Eagle, I don't want to form an alliance anymore.

Slava turned to the crowd in the hall.

The lights in the main hall were dimmed, and the faces below the stage blended together in the dim light. The front row was clearly visible; they were all familiar faces from the Politburo, and the colors of their epaulets, medals, and ties were clearly discernible. Further back, only outlines remained, and in the last few rows, only rows of human-shaped blocks of color, cut into equidistant lines by the chair backs, could be seen.

"I hereby declare the 28th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union officially open!"

...

As is customary, the first item on the agenda of the congress was the political report of the Central Committee.

This is the core of the entire conference, and the General Secretary personally delivered the report.

The content covers a summary of the domestic and international situation since the previous term, an assessment of the Party's line, and the strategic direction for the next stage.

According to Soviet political tradition, it was both a demonstration of the General Secretary's personal authority and the final verdict in the party's internal power struggles. Which statements were included in the report and which were deleted served as indicators of the subsequent political climate.

Slava's report began with a summary of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan. If he had followed the old routine of his predecessors, he would have spent an hour talking about the achievements, then spent ten minutes casually asking a couple of questions, and finally ended with the slogan "The process is tortuous, but the future is bright."

He briefly summarized the achievements of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan before turning to his blueprint for the alliance's next strategic direction.

"Comrades," Slava said, "I have finished recounting the achievements of the past five years. Now I will explain to you the goals and undertakings that our Communist Party of the Soviet Union will accomplish in the future."

"The socialist system has been in place in the League for more than seventy years."

Over the past seventy-odd years, the Soviet people have completed industrialization, defeated fascist aggression, established an education and healthcare system covering all citizens, and reached the forefront of the world in several key areas of science and technology. These achievements are real, and they form the foundation for our continued progress.

But the Party must make an honest assessment of the state of Soviet society.

Over the past two decades, the Soviet Union’s economic growth has continued to slow down, and the gap between its labor productivity and that of major developed countries has not only failed to narrow but has widened in some areas!

The rigidity and corruption of the management system led to resource misallocation: on the one hand, there was an imbalance in the distribution of materials, and on the other hand, there was a long-term shortage of daily consumer goods for residents. Agricultural production efficiency was low, and the expansion of administrative agencies eroded the substantive content of socialist democracy. The decision-making power of Soviets at all levels was hampered by departmental interests and bureaucratic inertia.

At the same time, the world is undergoing profound changes. The rapid development of computer technology, information and communication technology, and automation technology is transforming the fundamental ways in which humans organize production and manage society.

This technological revolution has posed challenges to the socialist system, but it has also provided it with an unprecedented historical opportunity. It is precisely the foundation of socialist public ownership and the framework of a planned economy that enable us to deploy new technologies, plan information infrastructure, and coordinate economic ties between various departments and regions in a unified manner throughout society, without being subject to barriers of private property rights and disorderly market competition!

The construction of the National Economic Unified Information Management System over the past four years has proven that:

Modern computing technology can significantly improve the scientific nature of planning and the accuracy of its execution, enabling real-time two-way information communication between production units and planning agencies, and incorporating actual consumer needs into the basis of planning!

Based on the above understanding, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union set forth the following program and objectives:

By 2015, the basic realization of socialist modernization will be achieved, and the Soviet Union will be built into a strong socialist modern country with economic prosperity, advanced technology, sound democracy, harmonious nationalities, and ecological sustainability!

Socialist modernization is not a negation or replacement of the socialist system, but rather a comprehensive update of the socialist system's operating methods, management tools, and governance capabilities, while maintaining the basic socialist system—public ownership of the means of production, distribution according to work, and the leadership of the Party—so that it can adapt to the technological conditions and social needs of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.

Socialist modernization includes the following interrelated fundamental aspects:

First, economic modernization.

We aim to build a unified information management system covering the major sectors of the national economy, thereby achieving informatization and scientification in planning, resource allocation, and supply-demand coordination.

On this basis, we will significantly improve labor productivity and resource utilization efficiency, fundamentally solving the problem of intensive economic growth. The industrial structure will gradually shift from focusing on the production of means of production to the coordinated development of means of production and consumer goods production, ensuring that the fruits of economic growth are truly transformed into improved living standards for the people.

While maintaining the dominant position of public ownership, we will encourage the development of diverse business forms, making the realization of socialist ownership more flexible and diverse, and adapting to the specific conditions of different fields and regions.

Second, political modernization.

In our next work, we will enrich the substantive functions of the Soviets at all levels as state power organs.

We will gradually implement competitive elections in the elections of Soviet representatives at all levels to guarantee voters' democratic rights. We will strengthen the Soviets' power to supervise and question administrative organs, ensuring that the government is truly accountable to the people.

We will leverage information technology to broaden channels for citizen participation in public affairs and economic decision-making, enabling workers to participate in the management of national and social affairs not only legally but also technologically. We will uphold and improve the Party's leadership while clearly defining the functional boundaries between Party organs and state organs, overcoming the phenomenon of the Party substituting for the government.

Third, modernization of science and technology.

Next, we will identify electronic computer technology, automation technology, new materials technology, and biotechnology as national priority development areas, and provide concentrated support in areas such as R&D investment, talent cultivation, and industrial application. We will ensure the independence of scientific research and prevent undue interference by administrative power in scientific judgment. The direction of scientific and technological development will be determined by the scientific community based on academic standards, and the state will provide support through resource allocation, but will not replace the scientific community in making academic judgments.

Fourth, social modernization.

We will basically solve the housing queuing problem for urban residents by 2000. We will continuously improve the variety and quality of food supply, so that residents' dietary structure is close to the scientifically recommended nutritional standards.

We will comprehensively improve the quality and accessibility of public health and medical services. We will reform the education system to cultivate socialist citizens with critical thinking skills, scientific literacy, and practical skills. We will gradually narrow the gap in living standards between urban and rural areas, between mental and manual labor, and between different ethnic groups and regions.

Fifth, ecological modernization. We will establish ecological protection and the rational use of natural resources as an integral part of national development. We will formulate and implement long-term restoration plans for existing ecological damage, fully implement the environmental impact assessment system in new economic construction projects, and incorporate ecological costs into the economic accounting system.

At the same time, the Soviet Union's socialist modernization required a peaceful and stable international environment. The Party advocated developing relations between states based on respect for each country's sovereignty and choice of social system, promoting the use of dialogue and negotiation to resolve international disputes, and opposing the use of military coercion as a tool for pursuing foreign policy. The Soviet Union was willing to develop equal and mutually beneficial economic and technological cooperation with all countries and to deepen cooperation with socialist countries on the principles of voluntariness and mutual respect.

Economic modernization provides the material foundation for other aspects; political modernization provides institutional guarantees and error correction mechanisms for economic reform; scientific and technological modernization is the fundamental driving force for the transformation of economic growth patterns; social modernization is the ultimate goal of all reforms; ecological modernization is a responsibility to future generations; and a peaceful international environment is the external condition for all undertakings.

The Party is keenly aware that the process of achieving socialist modernization will not be a smooth one.

It signifies a difficult farewell to old ways of working and ways of thinking, an adjustment of the distribution of interests, and the need to constantly correct mistakes through exploration.

But that is precisely why the Party needs a clear direction and timeframe to unite the will of the entire Party and society!

The ultimate measure of socialist modernization is not the numbers on statistical reports, but the actual life of every citizen in the Soviet Union: whether their housing is spacious, their meals are plentiful, their children receive a good education, they have sufficient social security, they can participate in decisions that affect their lives, they live in a harmonious and beautiful environment, and they have confidence in themselves, in the country, and in the cause of communism!

This is the promise that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has made to the vast Soviet people for the next twenty-five years, and it is also the cause for which the Party requires all its members to strive!

This speech, entitled "Socialist Modernization and the Historical Tasks of the Union of Soviets," was incorporated into the new program of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In the later agenda of the 28th Congress of the CPSU, the 1990 version of the new program was unanimously adopted.

Four short years have passed since Gorbachev revised the party program at the 27th Congress of the CPSU in 1986.

Now, Slava can finally erase the traces of this traitor.

------

The second item on the agenda was the report of the Central Inspection Commission. This part mainly concerned the Party's financial situation, the number of Party members, and the situation of discipline inspection. The content was relatively technical and did not carry much political weight.

After all, this is not a people's congress. The 28th Congress of the CPSU was the 28th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Of course, only party members can attend a party congress, and it is normal to discuss party affairs.

The third item on the agenda was a discussion among the delegates.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a federation. The first secretaries of the party committees of each constituent republic, the leaders of important departments, and local representatives were required to speak at the congress to express their support for the central report, and at the same time take the opportunity to garner resources and attention for their respective republics or departments.

This step had become highly ritualized during the Brezhnev era—speech drafts had to be reviewed in advance. The Brezhnev tradition was to "show loyalty and ask for resources." This remained unchanged during the Andropov and Chernenko periods, and it wasn't significantly altered at the 27th Congress hosted by Gorbachev because he was a new official and lacked sufficient prestige.

But now that Slava is in power, he has shown both tenderness and iron fist in resolving the issues of ethnic divisions within the Union and the separation of constituent republics.

He was not Gorbachev; many saw him more as Stalin. During his rule, many of the "mental hospitals" built during the Andropov era housed large numbers of people. He divided and suppressed ethnic separatist forces and Western democrats within the major republics, used special agents to de-radicalize hardliners, cultivated local loyalists, and respected local ethnic cultural traditions while strengthening economic ties.

His educational reforms freed the constituent republics from controlling the flow of intellectuals within their borders, allowing more and more elites to move freely throughout the union. University graduates would also intern for several years in various parts of the union. He wanted to prevent Moscow from having to rely on compromise and money to secure local loyalty to the central government.

In recent years, he has caused chaos among the local power factions in various republics. Some of these groups have become loyalists, while others hope to take advantage of the situation to enrich themselves. Some newly promoted individuals genuinely hope that Moscow can resolve the local difficulties...

This was a very politically active period, and although the discussion became quite heated within the first ten minutes, Slava felt it was still better than Brezhnev's stagnant era.

Having problems is a good thing; what's worrisome is when things are covered up!

At the conference, representatives from each member state took turns to speak. Following political tradition, they first expressed their support for the central report, their unwavering commitment to following the line of the great leader, and their commitment to the ideals of their mentor. Then, they took the opportunity to advocate for resources for their respective regions.

The Ukrainian representative emphasized the republic's contribution to food security across the union and hoped for a larger share of investment. Representatives from Central Asia raised issues related to the Aral Sea ecosystem and the difficulties of cotton transition. Representatives from the Baltic states expressed "full understanding and support for the central government's approach," while subtly hinting at a desire for "greater autonomy"...

The cadres of each constituent republic either cried poverty or played the victim, all in an attempt to beg for more budget.

Second Secretary Ligachev presided over the summary of this phase of speeches. As the cadre in charge of personnel appointments and removals within the Party Central Committee and the management of ideology, he specifically drew the attention of the Congress to several issues:

One issue is the relaxation of ideological education. Although the General Secretary's line emphasizes the cultivation of scientific literacy and critical thinking skills, we must not relax our ideological defenses because of this.

Another trend was the emergence of bourgeois liberalization in certain regions. The speed and scale of foreign investment in the Far East Special Zones were the largest since the establishment of the Union, and the large amount of goods brought by Sino-Soviet border trade transformed many individual business owners into large merchants.

The previous Soviet law legalizing individual businesses legalized the work of a large number of self-employed individuals, making it their "earned income." However, Ligachev and many conservatives believed this step could easily undermine socialist public ownership. Fortunately—

The answer was then provided in Slava's new party platform in 1990.

The fourth item on the agenda of the congress was to discuss and announce the basic direction of national economic and social development, and also to announce the outline document of the 13th Five-Year Plan.

The 13th Five-Year Plan would be implemented starting in 1991. Slava believed it was reasonable to formulate the programmatic document for the next five-year plan a few months in advance. From then on, the Soviet Union's next five-year plan would be discussed at the party congress held the year before the plan was announced.

Chairman of the Council of Ministers Ryzhkov delivered a report, mainly outlining the core growth indicators for the next five years:

National income has grown by 20%-25% cumulatively over five years;

The gross industrial output value is expected to grow by 30%-35%. Unlike previous reports, this year's growth target for gross industrial output value includes a new change – the growth rate of the consumer goods industry is set to be higher than that of the means of production industry.

For decades, the Soviet Union's five-year plans generally prioritized heavy industry while cutting back on consumer goods. This time, however, consumer goods have been reversed and prioritized.

The total agricultural output value increased by 22-28%, and per capita meat consumption increased from 60 kg to 70 kg.

Basic infrastructure investment grew by 25%-28%, but the structure underwent a significant adjustment—the proportion of productive investment decreased, while the proportion of non-productive investment, such as housing, schools, and hospitals, increased substantially.

...

Ultimately, the basic direction of the 13th Five-Year Plan was adopted by an overwhelming majority.

The next item on the agenda was to revise the party platform.

The party platform is not changed at every congress; it is only proposed when the alliance encounters a major turning point.

The Union is currently undergoing a historic transformation unseen in a century. Slava wants to promote institutional reforms within the Union, and amending the Party Constitution is an important tool—adjusting the way the Central Committee is formed, the term of office of the General Secretary, and the division of powers between the Party and state organs, etc.

The CPSU currently operates on Gorbachev's version of the party program. Since Slava succeeded him in 1987, the Soviet Union's direction has effectively diverged from that program. However, nominally, the old program remains, still the party's supreme program.

When Slava began reading his report at the start of the conference, all the committee members knew that he was laying the groundwork for revising the party platform.

Slava stood up and walked to the front of the stage.

"Comrades, I now submit to the Congress a proposal for revisions to the 1986 Party Program."

He opened the document that he and Director Nian had spent several months drafting.

"I already mentioned the core of this revision in my opening remarks at the conference, and now we can summarize it in one sentence—"

He raised his head and looked at the six thousand faces below the stage.

"Improve the socialist system, advance the construction of a democratic and scientific new era of socialism, and achieve socialist modernization by 2015."

Then he began reading the revised content.

The old party platform's wording on economic management remained vague, such as "improving the combination of planned management and economic levers," but Slava rewrote the entire section.

The new provisions clearly state that—

"The National Economic Unified Information System was the technological foundation of the Soviet socialist computerized planned economy and a core tool for achieving scientific planning, rational allocation of resources, and improvement of labor productivity."

Information technology reform is no longer a technological policy; it has become an essential feature of the Soviet socialist economic system.

In the near future, with the advancement of economic and government informatization, the Soviet Union will attempt to introduce more advanced automation and algorithms to eliminate bureaucratic corruption and data black boxes as much as possible, and eventually build a nationwide automated system—OGAS.

The second one follows immediately—

"Enterprises enjoy the right to operate independently in accordance with the law within the framework of the unified plan."

It acknowledged that enterprises needed autonomy—one of the core demands of the moderate reformists in the CPSU. Slava defined autonomy within the framework of a unified plan, which meant that autonomy was not boundless or a move towards marketization, but rather autonomy within a planned system coordinated by an information system.

This is Slava's third path: neither a Gorbachev-style move towards the market nor a return to earlier administrative directives. He aims to use a computer system based on cybernetics to achieve a scientific, real-time coordinated planned economy, within which enterprises will be freed from constraints.

Then came the issue of ownership, which was of utmost concern to Ligachev.

The old party platform insisted on two forms of ownership: public ownership and collective ownership, and basically rejected other forms of ownership. What Koslava has done in the past four years—the legalization of foreign investment, joint ventures, and individual businesses in the Far East Special Economic Zone, the contract system in the "vegetable basket" project—all fall outside these two "orthodox" forms of ownership.

He couldn't include allowing private ownership in the party program because the concept of private ownership in the Soviet Communist Party's ideology and its economic and social context were often confused, which could easily lead to misunderstandings. In that case, the entire congress might turn into an ideological war.

From a legal perspective, private ownership manifests as ownership, meaning that means of production such as land, factories, machinery, and capital belong to private individuals, who have the right to control, use, and dispose of these properties and obtain income from them.

At the level of political economy, private ownership manifests as production relations, namely the separation of the means of production from the laborers. Owners own the means of production, while workers do not own the means of production and can only sell their labor power in exchange for wages. The boss appropriates the surplus value created by the workers.

P.S.: Owning personal property such as clothes, cell phones, and one's own house does not fall under the scope of private ownership; that is individual ownership. Private ownership specifically refers to the possession of the means of production.

Previously, the Soviet Union legalized a large number of individually owned businesses, all of which had obvious characteristics of private ownership.

For example, merchant trade—such behavior was previously easily classified as speculation and prosecuted.

If a merchant pays for the goods himself and owns the rights to them, and keeps the profits after selling them, this is legally considered commodity circulation under private ownership.

If this merchant is a self-employed individual who doesn't employ workers and stands behind the counter himself, then he belongs to the category of "small private owners," selling his own labor and working capital.

If this businessman is a large supermarket owner who employs dozens or hundreds of workers, then it belongs to a typical private ownership production relationship—the employees sell their labor, and the owner appropriates the surplus profits.

Other individual businesses are similar; for example, an individual might open a repair shop, take on jobs and do the repairs themselves, and keep all the profits for themselves.

In economics, this is called "individual labor" or "small-scale commodity economy." Although the tools (means of production) are privately owned, the individual does not exploit others because they do not employ labor. This falls under the category of private ownership, but it is a primitive form of private ownership, which Marx called "private ownership based on one's own labor."

However, if you expand and open a repair chain store, employing 10 repairmen, with the owner providing tools and facilities and the repairmen receiving commissions or fixed wages, this enters a typical capitalist production relationship, because the owner controls the labor of others by owning the means of production.

This is the period of concern for many conservative cadres, including Ligachev—if individual business is allowed now, then in the near future, capital concentration will inevitably occur and capitalist production relations will emerge. Will the Soviets be usurped by capitalists who have resurfaced in the future?

Only God knows.

But Slava was more pragmatic, because as long as a commodity economy exists, private ownership and exploitation will inevitably occur. Unless the Soviet Union could achieve great material abundance and realize distribution according to need, the troubles of private ownership would forever loom over the Party.

"We must allow and encourage the development of diverse forms of socialist business operations while upholding the dominant position of public ownership. The choice of ownership form should be based on whether it is conducive to developing productive forces and improving the living standards of workers."

This idea was actually conceived by Director Nian.

Director Nian argued with Slava for a long time when drafting this line. Slava wanted it to be more open, but Director Nian put the brakes on him. She said:

"If you write about multiple forms of ownership, Ligachev will have a lot to say. If you write about multiple forms of operation, he can't criticize you—because forms of operation and ownership are not the same concept. State-owned is still state-owned, and collective is still collective. But how do you operate?"