Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

The philosophical theoretical legacy of I. V. Michurin 1949

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 805
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Jan 2008, 19:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 10 Mar 2019, 14:06
A.A.Rubashevsky “The philosophical significance of the theoretical legacy of I.V. Michurin”

Foreword
"Philosophers only
explained the world in
various ways , but the point is to change it."
K. Marx

“We cannot wait for favors from nature
; to take them from her is our task. ”
I.V. Michurin


After the defeat of Hitler's Germany and imperialist Japan in the Great Patriotic War, our homeland resumed its victorious movement to the highest phase of communism along the path that was outlined by the 18th Congress of the CPSU (B).

For the successful solution of the task of further powerful development of socialist agriculture and obtaining an abundance of products needed by communist society, the tireless development of agricultural science, which is a powerful productive force under socialist society, is required.

Created by the works of Michurin and Williams and developed by Academician Lysenko, the most advanced Soviet agrobiological science in the world in solving the fundamental issues of genetics, breeding, plant growing and animal husbandry, the fundamental issues of agriculture have achieved great success.

The task is to use the Michurin doctrine of the revolutionary transformation of living nature in the interests of the complete triumph of communism in our country.

It is known that the propaganda and use of the full power of Michurin science for the development of socialist agriculture was in every way hampered by supporters of Weismanism-morganism in Soviet biology. At one time, often taking positions in leading institutions, in research, in educational institutions, etc., they, under the banner of Michurin’s formal recognition, tried to dissolve his teachings in lean abstractions of Mendel’s laws and Morgan’s chromosome theory. At the same time, they viciously criticized the Michurin trend in biological science, headed by Academician Lysenko.

Having lost the feeling of Soviet national pride, supporters of the reactionary idealist Weisman-Morganist biology in our country (Zhebrak, Dubinin, Schmalgausen, and others) slavishly worshiped the reactionaries of the biology and genetics of the imperialist countries. Going to build a "world" biology, they at the same time willingly yielded to foreigners a priority in the development of biological science.

In August 1948, at a session of the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences named after VI Lenin, as a cleansing thunderstorm, there was a discussion of Michurins with Weismmann-Morganists, which ended with the complete defeat of Weismanism-morganism and the triumph of advanced, Michurin materialistic biology in our country. Acad. Lysenko, who made a report "On the Situation in Biological Science", approved by the Central Committee of the CPSU (b), and other Michurinists exposed and defeated the Weisman-Morganists as carriers and conductors of pseudoscientific idealistic and metaphysical bourgeois theories in the field of agricultural science and practice.

The results of the August session of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences particularly vividly confirmed the truth of Marxism-Leninism about the partisanship of science and philosophy. The history of biology is the scene of the ideological struggle of classes. The clash of the materialist and idealistic worldviews in biological science has taken place throughout its history. Now, in the era of the struggle of two worlds, these two opposite, opposing directions are particularly sharply defined in it. The session showed with its own eyes that the struggle of the Michurins against the Weismanists is a struggle of dialectics against metaphysics, materialism against idealism, science against mysticism - the struggle of the Soviet worldview against the penetration of bourgeois ideology in the USSR.

This discussion aroused the warm support of the Michurins from the entire scientific community, from the broad strata of workers and collective farmers. It caused a broad scientific and social movement that rocked the whole country, and was the beginning of a new stage in the development of Soviet science.

Describing the significance of this session, Comrade Molotov, in a report on the 31st anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, said: like the teachings of Weismanism about the unchanging heredity, which excludes the transfer of acquired properties to subsequent generations. She emphasized the creative significance of materialistic principles for all areas of science, which should contribute to the accelerated advancement of scientific and theoretical work in our country. [one]

The discussion gave impetus to the development of the struggle against idealism and metaphysics in all fields of knowledge and led to a serious review by a considerable part of scientists of their previous research from the point of view of a merciless struggle against all sorts of idealistic perversions.

The great practical significance of this discussion, especially for the continued success of socialist agriculture, is that it “passed under the famous Michurin motto:“ We cannot wait for favors from nature; to take them from her is our task. ” This Michurin covenant, one might say, is imbued with the Bolshevik spirit and invites not only scientists, but also millions of agricultural practitioners to lively creative work for the benefit and glory of our people.

The scientific discussion on the issues of biology was held under the guiding influence of our party.

Comrade Stalin's guiding ideas also played a decisive role here, opening up new broad perspectives in scientific and practical work.

The next major historical milestone in the successful development of Michurin agrobiological science was the publication of the decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) of October 23, 1948 "On the plan of shelter-bearing plantations, the introduction of grass crop rotation, the construction of ponds and reservoirs to ensure high and sustainable yields in the steppe and forest-steppe regions of the European part of the USSR ".

Describing the significance of this historical ruling of the party and government, Comrade Molotov said: “The goal has been set to use the extensive practical experience and achievements of agricultural science so that collective farms and state farms of steppe and forest-steppe regions, armed with advanced equipment, will make a significant leap in the coming years development of agriculture and animal husbandry. At the same time, special importance is attached to the development of the grassland farming system and the organization of large-scale works on shelter-afforestation. The implementation of this grand state plan, the adoption of which declared war on drought and crop failure in the steppe and forest-steppe regions of the European part of our country, will lead our agriculture to the direct path of high and sustainable yields.

The war of drought and crop failure in the steppe and forest-steppe regions of the European part of our country covers a vast territory of 120 million hectares. The planting of forest shelter belts and the introduction of grassland farming systems are also being developed in other areas of our country.

By eliminating the supporters of Weismanism-morganism from the path, rallying and mobilizing all the forces of Michurins to fully use advanced agrobiological science, organizing the masses, the party implements the grandiose Stalinist plan to curb the elemental forces of nature in agricultural production.

The Stalin's plan for the transformation of living nature sets a number of major new tasks for the Michurins in the area, requiring immediate resolution. It is necessary, for example, to scientifically, with the benefit of agricultural development, establish the most economical and productive methods of afforestation, the composition of those plant communities in which new plantations will best develop, the composition of fauna, which in the near future should populate new afforestation, the composition of soil microorganisms etc. The fulfillment of the Stalinist plan for the transformation of living nature creates so high soil fertility that many modern varieties of agricultural plants are fully utilized They will not be able to build these fertility opportunities, and in a decade and a half, many of them will have to be replaced by completely new varieties. Thus, the Michurin team is very acutely faced with the task of creating new varieties that can use new opportunities for soil fertility. V.R. Williams also aimed the Soviet selection idea not to focus on the worst conditions, but to create organisms capable of developing the greatest productivity in the presence of all the best conditions. Acad. Lysenko and other Michurinists are already striving to transform branchy wheat cultivated by them into varieties adapted to the local conditions of various regions of the country and to be widely introduced into production, since it is capable of producing up to 100 centners of crop per hectare against a high agrotechnical background. Life requires that these and similar tasks be solved quickly and accurately, for the people, considering this Stalinist plan as their own vital matter, strive to put it into practice not in 15, but in just 8-10 years. able to use the new possibilities of soil fertility. V.R. Williams also aimed the Soviet selection idea not to focus on the worst conditions, but to create organisms capable of developing the greatest productivity in the presence of all the best conditions. Acad. Lysenko and other Michurinists are already striving to transform branchy wheat cultivated by them into varieties adapted to the local conditions of various regions of the country and to be widely introduced into production, since it is capable of producing up to 100 centners of crop per hectare against a high agrotechnical background. Life requires that these and similar tasks be solved quickly and accurately, for the people, considering this Stalinist plan as their own vital matter, strive to put it into practice not in 15, but in just 8-10 years. able to use the new possibilities of soil fertility. V.R. Williams also aimed the Soviet selection idea not to focus on the worst conditions, but to create organisms capable of developing the greatest productivity in the presence of all the best conditions. Acad. Lysenko and other Michurinists are already striving to transform branchy wheat cultivated by them into varieties adapted to the local conditions of various regions of the country and to be widely introduced into production, since it is capable of producing up to 100 centners of crop per hectare against a high agrotechnical background. Life requires that these and similar tasks be solved quickly and accurately, for the people, considering this Stalinist plan as their own vital matter, strive to put it into practice not in 15, but in just 8-10 years. Williams aimed the Soviet selection idea not to focus on the worst conditions, but to create organisms capable of developing the greatest productivity in the presence of all the best conditions. Acad. Lysenko and other Michurinists are already striving to transform branchy wheat cultivated by them into varieties adapted to the local conditions of various regions of the country and to be widely introduced into production, since it is capable of producing up to 100 centners of crop per hectare against a high agrotechnical background. Life requires that these and similar tasks be solved quickly and accurately, for the people, considering this Stalinist plan as their own vital matter, strive to put it into practice not in 15, but in just 8-10 years. Williams aimed the Soviet selection idea not to focus on the worst conditions, but to create organisms capable of developing the highest productivity in the presence of all the best conditions. Acad. Lysenko and other Michurinists are already striving to transform branchy wheat cultivated by them into varieties adapted to the local conditions of various regions of the country and to be widely introduced into production, since it is capable of producing up to 100 centners of crop per hectare against a high agrotechnical background. Life requires that these and similar tasks be solved quickly and accurately, for the people, considering this Stalinist plan as their own vital matter, strive to put it into practice not in 15, but in just 8-10 years. Lysenko and other Michurinists are already striving to transform branchy wheat cultivated by them into varieties adapted to the local conditions of various regions of the country and to be widely introduced into production, since it is capable of producing up to 100 centners of crop per hectare against a high agrotechnical background. Life requires that these and similar tasks be solved quickly and accurately, for the people, considering this Stalinist plan as their own vital matter, strive to put it into practice not in 15, but in just 8-10 years. Lysenko and other Michurinists are already striving to transform branchy wheat cultivated by them into varieties adapted to the local conditions of various regions of the country and to be widely introduced into production, since it is capable of producing up to 100 centners of crop per hectare against a high agrotechnical background. Life requires that these and similar tasks be solved quickly and accurately, for the people, considering this Stalinist plan as their own vital matter, strive to put it into practice not in 15, but in just 8-10 years.

Fulfillment of this plan of great works will not only change the climate of our country, its appearance, not only provide high and stable yields and strengthen the economic power of our homeland, but also accelerate the process of industrializing the village and eliminating the opposition between city and country altogether, help the broad masses of the people assimilate the Michurin methods of transforming nature, will be a powerful means of developing the creative talents of millions of Soviet people and vivid propaganda among the masses of scientific, dialectical-material worldview mania. By systematically changing nature in the name of the complete triumph of communism in our country, the Soviet people change themselves, turning into workers in communist society,

* * *

The works of I. V. Michurin in the field of fruit growing produced a real revolution in science.

Michurin has created more than 350 new varieties of fruit and other agricultural plants.

Many of its varieties are widespread in our country and abroad and are of enormous national economic importance.

Thus, the Antonovka six-gram apple tree at the age of 15 yields a crop of up to 200 kg per tree; Pepin-Chinese at the same age yields up to 250 kg from one tree, and Pepin saffron apple-tree - over 200 kg.

Not to mention the fact that the Michurin varieties of apples, pears, cherries, mountain ash, etc., are first-class in their beauty and dessert qualities, many of them withstand the harsh winters of the middle and even northern strip of the USSR.

China's early Golden Apple Trees, Taiga, Yermak and others do not die of frost where even Antonovka and other northern varieties freeze.

Michurinsky grape varieties grow in many collective and state farms of the Tambov, Saratov and other related areas, where it has never grown before. The harvest of high quality grapes in these areas reaches 9 g per hectare.

Michurin varieties of fruit and berry crops in our country have already occupied tens of thousands of hectares of gardens. Even more valuable are the Michurin methods of conscious, planned creation of new plant forms, due to which a person receives enormous power over the natural course of the evolution of living nature.

His specific methods of controlling the shaping of plant organisms were the result of a generalization of the theory and practice of Russian and world fruit growing, the generalization of their own rich practice of breeding new varieties of fruit and berry plants.

Michurin left the most valuable capital in the form of a rich theoretical legacy, which gives a deeper and more concrete understanding than the laws of development of organisms than Darwin.

This was brilliantly shown by TD Lysenko, who creatively applied the Michurin doctrine to the management of the development of field and garden plants.

It was precisely Michurin’s teaching that for TD Lysenko was the guiding thread in creating the theory of the phased development of plants, which in turn is the scientific basis of a whole range of practical methods for creating new varieties of field and garden crops and increasing the yield of agricultural plants in general.

Here is what TD Lysenko writes about the importance of Michurin doctrine for various fields of agricultural science:

“In the history of selection and genetic science there were no other examples of such a deep understanding of the life and development of plants, which Ivan Vladimirovich Michurin achieved” [3].

“On the fruit and berry objects I. V. Michurin revealed the general patterns of plant development. Therefore, his work should serve as a scientific basis not only for the selection and genetics of fruit plants, but also for seed production, breeding and the genetics of all crops ”[4].

Acad. Lysenko and other Michurins (V. A. Shahumyan, academician L. K. Greben) showed the full applicability of Michurin’s teaching to the management of formative processes in animals. “The works of I. V. Michurin,” says T. D. Lysenko, “are an inexhaustible source of all new and effective guidelines.

Our duty is to develop and apply the brilliant theory of Michurin in the practice of socialist agriculture ”[5].

Despite the fact that the Michurin doctrine lies at the basis of the most advanced in the world, the Soviet agrobiological science, that this doctrine represents the highest stage in the development of materialistic biology, despite the fact that the ingenious application of this doctrine by academician Lysenko to field and garden crops ensures a significant increase in their that it caused tens of thousands of followers of Michurin and Lysenko in our country and abroad, despite the enormous theoretical and practical significance of the Michurin doctrine, our philosophers about the August 1948 session of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences did not set itself the task of comprehending the creative legacy of the great transducer of living nature from the point of view of materialist dialectics. The question of Michurin's worldview, the method of his creative work, was not investigated.

Prior to the August 1948 session of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences, philosophical literature did not even draw attention to Michurin’s direct statements on philosophical questions, it was not shown that before the October Revolution Michurin was one of the major representatives of natural science materialism and that during the years of Soviet power he became a conscious supporter Marxist-Leninist materialist dialectic. In the works on the history of Russian materialism and natural science, oddly enough, Michurin was not even mentioned. Such major theorists of the Soviet agrobiological science, as I. V. Michurin and V. R. Williams, dropped out of the history of Russian natural science and materialism.

This is apparently due to the fact that until the complete defeat of the Weismmann-Morganists, the prejudice in the views of Michurin, as a simple gardener, was not overcome. Such misconceptions about Michurin were spread by Weissman-Morganists. Formally, they, of course, recognized that Michurin had developed original methods for changing wildlife, but right there stressed that he allegedly remained an ignorant person in science. It was not known by such quasi-scientists that the development of effective methods for the transformation of living nature could only be based on a deep knowledge of the laws of the development of nature.

Many of our philosophers, until the very defeat of the Weymanists-Morganists in 1948, unfortunately did not understand that the struggle of the Michurins with the Weismanists-Morganists was a struggle of dialectics and materialism of advanced, Michurin biology against the metaphysics and idealism of reactionary biology, and in general remained outside this fight.

The discussion on biology showed that the workers of the philosophical front are faced with the urgent task of further exposing and criticizing the remnants of idealism and metaphysics in all fields of science, as well as in other forms of social consciousness. The workers of the philosophical front face the task of criticizing and completely eradicating idealism and metaphysics in biological science. On the other hand, the big task of disclosing the philosophical significance of the theoretical legacy of Michurin and the entire wealth of Michurin science and practice has been posed. The proper solution of this problem is of tremendous significance for all Soviet science. The Michurin science, reflecting the richness of the dialectic of living nature, is a brilliant confirmation of the principles of dialectical materialism.

The philosophical generalization of Michurin's science and practice makes it possible to show the tremendous strength and creative character of the principles of dialectical materialism in research and practical work. This will also make it possible to draw the necessary conclusions, enriching the natural-scientific foundations of the worldview of the Marxist-Leninist party, reinforcing this outlook against all kinds of idealism and metaphysics and contributing to the further development of Michurin’s teaching. This will make it possible to expand the propaganda of dialectical materialism and the very Michurinist teaching itself in wide sections of our intelligentsia and the entire Soviet people.

Michurinsky direction in biological science is an example of the application of materialistic dialectics to the knowledge of the phenomena of living nature, an example of the subordination of research work to the solution of specific tasks of communist construction in our country. The peculiarity and merit of the Michurin-Lysenkov trend in biology is that its creators consciously apply dialectical materialism to the study of living nature and that they rebuilt biological science on the basis of dialectical materialism as the most advanced and revolutionary world outlook - the world outlook of the communist party.

It is this circumstance that causes attacks of rabies against Michurin and his followers in reactionary geneticists, certified lackeys of US and British imperialism.

Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin’s dialectical materialism inspires the bourgeoisie and its ideologues with malice and horror, since the concept of the existence of capitalism includes materialistic dialectics as the inevitability of its death. The omnipotence and might of the ideology of Marxism-Leninism are proved by the world-historic victory of the socialist state over Nazi Germany, by the growth and strengthening of the positions of socialism and democracy as a result of this victory.

“The brilliant victory of socialism held in the Great Patriotic War,” said Zhdanov at the philosophical discussion in 1947, “which was also a brilliant victory of Marxism, became a bone across the throats of the imperialists. The center of the struggle against Marxism has now moved to America and England. All the forces of obscurantism and reaction are now placed at the service of the struggle against Marxism. The bourgeois philosophy, the servants of atomic-dollar democracy, the worn out armor of obscurantism and clericalism: the Vatican and the racist theory; frantic nationalism and a dilapidated idealistic philosophy; venal yellow press and corrupted bourgeois art "[6].

The reactionary genetics of the imperialist countries (Sax, Darlington, Headson, Richens and others) in every way seek to devalue Michurin’s theory and methods by criticizing the philosophical basis of this doctrine, that is, dialectical materialism. These black-hundred biologists and genetics especially criticize the work of the most outstanding continuer of the Michurinist teaching, acad. T. Lysenko, and moreover not so much for their theoretical content, as for their methodology, for the fact that Acad. Lysenko builds genetics on the foundations of dialectical materialism.

You can leave aside the fraudulent methods of hired hackers of American and English imperialism, which first narrow the dialectical method to the theory of the development of society and thereby distort it, and then prove the impossibility of its application to physics and biology. It is clear that under such conditions of the ideological class struggle, the dialectical-materialist generalization of the theoretical legacy of Michurin and the propaganda of the methodological foundations of the teaching of Michurin become our primary task.

Michurin himself set this task before philosophical cadres. He said: “... all my life I spent in the garden and on the beds, and during this life I have made a lot of observations and studies of plant life, many openly new facts, the theoretical side of which has not yet been touched by science. These facts require, of course, illumination and detailed theoretical development. In this regard, the materialist dialectic should be helped as the only correct philosophy of consistent materialism ”[7].

We are clearly in a big debt to Ivan. Vladimirovich, for he has not yet fulfilled his wills to generalize from the point of view of the materialist dialectics the phenomena and facts discovered by him. The task of disclosing the entire wealth of the dialectic of living nature, reflected in the works of the great naturalist, can be solved only by the efforts of many researchers. In this paper, it is meant to take only the first step on this path.

* * *

The proposed work - the fruit of three years of work, begun in 1946 - was defended by the author as a master's thesis at the Department of Dialectical and Historical Materialism of the Academy of Social Sciences under the Central Committee of the CPSU (b). Much of the work was reviewed in manuscript by Acad. T. Lysenko, whose instructions for the author were leading.

The author expresses his great appreciation to Acad. Trofim Denisovich Lysenko, his supervisor in the dissertation, T. Belov P. T., and all his comrades who, with their critical remarks, provided undoubted assistance in working on the topic.

I express my boundless love and gratitude to the Central Committee of the CPSU (b), which created all the conditions for me to complete the work on writing this book.

[1] V.M. Molotov, 31st anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, Gospolitizdat, 1948, p. 20

[2] Ibid., P. 13.

[3] I.V. Michurin, Works in Four Volumes, Selkhozgiz, 1948. Vol. 1, p. VIII.

[4] Ibid.

[5] I.V. Michurin, Works, vol. I, p. VIII.

[6] A. A. Zhdanov, Speech at the discussion on the book of G. F. Alexandrov, State Political Literature Publishing House, 1947, pp. 41-42.

[7] I. V. Michurin, Op., Vol. I, p. 624.
Kamran Heiss
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.