communism.

A separate study is much needed on the family history of Kim Il Sung, who managed, with all the burden of state affairs, to educate his son, the true leader of the Korean people Kim Jong Il, and the father of a wonderful leader and ardent patriot Kim Jong Un.

Marxism-Leninism, whose creators and developers were Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, is a synthesis of truths about the most general objective laws of development, primarily of society as a special kind of matter, to which knowledge of the universal absolute objective laws of the development of the universe is subordinated. Marxism-Leninism is the only, monolithic, unified scientific worldview open to development.

Is there a place in a truly scientific worldview for the concept of love? Of course there is, because love is the most powerful factor in the life of a fully developed person. Modern people, in whose life there is not, was not, and will not be love, find themselves outside of society as a whole, almost psychopaths. And the majority of villains, scoundrels, scoundrels, not knowing about the universal value of love, justify their anti-social deeds with empty talk about love for the family, nation, and people.

First of all, it should be noted that there is nothing more erroneous in the study of love than reducing it to emotion, to mere feeling. Love is not a feeling, but a relationship between people, colored by corresponding emotions, feelings. Therefore, love for the motherland is the relationship of a person with other people, a community with homogeneous socio-economic and cultural conditions, colored by the corresponding feeling. Love for the party is the relationship of a person with party comrades, like-minded people in the aspect of the common struggle, colored by the corresponding feeling. Love between a man and a woman is their relationship, colored by the corresponding feeling, which shimmers with passion, care, and so on.

This means that the feeling of love, as vulgar romantics suggest, cannot look like a homogeneous mass of pseudo-bliss, regardless of the object with which the relationship of love itself is formed. It is impossible to love all children with the same «parental love,» it is impossible for «sexual love» to be the same without the distinction of a woman or a man, and so on. Each specific relationship of love has its own unique content, colored by feelings. Otherwise, you can only talk about empty emotions under the guise of love.

So, to the history of the issue.

It is extremely difficult to single out love as a phenomenon in primitive communism due to the historical remoteness of such a society and the spiritual and moral cohesion of the primitive community (in the full sense of the word, there were no isolated individuals there). Therefore, science quite definitely for the first time fixes love as a separate phenomenon in the form of those love bonds that are observed in happy families. The economic reasons for the emergence of the family as a social institution are certainly primary and determined the behavior of people to an extreme degree. However, even with such oppression by the laws of the economic system of life, the traditions of patriarchal family slavery, each family had the prerequisites for the formation of love relationships. This is especially true of the oppressed classes. Throughout human history, in all formations, there have been relatively happy families based on strong love ties. This fact served as food for poets and romantics who glorified the feeling of love in literature, music, dance, and theater. It was also used by all kinds of clerics to introduce the idea of the connection of love with God.

And today, most of the proletarians from the cannibalistic madness of capitalist life are fleeing precisely to the bosom of the family. It is easy to see that from the point of view of the absolute economic law of capitalism, that is, profit, the monogamous family has no place at all in bourgeois society, however, despite this, it shows extreme vitality. A mother’s love for her children is especially strong, often reaching the point of self-sacrifice.

Love has also received other manifestations in history in the form of separate examples of sincere friendship, comradeship, love for the Motherland and people.

If we do not fall into biologizing and idealism, then at the first approximation of considering love as a phenomenon, we can say that those relationships that are called love are something that absolutely excludes egoism. Where selfishness reigns, the calculation of some kind of reward, benefit or exchange transaction, there can be no love by definition. Where altruism reigns, we always find relationships that can safely be called love.

In one of his works, Valery Alekseevich Podguzov rightly called all types of economic social relations in their objective content and essence as «egonomic,» that is, egoistic. Economism and egoism are synonyms. All economic motives are inherently selfish. Egoism is the dictatorship of one-sided personal gain in the psyche of specific people, and it will always disregard the interests of other people at a minimum.

Private property relations, underlying all economic forms from slavery to capitalism, represent the forcible exclusion by some subjects of the material and spiritual conditions of existence from other subjects. It is precisely this rejection that turns the direct and indirect producers of material and spiritual goods into slaves, serfs, proletarians, and, consequently, transform their owners into outright parasites—slavers, landlords, and capitalists.

Egoism, which is characteristic of voluntary and involuntary participants in private property relations, naturally spills outward and onto other people in the form of hatred. In order to turn a person into a slave, a serf or a proletarian, it is necessary to hatefully dehumanize him to one degree or another and to despise him, usually as a lower being. Therefore, the slave owners, the landowners and the capitalists should not be surprised that the people, who have been shackled into slavery, serfdom and wage labor, hate them fiercely in return. The exploiting classes have been planting religious obscurantism for thousands of years in order to instill servility and subservience among the masses in order to diffuse their reciprocal hatred.

No less hatred is contained in the relations between the exploiters themselves, since they perceive each other as predatory animals in the struggle for food, that is, as competitors.

Today, people of older generations are more and more clearly aware of the loss of that altruistic love for their neighbor, which at one time uniquely distinguished the Soviet person from the anti-Soviet and non-Soviet bipeds. True, few people understand that as long as classes remain in society, the change in the content of relations between strangers is absolutely dependent on the change in the content of production relations and the resulting change in social conditions of life. Many shy away from politics, they want to sit in the kitchen, while it was politics in the early 1990s that determined the economy in our country, and then the economy determined all the factors of life in general. So it turned out that it is extremely difficult, and sometimes even dangerous for life, to remain honest, decent, conscientious, and altruistic under capitalism. Unbeknownst to themselves, the former Soviet people ceased to be benevolent, then they ceased to care about the common good and, in the end, turned into typical individualists–the inhabitants of a capitalist society. Of course, this change was not of our own free will, and it happened in spite of our upbringing, but such is the defining role of the economic base, which we all experienced with our own skin.

Soviet communism, due to well-known political zigzags and the fierce class struggle of the anti-Soviets, failed in its development to reach the necessary maturity, in which the all-round development of each individual would become a condition for the all-round development of all. Communist relations are a subtle and lofty matter, which, like everything new, is very vulnerable during periods of formation. Therefore, there is nothing surprising in the fact that after the decay of the CPSU and the betrayal of its leaders, gross ignorance and the gloomy traditions of private property relations took over communism. Relying on semi-animal atavisms in the psyche of people, egoism is much easier to activate than to raise the worldview of the masses to the level of science.

Love and hate, altruism and selfishness are those mutually exclusive opposites that characterize all types of relationships between people.

The most complete scientific study of the hatred and selfishness inherent in the era of capitalism was carried out by Marx in the book “Capital. A Critique of Political Economy. In particular, he proved that selfishness and hatred subordinate social production only to an increase in profit, that is, to a type of «wealth» that increasingly alienates the working people from the factors of life. The material and spiritual reproduction of society is under capitalism only a side process. The reproduction of society for the sake of increasing and reveling in the parasitic way of life of an ever-shrinking group of oligarchs–such is the essence of capitalism and all class societies in general.

Therefore, love and altruism are a form of relations between people, also associated with the reproduction of society, but with a different goal.

In a wonderful article in 2002, «The country of love was called the USSR,» Valery Alekseevich writes:

“From the point of view of the essence of the first order, the word LOVE is taken to denote an EXTREMELY developed form of RELATIONSHIPS between individuals regarding the expanded reproduction of SOCIETY. However, Marxism, as is well known, does not recognize absolute scientific value behind brief definitions. To comprehend a higher level of the essence of love, the reader needs to remember the scientific definition of the categories “relationships” and “society,” so as not to confuse “relationships about the expanded reproduction of SOCIETY” with “the instinct of procreation”.

And it’s not just about romantic love. All varieties of love as a relationship between people are associated with the reproduction of society in the sense that they reproduce the spiritual, collectivist essence of man as a social being. Any individualism, egoism consists in the fact that the subject artificially opposes himself to society. Under the conditions of the dominance of private property, such an opposition seems natural, although in fact it contradicts the social nature of man. It is the forcible alienation of the masses of the people from the factors of existence that artificially divides society into opposite classes, competitive groups, mutually opposing families and selfish individuals living according to the laws of the jungle. Any altruism, on the contrary, affirms the identity of the individual and society as a whole, the manifestation of which he is. Moreover, relations in which at least one of the parties gains benefit at the expense of the other or a third party cannot be considered altruistic; altruism cannot be directed to anti-social goals, in which case this is called complicity, including in criminal activity.

The expanded reproduction of society is not limited to the simple reproduction of offspring, on the contrary, it is primarily the growth of the quality of the individuals themselves and the growth of the quality of the relations between them. The expanded reproduction of society is a fundamental law of social development, therefore, no matter how ugly the system of social organization takes, it is always only the embodiment of the expanded reproduction of society. The tragedy and stupidity of capitalism lies in the fact that the greatest forces and resources of mankind are directed not towards expanded reproduction properly, which occurs as if by a secondary order, but towards the mutual struggle of classes and the senseless accumulation of luxury and treasures in the hands of a miserable minority. The reason for this is private property as a consequence of unexpired animal atavisms in a still semi-rational man.

The expanded reproduction of society is an objective, independent of the will of man, social-internal, essential, stable and therefore repetitive connection, on the one hand, between society and nature, on the other hand, between the people themselves in society, which embraces the very existence of society as forms of matter.

Speaking from a scientific point of view about human society, first of all, we are talking about the fact that it exists, and therefore, we refer to the objective and necessary process of expanded reproduction of society through the transformation of nature. The specific methods of this reproduction develop from primitive to class, which consists of slavery, feudal, capitalist, and then to communistic. Thus, the content of the Marxist category «mode of production» reflects and reveals this law.

All economic relations, which are filled with selfishness, are production relations, since they necessarily arise in the course of social production, distribution or consumption. All economic, that is exploitative and selfish, production relations thus exist as a spontaneous, anti-scientific, animal-like embodiment of the objective law of the expanded reproduction of society. The economic (and egonomic) form of reproduction relations is extremely base, it is distorted by animal instincts and is a characteristic of a society that has not yet fully emerged from the state of the herd.

Therefore, all economic forms (in the polarity of hatred versus love, or egoism versus altruism), due to the baseness of the quality of their content, their qualitative underdevelopment, belong to the sphere of hatred. In turn, we have already found out that the most developed form of relations between individuals regarding the expanded reproduction of society is called love.

The term «love» is usually applied to interpersonal, individual relationships, but in principle it applies to industrial relations as well. After all, people say, for example, that a person loves his job or someone is busy with what he loves. This means that human activity is free from exploitation and fully corresponds to the natural inclinations of a person’s personality. But if you look deeper, this shows, first of all, that the relations of production in terms of the degree of maturity correspond to the quality of the personality of the person himself. Or, to simplify, that he benefits the whole society with his activities.

Such cases are also observed in an exploitative society, for example, in the work of doctors, teachers, scientists, researchers, rescuers, and revolutionaries, but they are the exception.

When production relations are completely liberated from egoism, hatred, and, as a result be formed on a scientific basis instead, that is, they will reach a fundamental level of maturity of their quality, then such an attitude of the individual and society will systematically develop everywhere, in which there is a stable correspondence between the dynamics of the development of the individual and the dynamics development of society. This is called happiness or communism.

Therefore, the production relations of communism, reflecting the objective requirements of progress, will be love in their sensual component. Or, as Stalin wrote, «comradely cooperation and mutual assistance of workers free from exploitation.»

The same thing will happen with those social relations that are not production relations. When people develop a scientific worldview, become conscious communists, their interpersonal relationships will be rid of egoism and hatred, primarily in the form of commodity-money ugliness, and will be filled with altruism: love for society, neighbors, relatives, comrades, friends, and family.

Hatred and unhappiness, as they should, will become only fleeting moments in the era of happiness and love. After all, there will always be tensions and personal conflicts, dangers and accidents, diseases and natural disasters, and so on.

The greatest contribution to the theory and practice of love was made by Stalin. The fact is that if, on the scale of an individual, it is quite possible to come, so to speak, to the awareness and practice of love on the basis of self-education, the development of conscience, the altruistic principle in oneself, then on the scale of society, we are talking about the formation of the necessary material factors.

For example, the biological prerequisite for the emergence of romantic love relationships is the mutual sexual attraction of men and women, and its necessary social condition is the adequacy of the intellectual development of individuals experiencing a feeling of mutual attraction.

For example, a prerequisite for the emergence of friendly love relations is the collectivist essence of a person, and a necessary condition is the intellectual development and maturity of individuals in joint life practice.

A prerequisite for the emergence of an attitude of love for work (“comradely cooperation and mutual assistance of workers free from exploitation”) is also the collectivist essence of man, and a necessary condition is public ownership of the means of production.

What conditions for romantic love today can we talk about if the housing problem, the shortage of kindergartens, and the obsession about making money are at the forefront? What conditions for friendly love can we talk about today, when everywhere man is a competitor to man? What are the conditions for love of work today, when the majority have to work for a beggarly wage to enrich the oligarchs?

Obviously, there is nothing to say about the conditions for the formation of love relationships on the scale of the whole society under capitalism, they can be formed only in the process of building communism.

The practice of the Stalinist period of building communism in the USSR, as well as Stalin’s theoretical developments on the construction of a society of the first phase of communism and the transition to a mature communism society (“Issues of Leninism,” “On Dialectical and Historical Materialism,” speeches on the education of communists, “Marxism and questions of linguistics,” «Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR») are the most significant contribution to the formation of the necessary material factors for a happy society with the dominance of love relationships.

The material conditions for the formation of love are the same as the material conditions for the formation of everyone’s happiness. In order to be happy and build love, it is necessary to i) first of all exist biologically, that is, to have food, clothing, housing in sufficient quantity and quality for personal consumption; ii) to be in society and correspond to the level of its development or to be ahead of this level; iii) live as long as possible; iv) live a peaceful life; v) to be free; and finally, vi) to work (see «The Fundamental Problems of Economic Development»). Despite the frenzied class struggle of external and internal enemies, by the 1950s the USSR was confidently ensuring the steady growth of all the necessary material factors for these conditions. After Stalin, the level of social development of the USSR significantly exceeded both Western countries and the current Russian Federation.

Back in 1848, Marx and Engels very briefly expressed the economic program for the formation of the material factors necessary for happiness and love–the elimination of private property. This is what constitutes the content of the measures taken by the dictatorship of the working class. Therefore, only a political struggle for the creative repetition of the victories of Bolshevism is a guarantee of building a society of happiness and love.

Redin