__SERIES__
the international
communist
PROGRESS PUBLISHERS MOSCOW
[4]Translated from the Russian by Julius Kalzer
MEJKflyHAPOAHOE KOMMyHHCTHMECKOE JJBH/KEIIHE
Hop, oSmeii 13. B.
Ha amji
__COPYRIGHT__ First printing 1973The revolutionary transformation of the world on the basis of the all-conquering Marxist-Leninist doctrine is the main, law-governed trend in social development, the main goal of all progressive and revolutionary forces. Our times are marked by the tremendous growth of the role of the world communist movement in the life of the peoples and in the struggle for the solution of cardinal problems of vital concern to all mankind.
Under the banner of Leninism, the international communist movement, whose foundations were laid by the great Lenin, has become a genuinely world-wide and most influential political force of our times. Held in Moscow in June 1969, the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties made an important contribution to Marxist-Leninist theory, and to the strategy and tactics of Leninism. The significance of this contribution is determined, in the main, by the following major aspects of the work of the Meeting: its profound theoretical analysis of cardinal problems of world social development; the drawing up of a realistic and clear-cut programme of the anti-irnperialist struggle, in full keeping with the vital interest of the peoples of our planet; its distinct and consistent internationalist course towards ensuring the most effective consolidation of all revolutionary forces, and in the first place the unity of its militant vanguard---the Communist and Workers' Parties, and the international communist movement.
A resolute struggle against Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism, the 1969 International Meeting pointed out, is an 12 indispensable condition for the consolidation of the Communist Parties. The Meeting drew important theoretical and political conclusions regarding the principles, roads and methods of consolidating the unity and solidarity of the communist movement.
``The world revolutionary process,'' as was pointed out by Leonid Brezhnev, General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, "is developing inexorably. The stronger and more influential the Marxist-Leninist parties become, the greater will be the achievements of this process. The deeper the great ideas of Marxism-Leninism sink into the minds of the masses, the sooner will the revolution achieve new victories.''^^*^^
Some of the fundamental problems in the activities of the Communist and Workers' Parties are dealt with in this book, which describes the leading role played by the communist movement in world revolutionary developments and in the struggle against imperialism; as well as the unity and the components of the revolutionary process. Considerable attention is devoted to problems of the socialist revolution and to the struggle waged by the Communist Parties for working-class unity, and for the creation and consolidation of the world-wide anti-monopoly and anti-imperialist front, and the forms and methods of Communists' work among the masses.
This book also deals with current problems in the Communist and Workers' Parties' struggle against Right-wing and ``Left''-wing opportunism, and for the unity and solidarity of the communist movement on the principles of MarxismLeninism and proletarian internationalism.
This book is the work of a group of authors consisting of V. V. Alexandrov, Y. V. Dobrotin, S.S. Gililov, V. B. Knyazhinsky, I. I. Lunev, N. G. Sibilev, V. V. Sukhanov, V. A. Trofimov, and V. V. Zagladin.
Besides, N. V. Myachin, S. S. Romanov, S. I. Semyonov, A. V. Vyatkin, and A. L. Yefimova took part in the work on some of the sections of the book. I. A. Sinitsin helped to select statistical and other data.
_-_-_^^*^^ L. I. Brezhnev, = Following Lenin's Course, Moscow, 1972, p. 304.
[13] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER I __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE COMMUNIST MOVEMENT---A FORCE STANDINGTo the world communist movement belongs the role of vanguard in the revolutionary transformation of capitalist society into a socialist society. The most influential political force in the world of today, the communist movement has amassed considerable and varied experience in guiding the struggle of the masses of working people for peace, democracy, national independence and socialism; it has evolved a genuinely scientific strategy and tactic for the revolutionary struggle of the working class.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. THE ROLE OF THE MARXIST-LENINIST PARTYThe historical process of mankind's transition to socialism reflects an objective pattern of social developments. That, however, in no way means that society's revolutionary transformation takes place spontaneously, and does not need guidance.
In society, as distinct from Nature, the operation of objective laws takes place through the conscious activities of people. The subjective factor in the revolutionary process, that is to say, the conscious and purposeful activities of the masses, classes, parties and even of individuals, plays a tremendous and ever mounting part in historical development.
The development of capitalism and the contradictions inherent in it, the living conditions of the working people and the inescapable struggle of the proletariat against the 14 bourgeoisie comprise the objective foundations of the working-class movement. The operation of the subjective factor in the revolution is ultimately determined by that objective foundation. At the same time, the activities of the masses, classes and parties exert a profound influence on the objective aspect of the revolutionary movement and foster favourable changes in the objective conditions necessary for victory of the revolution. The socialist revolution is impossible without an historical subject able and prepared to bring about revolutionary transformations.
In their analysis of the inevitability and the objective causes for the transition from capitalism to socialism, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, the founders of scientific communism, paid great attention to establishing the place and the role of the subjective factor in the liquidation of the capitalist system. In the Communist Manifesto, Marxism's first programmatic document, they revealed the role of the organised working class and of its political party in the revolutionary struggle against the old world. V. I. Lenin, who devoted tremendous attention to a substantiation of the role played by the subjective factor in the revolution, had scathing criticism for the opportunists for their preachment of spontaneousness and fatalism in the revolutionary process.
The documents of the world communist movement of today also speak of the need to take into account, not only the objective premises for the socialist revolution but also the subjective ones. As stated in the programme of the CPSU, "Social forces that are to ensure the victory of socialism are taking shape, multiplying and becoming steeled in the womb of capitalist society.''^^*^^ The International Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties held in 1957, 1960 and 1969 were dedicated to raising still higher the role of the communist movement as a factor in the revolutionary transformation of the world. "The communist movement,'' as was pointed out by the June 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, "is an integral part of modern society and is its most active force.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ The Road to Communism, Moscow, p. 480.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, Prague, 1969, p. 38.
15 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Communist Party---a Force StandingIt is only under the guidance of the revolutionary party of the working class and after all the forces standing opposed to capitalism have been united that a political army of the revolution can be created, capable of overthrowing the domination of the exploiter classes and establishing the rule of the working people.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels indefatigably insisted on the need to organise the proletariat in an independent political party, both on a national and on an international scale. As Frederick Engels wrote in this connection, "For the proletariat to be strong enough to win on the decisive day, it must---and this Marx and I have been arguing ever since 1847---form a separate party distinct from all others and opposed to them, a conscious class party.''^^*^^
The founders of Marxism laid down the methodological foundation and the main principles of the strategy and tactics of the Communist Party. They were the first to place the policies of the working-class movement on a scientific basis. At the same time, however, they regarded them as a complex art, and emphasised the need to work tirelessly to master their finer points. Marx and Engels regarded the following proposition as the point of departure in the strategy and tactics of a proletarian party: Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims and momentary interests of the working class; but in the present-day movement they also represent and take care of the future of that movement, that is to say, its ultimate aims.^^**^^
Basing himself on the conclusions drawn by the founders of Marxism, V. I. Lenin evolved the doctrine of a proletarian party of a new type (the Communist Party), the working class's main weapon in its struggle for the victory of socialism.
In the conditions of today, Marxists-Leninists are further _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Correspondence, Moscow, p. 492.
^^**^^ See Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works in three volumes. Vol. 1, p. 136.
16 developing the Leninist doctrine of the Communist Party, its principles, and its role in the revolutionary process. "The Communist Parties,'' it is pointed out in the Programme of the CPSU, "are the vanguard of the world revolutionary movement. They have demonstrated the vitality of MarxismLeninism and their ability not only to propagate the great ideals of scientific communism, but also to put them into practice.''^^*^^The Communist Party is part of the working class, its organised detachment. "I thereby express clearly and precisely,'' Lenin wrote, "my wish, my demand, that the Party, as the vanguard of the class, should be as organised as possible....''^^**^^ The appearance of the proletariat and the development of its class struggle logically led up to the creation of working-class organisations---trade unions, cooperatives and then of political parties. The Communist Party is the highest form of organisation of the working class, one that is called upon to give guidance to its political revolutionary struggle for radical revolutionary transformation of society through the replacement of capitalism by a communist society.
Unlike all other political organisations at present existing within the framework of the working-class movement, for example, those of the Social-Democratic trend, which at best work for the immediate demands of the working class to be met, but do not struggle for radical transformation of society, the Communist Parties act as consistently revolutionary militant detachments of the working-class movement. Their activities are based on a scientific foundation, on MarxismLeninism, which makes it possible to achieve a correct cognition of the immediate and ultimate interests of the working people and to smoothly and purposefully direct the revolutionary struggle of the masses towards the achievement of those interests. Lenin characterised the revolutionary Party of the proletariat as the highest form of proletarian class organisation.
The objective course of the class struggle has assigned to the Communist Parties the role of a guiding force standing _-_-_
^^*^^ The Road to Communism,, p. 488.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 7, p. 258.
17 in the van of the workers' revolutionary movement. The anti-Communists assert that the Communist Parties are out to ``commandeer'' or to "try to commandeer" this leading role so as to put themselves in a kind of privileged position. This assertion is a piece of gross falsification. Their role of leader and vanguard devolves on Communists as the result of their revolutionary activities, their possessing a scientific ideology that allows them to correctly foresee the course and prospects of social development and the class struggle, and, consequently, to determine their policies and tactics. Their courageous and selfless struggle for the interests of the people has won Communists the confidence of the workers and other working people, who have seen in practice that the Communist Parties are their best defenders and leaders.In the course of their struggle against the very foundations of capitalism, the Communist Parties establish ever closer co-operation with other organisations of the working class, such as the trade unions, co-operatives, and youth, women's and other organisations. On the basis of its scientific revolutionary strategy, the Communist Party comes out as the only force capable of co-ordinating and guiding the activities of such organisations into a single anti-capitalist channel. As the guiding force of the most advanced class, the proletariat, which is called upon to give leadership to other classes fighting against imperialism, the Communist Party stands in the van of all sections of society that are fighting against the monopolies, and against class and national oppression. It is all this that makes the Communist Parties the leading force in the revolutionary struggle of today.
The Communist Party can carry out its leading role in practice only if it is closely linked with the masses of the working people. The Communist Party, V. I. Lenin wrote, must be able "to link up, maintain the closest contact, and--- if you wish---merge, in certain measure, with the broadest masses of the working people---primarily with the proletariat, but also with the non-proletarian masses of working people''.^^*^^ The membership of the Communist Parties is made up of the finest representatives of the working class, the working peasantry and progressive intellectuals. Since they _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, pp. 24--25.
__PRINTERS_P_17_COMMENT__ 2-0873 18 work in the thick of the people, Communists exert an active influence on the people about them, organise the masses for the struggle, propagate the ideas of Marxism-Leninism, teach the masses and themselves learn from the latter's experience.The Communist Parties express not only the national but the internationalist interests of the working people. Capitalism, that enemy of the working class, is a world force which can be overcome only through the united efforts of the entire world working class. That is why international solidarity is characteristic of the communist movement. A profound internationalism is a distinctive feature of any genuine Marxist-Leninist party. "A class-conscious worker,'' Lenin wrote in 1913, "feels and realises himself to be not only a member of the Russian Marxist family---he is aware that he is also a member of the international family of Marxists. He also has duties to the workers' International. He must take account of the opinions and wishes of the latter. He must not lose touch with the international workers' army for a single moment.''^^*^^ The solidarity of all detachments of the world army of Communists is essential both for the solution of the common and internationalist tasks confronting them and for the solution of the national tasks confronting each of these detachments. Internationalism is a most important source from which each fraternal party and the entire movement as a whole draw their strength.
The enemies of the working class have come out with fierce attacks against the Communist Parties and their guiding role in society. They would sow, among the toiling masses, mistrust of the Communist Parties, with the aim of weakening the latter's influence on social life. The Communist Parties are coming in for constant attacks from the Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunists.
Under slogans of the ``liberalisation'' and ``democratisation'' of the socialist countries, the imperialist reactionaries are harping on the need to create, in the countries of socialism, counter-revolutionary opposition parties that will "freely take part in the political struggle for power''. Following in the wake of bourgeois ideologists, the Right-wing _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 41, p. 303.
19 revisionists are out to destroy the Communist Parties: they are demanding that the Communist Parties should be ``liberated'' from "elements of authority'', and speak of what they allege is the "unlawful nature" of the Communists' guiding role.The political crisis that arose in Czechoslovakia in 1968--69 provided convincing evidence of the danger of bourgeois and revisionist attacks against the guiding role of the Communist Party. In December 1970, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia held a plenary session, which adopted a document entitled "The Lessons of the Crisis Developments in the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia and in Society Following the Thirteenth Congress of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia''. The plenum unmasked the actual essence of the attacks launched by the anti-Communists and the revisionists against the guiding role of the Communist Party, and revealed the decisive significance of the Party's constant consolidation and of the enhancement of its guiding role in socialist construction.
``Left"-wing opportunism, sectarianism and dogmatism present a great danger to the implementation by the Communist Parties of their guiding role. These want to drive a wedge between the Communist Party and the masses, something that can lead to very grave setbacks. In particular, this is borne out by the tragic example of the events in Indonesia in 1965.
As was emphasised in the documents adopted by the 1960 International Meeting a grave threat to the Communist Parties is presented by the personality cult, which is connected with a departure from Leninist principles of Party and state leadership, and with considerable infringements of socialist legality. The Communist Parties are consistently coming out against the personality cult, in whatever forms it may manifest itself.
Particularly grave consequences to the Party result from its guiding bodies becoming politically and morally impaired as a consequence of a departure from MarxismLeninism and proletarian internationalism, and of a backsliding to nationalistic and great-power chauvinistic positions. This is very well illustrated by the example of the stand taken by the leadership of the Communist Party of China, which has in fact led to the Party being replaced by __PRINTERS_P_19_COMMENT__ 2* 20 a political body which supports the military-bureaucratic regime and a personal dictatorship.
Marxists-Leninists wage a consistent struggle against bourgeois ideology and all brands of opportunism, and in defence of the Leninist doctrine on the role of the Communist Party in the revolutionary struggle. The 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties re-emphasised the vanguard role of the Communist Party in the revolutionary struggle and in the construction of a new society. To quote Leonid Brezhnev, "The historical experience of many countries, the experience of the class struggle has given convincing evidence of how necessary the activity of the Communist Parties is for mankind and how fruitful this activity is for social development. Guided by MarxistLeninist theory, the Communist Parties show the peoples the road to the communist future. They rally the peoples to the struggle and steadfastly march in the van of the mass movements for the great goals of social progress. Communists are always in the front rank of the fighters for the vital rights of the working people, for peace. They carry high the invincible banner of the socialist revolution.''^^*^^
__NOTE__ Only 1 _LVL3 in this _LVL2. __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. THE MARXIST-LENINIST PARTY---AN EMBODIMENTA Communist Party can perform its role of vanguard only if it is an active organisation marked by cohesion and unity. The principle of democratic centralism is the basic organisational principle that gives a party unity and purposefulness in the achievement of its aims, at the same time guaranteeing the party the character of a creative and initiative-charged organisation. There are two aspects in this principle, namely, democratism and centralism.
A Communist Party's democratism stems from its very nature, its aims and tasks. First and foremost it consists in all the guiding bodies of the Party, both central and local, being freely elected by Party members.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, Prague, 1969, p. 155.
21Further, the democratic nature of a Communist Party's activities consists in all Party members not only electing the guiding bodies but also verifying and checking their activities. This scrutiny is effected by elected bodies and their individual members rendering periodical account to those collectives of Communists, ranging from Party congresses and conferences to meetings of the Party locals, that have elected them.
The democratic nature of inner-Party life consists in the functions of elected Party bodies being performed on the principle of collective decision-making. V. I. Lenin saw as the main advantage of extensive collectivism its reducing the influence of purely personal and chance factors.
Collective leadership in the Party is a definite style of work used by its guiding bodies, an atmosphere that makes it possible for every member to display initiative: it means the solution of problems with due account of the opinions of the mass membership of the Party. It is only in such conditions that Party bodies can be efficient and exert their influence.
The principle of collective leadership does not relieve Party members of their personal responsibility for work entrusted to them, but blends with that responsibility. The principle of collectivism promotes the fullest development of each Party member's abilities, and creates conditions for all Party members to learn from one another. In many respects, the results of the work done in any sector depend on the personal qualities of the man or woman in charge of that work. In this sense, collective leadership does not play down the part played by leaders or by their talent, experience or theoretical grounding. All major questions are dealt with collectively, but each Communist bears his own responsibility and devotes all his efforts to his particular job.
Democratic centralism means every possible opportunity for free discussion and the participation of all Party members in evolving its policies. Broad-based discussions make it easier for the Party to find solutions for all the complex problems that may arise, and are designed to evolve a common viewpoint and create unity of views so as to ensure unity of action. As Lenin emphasised, "No movement, 22 including the working-class movement, is possible without debates, controversy and conflict of opinions.''^^*^^ The Communist Parties ensure all the conditions for the development of discussions on all radical questions of Party policies.
The full encouragement of criticism and self-criticism is a most important condition for the democratic development of the Communist Parties. Party criticism and self-criticism is a means of posing and solving urgent problems confronting the Party. It is a practical test of theory, and enriches theory with practical experience.
During discussions of questions of the policies followed by the Communist Parties, various points of view may find expression, which frequently do not coincide. These divergences of opinion within the Party are a reflection of class contradictions that may arise in social life, or of the interests of various social sections, occupational and national groups, and so on. Differing points of view are also created by difficulties the Party may come up against. The non-homogeneous make-up of Party membership, varying degrees of political training as well as of life experience also give rise to different opinions on the various aspects of problems under discussion. Unity should not be regarded as complete identity of views. No particular danger is presented by divergences within the framework of a single and common position that is based on recognition of the Party's aims, its programme and ideology. Until the moment a decision has been made, Communists have every possibility of giving absolutely free expression to their opinions, at all levels; during discussions differing and sometimes contrary opinions may clash.
However the possibility of various points of view emerging during discussions of problems does not mean that the Party should not have a single line on any disputed question. "A struggle of shades in the Party,'' Lenin wrote, "is inevitable and essential, as long as it does not lead to anarchy and splits, as long as it is confined within bounds approved by the common consent of all comrades and Party members.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 19, p. 492.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 7, p. 347.
23Thus, the members of Communist Parties enjoy extensive democratic rights, which are set forth in Party Rules and decisions. The most important of these rights are: the right of all Communists to take part in business-like and free discussion of Party policies at Party meetings and in the Party press; the right to openly express and defend opinions until a decision is adopted; the right to criticise, at meetings, any leader or rank-and-file Party member; the right to elect and to be elected to guiding Party bodies; the right to demand personal participation in all instances when a decision is made on a Communist's activities or his behaviour; the right of appeal to a superior body (including a Party Congress); the right to demand from a permanent Party body an account on its activities. These rights develop in Communists a sense of being masters of their Party, and create conditions for Communists to be able to judge of everything taking place in the Party, enabling them to influence the policies and all the activities of the Party.
Democratism in the Communist Parties guarantees not only the activities but also equality of all members; it ensures correct relations both among Party members and Party bodies and is a guarantee against any distortion of Party policies, abuse of authority, or such injurious phenomena as administering by mere injunction, disregard of the opinions of rank-and-file Party members and local bodies. Observance of democratic principles is also a most important guarantee against the personality cult.
Questions of inner-Party democracy acquire a special significance in the conditions of today, when there exists a world system of states that are building socialism and communism under the leadership of the Communists, and when many Communist Parties in the non-socialist countries are working in legal conditions, and, by their struggle and policies, are exerting an influence on democratic institutions and organisations, and are attracting active participants in the democratic struggle. A Marxist party must be a model of democracy.
But a Communist Party is a party of action, one that is working for the revolutionary transformation of society. These historic tasks can be accomplished by a Communist Party only if a broad-based democracy goes hand-in-hand 24 with centralised leadership of the entire Party, all its bodies and members, and if that Party is capable of acting as a single whole.
To achieve their aims, the proletariat and its Party have not only to overcome the resistance of the big bourgeoisie, monopoly capital and the reactionaries, but also the pernicious influence of the petty-bourgeois ideology and policies, which penetrate into the working class and, as Lenin pointed out, lead to a recrudescence of petty-bourgeois spinelessness, fragmentation, individualism and alternating enthusiasm and gloom. That is why the Communist Parties need not only democratism but also centralism.
The Party grants all its members freedom to discuss all questions of its policies and activities. But, like the freedom of criticism within the Party, this freedom exists not of and for itself but to allow concrete decisions to be arrived at on the various questions that may arise. When questions have been discussed and all critical remarks taken into account, the Party is in duty bound to evolve a single stand on them. Otherwise it is impossible to ensure unity of action by the Party. A single line is achieved by all decisions adopted being obligatory for all Communists. Discussion comes to an end when a decision has been adopted on the question under discussion. A militant party cannot be turned into a debating club. A discussion is carried on with the purpose of conducting a successful struggle for the achievement of concrete aims.
Further, centralism in a Communist Party's activities means that the Party and its organisations can have only one guiding centre, a single guiding body. The experience of the international working-class and communist movement has shown that attempts by various elements to create bodies and centres in opposition to the lawfully constituted guiding bodies of the Party lead to factionalism and to a split in the Party.
``A faction,'' according to Lenin's definition, "is an organisation within a party, united ... by a particular platform of views on party questions.''^^*^^ The appearance of factions _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 17, p. 265.
25 is a result of attempts to contrapose to the interests of the Party as a whole the interests of individual groups and, first and foremost, of petty-bourgeois elements unwilling to maintain discipline. The existence of factions is incompatible with democratic centralism and destroys the very foundations a Marxist party is built on.Centralism in the Party also means that its guiding bodies, and in the first place its Central Committee, are invested with extensive rights. The Party's line and its attitude to various problems are evolved in the course of discussions throughout the whole Party, and at its conferences and congresses; a line that has been adopted is carried out between congresses under the guidance of the Party's elected bodies, under the leadership of its Central Committee.
Strict discipline is a most important principle in the activities of the Communist Parties, which demand of their members mandatory fulfilment of Party decisions, the subordination of personal interests to those of the Party, and strict discipline.
Party discipline is based on each Communist's profound conviction that it is in the interests of the entire Party and each and every individual Party body, that the Party cannot function otherwise, and that its activities cannot be successful without strict discipline.
Any negation of Party character or discipline, Lenin pointed out,'' is tantamount to completely disarming the proletariat in the interests of the bourgeoisie. It all adds up to that petty-bourgeois diffuseness and instability, that incapacity for sustained effort, unity and organised action, which, if encouraged, must inevitably destroy any proletarian revolutionary movement''.^^*^^
Strict discipline is not something that is imposed on Party members from above, against their will and wishes. On joining the Party, every Communist voluntarily assumes the duties laid down in its Programme and Rules, including the obligation to be a disciplined Communist and to carry out decisions of Party bodies. At the same time, the Rules emphasise, preservation of Party unity calls for the _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, pp. 43--44.
26 observance of a single Party discipline that is equally obligatory for all Party members, both leaders and rank-and-filers.The Party grants its members and bodies extensive rights, but it cannot permit anti-Party elements or groups to use democracy within the Party so as to impose upon the entire Party their own interests and opinions, those of a minority.
The Communist Parties cannot display any lack of principle or any conciliatoriness in respect of various kinds of revisionists and opportunists in their ranks; they cannot reveal indifference, especially when it is a question of the principles of the revolutionary struggle, or the fundamental tasks of the Party. Any lack of principle, or any conciliatoriness in respect of elements hostile to the Party can, as experience has shown, cause tremendous damage.
As Lenin pointed out, "The Party is a voluntary association which would inevitably break up, first ideologically and then physically, if it did not cleanse itself of people advocating anti-Party views.''^^*^^ "After the competent bodies have decided,'' he emphasised, "all of us, as members of the Party, must act as one man.'"^^**^^
Thus, Party centralism is directed first and foremost towards ensuring unity in the Party, in its political line, its leadership, and its action. It is the aim of Party centralism to prevent matters of principle from yielding place to the petty, personal interests from prevailing over common interests, criticism from going beyond the bounds of Party spirit, so that it shall not be used for the propaganda of views and ideas that are hostile to the Party and the workingclass movement, or to serve the interests of individual groups or lead to a split in the Party.
Democratic centralism means the unity and interaction of these two aspects---democracy and centralism. This unity is dialectical, not mechanical: one aspect complements the other, and any arbitrary deviation to one side or another destroys that unity, and can cause much detriment to the Party. "We are for democratic centralism,'' Lenin wrote. "And it must be clearly understood how vastly different _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 10, p. 47.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 11, p. 323.
27 democratic centralism is from bureaucratic centralism on the one hand, and from anarchism on the other.''^^*^^A correct combination of centralism and democracy ensures for the Party the necessary activity and organisation, gives the Party flexibility, and creates conditions for the development of initiative in Communists and the strict fulfilment of Party decisions.
The fundamental organisational principles in the structure of Communist Parties, principles which stem from their essence and mission, are of an overall nature. However, the forms of their implementation can and must change according to the concrete conditions; they are developed and perfected in connection with the development of a Party itself and with any change in the conditions in which it operates. That is why development and building up of a Party is an inherent part of the revolutionary movement.
The post-war alignment of forces in the world has created new and more favourable conditions for the development and activities of the Communist Parties, which have been actively perfecting their organisational principles ( especially after the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union); in particular, this process has found expression in improvements in the rules and other basic organisational documents. All this has led to a steep rise in the parties' creative activities and has helped consolidate their links with the masses.
This perfecting of Party Rules has been made against the background of a struggle against opportunist and revisionist elements, who have tried to take advantage of the changes in the Rules so as to bring about a departure from the MarxistLeninist organisational principles and from the proletarian concept of the Party, as well as of a struggle against the dogmatists. The new Rules have extended democracy within the Parties, enhanced the role of Communists in the mass organisations of the working people, given due consideration to raising the ideological and theoretical level of the Parties' membership and made it possible to eliminate sectarianism in the enrolment of new members. The changes in the Party Rules have adapted the forms of organisational work to the _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 27, p. 207.
28 new conditions and the task of giving the Communist Parties a mass character, and ensure better leadership of the upsurge of the mass movement. __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE STRATEGYIn all its activities, the world communist movement is guided by the Marxist-Leninist principles of the strategy and tactics of the class struggle. By Marxist-Leninist strategy and tactics is meant the science and art of giving guidance to the revolutionary struggle waged by the proletariat and all working people for their social and national emancipation. Communists attach tremendous importance to evolving their strategy and tactics, and also to perfecting them as the art of political leadership.
Marxist-Leninist theory, which has lit up mankind's road towards communism, is indissolubly linked with practice, with the political struggle. Of itself, and without revolutionary practice, theory cannot lead up to the triumph of communism. Marxism-Leninism finds embodiment in the practice of the revolutionary struggle, through the agency of the political strategy and tactics of Communists. Hence, the vast significance of communist strategy and tactics for mankind's liberation movement. "Without a programme,'' Lenin wrote, "a party cannot be an integral political organism capable of pursuing its line whatever turn events may take. Without, a tactical line based on an appraisal of the current political situation and providing explicit answers to the 'vexed problems' of our times, we might have a circle of theoreticians, but not a functioning political entity.''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Marxism-Leninism Is the Theoretical FoundationEach Communist Party and the movement as a whole draws life-giving strength from the profound scientific substantiation of the strategy and tactics of the communist movement. On many an occasion Lenin emphasised that politics is a _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 17, p. 280.
29 science. Here is what he wrote in 1920, in this connection: "Science demands, first, that the experience of other countries be taken into account, especially if these other countries, which are also capitalist, are undergoing, or have recently undergone, a very similar experience; second, it demands that account be taken of all the forces, groups, parties, classes and masses operating in a given country, and also that policy should not be determined only by the desires and views, by the degree of class-consciousness and the militancy of one group or party alone.''^^*^^Marxist-Leninist theory provides the scientific foundation in determining the strategy and tactics of the communist movement. All three components of Marxism-Leninism, namely, philosophy, political economy and scientific communism, are of decisive significance when the policies of the Communist Party are being drawn up.
Dialectical and historical materialism is the philosophical basis of communist strategy and tactics. Thus, Marxist philosophy has advanced the most important principle of the primacy of being, of social consciousness as a reflection of social being. That is why the strategy and tactics of the communist movement proceed from the objectively existing conditions, with due account of their changes and development.
The strategy and tactics of the communist movement are also intimately interlinked with Marxist-Leninist political economy. Economic laws underlie the social and political patterns of the world revolutionary process. In working out their strategy and tactics, Communists make a profound analysis of the features of society's economic development, the contradictions that arise on that basis, the conditions of the various classes of society, the relations between them, and the evolution of those relations.
Communists assess any working-class political movement from the angle of the part it plays in bringing about the proletariat's full social and economic emancipation. In determining the road to be followed and the means to be used in the struggle for the national and social emancipation of the masses, they consistently take stock of the general and _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, pp. 80--81.
30 particular economic interests of the working class, the peasantry, the median strata of the urban population, and other forces that are interested in the struggle against capitalist oppression.Of decisive importance in evolving political strategy and tactics is the theory of scientific communism, especially the Leninist theory of the social revolution. It is only given a knowledge of the patterns of the world revolutionary process, the features of the revolution's development, its various forms, motive forces, stages and the like, that the Communist Parties can scientifically determine their strategy and tactics.
Thus, for instance, the Marxist-Leninist theory of the proletarian revolution has scientifically proved that when society's transition from capitalism to socialism has begun the entire world capitalist system has matured for the socialist revolution. However, when the advent of the socialist revolution is seen as inevitable because its material, social and political prerequisites have appeared, it is the task of communist strategy and tactics to go through all the stages and ups-and-downs of the class struggle so as to carry out the revolution, and not to restrict the struggle to partial demands within the framework of the capitalist system (this despite all the importance of the struggle for such demands as a most important means of educating the masses and leading them up to the revolution).
Here is another example. Marxism-Leninism has revealed the proletariat's historic mission as the gravedigger of capitalism, the main force capable of achieving the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism and the construction of communism. The working class now stands at the focus of our times and is the leader in the revolutionary transformation of society. The proletariat's guiding role is ensuring the victorious outcome of the socialist revolution. Hence the most important strategical and tactical task confronting the Communist Parties: to develop in the proletariat the ability to guide the revolutionary movement of the masses of the people, to rally about itself the non-proletarian masses, to constantly consolidate the organisation of the working class and to enhance its class consciousness.
The Communists' political strategy and tactics are marked by common fundamental features, and common 31 internationalist principles. Lenin spoke of a single internationalist tactics, a single internationalist task of the communist movement. He often emphasised that tactics must be worked out with due account of the experience of the revolutionary movements in other countries, and of the generally applicable principles in that experience. At the same time, Lenin pointed out, it would be erroneous to mechanically copy the tactics of Communist Parties in different countries and in different conditions. The unity of the internationalist line followed by the communist movement calls for such a kind of application of the basic principles of communism "which will correctly modify these principles in certain particulars, correctly adapt and apply them to national and national-state distinctions''.^^*^^ Lenin called upon Communists "to seek out, investigate, predict, and grasp that which is nationally specific and nationally distinctive, in the concrete manner in which each country should tackle a single international task...''^^**^^.
Today, as in the past, Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunists in the working-class and communist movement are voicing doubt of the existence of common principles of strategy and tactics, or else they ignore the need to give them concrete shape in keeping with the national features of the various countries. At the same time, a striving is revealing itself to replace the internationalist principles of the strategy and tactics of the communist movement by the specific experience of some particular Communist Party, as expressed in specific conditions. This kind of approach completely contradicts the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of the science and art of the revolutionary struggle.
Thus, Marxist-Leninist theory in general and the doctrine of the socialist revolution in particular are the scientific foundation of communist strategy and tactics. Negligence of scientific theory, disregard of the historical experience, or any ignoring of the experience of other countries can lead to an erroneous and subjectivist definition of the strategy and tactics of the Party. Marx, Engels and Lenin, those great leaders of the working class, always came out resolutely against _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 92.
^^**^^ Ibid.
32 subjectivism in determining strategy and tactics. Their revolutionary activities are a model of a scientific approach to the tactics of the communist movement. In the conditions of today, the Marxist-Leninist parties, which have been creatively developing their revolutionary doctrine and applying it to an analysis of the concrete situation, formulated at their International Meetings (in 1957, 1960 and 1969) the basic propositions of the strategy and tactics of the world communist movement.But it is not only the scientific approach that jnarks communist strategy and tactics. There may be an ability to determine quite correctly and on a strictly scientific basis the fundamental political line, the alignment of class forces and the main enemy, and to choose the appropriate forms of struggle, but all this will be insufficient without the ability and the skill required to implement such strategy and tactics.
Lenin pointed out that "politics is a science and an art''.^^*^^ To master the art of political leadership, he pointed out, is no easy matter. The Party and its leaders are in duty bound to acquire the necessary knowledge and the necessary experience of political leadership, something that can be achieved only through long, assiduous, varied and all-round work. The proletariat, Lenin pointed out, must produce its own proletarian politicians, who must possess not only knowledge and experience but also political flair so as to be able rapidly and correctly to resolve complex political problems.
The art of political leadership is not acquired merely through the study of Marxist-Leninist theory; it is also gained through considerable personal experience in the struggle, the acid test of practice, and a comparison with the experience of other parties. Lenin more than once pointed out that the Bolshevik Party had acquired extensive international links and was excellently informed of the theory and practice of the revolutionary movement abroad. This comparison of European experience and the practice of Russia's revolutionary movement was of outstanding significance in working out the strategy and tactics of the Bolshevik Party.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 80.
33The art of strategy and tactics presupposes the ability to work among the masses, to correctly select the forms and methods of the struggle, establish top priorities among the Party's tasks, lead the masses up to the revolution, manoeuvre, and the like.
The concepts of ``strategy'' and ``tactics'' are closely interlinked and are often used together. It frequently happens that one and the same problem has strategical and tactical significance simultaneously. For instance, the question of a united front pertains to the sphere of strategy if we are referring to the creation of a single political army of the revolution; at the same time, it is also a question of tactics if we are referring to the forms and methods of achieving unity in the working class and in the masses as a whole. However, though they are closely interlinked, each of these concepts has its own content.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Content of the StrategyAs a rule, by the strategy of a party or of the entire movement is meant the fundamental political line for an entire historical (strategical) stage, one that is aimed at the accomplishment of the main tasks of the stage in question. The following pertain to the sphere of strategy: due account of the alignment and distribution of the class forces within a particular country and on the world scene; the establishment of the direction of the main blow; the ascertainment of the working class's main allies.
An analysis of a given historical period and of the content of the current (strategical) stage is the point of departure in strategy. As V. I. Lenin wrote, "Only on that basis, i.e., by taking into account, in the first place, the fundamental distinctive features of the various `epochs' (and not single episodes in the history of individual countries), can we correctly evolve our tactics; only a knowledge of the basic features of a given epoch can serve as the foundation for an understanding of the specific features of one country or another.''^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 145. 3-0873
34In their analysis of the general trend of the times, the Communist Parties at the same time establish the various substantial changes that have taken place within the framework of a given period of history, at the various stages of its development. Thus, for example, world developments since the October Revolution have gone through definite stages, which have been marked both by trends of development common to them all, and by substantial differences between them from the viewpoint of the alignment of world forces, and the roads and methods of accomplishing revolutionary tasks. Each of these stages has been marked by a particular strategy pursued by the communist movement. That is why these stages can be called strategical.
In the fundamentals, the strategy of the world communist movement remains constant throughout a strategical stage. It is modified when one strategical stage is completed and another begins that is marked by new phenomena in world development, a different alignment of class forces and the like. As historical experience has shown, a strategical stage does not coincide with an entire historical period of a Communist Party's struggle for the triumph of the socialist revolution, a struggle that goes through a number of strategical stages. The same holds true of the struggle of the entire world communist movement for the great aims of the working class.
A determination of the content of a historical period and of the current strategical stage makes it possible to establish the essence and the basic features of the revolutionary struggle. For instance, mankind is at present living in the epoch of the transition from capitalism to socialism, an epoch that was ushered in by the Great October Socialist Revolution. It is quite natural that, on the international plane, the communist movement is working out its strategy and tactics in conformity with the task of achieving the victory of socialism and communism on a world-wide scale.
However, as Lenin pointed out, the world socialist revolution is in fact a compound of a number of socialist, antiimperialist, national-liberation, general-democratic and other revolutions. And yet, while the trend towards socialism is the main feature of our times, there exist areas of the world, to say nothing of individual countries, in which the tasks characteristic of the pre-socialist stage of the revolution have 35 not yet been accomplished. That means that, in determining its strategy, each Communist Party also proceeds from the nature of the impending revolution in its own country. Here Communists take into account that today the democratic and the socialist stages of the revolution converge and intertwine so that there can be no lengthy interval between them. Due account of this circumstance is necessary in drawing up the correct strategy and tactics.
At each strategical stage, the world communist movement or any individual Communist Party evolves the strategic line, or, in other words, the general line of advance. The strategical or general line determines the fundamental political course of the Party or of the entire movement as directed towards the accomplishment of the fundamental revolutionary tasks of the given stage. That line is based on the theory of Marxism-Leninism, and is determined in keeping with the over-all historical aims of the communist movement.
At all stages, the Communists' strategical line is aimed at an advance towards the ultimate aim---socialism and communism. However, each historical stage gives concrete shape to the tasks of the communist movement, poses those tasks in their proper proportion to the other tasks inherent in that particular period, determines the special approaches and forms required for the accomplishment of those tasks, and so on. In keeping with all these factors the strategical line of the communist movement is also modified. In all conditions, of course, the strategical line is always intimately connected with the achievement of the main aims of the communist movement---the overthrow of imperialism and capitalism, and the construction of socialism and communism.
As is common knowledge, the Right-wing revisionists are out to void the strategical line of the communist movement of its revolutionary essence. They would reduce it merely to a struggle for the achievement of immediate demands, and reject the struggle for the triumph of socialism. As for the ``Left''-wing opportunists, the sectarians and the dogmatists, these regard the strategical line merely as a struggle for the general historical aims of communism, without due account of the characteristic features of the times; they ignore the immediate tasks of the toiling masses. Last, the nationalists __PRINTERS_P_35_COMMENT__ 3* 36 and the chauvinists, and, first and foremost, the leadership of the Communist Party of China, would impose upon the communist movement a strategy that is in accord with their nationalistic or great-power interests and requirements. The internationalist interests of the communist movement call for a most consistent struggle in defence of the scientific Marxist-Leninist strategical line.
The Communists' political line is based on due account of the correlation and alignment of the class forces in each country, and on the world scene. We all know what great attention Lenin devoted to an analysis of the alignment of class forces, when he determined the political line of the Communist Parties. "Tactics,'' he wrote, "must be based on a sober and strictly objective appraisal of all the class forces in a particular state (and of the states that surround it, and of all states the world over)....''^^*^^
Lenin pointed out that, at each historical stage, the following should be clearly determined: the fundamental classes taking part in the revolutionary struggle; the class that is heading that struggle; the intermediary strata that must either be drawn into an alliance with the revolutionary classes, or at least be neutralised; finally, the hostile classes, which should be distinctly marked out. "Only an objective consideration of the sum total of the relations between absolutely all the classes in a given society, and consequently a consideration of the objective stage of development reached by that society and of the relations between it and other societies, can serve as a basis for the correct tactics of an advanced class,'' he pointed out. "At the same time, all classes and all countries are regarded, not statically, but dynamically, i.e., not in a state of immobility, but in motion (whose laws are determined by the economic conditions of existence of each class).''^^**^^
The alignment of class forces changes in accordance with the nature and type of revolution, and with the strategical stage. A change in the alignment of class forces can lead to a change in the general line, in the entire strategy of the world communist movement.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 63.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 21, p. 75.
37The Communist Parties cannot limit themselves to merely taking stock of the spontaneous alignment of the class forces. It is the aim of their strategy and tactics to constantly strive to bring about a change in the alignment of the class forces in favour of the revolutionary movement. The communist line towards winning over the masses is a line of struggle for an alignment of class forces that is capable of bringing about the victory of the working class and its allies.
An objective appraisal of the alignment of the class forces makes it possible correctly to establish who the allies of the working class are at a given strategical stage, and to work for solidarity in the political army of the revolution. What we are referring to is the joint struggle of the working class and its allies for their common aims. It would be erroneous to regard the allies as simply a ``reserve'' of the Party or the proletariat, allies that can simply be ``manoeuvred''. Such an over-simplified approach could only cause detriment to the revolutionary movement. The various classes or social forces that may be taking action in alliance with the working class are fighting for their own interests. It is the task of Communists, with due account of the interests of their potential allies, to unite them about the working class, and against the common enemy.
When the necessary strategy is being evolved, it is also important to determine the Party's policy towards those forces which, while acting in opposition to the ruling classes, reveal instability, vacillation, and conciliatoriness because of the duality of their class stand. Lenin insisted on the need to utilise the least possibility of winning over to the side of the proletariat any mass ally, even if temporary and unstable. If it proves impossible to draw into an alliance with the working class forces that stand in opposition to the ruling circles, such forces should be neutralised.
Lenin also emphasised the need to carefully study the alignment of forces within the enemy camp, and to take advantage of differences between individual groups and parties of the bourgeoisie, and between bourgeois and petty-- bourgeois parties. "The more powerful enemy can be vanquished,'' he wrote, "only by exerting the utmost effort, and by the most thorough, careful, attentive, skilful and obligatory use of any, even the smallest, rift between the enemies, 38 any conflict of interests among the bourgeoisie of the various countries and among the various groups or types of bourgeoisie within the various countries, and also by taking advantage of any, even the smallest, opportunity of winning a mass ally, even though this ally is temporary, vacillating, unstable, unreliable and conditional.''^^*^^
Directly linked with an assessment of the alignment of class forces is the question of the establishment of the revolution's main enemy, and determining where the main thrust is to be made by the revolutionary forces. The art of strategical leadership consists in concentrating all the revolutionary forces in the most important line of attack and, at the decisive moment, dealing a smashing blow at the main enemy.
Various forces may be the main enemies at different stages of the revolution, this affecting the choice of the main thrust. Thus, the main enemy confronting the communist and revolutionary movement in the thirties was fascism which had behind it the most reactionary and jingoist elements of finance capital. That was why the Communists' main blow was aimed at fascism.
The main enemy today is world imperialism, and especially US imperialism.
``Imperialism,'' said Leonid Brezhnev in his address to the 1969 Meeting, "has been and remains the chief adversary not only of the communist movement but of all fighters for the rights of the working people, for the deliverance of the people from social and national oppression.''^^**^^ The 1969 Meeting's concluding Document points out that US imperialism has become the world exploiter and gendarme, the sworn enemy of liberation movements.^^***^^
The choice of the main thrust is made concretely by the Communist Parties in each particular country or group of countries. Thus, monopoly capital is the main enemy of the working-class and revolutionary movement in the developed capitalist countries. "The main blow in present conditions,'' said the 1960 Statement, "is directed with growing _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, pp. 70--71.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parlies, Moscow 1969, p. 111.
^^***^^ Ibid., p. 17.
39 force at the capitalist monopolies, which are chiefly responsible for the arms race and which constitute the bulwark of reaction and aggression, at the whole system of state-- monopoly capitalism, which defends their interests.''^^*^^The forces of the national-liberation movement are directing their main drive against foreign imperialism and their own reactionaries at home. The 1960 Statement emphasises that the fundamental tasks of national regeneration in the countries that have thrown off the colonial yoke cannot be accomplished without a resolute struggle against imperialism and the survivals of feudalism.
What is to be avoided is any confusion of the principal class enemy in the revolutionary struggle and the principal danger within the ranks of the working-class and the communist movement. For instance, it is Right- or ``Left''-wing opportunism that may become the main danger within the working class and the communist movement at one stage or another. However, despite all its tremendous importance, the struggle against that opportunism should not lead to the main class enemy of the revolution being lost sight of. Thus, errors were made in this question in the late twenties and the early thirties, at the beginning of the struggle against fascism. At that time, the opinion was widespread in the ranks of the communist movement that it was Social-- Democracy which was the main enemy and was splitting the forces of the working class. As a result, the main blow was often dealt at the Social-Democrats, which hampered the accomplishment of the main and fundamental task of the struggle against fascism.
Thus, political strategy is directed towards the solution of the cardinal problems that can ensure the victory of the revolution.
The present strategical line of the world communist movement has been evolved by the collective efforts of all Communist Parties. In the assessment of the fraternal Parties, an important part in laying down the theoretical and political foundations of that line has been played by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The documents of the _-_-_
^^*^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, Moscow, pp. 67--68.
40 International Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties provide a definition of the basic propositions in the strategical line of the communist movement at the present stage. The struggle for peace, democracy, national independence and socialism, and the unification of all the revolutionary forces in a single anti-imperialist alliance---such is the essence of the strategical line foil owed by the world communist movement at the present stage. Problems of the defence of peace and of the struggle for democracy and national independence and socialism are today being solved in their close interlinks and interdependence. In one way or another, all the propositions in the strategical line presuppose a struggle for the triumph of socialism. The struggle for peace, democracy and national independence is advancing mankind towards the triumph of socialism, whose successes are vastly promoting the growth of the general-democratic movements against war, reaction, and colonialism.As pointed out by the 1969 Meeting, a highly important part in the strategical line of the world communist movement is played by the consolidation of the unity of the world army of Communists, the world front of all fighters against imperialism. "The existing situation,'' says the Meeting's concluding Document, "demands united action of Communists and all other anti-imperialist forces so that maximum use may be made of the mounting possibilities for a broader offensive against imperialism, against the forces of reaction and war."^^*^^ It is the internationalist duty of every Communist Party to defend that strategy and to implement it in its day-by-day struggle.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Content of the TacticsThe tactics of the Communist Parties stems from the overall strategy and is subordinated to it, but, unlike it, is spearheaded towards the solution of the current tasks confronting the revolutionary movement, and is, therefore, more flexible. The determination of the Parties' current policies in a given _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 11.
41 concrete situation; an appraisal of the changes in the alignment of the class forces; the selection of the forms and methods of the struggle and organisation, in keeping with the conditions that have developed and promoting the best possible achievement of the strategical tasks---all these belong to the sphere of tactics. The following comparison is sometimes drawn to provide clearer understanding of the relation between strategy and tactics: strategy is directed towards winning a war, while tactics is designed to achieve success in a particular battle.The situation may undergo substantial change in the course of a single strategical stage. There may be an upsurge or a recession in the revolutionary movement; in one case, the conditions favour a tactical offensive, while in another a temporary withdrawal may be necessary. An appraisal of a given moment should be the point of departure in evolving a Party's tactics.
An analysis of the current situation allows the Communist Parties to take stock of the ebb and flow of the class forces. Even in the conditions of a definite historical stage, the alignment of class forces undergoes certain changes. Neither does the alignment of class forces remain unchanged in the solution of different problems. During some events the alignment of forces may develop in favour of the communist movement; in other instances, it may develop in favour of its opponents. This depends in some measure on the stand taken by the intermediate sections which may vacillate now in one direction, now in another. The tactics of the Communist Parties is planned with due account of all these changes.
In taking stock of the current situation and the alignment of forces that has developed, and proceeding from the needs of the moment, the Communist Parties set themselves their immediate tasks and determine the current policy or tactics. Thus, in evolving its tactics for current parliamentary elections, a Party may or may not nominate its candidates; it may support the candidates of definite parties or concentrate its criticism against other parties, and so on. A sober and realistic determination of the tasks of the Communists' current policies in their day-by-day struggle and in the variety of events---such is the most vital demand presented by tactics.
42The correct tactics of a Communist Party plays a tremendous part in the liberation struggle conducted by the working class. "Preparation of correct tactical decision,'' Lenin pointed out, "is of immense importance for a Party which desires to lead the proletariat in the spirit of sound Marxist principles, and not merely to lag in the wake of events.''^^*^^
In working out their current policies, the Communist Parties also choose those forms and methods of organisation and struggle which best help accomplish the tasks of a Party in a given situation.
Lenin advised the Communist Parties and the working class "to master all forms or aspects of social activity without exception''.^^**^^ He wrote that in politics it was far more difficult than, for instance, in military matters to determine in advance the particular means of struggle that can be used to best advantage in the future. If all the methods of struggle are not mastered, any change in the situation, which brings about the need to use new forms of activity, may lead to a major defeat. Lenin called upon Communists to use all the methods of struggle, even the oldest, but he considered it necessary to adapt those forms, enrich them, and to bring a new and communist content into them.
Lenin taught the working class and the Communist Parties to be prepared for "brusque replacement of one form by another''.^^***^^ To be efficacious, a Party's tactics must be flexible and keep in step with any change in the conditions. The art of political leadership consists in being able to manoeuvre and make compromises, and not only to advance but to retreat in complete order before superior forces of the enemy whenever it is necessary. Lenin mercilessly exposed those revolutionaries in word, who do not wish to understand that, in certain conditions, a retreat is necessary, and one must possess this skill to fall back.
The world communist movement has accumulated a wealth of experience in applying the most various forms and methods of working among the masses, both in conditions of an upsurge _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 9, p. 19.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, p. 96.
^^***^^ Ibid., p. 96.
43 of the revolutionary movement, and when it is on the wane and the reactionaries are on the offensive, both in years of ``peaceful'' work and in periods of revolutionary battles, in legal and illegal conditions. The Communists' parliamentary activities are an important form of the work of the Communist Parties. In the conditions of today, the Communist Parties are devoting considerable attention to work in democrati cbodies, in organisations of fighters for peace and the national emancipation of the working people.Tactics presupposes mastery of the various forms and methods of work among the masses. As Lenin emphasised, Communists "must absolutely work wherever the masses are to be found".^^*^^ He called upon Communists to make sacrifices and overcome all obstacles so as to conduct propaganda systematically, insistently and patiently in those bodies and organisations, even the most reactionary, in which industrial workers and other working people are involved. It is the task of Communists to be able to work among the masses and to convince those that are backward. At the same time, the Party not only teaches the masses, explaining the correct path of struggle to them, but also learns from the masses and absorbs and sums up the useful experience that is amassed in the midst of the people. Constant work among the masses, and winning their confidence and recognition--- these are essential for the Communist Parties to achieve leadership.
What is expected of Communists is not only well-organised agitation and propaganda but also the ability to teach the masses from their own experience. To win the masses over to the side of the Communist Party and to lead them up to the revolution, V. I. Lenin wrote, "the masses must have their own political experience''.^^**^^ As a classical example, Lenin quoted the fact of the Constituent Assembly in Russia being convoked after Soviet power had been established in the country. The Constituent Assembly at once revealed to the masses its inability to meet their demands. This visible and practical experience helped eliminate all bourgeois parliamentary illusions in the masses and strengthened _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., p. 53.
^^**^^ Ibid., p. 93.
44 the people's faith in the Soviets and the proletarian dictatorship.In the conditions of today, when the political outlook of the working masses has become much broader than before, and bourgeois propaganda is resorting to ever more refined methods of ideological influence on the masses, the task of teaching the masses from their own political experience acquires particular urgency. That is why, to convince the masses, the fraternal Parties are making extensive use of the example of socialism and the practice of the struggle for peace, democracy, and vital rights.
Leading the masses up to the revolution is a most important task of political leadership. V. I. Lenin taught Communist Parties to concentrate all their efforts and their attention on "the search after forms of the transition or the approach to the proletarian revolution.''^^*^^ Of course, the road towards a victorious proletarian revolution is a most complex one, which can be preceded by various events in which the struggle waged by many classes and for different aims are intertwined. It is the concern of Communist Parties to direct all class revolutionary movements into a single channel of struggle against the bourgeois system. As Lenin wrote in 1920, "To be able to seek, find and correctly determine the specific path or the paticular turn of events that will lead the masses to the real, decisive and final revolutionary struggle---such is the main objective of communism in Western Europe and in America today.''^^**^^
During the preparations for the October Revolution, the Bolshevik Party was able to give unity to the revolutionary working-class movement for the triumph of socialism, the peasant democratic movement for land, the national-- liberation struggle of Russia's oppressed peoples, and the movement of the masses against the imperialist war. In a different historical set-up, the anti-fascist struggle for liberation waged by the peoples of a number of European countries provided an approach of its own to the people's democratic revolution. In present-day conditions, the struggle for peace, democracy, and national liberation is one of the most _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 91.
^^**^^ Ibid., p. 97.
45 important means of bringing the masses into the revolution. Marxists-Leninists are resolutely unmasking the stand taken by the dogmatists and the sectarians, who see only a single road to socialism---the ``direct'' one.Guidance of the masses arid their involvement in the active revolutionary struggle demand of Communists the ability to determine the main link in the chain of revolutionary events, by grasping which they can accomplish the tasks confronting them at each concrete stage of the struggle. "You must be able at each particular moment,'' Lenin wrote, "to find the particular link in the chain which you must grasp with all your might in order to hold the whole chain and to prepare firmly for the transition to the next link....''^^*^^
Lenin, the Bolshevik Parly showed consummate skill in finding the main link in their revolutionary activities. Thus, early in 1917, following the February Revolution, a revolutionary withdrawal from the war became that main link. The Bolsheviks grasped at that link, which enabled them to lead the masses to the socialist revolution. Today the struggle to consolidate the communist movement on the principles of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, and for unity of action by all the anti-imperialist forces is the main link in the policies pursued by Communists on a world-wide scale. The success of the cause for which Communists and broad sections of the working people are struggling depends on a correct determination of the main link, both on a world-wide scale and on the scale of some particular country.
The choice of the decisive moment for the revolutionary forces to go over to an all-out offensive is a most important element of political leadership. Lenin warned that no battle should be begun if it is not to the proletariat's advantage. "To accept battle at a time when it is obviously advantageous to the enemy, but not to us, is criminal; political leaders of the revolutionary class are absolutely useless if they are incapable of" taking "evasive action in a patently disadvantageous battle.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 27, p. 274.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, p. 77.
46Basing himself on the experience of the revolutionary movement, Lenin showed that, to achieve victory, a number of important conditions testifying to the maturity of the revolution should he correctly assessed, and the moment for the attack properly chosen. A judgement of the burgeoning of the revolution should be formed, not so much from the degree of conviction of the revolutionary vanguard as from the alignment of forces and the temper of all classes, without exception, in a given society. It is only in the conditions of a revolutionary situation that Communist Parties can begin a decisive battle for the overthrow of the bourgeois system.
The October Revolution in Russia in 1917 is a classical example of the choice of the right moment to carry out a revolution. Led by Lenin, the Bolsheviks began the revolution no sooner and no later than was necessary for its victory.
Of course, the conditions of our times have brought into the revolutionary struggle very much that is new, complex and contradictory. Far from removing, this can only enhance the significance of the correct timing of a decisive offensive against the positions of the class enemy.
Correct tactics, skilful selection of the forms and methods of work, and winning over the masses to their side have allowed Communists to achieve successes in the current struggle and create the conditions for the preparation of the decisive assault against the outdated and exploiter system.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Due Account of the Enemy's PoliciesConfronting the strategy and tactics of the communist movement are the strategy and tactics of its main enemy--- the bourgeoisie. Of course, in determining their tactics, Communists should also take into account the tactics employed by the enemy, his methods of class domination, and the methods he uses to crush the struggle of the toiling masses. Ruling classes in general, and the bourgeoisie in particular, do not use one and the same tactics but modify and perfect them according to the situation.
The bourgeoisie usually makes use of two main methods of the struggle against the working masses; first, the method 47 of force, and second, that of reforms, of partial concessions to the working-class movement. These two methods now replace each other, now intertwine, this in accordance with the state of the working-class forces and the possibilities in the struggle against capitalism.
``Under the changing world alignment of forces and the sharpening of the class struggle in the bourgeois countries,'' Leonid Brezhnev has emphasised, "capitalism has to resort to new means and methods of struggle, which in many ways appear even to clash with the conventional `classic' features of the capitalist system. In an effort to reinforce their social hinterland areas, the capitalists combine methods of suppression with partial satisfaction of the working people's demands---a method which Lenin said was one of ' concessions of the unessential while retaining the essential' [ Collected Works, Vol. 24, p. 64]---sowing the illusion that the working class can achieve its aspirations through agreements with the employers, without a revolutionary transformation of society, within the framework of the capitalist system.''^^*^^ The bourgeoisie has learned a lesson from the defeat of its class in the socialist countries, and has learned to manoeuvre adroitly and adapt itself to the new situation. It makes wide use of demagogy, bourgeois reformism, opportunist ideology and politics, and is constantly searching for new methods so as to weaken the working-class movement from within and to try and ``integrate'' it in the system of capitalism.
In evolving its tactics, the bourgeoisie tries to take advantage of certain objective factors and to use for its own class ends the new phenomena in the development of state-- monopoly capitalism: the development of the scientific and technological revolution in the conditions of the further concentration and centralisation of production and capital; the growing might of the monopolies and their merger with the bourgeois state; the ever mounting intervention of the state in the economy. Also significant in this respect are the statemonopoly regulation and programming of the economy on a nation-wide scale, this being directed towards the _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 149.
48 achievement of the long-term aims of monopoly capital, and the economic integration of a numher of capitalist countries, the latter as the outcome of the objective requirements for the development of the productive forces, and the striving of the monopolies to pool their efforts so as to reply GO the challenge presented by socialism.The development of present-day production under capitalism has posed a number of social problems, which urgently call for solution: the problems of unemployment, the social consequences of the scientific and technological revolution, the modernisation of industry and agriculture, the housing and transport crises, the advances in the systems of education and public health, and the like. The bourgeois state is trying to solve these problems along reformist lines, but, of course, in the interests of the monopoly oligarchy. Under the cover of demagogical considerations of the " benefit to the nation'', it interferes in labour relations to the advantage of the employers, regulates working hours and holidays, and influences wage levels. In recent years special bodies have been set up in a number of the capitalist countries to evolve the social and economic policies of monopoly capital. These measures have no doubt given the bourgeoisie certain results, which, however, in the conditions of today, have proved insufficient. It is becoming ever more obvious that the method of partial reforms is incapable of deceiving or misleading the class struggle of the working masses, who are giving an ever more active rebuff to state-monopoly capitalism.
It is this that accounts in ever greater measure for the severer repressive measures employed by the monopoly oligarchy against the socialist and democratic forces. As emphasised by Gus Hall, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USA, American imperialism now "places a higher priority on the use of open terror---on the use of the para-military forces or the use of the CIA and FBI''.^^*^^ The growing activity of the bourgeoisie's reactionary circles, and the latter's resorting to an ever more undisguised policy of violence against the working class are to be seen in many _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 428.
49 countries. The ruling quarters in Ihese capitalist countries are trying to curb and weaken action by the working people, this with the aid of bare-faced provocations and methods of fascist violence.The two trends in bourgeois policy---the reformist and the repressive---present a grave danger to the working-class movement, especially if one remembers that today the methods and means of implementing such tactics have become far more refined and flexible than in the past.
In waging their struggle against the bourgeois tactics in all its guises, Communists are well aware that the bourgeoisie themselves are not homogeneous.
There are two main wings today in the camp of the imperialist bourgeoisie: the ultra-reactionary and the relatively moderate. Both wings pursue a common strategical aim--- preservation of the monopoly bourgeoisie's supremacy. However, there are certain distinctions in the tactics of these two groupings. Imperialism's extreme Right wing comes out with an apology for the "cold war" and foreignpolicy adventures that are fraught with the danger of a nuclear disaster, as well as for a policy of brutal repression and the violent suppression of the working-class and democratic movement. This stand has the backing of those imperialist circles that are actively supporting the Birchists, the hawks, and other ultras in the USA, the neo-nazi NDP in the FRG, and Right-wing extremist elements in France and Italy.
These are the forces that have inspired US aggression in Indochina and Israel's attack against the Arab states. They have been responsible for reactionary coups in a number of Latin American countries, in Indonesia, Greece, several African states, and so on.
The other and more moderate wing of the bourgeoisie is inclined towards more cautious tactics and, in certain cases, reveals preparedness to compromise in foreign policies and to engage in flanking movements in respect of the working-class and democratic movement.
It is not a matter of indifference to the working class which particular wing of the bourgeoisie is in a dominant position. The working-class movement is directing the main blow at the extreme reactionary forces, in which it sees the main danger.
__PRINTERS_P_49_COMMENT__ 4-0873 50The 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties gave a profound analysis of the features in the present-day strategy and tactics of world imperialism. To quote from the concluding Document of the Meeting: "The core of the aggressive policy of imperialism is the drive to use all means to weaken the positions of socialism, suppress the national-liberation movement, hamstring the struggle of the working people in the capitalist countries and halt the irreversible decline of capitalism....
``The spearhead of the aggressive strategy of imperialism continues to be aimed first and foremost against the socialist countries.''^^*^^
These words describe world imperialism's fundamental strategical line in a nutshell. Due account of that line and of its modifications, and of the ways it is implemented enables the world communist movement to evolve the most effective tactics in the struggle for its ideals. The International Meeting set the Communist Parties the task of contraposing to the imperialist strategy and tactics their own line of building up the unity of the international communist movement and mobilising the world-wide anti-imperialist front.
Imperialism has more than once shown that it is prepared both to export counter-revolution and to unleash wars designed to crush world socialism and the liberation and revolutionary movements. It would have nothing against checking the advance of history by means of a thermonuclear war against the socialist countries. Fortunately for mankind, however, imperialism is today obliged to take into account the revolutionary forces standing opposed to it, and, first and foremost, the world socialist system. The might of socialism is a strong curb on the aggressive designs of imperialism.
Proceeding from the lofty ideals of its doctrine, and with due consideration of our times and its historical revolutionary experience, the world communist movement has creatively evolved its strategy and tactics in the struggle against capitalism and for the triumph of socialism. The consistent _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 12.
51 implementation of that strategy and tactics, and their defence against any distortion by the Right-wing and the ``Left''-- wing opportunists is surety of more victories for the communist movement. __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 4. THE WORLD COMMUNIST MOVEMENT HAS BECOMEThe development of human society over the past century and more has shown the historical inevitability of the steady growth of the communist movement, and of its victory. When the communist movement arose in the forties of the nineteenth century, its ranks numbered only some three to four hundred men and women, united in an international organisation called the League of Communists. The movement soon struck deep roots. In the last third of the nineteenth century, mass working-class parties had arisen in the main European countries. Marxism had won big victories in the world working-class movement.
The communist movement reached a new stage in the epoch of imperialism. In 1903 there arose in Russia a party of a new type that had been created by the great Lenin---the Party of Bolsheviks. When the Great October Socialist Revolution took place, there were over 400,000 Communists throughout the world. The October Revolution was the starting point for a rapid and universal growth of the communist movement. The formation and consolidation of the world's first socialist state, and then the establishment of the Communist International accelerated the appearance of MarxistLeninist parties in dozens of countries. In 1918 there were already ten Communist Parties in the world; there were 34 in 1921, 46 in 1928, 61 in 1935, 75 in 1957, and in 1961 there were already 87 Communist Parties.
Today there are 89 Communist Parties in the world with a membership of almost 50 million. "The world communist movement,'' says the Statement of the 1960 Meeting, __PRINTERS_P_51_COMMENT__ 4* 52 ``has become the most influential political force of our lime, a most important factor in social progress.''^^*^^ How is this manifested in practice? First, the Communists, who head the masses, have converted scientific socialism from theory into the practice of the construction of socialism and communism in vast areas of the world. A number of countries in Europe and Asia, as well as Cuba, have taken to the road of socialism. The Communists have shown in deed their ability to achieve the overthrow of the power of the bourgeoisie, head the construction of a new society, one without exploitation and private ownership, and bring about socialism becoming an international force that is exerting an ever greater impact on the course of the historical development. The socialist system has provided the world communist movement with so powerful a material force that has enabled it to play the part of a leading factor in world social progress.
Second, the role played by the communist movement in the developed capitalist countries has grown considerably. The Communists are marching in the van of the struggle being waged by the working people in the capitalist countries for their vital interests and for peace, democracy and social progress. Their prestige and influence on social life are growing, and ever new sections of the population are coming over to their side. This has enhanced the Communists' influence on the masses and also on many aspects of the home and foreign policies of the capitalist countries.
Third, the Communists' influence on the world nationalliberation movement has grown greatly. The world communist movement has shown itself a firm ally of the forces of national liberation. The Communist Parties are active in the struggle for the complete national liberation of their countries, for progressive development, and for the advance towards socialism. In the new national states and in the dependent countries, the working masses are coming more and more to see that it is the Communists that are staunch defenders of their countries' national interests.
Fourth, its common aims and tasks give the world communist movement its strength. That movement is not the _-_-_
^^*^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, p. 70.
53 simple sum of individual isolated parties but a voluntary union of equal and independent Communist Parties united by bonds of proletarian internationalism, a single ideology, and the joint struggle against the common enemy, and for a single ultimate aim.In the fifth place, there has been a steady growth in the internationalist significance of the world communist movement, and of its leading role in the international workingclass, democratic and national-liberation movement, as well as of its progressive influence on world politics. Today there is not a single major question of the world economy and international relations that can be solved without due account of the stand taken by the socialist camp and the communist movement. Whether it is to their liking or not, the masters of the capitalist world are obliged in ever greater measure to reckon with the socialist countries and the communist movement.
This process is also marked by the Marxist-Leninist ideas of the communist movement penetrating ever deeper into the consciousness of broad sections of the population in the non-socialist part of the world. Many democratic bodies are more and more often advancing certain programmatic demands similar to those of the Communist Parties. The imperialist bourgeoisie has been forced to meet certain social and economic demands of the working people in the post-war period. This has taken place, not because the bourgeoisie has suddenly begun to ``sympathise'' with the Communists' slogans but because those slogans have won powerful support from the masses of the working people, and this is something the opponents of communism have been obliged to take into account. The communist movement has exerted an influence on the development of broadbased popular movements for peace, democracy, national independence, and social progress in the capitalist world.
The mounting impact of the communist movement on human society is closely connected with the development given by that movement to the science of the revolutionary transformation of the world. The Marxist-Leninist parties are providing scientific grounds for the prospect of mankind's advance towards new heights of social progress. Each new year provides fresh proof of that prospect being the correct 54 one. The theoretical impact of communism is growing from year to year.
Of course, the world communist movement has its difficulties and contradictions, which are exerting a negative influence on its development and are hampering the accomplishment of its fundamental tasks. Addressing the 1969 International Meeting Leonid Brezhnev, General Secretary of the CPSU's Central Committee, pointed out that the world communist movement is going through a complex period of its development. "Unity has been seriously disrupted in some of its links,'' he said. "Some fraternal Parties have suffered setbacks and even defeats.''^^*^^
In many respects these difficulties are a by-product of the vast demolition of the old world's social foundations, which is the essence of our times. They are also connected with mounting resistance from the bourgeoisie, which has elevated anti-communism to the level of state policy, and also with the strategy of imperialism, which is staking on corrupting the communist and the entire revolutionary movement from within.
As pointed out at the International Meeting of Communists of 1969, the difficulties and contradictions in the communist movement are being coped with on the basis of the objective community of fundamental interests that marks all the revolutionary detachments struggling against world imperialism, the common enemy, and for the achievement of the common aims---peace, democracy, liberty, and communism. What is necessary to eliminate such difficulties and contradictions is a decisive struggle against Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism, and against nationalism, hegemonism, and all brands of splitting activities.
Despite all the differences and difficulties that have arisen, the world communist movement remains a mighty force. All the activities of the Marxist-Leninist Communist and Workers' Parties show that the world communist movement has become the most influential political force of our times.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 155.
55 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Main DetachmentsThe establishment and consolidation of the world socialist system is the main achievement of the communist movement.
The creation of a new society in the socialist countries is guided by the ruling Communist Parties, which have become genuinely mass bodies with boundless prestige in the respective countries, and the guiding force for the peoples of the countries of socialism.
The Communist Parties of the socialist countries are having to solve complex problems in developing the economy, strengthening the new social relations, the communist education of their peoples, and ensuring defence of the achievements of the revolution. Indeed, they have successfully strengthened the people's power, and ensured the victory of socialist production relations in the economy. Under the guidance of the Communist Parties in the socialist countries, the exploitation of man by man has been abolished, socialist industrialisation has been actively implemented, and the socialist reconstruction of agriculture, that most difficult problem in the construction of socialism, has either been or is being successfully solved.
It is the internationalist duty of all Communists to do "the utmost possible in one country for the development, support and awakening of the revolution in all countries".^^*^^ The Communists of the socialist countries consider it their prime internationalist duty to achieve the further development of each socialist country and the entire system of socialism, and to strengthen the unity and solidarity of the socialist camp. The successful struggle waged by the Communists of the socialist countries is multiplying the forces of the entire world communist and revolutionary movement. At the same time, as is borne out by the policies pursued by the leadership of the Communist Party of China, any Communist Party's departure from the fundamental principles of socialist construction and socialist internationalism has an adverse effect on the peoples' struggle for peace and socialism.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 28, p. 292.
56In giving practical guidance to the masses' struggle for the construction of socialism and communism, and in implementing the ideals of communism, the fraternal Parties of the socialist countries stand in the van of the entire communist movement, in which they are a mighty force.
A very large number of Communist Parties are working in the capitalist countries.
The Communists of West Europe, North America, and Japan are waging a struggle in the main centres of the capitalist system, where the bourgeoisie's rule is based on a powerful industrial potential, a smoothly functioning imperialist machinery of state, and the use of the most up-to-date means of ideological influence. Most of the Communist Parties in these areas are tested and militant Marxist-Leninist organisations of the proletariat, and have gone through a stern school of an acute class struggle. In a number of countries, such as Spain, Portugal and Greece, the Communist Parties are persecuted and have to work deep underground. The Communist Party of the United States is being constantly badgered and hounded. There is not a single Communist Party in the capitalist world which has not experienced systematic restrictions and attacks on the part of the ruling imperialist quarters and their political and ideological machinery. The bourgeois reactionaries are constantly waging anti-communist campaigns designed to paralyse the influence of the Communist Parties and to prevent them from winning the majority of the working class over to their side.
Nevertheless, the Communist Parties of the capitalist countries are consolidating and increasing their ranks, and scoring successes in their struggle. The following have become mass parties: the Communist Party of Italy ( membership about 1,500,000), the Communist Party of France (membership about 450,000), the Communist Party of Japan (300,000), and the Communist Party of Finland (50,000). The membership of the Communist Parties of a number of other countries has also grown in recent years.
Many of the Communist Parties in these areas of the world are being followed by considerable sections of the working class of the countries concerned. These Parties hold strong positions in the trade unions and other 57 democratic organisations. In a number of countries, the Communists have been able to establish correct relations with those sections of the toiling masses that follow the SocialDemocrats and the Catholics. Tangible successes in the struggle for unity of action by the working people have been scored by the French, Italian, Japanese, and West German Communists. Communist influence is growing among the peasants, the urban petty bourgeoisie, the intellectuals, and white-collar workers. In particular, the communist vote at elections to central and local government bodies is rising. For instance, in the May 1968 Italian parliamentary elections, eight and a half million voters came out for candidates nominated by the Communist Party to the Chamber of Deputies, this being 26.9 per cent of the total number of votes cast, as against 25.3 per cent in 1963. In June 1970, the Italian Communist Party scored a fresh success during the municipal, provincial and regional elections. Considerable gains have been registered in recent years by the fraternal Parties of France, Japan, Luxemburg, and Sweden.
Of course, the Communist Parties in these parts of the world are still faced by a number of problems that await solution. Not all the Communist Parties have been able to find the right road to the masses and become an influential force in their respective countries. It is the main task of the Communist Parties in the developed capitalist countries to wage a struggle against the omnipotence of the monopolies and to advance their own countries along the road of peace, democracy and socialism.
The Communist Parties of the Latin American countries are a militant section of the international communist movement. Many of them are working in illegal or semi-legal conditions and are constantly persecuted and repressed. The prisons of Brazil, Haiti, Guatemala and Paraguay are full of Communists and other patriots. Parties that are legal come under constant pressure from the reactionaries.
Despite all this:, the Latin American Communists are conducting a stubborn struggle for the social and national interests of the working people, and are increasing their ranks. In recent years, the membership has grown of the Communist Parties of Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, and Costa Rica. The strategy of the Latin American Communist Parties is 58 directed towards the struggle against imperialism, the defence of national sovereignty, and for peace, democracy, economic independence, and profound social transformations that are opening the way towards socialism.
The programmes of the Latin American Communist Parties provide for the following: nationalisation of the property of the US monopolies and the local oligarchies; annulment of unequal agreements and treaties with the USA; the abolition of the big landed estates and feudal survivals; the transfer of the land to the working people; higher living standards for the people; a peaceful foreign policy; the establishment of normal relations with the socialist countries; support for socialist Cuba, and the like.
The Latin American Communists are concentrating their efforts to establish broad-based anti-imperialist and democratic coalitions that will accomplish the tasks of the people's revolution against imperialism and the oligarchy, and with an orientation towards socialism.
Speaking of the increasing possibilities of the antiimperialist struggle in the countries of capital, Leonid Brezhnev pointed out at the International Meeting of 1969 that the role of the Communist Parties and of their work among the masses is steadily growing, and that world development in the concluding third of the twentieth century largely hinges on the Communists' activities.
The communist movement is also developing in the countries of Asia and Africa. Despite the extremely arduous conditions, the Communists of the liberated and dependent countries are waging a stubborn struggle for the vital interests of the toiling masses, for peace and democracy, and against the local reactionaries and foreign imperialists.
The Communist Parties in the developing and dependent countries see their main task in the struggle for the final liquidation of colonialism, for the achievement not only of political but also economic independence, and for the development of their countries along the road of social progress.
The Communist Parties of the Afro-Asian countries are concentrating their efforts on the establishment of a broadbased front against imperialism and feudalism, and are establishing ties with the revolutionary-democratic forces that are actively participating in the national-liberation 59 revolutions, which they often head. Together with the revolutionary democrats, the Communist Parties are working for the establishment, in the course of the liberation struggle, of democratic governments of national liberation.
Thus, the communist movement has actually extended'its influence over the whole world and scored historic victories in the struggle for peace, democracy, national independence, socialism and communism.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ § 5. THE INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS OF COMMUNISTAt present the world movement of Communists is not organised within the framework of any formal body. In the conditions of today, new forms of relations have come into being between the Communist Parties: bilateral contacts, regional meetings, and international conferences.
In November 1957 there took place in Moscow a meeting of representatives of Communist and Workers' Parties of the socialist countries, and an International Meeting of Representatives of Communist and Workers' Parties. The Declaration and the Peace Manifesto which they adopted were an important step in evolving the fundamental political line of the world communist movement. The Meetings confirmed and further developed the conclusions drawn by the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU on the preventability of a world war, on peaceful coexistence between states with differing social systems, and on the peaceful and nonpeaceful forms of the transition to socialism. The Peace Manifesto provided a concrete programme of the struggle for peace, and, in the first place, of the struggle for a ban on the testing, production and use of nuclear weapons.
The Declaration gave special prominence to problems confronting Communists in the socialist countries. It confirmed the unity of views of the Communist Parties on the basic problems of the proletarian revolution and socialist construction, and formulated the main patterns in the transition to socialism. The Declaration gave a clear-cut definition of the historic tasks and the leading principles in the strategy and tactics of the Communist Parties in the struggle for peace, democracy, national independence, and socialism. 60 Throughout this document runs the idea of the vital importance of the cohesion of all revolutionary and progressive forces in the world.
The 1957 Meeting dealt a smashing blow at revisionism, and at the same time spoke of the danger presented by dogmatism and sectarianism, which, at individual stages, may present the main danger to the communist movement.
The second International Meeting of Representatives of Communist and Workers' Parties, which took place in Moscow in November 1960, discussed in detail the major problems of world development, and adopted a Statement and an Appeal to the Peoples of the World. The Meeting gave a scientific definition of the nature of our times, emphasising that the world socialist system is ever more becoming the decisive factor in the development of human society. The Meeting's Statement formulated the conclusion that the development of the general crisis of capitalism has entered a new stage. In characterising the current period, the Meeting proceeded from the contradiction between socialism and capitalism being the main contradiction of the times, and its local feature being marked by the existence of the international working class and its main creation---the world system of socialism.
The 1960 Meeting gave a comprehensive analysis of the principal strategical lines in the struggle waged by the world communist movement for peace, democracy, national independence, and socialism. The documents drawn up by the Meeting gave creative development to the problems of the theory and tactics of Communists in the struggle for peace. Of great importance was its analysis of the problem of peaceful coexistence as a particular form of the class struggle between socialism and capitalism. The Meeting emphasised the indissoluble tie between the struggle for peace and the struggle for socialism.
The Meeting's Statement formulated the principal strategical tasks and the tactics of the Communist Parties in the socialist countries, the developed capitalist countries, and also in the liberated and dependent countries. The Meeting examined the most important patterns and prospects in the development of the world socialist system, and indicated the conditions necessary for the transition of the 61 socialist countries to communism. Great attention was paid to the problems of the national-liberation movement, and in particular to the prospects of the non-capitalist road of development.
The Statement gave prominence to problems of the communist and working-class movement in the developed capitalist countries. The Meeting analysed questions of the creation of a single anti-monopoly front, the unity of the workingclass movement, the struggle for democracy as a component of the struggle for socialism, and problems of the roads and forms of the proletarian revolution.
The Meeting discussed in detail questions of the further consolidation of the world communist movement, laid special stress on the importance of the Leninist principles of Party life, formulated the principles of relations between the Communist Parties in keeping with the present-day conditions, emphasised the need for the greatest possible strengthening of the unity and solidarity of the world communist movement, and called upon the Communist Parties to wage a struggle both against revisionism and against dogmatism and sectarianism. The Meeting gave a firm rebuff to the dogmatic and sectarian positions of the Chinese leadership.
Congresses of the Communist Parties of many countries have drawn up concrete programmes of the struggle against imperialism and for peace and socialism, on the basis of the Meeting's conclusions. A major event in the life of the world communist movement was the Twenty-Second Congress of the CPSU, which adopted a new Programme for the CPSU---a programme of communist construction in the USSR.
Also of great importance to the world communist movement were the decisions adopted by the CPSU's Twenty Third Congress, which approved the activities of the CPSU's Central Committee in giving cohesion to the ranks of the world communist movement on the foundation of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism. The Congress came out in favour of the idea of holding a new international meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties when the conditions were ripe. In accordance with the line laid down by the Congress, the CPSU's Central Committee 62 did much, together with the other fraternal Parties, to prepare the ground for such a Meeting.
Held in Moscow between June 5 and 17, in 1969, the third International Meeting of Communists was attended by representatives of 75 Communist and Workers' Parties, most of which had taken part in the two preceding international Meetings. Also attending the Meeting were representatives of three new sections of the world communist movement---the Communist Party of Lethoto, the People's Progressive Party of Guyana and the Party of Nigerian MarxistsLeninists.
The Meeting held 21 plenary sessions, which were addressed by representatives of all the delegations. The discussion was marked, first and foremost, by a creative spirit. In the addresses given by delegates, pooling of the experience of the individual Parties went hand-in-hand with theoretical analysis. A wide range of questions was dealt with in the course of the debates. The fact that not all the viewpoints expressed were identical was a reflection of the variety of conditions in which the Parties are working, and the differences of the forms and methods of the revolutionary struggle.
Most of the conferences came out from consistently Marxist-Leninist positions, but certain erroneous views were also expressed, which came in for grounded and principled comradely criticism from other delegates. The discussion of all questions was friendly in nature, for this was a meeting of fellow-thinkers and fighters for a common cause.
As distinct from the 1957 and 1960 Meetings, the 1969 Meeting released its proceedings to the public. All speeches by the delegates were published, as were the documents adopted. This extensive publicity made it possible for the ideas of the Meeting to spread rapidly all over the world, evoking extensive comment in the most varied sections of society.
The Meeting's main political line stemmed from its aims, which were reflected in the agenda. As is common knowledge, the latter contained two items, the first being entitled "Tasks at the Present Stage of the Struggle Against Imperialism, and United Action of the Communist and Workers' Parties and All Anti-Imperialist Forces''. It was in this light that 63 the Meeting examined its concluding Document, as well as a document of solidarity with Vietnam and an Appeal in Defence of Peace.
The second item on the agenda was an Address on the centenary of Lenin's birth. The motion for the adoption of this Address was tabled by the Preparatory Committee in accordance with an idea first suggested by the CPSU delegation.
It will thus be seen that the agenda, which laid down the main line followed by the Meeting in its deliberations, reflected the fundamental needs of the revolutionary struggle and the main questions of present-day world development.
In the first place, it took into account the main problem of our times---that of eliminating the threat presented to mankind by the very existence of imperialism and its aggressive policies. This is, indeed, the focal problem of our days, on the solution of which depends the very existence of living and future generations of working people.
Further, the wording of the Meeting's agenda also reflected the main condition essential for the accomplishment of the task set, namely, the unity of all revolutionary forces and the uniting of their efforts in a single mighty movement capable of blocking the imperialist policies.
Finally, the Meeting's agenda indicated the road Communists should follow to remove the difficulties in the ranks of their movement and to achieve effective unity of the Communist Parties. That road is the cohesion of all fraternal Parties in a united struggle against imperialism.
On the whole, the deliberations of the 1969 Meeting showed the greater maturity of the communist movement, and reflected the mounting desire of the fraternal Parties to achieve cohesion and unity of their ranks in the common struggle against imperialism.
Only a single party---that of the Dominican Republic--- refrained from adopting the Meeting's concluding Document. The delegations of the Communist Parties of Italy, San Marino, Australia and Reunion, while coming out for greater unity of the Communist and Workers' Parties and of all anti-imperialist forces, expressed agreement only with that section of the Document which set forth a joint programme of struggle against imperialism. The delegations of the 64 Communisl Parties of Rumania, Spain, Switzerland, the Sudan and Morocco signed the Document as a whole, making certain reservations while signing it.
The Executive Committee of the Communist Party of Great Britain and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Norway signed the Document with some reservations. The delegations of the Communist Party of Cuba and the Left-wing Party of Swedish Communists were present at the Meeting in the capacity of observers, and were therefore not empowered to sign the Documents.
The International Meeting showed the determination and the readiness of the fraternal Communist Parties to activise the anti-imperialist struggle and strengthen the cohesion of the communist movement.
Notable was the unanimity with which the Address on the centenary of Lenin's birth was adopted. This was a vivid demonstration of Communists' fidelity to the great ideals for which the founder of the CPSU and the Soviet state fought and to which he dedicated all his life.
Also enthusiastically adopted were profoundly internationalist documents of solidarity with heroic Vietnam, as well as documents expressing fraternal support for the Arab countries' just struggle against the Israeli aggressors, and statements on solidarity with Communists and democrats brutally persecuted for their selfless struggle, in the most arduous conditions, against reactionary regimes backed by world imperialism.
Finally, by unanimously adopting an Appeal in Defence of Peace, the Meeting again demonstrated Communists' inflexible determination to combat the aggressive policies of imperialism and work for the peace and security of all peoples.
What was the new contribution made by the 1969 Meeting to the theory and practice of the communist movement?
In dealing with the world situation, the 1960 Meeting assessed the main trends of the times, an important approach in view of the Chinese leadership's having attacked the communist movement by advancing an erroneous appraisal of our times and underestimating the role and significance of the world socialist system and the might of the world working class.
65The 1969 Meeting, which confirmed the fundamentals in the characterisation of our times as given in 1960, scrutinised the development of the struggle waged by socialism and the forces of democracy and national liberation against the forces of imperialism. The analysis given in the Meeting's documents was most sober and realistic; it gave a correct appraisal both of the progress and the shortcomings of the anti-imperialist forces, and of the strength and weaknesses of imperialism. The following conclusion was drawn: the times have multiplied the possibilities of the world revolutionary movement, but the danger presented by imperialism still exists in full. Consequently, the vigilance and activity of the fighters for mankind's liberation are still the main guarantee of a further advance of the revolutionary cause of all the peoples.
In characterising present-day capitalism, the 1960 Meeting came to the conclusion that a new stage of its general crisis has set in. The 1969 Meeting analysed the manner in which the development of imperialism is taking place in the conditions of a new stage in that general crisis. As pointed out in the Documents of the 1969 Meeting, the main feature of present-day imperialism consists in its having been forced to adapt itself to the struggle between the two systems and to the conditions created by the scientific and technological revolution. This circumstance is also decisively influencing the way in which imperialism's inner patterns reveal themselves, its policies within the capitalist countries, and its world strategy. Today the material and technical, as well as the socio-political prerequisites for the liquidation of capitalism's domination are developing at over greater speed. At the same time, the new situation is forcing imperialism to show greater activity and to try to find some replies to the challenge presented by the forces of democracy and socialism. The Meeting emphasised that the new stage in the general crisis, which is weakening imperialism internally, has also presented new problems to the forces of national and social liberation in the capitalist countries.
The Documents of the 1960 Meeting gave a sweeping characterisation of the forces opposing capitalism. They devoted special attention to the world socialist system, whose development had been completed when the Meeting was convened. __PRINTERS_P_65_COMMENT__ 5-0873 66 In speaking of the problems of the working-class movement, the conferees of the I960 international forum gave a general characterisation of the present stage of the working people's struggle in the countries of developed capitalism. The section on the national-liberation movement gave a general characterisation of the disintegration of the colonial system and the new possibilities (i.e., the non-capitalist road; a state of national democracy) which lie open to the liberated countries in the conditions of the third stage of capitalism's general crisis.
The documents of the 1969 Meeting gave a new dimension to an analysis of and generalisations on these questions.
Problems of socialism were examined in the light of the new stage the countries of socialism had entered since 1960: most of them had already completed or were completing the transitional period and the construction of a developed socialist society was in full swing. The USSR is laying down the material and technical basis of communism. Hence the tremendous attention devoted to problems of the scientific and technological revolution and the greater co-operation between the socialist states as the main problems comprising the essence of the internal tasks confronting world socialism. At the same time, it was emphasised that (with due account of the events in Hungary in 1956 and in Czechoslovakia in 1968) the triumph of socialism may be considered guaranteed only given internationalist co-operation between the fraternal Parties of the socialist countries, and consolidation of the political and defence might of the socialist states.
In respect of the present-day working-class movement in the countries of advanced capitalism, the necessary conclusions were drawn from the internal changes in the social composition of society and the alignment of class forces there in recent years. The Meeting focussed attention on the strengthening of the vanguard role of the working class in the anti-monopoly movement, in particular in connection with the growing number of its allies, first and foremost among the intellectuals and also among the youth.
In this connection, greater emphasis was placed on the problem of a united anti-monopoly front as well as of unity in the working class and the working-class movement.
Finally, the main conclusions drawn by the Meeting in 67 respect of the national-liberation movement dealt with the processes under way in the newly independent countries following the abolition of the colonial yoke. The new forms of colonial oppression used by imperialism (neo-colonialism) were analysed in their close interlinks; also analysed were: the need to activise the anti-imperialist struggle in this part of the world; the greater social content of the nationalliberation movement, and the growth of the class struggle. The overall conclusion drawn was as follows: the future of the newly independent countries now depends in ever greater measure on the strength of the democratic and anti-- imperialist forces, and the consolidation of the working class's positions and its alliance with the peasantry.
Such, in general outline, were some of the conclusions which for the first time have become part of the general documents of the communist movement and have been adopted by all the Marxist-Leninist parties.
Lenin stressed that only that party has the right to consider itself Marxist and revolutionary which is able to put theory into practice and is able to merge its activities with those of the other revolutionary forces and their struggle, and to make a contribution to their actions so as to achieve common aims more rapidly. The Meeting was a demonstration of fidelity to this Leninist behest. The practical aspect of the deliberations---the concrete platform of the antiimperialist struggle drawn up by the Meeting, i.e., both the discussions held and the documents adopted comprised a most important part of its work.
The programme of action advanced by the Meeting contained nine main demands, which were as follows:
1. A primary objective of united actions is to give allround support to the heroic Vietnamese people.
2. The main link of united action of the anti-imperialist forces remains the struggle against war for world peace, against the menace of a thermonuclear world war and mass extermination which continues to hang over mankind.
3. The defence of peace is inseparably linked up with the struggle to compel the imperialists to accept peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems.
4. To preserve peace the most urgent task is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. The main effort should be directed __PRINTERS_P_67_COMMENT__ 5* 68 towards the prohibition of nuclear weapons. Nuclear energy should be used exclusively for peaceful purposes.
5. The Meeting calls on world public opinion to display unflagging and active solidarity with the peoples and the countries which are constant objectives of aggressive encroachments by imperialism.
6. Communists reiterate their solidarity with the struggle of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America for liberation from every kind of economic and political hegemony of imperialism. The demand of our epoch is to rid our planet completely of the curse of colonialism, destroy its last centres and prevent ist revival in new, camouflaged forms.
1. We consider it imperative to step up the fight against
the fascist menace and relentlessly to rebuff profascist sorties.
8. Communists again call on all honest men in the world to unite their efforts in the struggle against the man-hating ideology and practices of racialism.
9. The interests of the struggle against imperialism, which attempts to stifle basic human freedoms, demand a tireless fight to defend and win freedom of speech, the press, assembly, demonstration and association, for the equality of all citizens, to democratise every aspect of social life.'" ^^*^^
It will be seen that the Meeting concentrated attention on the most burning world issues, whose solution will create an entirely new situation on our planet---one in which imperialism will be unable to pursue its anti-popular policies, since its ability to harm will be neutralised. Democratic principles will triumph in the relations between states. In these conditions new opportunities will be created for the solution of such radical problems as, for instance, poverty, hunger and deadly diseases, as well as for the advance of all peoples to new horizons of social progress.
The programme of struggle proposed by the Meeting calls for offensive action. It is a matter not of merely curbing imperialism but of inflicting a decisive defeat upon it. This programme is designed not only for Communists, but also for all fighters against imperialism. "The participants in the Meeting,'' says the conclusion of Section~3 of _-_-_
^^*^^ See = International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, jip. 30--35.
69 the Document, "call on all organisations representing workers, peasants, office employees, youth, students, intellectuals, women, on various groups and social strata with different political, philosophic and religious convictions and views on realistically-minded political leaders of the capitalist countries, on all democratic parties, national and international progressive public organisations to pool their efforts with those of the Communist Parties for concerted action in the anti-imperialist struggle for a relaxation of tensions and in defence of peace. We invite them all to join in a broad and constructive exchange of opinion on the widest possible range of issues bearing on the anti-imperialist struggle.''^^*^^Communists are prepared to co-operate with all anti-- imperialist forces on the basis of complete equality. Any participant in the struggle makes a contribution to the common cause. In advancing their programme for the anti-- imperialist struggle, the Communists are aware that it is of a general democratic character, in keeping with the views and possibilities of any group of fighters against imperialism.
The Communists, of course, approach this programme and the struggle against imperialism, not only from the general democratic position but in their own way, in the communist spirit. How is that to be understood? They regard today's struggle against imperialism, not only as being spearheaded against the latter's crimes but also to prevent its crimes of tomorrow; they see it as a struggle for a future, the social emancipation of mankind; they see in that struggle today a stage in the struggle against capitalism and for socialism.
There can be no doubt that the new incentives to build up the struggle for unity in the communist ranks, provided by the 1969 Meeting, was a most important result of its deliberations.
It is common knowledge that the problem of communist unity contains two basic aspects: the inner unity of the Communist Parties, and their international solidarity. These two elements are closely intertwined. Consolidation of the Communist Parties' internal unity and the surmounting of various departures from the principled Marxist-Leninist line provide a firm foundation for the effective activities of _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., p. 36,
70 any Party within its own country, and at the same time enhance its possibilities in performing its internationalist duty, thereby increasing its contribution to the common cause of the world communist movement. The reverse is also true: enhancement of internationalist unity in the communist ranks is not only the major condition for the movement to carry out its international obligations, but, at the same time, strengthens each Communist Party's internal positions. Within the serried ranks, each section of the communist movement feels more confident and acquires fresh opportunities to cope with the tasks confronting it.In revealing the causes of the appearance and development, in today's conditions, of Right-wing and ``Left''-wing opportunist views, the representative of the fraternal Parties spoke, not only of the well-known ``traditional'' roots of such views (i.e., pressure from the bourgeoisie, the effect of changes in the social make-up of the revolutionary forces, and the like) but also of the new factors reflecting the particular features of the present-day stage in the revolutionary process.
Thus, in analysing the causes for the emergence of ``Left''-- wing trends, the leaders of the Communist and Workers' Parties stressed the negative role played by the activities of the leadership of the Communist Party of China, splitaway groups linked with the latter, and also of various ``Left''-wing opportunist revisionist forces and bodies. Their subversive theoretical work and the adventurist political line have caused grave detriment to the world communist movement.
As for the danger within the communist movement from the Right, it also finds expression in a number of new ways, e.g., in some communist circles having shown themselves prone to depart from the class positions in the question 6f the peaceful form of the transition to socialism. This manifests itself as follows: the possibility of carrying out the socialist revolution peacefully is reduced exclusively to the possibility of election victories; the parliamentary struggle is regarded as the main, and even the only, way to socialism; it is forgotten that the working class and its allies possess a wide range of peaceful and legal means of struggle; sight is also lost of a very important circumstance, that is to say, 71 that the peaceful form of transition depends not only on the desires of the Communist Party and the working people but also on the behaviour of the national and world bourgeoisie, so that, consequently, an armed class struggle can in no way be excluded.
In stressing the importance of a struggle against various departures from the Marxist-Leninist principled line, the Meeting took account of the difference existing between the ideological struggle waged by revolutionaries against the bourgeois ideology and the ideological struggle within the camp of the revolutionary forces. While, in the struggle against the bourgeois ideology, revolutionaries, Communists set themselves the aim of completely smashing the enemy and his views, their approach is entirely different when it is a matter of the struggle against erroneous views within the framework of the revolutionary forces. The task consists in doing everything possible to bring those with erroneous views back to the correct road; this is a struggle to bring positions closer on the platform of Marxism-- Leninism, and to unify efforts that will help eliminate erroneous views and achieve a better mutual understanding. Of course, when the deviationists are stubborn and do not wish to return to the correct road, the Communist Parties part company with them without compunction. In such cases, the Communists are ruthless.
In calling the attention of the entire communist movement to the importance of the ideological struggle, the Meeting said in its final Document: "Loyalty to Marxism-- Leninism and to proletarian internationalism, and dedicated and devoted service in the interests of their peoples and the common cause of socialism are a requisite for the efficacy and correct orientation of united action by the Communist and Workers' Parties, a guarantee that they will achieve their historic goals,"^^*^^
The fourth and concluding section of the Meeting's final Document begins as follows: "The participants in the Meeting consider that the most important prerequisite for increasing the Communist and Workers' Parties' contribution to the solution of tho problems facing the peoples is to raise the _-_-_
^^*^^ fiiicnia/ional Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 38.
72 unity of the communist movement to a higher level in conformity with present-clay requirements. This demands determined and persistent effort by all the Parties. The cohesion of the Communist and Workers' Parties is the most important factor in rallying together all the anti-imperialist forces."^^*^^ After a detailed examination of the theoretical and political aspect of the unity problem, the Meeting focussed attention on the question---how the present difficulties can be overcome and how the communist ranks can be given cohesion. The vast majority of speakers supported the ideas on this question that were voiced in the address given by the CPSU's delegation.In the first place, the Meeting was unanimous in its appraisal of the importance of joint action against imperialism and for cohesion in the communist movement.
In the second place, representatives of the fraternal Parties agreed that the utmost expansion of links and contacts between the fraternal Parties is necessary. These, it was emphasised, are also necessary as a kind of mechanism for concerted action by Communists on the international arena, and as a means of comparing positions on problems that may arise and of removing differences.
Finally, there was also unanimity in the opinion that the summarising of the theoretical work conducted by the Parties, the development, on that foundation, of MarxistLeninist theory, and defence of its principles and fundamental ideas are of the utmost importance in eliminating differences and in the struggle for unity in the movement.
In all its deliberations, the 1969 Meeting showed a consistently Leninist approach to problems of the communist movement. The Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU ( MarchApril 1971) gave a high appraisal of the International Meeting of Communist Parties in 1969 as a major step forward towards strengthening the Communists' international unity and consolidation of all the anti-imperialist forces. "The CPSU,'' said the Congress's resolution, "regards the fulfilment of the programme of anti-imperialist struggle put forward by the Meeting as an important basis for strengthening _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parlies, Moscow 1969, p. 36.
73 unity of action by the Communist and Workers' Parties, and for enhancing the role of the communist movement in the present-day world development.''^^*^^The fraternal parties gave similar appraisals of the Meeting.
What is essential for Communists to accomplish their historical tasks at the present stage of world development is cohesion and again cohesion. Unity in the ranks of the world's Communists is a guarantee of the successful implementation of the strategy and tactics of the communist movement, whose aims are the triumph of the cause of peace, democracy, national independence and socialism. In building up the unity of its ranks and working for unity of the working class, all anti-imperialist forces and all working people, democrats and adherents of peace, the world communist movement is mustering fresh strength for the triumph of the great Marxist-Leninist ideas, the ideas of communism.
_-_-_^^*^^ The 24th Congress of the CPSU, Moscow, 1971, p. 216.
[74] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER II __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE UNITY AND COMPONENTSThe problems facing the communist movement today cannot be correctly understood unless one takes into account that the world-wide transition from capitalism to socialism is a process taking place on many planes, marked by great variety, and becoming ever more complex. The economic, social and political conditions of the peoples are extremely varied, which is why the process of revolutionary change in various countries of the world stands at different degrees of maturity and takes place in different forms: as a struggle against capitalism, colonialism, or even feudal and prefeudal relations. "The social revolution,'' Lenin stressed, "can come only in the form of an epoch in which are combined civil war by the proletariat against the bourgeoisie in the advanced countries and a whole series of democratic and revolutionary movements, including the national-liberation movement in the undeveloped, backward and oppressed nations.''^^*^^ At the present stage, the variety of forms of revolutionary movements is of necessity growing in connection with the expansion of the revolution's social basis, and the involvement of new countries and peoples in the revolution.
The movements that go to make up the revolutionary process differ in the social composition of their participants, and in the aims pursued. In each country, such movements are marked by definite national features but, despite the variety of revolutionary movements, they are all linked together directly or indirectly, their community consisting, _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Loniji, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. (i().
75 first and foremost, in their standing opposed to imperialism in one way or another. Moreover, today, when the objective prerequisites exist all over the world for the outmoded exploitative system to yield place to a new system, the struggle of all the revolutionary forces ultimately acquires an objectively anti-capitalist direction. Socialist revolutions, antiimperialist revolutions for national liberation, people's democratic revolutions, mass peasant movements, the struggle of the masses for the overthrow of fascist and other tyrannical regimes---all these are merging in a single stream that is washing away and destroying capitalism. This gives an inner integrity to the world revolutionary process, despite all the latter's variety, and, as Lenin put it, makes it possible to "regard the international revolution as one process''.^^*^^The world-wide revolutionary process is developing both within the capitalist countries and on an international scale, and, first and foremost, as a struggle and competition between two opposing world social systems. The present scientific and technological revolution; the internationalisation of the productive forces, production and exchange; and the extension of international transport, information, culture and other links---all these are promoting the further growth of the interlinks and interdependence between social movements all over the world. Particularly marked is the internationalisation of life in countries that are building a new society. All the above has been fostering the internationalisation of the revolutionary process.
The world-wide unity of the revolutionary process is manifested primarily in the interlinks and interaction between the three fundamental revolutionary forces of our times: the peoples that are building socialism and communism; the working class in the developed capitalist countries; and the national-liberation movement of the oppressed peoples and of the peoples of the developing countries.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. THE WORLD SYSTEM OF SOCIALISM __ALPHA_LVL3__ [introduction.]By the mid-sixties the world's blue-collar and white-- collar workers totalled 540,000,000. The working class, which stands at the hub of our times, plays the leading part in the _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 32, p. 484,
76 struggle for the abolition of all oppression and exploitation of man by man, and for socialism and communism. The main outcome of the working class's revolutionary activities has been the establishment of the world socialist system, which now involves fourteen countries with an aggregate population of 1,200 million people, i.e., over one-third of all mankind.The construction of socialism and communism is a most important component of the world revolutionary process, for it is therein that the main contradictions of the times are completely resolved. By replacing the exploitative system by a society of social justice, socialism is successfully solving the problems facing mankind. The construction of a new society ensures socialism's onslaught against the positions of capitalism in the course of a world-wide class struggle, which has taken the form of competition and struggle between the two opposing social systems; it ensures the steady growth of the forces of social progress on a world-wide scale, as well as the mounting impact of socialism on the processes within the framework of the capitalist system. Thus, as the main revolutionary force of our times, the world system of socialism is exerting an influence on all world development. The achievements of socialism are leading up to a further change, in favour of social progress, in the alignment of forces in the competition and struggle between the two social systems and predetermine the socialist countries' ability to give more active support to the revolutionary and liberation movement all over the world. The successes scored in the construction of a new social system also enhance the ability of the countries of the world system of socialism to set an example to the working people in the countries of capital, and to those peoples that have thrown off the yoke of colonialism.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Revolutionising ImpactWhen, half a century ago, Lenin was assessing the prospects of the class struggle on a world-wide scale, he foresaw a time when the construction of communism in the Soviet 77 Land would provide other countries with a model in building a new society. While there existed only one socialist country, whose people were building a new society in an arduous struggle against the internal and external class enemies, and abolishing the economic and cultural backwardness inherited from the past, imperialism and its aggressive policies were holding up the revolutionary transformation of society.
The complete and final victory of socialism in the USSR, the emergence of socialism from within the confines of a single country, and the emergence and development of the world system of socialism have created fresh conditions for an acceleration of the historical process. With its ever greater maturity, the new social system, which is based on public ownership of the means of production and on the power of the working people, is ever more fully revealing the advantages of its economic and social and political organisation and of the genuine democratism inherent in it. Most marked is the growing impact of socialism on all world development at the present stage, in which the first socialist country has begun the construction of communism, and a number of other fraternal countries have laid the foundations of socialism and begun the construction of a developed socialist society.
The Marxist-Leninist standpoint on the significance of the impact exerted by the construction of socialism and communism on the hearts and minds of the masses, who are genuine creators of history, rejects the adventurist concept of "export of revolution'', which the enemies of socialism try to ascribe to Marxists. Even when fourteen imperialist states had fallen upon the young Soviet Republic, and revolutionary action by the working people was developing in capitalism's rear, Lenin pointed out to Communists that it was primarily the successes scored in the construction of a new society that were serving the cause of the world revolution. It is first and foremost by their actual gains that the masses appraise a revolution. That is why, after the proletariat has won power, such decisive significance attaches to the construction of a new society, one able to open up the road to forces whose development was choked under capitalism. Such work will show all the advantages over the old society.
78``We arc now exercising our main influence on the international revolution,'' Lenin wrote, "through our economic policy. The struggle in this field has now become global. Once we solve this problem, we shall have certainly and finally won on an international scale.''^^*^^ Today the tremendous development of the scientific and technological revolution has become one of the main areas of the historical competition between the two systems.
The economic competition between socialism and capitalism is in great measure determining the state of affairs in the anti-imperialist struggle. "The contribution of the world socialist system to the common cause of the anti-imperialist forces is determined primarily by its growing economic potential. The swift economic development of the countries belonging to the socialist system at rates outpacing the economic growth of the capitalist countries, the advance of socialism to leading positions in a number of fields of scientific and technological progress, and the blazing of a trail into outer space by the Soviet Union---all these tangible results, produced by the creative endeavours of the peoples of the socialist countries, decisively contribute to the preponderance of the forces of peace, democracy and socialism over imperialism. "^^**^^
The crisis-free development of the socialist countries is bringing nearer socialism's victory over capitalism in the sphere of material production. Most indicative is the industrial growth in the countries of socialism: between 1950 and 1969, their industrial output went up almost sevenfold, as against the 2.8-fold rise in the capitalist countries. As the leading socialist industrial power, the Soviet Union, which is responsible for 20 per cent of world industrial output, has scored great successes in the competition with the leading capitalist powers. Highly indicative in this respect are the comparative figures for recent years, including 1970, cited in Alexei Kosygin's report to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU. He said it had taken the USA 18 years to double its industrial output, Britain 22 years, the FRG over 11 years, and the Soviet Union---8.5 years. Today the USSR _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, p. 437.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 22.
79 leads the world in the production of iron and manganese ores, coal, cement, steel pipes, inuin-line diesel and electric locomotives, and the like. The steps being taken in the Soviet Union and the other CMEA members to speed up scientific and technological progress in order to bring science and industry close together will make it possible to increase the efficacy of the socialist economy even more.In 1965--70 the actual increment of industrial output in the CMEA countries was 49 per cent as against the 46--48 per cent planned. Implementation of the programmes for the socialist countries' economic development, as adopted by the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU and the congresses of the other fraternal parties in the socialist countries, will enhance even more the economic eflicacy of social production. The CMEA countries' economic development rates permit the conclusion that by 1985 their share in world industrial output will be between 40 and 50 per cent.
Higher development rates than under capitalism also mark the advance of agriculture in the socialist countries, where, since the people assumed power, it has developed into largescale co-operative production equipped with up-to-date machinery. Measures to ensure the further development of this highly important branch of the economy are being carried out in the Soviet Union and in the other socialist countries. Between 1966 and 1970, agricultural output in the CMEA countries showed an annual increment of 22 per cent, as against 11.5 per cent between the years 1961 and 1965.
The high development rates of production in the socialist countries show the tremendous possibilities socialism has created for the productive forces there, irrespective of their levels when the proletarian revolution triumphed. In a short space of time, most of the socialist countries, which in the past stood at low economic levels, have become highly developed states. For instance, in 1970 Rumania's volume of industrial output was 17-fold that of the pre-war year of 1938.
The socialist states' socio-economic structure undergoes change as their economies rapidly advance. Countries that were agrarian in the past have either become industrial-- agrarian countries or are in the process of doing so. The classes of landowners and capitalists have disappeared for 80 good; quantitative and qualitative changes have taken place in the working class; the social make-up of the peasantry has changed, and a people's intelligentsia has come into being. Of course, this radical change in ownership relations does not of itself eliminate survivals of the influence exerted by the bourgeois ideology on the consciousness of part of the population. Besides, there are still remnants of the once numerous petty bourgeoisie in several countries which have but recently taken to the road of socialism. That is why anti-socialist forces may still reveal themselves in the socialist countries, although there are no antagonistic class contradictions there. Many difficulties in these countries' development stem from the imperialists' constant attempts to hamper the economic growth of the world socialist system, restrict its influence on the peoples of the world, poison it ideologically, split up its members and isolate them politically.
The greater production of material values in the conditions of socialism, in which the people's welfare is the supreme aim of policies, ensures a steady rise in the population's standards of living. While, in the past, the possibilities of the socialist coutries did not allow them, together with the strengthening of their economic independence and defence capacity, to improve the people's welfare at high rates, today, when the Soviet Union has built up a developed socialist society and the construction of such a society is going on in the other countries of socialism, new possibilities lie open before them. It is perfectly logical that the CPSU's Twenty^Fourth Congress set as the main target of the Ninth Five-Year Plan a considerable rise in the people's material and cultural level on the basis of high development rates of socialist production, its enhanced efficiency, scientific and technological progress and higher labour productivity. "The course set by the Communist Party for raising the people's living standard,'' says the Congress resolution, "will determine not only the main task of the ninth five-year period, but also the general long-term orientation of the country's economic development. The increased economic potential and the requirements of the development of the national economy make it possible and necessary to concentrate the economy more definitely on accomplishing a variety of tasks 81 related to the raising of the people's standard of living.''^^*^^
The working people of the socialist countries do not know what is meant by fear of unemployment or uncertainty of the future. Moreover, highly favourable conditions have been created for the development of the peoples' culture, and education is within the reach of all the people. In the Soviet Union, the German Democratic Republic and several other socialist countries, the transition to universal secondary education is almost complete. During the last ten years, expenditures on scientific research and technical development in Bulgaria have gone up more than 3.5-fold. In the USSR there are more than twice as many graduate engineers engaged in the economy as in the USA. There is to be seen a steady rise in the level of culture, which is imbued with a spirit of genuine humanism and internationalism.
Socialist democracy is developing with the growth and consolidation of the economic, social and political foundations of socialist society. The liquidation of classes and social groups interested in the exploitation of others ensures the steady expansion of the social basis of the socialist state, and its conversion into a state expressing the will and interests of the entire people. Here, in a single alliance of the working class, the peasantry and the intelligensia, the leading role is played by the working class as the most organised part of the society, and consistent champion of the communist ideology. "The workers are the most revolutionary, disciplined and organised force in society, the most consistently interested in achieving the socialist and communist aims of social development. That is why it is on the working class that the main responsibility for the fate of socialism devolves,"said Leonid Brezhnev in his address at theAuto-Praga Works on May 27, 1971. "That is why the enemies of communism are sparing no efforts to strip the working class of its leading role, disorientate the workers, bring into the midst of the workers an ideology that is alien to them, and blunt the class consciousness of the working people. It is to be regretted that they did this here in Czechoslovakia.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 221.
^^**^^ Pravda, May 28, 1971.
__PRINTERS_P_81_COMMENT__ 6-0873 82The experience of the countries of socialism, and especially the Czechoslovak events of 1968--19(19, show that any attempts to belittle the working class's role in the political life of society create conditions for the activisation of the hostile class forces and threaten the working people's socialist gains.
The unbreakable link between the socialist state and the people, and the masses' participation in running the country and the affairs of society are the source from which that state draws its tremendous strength. The perfection and development of socialist democracy, which comprise the main direction of political advance in the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, signify the ever greater participation of the working class, guided by the Communist Parly, and of all the working people in running the stale and industry; it signifies the activisation of all mass bodies, and constant concern for the individual's rights. The development of socialist democracy is a vital need of socialist society. As the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU emphasised in its resolution, "the effort to build communism is inseparable from the allround development of socialist democracy, the consolidation of the Soviet state, the improvement of the entire system of society's political organisation''.^^*^^
It is only in the conditions of socialism that so important a problem is successfully solved as the elimination of the historically conditioned actual inequality of various peoples in material production and in the levels of living standards and culture; it is only there that they can be educated in the spirit of socialist internationalism, and new relations are established among them, which consistently blend the principle of equality with unselfish fraternal help.
Socialism is a living organism, with a past and a future, and with obsolescent and incipient features. Under socialism, social production has not yet reached a level that meets the needs of all members of society, and ensures the all-round development of the individual. For a certain period there will remain distinctions between separate social groups of the population, substantial distinctions between the cities _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress «/ the CPSU, p. 226.
83 and the countryside, and between manual and intellectual work. The contradiction between the new socio-economic structure of society and a certain lag in the level of the masses' consciousness will remain for a long time; also present are survivals of the past which affect a certain part of the population. There are also contradictions that pertain to the organisational form of government. However, in the conditions of socialism, all these contradictions are nonantagonistic in character, and can be eliminated through the conscious application of the laws of social development in the interests of the people.The successful application of the objective advantages provided by socialism, and the accomplishment of the complex tasks in the construction of a new society are ensured by correct policies of the Communist Party, which is closely linked with the masses of the working people, policies that are based on Marxist-Leninist theory.
Of immense importance is the role of the communist vanguard in the solution of so vital a problem as the strengthening of the socialist countries' unity. The world system of socialism has entered a stage in its development in which the full use of the possibilities of socialism depends in ever greater measure on the broad and all-round co-ordination of its effort within the framework of the entire system, and on the higher efficacy of social production and economic links within the community of fraternal countries. The operation of the economic laws of socialism in the socialist countries, the aggravation of the class struggle throughout the world, and the development of today's productive forces call for the further advance, consolidation and integration of the community of socialist states. Advances in integration speed up the economic progress of each socialist country and of the socialist community as a whole, thus ensuring a firmer material base for the world revolutionary process. It is natural for economic integration to have become a central element in the development of world socialism. "The economic integration of the socialist countries is a new and complex process'', said Leonid Brezhnev at the Twenty-Fourth CPSU Congress, "it implies a new and broader approach to many economic questions, and the ability to find the most rational solutions meeting the interests not only of the given country __PRINTERS_P_83_COMMENT__ 6* 84 but of all the co-operating participants.''^^*^^ This approach has become possible thanks to a cormnon social system and the common basic interests and aims of the peoples of the socialist countries, and thanks to the experience gained in coping with objective and subjective difficulties, experience accumulated by the Marxist-Leninist parties in the course of the construction of socialism and the establishment of a new, socialist type of international relations.
The twenty-fifth session of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, which was held in July 1971, unanimously adopted an all-round programme of closer co-operation, and of the development of socialist economic integration in keeping with the concrete conditions of the present stage in the construction of socialism and communism. This programme is to be implemented by stages during 15--20 years. As pointed out by the friendly meeting of leaders of the fraternal countries, which took place in the Crimea in August 1971, "the implementation of this long-term programme will actively help to accomplish the task of further raising the living standard of the working people, and further consolidating the political and economic unity and solidarity of the fraternal countries of socialism; it will play a historic part in ensuring new victories of socialism and communism, and in strengthening peace and international security''.^^**^^
The establishment of the new type of relations between states in which the socialist system has triumphed is, in principle, a marked achievement of world socialism. The main lines in building up the cohesion of the socialist system are: unswerving observance of the principles of socialist internationalism; the correct blending of the national and internationalist tasks of the socialist states, and development of their fraternal mutual aid and support, with consistent observance of the equality of all the countries of socialism. Within the framework of such co-operation, each country is in a most favourable position to strengthen its sovereignty and independence, while at the same time enjoying all the advantages provided by mutual aid and comradely support. By following this road, the world system of _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 13.
^^**^^ Pravda, August 3, 1971.
85 socialism is eliminating differences in the development levels of individual countries, is advancing the national economies and cultures, and is ever more confidently approaching achievement of the common aim of the socialist countries---ensuring the advantage of socialism over capitalism in all the decisive areas of social advance.Of course, the shaping of a new type of international relations is no simple or easy thing. The socialist countries have to cope with the heavy burden of their capitalist past, counter the imperialist intrigues and cope with complex problems in the construction of the new society which is being built for the first time in the history of mankind. Manifestations of nationalism, which in the main stems from the petty-bourgeois environment, remnants of the former exploiter classes, and the influence of imperialist propaganda and the bourgeois ideology on certain sections of the population give rise to certain difficulties in the relations between some of the socialist countries.
The elimination of nationalism is made the more difficult by the considerable differences in the conditions in which the construction of a new society is taking place in individual countries. These distinctions produce a variety of methods, forms and rates in social transformations. When they set about building a new society, most of the countries of socialism stood at a medium or low level of economic development, and had suffered much as a result of wars. Even today there still exist considerable differences in the socio-economic levels, the historical traditions and political conditions in individual countries of socialism. All this can produce temporary divergences of opinion between the socialist countries, different understandings of various questions, and differences in the approach to their solution.
Manifestations of national selfishness and nationalism run counter to the objective needs of the development of the world socialist system and of each of its member countries. Anyline'towards the construction of socialism, in isolation, separately from the other socialist countries, is economically harmful, since it leads to a waste of social labour, and to lower rates in the growth of production. Ultimately, this is damaging to the national interests of the country that chooses to follow such a line, to say nothing of the harmful 86 consequences to the world system of socialism. This course is politically harmful and even dangerous, since it creates a threat of disunity among the peoples of the countries of socialism in the face of the imperialists' united front. It is to this that the anti-Leninist course of the present Chinese leadership is leading.
Today socialism is so strong that imperialism cannot smash it militarily. It is becoming ever more obvious that capitalism will not win in the economic competition between the two systems either. In these conditions the imperialists are mainly staking on disunity among the socialist countries and are trying to encourage and play up nationalist feelings and trends and to isolate the individual socialist states. This political strategy on the part of imperialism was most manifest during the Czechoslovak events of 1968 when, in a bloc with the Right-wing revisionists and anti-- socialist forces within the country, the imperialists tried to overthrow the socialist system in that country. However, fraternal help from the other socialist states, who were performing their class and internationalist duty, destroyed all the imperialists' hopes to overthrow socialism in Czechoslovakia and thus deal a blow at the positions of socialism in Europe.
The main conclusions to be drawn from the Czechoslovak developments are formulated in the Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the Party's Twenty-Fourth Congress:
``The Czechoslovak events were a fresh reminder that in the countries which have taken the path of socialist construction the internal anti-socialist forces, whatever remained of them, may, in certain conditions, become active and even mount direct counter-revolutionary action in the hope of support from outside, from imperialism, which, for its past, is always prepared to form blocs with such forces.
``The danger of Right-wing revisionism, which seeks, on the pretext of `improving' socialism, to destroy the revolutionary essence of Marxism-Leninism, and paves the way for the penetration of bourgeois ideology, has been fully brought out in this connection.
``The Czechoslovak events showed very well how important it is constantly to strengthen the Party's leading role in 87 socialist society, steadily to improve the forms and methods of Party leadership, and to display a creative Marxist-- Leninist approach to the solution of pressing problems of socialist development.''^^*^^
Internationalist unity, fraternal mutual aid, and allround co-operation based on a common socio-economic system and basic interests and aims---such are the main lines along which obstacles to the socialist community's cohesion can be overcome. Consolidation of the economies, the independence and the sovereignty of the socialist countries create conditions for genuinely friendly relations, for the eradication of national hatred, which for centuries has caused immeasurable harm to the exploited and oppressed.
Janos Kadar, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party, had good reason to say at its Ninth Congress, which was held in 1966, of the present possibility of tearing up the roots of nationalism: "The problems of the past can be solved only in the conditions of socialism, inasmuch as it means a system with genuine co-operation and fraternal development on the basis of equality of peoples and nations and the observance of mutual interests.''^^**^^
In unmasking the present-day anti-Communists using the national sovereignty slogan as a ploy in connection with the 1968 developments in Czechoslovakia, Gustav Husak, First Secretary of that country's Coinmunist Party, said the following in his address to the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties: "...the class content of the sovereignty of a socialist state is linked unbreakably with its internationalist responsibility to the community of socialist countries and the world communist and revolu tionary movement.''^^***^^
Although the evolution of socialist international relations has not been completed, one cannot overestimate the significance of what has already been done in the past years. A firm _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 17.
^^**^^ The Ninth Congress of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Parti/, Moscow, Politizdat, 1967, p. 90 (in Russian).
^^***^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 412.
88 foundation has been laid down for the community of socialist countries; a variety of forms has been created for their collective economic, political and military co-operation (i.e. the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, the Warsaw Treaty Organisation, a system of bilateral treaties, and the like); the forms of the socialist states' joint action on the international arena have been evolved.The Warsaw Treaty Organisation is the main co-- ordinating centre for the fraternal countries' foreign policy activities. That co-ordination, which has become systematic and regular in recent years, has brought about considerable shifts in European politics; the struggle against imperialism's aggressive acts in South-East Asia and the Middle East has become more active, and a number of major world problems have been solved within the framework of the United Nations.
The Council for Mutual Economic Assistance helps expand and strengthen economic links between the countries of socialism. Its activities are a vivid example of relations of a new type and are promoting a rapid advance in the economy of each country, and thereby of the socialist system as a whole.
Each year reveals in practice and ever more fully the great possibilities and advantages of socialism---whether in space exploration or in housing construction, advances in material welfare or in socialist democracy, the successful solution of the nationalities question or the further consolidation of international relations of a new type. The construction of communism in the USSR and of a socialist society in the fraternal countries, and the strengthening of their co-- operation are dealing blows at the anti-communist ideology, refuting the fabrications of anti-communist propaganda, and enhancing socialism's influence on world developments.
An existent socialist society is a far more convincing argument for socialism than any theoretical conclusions or political slogans can be. The force of the example set by the new socialist system is becoming the finest agitator for socialism among the working people of the countries of the capitalist system. It is important to note, in this connection, the world significance of the decisions adopted by the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU. Implementation of the 89 Congress's Directives for the Ninth Five-Year Plan will be a major contribution to the common cause of strengthening the economic might of the socialist states and the positions of the world system of socialism in the economic competition with capitalism. As was emphasised in his address to the Congress by Georges Marchais, General Secretary of the French Communist Party, "Your successes along this road are of tremendous international importance. They provide the foundation of the might of the entire community of the socialist countries. They inspire the working class and the masses in the capitalist countries in the struggle against the domination of the monopolies, and facilitate that struggle''.^^*^^ The successes scored by the countries of socialism are especially conspicuous against the background of the offensive launched by the monopolies against the living standards and the social rights of the working people, and the savage racialism, national oppression and political arbitrariness that reign in the capitalist world.
In the present-day conditions of ever greater international economic, scientific, technological and cultural links, as well as improvements in the mass media of information, the monopoly bourgeoisie is no longer able to conceal from the masses in the capitalist countries the achievements of socialism. The successes of socialism are promoting the growth of the revolutionary consciousness in the working people of those countries, provide them with new criteria to assess their own conditions, and prompt new demands and slogans for their advancement. The successes scored by socialism in the competition with capitalism are reflected in economic and political action, not only by the working class but also by other sections of the population. Demands such as democratic planning, better social security, nationalisation, democratic reforms in education, and the like, which are being put forward by broad sections of the population in the capitalist countries, testify to the growing influence of the ideas of socialism. "In the consciousness of millions of people in the capitalist world,'' said Gus Hall, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USA in his address to the Twenty-Fourth _-_-_
^^*^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, p. 288 (in Russian).
90 Congress of the CPSU, "new criteria are appearing with the aid of which they are comparing two world systems. These assessments are not restricted to superficial comparisons. They take into account not only the indicators of industrial growth or commodity prices. Today the entire quality of life has been put on the scales. Here the level of material welfare plays a very important role, but the yardstick has become far wider and includes the entire range of human values, and their comparative significance, which is determined by the inner laws of each system. They include concepts of morals, culture and philosophy inherent in these systems.''^^*^^The existence of the socialist system, and the successes scored by socialism in solving vital economic, social and political problems are forcing the imperialist bourgeoisie to be more flexible and conciliatory in respect of the demands of the working class and other sections of the working people. They have been forced to meet many demands, such as insurance against old age, disablement and unemployment; they have had to make pay concessions and grant better working conditions, and the like. As the Communist and Workers' Parties emphasised with such good grounds in the final Document of the 1969 International Meeting, "Socialism has shown mankind the prospect of deliverance from imperialism. The new social system based on public ownership of the means of production and on the power of the working people is capable of ensuring the planned, crisis-free development of the economy in the interests of the people, guaranteeing the social and political rights of the working people, creating conditions for genuine democracy, for real participation by the broad masses of people in the administration of society, for all-round development of the individual and for the equality and friendship of nations. It has been proved in fact that only socialism is capable of solving the fundamental problems facing mankind.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ Greetings lo the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, = p. 2M (in Russian).
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, pp. 21--22.
91 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Growing Might of Socialism and New AlignmentIn the course of the competition between the two opposing social systems, the possibilities are increasing for socialism to give support to the revolutionary and liberation movement in the non-socialist areas of the world. Their economic successes are enhancing the socialist states' defence capacity. Having overtaken capitalism in a number of important fields of science and engineering and outstripped it in some others, socialism has provided the peace-loving nations with potent material means of curbing imperialist aggression. The Soviet Union's defence might has always been the main obstacle to the imperialist warmongers. Together with the other socialist states, the Soviet Union is an effective counterweight to the aggressive forces of imperialism, and is the mainstay of world peace.
The Soviet Union and the other socialist states are resolutely countering the aggressive policy of imperialism in world affairs in whatever form that policy is manifested. They stand opposed to imperialism in the economic and military, political and ideological spheres. The socialist states' role as a material force directly serving the interests of the revolutionary process is steadily rising. The very existence of the world socialist system and the policies conducted by the socialist states are sapping the main forces of international reaction and aggression ind creating favourable conditions for the peoples in the capitalist and the colonial countries in their struggle against imperialism and the reactionaries at home.
Post-war international development has brought out the intimate connection between the growing might of the world socialist system and the successes of the revolutionary struggle for national liberation. It was that might and the socialist states' solidarity that prevented imperialism from throttling the first socialist revolution in the Western Hemisphere. It is characteristic that national liberation revolutions triumphed in vast areas of the world when the world socialist system had begun to grow into a decisive factor of world development. This was because the weakening of imperialism allowed the liberation movement of the oppressed and 92 dependent nations to develop simultaneously in many areas. By diverting to itself the main forces of imperialism, the world socialist system protected the newly emergent nations from the export of counter-re volution and, by abolishing the imperialist monopoly of economic relations with those nations, greatly weakened neo-colonialism's pressure on them and created favourable external conditions for their progress.
The Soviet Union and the other socialist states are rendering the newly emergent nations extensive and friendly aid in their economic development. Over 2,500 industrial plants and structures have been built or are under construction in developing countries, with assistance from the socialist states. In many Asian and African countries, one can today find factories, electric power-station dams, hospitals and colleges erected with Soviet aid. The socialist states have extended to newly liberated nations more than 6,000 million convertible rubles in credits on favourable terms. A feature of this aid is that it is designed to ensure the economic independence of the newly free nations, and its scale keeps mounting. In 1955 the Soviet Union had economic and technical co-operation agreements with India and Afghanistan alone; today it has such agreements with 18 Asian and 20 African countries. The scope of Soviet economic and technical assistance to developing nations increased more than sixfold in 1970, as compared with 1968. Besides, the socialist states are rendering these nations political support and, whenever necessary, help them to build up their armed forces and defence potential. Without the world socialist community, the national-liberation forces would have been unable to achieve political independence and, moreover, to take steps to economic self-sufficiency.
The world system of socialism has come out as the vanguard of the social development of mankind. "The prospects of smashing imperialism would still be very remote without the military and economic power of the socialist world headed by the Soviet Union,'' Manuel Mora, General Secretary of the People's Vanguard Party of Costa Rica, said at the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. "It is beyond any question that the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries are in the firing line and 93 constitute the prime bastion of revolution.''^^*^^ This means that the successful construction of socialism and communism and the strengthening of the socialist countries' unity are an integral part of the world revolutionary process and the forefront of the world revolution. The more confidently the countries engaged in socialist and communist construction advance, the more rapidly will the socialist consciousness of the workers and other working people rise in the capitalist countries, and the more favourable the world conditions for the expansion of the revolutionary movement. The class enemies of socialism admit more frequently, and not without reason, that the main danger to capitalism lies not in the ``aggression'', ``intrigues'' or ``conspiracies'' of Communists but in the successful advance of the socialist states.
``The development and strengthening of the world socialist system,'' said Leonid Brezhnev, "are the most valuable contribution of the peoples of the socialist countries to the common revolutionary cause of Communists and the antiimperialist struggle of the masses throughout the world.''^^**^^
The world socialist system is actively helping to weaken the positions of the old system and is sharpening the latter's contradictions. Standing in the forefront, of the struggle against imperialism, and for the peace and humanity's social progress, the world socialist system is making a decisive contribution to the revolutionary process. However, there is not, neither can there be, a simple and automatic dependence between the progress of the world socialist system, and revolutionary changes in the capitalist world. The refashioning of social relations in the capitalist countries is a matter to be decided by their own working classes, their own revolutionary forces.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTThe revolutionary working-class movement in the capitalist countries is a decisive force in the world revolutionary process. The vast majority of people in those countries are _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 407.
^^**^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course, Moscow, 1972, p. 292.
94 exploited. According to data for 1969 and 1970, wage workers make up almost 80 per cent of the gainfully employed population in the developed capitalist states (e.g., 93 per cent in Britain; 85 per cent in the United States and Canada; 82 per cent in the Federal Republic of Germany; 76 per cent in France; 65 per cent in Italy, and over 60 per cent in Japan). Over half are factory workers. In countries with a medium level of capitalist development, wage workers total between 40 and 60 per cent of the gainfully employed population. The average figure for Latin America is 61 per cent.The working class of the capitalist countries, which totals more than 230 million people, is the most organised class of society. The workers have acquired rich experience of the class struggle against the capitalists. In many countries, the working-class movement has evolved fine revolutionary traditions in the struggle for democracy and socialism. The political and moral prestige of the working class in society is steadily rising.
Though the objective material pre-conditions for the transition to socialism have long matured in the capitalist countries, the revolutionary process is developing slowly and unevenly there, since the revolutionary movement is confronted by a highly organised and experienced enemy.
Gunning and resourceful, the bourgeoisie of the developed countries have learnt the lesson from revolutionary action by the international proletariat in the late 19th and the 20th centuries, especially from the defeat of their class in Russia, China, and countries in Central and South-East Europe. The monopoly bourgeoisie have built up a more refined and organised system for the economic, political and intellectual oppression of the workers and other working people, by rallying the reactionary forces on a national and international scale. With increasing persistence, they are trying to block the way for the revolutionary movement. The concessions wrested by the working-class movement are used by the monopoly bourgeoisie to disseminate reformist illusions. On the other hand, the monopoly bourgeoisie is constantly strengthening their machinery of coercion, enhancing the militarisation of the machinery of state, and encouraging neo-fascist trends.
The same road is being followed, with certain 95 modifications of course, by tli3 bourgeoisie of the medium-developed capitalist countries. A specific feature of these countries is, in particular, thai part of their bourgeoisie are allied with foreign capitalists, primarily of the US, and also with Ihe big landowning magnates. This creates additional problems for the labour movement. Despite the difficulties, however, the revolutionary working-class movement in the capitalist countries is forging ahead, paving the way for the victory of socialism there.
The main trend in the internal situation of the capitalist countries is the aggravation of class contradictions, above all, that between labour and capital, but not a trend towards ``conciliation'' between the working class and the bourgeoisie, as the anti-communist ideologists claim.
The monopoly bourgeoisie's efforts to slow down the revolutionary process are yielding only temporary results, and giving rise to fresh contradictions in different countries, and in the capitalist world as a whole. This sharpening of social contradictions in the past few years has been strikingly reflected in mass class clashes in the main citadels of capitalism. Many remember the bitter political clashes, especially in France and Italy, during 1968--1970, involving about 10,000,000 in France and 20,000,000 in Italy. In the course of these battles, the people's onslaught, headed by the working class, was launched not only at particular groups of capitalists but at the entire system of state-monopoly domination as well. The class battles became very tense in Britain and the United States. Political and social antagonisms between the classes became acute in the FRG, where the mass working-class movement was gaining strength. For the first time in many years, strikes were registered in the Netherlands and in the Scandinavian countries, demonstrating the growing political activity of the working class.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Condition of the Working Class,The main causes of the upsurge in the working-class political struggle lie in the shifts in the capitalist countries' socio-economic and political development over the past 96 twenly years. The scientific and technological revolution and the growth of state-monopoly capital have entailed a change in the conditions of the people, the working class in the first place.
First, in the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution, which brings the monopolies immense profits, the exploitation of the working class is intensified, a process which is by no means straightforward and not always on the surface. In the course of class battles, the workers have achieved appreciable gains in a number of capitalist countries. The national health service and social insurance have improved in Britain. Strike action by workers in France, Italy and Japan has won them higher wages, longer holidays, and broader trade-union rights.
However, the rise in the living standards still lags far behind the growth of monopoly profits. The monopoly bourgeoisie seek to get their own back for the pay rises won by the working class, by using more refined methods of exploitation. Higher pay does not make up for the greater physical and nervous stress imposed on the workers. Industrial accidents and occupational diseases are widespread in the capitalist countries, and the workers are quickly worn down physically.
In present-day conditions, the reproduction of labour, the restoration of the physical and nervous energy of the workers, and the acquiring of the necessary general educational and technical knowledge call for substantial expenditures on day-by-day and cultural needs. However, the workers are unable to meet these expenses. Further, the higher wages are greatly depreciated by inflation, the higher prices for goods and services. Last, many millions of workers do not get any pay rises at all. In the medium-developed and highly developed capitalist countries, millions of people are living in poverty. On the whole, it can be said that, in our age of the tremendous growth of the productive forces, the workers receive an ever smaller share of the values they create. The gap is ominously widening between their real needs and what they actually get.
Second, the unstable conditions of the working class have increased, and the problem of employment has grown sharper. The rapid changes brought about by technological 97 progress in the division of labour throughout the country and at factory level go hand-in-hand with the migration of labour from some economic areas and industries to others, with a greater demand for some skills and a smaller demand for others. In recent years, the annual unemployment figure in the capitalist countries has stood at between seven and nine million. Many millions of factory and office workers are partly employed. Youth employment is a very acute problem in a large number of countries. All this is greatly building up the rebuff given by the masses to pressure by capital.
Third, changes in the working-class structure in the course of the scientific and technological revolution is increasing the scale of class struggle. The modernisation of industry calls for greater worker knowhow, and results in the proletarianisation of part of engineering personnel and technicians. There has been a steep rise in employment in trade, the credit and finance system, the public services and at government offices, i.e., in the non-productive spheres.
The increased proportion of engineers, technicians, whitecollar and skilled industrial workers in no way means the ``de-proletarianisation'' of capitalist society and the absorption of the workers by the middle class, as is claimed by bourgeois ideologists. In fact, the vast majority of engineers, technicians, office workers and other similar categories of working people are drawing closer to the working class in the socio-economic conditions of their work. These sections are finding themselves in the same position as industrial workers in their relation to the means of production, their place in social production, their role in the social organisation of labour, and often in their pay scales. They are coming to gradually realise the radical opposedness of their interests to the existing system.
Fourth, the development of state-monopoly capitalism spells not only a heavier economic burden on the industrial workers and other working people, but also heavier sociopolitical and intellectual oppression of the people by monopoly capital. That is why flare-ups of the class struggle are not always directly attributable to the economic condition of the working people. More and more often they are caused by reasons of a political nature, such as national and racial __PRINTERS_P_97_COMMENT__ 7-0873 98 inequality, the threat of fascism, restriction of the democratic rights of the working people, and the threat of war.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Characteristic FeaturesA feature of the labour movement in the capitalist countries at the present stage is the growing appreciation by the workers of their potentialities and of their mounting role in their countries' socio-political life. The successes scored by the world socialist system are imparting fresh moral strength to the workers and multiplying their revolutionary energy. Though the workers' class and political consciousness is developing unevenly in the different countries, the following main features are characteristic of the workingclass movement in the capitalist world.
Working-class action against the bourgeoisie is marked, not only by a wider sweep and militancy but also by a higher degree of organisation and a higher level of demands. While developing mainly under slogans for better working conditions and higher pay, shorter working hours, longer holidays, bigger allowances, and the like, mass action by the workers is now more frequently accompanied by concrete political demands. The traditional form of an open workingclass conflict with the bourgeoisie---strikes---often involves all workers in a given industry but affiliated to different trade unions. Moreover, the strikes are on a country-wide scale, especially in Italy, France, Japan, and Uruguay, and involve not only industrial but also clerical workers. It is significant that the strike struggle in many countries has become intensified in the conditions of comparatively high business activity, the leading role often being played by skilled industrial workers. Partial demands by some sections of the working people have given way to general demands, which get nation-wide support.
Under state-monopoly capitalism, the conflict between labour and capital inevitably assumes the form of contradictions between the workers, and the joint force of the state and the monopolies. There has arisen a situation in which the workers can win their demands through a struggle not 99 against individual firms or corporations but against the economic policies of the monopolies and the bourgeois state. That is why the working people's economic and political demands are constantly and objectively drawing closer together, intertwining and even merging.
As a result, more and more workers are coming to realise the contradiction between their interests and the policies of the bourgeois state. Even if the workers do not advance direct political demands, their action---whether a struggle for democratic nationalisation or for participation in industrial management---is objectively directed against the monopolies' domination. The demands for broader trade-union rights at factory level, the guaranteed right to employment, more democratic management in nationalised industries, and the like, are more and more coming into the foreground. As a result, the slogans of a struggle for the working people's immediate economic and political demands are more often linked by them with a struggle for a democratic alternative to the monopolies' domination. In other words, as was pointed out at the 1969 International Meeting the workers' struggle for their vital interests is turning more and more against the economic foundations of the monopolies' power, and leads to clashes between the working jpeople and the state on a national scale, in the course of which the question of the nature of state power is bound to arise sooner or later.
Closely linked with this is the fact that political demands proper against the bourgeois governments' reactionary home and aggressive foreign policies and for peace and broader democratic rights feature prominently in class action by the workers. Such examples are the mass working-class opposition to turning Japan into an American nuclear base; the British workers' action against nuclear weapons and military blocs; action by the West German working people against anti-democratic emergency legislation, and the struggle of the Latin American working people for the abolition of US domination and against the policies of the ruling oligarchies. Other examples are: the struggle of the American Blacks (85 per cent of whom are workers) for their civil rights; the struggle for trade-union liberties and the rights of the national minorities in Spain; the movement for a __PRINTERS_P_99_COMMENT__ 7* 100 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1973/WCM485/20080513/199.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2008.05.13) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ top __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [*]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ federal state system in Belgium, for genuine regional autonomy in Italy, and so on. In the past few years, the proportion of political strikes has been rising. The workers movements' higher political level also finds a clear expression in a larger number of internationalist slogans and demands, for instance, the strikes and protest marches against the US aggression in Indochina; the movement of international solidarity with the Arab peoples of the Middle East and with the working people of the countries ruled by fascist or military dictatorial regimes.
It is a feature of our times that the workers' economic and political struggle in the capitalist countries is now more closely connected with the struggle of other sections of the people for their rights. Economic, political and intellectual oppression by state-monopoly capitalism is becoming a heavier burden on the peasantry, the urban petty bourgeoisie, and intellectuals. The working class is coming out more clearly as representative of the interests of these capitalistexploited strata. The working-class struggle is becoming the basis of broader social movements---for more rights for municipalities and for their democratisation, as, for instance, in France and Italy, and against the fascist regimes in Spain, Portugal and Greece, and the military dictatorships in Brazil.
In the past few years, the role of the working class in the capitalist countries has grown considerably, and not only because the workers form the relative majority of the population and are the decisive force in material production. The workers, whose class consciousness is steadily growing, express most consistently the interests of the entire nation.
The working class is coming out more decisively in the vanguard of the struggle against the monopolies, militarism and reaction, and for vital interests, and the extension and regeneration of democracy. In this struggle, which at times assumes acute forms, the working class has repeatedly forced governments and monopolies to make substantial concessions to^the working people's economic, social and political demands.
Under the logic of the class struggle, the upsurge of and the initiative shown by the working-class and democratic movement inevitably give rise to a counter-offensive by the 101 reactionary forces. More and more often the monopoly bourgeoisie resort to extreme and authoritarian measures, organised violence, and the activisation of neo-fascist groups, as is evidenced by events in Italy. These attempts by the reactionaries are meeting with a decisive rebuff from the progressive forces, headed by the working class. Thanks to the working-class movement, the masses in a number of countries have been able to preserve parliamentary and other democratic institutions which the imperialists have tried to abolish.
The present stage of the revolutionary movement in the capitalist countries cannot as yet be regarded as a period of revolutionary assaults against the citadels of capitalism. It is primarily a period in which the way is paved for the socialist revolution, and the political army of revolution is formed. The workers' revolutionary movement in these countries is developing and acquiring political maturity. Even in the conditions of the so-called ``calm'' development of capitalism, the working class, by extending anti-monopoly action, is ever more undermining the foundations of capitalism from within. The leading role of the working class and its revolutionary vanguard in the broad anti-monopoly movement of the people, and the internationalist ties of the working class, first of all with their class brethren in the socialist states, is enhancing the revolutionary consciousness of the masses.
Thus, the material and socio-political conditions are ever more maturing for a revolutionary replacement of capitalism by a new social system, for socialist revolutions.
The 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties stressed that "in the citadels of capitalism the working class, as recent events have shown, is the principal driving force of the revolutionary struggle, of the entire anti-- imperialist, democratic movement.''^^*^^
By their struggle against militarism and the aggressive foreign policy of imperialism, the working class and all working people in the capitalist countries are greatly hampering imperialist action against the other revolutionary _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 24.
102 forces of the times. The working-class movement in the developed capitalist countries, which comes under the powerful revolutionising impact of the world socialist system from whose development and unity it derives its strength and influence, is called upon, in its turn, to play an important part in the struggle against the imperialists' aggressive intrigues against the socialist community.The workers' struggle in the imperialist countries is important for the destinies of the national-liberation movement. Despite all persecution, the advanced sections of the working class in the colonial powers, led by their Communist Parties, are arousing the masses for a rebuff to the imperialists' colonial and neo-colonial policies. Action by the French revolutionary working-class movement against the ``dirty'' war in Vietnam, and the movement of solidarity with the Algerian patriots were an internationalist exploit. Support for the oppressed peoples has come from class-conscious workers in Great Britain. Headed by their Communist Party, the working class of Portugal has set up a joint front with the peoples of Angola, Guinea (Bissau) and Mozambique in the struggle against the fascist regime.
Contrary to claims made by the ideologists of imperialism and the ideologists of the radical petty bourgeoisie, who question the Marxist-Leninist thesis on the prospects of the working-class movement and its revolutionary vanguard, that movement in the capitalist countries bears out in practice the Marxist tenet of the mounting vanguard role of the working class in the struggle against imperialism and in the development of the world revolutionary process.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE NATIONAL-LIBERATION MOVEMENT __ALPHA_LVL3__ [introduction.]The national-liberation movement is an inalienable part of the world revolutionary process. Some 1,500 million people in former colonies and semi-colonies have won independence and begun an active political life. The time is nearing when the 35,000,000 people still under colonial rule will achieve liberation.
The struggle for national liberation has spread in dozens of countries with varying national traditions and historical 103 pasts and at different levels of socio-economic and political development. However, these countries have one feature in common---their economically subordinate position in the system of the international capitalist division of labour, and their exploitation by foreign monopolies and consequent economic and cultural backwardness in a greater or lesser degree. They have a common enemy---imperialism. Hence the close ties between the different streams of the nationalliberation movement, and its unity with the other revolutionary forces of the day.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Place of the National-LiberationNothing is more erroneous than to assert that MarxismLeninism underestimates the tremendous role of nationalliberation revolutions. It is the Marxists-Leninists who have given the sole correct assessment of the historical place of the national-liberation movement. The disintegration of the colonial empires and the rapid growth of the national-- liberation struggle have further aggravated the crisis of the imperialist system as a whole. The national-liberation movement, which is sapping imperialism and forcing it to divert considerable forces to the struggle against the colonial and dependent peoples, is an inherent part of the world revolutionary process.
At the same time, it would be wrong to believe, as the ``Left''- and Right-wing revisionists do, that the areas of the national-liberation movement are a kind of junction of the contradictions in the present-day world. The main contradiction of world development is linked with the main content of our times---the struggle for socialism. Characterising the historical place of the first socialist state in the destinies of the world revolutionary liberation movement, Lenin said in 1920, "In the present world situation following the imperialist war, reciprocal relations between peoples and the world political system as a whole are determined by the struggle waged by a small group of imperialist nations against the Soviet movement and the Soviet states headed by Soviet Russia. Unless we bear that in mind, we shall not be 104 able to pose a single national or colonial problem correctly, even if it concerns a most outlying part of the world. The Communist Parties, in civilised and backward countries alike, can pose and solve political problems correctly only if they make this postulate their starting-point.''^^*^^
World developments have repeatedly confirmed that the main contradiction of the times can be fully resolved in a struggle between the two opposing systems---socialism and capitalism, a struggle that is the highest manifestation of the contradictions between labour and capital.
Taken as a whole, the national-liberation movement is for the time being tackling democratic tasks of a general nature. Though it is dealing telling blows at imperialism, it is unable by itself to abolish the socio-economic system which engenders colonialism and neo-colonialism. The fact that about eighty nations have cast off the colonial yoke, has not led to the downfall of capitalism in any of the former colonial powers. Besides, the winning of political independence by former colonies does not resolve even the contradiction between their peoples and imperialism. Imperialism still possesses powerful means of influencing the socio-- economic and political growth of many of the newly emergent nations, not a few of which are, in one way or another, under the political control of imperialist states, and have been forced to join blocs set up by', the latter. Imperialist monopolies still hold key positions in the economies of newly liberated countries. Under the guise of ``aid'' of various kinds, the imperialist states have imposed on such countries shackling agreements designed to preserve or extend the positions of the foreign monopolies and to consolidate the positions of the local capitalists and feudal elements. Relying on local reactionaries, the imperialists hatch plots, stage coups, fan discord among nations, thereby promoting the growth of reactionary nationalism, and provoke territorial disputes between newly liberated countries.
Combining forms of ``classical'' colonialism and neocolonialism, imperialism devises and carries out a programme of direct and indirect intervention in the affairs of the developing countries, and seeks to influence the alignment _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 241.
105 of forces there so as to consolidate the power of capitalismoriented governments and ultimately keep these countries within the sphere of imperialist exploitation. The peoples of Asia and Africa need the support of socialism to stand up to the onslaught of imperialism.Socialism's role in the development of the national-- liberation movement was stressed by Lenin. The " revolutionary movement of the peoples of the East can now develop effectively, can reach a successful issue, only in direct association with the revolutionary struggle of our Soviet Republic against international imperialism,''^^*^^ he said. This behest is of ever greater importance today when socialism has grown into a mighty world system. The world-wide upsurge of the national-liberation movement and its emergence as an independent and active force were a direct outcome of the radical change in the alignment of world forces brought about by the growth of world socialism. The influence of the world socialist system and the working-class struggle in the capitalist countries is also reflected in the social content of the national-liberation movement.
Since the attainment of political independence by most of the former colonies, national-liberation revolutions have entered a stage of development in which their further successes depend, to an increasing extent, on the consolidation of their alliance with the other decisive forces of the world revolutionary process and also on the stronger positions of the working class and all democratic elements at home.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Social Aims of theThe establishment of independent national economies, and the abolition of hunger, poverty, illiteracy, diseases and other consequences of colonialism are ever more urgent tasks in all the former colonial countries. Efforts to solve these acute social problems are being furiously resisted by the _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 30, p. 151.
106 imperialists, who want to keep the newly emergent nations as appendages to the world capitalist economy.The newly free nations, even"those which still heavily depend on capitalism economically, are understandably trying to escape from the political system of imperialism. Most of these nations are opposed to the latter's aggressive policies. To find solutions of their domestic problems, they are taking measures against the foreign monopolies. Some have nationalised the latter's property. The newly emergent nations are seeking to end imperialist exploitation through nonequivalent exchange and other methods of economic plunder by the imperialist states. It may be recalled that these nations' total indebtedness went up from 7,000 million dollars in 1955 to 40,000 million dollars in 1967.
The imperialists annually extract thousands of millions of dollars from the "third world''. According to available data, the sum used to pay off debts and interest (with indebtedness growing at the same rate) will exceed, in 1977, new loans by 34 per cent in the countries of East Asia, by 30 per cent in Latin America, and by 21 per cent in Africa. The contradictions between the newly liberated countries and imperialism are bound to grow more acute.
The vital interests of the people---the workers and peasants in the first place---impel them to wage a more active struggle against imperialism, and for radical changes aimed at solving their countries' problems. Hence the inescapable growth of the national-liberation movement's social content.
With the developing national-liberation revolutions in Asia and Africa, the process of internal social differentiation is proceeding apace, and the struggle between the progressive forces and imperialist-backed reactionaries at home is becoming intensified.
The working class is bound to play a decisive part in Asia and Africa. However, it is only emerging there and is, therefore, a small ^proportion of the" population. Despite socio-economic distinctions between the various countries of Asia and Africa, the working class in most of them has quite a number of common features, these being determined by their economic dependence on the West: first, the poor wages and the very low standard of living; second, most workers have close ties with the countryside; third, the 107 numerous small factories seriously complicate the workers' organisation and class struggle. Only about one-fourth of the working class in Asia and Africa are engaged in industry and building construction. Despite the growing number of industrial workers, their proportion still remains small as compared with the mass of workers. Also high is the proportion of unskilled and semi-skilled workers. Labour migration prevents the formation of a stable and highly skilled proletariat. All this tells on the political consciousness of the working class.
The working-class movement in Asia and especially in Africa is still in its early stage. In many countries there, the trade unions are so far the only form of working-class organisation. In the industrially developing countries, the labour movement has already won substantial positions, and workers' political parties have been formed. The agricultural workers of these countries are also playing an active part in the struggle.
The peasants, who form the bulk of the population in Asia and Africa, are natural allies of the working class in the anti-imperialist struggle. They suffer acutely from imperialist and feudal exploitation and are vitally interested in abolishing oppression by the foreign monopolies and in effecting radical agrarian reforms.
Today the stand of the peasantry in Asia and Africa is the nub of the revolutionary process. The best way to effectively involve the peasantry in the struggle against imperialism and for genuine social progress is to establish an alliance between them and the working class. The problem of relations between the working class and the peasantry in the former colonies is to a great extent internationalist in character. It is a question of strengthening the alliance between the international working class, and the peasantry and all working people in the newly free states.
An important part in the anti-imperialist struggle is also played by the urban middle strata, especially in countries where capitalism is poorly developed, so that the working class and the bourgeoisie are numerically small.
In a number of countries, a certain part of the national bourgeoisie is interested in a further development of the anti-imperialist national-liberation revolution, because 108 imperialism prevents the development of national capital. At the same time, guided by their class interests, the upper sections of the national bourgeoisie are opposed to consistent implementation of anti-imperialist policies.
Developments are pushing the patriotic forces on to the road of social progress and of the genuine resolution of cardinal national problems. That is why the class struggle is growing more acute in many countries of Asia and Africa. "The main thing is,'' Leonid Brezhnev noted in the CPSU Central Committee's report to the Twenty-Fourth Congress, "that the struggle for national liberation in many countries has in practical terms begun to grow into a struggle against the relations of exploitation, both feudal and capitalist."^^*^^
Influenced by the victories of world socialism, the peoples of Asia and Africa are increasingly striving for advanced forms of social structure. It is of historic significance that some of the new Asian and African states have taken the road of non-capitalist development and, in the future, of building socialism. The social aims of the nationalliberation movement and the other main revolutionary forces of the day are drawing closer together, increasingly united by the common struggle against imperialism and a desire to achieve common aims, though they stand at different stages of advance towards those aims. This was vividly reflected in the speech by Lansana Diane, of the Democratic Party of Guinea, at the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Party Congress. "Our participation in the work of your Congress, and in many other important functions of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, is a historical and political necessity brought about by our common goals and struggle.
``The decisions of your congresses are of the greatest interestfor the Guinean people, because the Soviet people are the pioneers of socialist construction and, therefore, their experience in this field cannot but appeal to the Democratic Party of Guinea, which is trying to make the Guinean people the leading builders of socialism in Africa....
``Your struggle is our struggle. Your victories are our victories. Hence your Congress is as much ours as yours.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 23.
^^**^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, pp. 335, 336.
109The further consolidation of the alliance between the patriotic forces of the national-liberation movement and the socialist countries and the international working class is a major condition for the completion of national-liberation revolutions.
The prospects of development of the world revolutionary process depend on the cohesion of all revolutionary forces. "Three mighty forces of our time---the world socialist system, the international working class and the nationalliberation movement---are coming together in the struggle against imperialism,'' says the concluding Document adopted at the International Meeting in 1969. "The present phase is characterised by growing possibilities for a further advance of the revolutionary and progressive forces. At the same time, the dangers brought about by imperialism, by its policy of aggression, are growing. Imperialism, whose general crisis is deepening, continues to oppress many peoples and remains a constant threat to peace and social progress.''^^*^^
The situation today calls imperatively for united action by the Communist and Workers' Parties, by all anti-- imperialist forces, for an ever broader offensive against imperialism and the forces of reaction and war, by making full use of the ever new opportunities provided by the times.
The unity of these revolutionary forces has a sound basis. Each of these forces is tackling its own tasks, but they have a common enemy---imperialism. They have common aims---the struggle for the interests of the working people, for peace, democracy and freedom. All this calls for the efforts of the world socialist system, the working-class and the national-liberation movement to be united for a joint attack on imperialism. All the objective conditions exist to make that unity a reality.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 11.
[110] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER III __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE SOCIALIST REVOLUTIONThe radical reconstruction of mankind's social life on the principles of socialism is the ultimate aim pursued by the revolutionary workers' movement. That aim does not stem from abstract thinking by theorists, or from the proletariat's subjective volition. Socialism is an objectively necessary stage of social development. In fighting for socialism, the workers are consciously translating into fact the vital need of the historical process.
The road to the victory of socialist principles lies through a socialist revolution, which can assume different forms, though its essence always remains the same. It is a question of a qualitative leap in the development of society, a revolutionary transition from the exploitative capitalist system to the socialist system, which is free of exploitation and oppression, and ultimately to communism, which is a classless society.
In our times, which were ushered in by the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, socialist revolution has become the law of social development. Communists in the non-socialist countries see as their main task the preparation and the carrying through of such a revolution.
Theoretical questions of the socialist revolution have always come in for special attention from Marxists-Leninists. Using the general principles and laws of the transition from capitalism to socialism, as discovered by Marx, Engels and Lenin, and tested in practice in a number of countries, the communist movement of today is continuing work on the current problems of the preparation and carrying out 111 of revolution. The collective documents of the communist movement, the programme documents of fraternal parties, and their leaders' writings have been important contributions to the further development of the Marxist-Leninist theory of the proletarian revolution.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. LAWS GOVERNING SOCIALIST REVOLUTION __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Objective and Subjective ConditionsIt is a basic conclusion of Marxist-Leninist theory that the socialist revolution can be effected "only on condition that the basic economic, social, cultural and political preconditions for this have been created in a sufficient degree by capitalism.''^^*^^
The appearance of the objective preconditions for the socialist revolution in capitalist society results from a lengthy historical process. In view of this, Lenin wrote: " Revolution can never be forecast; it cannot be foretold; it comes of itself.''^^**^^ That, however, in no way means that MarxistLeninist parties should wait idly until history accomplishes its aims. Equipped with the scientific theory of social development, the Communists can correctly assess the progress and stages of social development, and determine the moment when the objective preconditions for the socialist revolution have matured to a degree necessary for its accomplishment. An analysis of this kind is an absolute prerequisite for Communists' revolutionary strategy to be correctly evolved.
The degree of maturity of the obvective preconditions for revolution has been a subject of discussion and polemics in the working-class movement for many decades. Since the October Revolution, the reformists and Right-wing opportunists have been trying to prove that a socialist revolution is possible only where the objective material prerequisites reach the highest degree of maturity, that is, when, for instance, the entire working population become _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 42, p. 71.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 28, p. 83.
112 proletarianised, and so on. On that basis the opportunists advised the working people to "wait and see" until all these processes mature of themselves.Reasoning of this kind is designed to discredit the October Revolution and all subsequent socialist revolutions which, as a rule, have taken place in countries with a medium level of socio-economic development. This is nothing but theoretical substantiation of a renunciation of the struggle for the revolutionary refashioning of society.
The Marxist-Leninist view on the degree of development of the objective material preconditions for a revolution was evolved by Lenin and then confirmed and taken further by the fraternal Marxist-Leninist parties. This view boils down to the following:
First, Marxists-Leninists maintain that a certain minimum development of the objective material preconditions, not necessarily a maximum, is needed for the socialist revolution to be carried out. Revolution is generally impossible if no such minimum exists. That minimum includes: a certain degree of development of the productive forces, at which their actual socialisation comes into irreconcilable contradiction with the private-ownership form of appropriation; a certain level of socio-economic antagonisms, which produces the political fighters of a revolution; last, a degree of development of the proletariat that makes it capable, socially and politically, of playing the role of the leading revolutionary force, and organiser and leader of the socialist revolution.
This is not, of course, a complete list "of the objective material prerequisites for a revolution, but the above preconditions are essential.
Second, in assessing the degree of maturity of the objective preconditions for revolution, Marxists-Leninists have in mind the state of affairs, not only in a given country but also in the capitalist system as a whole. The entry of capitalism into the imperialist stage meant in itself that the objective prerequisites for revolution had matured in the capitalist system.
Of course, far from precluding, this presupposed various degrees of maturity in capitalist relations in the different countries of the world; we know this from the law of 113 capitalism's uneven development. Also of considerable importance, beginning with that stage, was the development of internal contradictions in the capitalist system of production, not only in a given country, but also in the capitalist world as a whole.
In developing this thesis of Lenin's, the fraternal parties have formulated the thesis that now, when socialist revolutions have already won in a quarter of the planet, a world system of socialism exists, the colonial system has collapsed and state-monopoly relations are rapidly developing in most of the advanced capitalist states, the possibilities of accomplishing the socialist revolution in all countries of the nonsocialist world are increasing. In other words, at present the necessary minimum of development of the objective material preconditions for revolution has, as it were, somewhat decreased within the national bounds.
In the programme it adopted at its Sixth Congress, the Communist International named several groups of countries, depending on the degree of maturity of the objective material preconditions for revolution. The principles of this division still retain their significance, though the concrete situation in the various regions of the world has changed.
On the basis of assessments made by the fraternal Marxist-Leninist parties, we can establish three main groups of countries in the non-socialist world, this according to the degree of maturity of the objective material preconditions for revolution in each of them.
The first group includes the countries of developed capitalism. Half a century ago, Lenin stressed that the growth of state-monopoly capitalism in these countries (then in its initial stage) meant that the prerequisites for revolution were even over-mature. Lenin wrote about the developed capitalist countries, "Socialism is now gazing at us from all the windows of modern capitalism ... is outlined directly, practically, by every important measure that constitutes a forward step on the basis of this modern capitalism.''^^*^^ Lenin also stressed the following, "The mechanism of social management is here already to hand. Once we have overthrown the capitalists ... and smashed the bureaucratic _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25, p. 359.
__PRINTERS_P_113_COMMENT__ 8---0873 114 machine of the modern slate, we shall have a splendidly equipped mechanism, freed from the `parasite', a mechanism which can very well be set going by the united workers themselves.''^^*^^These assessments have acquired special significance and been filled with a new content today. In their programme documents, the fraternal parties in the developed capitalist countries point out that their countries are ripe for socialist changes. This does not, of course, mean that Communists in the imperialist countries regard the socialist revolution as an immediate task of the day. They see the need for a number of transitional measures capable of preparing the masses for revolution. However, this is connected, not so much with the objective conditions as wilh the still inadequate maturity of the subjective factor of revolution in these countries.
The second group includes countries with medium levels of capitalist development, for instance, most of the Latin American states. Here the productive forces have achieved a medium level of development, a national capital has taken shape, a numerous working class with its own class organisations has developed, and capitalist relations are rapidly expanding in the countryside. In most of these countries, as in tsarist Russia in the past, internal class oppression is intensified by oppression by foreign imperialism, that of the USA in the first place.
The third group includes countries where the objective material preconditions for socialist revolution are far from mature. These are the countries of Asia and Africa, most of which did away with colonial oppression only recently. In many of them pre-capitalist social forms still play a considerable part, industry is poorly developed, and the working class is in most cases only at the initial stage ot formation.
If these countries were developing in the conditions of, so to say, classical capitalism, they would probably need many decades to go through all the stages necessary for the maturing of the objective material preconditions for revolution. However, at present this process has been considerably _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lonin, Collected Works, Vol. 25, p. 426.
115 reduced in terms of time. Of great importance, in this respect, is the general state of affairs in the world today and, above all, the aid given by the world socialist system. Though the maturing of the material preconditions for socialism has accelerated, it is yet too soon to talk about the possibility of an early victory of the socialist revolution in most Asian and African countries. In countries with a predominantly small-peasant economy, Lenin said, a whole range of "gradual, preliminary stages'',^^*^^ "special transitional measures"^^**^^ are necessary to do away with backwardness, reorganise society along modern lines, and thus create the conditions for the construction of socialism.The degree of maturity of the objective material preconditions for revolution is expressed in the development of the internal contradictions of the capitalist system. A revolutionary situation arises when these contradictions have become extremely acute. "To the Marxist it is indisputable,'' Lenin wrote, "that a revolution is impossible without a revolutionary situation; furthermore, it is not every revolutionary situation that leads to revolution. What, generally speaking, are the symptoms of a revolutionary situation? We shall certainly not be mistaken if we indicate the following three major symptoms: (1) when it is impossible for the ruling classes to maintain their rule without any change; when there is a crisis, in one form or another, among the 'upper classes', a crisis in the policy of the ruling class, leading to a fissure through which the discontent and indignation of the oppressed classes burst forth. For a revolution to take place, it is usually insufficient for 'the lower classes not to want' to live in the old way; it is also necessary that 'the upper classes should be unable' to live in the old way; (2) when the suffering and want of the oppressed classes have grown more acute than usual; (3) when, as a consequence of the above causes, there is a considerable increase in the activity of the masses, who uncomplainingly allow themselves to be robbed in 'peace time', but, in turbulent times, are drawn both by all the circumstances of the crisis _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 28, p. 342.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 32, p. 214.
__PRINTERS_P_115_COMMENT__ 8* 116 and by the 'upper classes' themselves into independent historical action.``Without these objective changes, which are independent of the will, not only of individual groups and parties but even of individual classes, a revolution, as a general rule, is impossible. The totality of all these objective changes is called a revolutionary situation''.^^*^^
Though more than half a century has passed since 1915 when Lenin gave this definition of a revolutionary situation, the main criteria of this situation, as described by him, remain valid. Our times have brought new elements into the process of the inception of a revolutionary situation, elements that are reflected in the theoretical documents of the fraternal Marxist-Leninist parties.
Let us take the first feature of a revolutionary situation, as formulated by Lenin, the crisis of the "upper classes''. Lenin warned that, though doomed by history, the bourgeoisie can do much to avert acute crises in their domination. "There is no such thing as an absolutely hopeless situation,'' he noted. "The bourgeoisie are behaving like barefaced plunderers who have lost their heads; they are committing folly after folly, thus aggravating the situation and hastening their doom. All that is true. But nobody can `prove' that it is absolutely impossible for them to pacify a minority of the exploited with some petty concessions, and suppress some movement or uprising of some section of the oppressed and exploited. To try to `prove' in advance that there is `absolutely' no way out of the situation would be sheer pedantry, or playing with concepts and catchwords.''^^**^^ This warning has a special significance for Communists today.
In developing the Leninist theory of imperialism, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union drew the following conclusion at its Twenty-Fourth Congress: "The features of contemporary capitalism largely spring from the fact that it is trying to adapt itself to the new situation in the world. In the conditions of the confrontation with socialism, the ruling circles of the capitalist countries are afraid, _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 214.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, p. 227.
117 more than they have ever been, of the class struggle developing into a massive revolutionary movement. Hence, the bourgeoisie's striving to use more camouflaged forms of exploitation and oppression of the working people, and its readiness now and again to agree to partial reforms in order to keep the masses under its ideological and political control as far as possible.''^^*^^This assessment of the state of affairs in the capitalist world has been accepted by the fraternal parties in the developed capitalist countries. These parties have also stressed, in their documents, that, as the general crisis of capitalism grows deeper, the monopoly bourgeoisie are trying with might and main to alleviate or put off the crisis of their domination.
Of course, the monopolies' new class strategy is somewhat hindering the appearance of an acute crisis in the upper crust and, consequently, the inception of a revolutionary situation.
However, all the attempts of the monopolies to adapt themselves to the new situation are bringing forth only the further aggravation of the internal antagonisms of the capitalist system. The limits of capital's social adaptability are quite narrow, which is why the new strategy, the result of the profound crisis of imperialism, is actually promoting the preconditions for a further exacerbation of that crisis.
Let us now take the second feature of a revolutionary situation, as was defined by Lenin, the growing suffering and want of the oppressed classes. Commenting on this proposition of Lenin, the Right-wing reformists often allege that it has lost its significance today when the standard of living in the developed capitalist countries has risen as compared with the past. Such statements are directly linked with the Right-wing opportunist thesis that the working class has lost its revolutionary spirit (as mentioned above). In fact, however, such ``conclusions'' by the Right-wing opportunists are groundless.
In the first place, capitalist development in recent decades has convincingly shown that the economic causes of a revolutionary crisis are still operative, despite a certain rise _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 20.
118 in the living standards in the most advanced countries. In point of fact, the contradiction between the present hardwon living standards of the masses and their actual requirements, as brought about by the level of production, continues to deepen.Even today, millions of people in the most advanced countries, to say nothing of the other capitalist states, are living in poverty. This being so, any economic or financial upheaval can aggravate the want and the hardships of the oppressed classes in the most developed countries to such an extent as to easily engender a revolutionary situation.
Further, it follows from the definition of a revolutionary situation given above that Lenin did not reduce its causes only to economic difficulties and the poverty of the population. The hardships of the oppressed classes in the capitalist countries may stem, not only from economic but also from numerous socio-political causes. Such circumstances (quite possible in the present-day conditions), as the greater war danger, attempts by the ruling circles to suppress the democratic rights and freedoms of the peoples, the aggravation of national relations, and the like, may create conditions intensifying the hardships of the masses, thus creating preconditions for a revolutionary situation.
Thus, contrary to the Right-wing opportunists, the possibility of a revolutionary situation arising due to the aggravation of the want and hardships of the oppressed classes are considerably growing, and not declining, in the present-day conditions.
The International Meeting of 1969 pointed out that capitalist development has engendered a number of new socio-economic contradictions connected, in particular, with the progress of the scientific and technological revolution. The present-day growth of monopoly capitalism has greatly expanded the sphere of exploitation by the monopolies, which means that new sources of aggravation of the want and hardships of the masses have appeared, sources which have still more extended possibilities for a revolutionary situation to emerge and for a socialist revolution to be carried through.
Finally, let us take the third feature of a revolutionary 119 situation as given by Lenin: a considerable enhancement of the revolutionary activity of the masses, with a crisis among the ``upper'' strata and the aggravation of the working people's hardships. As the fraternal parties have pointed out, new possibilities for the appearance of a revolutionary situation have appeared in this respect, too.
The struggle for cardinal democratic reforms that has now begun in most of the developed capitalist countries can produce conditions for a steep rise of the masses' activity and, simultaneously, an acuter crisis of the ``upper'' strata. This idea was well formulated by Ib N0rlund, a prominent figure in the present-day communist movement. To quote from his book, The Communist Point of View, "The carrying out of a broad programme of anti-monopoly changes can, provided these changes are supported by the masses, create a situation under which the `upper' strata, that is, the monopolies, will be unable to 'rule in the old way'. This means that a revolutionary situation concerning the `upper' and the `lower' strata can arise in a way different from that in the past.... The new thing here is that this situation arises mainly on the basis of the initiative of the masses, and not only when a catastrophe brought about by the old order will fall upon society.''^^*^^
A revolutionary situation, as follows from MarxismLeninism, is a result of a country's internal development. Though the external factors are also important, they have never been, and will not be, sufficient for the appearance of such a situation. Revolutions are not exported. At the same time, the present-day alignment of world forces, which is marked by the growing might of socialism, and of the workers' and the national-liberation movement, has created far more favourable conditions for the development of internal factors of a revolution than ever before. In this sense, the role of external factors in the emergence of a revolutionary situation has increased, and today a serious international crisis is likely to favour the growth of internal capitalist contradictions in any country, and lead developments up to a revolutionary situation. In their activities, the fraternal _-_-_
^^*^^ Ib Narlund, Del kommunistiske syuspunkt, K0benhavn, 1968, s. 150.
120 Marxist-Leninist parties always take this circumstance into account.On the whole, the situation in the developed capitalist countries is such that though, in Communists' opinion, it is not yet possible today to speak of a revolutionary situation there, the level of social contradictions, the problems of the "upper strata'', and the activity of the masses have assumed such proportions that the possibility of a spontaneous outbreak of great social upheavals has become quite real.
It will be pertinent to recall the following words of Lenin, "Where the objective conditions of a profound political crisis exist,'' he said, "the tiniest conflicts seemingly remote from the real breeding ground of revolution, can be of the most serious importance as the reason, as the last straw---"^^*^^ In these conditions, the study and creative application of Lenin's doctrine of a revolutionary situation becomes an important task for Communists.
The exacerbation of contradictions in capitalist society is giving rise to a revolutionary situation, an objective condition for a socialist revolution. However, as Lenin frequently pointed out, objective conditions are not at all enough in this case. "It is not every revolutionary situation that gives rise to a revolution,'' he wrote; "revolution arises only out of a situation in which ... objective changes are accompanied by a subjective change, namely, the ability of the revolutionary class to take revolutionary mass action strong enough to break (or dislocate) the old government, which never, not even in a period of crisis, `falls', if it is not toppled over.''^^**^^
History has repeatedly borne out the correctness of this thesis. This was so in the years following the October Revolution in Russia. The revolutionary situation that then arose in a number of West European countries did not lead to the victory of the revolution, for the masses were not yet ready for a victorious struggle and there were no revolutionary parties in Europe at the time capable of ensuring this victory.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 15, p. 276.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 21, p. 214.
121A revolutionary situation cannot develop into a national crisis, or, as it was said in Communist International's documents, into "a directly revolutionary situation''. It cannot end in a victorious revolution if there is not a combination of objective and subjective preconditions. It was herein that Lenin saw the main law of revolution.
Stressing the significance of this conclusion as drawn by Lenin, Georges Marchais, Deputy General Secretary of the French Communist Party, wrote, "We have to consider, more than ever before, Lenin's assessment of relationships between objective and subjective factors in the course of historical development, in the making of history. Presentday development in France fully confirms Lenin's words that underestimation of one of these factors and overestimation of the other entail mistakes in policy, mistakes that lead either to the cult of a spontaneous movement in case of underestimation of the subjective factor, as this is characteristic of Right-wing opportunists, or to voluntarism and neglect of the objective conditions of the mass struggle, which is typical of the `Leftists'. The two mistakes supplement each other, and their common sequence is the ideological disarmament of the working class and the other revolutionary forces.''^^*^^
In speaking of the content of the "subjective factor of a revolution'', Lenin noted three main conditions: first, for a revolution to be victorious, "a majority of the workers (or at least a majority of the class-conscious, thinking, and politically active workers) should fully realise that revolution is necessary, and that they should be prepared to die for it.''^^**^^ In other words, the working class's readiness for revolution is the first condition necessary for its success.
Second, action by the working class alone, and, the more so, of its vanguard, is not enough. "To throw only the vanguard into the decisive battle, before the entire class, the broad masses have taken up a position either of direct support for the vanguard, or at least of sympathetic neutrality towards it and of precluded support for the enemy, _-_-_
^^*^^ Pravda, March 12, 1970.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 85.
122 would be, not merely foolish but criminal,'' Lenin wrote.^^*^^ In other words, both great activity of the working class and support of that class by its allies, the other working people, are necessary for the victory of a revolution.Finally, an active and militant revolutionary party with a scientifically grounded programme of revolutionary action and capable of rousing the masses for the victory of the revolution.
Analysis of the programme documents of the fraternal parties in the capitalist countries shows that today's Marxists-Leninists have not forgotten these conclusions, which Lenin drew from a study of the rich experience of the revolutionary working-class movement.
Communists take into account that the role and significance of the subjective factor have increased many times over today, when the objective conditions of a revolution have reached a high degree of maturity. Basing himself on the experience of Latin America, Rodney Arismendi, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Uruguay, formulated this conclusion as follows: "... both the objective conditions on the continent and the general peaceful course of development determined by the enhanced role of the socialist camp and the deepening of the crisis of capitalism make the maturing of the revolutionary situation more and more dependent on the ability of the vanguard to lead the masses in the struggle, on the flexibility of its tactics, the energy and militancy of its actions."^^**^^ This circumstance impels the fraternal parties to work actively for the revolutionary education of the people.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The General Principles of the Socialist RevolutionIn evolving their revolutionary strategy, Communists have in mind that, just as the conditions for the outbreak of a revolution are of an objective law-governed nature, _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, pp. 92--93.
^^**^^ Rodney Arismendi, "Some Aspects of the Revolutionary Process in Latin America Today'', World Marxist Review No. 10, 1964, p. 17.
123 a revolution itself also has its general and objective pattern. This conclusion is not only theoretical but is drawn from almost 150 years of the working-class movement's revolutionary practice.The general laws governing the socialist revolution and the conditions for that revolution to begin have come up for heated discussion in the working-class movement, with the discussion growing sharper as the conditions for a revolution continue to mature and revolution itself approaches. Both Right-wing and ``Left''-wing opportunists have of late been bitterly attacking the general laws of the socialist revolution. They actually deny the existence of such laws of revolution and socialist construction. According to them, each revolution is purely specific and national in character, and develops only under its own laws. Such is the essence of "national communism'', a theory that hampers the unity of revolutionaries of different countries, and justifies any deviation from Marxism-Leninism and even betrayal of the cause of the socialist proletariat.
The question therefore arises: what makes the laws of revolution common to all countries?
This community stems, first of all, from the essence of the capitalist system being the same all over the world. Irrespective of a country's development, history and geographical location, capitalism has always been a system of exploitation and oppression. Similarly, the contradictions in the capitalist system, which underlie the revolutionary process, are also, in principle, the same everywhere. First and foremost is the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the working class; in the conditions of today, this is a contradiction between the monopolies and the people wherever imperialist relations dominate; it is the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the peasantry, between oppressed and oppressor nations, and so on.
Hence, if the essence of the system to be abolished by a revolution is the same everywhere, then the laws governing such revolutions must be the same, too.
Further: if we speak of a socialist revolution, its essence must be the same in all cases. It must boil down to the abolition of the capitalist and establishment of a socialist system. Whatever the specific features of capitalism in one country 124 or another, the forms of capitalist domination must all be abolished. A socialist revolution means an end to the rule of the exploiters. If that does not take place, then there has been no such a revolution. That being so, the pattern of the socialist revolution must inevitably be the same, regardless of the conditions it develops in.
Lastly, a socialist revolution can be considered victorious only when it results in the establishment of a socialist system. Though the latter may assume different forms, its essence must everywhere ultimately boil down to the establishment of a social system without any exploitation and the oppression of man by man. Unless this condition is observed, we cannot say that a socialist revolution has been carried out. Irrespective of its forms, the socialist system's common features thus represent a third factor making for the common laws of a socialist revolution.
Negation or belittlement of the general laws of the socialist revolution is tantamount either to negation of the very essence of the capitalist system and a varnishing of capitalism, or negation of the essence of a socialist revolution, that is to say, renunciation of the genuine socialist revolution, or a denial of the essence of socialist society, in other words, renunciation of its basic principles. In all three cases, it is actually a question of betraying MarxismLeninism and the working-class cause.
Recognition of the general applicability of the laws of the socialist revolution to all countries is closely interlinked with recognition of the unity of that revolution as an international event, that is, with recognition of the need for unity in the international workers' and international communist movement. Negation of the general applicability of the laws of the socialist revolution is, in effect, an attack on the principle of the unity of the revolutionary forces. It is not fortuitous that the imperialist bourgeoisie and their ideologists are doing everything to impose on the working class and its organisations a rejection of the general laws of revolution and to discredit the very idea.
The general laws of revolution can be methodologically divided into two major groups: those governing revolution itself and indicating the road to socialism, and those 125 governing the development of socialist society and determining the features of socialism as already built up.
``Experience shows,'' Leonid Brezhnev said, "that the road of different countries to socialism is marked by such major common milestones as the socialist revolution in one form or another, including the smashing and replacement of the state machine of the exploiters; the establishment of one or another form of the dictatorship of the proletariat in alliance with other strata of the working people, and the abolition of the exploiting classes; the socialisation of the means of production and the consolidation of socialist relations of production and other social relations in town and countryside; the bringing of cultural values within the reach of the masses of working people, i.e., the cultural revolution in Lenin's meaning of the word.''^^*^^
Leonid Brezhnev went on to describe the main features of socialism, as already built up, namely, rule by the working people, with the working class in the vanguard and the Marxist-Leninist party guiding the development of society; society's ownership of the means of production, and the planned growth of the national economy on that basis, at a high technological level and in the interests of the people's welfare; implementation of the principle, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his work''; education of the people in the spirit of the ideology of scientific communism and of friendship with the fraternal socialist nations and the working people of the whole world; a foreign policy based on the principles of proletarian socialist internationalism.
These principles reflect, in a most general form, the conclusions arrived at in its collective documents, by the communist movement. They are approved and supported by Communists throughout the world.
That Marxists-Leninists emphasise the community of the laws of a socialist revolution in no way means that they negate the specific features of the transition to socialism in different countries. Like any laws of a general nature, the general laws of a socialist revolution are manifested _-_-_
^^*^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course, p. 291.
126 in specific forms, depending on the situation in one country or another. Revolution breaks out on national soil, and, though it is part of the world socialist revolution, it inevitably assumes certain features reflecting the concrete realities in a particular country.``The revolution proceeds in its own way in every country.. .,'' Lenin pointed out. "World revolution is not so smooth as to proceed in the same way everywhere, in all countries.''^^*^^ "All nations will arrive at socialism---this is inevitable, but all will do so in not exactly the same way, each will contribute something of its own to some form of democracy, to some variety of the dictatorship of the proletariat, to the varying rate of socialist transformations in the different aspects of social life,''^^**^^ he wrote in another article.
What, in Lenin's view, are the circumstances which make for a specific character of the road to socialism of one country or another?
Two groups of circumstances of this kind can be established: circumstances of an internal nature which, according to Lenin, include the specific features in the economic structure in one country or another, i.e., the degree of maturity of the objective material preconditions for a revolution, or the degree of maturity of its socio-political prerequisites, historical traditions, and even modes and customs.^^***^^
Circumstances of an external nature, which include the alignment of world forces and the place of a given country in the system of other states.^^****^^
Lenin noted that the specific circumstances of a revolution's development in some country or another may have a positive aspect (by providing experience useful to others), and a negative aspect (by revealing the drawbacks of various forms or ways of revolution). "The greater such diversity--- provided, of course, that it does not turn into eccentricity--- the more surely and rapidly shall we ensure the achievement _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 28, p. 123.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 23, pp. 69--70.
^^***^^ Ibid., Vol. 27, p. 208.
^^****^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, p. 63.
127 of ... a socialist economy,''^^*^^ he stressed. He also stressed that .socialism "can come into being only by passing through a series of varied, imperfect concrete attempts to create this or that socialist state''.^^**^^These words have been fully borne out by experience. Distinctions between the socialist states are quite considerable at times, reflecting both the variety of the local conditions, and the more or less correct solutions of the particular problems of socialist construction.
At the same time, historical experience has clearly borne out another proposition of Lenin, who said that "the peculiarities can apply only to what is of lesser importance''.^^***^^ Lenin insistently stressed time and again that the specific features of the revolutionary road of one country or another should never conceal from Communists the general and main laws of revolution as mentioned above. To the genuine Marxist-Leninist, the task consists not in locking oneself up within the narrow confines of national specificity, but in "learning to apply the general and basic principles of communism to the specific relations between classes and parties, to the specific features in the objective development towards communism, which are different in each country and which we must be able to discover, study, and predict''.^^****^^
The course of events has proved the correctness of these conclusions, and has also shown that a proper combination of the historically common and nationally specific features is a difficult problem facing the Communists. This problem has acquired a special significance today, when the internationalisation of the working-class movement has greatly increased, and the role of the national factor in the class struggle has grown. In recent years, the fraternal parties have done much for a correct combination of the general and the specific features in the revolutionary struggle. Experience has shown that they are successfully dealing with this task. As Erich Honecker stressed at the Eighth _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 27, p. 208.
^^**^^ Ibid., p. 341.
^^***^^ Ibid., Vol. 30, p. 108.
^^****^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, p. 89.
128 Congress of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany, "We adopt the tremendous theoretical and practical experience of the Soviet Union, applying it in conformity with our concrete conditions. In this way we ensure complete unity between the supremacy of the common principles of socialist construction and consideration for the specific conditions of the country.''^^*^^Summing up the above, we can say that while unity of the objective and subjective factors is necessary for the outbreak of a revolution, the unity of the historically common and nationally specific features in the revolutionary vanguard's class strategy is just as necessary for the successful accomplishment of a socialist revolution. Without this, as experience has shown, a revolution cannot be carried out successfully.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. THE STRUGGLE FOR DEMOCRACYIn evolving the strategy of the struggle for the victory of the socialist revolution, Communists take into account the steadily increasing share and role therein of generaldemocratic movements. On the one hand, this growth stems from the struggle for democracy drawing closer today to the struggle for socialism, due to the specific features of imperialist development. Here we see confirmation of Lenin's prevision. "To develop democracy to the utmost, to find the forms for this development, to test them by practice, and so forth---all this is one of the component tasks of the struggle for the social revolution,'' he said. "Taken separately, no kind of democracy will bring socialism. But in actual life democracy will never be 'taken separately'; it will be 'taken together' with other things, it will exert its influence on economic life as well, will stimulate its transformation; and in its turn it will be influenced by economic development, and so on. This is the dialectics of living _-_-_
^^*^^ Erich Honecker, Bericht des Zentralkomitees an den VIII Parteitag der Sozialistischen Einheitspartei Deutschlands, Dietz Verlag, Berlin, 1971, S. 14.
129 history.''^^*^^ On the other hand, the growing role of generaldemocratic movements in the revolutionary struggle is explained by the greater number of social forces being involved in it, the expansion of its social basis. __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Class Essence``Democracy" is a Greek word meaning "government by the people'', a form of society's political system presupposing the participation of the people in deciding its affairs, with subordination of the minority to the majority, and with recognition of the liberty and equality of citizens.
However, like any other socio-political form, democracy does not exist in the abstract, but always has a definite and real class content. Marxists-Leninists have invariably taken into account the historical development of democracy and its direct dependence on the replacement of one socioeconomic formation by another, and the nature and intensity of the class struggle.
The democratic rights and institutions (freedom of the individual; freedom of conscience; sovereignty of the people; election of the organs of power; parliament and a constitution; freedom of speech, the press and organisation, etc.), as achieved by the people in centuries of struggle, are among the greatest values of human civilisation. However, in an antagonistic class society, democracy for the working people is restricted, and is in many respects formal in character. The fruits of such democracy are actually enjoyed only by the ruling classes.
Any democracy, Lenin said, ultimately serves production and "is ultimately determined by the relations of production in a given society''.^^**^^ Private ownership of the means of production is the economic basis of bourgeois democracy. Private property is a socio-economic guarantee of democracy for those who possess such property. In bourgeois countries, where the power of capital is stronger than all the _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25, pp. 452--53.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 32, p. 81.
__PRINTERS_P_129_COMMENT__ 9---0873 130 authorities, democracy is a form of the class domination of the bourgeoisie. That is why the degree of the development of democracy directly reflects the alignment of class forces in a given country or group of countries.The political basis of bourgeois democracy is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, which is ideologically moulded by the reactionary world-outlook of the present ruling exploiter class. Therefore, in capitalist society, democracy means freedom for the ruling, class, those who own the means of production, to suppress the striving of the working people for greater rights and their complete emancipation. Until a certain time, the bourgeoisie were interested in comparatively broad-based democracy as a weapon in the struggle against the feudal lords, and of ensuring political domination for themselves. It was then that they advanced the slogans of liberty, equality, fraternity, and laid the foundations of the present-day mechanism of bourgeois democracy: bourgeois constitutions were drawn up, parliaments and other representative institutions were established, and universal suffrage and political freedoms restricted by the interests of the bourgeoisie itself were set up under pressure from the masses.
Lenin disclosed the historical nature and essence of bourgeois democracy. "Compared to feudalism,'' he wrote, "capitalism was an historical advance along the road of `liberty', `equality', `democracy', and `civilisation'. Nevertheless, capitalism was, and remains, a system of wageslavery, of the enslavement of millions of working people, workers and peasants, by an insignificant minority of modern slave-owners, landowners and capitalists. Bourgeois democracy, as compared to feudalism, has changed the form of this economic slavery, has created a brilliant screen for it but has not, and could not, change its essence. Capitalism and bourgeois democracy are wage-slavery.''^^*^^
In the early stages of bourgeois society, when it became clear that the masses could use bourgeois democracy in their own interests, the working people were deprived of the material possibilities of utilising representative institutions and freedoms. The entire machinery of the bourgeois state _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, p. 517.
131 was brought into action to suppress the political activity of the masses, and to oust them in different ways from deciding the vital problems of national life.As the contradiction between labour and capital grew deeper, the bourgeoisie, to maintain their domination, curtailed the rights and freedoms of the working people more and more. This process was intensified with the transition to monopoly capitalism. Lenin wrote, in respect of the changes that had taken place, "The political superstructure of this new economy, of monopoly capitalism (imperialism is monopoly capitalism) is the change from democracy to political reaction. Democracy corresponds to free competition. Political reaction corresponds to monopoly.''^^*^^ In foreign and home policies, Lenin stressed, imperialism seeks to violate democracy and to introduce reaction. "In this sense imperialism is indisputably the `negation' of democracy in general, of all democracy."^^**^^
The concentration of economic and political power in the hands of the monopolies, and the mounting intervention of the bourgeois state in all spheres of social life inevitably result in a curtailment of democratic rights and freedoms, above all such which can be used by the masses in their interests. This is expressed in different forms. Thus, with this aim in view, the powers of parliamentary institutions and local government bodies are docked, while those of executive bodies controlled by monopoly capital are increased.
Anti-constitutional laws are more and more often pushed through parliaments in the capitalist countries. Relying on these "unlawful sanctions" and using the swollen state machinery of coercion, the ruling classes deal ruthlessly with democrats, Communists, and other progressives. The imperialist bourgeoisie try to deny them all social and political activity, and frequently ban democratic parties and organisations.
Militarisation and the arms drive are intensifying the anti-democratic nature of the present-day bourgeois state. The establishment of military-industrial complexes and _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 23, p. 43.
^^**^^ Ibid.
132 military blocs such as NATO has led to foreign policy and military affairs being virtually taken away from parliaments in a number of capitalist countries.It is not merely a question of democratic rights and freedoms being more and more restricted in capitalist states. The monstrous growth of the bureaucratic and militarybureaucratic apparatus has intensified reactionary tendencies in the entire bourgeois state machine, and in the life of capitalist society.
Imperialism engendered fascism, that regime of mass political terror and death camps. German nazism was the most sinister manifestation of fascism. However, fascism is not only a thing of the past. In countries where the exploiters are unable, within the framework of bourgeois democracy, to maintain the ``order'' they want, power is often turned over to openly fascist-type terrorist regimes, as has been the case in Greece and in many Latin American countries. Such regimes enjoy the financial and political support of the ruling circles of the imperialist states and the big monopolies. Recent experience has shown that, to preserve their power, the monopoly bourgeoisie are ready to discard even the restricted bourgeois-democratic freedoms.
To strengthen their class domination, the bourgeoisie make wide use of their ramified political and ideological machinery. The most skilful media of bourgeois propaganda, designed to spiritually shackle the individual, are engaged in indoctrinating the people in the capitalist countries. Bourgeois and opportunist ideologists embellish bourgeois democracy, by popularising pluralism, i.e., the existence of different political parties. However, this pluralism is nothing but a reflection of the different social contradictions in capitalist society and serves to cover up the dictatorship of the monopolies.
Thus, modern bourgeois democracy is, in essence, a form of the dictatorship of the capitalist monopolies. Whatever the political signboard used, the capitalist system always remains one of social and national inequality, of coercion of the working people, society and the individual. That is the assessment the Communist and Workers' Parties proceed from above all in determining their attitude to bourgeois democracy.
133 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Working ClassAt the same time, the Communists take another aspect of the matter into account. The bourgeoisie, as Engels pointed out, cannot acquire political domination and express that political domination in a constitution or laws, without providing the proletariat with a weapon.^^*^^ Moreover, bourgeois democracy cannot be regarded as a creation of the bourgeoisie only, or their ``gift'' to the people. As mentioned above, democratic rights have been won by the masses in a struggle. The extent of democracy has always depended on the alignment of class forces, the role of the working people in the class struggle, the degree of their organisation and political consciousness, the experience of the political and economic struggle, and on the cultural standards of the people.
Though limited, bourgeois democracy has two important aspects.
First, the workers and other working people in many countries have won a number of substantial democratic and social rights and freedoms in the course of bitter struggles. They have won the right to form mass organisations of a political, economic and cultural character (political parties; trade unions, industrial councils, co-operatives; youth, students' and women's associations; mutual benefit societies; cultural and educational societies, etc.). As a result, the democratic traditions and institutions established in a number of capitalist countries have become a tangible political force and a potent means of exerting mass pressure on the bourgeois state and the employers.
Second, the working people, while on the whole kept away from the running of public and state affairs, are nevertheless able, with the present alignment of class forces, to use the political forms of bourgeois democracy in their own interests. They often elect their representatives to parliaments and local government bodies. The Communists seek to rally about themselves millions of voters who constitute the most active, creative and productive part of the _-_-_
^^*^^ See Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Werke, Bd. 16, S, 76.
134 people (industrial workers, progressively minded farmers, intellectuals and other representatives of the middle classes). In a number of countries, the Communist vote has risen, and entire cities and regions have appeared (like the "Red Belt" of Paris, the "Red regions" in Italy, etc.), where, from year to year, Communists are returned to parliament and municipal bodies. It is clear that the stronger the positions won by the Communists in representative bodies, the better the general conditions for the class struggle of the working people.The interests of the struggle against imperialism, which seeks to suppress the fundamental freedoms, call for stronger and more active mass movements to defend or gain freedom of speech, the press, assembly, processions and association, guarantee equal rights for all citizens, and make all aspects of social life democratic. As the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties pointed out, "A firm rebuff must be administered to any attempt and any legislation by reaction designed to nullify the democratic rights and freedoms won in the course of hard class battles. There must be systematic work both within these countries and in the international arena to save the patriots and democrats who face death, to stop arbitrary court rulings against Communists and other patriots, and to defend the right to political asylum; there must be a fight for the release of the patriots and democrats lying in jail.''^^*^^
The interests of the working class bring it forward as the advanced fighter for democracy. "The very position the proletariat holds as a class compels it to be consistently democratic,''^^**^^ Lenin stressed.
The present crisis of bourgeois democracy forcefully reveals the vital need and importance of the working-class struggle for democracy as a road towards the overthrow of the power of big capital. "It would be a radical mistake to think that the struggle for democracy was capable of diverting the proletariat from the socialist revolution or of hiding, overshadowing it, etc.,'' Lenin said. "On the _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 35.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 9, p. 51.
135 contrary, in the same way as there can be no victorious socialism that does not practise full democracy, so the proletariat cannot prepare for its victory over the bourgeoisie without an all-round, consistent and revolutionary struggle for democracy.''^^*^^ __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Objective ConditionsIt is the working class that suffers, in the first place, from increasing oppression by the monopolies, the curtailment of democratic rights and freedoms, and the sway of the reactionary forces. It is experiencing growing pressure from capital against its living standards and socio-- political rights.
However, it is not only the working class that is subjected to increasing oppression and exploitation. With active assistance from governments, the monopolies are bringing under their control the non-monopoly sectors of the economy (agriculture, a number of industries, and branches of trade and services). All the other sections of the people also come under the increasing political pressure of big capital. The problem of democratic rights confronts, in all its magnitude, the peasantry, the urban middle sections, and the intelligentsia.
The ruining of small and medium-sized peasant households has accelerated tremendously, with the peasants being confronted by the united forces of the monopolies and governments, which are bent on speeding up the process of the concentration of agriculture. In the Common Market countries, for instance, self-supporting peasant households have been abolished under officially approved plans. It is not surprising, then, that the small and middle farmers are coming out against finance capital and its policies.
Under state-monopoly capitalism, various groups of the non-monopoly bourgeoisie are also being progressively ruined. Petty and medium-scale employers are losing their former economic and financial independence, and often _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 22, p. 144,
136 become agents or commercial travellers for the big firms and corporations. There is a growing feeling among them, too, that their day-by-day problems have been caused by the policies of big capital and the anti-democratic course of its governments.State-monopoly capital exploits intellectuals, engineers, technicians, and the numerous white-collar workers. More and more members of the "liberal professions" are losing their independence, becoming rank-and-file office workers in monopoly amalgamations. Progressive intellectuals see that the state, which serves the monopolies, squanders immense sums for military purposes, while refusing to meet the pressing needs of the people.
The upsurge of the youth movement has become a major force in the social life of the capitalist countries. Every year millions of youths and girls join the ranks of the working class and, ruthlessly exploited by the capitalists, become active in the class struggle. Mass action by the youth and their growing political activity, which reflect the profound crisis in present-day bourgeois society, are largely directed against the home and foreign policies of the ruling classes. Particularly active in the movement are the young workers, who see no prospect for themselves under capitalism. In many countries, the students are also rising in the struggle against the monopolies and their rule.
All these processes are extending the class struggle against the monopolies. The community of interests of the working class, the peasantry, the urban middle sections, the intelligentsia, the youth and religious believers, and their growing co-operation are narrowing the social basis of monopoly power, exacerbating the internal contradictions of capitalist society, and rallying the masses for a struggle against the monopolies and imperialism. Favourable conditions are objectively arising for the unification of all these forces on a common platform of the struggle for peace and national independence, in defence of democracy, and for extension of the latter. The 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties pointed out, "In the course of anti-monopolist and anti-imperialist united action, favourable conditions are created for uniting all democratic trends into a political alliance capable of decisively limiting 137 the role played by the monopolies in the economies of the countries concerned, of putting an end to the power of big capital and of bringing about such radical political and economic changes as would ensure the most favourable conditions for continuing the struggle for socialism.''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Revolution and ReformThe ever greater convergence and conjunction of the struggle for democracy and the struggle for socialism are posing the problem of the relation between the immediate demands of the masses and the ultimate target of the struggle for socialism, between reform and revolution.
The erroneous notion exists that reform is the absolute opposite of revolution. That is not the case. Lenin pointed out that the oppositeness of reform and revolution is not absolute, and that the line between them "is not something dead, but alive and changing, and one must be able to define it in each particular case''.^^**^^ The economic and political struggle of the working class, he said, can "transform half-hearted and hypocritical `reforms' under the existing system into strong-points for an advancing working-class movement" on the road towards the victory of socialism.^^***^^
To Marxists-Leninists, the struggle for general-- democratic reforms is at the same time a struggle to prepare the socialist revolution. In this, they differ radically from the reformists, who reduce the working-class struggle to demands for better conditions, without encroaching upon the power of the ruling class. The reformists describe as "socialist transformations" changes within the framework of capitalism. The Right-wing Social-Democrats maintain that gradual petty reforms are enough for the advance towards socialism. Socialist society, they claim, will ultimately emerge from such achievements as pensions, the nationalisation of one industry or another, or of transport, and pay rises.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers Parties, Moscow 19G9, p. 27.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 17, p. 116.
^^***^^ Ibid., Vol. 15, p. 440.
138Contrary to the reformist illusions, Marxism-Leninism states that the transition to socialism is effected by a socialist revolution. Lenin proved the objective need for such a revolution, and showed the radical difference between revolutionary and reformist directives and programmes. Replying to an American correspondent in July 1919, he stressed, "The governmental programme of the Soviet Government was not a reformist, but a revolutionary one. Reforms are concessions obtained from a ruling class that retains its rule. Revolution is the overthrow of the ruling class. Reformist programmes, therefore, usually consist of many items of partial significance. Our revolutionary programme consisted of one general item---removal of the yoke of the landowners and capitalists, the overthrow of their power and the emancipation of the working people from those exploiters.''^^*^^
At the same time, no opportunity should be lost of implementing reforms that are in the interests of the working class, and in some degree help it to achieve its ultimate ends.
There are different kinds of reforms. Those made by state-monopoly methods are designed to strengthen the power of big capital and weaken the positions of the workers, the influence of their class organisations, and their role as leader in the revolutionary struggle.
General-democratic reforms, for which the Communists work, can strengthen the positions of the working class and its allies, undermine the domination and power of the monopolies, and shatter the economic, social and political foundations of capitalism.
Of course, such reforms cannot of themselves abolish the exploitation of man by man, but their implementation would restrict the power of the monopolies, enhance the prestige and political impact of the working class in the life of a country, help isolate the ultra-reactionary forces, and facilitate the unification of all progressives.
``In contrast to the Right and `Left' opportunists, the Communist and Workers' Parties do not contrapose the fight for deep-going economic and social demands, and for _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, p. 515,
139 advanced democracy, to the struggle for socialism, but regard it as a part of the struggle for socialism,'' the 1969 International Meeting declared. "The radical democratic changes which will be achieved in the struggle against the monopolies and their economic domination and political power will promote among the broad masses awareness of the need for socialism.''^^*^^After analysing the objective conditions for the development of the revolutionary process and the diverse forms of its manifestation today, the Communist Parties have worked out programmes revealing the intimate links between general-democratic reforms and the advance towards socialism. Inasmuch as the struggle for radical democratic reforms is directed against the imperialist monopolies as the main enemy of revolution, it becomes revolutionary in character and part of the struggle for socialism.
Thus, state-monopoly capitalism, by building up the reactionary trends in the policies of bourgeois countries, has considerably extended the objective basis for the democratic forces to rally about the working class. It has thus fostered the specific development of the revolutionary process in the capitalist countries, and has called to life specific forms of development of a socialist revolution. In the conditions of today, the general-democratic struggle against monopoly capital is dealing a staggering blow at the most powerful and politically and economically influential section of the bourgeoisie, and is largely undermining the foundations of the capitalist social system. In other words, the struggle for democracy and for the all-round expansion of democracy, ultimately acquires an anti-capitalist content. The blows at the monopolies are creating the material basis for the convergence of the democratic and the socialist tasks of the revolutionary transformation of capitalism, this being a marked feature of the revolutionary process in the developed capitalist states.
Fundamental democratic, socio-economic and political reforms play a major part in the socialist transformation of society, a part which depends on the rate and scope of _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers^^1^^ Parties Moscow 1969, p. 24.
140 transformations and on the alignment of class forces within a particular country and in the world.The forms and methods of accomplishing general-- democratic tasks depend on the degree of the resistance the monopoly bourgeoisie offers to the development of the revolutionary process. It is quite possible that demands presented as democratic may develop into a demand for a socialist transformation of society.
The course of the revolutionary process has borne out Lenin's idea that, in the developed capitalist countries, the socialist revolution will be, not merely a clash between the socialist and anti-socialist forces but a combination of movements, including the general-democratic and socialist sections of the general advance towards socialism. A combination of such movements, both on a national and a world-wide scale, will eventually lead to the socialist revolution.
In other words, an intimate connection appears between democratic and socialist processes, in the course of the anti-monopoly struggle for democratic reforms. This is an expression of the continuity of revolutionary action and of the fact that more and more people are becoming involved in it. In the struggle for democracy the masses are prepared for active participation in revolution, and the conditions are created for decisive battles against the monopoly oligarchy, and for the victory of the socialist revolution. The resolution of the fundamental contradictions in presentday capitalist society is imperatively demanded by social progress and is possible only as a result of the overthrow of capitalism and the abolition of the monopoly bourgeoisie's domination in the socialist revolution.
Summing up the developments in the social life of the capitalist world, Leonid Brezhnev stressed at the International Meeting of 1969 that, on the whole, "not only the material but also the socio-political conditions are maturing for a revolutionary replacement of capitalism with the new social system, for socialist revolutions''.^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 151.
141 __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE FORMS IN WHICH THE WORKING``The worker will some day have to win political supremacy...,'' Marx emphasised. "But we have by no means affirmed that this goal would be achieved by identical means.''^^*^^
``Marx did not commit himself, or the future leaders of the socialist revolution, to matters of form, to ways and means of bringing about the revolution,'' Lenin noted, "lie understood perfectly well that a vast number of new problems would arise, that the whole situation would change in the course of the revolution, and that the situation would change radically and often in the course of revolution.''^^**^^
At the same time, the classics of Marxism-Leninism clearly laid down the criteria revolutionaries should be guided by in choosing the forms of struggle.
``In the first place,'' Lenin wrote, "Marxism differs from all primitive forms of socialism by not binding the movement to any one particular form of struggle. It recognises the most varied forms of struggle... Marxism, therefore, positively does not reject any form of struggle...
``In the second place, Marxism demands an absolutely historical examination of the question of the forms of struggle.... At different stages of economic evolution, depending on differences in political, national-cultural, living and other conditions, different forms of struggle come to the fore and become the principal forms of struggle; and in connection with this, the secondary, auxiliary forms of struggle undergo change in their turn. To attempt to answer yes or no to the question whether any particular means of struggle should be used, without making a detailed examination of the concrete situation of the given moment _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works in three volumes, Vol. 3, p. 292.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 27, p. 343.
142 at the given stage of its development, means completely to abandon the Marxist position.''^^*^^For Marxists-Leninists, these propositions are now fundamental on the question of the forms in which the working class can win power. A variety of such forms is recognised, with a historically concrete approach to their utilisation. As the experience of all socialist revolutions has shown, one of the two main forms---peaceful or non-peaceful---is used by the working class to win power.
The non-peaceful form of winning power presupposes an armed struggle (insurrection, guerrilla or civil warfare, etc.). The peaceful form means the gaining and consolidation of power by the working class without a nation-wide armed struggle. However, in all circumstances, even the relatively peaceful development of the socialist revolution takes place in conditions of an uncompromising class struggle. Sharp clashes with the class enemy, critical situations and unexpected turns are inevitable along the peaceful road of development. The peaceful and the forcible forms are interconnected, often replacing each other, or growing one into the other.
The founders of Marxism-Leninism pointed out that the working class prefers to win power peacefully; it prefers a peaceful revolution because, to a great extent, that accords with the humane aspirations and ideals of the Communists. "Insurrection would be madness where peaceful agitation would more swiftly and surely do the work,''^^**^^ Marx said. "The working class would, of course, prefer to take power peacefully,"^^***^^ Lenin stressed.
However, the founders of Marxism-Leninism, who took a historically concrete approach to this problem, believed that the armed seizure of power is most probable and possible for the working class.
The 1871 revolution in France and the October 1917 revolution in Russia developed through an armed struggle. In France, where the proletarian revolution began when the reactionary forces were weakened and dispersed, the proletariat established its power by relying on the armed _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 11, p. 214.
^^**^^ Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Werke, Bd. 17, S. 641.
^^***^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 4, p. 276.
143 force of the revolutionary masses, but without bloodshed. On March 18, 1871, power in Paris was assumed by the Central Committee of the National Guards, and later, as a result of elections held on March 26, 1871, the Paris Commune was established. This was the first state form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Backed up by interventionists, the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie soon imposed a civil war on the proletariat, and put down in rivers of blood the revolutionary movement of the Paris Communards.After the July 1917 events in Russia, the bourgeoisie went over to violent action against the revolutionary masses, which was why the working class could establish its power only through an armed struggle. This aim was achieved by an uprising which broke out in Petrograd in October 1917 and then spread to the entire country. In the course of the armed uprising, the working class, in alliance with the poor peasantry, overthrew the bourgeois power, routed the bourgeois army, destroyed the reactionary state machinery of mass oppression, and instituted Soviet power as a form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. After the October Revolution, the Leninist Party mapped out the road for Russia's peaceful development. However, the combined forces of internal and foreign counter-- revolutionaries imposed a civil war and foreign intervention on the Soviet Republic. Led by the Communist Party and supported by the workers of other countries, the working people of Russia defended in a bitter struggle the gains of the October Revolution, and defeated the counter-revolutionaries and invaders.
The victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, the result of an armed uprising, was a triumph of creative Marxism.
However, Marx, Engels, and Lenin did not absolutise the armed struggle as the road to the socialist revolution. Marx considered possible the peaceful abolition of bourgeois rule in such countries as Britain and the United States, where a developed bureaucratic machinery of state did not yet exist in his day. "We know of the allowances we must make for the institutions, customs and traditions of the various countries, and we do not deny that there are 144 countries such as America, England, and I would add Holland, if I knew your institutions better, where the working people may achieve their goal by peaceful means,''^^*^^ Marx said at a meeting in Amsterdam in 1872.
During World War I, Lenin wrote that "in individual cases, by way of exception, for instance, in some small country after the social revolution has been accomplished in a neighbouring big country, peaceful surrender of power by the bourgeoisie is possible, if it is convinced that resistance is hopeless and if it prefers to save its skin.''^^**^^
While he considered the peaceful development of revolution extremely rare in history, Lenin sought to use every possibility of peacefully establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia.
Conditions for the peaceful development of the revolution in Russia appeared on two occasions: in the period between March and July 1917, and, for a short time, in September 1917. The February 1917 revolution created an unusual situation in Russia. Extensive bourgeois-- democratic freedoms were won; the workers and peasants, mobilised for active service, were armed; the organs of coercion of the old machinery of state had been rendered ineffective and could not openly crush the revolutionary movement; organs of the new power appeared in the form of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. The Russian bourgeoisie were comparatively weak, and international imperialism was split into hostile blocs and sapped by the war. The bourgeois Provisional Government could retain power only due to the confidence it enjoyed among considerable sections of workers and peasants with insufficient political experience, who had been deceived by the conciliatory policy of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, who were then in a majority in the Soviets.
In these circumstances, the revolution could be carried through peacefully and revolutionary forces rallied under the slogan of "All Power to the Soviets!''. The Communists conducted their activities under that slogan from April to July 1917, when the counter-revolutionaries had mustered _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works in three volumes, Vol. 2, p. 293.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 69.
145 their forces and were using arms against the people. Even in September 1917, after the counter-revolutionary mutiny led by General Kornilov had been put down, Lenin allowed the possibility of power being peacefully assumed by the working class. "Our business,'' he said then, "is to help get everything possible done to make sure the `last' chance for a peaceful development of the revolution, to help by the presentation of our programme, by making clear its national character, its absolute accord with the interests and demands of a vast majority of the population.''^^*^^However, power could not be won peacefully at the time mainly because of the policy of class collaboration pursued by the petty-bourgeois parlies.
A peaceful transition of power to the working class took place in Hungary in 1919. The bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1918 had abolished the monarchy in that country, and power had been taken over by the liberal bourgeoisie, with support from the Social-Democrats. The coalition government they formed defended the interests of the big bourgeoisie and landowners, ruthlessly crushed the workers' and peasants' movement, refused to recognise the national minorities' right to independence, and sought to preserve the bourgeois system in the country by relying on the Entente powers. However, the latter presented an extortionate ultimatum to Hungary, acceptance of which would have been disastrous to the country. With the failure of the home and foreign policies of the bourgeoisie and the Social-Democrats, the alignment of forces shifted towards the workers, who demanded the establishment of a socialist republic. Disappointed with the coalition government's policy, the peasants and the urban petty bourgeoisie followed the working class. Communist influence grew quickly among the masses of the people. Faced by the threat of completely losing all ties with the masses, the SocialDemocrats were compelled to agree to unity with the Communists. The people were armed and ready for the struggle and there was no force in the country which could oppose the working class and its allies. The preponderance of the revolutionary forces was so evident that the bourgeoisie _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 20, p. 60.
__PRINTERS_P_145_COMMENT__ 10--0873 146 did not dare to resist. On March 21, 1919 the dictatorship of the proletariat was installed in Hungary, remaining in power for 133 days.Warmly greeting the Hungarian revolution, Lenin pointed out that "in Hungary the transition to the Soviet system, to the dictatorship of the proletariat, has been incomparably easier and more peaceful.''^^*^^
When, aided by the foreign imperialists, the reactionaries restored the bourgeois system in that country, Soviet Russia could not help the Hungarian revolution because it was fighting in hard conditions to repel the onslaught of the counter-revolutionaries.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Diversity of the Forms of WinningIn deciding on the forms to be used in the struggle and to gain power, the Communist Parties creatively apply Marxist-Leninist principles, on the basis of an analysis of the concrete conditions in the various countries.
This analysis suggests the conclusion that, in a large group of capitalist countries, the revolution will, evidently, not develop peacefully at present. This group includes many Latin American and a number of West European states.
Gilberto Vieira, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Colombia, said, "Our Party's Tenth Congress declared that the Colombian revolution will not be a peaceful one.''^^**^^
The programme of the Portuguese Communist Party stresses that the Portuguese people have only one way of overthrowing the fascist dictatorship and establishing the power of a provisional government: a nation-wide uprising, an armed revolt of the people.
However, while declaring the non-peaceful forms the main ones, the Communist Parties do not reject peaceful forms of the revolutionary struggle to win over the masses _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, p. 387.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 135.
147 and to educate them in the revolutionary spirit. The Communist Parties, which have chosen the non-peaceful form of the working-class struggle for power, follow a flexible policy of using all means of the political struggle to strengthen their positions and achieve unity of the revolutionary forces. In doing so, they take account of the situation in their own countries and throughout the world.The non-peaceful development of revolution has its objective laws, the most important of which, as experience shows, is that an armed struggle should not be launched unless the objective conditions have taken shape and a revolutionary situation, or at least the first signs of such a situation have appeared in the country.
Of exceptional importance in this connection are the propositions of the objective conditions of an armed uprising as formulated by Lenin shortly before the October Revolution. "If the revolutionary party has no majority in the advanced contingents of the revolutionary classes and in the country, insurrection is out of the question,'' he wrote then. "Moreover, insurrection requires: (1) growth of the revolution on a country-wide scale; (2) the complete moral and political bankruptcy of the old government, for example, the `coalition' government; (3) extreme vacillation in the camp of all middle groups, i.e., those who do not fully support the government, although they did fully support it yesterday.''^^*^^
The founders of Marxism-Leninism devoted particular attention to the thorough preparation of the revolutionary forces for an armed uprising.
On the basis of the experience of the 1905 and 1917 insurrections, Lenin showed that an uprising could not be action by individuals or even armed action by members of a single party. It should involve the masses of the working people, this being possible only if they have been prepared for action by the very course of events, by the development of the revolution. Speaking of the slogan of an uprising, Lenin noted, "The more complex the social system, the better the organisation of state power, and the more _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 26, p. 134.
__PRINTERS_P_147_COMMENT__ 10* 148 perfected the military machine, the more impermissible is it to launch such a slogan without due thought.''^^*^^During a revolutionary crisis, the masses can rise spontaneously in an armed struggle, but they can suffer defeat if they are scattered and lack organisation. What is needed is a political army of the revolution, well-organised, united and led by a Marxist-Leninist party, an army ready to begin a selfless armed struggle at the call of that party.
Experience has shown that conditions for a revolt mature and the political army of revolution is formed in several stages. The first stage is the mustering of forces, the establishment of close ties between the industrial workers and other working people. Such ties allow all the forces of the revolution to make a correct assessment of the political situation and to act jointly. Through its propaganda and by organising the masses, the revolutionary party convinces the latter of the need for insurrection. The question of an armed uprising can be posed at this stage, but the decision on when to begin it cannot yet be made. The working class must first realise, not only the political significance of an armed uprising but also the tasks involved in its practical preparation. It must be ready for a decisive struggle and be aware that energetic attack, not defence, is the slogan of an uprising. Therein consists the general political preparation of an insurrection.
Then comes the stage of immediate preparations for an armed uprising. The masses are organised for it, and their revolutionary vanguard is armed. An important condition of these preparations is political work conducted by the revolutionary forces in the army, and the winning over of the army (or part of it) to the side of the revolution. Also important is the correct timing of the uprising. It should be timed for a period when the activity of the advanced section of the people is at its highest, and vacillation is greatest in the enemy camp (the moral and political crisis of the old government) and among the wavering friends of the revolution. In such conditions, the people stand very close to insurrection, the road to which is indicated by the Communist Party.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 9, pp. 367--68.
149The preparation and staging of an armed uprising require manifold practical activities of the Communist Party. Underground work must be organised, with the simultaneous use of legal avenues; revolutionaries must be taught the military art; sources of arms must be found, and so on. A revolutionary party can do all this, proceeding from the concrete situation in its country.
An armed struggle does not necessarily develop as an uprising; it may take other forms as well. For instance, Lenin attached great importance to guerrilla warfare. The revolutionary movements in China, Vietnam and Cuba have shown that, in certain conditions, such a war can become an effective means in the struggle to overthrow the ruling classes and establish the power of the revolutionary classes.
An armed struggle does not always end in a workingclass victory. If the revolutionary party does not have the backing of the majority in the advanced contingents of the revolutionary classes, and if the armed struggle does not have the support or sympathy of most of the people, an uprising is most likely to be defeated. This explains why Marxists criticise Leftist elements who underestimate the struggle for a united democratic front, for legal forms of struggle, and for work among the people, so as to prepare them for decisive battle for power.
Having analysed the new alignment of forces in their own countries and throughout the world, the Communist Parties of a number of capitalist states have arrived at the conclusion that, in certain circumstances, the possibilities have now increased for the relatively peaceful assumption of power by the working class.
The main condition for a peaceful proletarian revolution is the absence of any possibility for the bourgeoisie to use armed force against the working people. That can be achieved if broad sections of the urban and rural working people unite under the leadership of the working class, the vast majority of the people are won over to the latter's side, the combined forces of the revolution give a decisive rebuff to the opportunists, who are pursuing a policy of conciliation with the capitalists and landowners, and if the reactionaries and their accomplices are isolated.
150A peaceful revolution does not at all mean that the class struggle has ended, or that its intensity has slackened. On the contrary, a sustained and intense class struggle, with the participation of broad sections of the revolutionary class and its allies, is necessary to create a decisive preponderance of forces on the working class's side, since otherwise a peaceful revolution is inconceivable. A peaceful revolution only means that forms such as an armed uprising or civil war are not used in this acute class struggle.
The use of peaceful forms of struggle cannot be considered without account of the growing opposition from the imperialists, who seek to regain their lost positions. Imperialist attempts of that kind are accompanied by an aggravation of world tensions, the arms drive, militarisation of the economy, the growth of the military-bureaucratic apparatus, the formation of aggressive military and political blocs and groupings by capitalist states, and by the bourgeoisie's striving to install fascist dictatorships in a number of countries. Imperialism raises numerous obstacles to the peaceful development of revolution. That is why a socialist revolution, which has begun relatively peacefully in one country or another, can repeatedly change its forms, that depending on the degree and nature of the resistance offered by the bourgeoisie.
The Central Committee of the French Communist Party said, in its Manifesto, that Party members are working perseveringly to create conditions favourable for a peaceful transition to socialism, and that they are trying to draw the bulk of the people into the struggle for that prospect. At the same time, the document stressed, no one can predict in what way the transition to socialism will take place in France, since the use of one means of struggle or another depends, not only on the fighters for socialism but also on the degree of resistance by the exploiter classes to the will of the majority of the people. "That is why, if the exploiter classes resort to force against the people, the working class will naturally have to envisage another prospect and ensure the transition to socialism by non-peaceful means,'' the Manifesto stated.^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ Cahiers du communisms N. 1, 1969, p. 131.
151In its theses for its Twelfth Congress, the Italian Communist Party emphasised that it "...rejects any concept of violence for the sake of violence, just as any rigid opposition of a peaceful to a non-peaceful development of the revolutionary struggle''. Pointing to the danger of the ruling classes resorting to violence, the Party called for "preparing the workers and other democratic forces to rebuff and defeat any reactionary attempts, including the use of force,''^^*^^ by way of spreading the mass movement and promoting mass organisations and democratic institutions.
Historical experience has shown that the peaceful assumption of power by the working class as the most painless and therefore preferable to the revolutionary forces, at the same time creates certain difficulties for them.
Characterising the 1956 events in Hungary, Janos Kadar said: "The victory of the socialist revolution in a relatively peaceful way gave the Hungarian bourgeoisie an advantage in that, though the economic foundation of their power was abolished as a result of expropriation, they nevertheless retained their cadres and active political role to a considerable extent. This was also helped by the fact that, on account of a special character of development, we did not destroy the bourgeois state apparatus, with the exception of the gendarmerie and the army, right after 1945, and merely changed it gradually. In this way, the bourgeoisie could even, for a long time and to a considerable extent, retain their influence on the state administration and the solution of economic and cultural problems.
``That is why, after October 23, 1956, the bourgeoisie were able quite effectively to organise their ranks within a few days and to come out as an active political force.''^^**^^
A preponderance of the revolutionary forces over the forces of reaction and counter-revolution is a major condition for the success of a socialist revolution, in whatever form it is carried out---peaceful or non-peaceful. The rallying of the workers and broad sections of the working people about the slogans of the struggle for democracy and socialism; education of the working people in the spirit of _-_-_
^^*^^ L'Unitd, 27 ottobre 1968.
^^**^^ Janos Kadar, Selected Articles and Speeches, 1957--1960, Politizdat, Moscow, 1960, p. 52 (in Russian).
152 preparedness for decisive and dedicated action under the guidance of the Communist Party; the spread of the mass movement of the workers and other people; undermining the positions of the exploiter classes in the punitive bodies (the army and the police)---all these ensure the preponderance of the revolutionary forces indispensable for the success of the revolution. These factors also make for the timely transition of the revolution from one path to another, at sharp turns of the class struggle.Mastering by the Communist Parties of all means and forms of the struggle is of exceptional importance for the success of a revolution. It is impossible to determine beforehand, Lenin pointed out, "which methods of struggle will be applicable and to our advantage in certain future conditions. Unless we learn to apply all the methods of struggle, we may suffer grave and sometimes even decisive defeat, if changes beyond our control in the position of the other classes bring to the forefront a form of activity in which we are especially weak. If, however, we learn to use all the methods of struggle, victory will be certain.''^^*^^ Communists are out to learn how to use peaceful and non-peaceful, legal and illegal, parliamentary and mass forms of the struggle, and to apply them skilfully in the concrete conditions, with special attention to the mass struggle.
``We are convinced that our political platform, based on the combination of all forms of mass struggle and on placing in the forefront those forms which conform best to the real conditions and the level of political consciousness of the proletariat and the entire people, meets the principles of Marxism-Leninism,''^^**^^ Gilberto Vieira wrote.
The Communist Parties are countering the Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunists, who contrapose to each other the peaceful and the non-peaceful development of revolution. The Right-wing opportunists absolutise the peaceful development of revolution, considering it the only possible one. They overestimate the parliamentary and legal forms of struggle, underestimate the non-parliamentary ones, and reject the illegal forms of struggle. They do not want to _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. C6.
^^**^^ fravda, November 18, 1969.
153 recognise that, in certain circumstances, the armed struggle and illegal forms of revolutionary work are necessary and inevitable for the winning of power.The ``Left''-wing opportunists, on the other hand, blindly believe in the formula that "power grows out of the barrel of a gun''. They are unable to understand that the development of the world revolutionary process makes it possible to win power in a peaceful way. A socialist revolution is not a conspiracy or a coup staged by a group of "active revolutionaries'', but a struggle by millions of people headed by the working class under the leadership of a MarxistLeninist party. In 1917, the Party founded by Lenin set an outstanding example of historical initiative, and proper account of the alignment of class forces and the specific features of the situation. At different stages of the revolution, the Bolshevik Party applied flexible and diverse tactics, used peaceful and non-peaceful, legal and illegal means of struggle, and displayed the ability to combine them and to replace one form or method by another. In this lies the fundamental distinction between the strategy and tactics of Leninism on the one hand, and both social-- democratic reformism and petty-bourgeois adventurism on the other.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 4. THE SOCIALIST REVOLUTIONIt is the goal of the socialist revolution to replace the capitalist system by a new, socialist one. As the experience of a number of revolutions has shown, this is a relatively lengthy process, which goes through successive stages. In their entirety, the latter constitute the transitional period from capitalism to socialism.
There are at least two main aspects of this transition. One of these is the destruction of the old system of power, the abolition of capitalist ownership. This is a destructive aspect of the socialist revolution. The other aspect is the building of a new, socialist system---the constructive aspect 154 of the socialist revolution. The two processes of the revolutionary transformation of capitalist into socialist society proceed simultaneously and are intertwined. How are the problems that appear during this period to be solved?
Contrary to historical experience, the Right-wing opportunists allege that both processes can proceed evolutionarily, so that the power of the bourgeoisie can of itself gradually develop into the new system, and the old society can automatically acquire new socialist qualities. This is, in fact, nothing but a Right-wing opportunist concept of socialism growing into capitalism.
In a constant struggle against the Right-wing opportunists, Lenin, proceeding from the propositions of Marx and Engels and the experience of the Paris Commune and the 1905 Revolution in Russia, formulated even prior to the October Revolution a clear-cut view on what is necessary to accomplish the tasks of the transition from capitalism to socialism. His main conclusion was that the takeover of power by the working class and its allies stood first. "The key question of every revolution,'' he wrote, "is undoubtedly the question of state power. Which class holds power decides everything.''^^*^^
In Lenin's view, the takeover of power by the working class is the principal indicator of a socialist revolution, an indicator without which it cannot be regarded as such. "The passing of state power from one class to another is the first, the principal, the basic sign of a revolution, both in the strictly scientific and in the practical political meaning of that term,''^^**^^ he wrote.
The very assumption of political power by the proletariat is a unity of two elements. On the one hand, it shows that the shaping of the political forces of revolution has been completed. In assuming political power and establishing their political domination, the revolutionary forces, led by the working class, fully assert themselves and prove that they have matured to cope with the tasks confronting them.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25, p. 366.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 24, p. 44.
155At the same time, the takeover of power initiates another process: the working class and its allies set about accomplishing their constructive tasks, those stemming from the construction of a new society.
Without possessing political power and establishing their political domination, the working class and its allies cannot set about accomplishing the cardinal tasks of the revolution and begin a real advance towards socialism. As Marx and Engels wrote, "Every class which is struggling for mastery, even when its domination, as is the case with the proletariat, postulates the abolition of the old form of society in its entirety and of domination itself, must first conquer for itself political power.''^^*^^
Marxism-Leninism teaches us and experience has shown that the takeover of power by the working class and its allies presupposes the abolition of the old, capitalist rule, or, as Marx said, the destruction of the bourgeois machinery of state. This is a most important and, at the same time, a most complex question of the theory of the socialist revolution.
The machinery of state is the main instrument of the imperialist bourgeoisie in its struggle against the workingclass movement and for the suppression of its class enemies. As a class apparatus specially designed for such anti-- working-class and anti-revolutionary tasks, the bourgeois machinery of state cannot simply be taken over by the working class and used for its own purposes. It must be destroyed, and a new socialist state apparatus set up in its stead.
The question was posed in general outline and theoretically evolved by Marx and Engels, whose view on the need to destroy the bourgeois machinery of state was borne out by the experience of the Paris Commune, the October Revolution, and all subsequent revolutions. It should be mentioned, however, that the working class and the revolutionary forces have to adopt a differentiated attitude to different sections of the bourgeois state apparatus.
Lenin often stressed that the bourgeois state apparatus is not homogeneous. The main function performed by part _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, The German Ideology, Moscow, 1964, p. 45.
156 of it is the suppression of the working-class movement and of revolution. That part consists of the army, the police, the courts, and the like. In other words, this is the militarypolice, the military-bureaucratic part of the bourgeois state apparatus.Another part of capitalism's machinery of state, which also acts in the interests of the bourgeoisie, performs other functions, such as control, regulation of the economy, etc. "This apparatus,'' Lenin noted, "must not, and should not, be smashed. It must be wrested from the control of the capitalists; the capitalists and the wires they pull must be cut off, lopped off, chopped away from this apparatus; it must be subordinated to the proletarian Soviets; it must be expanded, made more comprehensive, and nation-wide.''^^*^^
Referring to these ideas of Lenin, some revisionists with Rightist leanings allege that the question of destroying the capitalist machinery of state does not arise today because of the changes that have come about, over the past halfcentury, in the structure and functions of the bourgeois machinery of state, and, primarily, because of the immense growth of the state-economic mechanism. Moreover, they allege, talk of destroying the apparatus of state-monopoly capitalism is harmful to the cause of revolution, because that apparatus can and should be wholly placed at its service.
Big changes have, indeed, taken place in the structure and activities of capitalism's machinery of state. It is also true that the apparatus of the state regulation of the economy, i.e., state economic organisations of different kinds, is expanding very rapidly.
The working class is naturally interested in using these economic regulatory bodies and must do everything possible, after the establishment of the new power, to use them in its interests by replacing the managerial staff, abolishing the bureaucratic system of management, and so on. The need to use the bourgeois apparatus of accounting and control in the interests of the revolution is evident, and this is fully in keeping with Lenin's conclusions.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 26, p. 106.
157However, all this in no way refutes the Marxist-Leninist thesis on the need to smash the bourgeois state apparatus as an important condition for the success of a revolution. Moreover, in many respects this task has now become more urgent than ever before.
Together with the rapid development of the economic bodies of the bourgeois state apparatus, big changes have also taken place in the evolution of the military-bureaucratic mechanism. Recent years have seen tremendous efforts by monopoly capital to strengthen the apparatus of suppression of the working people. In many cases, the bourgeoisie have used brutal repression against the progressive forces. An immense growth of militarism is to be seen in the capitalist world in the past ten years. Government measures within a particular country have been augmented by coordinated action on the part of monopoly capital in different countries, within the framework of military blocs, NATO in the first place.
In the event of revolutionary action by the working people of one country or another of the capitalist world, this military-police and militarist apparatus will obviously be used against them; that is why the task of destroying this part of the bourgeois machinery of state is of special importance today.
The posing of the question of destroying the bourgeois state apparatus does not anticipate the forms in which that can be done, since that will depend on the way the revolution develops in a particular country.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Dictatorship of the Proletariat,Defectors from Marxism and its declared enemies have devised a host of incredible falsifications and myths on the question of working-class power and its essence. There is, however, a common denominator in all this fiction: it is the main purpose of all the enemies of Marxism to deny, by all and any means, the need to establish working-class power after the victory of the socialist revolution.
Yet the establishment of working-class power, or, in other words, the dictatorship of the proletariat, is, as Lenin 158 stressed, the question "of the very essence of proletarian revolution''.^^*^^ The proletarian dictatorship is a fundamental historical necessity, an essential feature of the socialist revolution, a sign that a new, socialist society has come into being.
The enemies of socialism have spared no effort to present the dictatorship of the proletariat as a bugbear, something inhumane, almost contradictory to human nature. Bourgeois ideologists, and with them the Right-wing Social-Democratic leaders, have spread all kinds of nonsense about the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The essence of the dictatorship of the proletariat was theoretically defined by the founders of Marxism-Leninism long before it was established by the working class. The conclusions of Marx, Engels and Lenin have been confirmed by the entire history of countries that now make up the world socialist system.
True, errors and deviations from the Marxist-Leninist principles of proletarian power have been made in the course of that system's development. Suffice it to recall the current events in China---the Chinese "cultural revolution" and its consequences. The enemies of socialism are trying to take advantage of developments of this kind, alleging that they express the genuine essence of the dictatorship of the proletariat. In fact---and this has been emphatically stated by Marxists-Leninists in different countries---these developments represent deviations from the true principles of proletarian power, deviations unanimously condemned and rejected by all adherents of truly revolutionary and creative Marxism.
In briefly formulating the essence of working-class power as born in the crucible of the socialist revolution, Lenin wrote, "If we translate the Latin, scientific, historico-- philosophical term 'dictatorship of the proletariat' into simpler language, it means just the following:
``Only a definite class, namely, the urban workers and the factory, industrial workers in general, is able to lead the whole mass of the working and exploited people in the struggle to throw off the yoke of capital, in actually carrying _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 28, p. 231.
159 it out, in the struggle to maintain and consolidate the victory, in the work of creating the new, socialist social system and in the entire struggle for the complete abolition of classes.''^^*^^Hence, the dictatorship of the proletariat has two main aspects: one is to ensure the victory of the revolution, crush resistance by hostile classes, and establish the proletariat's political domination over the reactionaries in a given country until the reactionary classes (or forces) are liquidated in the course of socialist transformations.
This aspect of the proletarian dictatorship naturally presupposes the use of force against the enemies of the revolution, both internal and external, if they attack the revolutionary gains. The need for such force and of defending the revolution is recognised by all the Marxist-Leninist parties.
But, as Lenin said on more than one occasion, force is not the only function of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and does not even comprise its main content, which consists in the second aspect of the dictatorship of the proletariat, namely, the political leadership it gives the working people with the aim of building a new society, a socialist economy and culture, and of educating the working people in the spirit of communist ideas. This aspect of the proletarian dictatorship embodies the constructive function of socialist revolution and is the main feature of its activities. Convincing proof of this is provided by the socialist nations, which have effected truly immense changes in their lives in a short space of time.
The Right-wing opportunists are often ready to admit that revolution must perform both its destructive and constructive functions. But, they ask, why the dictatorship of the proletariat? Is it not possible to accomplish all these tasks through a much broader political coalition, including representatives of the bourgeoisie and also the proletariat, the latter as ordinary members of the coalition, not as leader? The Right-wing opportunists answer in the affirmative. In their opinion, the dictatorship of the proletariat can and even must be dispensed with in the present-day conditions. This Right-wing opportunist thesis is clearly _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 29, p. 420.
160 linked willi their ``theory'' of the diminishing revolutionary role of the working class and of other social strata taking over the guidance of society.Both Marxism-Leninism and historical experience have shown the hollowness of the Right-wing opportunists' reasoning. Let us take such a decisive function of socialist revolution as the abolition of capitalist power and private ownership of the basic means of production. Who can accomplish that task consistently and in a truly revolutionary way? It would be absurd to expect it of the bourgeoisie who, on the contrary, will do everything to prevent it coming about. It is also hard to expect it of the petty bourgeoisie, whose dual nature make them irresolute in the struggle against capital. There is only one class which, possessing no means of production, can accomplish this historical task---the working class, without whose political domination and guidance of society this cardinal task of the revolution will remain unaccomplished.
The same is true of the other aspect of revolution---the building up of a new society, one without exploitation and oppression. Any other class but the proletariat will persistently seek ways of preserving the relations of exploitation of man by man in one form or another. This is also true of the petty bourgeoisie, to say nothing of the middle or big bourgeoisie. It is likewise evident that the task of educating the working people in the spirit of socialist and communist ideas can be accomplished by no other class than the working class which, by its social nature, is the only consistent fighter for socialism.
The above in no way means that, by adopting such a stand, Communists preclude or reject the participation of other, non-proletarian strata and classes in the struggle for socialism and in the building of a socialist society. What Marxist-Leninist theory says on this question is supported by numerous facts from the history of world socialism, facts which show that the working class and its Communist Parties have done their best to draw the non-proletarian strata of the people into the construction of a socialist society.
Of course, the working class and its party have different attitudes to different strata of society, a question that will 161 be taken up in later chapters. However, the underlying^^1^^ principle is that all classes and strata of present-day society, including even some part of the bourgeoisie, can be drawn into socialist construction, provided they are led by the working class. Moreover, as Lenin said, the rate of socialist construction will be the higher, the broader the masses of the people are drawn into this great cause by the proletariat.
The possibilities of bringing the non-proletarian sections of the working people into socialist construction have increased appreciably. This is obviously the result of the new alignment of forces in the world, the greater significance of the working-class movement in the capitalist countries and the deeper contradictions between the monopolies and the people in the imperialist countries. Oppression by the monopolies has become so unbearable that it is compelling even the constantly vacillating petty bourgeoisie to insistently seek an alliance with the working class and to strive for a progressive social order.
The present-day strategy of the working-class movement presupposes its struggle for socialism, in alliance with all working people. This strategy is laid down in the documents of the fraternal parties and the 1969 International Meeting.
The dictatorship of the proletariat---that essential condition for the building of socialism---can assume different forms in each particular country. "The transition from capitalism to communism is certainly bound to yield a tremendous abundance and variety of political forms, but the essence will inevitably be the same: the dictatorship of the proletariat,"^^*^^ Lenin wrote. History has fully confirmed this proposition by producing different state forms of the dictatorship of the proletariat: the Paris Commune in France, the Soviets in Russia, and People's Democracies in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe and Asia.
What are the distinctions between the Soviet system in the USSR and the People's Democracies, say, in European countries?
The first is that in many countries where the dictatorship of the proletariat is exercised in the form of a People's Democracy, there are a number of political parties, and not _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25, p. 413. 11--0873
162 one, as in the USSR. Another distinction is that in most of the People's Democracies, universal suffrage has, from the very outset, been enjoyed by all citizens, including those belonging to the bourgeoisie. Besides, in the Soviet Union the bourgeois parliamentary system was abolished and the Soviet system set up instead, whereas the People's Democracies have used many of the traditional forms and institutions of the parliamentary system in building up their states. Several more distinctions might be mentioned here.All these distinctions between the dictatorship of the proletariat in the USSR and the People's Democracies in no way affect its essence and its main functions; they are merely forms in which it is expressed.
Let us take, for instance, the multi-party system in a number of socialist countries. In all cases, it appeared only because the working class and its party took into account the concrete conditions and, in particular, the social composition of the population in a given country, the make-up and nature of parties that existed before the revolution, and, last, the behaviour of the various strata and parties in the pre-revolutionary and the revolutionary periods.
It will be recalled that several parties existed in Russia after the triumph of the October Revolution. One of them, that of the ``Left'' Socialist-Revolutionaries, was even represented in the Soviet Government. However, in the course of a bitter class struggle during the Civil War, all these parties sided with the counter-revolutionaries and openly opposed Soviet power. As a result, they rapidly disappeared from the political scene, the Communist Party remaining as the sole party able to defend the people's interests to the full. That was how a single-party system of the dictatorship of the proletariat took shape in the USSR.
Things were quite different in such countries as Poland, Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria, where the political parties represented different strata of the people. All of these fought against fascism and, together with the Communists, then worked for democratic changes. As a result, they were able to keep the people's confidence and carry on in the political life of their countries.
This was no easy process. A division of forces took place in these parties. The reactionary elements in their 163 leadership, who attempted to sabotage the building of socialism, had to leave their posts.
A system of democratic parties has arisen in Poland, the German Democratic Republic, Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria. Each of these parties has preserved its independence and has its programme and newspapers. However, all of them play an active part in the common cause of building socialism. These parties have united in active political unions---people's or national fronts. They recognise the leading role of the Communist Party and, as its partners, jointly guide the development of their countries.
Thus, the multi-party form in the socialist countries' proletarian dictatorship does not mean any rejection of the leading role of the working class or its Communist Parties. It is a political structure engendered by the specific features of these countries and their historical development.
The same is also true of suffrage being retained for the bourgeoisie and of the use of the traditional forms and institutions of the parliamentary system. Lenin pointed out that "the question of depriving the exploiters of the franchise is a purely Russian question, and not a question of the dictatorship of the proletariat in general''.^^*^^
The socialist countries' experience in using various forms of the dictatorship of the proletariat, with the latter being preserved in its essentials, is of great international importance. The Communist Parties of the capitalist countries can apply this experience in drawing the non-proletarian masses and their political parties into the struggle for socialism.
Future revolutions will no doubt bring about even greater variety in the forms of the proletarian dictatorship. Quite new combinations in the parliamentary system and some new system of popular government may appear, along with new ways of drawing certain parties and organisations into the construction of a new society, and new principles of relations between them. Absolutely new designations may also appear to define the rule of the working class and its allies. All that is natural. The main thing, however, consists in preserving intact the essence of the dictatorship of the proletariat as a necessary condition to build up socialism.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 28, p. 255.
__PRINTERS_P_163_COMMENT__ 11* 164 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Transitional Stages in the StruggleExperience has shown that though the dictatorship of the proletariat can be the direct outcome of the socialist revolution, as was the case in Russia and Bulgaria, it can also be a result of development through transitional stages or forms. This may happen in the course of a democratic, anti-fascist or anti-imperialist revolution growing into a socialist one, a process which took place in Mongolia, Hungary and the German Democratic Republic.
The possibility of a revolution developing through transitional stages was first elaborated in principle by Lenin during the 1905 Revolution in Russia, when he evolved the doctrine of the revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry, which he regarded as a possible form of transition from the bourgeois-democratic to the socialist revolution.
Shortly before the October Revolution, Lenin, in his article, "The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat It'', gave a profound treatment of the question of the possible appearance, in developed capitalist countries, of a state form transitional to the dictatorship of the proletariat. He foresaw that a revolutionary-democratic state, in which the foundations of the rule of big capital are radically undermined, may rise in the course of the struggle against the monopolies and for democracy, in such countries. This state, he wrote, "will still not be socialism, but it will no longer be capitalism. It will be a tremendous step towards socialism''.^^*^^
In all these cases, Lenin stressed, the conditions must exist that are necessary for the emergence of a state form transitional to the dictatorship of the proletariat. Among these conditions are, first of all, the hegemony of the working class, the active role of the masses as its allies, and suppression of attempts by the petty bourgeoisie to turn the new and transitional regime into a form of compromise with old bourgeois power.
Lenin's conclusions have been completely borne out by _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25, p. 360.
165 history. In generalising this practice, at the new stage of social development, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union stated in the Programme it adopted at its Twenty-- Second Congress: "While the principal law-governed processes of the socialist revolution are common to all countries, the diversity of the national peculiarities and traditions that have arisen in the course of history creates specific conditions for the revolutionary process, the variety of forms and rates of the proletariat's advent to power. This predetermines the possibility and necessity, in a number of countries, of transition stages in the struggle for the dictatorship of the proletariat.''^^*^^The fraternal parties in the non-socialist world are devoting much attention to work on the question of the transitional forms and stages on the road to the socialist revolution and the victory of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The fraternal parties of the developed capitalist countries now distinguish as quite possible, and, in some cases, necessary, the stage of anti-monopoly or advance democracy. The Manifesto adopted by the French Communist Party in 1968 explains, for instance, that this democracy represents some transitional state form that is no longer a modern bourgeois state and in which monopoly power has been abolished and new and democratic rule has been established, with the active participation and the guiding role of the working class. This system is not yet socialist in the direct sense of the word. The transition to socialism will need higher political consciousness in the working class and its allies, and closer unity between the working-class and democratic movements. It is implied that all these tasks can be accomplished in the development of the regime of advanced democracy, which will subsequently grow into a socialist regime.
In the medium-developed countries, such as most Latin American countries, the Communist Parties foresee the possibility of the rise of specific transitional regimes in the wake of anti-imperialist, anti-feudal and democratic revolutions. Judging by the characteristic given to such regimes in the programme documents of the Latin American _-_-_
^^*^^ The Road to Communism, pp. 486--87.
166 Communist Parties, they will, in greater or lesser degree, resemble the revolutionary democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry, as foreseen by Lenin during the 1905 Revolution.In the countries with a low level of capitalist development, i.e., in the former colonies and dependencies, primarily in Asia and Africa, where the approach to the socialist revolution will obviously take much more time, historical practice has produced such a transitional form as a state of socialist orientation.
This form first appeared and was historically tested in the Mongolian People's Republic, whose experience has shown that a state progressing along the non-capitalist road can create economic and socio-political conditions for the transition to socialist construction. It also shows that this possibility may materialise only if such a state is headed by genuinely democratic forces led by an active and militant, though young and numerically small, working class.
The emergence, in one country or another, of a transitional state form developing along the road to the dictatorship of the proletariat is a major victory for the revolutionary forces. It would, however, be naive and mistaken to believe that the birth of such a state makes the triumph of socialist relations inevitable. As experience has shown, acute class clashes flare up in the transitional stage to the dictatorship of the proletariat. The outcome of these clashes cannot be predetermined. We may recall the national-revolutionary war in Spain, where the new democratic regime of a transitional type was crushed by the fascists.
All this shows that the Communist Parties and all democratic forces should not slacken their struggle after the establishment of the revolutionary regime of a transitional type. On the contrary, they have to step up the struggle and raise the activity of the masses still higher in order to bring developments to a victorious end, i.e., to that transitional state form developing into a form of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
[167] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER IV __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORLD REVOLUTIONARYIt is not only within individual countries but on a worldwide scale that the forces of progress and reaction stand confronting each other today. The influence of world developments on the course and outcome of the class struggle in any country is now determined, first and foremost, by the struggle between the forces of socialism and of capitalism being focal in world events. That influence is mounting steeply in connection with the growing internationalisation of economic and political life and, in particular, with the extension of the scientific and technological revolution to means of warfare. In the existent conditions, the problems of the revolutionary movement are closely intertwined with those of the relations between states on the world arena, and especially with the resolution of the main question of international politics---that of war and peace. The latter's close connection with the question of how the fundamental contradiction of the times is to be solved gives it a burning urgency.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. THE LINK BETWEENWars between states are often accompanied by social convulsions and upheavals. A superficial glance at this link may produce the impression that war engenders revolution---a thinking followed by the anti-communist theorists, who would insist on ascribing the triumph of socialist revolutions in a number of European and Asian countries 168 to the consequences of World War II. War and revolution have been directly and inescapably linked together by the Chinese leaders and other theorists of petty-bourgeois revolutionariness. That is why an examination of the actual relationship between war and revolution is essential.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ War and RevolutionWar is a continuation of the policies of certaiu classes by means of an armed struggle. To quote from Lenin, "War is a continuation of policy by other means. All wars are inseparable from the political systems that engender them. The policy which a given state, a given class within that state, pursued for a long time before the war is inevitably continued by that same class during the war, the form of action alone being changed.''^^*^^
Hence it is clear that wars and revolutions differ in their origins, no mandatory link existing between them as social phenomena.
As such, wars are never the causes of revolution, even if they are accompanied by the latter. That is because a revolutionary social upheaval is possible only when the material prerequisites for it have appeared, a revolutionary situation has arisen, and the subjective factor for that revolution has matured.
In the past, wars were often catalysts of the revolutionary process: they speeded up the appearance of a revolutionary situation, caused a crisis in the policies of the ruling class, exacerbated the poverty and misery of the oppressed classes, and promoted the political activity of the masses. Nevertheless, it was not wars as such, but the social contradictions, the struggle of the masses against the exploiter system that had engendered those wars and was bringing death and desolation, that led to revolutions. Here is what Lenin wrote in this connection, on the eve of the October Revolution: "It would be impossible to put an end to the rule of capitalism if the whole course of economic development in the capitalist countries did not lead up to it. The war has _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 24, p. 400.
169 speeded up this process, and this has made capitalism impossible. No power could destroy capitalism if it were not sapped and undermined by history.''^^*^^In exactly the same way, World War II did not engender a revolutionary explosion, but only accelerated it in a number of European and Asian countries. Thus, in the course of the anti-fascist war of liberation waged by the peoples of Central and South-East Europe, there took place a class re-groupment which led to the unification of all the revolutionary forces. The rout of German nazism and its allies, in which a decisive role was played by the Soviet Army with the support of the armed forces of the embattled peoples, meant the destruction of the old machinery of coercion, and the appearance of favourable conditions for the overthrow of the rule of the capitalists and the landowners. The presence of the Soviet Army in some of these states, as well as the treaties entered into by the Soviet Union and other states, pinned down the forces of reaction at home and abroad and prevented them from unleashing armed intervention and civil wars. The triumph of the people's democratic and socialist revolutions in the countries of Central and South-East Europe followed many years of struggle against oppression, and national treachery of the exploiter classes; this was no "export of revolution" in connection with a war, as is alleged by the ideologists of ajiticommunism.
The humane and creative nature of the socialist revolution determines Marxists' attitude, in principle, to military conflicts, which bring in their train so much bloodshed, and waste of the peoples' wealth, and the destruction of society's productive forces. On many an occasion V. I. Lenin emphasised that the destruction caused by war greatly complicated the emergence of a new society. "Marx and Engels, the founders of scientific socialism,'' he wrote, " always said that the transition from capitalism to socialism would be inevitably accompanied by prolonged birth pangs. And analysing the consequences of a world war, Engels outlines simply and clearly the indisputable and obvious fact that a revolution that follows and is connected with a _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., p. 417.
170 war (and still more---let us add for our part---a revolution which breaks out during a war, and which is obliged to grow and maintain itself in the midst of a world war) is a particularly severe case of childbirth.''^^*^^ That is why the working class and all working people are interested in a peaceful solution of the problem of the transition from capitalism to socialism, both within the framework of individual countries and on a world-wide scale.The uneven development of the world socialist revolution has made it inevitable for states with differing social systems to coexist on the world arena for a considerable length of time. The antagonistic contradiction between labour and capital has acquired a world-wide scale as a result of socialism having triumphed in a number of countries. It is this contradiction which, in essence, comprises the content of the relationships between the socialist and the capitalist states, and is the cause of the inevitable and acute class struggle between them. It is because of the socialist countries' deep interest in the maintenance of peace that they strive to have that struggle take the form, not of military conflicts but of peaceful competition between states with differing social systems. The nature of today's world economy, of which both the socialist and the capitalist economies are components, calls for the existence of definite economic, scientific and technological links between states whose social systems are different. It is from these objective lawgoverned processes that the need stems for peaceful coexistence and co-operation in dealing with definite problems of the socialist and the capitalist states.
However, the Marxists' negative attitude to war in no way smacks of pacifism: they are aware that the very nature of the capitalist system engenders wars. It is in a struggle against the furious opposition offered by the exploiters that a new society comes into being. In these conditions, as Lenin pointed out, some wars which help destroy especially harmful and reactionary institutions may play a progressive role, despite the distress and horrors that go hand-- inhand with any war. That is why a concretely historical _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 27, p. 498.
171 approach is essential in the appraisal of each and any war.^^*^^ As Lenin put it, "We must be clear as to what historical conditions have given rise to the war, what classes are waging it, and for what ends.''^^**^^This approach calls, first and foremost, for due account of the class content of any particular war and its political aims. Marxists-Leninists distinguish between unjust and just wars. The former are waged by the exploiter classes to strengthen their power and amass wealth, to crush and plunder small and weak nations, and to counter movements for social and national liberation, and to offer opposition to the socialist states. In condemning imperialist wars of plunder, Marxists-Leninists give support to just wars waged in defence of the peoples from imperialist aggression and for national liberation, wars waged by the revolutionary classes to foil attempts by the reactionary forces to keep or restore their rule with the aid of arms.
Of course, communist support for just wars, such as the war which was waged by the Vietnamese people against US imperialism's criminal aggression, has nothing in common with any "export of revolution'', the very idea of which runs counter to the essence of Marxism. The liquidation of the old social system and the construction of a new society are exclusively the concern of the masses, with guidance from the proletariat and its revolutionary vanguard. As has already been pointed out, a revolutionary situation cannot be artificially created, for it arises and develops into revolution as the result of the inevitable exacerbation of social contradictions, the working class's organisation and consciousness, and the masses' conviction that capitalism must yield place to socialism.
As far back as 1882, Engels pointed out that "the victorious proletariat can impose no blessings of any kind upon any foreign nation without undermining its own victory by so doing.''^^***^^ In sharply criticising the ``Left''-wing Communists and the Trotskyites, Lenin emphasised that those who were trying to "export revolution" to other countries _-_-_
^^*^^ See V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 299.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 24, p. 399.
^^***^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Correspondence, Moscow, p. 423.
172 were either madmen or agents-provocateurs. Indeed, bringing ``blessings'' to imperialist-oppressed peoples, through the agency of the "revolutionary wars" for which the supporters of neo-Trotskyite concepts call, would be highly detrimental to the cause of the world revolution, for it would encourage passivity in the mass of the working people, and lead them to expect help from without. Moreover, it would help the bourgeoisie identify their class interests with those of the entire nation, inflame nationalism in certain sections of the population, fan war hysteria, and foster attempts by the most aggressive circles of the imperialist bourgeoisie to seek in a new world war a solution of the historical confrontation between capitalism and socialism. __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Danger from Imperialism's PolicyImperialism has not become less aggressive, as is asserted by certain bourgeois theorists, and the revisionists. The steadily declining sphere of imperialism's rule has led to the imperialists' striving to retain their weakening positions and even, wherever possible, to regain what they have lost. In the conditions of a sharpening struggle between the two world systems, the capitalist powers are endeavouring, despite the growing contradictions among them, to pursue a common policy in the basic areas of the class struggle, this with the aim of preserving and consolidating their system of exploitation and oppression. The unified and nation-wide might of the bourgeois states and monopolies and the closer international economic and political ties among them have made it easier for the monopoly groups to reach agreement among themselves on the use of the means the bourgeois states dispose of.
Despite the mounting contradictions among the imperialists in the last few decades (and partly because of those contradictions), the trend has been developing towards the formation of a "general alliance of the imperialists of all countries'', with the purpose of defending capitalism. This trend, which Lenin called "the main economic trend of the
173 capitalist system"^^*^^, has been embodied in imperialist military and political blocs and international state-monopoly corporations, within whose framework the imperialists are bending every effort to perfect their class strategy on the international plane, with the purpose of finding new methods and means for the struggle against the revolutionary forces.The US imperialists are highly active in this respect. Using their tremendous economic potential and the ramified network of channels along which US capital has penetrated into many countries, they have set up a system of military and political blocs (such as NATO, SEATO, and CENTO), and bilateral alliances. US imperialism has the final say in the formulation of the basic military and political doctrines that are influencing the entire imperialist camp. The US army, navy and air force have numerous overseas bases: the GI jackboot is trampling underfoot the soil of over 40 countries. The US imperialists interfere in the home affairs of member-states of the various blocs they have set up, and have been the initiator of new "holy alliances" of the imperialist reactionaries, in an attempt to subordinate the policies of the other imperialist states to a single class strategy.
What is termed as policy "from positions of strength" is a major element in imperialism's counter-revolutionary political strategy in international affairs. Its essence has been clearly expressed by W. Kulsky, a US theorist of anticommunism: "The superior armed forces of a foreign state can establish any regime in any country.''^^**^^ Proceeding from the false concept that the use of force can change the course of history, the imperialist bourgeoisie are trying to retain and strengthen their positions with the aid of militarisation, local wars, and preparations for a third world war.
The capitalist states' war machine has assumed tremendous proportions: in 1970, the war budgets of the NATO states were 5.5 times as great as they were in the bloc's first year of existence.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 27, p. 367.
^^**^^ W. Kulsky, International Politics in a Revolutionary Age, New York, 1964, p. 336.
174``Modern militarism is the result of capitalism. In both its forms, it is the 'vital expression' of capitalism---as a military force used by the capitalist states in their external conflicts ('Militarismus nach aussen,' as the Germans say) and as a weapon in the hands of the ruling classes for suppressing every kind of movement, economic and political, of the proletariat ('Milltarismus nach innen')."^^*^^
Present-day militarism, as a function of state-monopoly capitalism entrusted with the defence of the monopoly bourgeoisie's class interests with the aid of armed force, operates within the capitalist countries as the bulwark of extreme imperialist reaction, which is out to subordinate all those countries' policies to that militarism, and thus crush the working-class and general-democratic revolutionary movement.
In all NATO countries, wars and the arms race have always gone hand-in-hand with action against democratic movements. Thus, it was not fortuitous that, during the Korean war, McCarthyism was rampant in the United States, and pro-fascist and military forces were active in France during the Algeria war. An idea of the nature of such action is also provided by the military-fascist coup in Greece in 1967, which was carried out according to a plan drawn up in NATO, as well as by preparations for a reactionary conspiracy in Italy in 1964, made in accordance with a similar plan. In the opinion of military leaders of this bloc, a pretext for direct US military intervention in the affairs of countries they are quartered in may be provided by any " internal disorders'', including political strikes, demonstrations by supporters of the peace movement, and the like. The Indochina war was used in the United States to whip up jingoism, fan hatred of US Blacks fighting for their civil rights, and persecute progressive intellectuals, students, the trade unions, and so on. In West Germany, the revengeseekers, who are more and more acting hand-in-glove with the neo-nazis, are the most rabid supporters of their country's militarisation; in Britain they would crush Ulster under heel, and are supplying weapons to the Republic of South _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 15, p. 192
175 Africa. Forces of militarism and reaction also exist in other capitalist countries.In foreign policy, imperialism's aggressive militarist strategy is directed, first and foremost, against the socialist states. Militarism, which has not given up the idea of a direct armed struggle against socialism, is trying to galvanise the military blocs set up for aggression against the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries. On many an occasion, in recent years, the imperialists have provoked acute international crises, which have placed mankind on the verge of a world-wide thermonuclear collision.
Nevertheless, the US imperialists have been forced to take into account the alignment of world forces, the Soviet Union's nuclear potential, and the possible consequences of a nuclear war; it is becoming ever more difficult and dangerous for them to stake on the unleashing of another world war. In these conditions, the US imperialists are placing special emphasis on local wars. From time to time, they engaged in military adventures against individual socialist countries. Examples are the Korean war, the attempt to invade Cuba, and the bombing of North Vietnam.
Since World War II, the imperialists have provoked over 30 wars and armed conflicts of various scales, clashes which have often threatened to develop into a new world war. This threat cannot be considered as wholly eliminated today.
The imperialists are doing all they can to hamper the progressive development of countries that have thrown off colonialist rule. They try to keep their military bases in such countries, involve them in militaty blocs, and turn some of them into springboards for subversive and aggressive acts against the revolutionary forces.
Gross interference in the internal affairs of other countries, more and more often in the form of armed intervention and provocation, is characteristic of the imperialist relations with small or weak countries; this is especially true of US imperialism's relations with Latin American countries. US armed intervention in the internal affairs of the Dominican Republic is an example of such arbitrary action. The US imperialists are even trying to legalise their ``right'' to the armed export of counter-revolution to the Latin American countries.
176In appraising the danger presented by imperialism's aggressive and militarist policies, Communists fully take into account the nature of present-day warfare, and the hardware it calls for. During World War I, Lenin pointed out that a world-wide confrontation, in which the most mighty achievements of technology are used with such energy to destroy millions of human lives, can "undermine the very foundations of human society''.^^*^^ This remark should be remembered today, when the means of warfare have made such strides since World War I and even World War II. The havoc that a world-wide thermonuclear war can cause defies calculation.
Peace, not war, can create the most favourable conditions for the peoples' revolutionary struggle to develop, which is why Communists are working to peacefully resolve the fundamental social conflict of our times. As is pointed out in the final Document of the 1969 International Meeting, "The main link of united action of the anti-imperialist forces remains the struggle against war, for world peace, against the menace of a thermonuclear world war and mass extermination which continues to hang over mankind.''^^**^^
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. THE POSSIBILITY OF AVERTING A WORLD WARIn their struggle against the aggressive policies of imperialism, Communists reject the thesis that a new world war is inevitable. Those whose calculations are built on the inevitability of another world conflict in fact ignore the existent alignment of forces and the mounting influence exerted on world politics by the socialist countries, and the workingclass and national-liberation movements that are fighting against war.
The possibility of preventing imperialist wars today is a result of the narrowing sphere of capitalism's supremacy and of its influence on world relations. As far back as the _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 27, p. 422.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 31.
177 years of World War I, Leriin pointed out that a series of victorious revolutions could prevent any repetition of a world war. Indeed, the appearance of the world's first socialist state did in some measure curtail the possibilities of imperialism's aggressive forces. For the first time there had appeared in the world a state that stood opposed to the imperialist policy of oppressing and enslaving other peoples, the policy of colonial exploitation, brute force and wars of plunder, to all of which it contraposed a policy of peace and a rebuff to the imperialist aggressors. Thereby the Soviet state helped bring about genuinely revolutionary changes in world relations. An analysis of that influence enabled Lenin to arrive at the conclusion that a future proletarian dictatorship in several advanced countries could have "a decisive influence upon world politics as a whole''.^^*^^Lenin took into account that, with the emergence of a socialist state, the development of international relations was determined by the struggle between two social systems, in the course of, which socialism, by uniting all peaceful forces about itself, could restrict imperialism's capability of using armed force. The further successes of the world socialist revolution have laid down ever firmer foundations for the prevention and curbing of imperialist aggression. As a result of profound changes in the international alignment of forces, the imperialists have foregone all possibility of playing with the fates of the peoples with impunity. The mounting might of the world socialist system, the international working class, and the national-liberation movement has created conditions for a successful struggle for the preservation and consolidation of world peace.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Peaceful CoexistenceIn accordance with the principles of the communist movement, the socialist countries pursue, in their relations with the capitalist world, the Leninist policy of peaceful _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 148.
__PRINTERS_P_177_COMMENT__ 12--0873 178 coexistence between states with differing social systems, a policy that is the communist alternative to a military solution of the fundamental contradiction of the times, a solution that is being sought by the most aggressive circles of imperialism.From the angle of international law, the principle of peaceful coexistence between states, irrespective of their social system, means that no matters of dispute should be settled by the force of arms. It also means the need for observance of the principles of the sovereignty, equality and territorial integrity of each and every state, large or small, non-- interference in the internal affairs of other countries, respect for the right of all peoples to freely choose their socio-economic and politicpl systems, and the solution of all unsettled international problems along political channels, by negotiation. Peaceful coexistence does not preclude but, on the contrary, presupposes a decisive struggle against the imperialist ideology.
From the class and socio-political point of view, implementation of the principle of peaceful coexistence means the following:~
ensuring conditions for the peaceful development of the countries of socialism;~
curbing the imperialist policy of aggression and the grabbing and annexation of foreign territory;~
preventing any interference by the imperialists in the internal affairs of other countries, in particular with the aim of putting down the liberation struggle of the peoples;~ in other words, it means blocking the imperialist "export of counter-revolution'';~
excluding the use of force for the settlement of national and other conflicts between any countries, in the solution of which the imperialists are interested.
In other words the policy of peaceful coexistence in no way means any elimination of the class struggle or the surrender of positions by the revolutionary forces, as is falsely asserted by the imperialist propagandists and the ``Left''-wing opportunist ideologists, who have taken sides with them. As pointed out by the 1969 International Meeting, this policy "meets the general interests of the revolutionary struggle against every form of oppression and exploitation, and 179 promotes friendship between all peoples and the development of fruitful economic, scientific, technological and other spheres of co-operation between countries with different social systems in the interests of social progress''.^^*^^
Aid and support for all peoples that are fighting for the freedom and independence of their countries, against imperialist aggression, is inherent in the Leninist course towards peaceful coexistence. The principle of peaceful coexistence is inapplicable to relations between oppressors and the oppressed, between the colonialists and the victims of the colonial yoke, which is why socialism's foreign policy is imbued with solidarity with the revolutionary and progressive forces, and is an active factor in the class struggle throughout the world.
The socialist countries rendered all possible support to the heroic people of Vietnam, who waged a struggle against US imperialism, and to the Arab peoples in their struggle against Israeli aggression, which is backed by the NATO imperialists. The Soviet Union helped restore the defence potential of the Arab countries, Egypt and Syria in the first place, which had been invaded by Israel. The steps taken by the USSR and the other socialist countries has been a decisive factor in upsetting the imperialist plans of overthrowing progressive regimes in Arab countries. "And we declare that, while consistently pursuing its policy of peace and friendship among nations, the Soviet Union will continue to conduct a resolute struggle against imperialism, and firmly to rebuff the evil designs and subversions of aggressors. As in the past, we shall give undeviating support to the people's struggle for democracy, national liberation and socialism,''^^**^^ Leonid Brezhnev stressed in the GPSU Central Committee's Report to the Party's Twenty-Fourth Congress.
On the initiative of the Soviet Union and with active support from the other socialist states, the United Nations adopted by an overwhelming majority the well-known " Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries and _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, pp. 31--32.
^^**^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 39.
__PRINTERS_P_179_COMMENT__ 12* 180 Peoples" and then the "Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty''.Firm action by the Soviet Union in support of nationalliberation movements has often inflicted resounding defeats on the aggressive policies of imperialism, and created favourable conditions for the advance of the peoples' liberation struggle. Thus, the failure of the imperialists' military adventure in the Suez area in 1956 did much to foster the national-liberation revolutions in African and Middle East countries.
The struggle waged by the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries to curb the imperialist aggressors is at the same time a struggle to isolate that part of the exploiter classes that is most hostile to the revolutionary workingclass movement. The socialist countries have consistently exposed the revenge-seeking and militarist forces in West Germany. The treaty signed in August 1970 between the Soviet Union and West Germany was a significant contribution to European security, an event which, as West German Communists have pointed out, has facilitated the struggle of FRG democratic and progressive forces for a radical change in their country's foreign policy.
The line towards the settlement of international problems by negotiations and the establishment of a system of collective security in Europe and other areas of the world is hampering imperialist attempts to solve their inner contradictions by building up international tension. With reference to the existence of "the pacifist camp of the international bourgeoisie" and of "the gross-bourgeois, aggressive-bourgeois, reactionary-bourgeois camp'',^^*^^ Lenin spoke of the need to distinguish between these two groups, both within states and on a world-wide scale, a distinction which has now become even greater. The policy of peaceful coexistence helps curb the most aggressive circles in the imperialist states and consolidate the positions of the more moderate wing in the ruling circles of those states, whose representatives, while opposed to socialism, are prone, for considerations of realism, _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 42, p. 403.
181 to seek for mutually acceptable solutions of international issues.The line towards peaceful coexistence between states and towards the development of mutually advantageous economic, scientific and technological co-operation and cultural exchanges among them is accelerating centrifugal trends in the imperialist blocs and is strengthening the positions of those members of the ruling circles in the capitalist countries who stand for peaceful relations with the socialist states. Thus, this policy has, in many respects, encouraged Western Europe's striving to cast off US imperialism's tutelage and has helped considerable social and political circles in the capitalist countries to become aware of the danger of US imperialists' aggressive policies.
Pressure from the masses is exerting an ever growing influence on the struggle between the aggressive and the moderate trends in the ruling circles of the capitalist states. The interests of the working class, the peasantry, and the middle strata in the capitalist countries are objectively hostile to the aggressive policies of imperialism. Militarism is linked with a heavy burden of taxation, lower living standards, attempts by the more reactionary circles of monopoly capital to set up dictatorship, and with a striving to demolish democracy and deprive the working class and other democratic sections of society of opportunities for legal political activities. It is not accidental, therefore, that the militarist policy is coming up against growing opposition from broad sections of the population in many capitalist countries. This found vivid expression, for example, in mass anti-war manifestations in the United States. Opinion polls conducted in 1971 showed that 73 per cent of Americans favoured an immediate withdrawal of US forces from Indochina.
The masses' struggle against the arms race unleashed by the imperialists has assumed a vast scale. Only disarmament can deprive the imperialists of the means of mass destruction, with which they are threatening the world with a thermonuclear catastrophe. Disarmament is no illusion, as is claimed by some bourgeois politicians and theorists. As far back as the close of the 19th century, Engels revealed the dialectics of militarism in showing that it inevitably engenders forces that, will do away with it. "Disarmament,'' he wrote, 182 ``and thereby a guarantee of peace, is possible.''^^*^^ Lenin called disarmament an ideal of socialism. Of course, implementation of any disarmament programme cannot be based on the bourgeoisie voluntarily renouncing their weapons. The crux of the matter is the struggle, the alignment of forces. To quote from Leonid Brezhnev's address to the International Meeting of 1969: "To force a curtailment of the arms race on the imperialists means to shake the positions of the instigators of another war, to switch colossal resources to constructive purposes, and to strengthen world peace.''^^**^^
That is why the socialist countries are waging an unflagging struggle for disarmament. The first success in this direction was achieved by the Moscow Treaty of 1963, which banned nuclear tests in the air, under water and in space. Another major success scored by the socialist countries was the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was signed in the summer of 1968, was approved by most of the world's countries, and came into force in the spring of 1970. The Soviet Union is consistently working for other measures to be carried out to stop the arms race and bring about disarmament. The CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress advanced new important and far-going proposals in this direction, viz., a conference of the five nuclear powers to achieve disarmament, joint reduction of armed forces and weapons in Europe, and the like. However, as long as imperialism continues its aggressive line, the socialist states are, of course, obliged to take all the necessary steps to build up their defence capacity.
The socialist countries' consistent policy of peace has dispelled the false legend of "Moscow's aggressiveness" and "the communist threat'', with the aid of which the world's reactionaries, headed by those of the USA, have built up aggressive blocs. Advanced by the USSR and the other socialist countries, the proposals on disarmament and the establishment of a system of universal security have disproved the arguments used by imperialist propaganda on the need to put up with the arms race for considerations of ``defence''. As _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Werke, Bd. 22, S. 373.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow 1969, pp. 171--72.
183 pointed out in the Report delivered by the CPSU's Central Committee to the Party's 24th Congress, the USSR has no territorial claims on any other country; it threatens nobody, and has no intention of attacking anybody. In advocating free and independent development for all peoples, the CPSU, together with the other fraternal countries and peace-loving states, calls for the liquidation of hotbeds of war in SouthEast Asia and the Middle East, and an agreement to be reached on the renunciation of the use of force or the threat of its use in searching for solutions of questions at issue. In Europe, the Soviet Union proposes that the results of World War II should be finally recognised, and everything possible be done to ensure collective security. The Soviet Union also stands for universal nuclear disarmament and proposes a more active struggle for an end to the arms race and to military bases on foreign territory, and for measures to be drawn up to diminish the probability of a war breaking out by accident. Even the foes of socialism have been forced to acknowledge the attractiveness of the Peace Programme advanced by the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU.Disarmament is in the interests of various sections of society, ranging from the masses to certain groups of the bourgeoisie. The growing awareness in the mass of the population in the capitalist countries of the need for disarmament, and the search for concrete ways of translating the economy of those countries to peaceful production is a process that is helping to restrict the influence exercised by the monopolies and the brass hats on the foreign policies of the capitalist countries. "The basic interests of the peoples,'' says the final Document of the 1969 International Meeting, "demand the intensification of the struggle against militarism in all its forms, particularly against the military-industrial complex of the USA and other imperialist states. We call on all peace-loving forces to mount a struggle for a radical cutback in military budgets, for general and complete disarmament under effective international control so as to switch resources now absorbed by the arms race to improving the working people's life, promoting the health services and education, and rendering assistance to the developing countries.''^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Partief, Moscow 1969, p. 32.
184 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Interlink Between the StruggleThe struggle for peace waged by the socialist states with support from most of the newly independent countries and from the peaceful forces within the capitalist states is a major component of the world-wide struggle against imperialism.
In other words, the class struggle of the world's working class for social and national emancipation and for socialism today merges with mankind's struggle to avert another world war. In holding a class stand in the world-wide struggle for peace, the world's working-class movement is at the same time the guiding force in this process, the sole force capable of strengthening and extending the front of the struggle for peace in such a way as to preclude any breakthrough by the imperialist forces of war.
In this struggle, imperialism has suffered a number of defeats which show that there is an unbridgeable gap between imperialism's striving to slow down and check the world liberation movement, and its actual possibilities. US imperialism, which has let loose the entire fury of its military machine against Vietnam, has failed to subordinate the Vietnam people. The imperialists' attempts to crush the Arab peoples' liberation movement through the agency of the Israeli aggressors have also met with failure. All this goes to show that the aggressors cannot have things their own way.
The curbing of militarism and armed force in world relations is inescapably turning against the imperialists. In the first place, successes scored in the struggle for peace mean a check on the arbitrariness of the most aggressive part of the international monopolies, and help isolate them. As is common knowledge, it is this grouping that is the sworn enemy of democracy and socialism. The struggle within the capitalist countries for a ban on nuclear tests and production, for the abolition of military blocs and bases on foreign territories, and for a sharp cut in military expenditures and armaments is closely linked with the struggle for democratic and social rights, which weakens the positions of the most reactionary and militarist circles of the ruling classes.
185The efforts of the most various sections of society merge in the course of action by the masses, under the leadership of the working class, against the aggressive foreign policies of the imperialist governments and the militarists. Action for peace and disarmament brings closer together the interests of the working class and other sections of the population. The struggle for peace boosts the masses' political activity, while the struggle to avert a world war builds up the protest of the bulk of the population in the capitalist countries against the policies of the monopolies.
The unity of the main motive forces of the world revolutionary process gains strength in the course of the struggle for peace. Like many other anti-imperialist movements, the struggle for peace does not set itself any immediate socialist aims but is of an overall democratic nature. Yet, in the course of that struggle, the masses become aware of the irreconcilable contradiction between their interests and the policy of aggression, and the social system that has engendered the latter. Directed against the warmongers, the reactionaries, and the arms-producing monopolies, that movement is in accord with the overall interests of the revolutionary struggle against all forms of oppression and exploitation. The struggle against one of the manifestations of the exploiter system objectively strikes at the very foundations of that system.
Of course, the growth of the masses' political maturity and activity in the struggle for peace is a most uneven process. Imperialist propaganda glosses over the selfish aspirations of monopoly capital by making reference to the national interests, playing on the jingoist nationalist, and pettybourgeois prejudices of certain sections of the population. The entire might of the state machinery that serves the monopolies is used against the fighters for peace. Though they hate war and want peace, many sections of the population in the developed capitalist countries do not yet see the real sources and roots of the war danger.
The correct road of struggle for universal peace is not yet clear to all. There are such that see that road in a "balance of fear'', and therefore tolerate the arms race. This, in certain measure, explains the political stagnancy and passiveness of certain sections of the population in the capitalist 186 countries, features that are hampering the further growth of the mass movement for peace and disarmament.
From this point of view, a serious danger may also be presented by a sense of complacency and a loss of vigilance in respect of the war danger, which sometimes manifest themselves. This stems partly from the successes scored by the anti-imperialist fighters having created a moral atmosphere in the world which has led to even the most aggressive imperialists discontinuing the open calls for war they were issuing some ten or fifteen years ago. The peaceful actions by the socialist states are more and more hampering the aggressors' initiative, and making them fall back. This has created among a certain section of the peace fighters the impression that the problems of world peace have been resolved, and that the growing might of socialism and the other anti-- imperialist forces is of itself a guarantee against another world war.
It is an important feature of the anti-war struggle against imperialism that victories do not come of themselves: all the gains made by the forces of peace are the result of intense and stubborn efforts and ever greater activity. Any slackening of that activity in any sector of the anti-imperialist front means an overall weakening of that front, which can ultimately result in a growth of the war danger. The Communists are everywhere working for ever greater vigilance and activity on the part of the forces of peace, for they see in this their supreme duty to mankind.
The solidarity and unity of the forces of peace throughout the world are now undergoing an acid test. It is essential that millions of people should realise what the imperialist policy of war, the existence of aggressive blocs, the striving to revise existent state boundaries, subversive activities against the countries of socialism and the progressive regimes in the recently established national states hold out for mankind.
The development of the world revolutionary process has engendered mighty forces capable of blocking the way to the imperialists' striving to unleash another world war.
The outcome of the struggle to avert a world war depends on the cohesion of all the revolutionary forces, both international and national, and on their vigilance and activity, 187 their might and resolution. As the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1969 pointed out, "A new world war can be averted by the combined effort of the socialist countries, the international working class, the national-liberation movement, all peace-loving countries, public organisations and mass movements.''^^*^^ This will undoubtedly be a major contribution to social progress
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 31.
[188] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER V __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE COMMUNIST PARTIES IN THE STRUGGLEThe successful outcome of the working class's struggle for its ultimate aims---the liquidation of capitalism and the construction of socialism---hinges on the unity of that class. "Unless the working class is united,'' Lenin wrote, "its struggle cannot be successful.''^^*^^
However, the working-class movement in the capitalist countries is not united today. Part of the workers follow the communist lead, while others follow the socialists, while yet another part either support petty-bourgeois and bourgeois parties, or else stand outside the political struggle. This split in the working-class movement has been a cause of many of its reverses in the past, and also of many difficulties and setbacks today.
The struggle for working-class unity is one of the major tasks confronting the world communist movement. In many respects, the prospects of the struggle for peace, democracy and socialism hinge on the accomplishment of that task. The unification of all workers in a single class force is a most important principle in the strategy and tactics of the world's Communists.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. THE CAUSES OF THE SPLIT IN THE WORKING-CLASSSuccess in the struggle for unity in the working class and for the elimination of the split in its ranks demands that Communists should have a correct understanding of the causes _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I, Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 19, p. 112.
189 of that split: no disease can be treated without a knowledge of its causes.The split in the working class is no chance phenomenon, born of transient circumstances. It has been fostered by the objective conditions in the development of the workingclass movement under capitalism, especially under imperialism, and by the activities of various political and class forces.
The non-homogeneous composition of the working class and the presence in it of representatives of different trades and varying skills, different nationalities and races, religious convictions and beliefs, different origins, and the like, are some of the objective causes of the split in the workers' ranks.
The appearance of various trends and currents among the workers has been promoted by the very growth of the workingclass movement, the involvement of new groups of workers in the class struggle, and the enrolment of fresh groups of working people into the working-class parties and the trade unions. These newcomers to the working-class movement, people who have not gone through the school of the class struggle, are prone to yield to the bourgeois and pettybourgeois ideas and concepts inherent in politically immature workers. When they join the class struggle and become members of working-class parties, such workers bring with them their old prejudices and errors, and thus exert some influence on the working-class movement as a whole.
The split in the working class is the result of the influence, the ideology and the policies of the petty bourgeoisie. Vast numbers of petty proprietors, peasants in the first place, are being ruined in the capitalist countries; they join the ranks of the working class, bringing with them their petty-- bourgeois and opportunist views. Besides, petty-bourgeois influences penetrate into the ranks of the workers also because the working class is surrounded by a mass of petty proprietors.
Together with the ruin of petty proprietors in the capitalist countries, there also takes place the emergence of new sections of such small proprietors (owners of small shops, cafes, repair shops and filling stations). This possibility of "making good" and achieving ``independence'' by becoming their "own masters" is exerting a corrupting influence on a certain part of the working class, and encouraging the spread of petty-- proprietor strivings and ideals among them.
190Last, the serious problem presented to the working-class movement in the USA and some other countries by the relations between while and non-white workers, especially between whites and blacks, is common knowledge. In a number of countries, such as India, Pakistan and Ireland, profound differences among working men have arisen on religious grounds. In many countries where Islam or Roman Catholicism is powerful (in the Middle East and in Latin America) there exist acute problems of the relations between believers and non-believers, and also national contradictions in certain areas. The relations between local and immigrant workers present a serious problem in many countries of developed capitalism. To this one can add the tribal distinctions in a number of African states.
It goes without saying that these and other objective causes could not of themselves have brought about a deep and lasting split in the working class, were it not for those forces in bourgeois society that would make use of these objective conditions so as to preserve the split and use it in the struggle against working-class unity.
The bourgeoisie, monopoly capital is the main foe to working-class unity. The bourgeoisie are well aware of the danger that working-class unity presents, which is why they are doing all they can to prevent the workers from uniting. The bourgeoisie's strategy towards the working class consists in contraposing one section of the workers to another, so as to evoke conflict and rivalry among the various trends and parties within the working class itself, and, in the first place, between Communists and socialists.
Special privileges for part of the workers (higher pay and better working and living conditions than for the bulk of the workers) are one of the main methods used by the bourgeoisie to create a split in the working class. What the bourgeoisie want is for such privileged groups to be isolated from the rest of the workers, be reconciled to the existing system, and eschew the revolutionary struggle.
This practice is widely employed by the leading monopolies in the capitalist world, not only in the highly developed capitalist countries but also in the economically less developed countries, at factories owned by such monopolies. Examples are certain machine-building, oil and other 191 enterprises in Latin America, the oillields of the Arab East, and certain factories recently erected in Asia and Africa. This method of struggle is also used by the big monopolies belonging to local capital, for example, in India and in a number of Latin American countries.
Great efforts are also made by the bourgeoisie so as to make use---with the aim of encouraging the split in the workingclass movement---of the so-called labour bureaucracy, i.e., the leaders and functionaries of the Social-Democratic parties and reformist trade unions, and workers' representatives in local and central government. By granting such " workingclass functionaries" ``cushy'' jobs, higher pay and other privileges, the bourgeoisie endeavour to use them as their agents in the ranks of the working class.
The bourgeoisie extensively employ concessions, sops and reforms to split the working-class movement, bring confusion into its ranks, and foster an internal struggle therein. "In the conditions of the confrontation with socialism'', Leonid Brezhnev emphasised in the Report of the CPSU's Central Committee to the Party's 24th Congress, "the ruling circles of the capitalist countries are afraid more than they have ever been of the class struggle developing into a massive revolutionary movement. Hence, the bourgeoisie's striving to use more camouflaged forms of exploitation and oppression of the working people, and its readiness now and again to agree to partial reforms in order to keep the masses under its ideological and political control as far as possible.''^^*^^
Propaganda of the capitalist way of life holds an important place in the bourgeoisie's policy of splitting the workingclass movement. The bourgeoisie's ideologists stop short of nothing to conceal from the workers the vices of capitalist society, which they try to present in the most attractive light, as a society of "universal welfare'', liberty, democracy, and the like. Extensive use is being made of certain new aspects in the development of capitalism as a result of the scientific and technological revolution.
Anti-communism is a most important weapon in fostering the split in the working-class movement. The bourgeoisie use the mass media (radio, television, films, newspapers _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 20.
192 and magazines) to denigrate the Communists, their ideology and policies. By distorting the actual history of socialist revolutions and of socialist construction in the Soviet Union and the fraternal socialist countries, the bourgeois ideologists are trying to frighten the working people with the difficulties in a revolution, the horrors of civil war, economic dislocation, and the impoverishment, hunger and distress of the masses, which, they claim, are inevitable consequences of a " communist revolution''.It should be remembered that, under the influence of anticommunist propaganda, many rank-and-file industrial and clerical workers look upon Communists with suspicion and sometimes even with hostility, evincing a non-desire to co-operate with them, this raising serious obstacles towards working-class unity.
Petty-bourgeois parties exert a tangible influence on the working class in a number of countries, especially in those with a medium or low level of industrial development, where the petty bourgeoisie comprise the bulk of the population, and petty-bourgeois parties play an important part in political life.
Particularly difficult conditions sometimes develop for the working class and its organisations in countries where the petty bourgeoisie are in office and often use their state power to slow down the development of the revolutionary working-class movement, hamper the establishment and activities of Communist Parties and independent trade unions, and impose their own ideological and political concepts on the working class, at the same time borrowing from the monopoly bourgeoisie of the developed capitalist countries certain methods of struggle against the workers' revolutionary organisations and their unity.
A split in the working class is created, not only by the policies of the big and petty bourgeoisie but also by the activities of the opponents of working-class unity within the ranks of the working class itself---by the activities of the Rightand ``Left''-wing opportunists. In the ranks of the working class, it is the Right-wing leaders of the Social-Democratic parties and the reformist trade unions that are the main enemies of working-class unity. In word, these people acknowledge that a split in the working class is a great evil, which 193 hampers the workers' struggle, but they present matters in such a way as to place the blame on the Communists, not on the bourgeoisie and the opportunists. The Right-wing socialists assert that the Communists have not only split the workingclass movement but are constantly acting against its unity, the Communist Parties' calls for unity being, not a line of principle but a tactical manoeuvre.
In their endeavours to justify their refusal to work together with the Communists, the Right-wing leaders of the Social-Democratic parties declare that the socialists and the Communists have nothing in common, which is why the former flatly reject "the idea of establishing any united front and any other form of political co-operation" with the Communist Parties. That was what the leaders of the Socialist International stated in a special resolution "Socialism and Communism"^^*^^ which was adopted in 1956 in reply to an appeal from the CPSU's Twentieth Congress. The same stand was confirmed in the Socialist International's programme document of 1962^^**^^ and in a decision of its Eleventh Congress in 1969^^***^^.
Aware that such explanations were ever less convincing to the proletariat, with its growing class consciousness, the leaders of the Socialist International advanced a number of new arguments, this at their latest Congress at Eastbourne, England, in 1969, in defence of their anti-communist positions. Thus, they claimed that the Communists were intolerant of those who did not agree with them and that the Communist Parties' striving to achieve unity of action with the SocialDemocrats was ultimately aimed at winning hegemony for the Communist Party, and at a single-party government. They went on to claim that it was the aim of the people's front of the communist type to utilise participation of the democratic forces so as to destroy them as independent organisations, and that the Communist Parties enjoin all their members to be active in the trade unions and other democratic organisations, not to help achieve the aims of the latter _-_-_
^^*^^ Yearbook of the International Socialist Labour Movement, Vol. II, London, 1960, p. 29.
^^**^^ Socialist International Information, Vol. 12, 1962, Nos. 24--25.
^^***^^ Ibid., Vol. XIX, 1969, Nos. 147--148.
__PRINTERS_P_193_COMMENT__ 13--0873 194 but to subordinate them to accomplishment of communist tasks.Thus, the Right-wing socialists' anti-communism and their outright rejection of co-operation with the Communists is the main obstacle to working-class unity today.
The ``Left''-wing doctrinaires and sectarians (the Trotskyites, the Maoists and their ilk), as well as the sectarian elements in some Communist Parties, are also greatly hindering the achievements of worker unity. Though from other initial positions, they are in fact reiterating some of the theses the Right-wing socialists utilise against unity, asserting that there can be no co-operation between revolutionaries and the Social-Democrats, and that a constant unflagging and uncompromisingly decisive struggle is the only correct policy as regards the Social-Democratic parties and their members.
The struggle waged by V. I. Lenin against the leaders of the Second International, who had betrayed the cause of the proletarian revolution, and his calls for a break with the ``social-chauvinists'' and the establishment of new revolutionary parties of the working class are presented in such a way as to show that Lenin was opposed, in principle, to collaboration between the Communists and the Social-Democratic parties and the reformist trade unions.
Like the Right-wing socialists, the ``Left''-wing sectarians ignore Lenin's calls and those of the Communist International for working-class unity, and ascribe to Lenin's ideas on a united working-class front the character of a tactical step necessitated by specific and temporary circumstances, and not as a vital principle in the Communists' policies.
Finally, it should be noted that, as Communists themselves self-critically acknowledge, extra difficulties in achieving working-class unity have stemmed from errors made by the Communist Parties themselves, which have not always been able to find the correct roads and forms of struggle for the achievement of that unity, and to correctly determine their own line towards other working-class parties.
Thus, an analysis of the state of affairs in the capitalist countries shows that the causes of the split in the working class are deep and numerous, which is why the split has not yet been healed, despite years of efforts by the Communists 195 In their struggle for unity, the Communist Parties have made a profound and all-round study of these causes and are evolving their strategy and tactics, with due account of all the difficulties and unfavourable factors.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Factors Favouring Workers' UnityIt would be wrong to assume from the above that the split in the working-class movement in the capitalist countries is inescapable and irremediable. The Communists hold that, alongside of factors that hamper workers' unity, there exist major factors promoting the achievements of that aim. These factors stem from the objective trends in capitalism's development: the contradictions within the capitalist economy; the class struggle; the crisis in the bourgeoisie's home and foreign policies, and the heightened activities of the revolutionary and democratic forces.
The workers' unity is, in the main, based on their comprising a single class---a class of hired working men and women who own no means of production. Workers of all grades--- skilled and unskilled, with high pay or low---are exploited by the capitalists and therefore, despite the considerable differences in their material conditions and their views, are objectively interested in unity, so that their joint efforts should weaken and ultimately abolish exploitation. No matter how the bourgeoisie may manoeuvre or resort to all kinds of methods to cover up their exploitation of the workers, they will never be able to eliminate the main contradiction in capitalist society---that between labour and capital.
Today the need for joint action by the workers in defence of their interests and against the unfavourable consequences of the scientific and technological revolution is the main factor that calls for unity. Far from removing the basic vices of capitalism and the contradictions between labour and capital, the scientific and technological revolution is resulting in an exacerbation of those contradictions, and gives rise to new phenomena that are exerting a ruinous effect on the various sections of the working class. One of these consequences is the deterioration of the employment situation--- the growing number of unemployed, particularly among the youth and the old.
__PRINTERS_P_195_COMMENT__ 13* 196At present, the economies of the main capitalist countries are experiencing ever new difficulties, as is borne out by the slower rates of production growth, the growing acuteness of the currency and financial crisis, the greater number of workless, and the mounting competition between the monopolies both within the individual countries and on the world scene. The bourgeoisie are seeking solutions of these problems at the expense of the working people, the workers in the first place: wages are coming under attack, labour is becoming intensified, and a struggle is being waged to do away with the social gains the workers have been able to win from the bourgeoisie in recent years. These ends are being achieved through the institution of the so-called "incomes policy'', the passing of anti-strike laws, and the monopolies' offensive against the trade unions. All this has intensified the struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, and calls for unity and cohesion on the part of the workers.
In their struggle against the working-class movement, the bourgeoisie resort, not only to concessions and reforms but also to direct coercion. Even in the so-called democratic countries, they are trying to restrict the rights of the people, the trade unions and the working-class parties, as well as the privileges of parliaments and local government; the functions of executive state bodies are being expanded and authoritarian regimes are being established. In a number of countries, the reactionaries have resorted to coups d'etat and fascist regimes. It goes without saying that such antidemocratic trends in the ruling classes' policies present a grave threat to all workers, and call for the workers' unity in defence of their interests.
Unity is just as essential in countries such as Portugal, Spain, Haiti, Guatemala and Paraguay, where many years of reactionary regimes have deprived the workers of all democratic rights and freedoms.
A grave threat to the working class in the capitalist countries is presented by the growth of reactionary neo-fascist trends and organisations, which are supported by big capital and the monopolies. Especially noteworthy are the activities of the so-called National-Democratic Party and other revenge-seeking organisations in the FRG, the certain successes achieved by the nationalist Right-wing organisations 197 in Belgium, and the activisation of neo-fascist organisations in Italy and elsewhere. The workers must not forget the lessons of the past: reactionary fascist regimes achieved successes wherever the working-class forces were split.
It is especially noteworthy that unity in the workingclass movement is necessitated, not only by the need to defend the workers' gains against the reactionary forces, not only by the need for defence, but also for offensive action by the working class, and the winning of new positions in the economic, political and social spheres.
Dissatisfaction with reforms carried out in the post-war years has been mounting of late in many capitalist countries. Many workers were taken in by such reforms, which, giving ear to bourgeois propaganda, they considered the onset of a new era in the development of capitalism---that of the establishment of the Welfare State. At present, more and more workers are coming to understand that such reforms have not lived up to their expectations, and disappointment with the policies of bourgeois reformism is growing.
Also increasing is a desire to bring about more radical reforms in social legislation, since many reforms of the past no longer live up to the workers' new needs, their way of life, and their working conditions as brought about by the scientific and technological revolution and the changes in the structure of the working class. High on their agenda are demands, not only for more pay, but for democratic planning, democratic reforms in education, public health, social security and the like.
Apart from the need to defend and extend political democracy, importance also attaches to the demand for economic democracy, i.e., restriction of the rights of factory management and more rights for the trade unions, and working people's participation`in'the running of the economy both at factory and national levels. The struggle for such reforms is creating fresh opportunities to bring closer together the positions of various sections of the workers, and for unity of action by them.
The aggressive policies of the imperialist partners in various aggressive blocs are another cause of concern among workers of all political affiliations. It is common knowledge that, in preparing and carrying out their acts of aggression, 198 the imperialists take cover behind false assertions about the "Soviet threat'', the "communist danger'', "Red imperialism'', and the like. Under the influence of bourgeois propaganda, many ordinary people in the capitalist countries, including workers, have failed to see the real essence of the imperialist policies.
Considerable changes have begun to take place in this field in recent years: the workers of the capitalist countries are beginning to realise that no threat exists from the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries to the freedom of the peoples and to world peace. Anti-Soviet and anti-communist propaganda is becoming ever less effective, for it is being disproved by the actual facts of the foreign policy conducted by the USSR and the other socialist countries.
The peace programme formulated by the CPSU's TwentyFourth Congress has exerted a particularly telling influence on the toiling masses in the capitalist countries. This new peace initiative is dispelling the myth of "Soviet imperialism'', and is creating more favourable conditions for the elimination of anti-communist prejudices among the worker rank-and-file, and in the membership of the Social-- Democratic parties and the reformist trade unions.
On the other hand, ever new facts are emerging, proving the criminal and aggressive nature of the imperialist policies, so that all can see the source of the mortal threat confronting all mankind. Fresh light on the aggressive policies of the imperialists has been shed by the secret Pentagon documents published by some US newspapers in June 1971. These have shown the world the bare-faced deception practised on the peoples by the US imperialists who, under false slogans of the defence of "liberty and democracy'', prepared for their gangster war in Indochina.
__b_b_b__These fresh disclosures of imperialist policies will no doubt help the workers also realise that there still exists the threat of a new war, whose horrors can be averted only by action of all the peace-loving forces, first and foremost by united working-class action.
The arms race and the militarisation of the economy as carried out by the ruling circles in the imperialist countries 199 are a dire threat to the interests of the workers. These policies are leading to a mounting threat of a new world conflagration, and place on the working people a grievous burden of war expenditures, thus worsening their material conditions; they bring about a senseless waste of vast material and spiritual resources so essential to meet the needs of the working people.
It goes without saying that the workers holding the most varying political and religious convictions (Communists and socialists, believers and non-believers) are equally interested in an end to the arms race and the militarisation of the economy, which are threatening, not only their immediate interests but their very lives.
The struggle for national independence, and against the imperialist powers, influence on the policies of the developing countries, and against the harsh grip of foreign capital and the policies of neo-colonialism provide an important foundation for unity of workers of all trends. The penetration of US as well as of FRG, British, French and Japanese capital into the economies of other states results in the brutal exploitation of the natural resources and the working people of those countries and also creates a real threat to their national independence. It is the duty of the workers as the most classconscious and revolutionary class in the capitalist countries to head the national-liberation struggle. However, that function of vanguard of the anti-imperialist forces can be performed by the workers only if they are united.
These tasks are of particular urgency in the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, where the struggle against imperialism and neo-colonialism is one of the main objectives of the entire democratic and working-class movement. These problems are also of major importance in a number of countries of advanced capitalism, as can be seen from the struggle waged by the Japanese working class for the liberation of Okinawa, the annulment of the US-Japanese " security pact'', and the dismantling of US military bases, including those equipped with nuclear weapons, on Japanese territory. Problems of the struggle against domination by US capital and against US bases and the presence of US forces on their territories also confront the workers of Britain, Italy, Belgium, Iceland, and other countries.
200 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1973/WCM485/20080513/299.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2008.05.14) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ top __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [*]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+Of vast importance in the struggle for working-class unity are the successes scored by the socialist countries in developing their economies and culture, raising the working people's living standards, and advancing socialist democracy. These successes are disproving the lies spread by bourgeois propaganda about the socialist countries and the Communist Parties'ideology and policies; they are enhancing the prestige of the Communists and the trust placed in them by the workers, and are helping eliminate anti-communist views and ideas among the working people.
The present stage in the development of world capitalism and the world working-class movement is marked by the latter building up its forces and going through a number of stages in the general democratic struggle against the monopolies and imperialism, in the course of which favourable conditions are emerging for the socialist revolution and the formation of that revolution's political army. That is why the Communist Parties' programmes lay such stress on demands of a general-democratic nature, which are close to similar demands presented by other working-class parties and organisations. This is creating more favourable conditions for the unification of different sections of the working class.
Such are some of the objective features in the development of the capitalist countries and the working-class movement, which are promoting working-class unity.
However, as shown by the experience of the world working-class movement, objective conditions for the achievement of workers' unity are of themselves insufficient to close the split in the working-class movement. For that to be achieved, purposeful activities are needed of those forces in the working class which are working for united action.
The world communist movement is the chief and most consistent fighter for the workers' unity. To the strategy of the world bourgeoisie, which is aimed at splitting the working-class movement and preserving and exacerbating hostility between its various sections, the Communists contrapose their own strategy---that of a struggle for workingclass unity, the elimination of enmity and rivalry among its various parties and organisations, and the achievement of firm co-operation of all its sections, in the struggle for 201 both the immediate and ultimate aims of the working-class movement.
The Communists' struggle for working-class unity is no temporary or transient campaign connected with today's alignment of political and class forces or with the current tasks confronting the \vorking-class movement. Throughout the existence of the Communist Parties and in various historical conditions, and in all the ups and downs of the revolutionary movement, the Communists have always been guided by this strategical principle in determining their tasks and their policies.
The basic principles of the communist struggle for working-class unity were laid down by V. I. Lenin, who launched the practical struggle for the achievement of that aim by advancing the idea of a united workers' front. To help the masses of proletarians in their struggle against capitalism, Lenin wrote, "We adopted united front tactics ... and we shall pursue these tactics to the end.''^^*^^
These principles were further developed in the decisions of the Communist International. Thus, the theses "On a United Workers Front'', which the Comintern's Executive Committee adopted in December 1921, emphasised that the united-front policy would be operative throughout the entire transitional period, right up to the triumph of the socialist revolution.
True, after Lenin's death, his ideas on the need for co-- operation between Communists and other working-class parties were distorted by sectarian elements in some of the Communist Parties and in the Comintern. However, these sectarian errors were roundly condemned by the Comintern's Seventh Congress in 1935, which fully restored and further developed Lenin's views on working-class unity. Since then the communist movement has unswervingly followed this policy.
The communist line towards working-class unity was clearly formulated in the decisions adopted by the International Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1957, 1960 and 1969.
``In the new situation,'' says the concluding Document of the 1969 Meeting, "the need for working-class unity has _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 33, p. 334,
202 become even more urgent.''^^*^^ The struggle for working-class unity is also being constantly brought into the foreground by individual Communist Parties.It is the bourgeoisie and the reactionaries, Communists emphasise, who are the main enemies of the working class and its unity, which is why the Communist Parties are dealing their blows, first and foremost, against the bourgeoisie and other reactionary forces. They are also waging a determined struggle against the enemies of working-class unity in the ranks of that class itself; they are unmasking the hollow arguments that the Right- and the ``Left''-wing opportunists employ against co-operation between the various workers' parties and organisations, coming out against disbelief in the possibility of unity, and revealing the erroneousness and the detriment to the working-class movement caused by their stand. Constant and insistent efforts by the Communist Parties to achieve unity is a most important factor helping the workers unite in a single class force.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. CO-OPERATION BETWEEN COMMUNISTSIn striving for working-class unity, Communists focus their attention on unity of action by the Communist and Social-Democratic parties as the main political forces of the international working class, on whose co-operation the further struggle for a united working-class front depends first and foremost. This idea was re-emphasised at the 1969 Meeting, whose concluding Document said, "Communists, who attribute decisive importance to working-class unity, are in favour of co-operation with the Socialists and SocialDemocrats to establish an advanced democratic regime today and to build a socialist society in the future. They will do everything they can to carry out this co-- operation.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 24.
^^**^^ Ibid.
203The Communist Parties' policies take into account that at present the Social-Democrats are a major force in the ranks of the workers' and democratic movement in the capitalist countries. Today there exist about 60 socialist and SocialDemocratic parties throughout the world, the overwhelming majority of which (42 parties) belong to the Socialist International, which was founded in 1951 at their congress in Frankfort-on-the-Main. The total membership is 15,400,000 and they command a voting force of 77,600,000 at elections. In many advanced capitalist countries, the bulk of the working class and considerable sections of other working people ( clerical workers, intellectuals and petty-bourgeois elements) follow the Social-Democratic parties' lead.
West Europe is the stronghold of the Social-Democrats. In most countries in this region, with the exception of Italy, France and Spain, the Socialist Party membership greatly exceeds that of the Communist Parties, the respective figures being 9,500,000 and 2,500,000. In the mid-sixties, about 36 per cent of all votes cast were for the Social-Democrats, with a little over eight per cent going to the Communists. Of the 40 million trade-union members in West Europe, about 30 million belong to trade unions that are under socialist influence.
Despite individual setbacks, the weakening of some of the socialist parties and a decline in their membership, the Social-Democratic movement as a whole still plays a considerable political role in the life of the respective countries. However, most of their parties hold an opportunist stand, that of anti-communism and collaboration with the bourgeoisie.
After World War II, during which Communists and socialists co-operated in the struggle against fascism, there took place a further shift to the right in the ideology and policies of the Social-Democrats. In the programme documents adopted by the Socialist International and the Social-- Democratic parties in the fifties and the sixties, the leaders of Social-Democracy rejected the scientific principles of the class struggle and the need to abolish capitalist private property, as well as a number of other important demands of the working-class movement, which had still been registered in their previous documents.
204The Right-wing socialists are constantly slandering the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries. Blinded by their anti-communism, they deny the socialist character of such countries, whose system they describe as a variety of state capitalism, where, they claim, the same vices exist that are inherent in capitalist states.
The Communist Parties are also targets of furious attacks by the leaders of Social-Democracy, who attempt to present the former as organisations that are inimical to the interests of the nation and "serve the interests of the Soviet Union''.
The Communist Parties are fully aware of the harm caused to the workers by the Social-Democratic parties' anti-- communism and their policy of class collaboration. Nevertheless they hold that, in any appraisal of present-day SocialDemocracy, due account should be taken of the complexity and contradictoriness of their ideology and policies and of the part they play in the capitalist countries.
Of course, many Social-Democratic leaders publicly voice bourgeois views and ideas and come out against the revolutionary working-class movement, their policy of class collaboration objectively helping the bourgeoisie to maintain their domination. However, the Social-Democratic parties are made up not only of leaders but also of many thousands of rank-and-file members, rank-and-file factory and office workers. Though they support many of the reformist views held by their leaders, they are dissatisfied with their own condition in society and want it changed. These masses obviously stand in contradiction with the bourgeoisie, with capitalism, since they can get their immediate demands met and achieve a radical change in their social position only through a struggle against the bourgeoisie and the entire capitalist system. It is not service to the bourgeoisie and defence of the existing system, but a struggle against the bourgeoisie and defence of the workers' interests that forms the main content of the strivings of millions of rank-and-file members and many functionaries of the Social-Democratic parties. That is why Communists think that it would be mistaken to take account only of the Right leaders' stand, and to ignore the stand taken by the rank-and-file membership of the Social-Democratic parties.
205Communists also realise that though the Social-- Democratic leaders have never and nowhere done away with capitalism (whose existence, moreover, they have even helped to preserve), that does not mean that they have done nothing for the working people or for satisfaction of their demands. Some reforms, sometimes important to the workers, have been achieved by the Social-Democratic parties and governments in such countries as Britain, Sweden, Norway, and Austria.
While noting the Right-wing trends in the Social-- Democratic ideology and policies, Communists cannot agree with the assertion that the present-day Social-Democratic line and programmes contain nothing socialist, let alone democratic: that is not true, since even today the positions of the Social-Democratic parties contain not only democratic features but also some that are socialist.
Thus, the Communist Parties take account not only of the negative features in the ideology and policies of the SocialDemocratic parties, but also the positive. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of Social-Democracy, the Communist Parties define the Social-Democratic parties as working-class parties that adhere to opportunist and reformist positions, and the Social-Democrats of today as the opportunist wing of the working-class movement.
In their characteristic of the Social-Democratic parties, Communists stress the profound contradictions in the latter's ideology and policies, in the first place, the contradictions between the labour aristocracy and the petty-bourgeois intellectuals in those parties on the one hand, and the rank-- andfile factory and office workers on the other, and, in the second place, the contradictions between the socialist parties' positions, in which bourgeois views find reflection, and those positions in which the workers' demands are expressed.
The contradictions in the positions of the Social-Democrats stem from the petty-bourgeois nature of the Social-- Democratic ideology and policies, the eclectic and inconsistent stand taken by the leadership, and also from the politically underdeveloped sections of the working class and those workers who have been placed in a privileged position as compared with the mass of the working people. These sections of bourgeois society would like to see a change in the existing 206 systern, since they suffer exploitation by big capital and the monopolies, yet they fear the proletarian revolution. Many of them feel quite comfortable in bourgeois society and are therefore afraid of revolutionary changes in the entire system. Hence their opportunism, and their dream of a change in the bourgeois world, but without revolutionary upheavals.
Since the ideology and the policies of the Social-- Democratic parties are petty-bourgeois in essence, and inasmuch as these reflect, not only bourgeois ideas but also views held by workers, the Communist Parties consider it possible and necessary to pose the question of co-operation with the Social-Democrats.
The Communist Parties hold that, despite the deep differences of principle between Communists and socialists, they share many common points of view and common interests which could serve as a basis for collaboration. Thus, at the 1969 Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, many speakers emphasised that Communists and socialists could take joint action to get the immediate demands of the workers met and to achieve the solution of such problems as higher pay, less labour intensification and better working conditions; they had common interests in the struggle against the monopolies' attempts to strip the workers of their gains of the previous years and in defending and extending the workers' democratic rights and liberties, the rights of the working-class parties and the trade unions; unity between Communists and socialists was possible in a struggle against the activities of reactionary regimes and the activisation of neofascist forces; they could act together in defence of the national interests and independence, and against the onslaught of foreign capital, the imperialists and neo-fascists; they were equally interested in the preservation of peace and the consolidation of world security.
When they speak of their common interests with the socialists, Communists do not lose sight of the ideological differences between them. However, the Communist Parties hold the view that ideological differences should not become insurmountable obstacles to a joint struggle for the vital interests of the working class, and for the solution of the urgent problems of democratic development.
207In working for unity of action with the Social-- Democratic parties, Communists do not limit such co-operation to the framework of the workers' immediate demands and their struggle for democratic aims of a general nature. Such unity, Communists consider, can and should be preserved during the workers' struggle to win political power, overthrow the bourgeoisie, and set about building a socialist society.
Of course, it does not hence follow that conditions already exist in all the capitalist countries for practical co-operation between Communists and socialists. Such unity of action calls for radical changes in the Social-Democrats' stand. In the first place, as was emphasised by the 1969 Meeting, "It is, of course, necessary for the Socialist parties and other political organisations favouring socialism resolutely to break with the policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie and to pursue a policy of effective struggle for peace, democracy and socialism.''^^*^^ In the second place, the SocialDemocratic parties should renounce their anti-communism.
To the question of whether such changes in the SocialDemocrats' stand is possible or whether effective co-operation is possible between socialists and Communists, the latter reply in the affirmative, although they realise that rapid changes in the stand held by the Right-wing socialists are not foreseeable.
What do the Communist Parties base their stand on?
In the first place, on co-operation between Communists and socialists being not only a subject for theoretical discussion but also a matter of the practical experience gained by many parties, both at present and in the past. That experience goes to show that the Communists' consistent and purposeful struggle, the development of the class struggle, and the changes in the political and economic situation have on more than one occasion forced the Social-Democratic leaders to change their stands and join the Communists in a joint struggle. Such co-operation was effected on a particularly wide scale in the Resistance movement during World War II, and was continued in the first post-war years, bringing the workers major gains, which are still of value to them.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parlies, Moscow 1969, p. 25.
208The experience of the world working-class movement has borne out the viability and the correctness of the Communists' policies in the struggle for unity. Despite all efforts by the bourgeoisie and the resistance put up by Right-wing socialists and Leftist elements, the Communists have achieved fruitful co-operation with the socialists in a number of countries in recent years.
Thus, in Chile, considerable and useful experience has been accumulated by Communists and socialists, whose militant alliance has provided the foundation for the bloc of Popular Unity, which won so resounding a victory in the 1970 Presidential elections, leading up to the election of Salvador Allende, leader of the Socialist Party, as President and the formation of a government containing both socialists and Communists. Profound economic reforms have been launched, and measures are being taken to improve the conditions of the working people. Unity of action by Communists and socialists has given Chile the prospect of peaceful development along the road to socialism.
Despite the efforts of the Right-wing socialists, Communists and socialists are ever more working together in Italy. Thanks to their joint struggle, the Italian workers have been able, on a number of occasions, to stage nation-wide action which has given them considerable gains. In the elections held in the summer of 1970 in three regions of the country (Emilia, Tuscany and Umbria), as well as in a number of cities (Bologna, Ferrara, Reggio-del-Emilia, Grosseto, Rimini and Forli, etc.) local government bodies were elected, headed by representatives of the Left: Communists, socialists and members of the Socialist Party of Proletarian Unity.
Experience in united action by Communists and socialists has also been gained in such countries as France, Japan, and India.
Communists are working for close unity of action to be achieved by working-class parties in all the capitalist countries; in their opinion, that can well be brought about. The development of world capitalism and of the class struggle, on the one hand, and, on the other, the successes scored by world socialism---all these will exert an important influence on the Social-Democratic parties, foster differentiation between the membership and the leadership in such parties, 209 and also promote the struggle between the Right-wing Social-Democratic leaders and the rank-and-filers.
The shift to the Right in the policies of certain SocialDemocratic parties has exacerbated the struggle between various forces within those parties and organisations which give them support. A manifestation of that struggle has been the conflict between the official line followed by the SocialDemocratic parties and the trade unions, particularly in the FRG, where differences have come to the fore between the SDPG leadership and the Deutsche Gewerkschaftsbund (DGB) on such important matters as greater rights for the trade unions in running the economy, the emergency laws, and the like. No less acute has been the conflict between the Labour Party leadership in Britain, and the leaders of most, of the trade unions.
__b_b_b__The mounting struggle between the Right-wing leadership and the youth organisations of the Social-Democrats has been another significant event in the development of the SocialDemocratic parties. In a number of countries, such as West Germany, Sweden, and France, the socialist youth are critical of the ideology and policies of their parties' official leadership, demanding that the latter should revise their line; they are coming out with a programme of radical reforms. The stand taken by the socialist youth is exerting a significant influence also on the Social-Democratic membership.
As pointed out in the final Document adopted by the 1969 Meeting, "A differentiation is taking place in the ranks of Social-Democracy, and this is also reflected in the leadership. Some of the leaders come out in defence of monopoly capital and imperialism. Others are more inclined to reckon with the demands of the working masses in the economic and social fields, and in the questions of the struggle for peace and progress.''~^^*^^
An ever greater influence on the positions held by the Social-Democrats as a whole will be exerted by the experience of those of their parties which are actively co-operating with _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 24.
__PRINTERS_P_209_COMMENT__ 14---0873 210 the Communists. Characteristic in this respect are the words spoken by Vaine Leskinen, a Finnish Social-Democratic leader, at a session of the Socialist International's Council in Helsinki, in May 1971. "The Social-Democratic Party of Finland,'' he said, "wants broad co-operation among the forces of progress. We have proposed establishing contacts between the Social-Democratic parties and the leading parties of the socialist countries in Eastern Europe and are now repeating that proposal. Would it not be an historical mistake to neglect that possibility at a moment when so obvious a striving towards constructive co-operation is manifesting itself.''^^*^^Finally, the successes scored in the development of the world communist movement, and its consistent struggle for unity are helping to overcome the Right-wing socialists' anti-communism, and bring about unity of action by Communists and the Social-Democratic parties.
The growing might of the world socialist system and the radical changes in the world in favour of socialism are decisively strengthening the positions of the Communist Parties, and increasing their influence on the working-class movement, whose experience shows that the stronger a Communist Party, the more easily it can deal with resistance from the enemies of working-class unity, and induce the representatives of other working-class parties and organisations to follow the road of joint action.
The prospects of co-operation between Communists and Social-Democrats are also favoured by the world communist movement's successes in ironing out contradictions which had such a negative effect on a rapprochement between the Communist and the Social-Democratic parties. The consolidation of unity and cohesion in the world communist movement, a process that revealed itself so forcefully at the 1969 International Meeting in Moscow during the celebrations marking the Lenin Centenary, as well as at the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress and at congresses held by other Communist Parties in 1971, will no doubt strengthen unity of action by the working-class parties.
_-_-_^^*^^ Suomen socialdrniokmalii, 30.5.1971.
211The Communist Parties stand for a constructive approach to problems of unity of the working-class parties, the foundations of which were laid down by the CPSU's Twentieth Congress. Practical action by the Communists of many capitalist countries has demonstrated their sincere adherence to a policy of co-operation with the Socialist Parties and their striving to do everything possible to ensure the success of that policy. The Communists have thereby disproved the inventions of the opponents to working-class unity within the ranks of the Social-Democrats, and are showing the senselessness of the latter's numerous arguments against such unity.
The successes scored by the world system of socialism, the shift in the alignment of world forces, and the consolidation of the world's working-class and communist movement have made it possible for Communists to use a new approach to the solution of major problems of the revolutionary struggle, problems which in the past gave rise to grave differences between Communists and the Social-Democratic Parties. We are referring, first and foremost, to the greater possibilities for the peaceful development of the socialist revolution, without an armed uprising and civil war. The inclusion of this thesis in the programmes of many Communist Parties had created better possibilities for co-operation with the socialists, who recognise only the peaceful forms of struggle and are constantly accusing the Communists for the latter's alleged desire to hurl the peoples into a bloody civil war, chaos and ruination.
The closer approximation of the tasks pursued in the general-democratic and socialist struggle has led to the Communists' strategy and tactics placing more emphasis than in the past on tasks of a general democratic character and to programmes of various reforms and changes. This too has opened up prospects of closer co-operation between the Communist Parties and the Social-Democrats.
Thus, the communist principled line towards unity of action with the socialist parties is based on the actual factors in the development of the world working-class movement and international Social-Democracy.
__PRINTERS_P_211_COMMENT__ 14* 212 __ALPHA_LVL3__ Principles of the Struggle for UnityThe Communist Parties are guided by a number of vital principles in the struggle for working-class unity and for cooperation with the socialist and other parties of the working class. These principles have been evolved on the basis of the experience amassed by the world communist movement, their essence consisting in a striving to implement the Communists' principled line towards unity of action.
In working for co-operation with other working-class parties, Communists do not pursue any particular interests or aims distinct from those of the working class. They see the significance and importance of co-operation, not in undermining other working-class parties and establishing their own hegemony, as the Social-Democratic leaders assert, but in enhancing the might and militancy of the entire working class, strengthening its positions and influence in society, achieving an overall rise in the level of the working-class movement, and promoting the workers' successful struggle, not only for their immediate demands but also for the assumption of power and the construction of socialism.
Communists regard all workers---socialists, ChristianDemocrats and supporters of other parties---as their class brothers, and are doing everything to achieve mutual understanding and co-operation with the latter. That is why Communists have brought into the foreground that which is common to all workers and unites them in the common struggle.
In advancing the task of united action, the Communists are not at present raising the question of a merger of the Communist and Social-Democratic Parties and the creation of united parties of the working class. Of course, the latter, if carried out on Marxist principles, would be a tremendous gain for the working class, but the proper conditions for that do not yet exist. That is why the unity of Communists and socialists is now understood as unity of action by independent political parties of the working class on the basis of a jointly evolved platform.
In this the Communist Parties do not base their policies on the expectation that Social-Democracy will soon collapse; on the contrary, they count on its lengthy existence, not only in the conditions of capitalism but possibly, in certain 213 countries, even after the triumph of the socialist revolution.
Communists consider it their task to work towards the establishment of firm and friendly relations with the SocialDemocrats so as to achieve a change in the policies of the Social-Democratic Parties, and a firm alliance with them.
Systematic work by Communists in the thick of the masses, and winning the masses over to a policy of unity are the chief way to achieve co-operation between Communist and Social-Democratic parties in the struggle for the workingclass cause. It is at grass-root level, as experience has shown, that the anti-communist prejudices can be overcome, which exist among Social-Democratic workers employed at factories where they work side by side and in the same conditions as Communists do and are subjected to the same trials. It is there that the ice of alienation and hostility can best be melted and joint action achieved in the struggle for common demands and aims. If, at shop-floor level, a sweeping movement can be started among the workers for unity of action, that striving will exert an influence on the leaders of the socialist parties, who will be unable, no matter how far they stand from the workers, to constantly ignore the insistent demands of those who make up the parties' and the trade unions' foundations, vote for those leaders at elections, and support their influence in society.
The Communists' struggle to achieve unity of action with the Social-Democratic rank-and-file does not preclude, but, on the contrary, presupposes co-operation with the leaders of the Social-Democratic Parties. As the experience of the world working-class movement has shown, firm, effective and long-term co-operation between Communists and socialists can be ensured only if unity at grass-root level is supplemented and consolidated at the top, that is to say by agreements between the parties, between their central bodies and leaders.
There were times in the past when some Communist Parties considered wrong in principle, and impermissible, any collaboration with the leaders of Social-Democracy, and tried to achieve unity in the working-class movement only by action among the masses, ignoring the leaders, over their heads and against their will. This policy, however, did not justify itself; it did not lead tc a firm alliance of 214 workingclass parties, to unity in the working-class movement. That is why the line towards co-operation at grass-root level cannot be contrasted to co-operation at the top. Both tasks must be accomplished; all successes in the accomplishment of either of these tasks help unite the efforts of Communists and socialists and of the entire working class.
In emphasising this idea at the 1969 Meeting, Max Reimann, First Secretary of the CPG's Central Committee, said, "This does not mean that we, Communists in the Federal Republic, though willing to form a united front with the rank-and-file Social-Democrats, intend to follow a policy of struggle against the top SD leadership. All Communists in the Federal Republic are oriented on seeking a dialogue with the Social-Democrats at all levels.''^^*^^
The road to unity is that of a joint struggle, joint action, to get the workers' concrete demands met. Ideological discussions between socialists and Communists can provide some positive results, but since at present the ideological stand of most of the socialist parties is so far removed from that of the Communists, discussions on such matters cannot promote unity of action; they can only hamper it. A practical joint struggle to achieve concrete aims helps bring various sections of the workers closer together, remove hostility between them, and build up mutual confidence. All this is the foundation of co-operation.
Unity is achieved where Communists advance demands that reflect the workers' vital interests. Whenever Communists are able to correctly assess the situation and the temper of the masses, and correctly formulate the tasks of the joint struggle, no enemies of unity can hamper the workers' struggle for such demands. In these conditions, communistformulated demands are taken up by all the workers, so that even the most rabid anti-Communists have to modify their tactics so as to escape isolation from the masses.
This approach by Communists does not, however, mean that the Communist Parties in general eschew questions of ideology, and come out against ideological discussions. On the contrary, Communists have always given prime _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 178.
215 consideration to questions of ideology and to problems of theory. But, while working for unity of action, Communists consider that, in the first place, agrsement on these questions should not be made a precondition for joint action; in the second place, the content and character of such discussions should help bring out the points of view and the stands held, serve to ascertain what Communists and socialists have in common, and help bring the working-class parties closer together.The most difficult thing in the struggle for co-operation between Communist and socialist parties is to take the first step, eliminate the hostility of many years, and launch joint action. It is obvious that, in the initial stages, Communists will have to show considerable flexibility and be able to find ways towards the joint accomplishment of concrete tasks. In practice, the ``everything-or-nothing'' stand can only hamper joint action and prevent the parties from drawing closer to each other.
For joint action to be successful, united programmes formulating the most important demands must be drawn up, both sides being in duty bound to wage a consistent struggle for their implementation. The elaboration of such programmes is one of the most complex and acute problems of co-- operation between Communists and socialists. A programme of united action is a joint document, it cannot be purely Communist or purely Social-Democratic; it should be the result of compromise, of definite concessions by both sides.
To ensure success in the struggle for working-class unity, achieve the common aims of the working-class movement, and build up its forces and solidarity, Communists are prepared to reach certain compromises with the Social-- Democrats and to make certain concessions to them, if they, the Social-Democrats, also make concessions and are prepared to renounce a number of their demands and positions. To take up a stand of rejection, in principle, of all concessions and compromises means blocking the way to co-operation and united action. Even in the early years of the development of the communist movement, Lenin had words of criticism for such ``principledness''.
However, in approaching such questions, Communists are threatened by another danger---that of opportunist errors, the danger of making concessions that are impermissible 216 in principle, the danger of losing their independence and becoming captives of the Social-Democrats. There cannot be any single reply, one given in advance and suitable for all occasions, to the question of how these dangers are to be avoided, and how the permissibility or impermissibility of certain compromises and concessions can be established. "One must,'' Lenin wrote, "use one's own brains and be able to find one's bearings in each particular instance. It is, in fact, one of the functions of a party organisation and of party leaders worthy of the name, to acquire, through the prolonged, persistent, variegated and comprehensive efforts of all thinking representatives of a given class, the knowledge, experience and---in addition to knowledge and experience---the political flair necessary for the speedy and correct solution of complex political problems.''^^*^^
The struggle for unity will yield results only if a programme for united action goes hand-in-hand with some organisation of that unity, and if agreement on unity of action is backed up by organisational unity. The latter can be effected either within the framework of a working-class front, or within that of a broader popular front. The establishment of such forms of unity, centralised, and especially local---at factories, offices and places of residence---cements unity, making it stronger and more eSective.
These conclusions stem from the experience of the international working-class movement. Thus, in studying the history of the Popular Front in France on the eve of World War II, the French Communists can see that the lack of the Front's representation in the various localities was a weak point in its activities and was a factor in its downfall. On the other hand, it is a source of strength for the present-day Front of Popular Unity in Chile that its organisations have sprung up all over the country, and give support to the democratic government and to the President in effectuating progressive transformations.
Strict fulfilment of their obligations is an important condition for the success of the policy of Communists' and socialists' unity. Only then can trust be built up between these parties, and the sphere of their joint action extend _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, pp. 68--69.
217 and develop. Any attempt, made for the sake of temporary advantages, to swerve from the line agreed on, and to infringe obligations'entered into, can only undermine trust between the parties and hamper accomplishment of the main strategical task---the militant unification of the workingclass movement.However, the Communists' sincere desire to co-operate with the socialists in no way means that the Communist Parties have renounced the ideological struggle against the Right-wing socialists, and their ideology and policies. On the contrary, as was stated with the utmost clarity in numerous speeches at the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, the ideological struggle must and will continue to be important in boosting the Communists' influence on the masses, and a means of exposing the erroneous stand of the Right-wing socialists, which is so detrimental to the working class.
The leaders of the Communist Parties have emphasised that such criticism of the stand taken by the SocialDemocrats, far from running counter to the Communists' struggle for working-class unity and co-operation with the socialist parties, will help overcome anti-communism in the socialist parties and win them over from collaboration with the bourgeoisie and the entire system of state-- monopoly capitalism.
Aarne Saarinen, Chairman of the Communist Party of Finland, said in his address to the Plenum of that Party's Central Committee, in November 1969, "In recent months, we have had several times to criticise political decisions made by the leadership of the Social-Democratic Party. We did so, not because we wanted to achieve some reappraisal or end co-operation. We criticised the SocialDemocratic Party and its leadership, and shall continue to do so, for decisions made by them, which we consider wrong.... We consider that such an attitude is a sincere precondition for the policy of co-operation.''^^*^^
Of course, the ideological struggle waged by Communists, and their criticism of social-reformism can be successful only if these are conducted with the aim of cementing unity _-_-_
^^*^^ Kansan Unttset, 23.9.1969.
218 in the working-class movement, and not of deepening the split in it, and only if conducted on a profoundly scientific foundation, without offensive attacks and personalities, and without sectarian and dogmatic simplification.The task confronting Marxist criticism of the ideology and policies of the Right-wing socialists consists, not only in revealing the theoretical bankruptcy and political harm of the views held by Social-Democrats, or the distinctions between their stand and that of the Communists, but also in establishing what is common in the ideologies and policies of socialists and Communists, and what can bring them closer together and promote their unity of action.
``While it does not renounce any justified criticism of the Right-wing stand of the Social-Democratic Parties,'' said Waldek Rochet, General Secretary of the French Communist Party, at the December 1968 Plenum of the Party's Central Committee, "our Party has consistently come out for a comparison of viewpoints with the Socialist Party, with the aim of bringing socialist working people and communist working people closer together and of jointly evolving the political foundations of our alliance for the construction of a socialist France.''^^*^^
A differentiated approach to the various strata of SocialDemocrats and to different groups and trends in their ranks is a sine qua non for the Communist Parties. Of course, Communists cannot have the same attitude to those socialists who consciously adhere to a stand of anti-communism and class collaboration, or harbour anti-communist views and concepts, as to those who are ready to join the Communists in a struggle for the interests of the working people, and for peace and socialism; in just the same way, Communists cannot adhere to the same stand of joint action in respect of Social-Democrats that hamper united action by the working class.
The CPSU's line towards present-day Social-Democracy was formulated in the CPSU Central Committee's Report to the Party's Twenty-Fourth Congress: "In accordance with _-_-_
^^*^^ Waldeck Rochet, "The Tasks of the French Communists in the Struggle for Democracy and Socialism'', Kommunist No. 18, 1968, p. 96.
219 the line laid down by the 1969 International Meeting, the CPSU is prepared to develop co-operation with the SocialDemocrats both in the struggle for peace and democracy and in the struggle for socialism, without, of course, making any concessions in ideology and revolutionary principles. However, this line of the Communists has been meeting with stubborn resistance from the Right-wing leaders of the Social-Democrats. Our Party has carried on, and will continue to carry on, an implacable struggle against any attitudes that tend to subordinate the working-class movement to the interests of monopoly capital, and to undermine the cause of the working people's struggle for peace, democracy and socialism.''^^*^^Such are the leading principles in the relations between Communist Parties, and Social-Democratic and other working-class parties.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE STRUGGLE FOR UNITY IN THE TRADE-UNIONThe struggle for working-class unity has assumed a significant scale in the trade unions. Its importance stems from the trade unions being the biggest mass non-party organisation of the working class, with a membership embracing workers of the most varying views, on the basis of their joint resistance to capitalist exploitation. Karl Marx pointed out that the future of the trade unions lay in their consciously acting as organising centres of the working class, and setting themselves the lofty aim of that class's full emancipation. "The trade unions,'' Karl Marx wrote, "must convince the world at large that their efforts, far from being narrow and selfish, aim at the emancipation of the downtrodden millions.''^^**^^
The world trade-union movement is a tremendous force today, with an overall membership of 250,000,000 as against _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, Moscow, 1971, p. 28.
^^**^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works, in three volumes, Vol. 2, p. 77.
220 65,000,000 in 1945. Numerous trade unions have become more militant and built up unity of action and co-operation in the struggle to preserve peace, improve the working people's standards of living, and win democratic freedoms and rights for the trade unions.However, insufficient organisation of industrial and office workers in the trade unions, and the fragmentation of the trade-union movement present a serious obstacle to a genuinely militant alliance of the working people in the struggle against imperialism. Less than half of all those gainfully employed in most of the non-socialist countries belong to trade unions, the percentage being only 25 in such countries as France, the USA, and Canada. In many countries, workers employed at one and the same factory belong to various trade unions which are under the influence of different political parties.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Communist PartyCommunists exercise a tremendous positive influence on trade-union activities. Wherever communist influence on the trade unions is stronger, the proletariat's class consciousness is greater, as is its militancy, and tradeunion participation in the political struggle is broader.
The Communist Parties want the trade unions to firmly defend the working people's class interests, and not to backslide into class collaboration with the bourgeoisie. They are working for the closest possible contacts with the trade unions, and are firmly opposed to any underestimation of communist activities in the trade-union ranks. Anti-communist propaganda would make out that Communists ``infiltrate'' the trade unions so as to strip the latter of their independence and subordinate them to communist interests. In reality, however, Communists working in the trade unions are out to have the latter best accomplish the tasks confronting them.
Lenin, as is common knowledge, waged an uncompromising struggle against adherents of the theory of trade-union ``neutrality'', those who would restrict trade-union activities to the economic struggle, and denied the need for close 221 links between the Communist Party and the trade unions. At the same time, Lenin regarded the trade unions as independent organisations of the working people, and as a school for their solidarity and for the defence of their interests. In characterising the resolution of the Stuttgart Congress of the Second International (1907) which was directed againt the theory of trade-union neutrality, he underlined the importance of those propositions in the resolution which said: "Each of the two organisations (the Party and the trade union) has its own sphere, determined by its nature, and within which it must act quite independently.''^^*^^ Without losing sight of the trade unions' independence, Communists at the same time work for closer links between the latter and the Party.
V. I. Lenin called upon Communists not to consider Party leadership of the trade unions as stripping the latter of their independence. He came out against any attempts to turn the unions into branches of the Party, or an appendix to it. At the same time, he saw the trade unions as an organisation linking the workers with the Party, its aims and ideals.
These concepts are still cogent: an over-simplified or dogmatic understanding of the Party's leading role in the trade unions may cause considerable detriment.
Of late many Communist Parties have been laying special stress, in their documents, on the principle of trade-union independence. It may be asked how Communists understand that independence. In the first place, they see it as independence of governments and employers. The governments of many capitalist countries have been curtailing trade-union rights, interfering in their activities, and have denied them the right to advance political demands. When they defend trade-union independence, the Communists do so to protect the unions against the monopolies, which are dominant in the capitalist countries, and against their henchmen; they defend the right of the trade unions to present their demands and to fight for democratic rights for the working people.
Communists regard the trade unions as independent bodies also in respect of political parties, which, however, _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 13, p. 463.
222 does not preclude co-operation between working-class parties and the trade unions for common aims. Any tradeunion member can belong to the Communist Party or to any other party he chooses. Of course, Communists want the most class-conscious workers to join the Communist Party, but any attempt to mechanically convert the tradeunion movement into an appendix to some political party or other can lead to isolation of the trade unions, their divorce from the masses.The fact that many trade unions (the TUG in Britain; the Deutscher Gewerkschfatsbund in the FRG; the Italian General Confederation of Labour; and the Belgian and Scandinavian trade unions) have become more radical of late than the Social-Democratic parties in the struggle against the monopolies and for united action by the working class is a reflection of the trade unions' growing desire for a genuinely independent class policy, and creates real preconditions for the split in the trade-union movement gradually to be closed.
The Communist Parties have long renounced the idea of organising special and "purely communist trade unions'', since practice has shown that such a line isolates the Communists from the trade-union masses. By being active in trade unions, whose membership involves the bulk of the working people, and in working jointly with representatives of other progressive parties to achieve unity of action in the struggle for the economic and political demands of the masses, Communists are ever more spreading the influence they exercise.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ How Influence Is to Be WonThe Communist Parties win influence in the trade unions first and foremost because they consistently defend the working people's interests, advance timely slogans reflecting the pressing needs of the moment and the specific features of the country in question, and expose the manoeuvres practised in the working-class movement by the ruling classes and their agents. Communists win influence in the trade unions by actively participating in all the latter's 223 activities, and by the influence they have on their fellow-members. The Communist Parties consider that all their members should belong to trade unions, a condition that is often registered in Party Rules.
Communists are active in the day-by-day trade-union work, meticulously carry out the requirements of their Rules, and do all they can to have all trade-union work conducted to the utmost in the interests of the working class. While they work in the trade unions in keeping with their communist convictions, they respect views and opinions held by trade-union members of other convictions. By their practical work in the trade unions and their vigorous, consistent and skilful struggle for the workers' vital interests, Communists have won prestige in the trade unions, whose members more and more often elect them to leading posts.
__b_b_b__The Labour Party is predominant in the British trades unions, as is common knowledge, yet Communists have been elected to the leadership in a number of trades-union bodies. The Communist Party is influential in the miners', engineers' and transport workers' unions, as well as in the Amalgamated Society of Woodworkers, the Plumbing Trades Union, and the Amalgamated Society of Painters and Decorators. They hold official posts in the National Union of Teachers, the Clerical and Administrative Workers' Union, the Association of Scientific Workers, and the Union of Post Office Workers. Communists play an important part in the shop stewards' movement at most big factories in Britain.
The Communists defend the democratic principles of trade-union organisation. Only given broad democracy can trade-union demands and decisions be drawn up, with participation of the workers themselves, and their genuine strivings find reflection. Where broad trade-union democracy exists, the reactionary elements are unable to win predominant positions in determining demands and the forms of struggle and in elections of trade-union officials. On the other hand, it is only in conditions of broad democracy that Communists are able to spread their views, hold broad 224 discussions, try to have every trade-unionist correctly understand the tasks confronting trade-union bodies, and criticise erroneous views and action. Where democracy does not exist within the trade unions, the reactionary leaders of employer-organised and state trade unions are in a position to subordinate the latter to the interests of the ruling classes.
In working for a correct correlation of economic and political demands in the struggle, Communists stress the vast importance of the political struggle. They explain to the working people that, in defending the independent line of the working class, the trade unions cannot stand outside politics. If they give up the political struggle, they thereby aid the enemy class to implement its policies. Independence of politics means in fact dependence on the bourgeoisie.
It is common knowledge that in the conditions of today, the working people's economic struggle is interlinked with the political struggle. Never before have the trade unions been so sharply confronted with the question of a struggle against the capitalist state. Experience and the entire course of the class struggle contrapose the trade unions (even those with reformist leadership) to the bourgeois state, which has become merged with the monopolies. In these conditions, neutrality in politics means renouncing in advance the possibility of scoring any notable successes even in the economic struggle, and dooming the workingclass movement to defeat.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Nature of Trade-Union DemandsEach individual Communist Party determines the content, form and methods of its work in the trade unions, and ways of winning influence in the latter in accordance with the concrete conditions and the level of class consciousness and the specific features and traditions of the class struggle and the trade-union movement in the country in question. Communists are working to make trade-union demands a more exact and complete reflection of the conditions in the country and of the working people.
The trade unions are waging a struggle for higher pay, equal wages for equal work, better social security, and 225 trade-union rights, and against unemployment. Such demands can be understood by all sections of the working class. However, various areas in the world, or groups of countries, are marked by specific features, both in tradeunion demands, and in the forms and methods of the tradeunion movement.
Curbing the unbridled power of the monopolies is a major long-term task of trade-union activities in the capitalist countries. It is in this light that Communists see the new and growing role of the trade unions, whose social and economic struggle is emerging from the traditional framework, reaching the level of the nation-wide interests of the working people, and growing into a struggle for the accomplishment of the major political tasks in the development of society. The trade unions are working for implementation of a policy of reforms evolved with the participation of the masses of working people (in the economy, social security, public health and education, housing construction, and the like), for extension of their rights, and for the establishment of democratic (worker) control in the principal questions of production and distribution in society, at all levels ( factory, and corporation; industry, and leading economic bodies on a nation-wide scale). Also designed to curtail the power of the monopolies is the demand for the nationalisation of key industries and the establishment of democratic control over them.
Communist initiative has led to a struggle developing in a number of countries for the right to sign collective agreements at every factory, providing for the regulation of all aspects of labour relations, such as the hiring and dismissal of workers, pay rates, forms of improving skills, bonuses and the like. These demands are intended to ensure trade-union influence on the factory's economic activities and to deprive the employers of an important instrument of disuniting the workers and imposing their will on them.
The trade unions are organising the working people for a struggle to preclude any detriment to the working people as a result of the scientific and technological revolution, and for new investments, technological improvements, renewal of plant, and higher employment to serve the interests of the working people and raise their living __PRINTERS_P_225_COMMENT__ 15---0873 226 slandards. Communists in the advanced capitalist countries are working to get the trade unions evolve concrete alternatives to the economic policy of the monopolies, especially in connection with the "incomes policy" conducted by the bourgeoisie. With help from scientists who adhere to the working-class stand, they can draw up, in contrast with the bourgeoisie's measures, an alternative programme in the interests of the working people and against the monopolies' drive for higher profits.
The changes in the policies pursued by many western trade unions, and the radicalisation of their programmes have, in their turn, brought about modifications in the anti-worker strategy pursued by the employers, who are resorting to all and any means to play down the role of the trade unions, declare unlawful strike action, as well as other means of exerting pressure on the employers. Attempts are also made to turn the trade unions into semi-state bodies and to get them included in the social and economic machinery of the ruling class. All this calls for particular vigilance and greater activity on the part of the trade unions in the struggle against monopoly omnipotence.
In reply to the monopolies' offensive, the trade unions have been organising the working people to foil bourgeois attempts to fetter the trade-union movement. In December 1970, the British working class retorted to the government's anti-union bill with strikes of a scale unparalleled since the 1926 General Strike, and with mass demonstrations that were the biggest since the Chartist movement. In the appraisal of the Communist Party, the class confrontation in Great Britain has led to an obvious shift to the Left in the trade-union and working-class movement. The upsurge of the working-class struggle, the emergence of a Left-wing trend in the United States trade-union movement, and the growth of a democratic trend there are indicated by the strikes of General Electric workers, which were supported by the biggest trade unions in that country and ended in victory. As a result of an extensive struggle, Finnish and Italian trade unions have achieved new labour legislation which has considerably expanded trade-union rights at the factories, including the holding of workers' meetings, for which the employers must provide time and premises.
227In countries where democratic trade unions are banned, Communists work for influence in the existing statecontrolled trade unions in order to create a broad-based worker opposition there. In Spain, for example, the Communists have been able to build up, in the Francoist trade unions, a considerable oppositional movement which comes out for higher pay and unemployment benefits, the right to hold strikes and establish their own organisations and hold meetings, and for freedom of the press. Fascism has been unable to crush this opposition.
Special tasks face the trade-union movement in Latin America, where the situation is characterised by dependence on imperialism and the unbridled rule of oligarchies. Considerable sections of the proletariat in these countries have come under the influence of bourgeois-nationalist or reformist trends.
The trade unions are persecuted in countries where dictatorships rule. The Communist Parties of Latin America consider it their prime aim to extirpate bourgeois influence in the trade unions, and to expose the ``yellow'' unions, which are financed by the monopolies and Administration of the USA, to get the trade unions join the active struggle against dictatorships and oligarchies, and to win independence of US imperialism.
In countries that have thrown off colonial dependence, the trade unions are working for the nationalisation of foreign monopoly-owned enterprises, for the development of the national state sector, radical agrarian reforms in the interests of the peasantry, the liquidation of foreign-owned and feudalist property, and aid for farm workers in developing agriculture. In these countries, the trade unions are working to make the state develop on democratic lines, have the working people take part in evolving and implementing programmes of independent economic development, and for a policy of co-operation with all countries.
In developing countries where the national bourgeoisie occupy strong positions, the democratic trade unions are working to bring about a transition to the non-capitalist road of development, for restrictions on the employers' arbitrariness, and against the anti-national policies of the private monopolies and their henchmen in the __PRINTERS_P_227_COMMENT__ 15* 228 governments, and foreign-policy concessions to the imperialists.
In countries which are fully dependent on imperialism, as well as in those where reactionary regimes are still in power, the trade unions come out---for a change in the political system and for the liquidation of imperialist control of the economies and the policies of such states. In countries such as Angola, they take part in the armed struggle within the framework of the forces of national liberation.
The trade unions' activities are of a specific nature in the developing countries which have taken to the road of noncapitalist development. Here they participate in the running of factories as well as in all major political measures. Besides waging a struggle against colonialist survivals, and the exploitation of the working people by private employers, and for better working conditions and the like, the trade unions mobilise the masses of working people to advance their countries' economies and help implement major measures proposed by their democratic governments.
The conditions of working people in the capitalist countries depend, not only on the home policies pursued by the ruling circles but also on their foreign policies, which is why problems connected with the latter are playing an ever more important part in trade-union activities. The trade unions cannot but come out, for instance, against the policy of governments that have consented to foreign military bases in the country, or have joined an aggressive bloc, or speed up the arms race, encourage exorbitant foreign investments in the country, and so on. Communists are working for the trade unions to take up an ever more active stand in defence of the national interests, link up with the anti-imperialist movement and play an active part in the latter, shoulder to shoulder with other patriotic forces.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ For Nation-Wide UnityThe effectiveness of the struggle waged by the trade unions depends, first and foremost, on united action by the working people. Experience has shown that success is achieved whenever various trade-union bodies or groups work in unison. Here is what the 1960 Meeting of 229 Communist and Workers' Parties had to say in its Statement, in its principled appraisal of the importance of trade-union solidarity: "The restoration of unity in the trade-union movement in countries where it is split, as well as on an international scale is essential for heightening the role of the working class in political life and for the successful defence of its interests.'' This proposition was re-affirmed at the 1969 Meeting.
The Communist Parties have accumulated considerable experience in the struggle for trade-union solidarity. In their documents, the Communist Parties stress that tradeunion action for solidarity is created at grass-root level, in the thick of the working people, and in a struggle waged on concrete issues. Under pressure from the trade-union rank and file, even the Right-wing reformist leaders are forced to support united action by the working people.
The working class of Finland has scored major successes in the post-war years in achieving united action in the trade unions. About 700,000 members belong to the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions which was established in June 1969.
Unity of action by Italy's three principal trade unions has resulted in the working people winning new social gains and democratic rights as the result of a broad-based common struggle for profound changes, especially in the field of housing construction, education, and the health services. The successes scored through trade-union solidarity have given rise to so strong an urge towards unity in the local trade-union organisations (thus unitary tradeunion bodies have been set up at many factories), that a firm foundation has been laid for the creation of a single trade-union centre for the entire country.
In May 1971, for the first time in the history of independent India, a conference of representatives of more than 20 mass trade-union associations of the country was convened. On the initiative of the communist-led All-India Trade-Union Congress, the conference adopted a Joint Action Charter, in which representatives of trade-union centres of differing political convictions formulated the basic tasks of the country's trade-union movement: nationalisation of the key economic sectors without indemnifying 230 the monopolies; radical land reforms in the interest of the Indian peasants and landless agricultural labourers; a rise in real wages, with due account of the rising cost of living in the country; prompt solution of the unemployment problem; preservation of the workers' right to strike; abolition of the country's dependence on foreign monopolies; strengthening of the public sector in the key branches of the national economy. This programme of the working people's joint struggle is widely supported throughout the country.
Despite the resistance put up by the reformist leaders and their attempts to restrain the workers' struggle, it has been increasingly gaining in scope under the leadership of the trade unions. The number of strikers in the developed capitalist countries alone totalled 420 million in 1960--70. The same period saw 260 major nation-wide strikers.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ For International UnityAt present the trade-union movement is represented by several international associations and a number of organisations which are not affiliated to these associations. The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), which represents the revolutionary-class trend within the trade-union movement and adheres to positions of proletarian internationalism, has an overall membership of over 150,000,000 in more than 100 countries. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), representing the socialreformist trend, has a membership of approximately 50 million workers. The World Confederation of Labour (WCL),^^*^^ a sphere of the clerical parties' influence, has a membership of nearly 12 million workers.
There are also autonomous trade unions, most of which gravitate towards a progressive trend. Thus, in 1956 the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions---a tradeunion association of 10 Middle East countries---was founded. In 1961, trade unions in the African countries united in an _-_-_
^^*^^ Until October 1968 it was known as the International Confederation of Christian Trade Unions (ICCTU).
231 All-Africa Trade-Union Federation. Convened in January 1964, the Latin American Congress of Trade-Union Unity adopted a joint action programme and passed a decision on the need to set up a single trade-union organisation of Latin America---the Permanent Congress of Trade-Union Unity of Latin American Workers, uniting the trade-union movement of 20 Latin American countries. The Congress formed a permanent secretariat with its headquarters in Santiago.The autonomous democratic trade-union associations, particularly the All-Africa Trade-Union Federation, are establishing ever closer contacts with the World Federation of Trade Unions and taking part in the latter's programme of activity. In February 1969, Conakry was the venue of a consultative conference of Afro-European trade-union solidarity in the joint struggle against the imperialist monopolies and colonialism, and for a policy of economic and social aid. The WFTU's contacts with the Permanent Congress of Trade-Union Unity of Latin American Workers, the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions and the All-Africa Trade-Union Federation have become more regular and acquired organisational forms: unitary liaison and co-operation committees have been set up.
The ICFTU and WCL leaders come out against international trade-union solidarity. They have placed a ban on their respective organisations establishing any contacts with the WFTU and the trade unions of the socialist countries. Since 1951, the WFTU, in a desire to restore international trade-union unity, has systematically approached the ICFTU and WCL leaders with proposals to discuss measures in defence of the working people's vital interests. In 1956, for instance, the WFTU suggested that joint action should be taken on questions of shorter hours without wage cuts and of introducing a 40-hour working week in European countries. In a letter addressed to the ICFTU's Sixth Congress (1959), the WFTU suggested that the possibilities should be explored of adopting a joint economic and social programme connected with a draft plan for universal and total disarmament, and proposed that the question of exchanging delegations should be discussed. These suggestions, however, were turned down by the ICFTU and WCL leaders.
232At the same time, experience has prompted changes in the attitude of all international trade-union associations towards unity. The need for international unity and more contacts between trade unions is now under discussion by representatives of the most diverse trade-union associations. Many trade-union organisations affiliated to the ICFTU have shown a desire for an end to the policy of discrimination in respect of trade-union ties.
The WFTU declares that any initiative on a continental or world scale, aimed at promoting workers' unity, will meet with its support. It has raised the question of unity of action by all European trade unions against the monopolies' policies, and proposed a meeting of WFTU, ICFTU and WCL representatives to achieve more effective counteraction to the monopolies' bloc by an alliance of working people and trade unions and, specifically, for joint measures and struggle against intenser exploitation, soaring profits, and the like. The WFTU has also proposed that measures should be drawn up towards co-ordinating action by the national trade-union centres and industrial trade unions of the Common Market countries.
At its special session in April 1968, in which representatives of 41 organisations other than those affiliated to the WFTU took part, the WFTU General Council appealed to the world's trade unions to promote solidarity (in concrete terms) with the people of embattled Vietnam. The WFTU General Council, at its 18th session in December 1968, discussed WFTU's activities in promoting international trade-union unity.
Of great importance in the struggle for unity of the tradeunion movement are the decisions of the WFTU's Seventh Congress, held in October 1969. In the Document on TradeUnion Policy and Action adopted by the Congress, there is a special section on unity of the international tradeunion movement. It is pointed out that the idea of a common trade-union front to be established by the different tradeunion centres of Western Europe, the Common Market countries in particular, with a view to standing up to the alliance of the monopolies, has been making considerable headway.
In the conditions of the increasing integration of the West European capitalist countries, it is becoming more 233 difficult for the trade unions to have their socio-economic and political demands met by acting only within the national framework. The revolutionary trade unions of these countries are explaining to the working people that the processes of integration express the objective need to develop the productive forces, facilitate the growth and consolidation of the working class, and bring the national contingents close together. At the same time, however, the monopolies, who are guiding the integration processes, want the internationalisation of production to serve, not the interests of the country in question, but higher profits for the monopolies, through the exploitation of the workers on an international scale, and to become a means of struggle against the working-class and democratic movement.
The trade unions are thus faced with the urgent task of drawing up a common programme of struggle for the economic and socio-political interests of West Europe's working people.
It is also suggested in the Document on Trade-Union Policy and Action that joint platforms should be drawn up and efforts co-ordinated between various continental tradeunion organisations, specifically, the Permanent Congress of Trade-Union Unity of Latin American Workers, the African trade-union movement, and the trade-union organisations in Asia.
The WFTU's initiative has met with support from broad sections of the working people. Work for its implementation, should substantially advance working-class international unity. This is being facilitated by the mounting crisis of the anti-communist trend within the world tradeunion movement, which has particularly affected the main splitter and reformist trade-union centre---the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Until recently, the leading Meany-Lovestone group in the AFL-CIO regarded the Confederation as its instrument for splitting activities within the international trade-union movement. Members of the Confederation were not allowed to establish contacts with the trade-union movement in the socialist countries, with the WFTU, or trade unions where Communists were influential in the leading bodies. In February 1969, the AFL-CIO leaders adopted a decision to quit the 234 ICFTU, on the pretext that the ICFTU was not a sufficiently anti-communist organisation, and that the AFL-CIO could not tolerate closer contacts with the trade unions of the socialist countries. This testified to a setback for the most reactionary elements within the trade-union movement, and for the policy of discrimination and division. Experience has prompted the leaders of the major organisations affiliated to the ICFTU to take a more realistic stand and to agree to establishing contacts with WFTU organisations. In 1968, the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, one of the largest US trade unions, quit the AFL-CIO and, jointly with another large trade union---that of truck drivers---founded a new trade-union centre---the Alliance for Labour Action, which was opposed to the Vietnam war and favours contacts with all trade unions in the world, irrespective of their political trends. The new trade-union association, at its conference in May 1969, not only reaffirmed its condemnation of the US war in Vietnam, but also condemned the arms race and demanded that the government should switch the thousands of millions it was spending on it over to education, social security, housing construction, and so on. It was the first instance in US history of large trade unions opposing Washington's official foreign policies.
Agreements and joint action have become fairly frequent among trade-union associations of various trends. The Soviet trade unions, for example, have established in recent years contacts with such bodies making up the core of ICFTU as the British Trades Union Congress, the Association of German Trade Unions (FRG) and the trade-union centres of the Scandinavian countries.
The leaders of another major international organisation, the World Confederation of Labour, as well as of many national trade-union centres and regional organisations, particularly the Latin American Confederation of Christian Trade Unions, which are affiliated to it, are also gradually reaching agreement on contacts and participation in joint measures with the progressive trade-union associations. All this shows that the extreme Right-wing elements within the trade-union movement are becoming ever more isolated.
"Some leaders create artificial obstacles to unity of action 235 by trade unions of different orientation, on a national and international scale,'' the final Document of the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1969, points out, "but the desire for such unity has, nonetheless, been growing in the trade-union movement in recent years. Communists are consistent champions of trade-union unity within the framework of each country and in the international arena.''^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 25.
[236] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER VI __ALPHA_LVL1__ HOW THE COMMUNIST PARTIESThe proletariat's class struggle is becoming increasingly intertwined with the mass democratic movements in the capitalist countries. The monopolies are extending exploitation to ever new strata of the population, thereby creating the objective prerequisites for the latter's joint anti-- monopoly actions on a mass scale. "State-monopoly development results in an aggravation of all the contradictions of capitalism,'' a resolution of the 24th CPSU Congress reads, "and in a rise of the anti-monopoly struggle. The leading force in this struggle is the working class, which is increasingly becoming a force rallying all the working sections of the population.''^^*^^
In the present-day strategical phase of the working class's revolutionary struggle in the capitalist countries, which has set itself the aim of doing away with the omnipotence of the monopolies, extensive anti-monopoly unions are a most important form in which the working class performs its leading role in the overall democratic movement. In heading the anti-monopoly unions in countries with a high or medium level of capitalist development, the working class guides their action towards carrying out radical democratic transformations that will ensure the conditions for going over to the struggle for socialism.
_-_-_^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 214.
237 __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. ALL ANTI-MONOPOLY FORCES GRAVITATE TOWARDSContrary to the bourgeois falsifiers' and opportunists' allegations, the profound social differentiation of bourgeois society and its division into capital and labour are growing ever deeper. At one extreme of bourgeois society are a handful of big capitalists, the aggregate of state-monopoly exploiters; at the other are the working class, working intellectuals and white-collar workers, the sum total of manual and brain workers. The monopoly bourgeoisie is the main enemy of the mass of working people in the capitalist countries.
The front of the class struggle against the monopolies which has become broader everywhere, cannot develop of its own accord, spontaneously. The social composition of the population in the capitalist world presents a motley pattern, non-proletarian classes and strata making up a considerable part and, in some countries, most of it. They are indignant at their oppression by the monopolies and offer resistance to them, but they are incapable of waging a consistent anti-monopoly struggle. The peasantry and the urban petty bourgeoisie, who are associated with the private ownership sector of the economy, are often disunited by competition, and come under the strong influence of bourgeois ideology. This is also true of the new contingents of the army of hired labour, drawn from the liberal professions and the intelligentsia.
All these sections can throw off the yoke of monopoly capital only in an alliance with the working class and under the latter's leadership. None of the non-proletarian sections in the anti-monopoly coalition can set themselves the aim of reorganising society along socialist lines and of conducting a consistent struggle for its attainment.
The experience of all socialist revolutions has confirmed the prediction of the founders of Marxism-Leninism: in liberating itself from capitalist oppression, the working class at the same time liberates the whole of society. 238 Capitalism mercilessly exploits the peasants, the urban middle strata, intellectuals and white-collar workers. It is only through a socialist revolution, under the conditions of socialism, that these classes and strata can radically change their social status and become masters of their own destinies, basic elements in the social structure of a new society.
The working class in the capitalist countries is deeply interested in an alliance with all anti-monopoly forces, for it is only together with them that it can put an end to the domination of the monopolies and accomplish the socialist revolution.
The working class plays an organising and mobilising role within the anti-monopoly alliance. "It is the only class capable of leading this alliance to victory,'' L. I. Brezhnev emphasised, "and of raising the struggle to a new level, securing the complete abolition of the power of capital and the triumph of socialism. No other class, no other social stratum of society is as organised and strong. The numerical strength of the working class is enormous. Its revolutionary experience is exceptionally rich. Its ideological, cultural and spiritual level has been rising from year to year. The political and moral prestige enjoyed by it in society has grown immeasurably.''^^*^^
The development of international working-class movement, and the achievements of the world socialist system make all working people in the capitalist countries gravitate towards the working class. The proletariat's hegemony in the struggle waged by the masses against the reactionary and aggressive policies of imperialism is an important condition for the success of the anti-monopoly struggle.
Certain conditions are necessary to ensure working-class leadership within the bloc of the anti-monopoly forces, the chief being the unity of the working class itself, its ability to instil the democratic forces with confidence in the victory of the anti-monopoly coalition, and win their trust and support through vigorous defence of the interests of all the anti-monopoly forces. At the same time, successes in rallying all the progressive non-proletarian forces about _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 150.
239 the proletarian vanguard facilitate and accelerate the trends towards unity of the working-class movement itself.The Communist Parties---the vanguard of the working class---are the leading political force in the anti-monopoly coalition. They gain that position by evolving, on the scientific basis of Marxist-Leninist theory, a platform of the anti-monopoly alliance, including aims that will rally the majority of the nation.
The way in which the growing possibilities of forming anti-monopoly alliances are used depends in many respects on the correct and principled policy of the Communist Party towards the mass allies of the working class in the struggle for democracy and socialism. Communists, the proletariat, enter into class alliances within the framework of anti-imperialist associations, while preserving the independence of their political line and the principled character of their positions. The Communist Parties work to consolidate such alliances, and to instil revolutionary class-- consciousness in the non-proletarian masses of working people. In developing and extending the anti-monopoly struggle, Communists take into account the socio-economic interests, political convictions, religious views, sentiments and traditions of various contingents of the anti-monopoly alliances. They help members of the coalition realise from experience the correctness of the goals set by the Communist Parties. However, Communists reject the policy of unprincipled adaptation to a situation or to the sentiments of their possible allies. They believe that such adaptation may result in the working class departing from its class policy and forfeiting its leading role among the masses.
The struggle of the democratic forces is objectively spearheaded against the policy of the monopolies and imperialist domination. This is manifested in the ever larger scope of the anti-war movement and confirmed by the growing progressive national movements in various regions of the capitalist world. These movements have become an important part of the present-day anti-monopoly and antiimperialist struggle of the masses. They are developing in the form of a struggle for civil rights, national and social emancipation, and internationalist unity, and against 240 racial discrimination. The working class and its organisations, the Communist Parties first and foremost, are exerting an ever greater influence on the development of such movements. Ever broader sections of the progressive public in the capitalist countries are becoming more and more aware of the need to strengthen the alliance between the working-class organisations and the general-democratic movement for peace and civil rights, and the efficacy of joint action.
The non-proletarian strata of working people (peasants, artisans, small traders, intellectuals, college students, and the like) are more and more resorting to the traditional methods of the working-class struggle. For instance, the nationwide strike of the personnel at France's research centres held on October 10, 1969, was joint action by 30 research workers' trade unions affiliated to the trade-union centres of all trends, with scientists belonging to the Communist Party playing an important part in the strike.
In organising and heading the masses' struggle against the monopolies, the Communist Parties create prerequisites for the formation of a political army of the socialist revolution and are laying the foundations for co-operation between the proletariat and its allies, not only in the overall democratic struggle but also for the future---for society's socialist transformation. It is becoming more and more obvious to such allies that their interests coincide with those of the proletariat. As a result, a temporary alliance may become permanent.
The Communist Parties can achieve leadership of the anti-monopoly movement in their respective countries only on condition that they act as an independent class force, on the basis of the principles of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism. As Alvaro Cunhal, General Secretary of the Portuguese Communist Party, said at the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1969, "Dissolving the Communist Parties in the anti-imperialist movement would mark the end of the communist movement as such, as an independent movement of the working class and other working people, and would thus rob the revolutionary process of its decisive force. The Communist Parties,'' he emphasised, "want not only 241 to accomplish the immediate and urgent tasks of the antiimperialist struggle but to transform the world, to end imperialism for ever and lead the working people to the conquest of socialism and communism. This is the actual raison d'etre of the communist movement and the purpose ol the revolutionary fight which every Communist Party is carrying on.''^^*^^
The anti-monopoly movement becomes the more powerful, the more vigorously the Communist Party counters ``Left''-wing sectarianism and Right-wing revisionism. ``Left''-wing sectarianism manifests itself in a reluctance to reckon with the interests of other members of the antimonopoly association, and in an ``all-or-nothing'' doctrinaire policy. Right-wing revisionism reveals itself in weakening the ideological, political and organisational independence of the Communist Party within a single front, and in capitulation to the petty-bourgeois strata. Communists are tirelessly working to expose both the former and the latter deviations from the principled Marxist-Leninist line.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Anti-Monopoly Alliance'sUnity in the anti-monopoly coalition is achieved on the basis of programmes for democratic transformations drawn up by the Communist Parties and in the course of the struggle for their implementation. Communists bend all their efforts to achieve a state of affairs in which the working class and all sections of the working people can, without waiting for socialism to triumph, enjoy the results of the successful struggle against the monopolies, achieve higher living standards and greater democratic rights, and eliminate the constant threat of imperialist aggression and war.
There are certain distinctions in the concrete programmes for the anti-monopoly struggle advanced in different countries by the fraternal Communist Parties. In the developed capitalist countries, the Communists' main demands are directed against the domination of their ``own'' national _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parlies, Moscow 1969, p. 400.
__PRINTERS_P_241_COMMENT__ 16---0873 242 monopolies in all spheres of life, and against government policies pursued in the interest of big business. In countries with a medium level of development, slogans for the struggle against local capital and against the domination of oligarchies go hand-in-hand with calls for a struggle against oppression by foreign monopolies, those of the US first and foremost. As for countries with military-fascist regimes, slogans for the overthrow of such regimes stand in the foreground.No matter how these programmes may vary, they have important features in common. Slogans with the most universal appeal call for a struggle for peace and national independence; for the defence and advancement of democracy; the democratic nationalisation of key economic sectors and more democracy in their management; the working masses' actual participation in running the economy and public affairs; people's control; democratic planning; greater trade-union participation in managing industry; demilitarisation of the economy; radical agrarian reform; better living standards for working people; defence of the interests of the intelligentsia, the youth, the peasantry, and the urban and rural middle strata against monopolies' arbitrary rule; the democratisation of all spheres of society's life.
An important place among these demands, especially in the developed capitalist countries, belongs to the slogan of the nationalisation of key industries controlled by the monopolies, as well as of the big banks and insurance companies controlled by the financial oligarchy. In advancing the target of nationalisation together with other economic or political demands, the Communists advocate that this should be carried out democratically. They mobilise the working class and other strata of the working people against the monopoly ownership, that basis of big business's power. Thus, the French Communist Party is demanding nationalisation of mines, iron and steel works, the chemical and aluminium industries, enterprises engaged in prospecting for oil and extracting, refining and marketing it, and the country's big banks and insurance companies. To the working class belongs the initiative in the struggle for the nationalised enterprises and the entire state sector of the economy 243 to be used, not to strengthen the monopolies' power, but to serve the interests of the entire people.
The ever broader demands for the economies of the capitalist countries to be placed under democratic control in all sectors are becoming a leading slogan of the workingclass and anti-monopoly movement. The movement for more democracy in running the economy shows that the working people's economic struggle and political struggle are becoming fused. Their content is determined by an ever broader movement to bring democracy int he management of state-owned enterprises, ensure full employment, prices control, regulate the policy of capital investments in the interests of the working people, and the like.
In advancing the slogan of democratic control over the economy, the Communist Parties of France, Italy, the FRG, Finland, Austria, Belgium and other capitalist countries are calling for the introduction of new democratic forms and methods of running enterprises, and broader rights for the trade unions and workers' collectives.
The Communist Parties of a number of countries, in evolving tactics for the achievement of democratic control, have precisely defined the forms and vehicles of such control. In France, for instance, the struggle for participation in industrial management is carried on through the factory committees. Workers' organisations are pressing for the rights of these committees to be extended, and for items on trade-union participation in dealing with basic issues of the development of each particular branch of industry to be incorporated in collective agreements. The Italian working class is fighting for control to be instituted over the adoption of economic decisions, both at national and at enterprise level. After a long struggle, the workers have achieved the inclusion in collective agreements of items concerning a considerable extension of trade-union rights in the sphere of economic control.
The programmes for anti-monopoly measures have nothing in common with the social-reformist expatiations on "social partnership'', "economic and production democracy'', and "class peace''. The struggle for anti-monopoly measures presupposes a consistent extension and build-up of the class struggle.
__PRINTERS_P_243_COMMENT__ 10* 244The bourgeoisie are making desperate efforts to prevent the workers from intervening in the affairs of enterprises, and especially of industries or the entire economy. The struggle for worker and democratic control on a practical basis that the masses can readily understand is leading to clashes between the working class and other members of the anti-monopoly alliance, on the one hand, and the monopolies and the bourgeois state, on the other. This struggle may well boost the working people's political consciousness.
Communists proceed from the premise that the mere proclamation of demands, without militant tactics of the anti-monopoly struggle being evolved, or without vigorous action by the working class and all other working people, cannot effectively mobilise the masses. General-democratic demands do not display their revolutionary character if they are divorced from a concrete and effective struggle against the power of monopoly capital. The tactics of the anti-monopoly struggle can be successful only if they consistently link up the struggle for the overthrow of the power of monopolies with the day-by-day struggle for the working people's vital needs.
Communists believe that implementation of the programme of anti-monopoly economic changes calls for radical political changes as well. The struggle for democratic management of the economy should merge with the struggle for the advancement of democracy, and for an end to the reactionary forces' unrestricted rule of the state. In waging a consistent struggle against the power of the monopolies, the Communists show the masses the need to achieve the abolition of the monopolies' domination.
Mass movements which assume a nation-wide scale develop from the anti-monopoly struggle, as is evidenced by a number of nation-wide strikes in such countries as France, Italy, Belgium and Japan. These class battles have built up experience of a joint struggle waged by factory workers, intermediate strata, peasants, intellectuals and college students for peace, democracy and anti-monopoly reforms, and greater solidarity among various sections of the people. Thus, an alliance between the working class and the non-proletarian sections of the working people 245 is increasingly becoming a factor in socio-economic practice.
All the above demands and slogans are, of course, of a general-democratic character. Even when they are implemented the working class will not have done away with the capitalist system. Nevertheless, a radical shift towards democracy will take place in the alignment of forces. The working people will advance to new economic positions, and will play an active part in the political struggle against capitalism. Programmes for radical anti-monopoly changes offer a realistic alternative to the policy of state-monopoly capitalism, and are mobilising ever broader sections of the people for the struggle for socialism.
In advancing their interim programmes of struggle against the monopolies, the Communist Parties always keep in mind that these can produce desirable results only if they go hand-in-hand with the struggle for socialism in the long term.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. THE ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE WORKING CLASSAmong V. I. Lenin's immense service to the cause of the proletarian revolution is profound research into the agrarian problem. He evolved a closely reasoned and orderly theory in this field, and scientifically defined the strategy and tactics in dealing with the question of the peasantry. Leninism has bound up the agrarian problem with the proletariat's political struggle. In his works V. I. Lenin concretely indicated how the revolutionary-democratic peasant movement could be united with the socialist movement of the working class. These propositions are still valid today, the Communist and Workers' Parties drawing on them in their activities. As L. I. Brezhnev, General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, emphasised, "Work in the midst of the peasant masses of the capitalist states continues to be of great importance. The working peasants remain the chief allies of the working class, despite the fact that their number has declined considerably 246 in the advanced capitalist countries.''^^*^^ The peasants are a major anti-imperialist force with great potentialities. Statistics (for 1968) show that 465 million people, the bulk of them peasants, are engaged in farming in the developed capitalist and developing countries. In the developed capitalist countries, agriculture accounts for 14.5 per cent of the gainfully employed population (42,000,000) as against 68 per cent (423,000,000) in the developing countries. The size of the rural population in some continents and groups of countries is characterised by the following figures: Western Europe---13 million people, or 11 per cent of the gainfully employed population; North America---between four and five million, or 4 to 5.5 per cent of the gainfully employed population; Latin America---41 million, or 47 per cent; in South and Fast Asia---between 257 and 2G4 million, or 71 per cent; North Africa---20.5 million, or 66.3 per cent of the gainfully employed population. The number of farm labourers in the developed capitalist countries is nine million, or four per cent of the gainfully employed population; in the developing countries, the respective figures are 87 million and 46 per cent. Farmhands and day- and other labourers form the vast majority of the labour force in the developing countries. That is why a close alliance between the working class and the peasants, aimed at accomplishing the revolutionary tasks of our times, is a pressing and vital need.
Consequently, Communists proceed from the premise that the peasantry, as a class ruthlessly exploited by the monopolies, can and must become an important ally of the working class. The peasants themselves are coming to realise that firm support for their struggle comes from the working class. However, the problem of an alliance between the working class and the peasantry, even in the highly developed countries, cannot be reduced to reliance on the proletarian and semi-proletarian rural strata alone, for today the bulk of the rural population, including the middle peasants and part of the well-to-do peasants, can be drawn into active participation in the anti-monopoly struggle.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 150.
247However, numerous obstacles have to be overcome in establishing a firm alliance between the working class and the peasantry. The monopoly bourgeoisie keeps on trying to sow dissension between urban and rural workers. Bourgeois ideologists juggle with superficial facts so as to gloss over the two classes' basic community of interests. Thus, they assert that, since the rural population are interested in selling produce at higher prices and buying industrial goods at lower prices, while urban workers want higher wages and seek to buy farm produce at lower prices, it follows that the interests of workers and peasants clash. That is why, they claim, no alliance between them is possible.
The Communist Parties have given the lie to the bourgeois ideologists; they explain to the peasants that their interests fully coincide with those of the workers. The peasant and the worker are equally interested in greater buying power for all working people, and in the unrestricted growth of production in city and countryside. Their common enemy is monopoly capitalism which is stifling the growth of the working people's buying power and creating ``surpluses'' of agricultural produce, while millions of people, even in highly developed countries, do not get enough food. In citing such facts and showing that the rural workers are being increasingly exploited by the monopolies, the Communist Parties are working to extend and strengthen the alliance between the industrial workers and the working peasants, and to draw the peasants into an active struggle against the monopolies.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Peasant Action Against OppressionThe intensification of class battles in the countryside is a feature of conditions in a number of capitalist countries. A spirit of democracy and a determination to fight for their rights are awakening in the peasant masses. Rural workers are offering ever more resolute resistance to the monopolies and the bourgeois state. Agricultural areas in Italy, France, the FRG, Belgium, the Netherlands and many Latin 248 American countries were arenas of large-scale class conflicts in the sixties.
The peasants employ a variety of forms of the struggle for their interests. From spontaneous and unorganised expressions of protest, rural workers are more and more going over to well-co-ordinated mass action, drawing on the experience of the working class and using the traditional forms of its struggle. In the past, peasant unrest did not go beyond attempts to attract the attention of the authorities and the public to the plight of the countryside. These assumed the form of letters and parcels sent to local and central authorities, patrols on roads and at the entrances to cities and villages, road blocks and railway line obstructions, and picketing local institutions. Thus, French peasants sent thousands of parcels of unsold potatoes, each containing one kilogram and addressed to the Prime Minister, and piled up heaps of cabbages, carrots and sugarbeet at the entrances to local Prefectures.
With the mounting organisation and consciousness of the rural workers, such action spread from separate villages or districts to involve entire regions. The peasants have begun to use typically proletarian forms of struggle, mass demonstrations and rallies in cities, large-scale strikes, rural workers' marches to the cities, and seizure of landed estates. The peasants have presented increased demands, and links have developed between their economic and political action, with slogans appearing calling for an end to the criminal arms race and for funds to be channelled to help peasant households; for democracy in the management of agriculture and local government and for an end to the arbitrariness of the administration and the police against the peasants. Rural workers have begun to play a far more active part in political anti-monopoly moves. Action against the reactionaries, the arbitrariness of governments, the war danger, and the takeover of peasant land for military bases---such are characteristic features in the rural workers political struggle. Higher political consciousness, a distinct anti-monopoly character, a mounting scope, militancy, and, in a number of instances, a clearly expressed desire for an alliance with the proletariat---all these are to be seen in peasant action. The upsurge of the peasant 249 movement is fostering class consciousness in the rural workers. There is a growing awareness among the peasants of the need to combine their efforts with those of the working class in a joint struggle against the common enemy---the monopolies.
Important in promoting the peasant movement is working-class action in support of the peasants' demands. Experience has shown that, in countries where the workingclass movement has won substantial political positions, it contributes to the extent and success of the peasant movement.
Peasant action is growing in intensity in countries with a medium level of capitalist development, primarily in Latin America. It is common knowledge that in such countries as Colombia, Bolivia and Venezuela the peasants have frequently come out vigorously against the local oligarchies, big landowners and also against the US plantation-owners. The peasant movement is a most important component of the anti-imperialist, anti-monopoly and anti-feudal struggle in Latin America. Thus, the struggle for agrarian reforms waged by the Chilean peasants in alliance with the working class and other democratic forces, and the development of that struggle to serve the interest of the peasant masses has become part of the programme for radical revolutionary changes advanced by the Popular Unity bloc.
The workers' and peasants' joint struggle for democratic changes and ultimately for socialism is giving reality, for the overwhelming majority of peasants, to the prospect of eliminating oppression by the financial oligarchy and the threat of ruin and expropriation. The anti-monopoly movement is becoming a most efficacious form of a political alliance between the proletariat and the peasantry.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Communist Parties'Communists are the most consistent, resolute and devoted fighters for the rural workers' interests. Only the Communist Parties contrapose to the brutal expropriation of the peasant masses a programme of a genuinely democratic 250 solution of the peasant-agrarian question. While vigorously defending the interests of the working peasants, the Communist Parties of a number of countries are waging a stubborn struggle for radical agrarian reforms, and the abolition of the big estates, all survivals of feudalism, and the monopolies' domination of agriculture. Communists hold that radical agrarian reforms will free the productive forces in agriculture from the shackles of monopoly domination, ensure a considerable growth of the peasants' purchasing power, expand the home market, and create the necessary conditions for an economic revival.
The agrarian programmes of the Communist Parties of a number of capitalist countries contain the following basic points: expropriation of land appropriated by the big landowners, or its indemnified confiscation; the transfer of land to those who till it, on the basis of ownership rights; effective state protection and assistance for small and middle peasants; the peasants to freely choose whether they will till such land individually or in associations; effective support for democratic peasant co-operatives; nationalisation of the remaining land and of large estates, whose carving up will be detrimental to the national economy, and the establishment, on their basis, of efficient state farms to serve as models to the peasants.
The agrarian programmes of Communist Parties take due account of historical and national features of each country. Thus, the French Communist Party has linked the solution of the agrarian problem with the establishment of an advanced democracy that will open up the way towards socialism. As pointed out in the Party Central Committee's Manifesto of December 1968, such democracy means "the conduct of an agricultural policy that will ensure a life of dignity for the small and middle peasants, and will encourage co-operatives in every form"^^*^^. The French Communists demand that the toiling peasants should be represented on all bodies controlling agriculture.
The Italian Communist Party has linked the agrarian reform with an overall programme of democratic demands to restrict and then undermine the power of the authorities. _-_-_
^^*^^ Cahiers du communisme N. i, 1969, p. 125.
251 As the Party sees it, the political line in respect of the peasantry lies in a struggle for implementation of the fundamental principles of the Constitution, which envisages access to landownership for working people and a ceiling to the size of land holdings. Italy's Communists demand that the land should be transferred to those who till it, that small peasant holdings should be increased to sizes that would provide effective employment for the family, that big state investments should be made to develop peasant households, including such that have been created by implementation of the agrarian reform, and that encouragement should be given to all forms of voluntary peasant associations, and in the first place to co-operatives. The ICP's programme also provides for controls to be established over the monopolies, which are grinding down the peasantry, that parliamentary controls should be established over the big industrial enterprises that sell agricultural machinery, fertilisers and the like to the peasants, and that those branches of industry should be nationalised which have a direct influence in the development of agricultural production. The Communists have launched a big campaign for special democratic bodies to be set up in all regions of the country to administer agriculture and authorised to allot land to peasants and to verify how state investments in agriculture are made use of. One of the major demands of the Party is a democratic procedure in working out an agricultural policy, both local and country-wide.In Latin American countries where the US imperialists have seized large areas of land, the Communists emphasise the need to expropriate the foreign-owned latifundia. Latin American Communists proceed from the premise that agrarian relations in that part of the world are characterised, first of all, by the preponderance of big estates (latifundia), while most of the peasants are landless. Sixty per cent of all working peasants possess no land at all.
Capitalist development is under way in Latin American agriculture, at times most unevenly and painfully. Backward agrarian relations continue to predominate. The development of capitalism in the countryside, the existence of feudal and semi-feudal relations, domination by foreign plantation-owners, and the appropriation of peasant land 252 by foreign monopolies, especially by those of the US, are further aggravating contradictions, and building up exploisive material in the entire social, economic and political life of Latin America. That is why the peasant movement is an important driving force in the revolutionary process. There is nothing surprising, therefore, in the importance Latin American Communists attach to the peasant movement, and to their work for a close militant alliance between workers and peasants.
The Communist Parties believe that the development of the co-operative movement should be furthered to the utmost. Under capitalism, co-operatives often serve the interests of the bourgeoisie. However, in a number of cases, co-- operatives protect the immediate interests of the peasants, and offer resistance to the monopolies' offensive.
In conditions of a growing and broad-based anti-- monopoly movement, co-operatives can become a form of the peasants' class organisation to be used in a struggle against the monopolies and the bourgeois state. Co-operatives enable the peasants to modernise their farming, thereby making the farms more competitive. Co-operatives help organise the peasants, giving them support in the struggle for radical agrarian reforms and thorough changes in the existing system. By giving the peasants experience in collective work, the co-operatives will make their future transition to socialism easier.
Co-operatives can develop along such lines only if they become thoroughly democratic and throw off the influence of the rural bourgeoisie and the home and foreign monopolies. It is only by relying on the working class and the Communist Parties that the peasants can accomplish that task. The Communists give every support to the co-- operative movement and its anti-monopoly orientation. At the same time, the Communists explain to the peasants that, in the conditions of capitalism, co-operatives are insufficient; without radical revolutionary changes and without eliminating the basis of exploitation, no genuine solution of the agrarian question can be found, and the yoke of the monopolies and the landowners cannot be thrown off.
The Communist Parties are waging a vigorous struggle against the opportunist views of the Right-wing leaders 253 of Social-Democracy and the revisionists, who accuse the Communists of the so-called ``conservatism'' of their agrarian policies. The Right-wing reformists regard the `` reorganisation'' of the countryside in the interests of the monopolies and the abolition of the peasantry as a ``natural'' and ``logical'' process; they regard defence of the peasants' interests as advocacy of the ``outdated'', an "apology for the bullock and the wooden plough''. Although Communists are not opposed to large-scale agricultural production, they are against the plundering of the peasants by the big monopolies or the landowners. Communists advocate, not the fragmentation of farming but the interests of the peasant masses in their struggle against the large-scale exploitation. They are working for a radical reorganisation of agrarian relations so as to enable the peasants to benefit from scientific and technological progress and large-scale production. That is why the Communist Parties call upon the working peasants to take resolutely to the road of struggle for the transformation of their countries along socialist lines and for socialist co-operatives.
The Communists emphasise the close link between demands for far-going agrarian reforms and the programme for radical reorganisation of the life of society. They believe that a genuine solution of the basic problems of the peasantry is bound up with the victory of the socialist revolution. Therein lies the foundation of a class alliance between the workers and peasants.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Forms and Methods of CommunistIn working for a close alliance between the working class and the peasantry, and in choosing the forms and methods of their activities, the Communist Parties take into account the existence of different social strata in the countryside. A differentiated approach to the various social groups in the countryside is of great importance for the organisation of the peasant struggle against the monopolies policy. The Communist Parties base their work on the agricultural labourers and also on small peasants who work their farms 254 without hired labour. At the same time, Communists realise that the oppression by the monopolies and the bourgeois government weighs heavily, not only on the poor and middle peasants but even on the well-to-do, who employ hired labour on a small scale. Communists uphold such demands by the well-to-do peasants which do not run counter to the vital interests of the working class and the working peasants. At the same time, Communists organise the peasant mass struggle against the big landowners, who exploit farm hands.
The Communist Parties have accumulated a wealth of experience in guiding the struggle of agricultural workers, farm hands and the working peasants (petty proprietors, leaseholders and sharecroppers), whose vital interests coincide with those of the working class both today and in the future. The formation and strengthening of trade unions of rural proletarians holds an important place in the Communist Parties' work in the countryside. Communists pay considerable attention to the promotion of unity between rural proletarians and semi-proletarians, through concrete demands, the organisation of mass action, meetings, demonstrations and rallies held jointly with the trade unions. Work among smallholders assumes a variety of forms. Thus, French Communists conduct extensive and varied propaganda and agitation work, distributing numerous leaflets, booklets and books in the countryside. La Terre, published weekly by the Party, is one of the biggest rural newspapers in France with a circulation of over 200,000. Its readership runs into hundreds of thousands. The Party press is an effective means of winning the rural population over to the side of the Communist Party.
Group and individual talks with peasants are often practised by Finnish Communists during get-togethers at Communists' homes. Speakers on the more complex questions usually include leaders and activists of Party committees, or class-conscious workers from the cities. The topics include major international and domestic events, proposals for the betterment of the smallholders' conditions, introduced by Communists for consideration by Parliament or municipal councils; then come replies to questions. 255 Sunday political schools conducted by factory workers function in many Finnish villages.
The Latin American Communist Patties give active support to peasant action for economic and political demands and revolutionary goals. This struggle assumes varied forms---from demands for agrarian reforms in the interests of the peasants to the seizure of land by the latter. In some Latin American countries, the peasant movement resorts to armed methods of struggle. The Communist Parties work to raise the class consciousness and organisational level of the peasants and their bodies, send Communists to work in the countryside, organise joint action by workers and peasants, and appeal to all democratic forces to vigorously support the rural workers' just demands.
In Colombia, a struggle is gaining momentum, aimed at giving peasants the right of possession of formerly uncultivated land they have occupied, a peaceful solution of conflicts arising in the process, the return to the peasants of land taken away from them in the so-called zones of military operations, and also for the withdrawal of troops from rural localities, and an end to government persecution. The peasants are also demanding discontinuation of imports of surplus agricultural produce; incentives for home production of goods now being imported; a just minimum wage; credits for rural inhabitants and social security in the countryside. These and many other demands make for closer cooperation among all the democratic forces. As a result, an awareness is growing among the masses that radical transformations in the countryside and complete independence through the abolition of neo-- colonialism are integral parts of the anti-imperialist agrarian revolution.
In their work to put their agrarian programmes into practice, the Communist Parties are making the fullest, possible use of parliamentary and other representative institutions, but devote special attention to the organisation of mass action by the peasants themselves. In Italy, for example, communist parliamentary action for agrarian reforms is supplemented by so militant and effective a form of mass action as the seizure by farmhands and peasants of uncultivated estates which are to be parcelled out in 256 accordance with a law on land reform but are still in landowner possession. Communists have become organisers of demonstrations and strikes involving millions of farmhands, sharecroppers and small and middle peasants. Thus, the Party holds Days of Struggle for Land on a nation-wide scale. Big meetings and demonstrations are organised in all regions of the country, with help from the trade unions. Peasants assemble in the cities, where they hold meetings in central thoroughfares and squares, jointly with industrial workers. A Day of Struggle for Land is usually followed by peasant mass action in various regions and provinces. Such joint campaigns and manifestations involve up to two million peasants and agricultural labourers, and even three to four million on some days.
Important in Communists' rural activities is the formation of peasant co-operatives, and the democratisation of already established co-operatives, with the aim of turning them from sources of enrichment for the bourgeoisie into a means of protecting the peasants' interests. Thus, Italian Communists are active in the National League of Co-operatives, which has a membership of 2,200,000. The democratic cooperatives give extensive aid to the rural working people, in the teeth of strong opposition from the monopolies and the government. They come out actively against the monopolies' price policies and their arbitrariness, and act jointly on the market. The co-operatives work for implementation of measures approved by Parliament, facilitate land redemption by the peasants, purchase machinery, assist in the organisation of land tenure, help introduce new crops and agronomical methods, and organise vocational schools. Experience has shown that co-operatives can help spread communist influence in the countryside.
French Communists, who have also amassed much experience of rural work, attach much importance to peasant co-operatives. A Manifesto of the Central Committee of the French Communist Party (December 1968) reads: "For the peasant, socialism will signify, first of all, agrarian reforms, and the land for those who till it, the efflorescence of co-- operatives in their varied forms, and the marketing of all crops at guaranteed prices. The development of co-- operatives and the voluntary organisation of collective labour 257 will make it possible to reduce working hours in farming and to ensure weekly rest days and annual holidays, and the advantages of social security for all working peasants.''^^*^^
The Communist Parties are active in various agricultural organisations, irrespective of the political orientation of their leadership. Such bodies are often headed by reactionaries and big landowners. In some countries, Communists have been able to get representatives and peasants who support them elected to the leadership of agricultural organisations. Communists have set up committees and associations for the protection of small and middle peasants, involving many rural workers. Actions by these organisations are more and more often forcing the ruling circles to meet the working people's demands. Through such peasant organisations, Communists establish close contacts with large numbers of peasants with different political views. Even when they are in a minority, Communists can do much to give them a correct orientation.
In a number of Latin American countries, communist initiative and participation have resulted in peasant congresses at which bills for agrarian reforms are tabled and discussed. Specially elected delegations, led as a rule by members of parliament, are instructed to submit such bills for consideration by legislative bodies. Communists see such measures as the onset of a struggle for agrarian reforms.
The growing activity by peasants and agricultural labourers has led to the formation and consolidation of peasant organisations, and their merging into nation-wide associations (e.g., in Chile, Brazil and Mexico). Existent peasant organisations often lack political independence and are in many cases subordinated to bourgeois-landowner and richpeasant parties and Catholic organisations. The influence of rich-peasant elements, who are trying to hold back the development of the revolutionary movement of the peasant masses, is substantial in peasant organisations in Argentina, Uruguay, Mexico and Chile. The Communist Parties work for the establishment and consolidation of mass peasant organisations.
The strengthening of communist organisations in the _-_-_
^^*^^ Cahiers du communtsme N. 1, 1969, p. 133.
__PRINTERS_P_257_COMMENT__ 17--0873 258 countryside is decisive for the success of communist rural activities. However, as pointed out in the documents of several Communist Parties, the total number of such organisations in the countryside is still too small to meet the tasks and increased possibilities of communist work among the peasants. A number of Communist Parties have not yet been able to win major sections of the peasantry over to their side, and have not eliminated the influence of reactionary and clerical circles on rural workers. There have been instances, even though rare, of an incorrect and negligent attitude of individual Communists towards work among the peasants and their needs. The Communist Parties are vigorously working to rectify sectarian errors in the peasant question, and to improve political and organisational work in the countryside.The Communist Parties have to wage a struggle on two fronts---against Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism. The Right-wing opportunist deviation consists in an underestimation of a revolutionary alliance between the working class and the peasantry, a desire to remain confined within the purely economic framework, an unwillingness to develop mass political action by rural workers, and a negation of socialist prospects for the countryside. No less harm is caused by the ``Left''-wing sectarian views on the peasants, which are manifested, in particular, in an exaggeration of the peasantry's role as a revolutionary factor, in proclaiming the peasantry the decisive force in the revolution, in an adventurist approach to work among the peasants, in calls to take up arms in peasant districts in the absence of the necessary conditions, and in implanting artificial methods of work among the rural workers without due account of the specific conditions.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE COMMUNIST PARTIES' POLICY TOWARDSMasses of people belonging to the urban middle strata are acquiring ever greater significance in the class struggle and the anti-monopoly movement. These are social groups of the urban population which hold an intermediate 259 position between the main classes in modern bourgeois society--- the bourgeoisie and the proletariat: first of all, the urban petty and the lowest-bracket proprietors such as craftsmen, artisans, small traders, and also part of the intelligentsia, members of the liberal professions, civil servants, and also college students.
The founders of Marxism-Leninism devoted much attention to an analysis of the status and role of the urban petty bourgeoisie in capitalist society, and in the class and general democratic struggle, "...the petty bourgeoisie,'' Marx wrote, "will form an integral part of all the impending social revolutions.''^^*^^
Marx, Engels and Lenin showed the dual nature of the petty bourgeoisie, as petty proprietors, on the one hand, and working people, on the other; they showed that they are not socially and economically homogeneous. The upper strata are made up of small-scale employers, who exploit hired labour on a limited scale; the lower strata are often in semi-proletarian and even lumpen-proletarian conditions, and suffer need and privations.
With their intermediate economic and social status, the urban middle strata inevitably vacillate ideologically and politically between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. They succumb to petty-bourgeois sentiments, which give rise to both Right-wing opportunist trends prompted by a desire to ``adapt'' to monopoly capitalism, and Leftist adventurism, which switches so rapidly from ``ultra-Left'' revolutionism to apathy and despondency. V. I. Lenin emphasised that "... one and the same psychology, one and the same class peculiarity (that of the petty bourgeoisie, for example) is displayed both in the dejection of the opportunist and in the desperation of the terrorist.''^^**^^ Impoverished by the pressure of big monopoly capital and swelling the ranks of the proletariat, former members of the urban petty-bourgeois middle strata bring into the working-class movement elements of the anarchism, disorganisation and Leftism inherent in petty-bourgeois radicalism, and sometimes a pessimism and liquidationism. Historical experience has shown _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Rngels, Selected Correspondence,.p. 51.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 15, p. 152.
__PRINTERS_P_259_COMMENT__ 17* 260 that petty-bourgeois circles are also often used by the extreme Right-wing reactionary forces as their main reserve and mass basis. __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Position and StruggleThe Marxist-Leninist assessments of the social position of the urban middle strata and their role in the class struggle have been corroborated by both past and present experience.
In the conditions of state-monopoly capitalism, and as a result of the rapid development of the productive forces following the scientific and technological revolution substantial changes have been taking place in the conditions and structure of the urban middle strata. Some social groups linked with outmoded forms of production have been rapidly declining in number; self-employed artisans are being ousted not only from the main industries, but also from many auxiliary spheres of material production.
The ousting of the petty producer, however, is not a straightforward process. V. I. Lenin noted that the monopolies while ruining the petty bourgeoisie, were also engendering it. As he pointed out, "A number of new 'middle strata' are inevitably brought into existence again and again by capitalism (appendages to the factory, work at home, small workshops scattered all over the country to meet the requirements of big industries, such as the bicycle and automobile industries, etc.).''^^*^^
A rise in the number of small enterprises, most of them concentrated in the retail trade and public services, is to be seen in some sectors. Small industrial enterprises, repair shops, small traders' shops, filling stations, barber's shops, cafes and other small privately-owned enterprises appear wherever the big firms see no profits in maintaining their branches. That is why the urban middle strata may sometimes even increase in size in some countries.
Many small-scale employers in the developed capitalist countries have lost their economic independence, and are _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 15, p. 39.
261 objects of still greater exploitation by big capital. Their enterprises function as ancillary specialised enterprises filling orders from the big monopoly firms. On the whole, all the proprietors of small-scale enterprises have long become fully dependent economically (financially, commercially, etc.) on the monopolies, being independent proprietors only in name.As the most unstable group of the population in the capitalist countries, and subjected to constant pressure from the big corporations and the bourgeois state, the petty bourgeoisie are being more and more differentiated. A small portion climb up in the world to become small and medium capitalists, but the bulk are ruined. State-monopoly regulation hits at broad sections of the petty proprietors, accelerating their proletarianisation and impoverishment.
To the urban middle strata also belong other social groups and sections whose place in social production is similar to that of the urban petty bourgeoisie. These are, in the first place, a considerable part of the intelligentsia, including members of the liberal professions: medical practitioners, lawyers, legal advisers, writers, painters, artists, and the like. The intermediate strata also include other brackets of the gainfully employed population, among them mid-level management personnel, petty stockbrokers, travelling salesmen, and so on.
While in the past, the middle urban strata's economic standing made them a bulwark of the ruling class rather than an ally to the proletariat, they are today becoming increasingly drawn into the struggle against state-monopoly capital, by championing democracy, the cause of peace and radical social improvements. Representatives of the middle strata are more and more often resorting to typically proletarian methods and forms of the struggle (strikes, demonstrations, and the like). In noting these new features, the 1969 International Meeting emphasised: "Big capital tramples on the vital interests of the majority of the urban middle strata. Therefore, despite their lack of unity and special susceptibility to bourgeois ideology, large masses of the middle strata are coming forward in defence of their interests, joining the struggle for general democratic demands, and becoming increasingly conscious of the vital 262 importance of united action with the working class.''^^*^^
The middle strata's entry into the struggle has given a broader sweep to the struggle for democracy, swelling the ranks of the forces opposing the monopolies. This is shown by the events in France in May-June 1968, during which the working class, a considerable part of the intelligentsia, college students and other representatives of the middle strata clashed with the regime, this revealing new possibilities in the struggle for democracy and socialism.
Though inclined to compromises arid often adhering to an inconsistent and contradictory stand, the urban middle bourgeois strata are a political force that is interested in the struggle against imperialism and the monopolies. While representatives of these strata often harbour reactionary ideas and views (including such that are anti-communist), the petty bourgeoisie of the capitalist cities are gradually throwing off the influence of monopoly capital and turning into an ally of the working class in the struggle against imperialism. Pointing to this fact, Waldeck Rochet, General Secretary of the French Communist Party, wrote that in France "one can observe the growing proletarianisation of various social strata, which are thus drawing closer to the working class, despite all the efforts made by the ruling classes to divide and isolate them.''^^**^^
The activity of the middle strata has been steadily growing in the workers' class battles and democratic movements in Italy, Spain, Britain, the Federal Republic of Germany, Portugal, West Berlin, Japan, Turkey and many Latin American countries.
In the sixties, the protest movement against militarism and US imperialism's military ventures in Vietnam was marked by mass participation of the middle strata.
Intellectuals, members of the liberal professions and other representatives of the middle strata in the United States, that citadel of modern imperialism, are ever more _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 25.
^^**^^ Class Struggle and Modern World (Pressing Problems of the Working-Class Movement in the Developed Capitalist Countries), p. 30 (in Russian).
263 actively joining the social protest movement, the antimonopoly struggle, and the democratic and peace movement.What is needed to draw the urban middle strata into the anti-monopoly front is the purposeful organising activities of the Communist Parties, since there are considerable forces in the capitalist countries which are out to prevent the middle strata from uniting with the working class. In such countries as the FRG, France, the United States, Chile and Argentina, the reactionary circles are trying to win over the middle strata with slogans of anti-communism, jingoism, revanchism, and so on. Just as previously, the home reactionaries, the neo-fascists in particular, are addressing themselves first of all to petty-bourgeois strata which are being impoverished, in an attempt to set them against the working class. Part of these strata are still politically passive or, by long-standing tradition, following the lead of the bourgeois parties, which is impeding the unification of all the anti-monopoly forces. All this confronts the Communist Parties with the task of more work on problems of an alliance between the working class and the urban middle strata.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Communist PartiesDrawing on the experience of the post-war years, the Communist Parties believe that a firm alliance between the working class and the urban middle strata in the struggle against monopoly capital is possible and necessary both for the accomplishment of democratic tasks and in the transition from capitalism to socialism.
As early as 1959, the French Communists noted, at their Fifteenth Congress, the need to ensure an alliance between the proletariat and the middle strata. "To establish a united front of the working class at any cost,'' Maurice Thorez told the Congress, "to secure unity within the working class, and a unification between the working class and the middle classes by all means---such is the slogan of the Communist Party.''^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ Maurice Thorez, Selected Articles and Speeches (1930--64), Moscow, 1966, p. 443 (in Russian).
264In his speech at the 1969 International Meeting Luis Corvalan, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Chile, noted the activity and revolutionary spirit of the middle strata in the Latin American countries. "Fresh detachments are joining the working class and the Communists in the battle,'' he emphasised. "Middle strata in town and countryside, young people and intellectuals are joining in the social struggle against the injustice and crime inherent in capitalism. A sizeable section of these classes and social strata display a truly revolutionary spirit, often using working-class methods in their action, acting together with the Communists and accepting socialism as their goal... We take a positive view of these phenomena and are prepared to co-operate.''^^*^^
The Communist Parties' action in defence of the specific interests, needs and demands of various sections of the middle strata is a highly important factor in the struggle to rally the middle strata about the proletariat. Communists are drawing up programmes for the democratic reform of taxation systems, demanding price adjustments for services rendered to petty proprietors, a system of social insurance for traders, long-term credits for them, and so on. In their policy statements, the Communist Parties emphasise that the possibility has now arisen for the middle strata to take part, in an alliance with the proletariat, in the struggle for the accomplishment, not only of general democratic tasks but also of a number of tasks of a socialist character. Communists point out that socialism will free all working people from exploitation, from being ruined and absorbed by the monopolies, and will provide them with prospects of an assured and dignified life.
Bourgeois ideologists are intimidating the middle strata with the alleged communist intention to deprive the small proprietors of their property, and turn them into proletarians. V. I. Lenin gave a clear-cut definition of the Communists' principled position, writing that the bourgeoisie was lying when it said that the Communists wanted to deprive the middle and small peasants of their property.^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 269.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 6, p. 397.
265Of course, the Communists do not promise artisans, petty traders and the like that they will perpetuate the petty entrepreneur. They make no secret of their goal---the abolition of bourgeois private property of every kind. After the victory of the socialist revolution, the working class will expropriate the means of production belonging to the big bourgeoisie. As for the petty proprietors, they will see for themselves the advantages of running the economy on the basis of socialist ownership of the means of production, and that only socialist co-operatives will give them a free and well-to-do life. This has been borne out, in particular, by the socialist countries' experience.
The decisions of congresses of a number of Communist Parties have stressed that a broad-based democratic coalition, including the middle strata and headed by the working class and its communist vanguard, must be retained even after the victory of the socialist revolution. During the transition from capitalism to socialism, the participation of parties representing the middle strata in administering the state is possible. Communists believe that the question of the middle strata during the transition to socialism can be solved through the further consolidation of their alliance with the working class. In this, the Communist Parties draw upon the experience of the GDR and other socialist countries, where the Communists have succeeded in enlisting the middle strata and their parties in a national front led by the working class.
In the citadels of capitalism, the working class has been ever more consistently directing its own efforts and those of its anti-monopoly allies in the urban middle strata against the imperialist state, that strike-force of modern capitalism, thereby expanding the scale of general democratic action and raising it to the level of a political struggle against the exploiter system as a whole. As L. I. Brezhnev said at the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress, "The events of the past five-year period in the capitalist world have fully borne out the importance of the working class as the chief and strongest opponent of the rule of the monopolies, and as a centre rallying all the anti-monopoly forces.'' He emphasised that the current class battles were "harbinger of fresh class battles which could lead to... the establishment of the power 266 of the working class in alliance with other sections of the working people''.^^*^^
Highly indicative in this respect are the developments in Chile, where a government of the progressive Popular Unity bloc has been in power since November 4, 1970. As Luis Corvalan emphasised in his speech at the GPSU's TwentyFourth Congress, "The Chilean Government has been formed by a bloc of parties, extensively representing the working class, the middle sections and various other groups of the population.'' He went on to say that "...in our country, we regard all questions, including socialist construction, from the standpoint of co-operation, unlimited in time, between the Communists and Socialists, and among all the parties making up the Popular Unity bloc.''^^**^^
By defending the vital interests of the urban middle strata, the Communists are gradually winning their sympathy and support, thus fostering the growth of political consciousness and eliminating anti-communist prejudices in their midst. All this makes for solidarity between the working class and the middle strata in the struggle against the rule of the monopolies.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Forms and MethodsOf great importance in the struggle to strengthen the alliance between the working class and the middle strata is communist work within mass organisations of the urban middle strata. In conducting this work, Communists endeavour to use a differentiated approach to various brackets of the middle strata. The Communists carry on considerable work in the corporative bodies which involve a major part of the middle strata in the developed capitalist countries. The most typical organisations of independent employers of a corporative character are associations of artisans and traders, co-operatives and chambers of commerce. In the'FRG, for example, there are about 9,500 artisan workshops affiliated _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, pp. 22--23.
^^**^^ Our Friends Speak, Moscow, p. 392.
267 with the Central Association of Artisans. Two-thirds of the business petty bourgeoisie in the FRG belong to the Main Association of German Retail Trade. In France, there are three associations of artisans: the National Confederation of Artisans, the Confederation of French Artisans and the United Artisans' Confederation. In Britain, several hundred chambers of commerce are organised in the national chamber of trade and an association of manufactured goods retail traders.Co-operatives of various kinds---consumer, credit, marketing and supply, housing and even production co-- operativeshold an important place among the economic associations of the petty bourgeoisie. In a number of countries such as Norway and Denmark, the co-operative movement remains typically petty-bourgeois. Small and medium employers' unions are also among the influential corporate associations. In the United States, for example, most of such unions are united in the two organisations---the national association of small businessmen and the confederation of American small business organisations. In France, there is a Confederation of Small and Medium Enterprises uniting many small employers and traders. Monopoly capital subordinates these pettybourgeois corporative associations through the big and medium capitalists, who are members of most of these associations and play a leading part in their guiding bodies.
The Communist Parties have set themselves the aim of winning these mass organisations over to the side of the working class. Communist tactics consists in work being carried on within all such bodies, despite their reactionary leadership. Communists coming from among the small artisans and traders hold meetings and talks in workshops, stores, cafeterias, etc., with the purpose of building up contacts within such organisations at the lower levels, to ensure, from below, unity of action by the middle strata in an alliance with the working class.
The communist press systematically deals with problems of interest to the urban middle strata, for whose benefit special bulletins are published and seminars held, while various urban organisations and committees are set up to protect the interests of traders, artisans, housing tenants, co-- operatives and co-operative associations for the purchase of 268 products and raw materials. In a number of countries, such co-operatives have already become effective in the struggle against the wholesale-trade monopolists.
All this has enhanced the Communists' prestige and influence among the middle strata. In France, for example, Communists are in the vanguard in a number of large organisations of artisans, small traders, and other middle strata.
Communists appeal to all democrats to display the utmost initiative in protecting the interests of the middle strata; they take an active part in elections to guiding bodies, workers' commissions and other factory bodies, mutual aid societies of smallholders, artisans, salesmen, etc. Communists and their Party organisations study the working and living conditions of the urban middle strata, maintain direct contacts with them, and link up their day-by-day demands with the demand for far-going economic reforms and greater democracy in the country's political life.
The Communist Parties are working to establish close contacts between the corporative associations of the middle strata and the workers' trade unions, and also to organise certain groups of the middle strata in trade unions. They want trade-union locals to tackle the problems of the small traders.
In a number of countries, the urban middle strata have political parties of their own, which is why Communists are working to extend and consolidate the alliance between the working class and the urban middle strata, and achieve unity of action with petty-bourgeois and Social-Democratic parties, a considerable part of whose membership belong to the middle strata.
In recent years, many Communist Parties in capitalist countries have made considerable progress to bring about united action with other Left democratic parties. This was reported to the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress by the leaders of the Communist Parties of such countries as France, Italy, the United States, Canada, Japan, Uruguay, and Chile. Thus the policy of united anti-monopoly action has enabled the Italian Communists to win the votes of as many as 9,000,000 electors and achieve, in hundreds of local, city, provincial and three large regional organs of local government, relations of unity with the Italian Socialist 269 Party of Proletarian Unity and the Italian Socialist Party, in respect of the question of power. "...This has placed in the order of the day,'' E. Berlinguer, head of the Italian delegation, said at the Twenty-Fourth Congress, "and created prospects for a shift to the Left in the administration of the country as a whole.''^^*^^
An active role in bringing the urban middle strata closer to the working class is played by communist protection of the petty-bourgeoisie's interests iu parliaments and municipal councils. Thus, communist deputies to the French National Assembly are calling for abolition of the turnover tax on artisans, and an increase in their tax-free incomes. Communists are supporting protests voiced by small traders against the demagogic campaigns for "price cuts" and are showing the working people who is actually responsible for the soaring prices---the big bourgeoisie. In this way, the Communists are helping the petty bourgeoisie understand the coincidence of their interests with those of the working class.
Communists are organising strike action by the urban middle strata jointly with the working class; thus office workers and other representatives of the middle strata learn to use proletarian methods of action. United action, strikes, and mutual assistance and solidarity with the working class are raising the level of political consciousness in the middle strata, and facilitate the establishment and strengthening of the anti-monopoly front.
The growing acuteness of the class struggle in capitalist countries and ever greater successes of the world socialist system are inducing the most progressive representatives of the middle strata to side with the working class, support its struggle and join the Communist Party. Many artisans and traders are members of the French and the Italian Communist Parties. Such things increase communist influence in the mass of the urban middle strata, in contrast to that of bourgeois ideology and the reactionary parties.
Of course, the middle strata's closer approach to the proletariat comes up against difficulties, with further _-_-_
^^*^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, p. 183 (in Russian).
270 differentiation proceeding within those strata. Discarding the traditional prejudices of the petty bourgeoisie is a painful process, with the pro-imperialist and conservative elements of the petty bourgeoisie falling into the embrace of fascist reactionaries, while others go to extremes of anarchist rebelliousness. In the FRG, for example, fascist-minded organisations attract part of the urban middle strata with their slogans of brazen revanchism. In the United States, France and Italy, representatives of the middle strata also take part in the pro-fascist movement.Experience has shown that wherever unity of action is established between the working class and the middle strata much can be achieved in the struggle against the omnipotence of the monopolies and for peace, democracy and social progress.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 4. THE COMMUNIST PARTIES' POLICY TOWARDSThe problem of building up the alliance between the working class and broad sections of the intelligentsia is acquiring ever greater significance in the revolutionary movement in the capitalist countries. As the 1969 International Meeting emphasised, "The alliance of workers by hand and by brain is becoming an increasingly important force in the struggle for peace, democracy and social progress, for the democratic control of production, of cultural institutions and information media and for the development of public education in the interests of the people.''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Condition of the IntelligentsiaFor a correct understanding of the intelligentsia's condition in capitalist society and its significance as an ally of the working class, one should bear in mind that the distinction between manual and mental work is the basis for the intelligentsia being singled out in Marxist literature as a special stratum, comprising those engaged in _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow 1969, p. 25.
271 professional and brain work of a definite level which is above the average at each stage of a given society's development. At present, professional and mental work calls for higher education in most cases, particularly in the developed capitalist countries. Its specific social function is another distinguishing feature of the intelligentsia, this consisting in the preservation, transmission and development of culture, both material and spiritual. For a correct understanding of the class and political stand of the intelligentsia in capitalist countries, it is essential that this social function should be taken into account. At the same time, it should be remembered that the intelligentsia is not homogeneous in its class make-up. Individual groups of the intelligentsia differ in their position within the system of social production, play quite different parts in the social organisation of labour, and receive different incomes. Even if one takes as an example the scientific, engineering and technical intelligentsia, who are directly engaged in social production, one will see considerable differences between the various sections of that intelligentsia. Some engineers and technicians are engaged in production, many of them playing no part in management and organisation. Other engineers and technicians are engaged in the system of organising, planning and managing production, while yet others work at research institutions, design offices and laboratories. The bulk of scientists, engineers and technicians in capitalist countries are salary earners, with substantial salary differences among certain brackets of this branch of the intelligentsia. The condition of various groups of the intelligentsia standing outside the immediate sphere of production is even more differentiated. Consequently, the intelligentsia does not comprise a special class.The scientific and technological revolution, the unprecedented rise in the role of science in all spheres of the economy and social life, and the greater desire among broad sections of the people for education and culture have resulted in a rapid increase in the size of the intelligentsia in capitalist countries, and its growing significance in the social structure. In the early years of this century, engineers and technicians made up about 7-8 per cent of all wage and salary earners in the developed capitalist countries; their 272 propertion increased three to fourfold in the sixties. In the United States, the number of engineering and technical personnel went up from 4,500,000 in 1950 to 10,500,000 in 1968, while the number of clerical personnel (exclusive of management) totalled 35,400,000. In the developed capitalist countries, the growth rate in the proportion of brain workers in the total army of employees exceeds the growth rate in the aggregate number of working people. This applies in particular to scientists, technicians, engineers and teachers. The rapid rate of increase in the size of the intelligentsia in the developed capitalist countries is likely to continue in the near future. Thus, it has been estimated that by 1980 the number of engineers and technicians and scientists in the United States will increase by 50 per cent over 1966, with a total 20--22 per cent increase in the number of all wage and salary workers.
The number of college students is also increasing rapidly. Between 1962 and 1967, the increase was 70 per cent in the EEC countries. Thus, the intelligentsia is becoming a mass intermediate class stratum in the developed capitalist countries.
There has also been an increase in the size of the intelligentsia and the number of college students in Latin American and Asian countries with a medium level of development. Thus, though college graduates still comprise a mere 1.6 per cent of all the population in the Latin American countries, their number had almost doubled in 1960, as against 1950. The number of college students in the Latin American countries increased 300 per cent from 1950 through 1965, totalling 1,212,000 in 1970.
The mounting numerical strength of the intelligentsia in the capitalist countries is accompanied by a growing trend, indicated by Marx and Lenin, towards proletarianisation of the bulk of brain workers. This trend is manifested in various forms and with varied force in various sections of the intelligentsia, this depending on the economic and political development of the country in question, its national features, and the like. On the whole, however, it is objectively bringing the intelligentsia closer to the working class.
The trend towards proletarianisation is already to be seen in the democratisation of the intelligentsia's social 273 composition. The scientific and technological revolution, which has called for a steep rise in the number of brain workers engaged in production, as well as the struggle waged by the working class and broad sections of the people for greater access to education, has extracted concessions from the ruling bourgeoisie and the replacement of outmoded forms of class segregation in education by more camouflaged and refined forms. Of course, bourgeois reforms do not change the class essence of education in the capitalist countries, which, as before, is aimed at forming an elite from among the privileged classes and at restricting access to education, especially tertiary education, for broad sections of the working people. As before, there are disproportionately few workers' children among college students in the capitalist countries, considering the working class's share of the total population. Nevertheless, the working people's gains in the sphere of education have led to some democratisation of the social composition of the intelligentsia in the capitalist countries. "The engineering and technical intelligentsia in the capitalist countries,'' L. I. Brezhnev pointed out, "is now being drawn not only from the bourgeoisie but also from the middle sections and in part from among the working people as well.''^^*^^ Thus, for instance, college students from the middle strata make up 58 per cent of all students in Britain; in the FRG---53 per cent; in France---about 50 per cent; in Italy--- 39 per cent, and so on. The same is true of college students in the Latin American countries.
The increasing trend towards proletarianisation is manifested vividly in the considerable changes in the position of the intelligentsia, among whom a sharp social differentiation is taking place. While the top crust are increasingly merging with the bourgeoisie, and receiving a part of the monopoly profits in the form of salaries, the far greater part are swelling the ranks of wage and salary workers living exclusively by selling their labour power.^^**^^ To most of the _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 151.
^^**^^ In France, for example, 98.6 per cent of engineers and technicians in the sphere of production and 82.4 per cent of top managerialtechnical personnel in the non-productive sphere are wage and salary workers.
__PRINTERS_P_273_COMMENT__ 18--0873 274 intelligentsia, joining the ranks of wage and salary workers means greater exploitation and lower standards of living. The salaries of most intellectuals are approaching the wages of skilled industrial workers and in some countries have fallen below that level. Of course, the trend towards lower salaries reveals itself with differing force among the different groups of the intelligentsia. Thus, for example, studies carried out in France in 1968 showed that, on the whole, engineers and technicians engaged directly in production get lower pay than comparable employees in other economic sectors. At the same time, some groups of intellectuals outside the sphere of production (teachers, some brackets in the medical profession, and the like) receive salaries approaching industrial workers' wages.Not only manual workers but brain workers too are already suffering from the effects of the capitalist intensification of labour, unemployment, and uncertainty of the future. Other important changes in the nature of work done by intellectuals are also running parallel with the conversion of most intellectuals into wage and salary workers.
Work done individually or in small groups, and essentially artisan in nature, is gradually yielding place to work in large collectives, in which the brain worker merely makes a contribution to the collective effort. This trend, which is most pronounced among the scientific and technical intelligentsia, involves substantially all groups of brain workers. Even intellectuals in such traditionally ``independent'' and ``liberal'' professions as physicians, lawyers, artists, etc., are employed as salary workers at large clinics, legal offices, news and publicity agencies, and so on. All this has borne out what Marx and Engels said on this subject: "The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage-labourers.''^^*^^
Despite science's growing role in all spheres of production and social life, state-monopoly capitalism actually strips most of the intelligentsia of any part in administration, _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, = Manifesto of the Communist Party, Moscow, 1959, p. 49.
275 paralyses its initiative, and strives to reduce its work to the performance of limited and monotonous operations.The growing concentration of brain workers (with all its distinction from concentration of the working class), and their loss of the special social prestige created by material and moral professional independence also bring the intelligentsia's objective position closer to that of the working class in the capitalist countries.
The intelligentsia's deteriorating economic condition and social status in the capitalist countries, and their increasing closeness to the working class are decisively influencing their stand in the class struggle. As V. I. Lenin emphasised, the intelligentsia join the ranks of wage and salary workers, as "capitalism increasingly deprives the intellectual of his independent position, converts him into a hired worker and threatens to lower his living standard''.^^*^^
Under present-day conditions, an alliance between the working class and broad sections of the intelligentsia is facilitated, not only by changes in the letter's economic and social position but also by the profound crisis of bourgeois ideology, politics and culture. The monopoly bourgeoisie's trampling democracy and civic liberties underfoot, and its desire to curtail and abolish democratic rights are evoking growing resistance from considerable sections of the intelligentsia, who are devoted to such ideals.
Many participants in the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties pointed out that the ideological and intellectual hollowness of the "consumer society'', and the utter anti-humanism that pervades all capitalist society and manifests itself in all of imperialist policies, in the militarisation of the economy, aggression, wars and unprecedented crimes against humanity bring broad sections of the intelligentsia, especially college students, into the anti-monopoly struggle. As the 1969 Meeting stressed, "In this age, when science is becoming a direct productive force, growing numbers of intellectuals are swelling the ranks of wage and salary workers. Their social interests intertwine with those of the working class; their creative aspirations clash with the interests of the _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 4, p. 202.
__PRINTERS_P_275_COMMENT__ 18* 276 monopoly employers, who place profit above all else. Despite the great diversity in their positions, different groups of intellectuals are coming more and more into conflict with the monopolies and the imperialist policy of governments. The crisis of bourgeois ideology and the attraction of socialism help to bring intellectuals into the anti-imperialist struggle.''^^*^^ __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Intelligentsia: an Important AllyThat broad sections of the scientific, technical and creative intelligentsia and so many college students have entered the anti-imperialist struggle is a distinguishing feature and a most important factor in the spread of the class struggle in the capitalist countries. The demands from intellectuals and college students are more and more coinciding with those of the working class. Not only in content but also in form their action is falling in with action by the working class. Thus, the intelligentsia have been using such tested forms of struggle as strikes, mass demonstrations, boycotts and the like. This has created favourable conditions for a firmer alliance between the working class and the intelligentsia, and has revealed new prospects for the revolutionary struggle.
The Communist and Workers' Parties attach great importance to the consolidation of this alliance in the struggle against the monopolies. The Manifesto of the French Communist Party's Central Committee (December 1968), for instance, points out that the French Communist Party regards "the indispensable alliance between the working class and the intellectuals as a capital question, to which it is according the greatest attention.''^^**^^ Similar assessments are contained in the policy statements made by the Communist Parties of Italy, Belgium, the FRG, the United States, Canada, Chile, Uruguay and other countries. The present task is to win over to the side of the working class not only _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parlies, Moscow 1969, p. 25.
^^**^^ Partiinaya zhizn (Party Liie) No. 1, 1969, p. 66.
277 certain progressive intellectuals, but the entire intelligentsia as an ally in the struggle against the monopolies.The significance of an alliance between the working class and the intelligentsia reaches far beyond the framework of struggle against the monopolies. V. I. Lenin repeatedly pointed out that we need the intellectuals, that "...we need them, too, for our socialist revolution. We know socialism can only be built from elements of large-scale capitalist culture and the intellectuals are one of these elements,'' and that "We cannot build it if we don't utilise such a heritage of capitalist culture as the intellectuals.''^^*^^ In this way, by developing and consolidating the alliance with the intelligentsia as part of an extensive anti-monopoly front, the working class also creates conditions for the attainment of its ultimate goal---the construction of socialism and communism.
The objective process of the proletarianisation of the intelligentsia and the approximation of its vital interests to those of the working class does not of itself lead to broad sections of the intelligentsia understanding the changes taking place or to their recognition of the need for an alliance with the working class, and of the latter's leading role. The petty-bourgeois social roots of most intellectuals in the capitalist countries, the lengthy impact bourgeois ideology has made during their professional training, and their deep-seated petty-bourgeois illusions and traditions greatly hamper the intelligentsia's drawing closer to the working class. The ruling bourgeoisie makes use of a vast range of means of bringing ideological and political pressure to bear, bribing certain sections of the intelligentsia, splitting its ranks, resorting to threats and direct repression to prevent a considerable part of the intelligentsia from siding with the working class, and to preserve its ideological and political influence over it. The involvement of broad sections of the intelligentsia in the revolutionary process sometimes gives rise to a temporary intensification of Right-wing reformist and Leftist sectarian opportunist trends, which try to cash in on the political inexperience of intellectuals and college students.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 28, p. 215.
278While distorting the significance of the social and political processes in the intelligentsia, bourgeois and revisionist ideologists try to advance ``new'' social theories. Despite their motley variety, these theories pursue one aim---to refute Marxism-Leninism and, particularly, its doctrine that the working class is the most revolutionary class of our times, and that there is an objective need for the leading role of the Communist Parties in the struggle for socialism.
A wide range of bourgeois and Right-wing revisionist theories of the so-called new middle class are being spread in the capitalist countries. These views allege that the intelligentsia's rapid growth-rate proves the non-validity of Marx's thesis of the inevitable growth of the working class in the process of capital accumulation. They are out to prove that the levelling of all classes in an overall "middle class" is taking place in the capitalist countries, and that class antagonisms are disappearing.
In bringing forward the intelligentsia as a "new middle class'', the propagandists of these theories consider them an integral whole, thus ignoring the deep distinctions between individual groups of the intelligentsia. At the same time, they gloss over the radical changes in the socio-economic conditions of the intelligentsia, changes which are objectively leading to considerable sections drawing closer to the working class. In fact, the changes in the class structure of the capitalist countries have again shown the correctness of the basic Marxist propositions on the inevitable proletarianisation of ever new sections of the working people.
The Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunists, often in the guise of Marxists, try to cash in on the intelligentsia's mounting economic and political struggle against the monopolies. Falsely accusing the working class of the capitalist countries of "becoming bourgeois" and ``integrating'' in the capitalist system, these ``theorists'' are trying to advance the intelligentsia and college students as the revolutionary vanguard. The opportunists place a high value on spontaneous and unorganised action by college students and anarchist-minded intellectuals, who are allegedly ``free'' of any ideology and politics.
Such theories are objectively aimed at divorcing the intelligentsia from the working class, strengthening the 279 influence of bourgeois ideology on the intelligentsia, driving them onto the pernicious path of adventurism and, eventually, weakening the entire revolutionary movement in the capitalist countries. Recent experience of class battles has convincingly shown the scientific non-validity and the considerable harm these theories have caused to the entire anti-monopoly movement. The intelligentsia's active participation in the anti-monopoly struggle helps build up its consciousness and its wish for an alliance with the working class. Important in creating the subjective prerequisites for consolidating this alliance are the activities of the working class and the Communist Parties in support of the economic and social demands of the working intelligentsia.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Communists and IntellectualsThe Communist Parties are giving close attention to problems facing the intelligentsia and to th^ new facts that reveal its growing activity in the anti-imperialist struggle. Of great theoretical and practical importance was the discussion on problems of the intelligentsia at the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Communists are making a significant contribution to the Marxist analysis of the intelligentsia's socio-economic position today in the capitalist countries and are bringing out the specific manifestations of proletarianisation in various sections of the scientific, technical and creative intelligentsia. In emphasising that the vital interests and basic demands of broad sections of the intelligentsia and the working class coincide, the Communist Parties are showing the need for a thorough analysis and development of, and support for, the specific demands of broad sections of the intelligentsia.
Many Communist Parties are successfully drawing up programmes and proposals for the advancement of various spheres of culture, science, technology, the arts and education in their respective countries, and for better economic conditions for the intelligentsia, its professional training and qualifications. The Communist Parties are enlisting the aid of intellectuals for work on these questions.
280As the experience of the Communist Parties of France, Italy, Chile, Uruguay and other countries has shown, the influence of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideology on the intelligentsia can be countered only given intensification of communist ideological work among those sections of the people, and popularisation of the scientific Marxist-Leninist ideology. The Communist Parties are working to provide, in the spirit of Marxism-Leninism, positive solutions of the ideological and political problems agitating the intelligentsia---problems of democracy, national sovereignty, culture, humanism, and so on. Of great importance to this work are the communist periodicals addressed to various groups of the intelligentsia, publications which acquaint the intelligentsia with the achievements of the socialist countries in various spheres of science, technology and culture, initiate discussions on current problems of politics, economics, philosophy and the arts, and popularise the Marxist-Leninist doctrine.
A number of Communist Parties are dealing with the question of the working intelligentsia's place in anti-- monopoly movements and the forms of its participation therein. Parallel with their ideological work, Communists are actively setting up and strengthening trade-union organisations for brain workers, associations of creative workers that will be closely connected with the working-class trade unions. The Communists back mass action by the working intelligentsia in defence of their vital demands, and also organise movements of working-class solidarity with that struggle. Communists are also working for the intelligentsia to support the working class's political and economic struggle in the capitalist countries. Important in the Communist Parties' ideological and political work among the intelligentsia is a vigorous struggle against Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism, which, as has been pointed out, distorts the role and place of the intelligentsia in the revolutionary struggle, and attempts to win it away from the working class.
Work among college students holds an important place in the activities of the Communist Parties, who are working for the unity of all democratic student organisations and for united action by students and the working class. Communists are also devoting more attention to students' day-by-day 281 needs, the organisation of sports and cultural and educational work, improvement of their living conditions, their leisure-time activities, and so on. Communists have also accumulated valuable experience in working with progressive intellectuals and enlisting their active participation in communist ideological and political activities. Thus, the Communist Parties have set up research groups of all kinds, associations and even institutes to work on important theoretical and practical problems, are organising competitions, exhibitions and concerts by creative intellectuals, and are drawing broad sections of the intelligentsia into the movement for peace, and the peoples' international solidarity against imperialist policies, reaction and wars.
Though important successes have been scored in recent years in work among the intelligentsia, the Communist Parties of a number of capitalist countries have not yet won influential positions among some important contingents of the scientific, technical and creative intelligentsia, or overcome the influence of bourgeois ideology on them. This stems not only from the objective difficulties already mentioned, but also from the sectarian attitude to the intelligentsia on the part of some Communists, and from a failure to appreciate the importance of winning it over to the side of the working class, and a reluctance to cope with the difficulties of work among intellectuals.
A number of Communist Parties in capitalist countries have recently criticised the erroneous and sectarian attitude towards the intelligentsia, and have stressed the need to eliminate the shortcomings and difficulties in work in this field. This creates conditions for the greater active participation of broad sections of the intelligentsia in the working people's revolutionary struggle.
[282] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER VII __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE STRUGGLE TO BUILD UP AN ANTI-IMPERIALISTThe struggle of the national and social liberation forces against imperialist domination and for economic independence remains the main content of the national-liberation movement in the 1970s. At the same time a number of Asian and African countries are going through a multiform process of changes in social relations, during which the nationalliberation struggle is developing into a struggle against relations of both feudal and capitalist exploitation.
Two trends are emerging in the progressive advancement of the Asian and African countries. A change in favour of democracy and socialism in the world alignment of class forces has helped enrich the content of national-liberation revolutions. The national-democratic and revolutionary forces that are fighting against imperialist exploitation, also come out against the capitalist relations of exploitation, which become an obstacle to social progress. The 1969 International Communist Meeting noted that "countries which have taken the capitalist road have been unable to solve any of the basic problems facing them''.^^*^^ These countries' economic backwardness and their subordinate position in the world capitalist economy are placing a heavy burden on their working people.
Many of the newly free states have made certain progress during their existence as independent nations. Thus, from 1950 to 1967, Africa's share of capitalist industrial _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 29.
283 production rose from 1 to 1.3 per cent, and that of Asia, from 4 to 5.6 per cent. Agricultural production in the developing states has increased too. Between 1948 and 1952, these accounted for 28 per cent of the wheat harvested in the capitalist world; in 1969 the figure was 35 per cent. However, this growth is insufficient to abolish the socio-economic backwardness of the newly emergent states, which remain an object of imperialist exploitation. Far from narrowing, the gap between the advanced capitalist and the developing states has been widening. In 1969, the gross national product per head of the population in the developed capitalist countries was 11.4 times larger than in Asia and Africa (9.9 times in 1950). For Africa the figure was 12.3 times (10.4 times in 1950), and for South and South-East Asia it was 17.7 times (14.4 times in 1950). The gap also widened in the per capita national income of the advanced and developing countries. Thus, in 1950 the national income per head of the population in the advanced countries was 12 to 13 times greater than in Asia and Africa, and at present the figure is 15 to 17 times.Since the Asian and African countries do not have the necessary wherewithal for their economic growth, the imperialist states are taking advantage of this situation in their neo-colonialist plans. Economic ``aid'' is granted by the imperialist states with the aim of an even greater economic and political subordination of the newly free nations. In the 1970s, according to UN data, the developing countries will have to pay foreign monopoly capital over $10,000 million for its ``services'', or twice as much as in the mid1960s. By the mid-1970s the developing nations' indebtedness to the imperialist states will total $100,000 million. Through different forms of economic exploitation, the imperialists are extracting, in the shape of profits, up to 17 per cent of the national incomes of the developing countries.
The development of these countries shows that they will be unable to accomplish their social and economic tasks rapidly and in the interests of the working people as long as they remain within the capitalist economic system, have a very low level of the productive forces, and no sources for the accumulation of capital.
Capitalist development is the road towards the virtual re-colonisation of the newly independent states, leading to 284 tens of millions of working people living, as before, in hardship and poverty. The course of events is convincing the working people that two conditions are necessary for social progress: liberation from dependence on imperialism and radical socio-economic reforms of an anti-capitalist character.
The more than 20-year rule of the national bourgeoisie in a number of newly free countries has revealed its inability and reluctance to resolve the pressing general democratic tasks and, consequently, to take their countries along the road of genuine social progress.
Many Asian and African nations are today facing the tasks of demolishing imperialism's economic positions, ending the backward agrarian specialisation of their economies as suppliers of raw materials, achieving an appreciable growth of their productive forces, and training their own personnel capable of guiding their political, economic and cultural life. This calls for radical socio-economic reforms as part of the general-democratic programme of the revolution in its new stage. What is first of all necessary is the ousting of representatives of foreign and national monopolies from economic management; entrusting that management to the state sector, which is capable of resisting these monopolies; solving the agrarian problem in the interests of the peasants, building and developing modern self-sustaining national industries; improving the life of the people so as to expand the home market necessary for economic growth; introducing democratic principles in public life, and enhancing the people's role in running the economic and social affairs in the interests of national regeneration. For this reason the national-liberation struggle in the Asian and African developing countries is assuming an increasingly anti-capitalist trend.
``The struggle against the forces of reaction and against the henchmen of imperialism is being carried on everywhere, and in some countries the progressive forces have already scored serious gains,''^^*^^ said the CPSU Central Committee's report delivered to the Party's Twenty-Fourth Congress by Leonid Brezhnev.
_-_-_^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 24.
285The conditions and the scope of the liberation struggle vary in different countries and regions. This makes for the diversity of its roads, forms and methods. Even in countries that are developing along the capitalist road, the content and scope of the liberation struggle are different, this depending in the first place on the sections of the bourgeoisie that hold power and the alignment of class and political forces in a given country. Thus, in countries ruled by the big bourgeoisie, who maintain close economic relations with foreign monopolies and feudal landed interests (Thailand, the Philippines, Iran, Morocco, etc.), socio-economic tasks are being accomplished to an extent that is advantageous to the bourgeoisie and ensures a purely capitalist development of these countries.
In a number of countries, where the democratic and other progressive forces are better organised, the patriotic sections of the bourgeoisie have been compelled to join the progressive forces against the monopoly groups of the home bourgeoisie and the feudal forces and for accomplishment of social and economic programmes of national regeneration (India and Sri Lanka).
Historical experience has shown that programmes of socioeconomic reforms can be achieved only through a consistent anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist struggle. Success along this road will be made possible by radical changes in the alignment of class forces in favour of progress and democracy and by stronger positions of the working class and its vanguard, the Communist Parties.
Representatives of revolutionary democracy have come to power in more and more countries, such as Egypt, Syria, Algeria, Somalia, Tanzania, the People's Republic of Congo, Guinea and Burma. These countries are carrying out profound social reforms in the interests of the people and greater national independence. Though they do not yet predominate among the newly free states, their emergence and development have been of great significance, because they have shown other countries prospects of advancement along the road of social progress. The successful development of the socialist-oriented countries provides an example and incentive for a fresh upsurge in the liberation struggle everywhere.
286Thus, qualitatively new progressive changes that may become irreversible are taking place in the Asian and African national-liberation movements. In characterising the features of the national-liberation revolution at the present stage, Leonid Brezhnev said at the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties: "The socialist orientation of a number of young states of Africa and Asia is an important achievement of the revolutionary forces and a heavy defeat for imperialism. These countries have scored their first successes in carrying through deep-going social and economic reforms, thereby providing fresh practical confirmation of the Leninist conclusion that in our epoch the peoples who win liberation from colonial oppression can advance along the path of social progress by-passing capitalism. One of the most important conditions which make such development possible is co-operation between the progressive young states and the socialist countries.''^^*^^
The progressive social changes taking place in Asia and Africa are different in scope. Though the progressive forces have not yet made substantial gains everywhere, the decisive trend in most Asian and African countries is towards activisation of the democractic forces, a shift of more and more working people to the Left, and the growing awareness of the need to fight not only against foreign imperialists but also against those groups of the national bourgeoisie who are no longer able to express the interests of the people in the struggle for social progress.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Non-Capitalist Road of DevelopmentThe question of the possibility for a number of countries to by-pass the capitalist stage and go over to socialism was theoretically raised by Marx and Engels, but acquired practical significance only after the October 1917 Revolution in Russia. Proceeding from the specific situation in the colonial and dependent countries and with due account, first of all, of their economic backwardness, undeveloped social relations and predominantly peasant population, Lenin expressed the idea that a number of economically backward _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 152.
287 countries could go over to socialism, skipping the capitalist stage- In his view two conditions were necessary for this: 1) the growth of the political consciousness, independent political activity and organisation of the working people, and 2) assistance from the victorious working class, i.e., the existence of a world socialist system which could exert a decisive influence on world development. Later on, Lenin developed and gave concrete shape in his writings to the idea of non-capitalist development as a form of the transition of economically backward countries to socialism. In doing so, he called attention to the socio-economic and political content of this transition; the forms of development; the class nature of state power and the prospect of its conversion into the dictatorship of the proletariat; the significance of a Marxist party, the role of peasants' co-operatives, and other factors.The concept of the non-capitalist development of the newly free nations was further advanced at the Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties held in Moscow in 1957, 1960 and 1969.
It is a distinctive feature of the current socio-economic development of a number of newly emergent countries that the interests of the working people, like those of the petty and middle bourgeoisie, have been politically expressed by representatives of petty-bourgeois democracy. The revolutionary democratic regimes established in these countries have set themselves the aim of eliminating the gaping contradiction between their political independence and continuing economic dependence on world imperialism. Achievement of this aim calls, first of all, for the establishment of an independent economy, i.e., consistent implementation of radical socio-economic reforms. The choice of the noncapitalist road has inevitably presented these countries with the prospect of development towards socialism.
The non-capitalist road is something new in history, a special form for a number of countries to progress towards socialism without direct state guidance from the working class but with reliance on the socialist countries and in alliance with the international workers' and communist movement.
The development of countries along the non-capitalist road is characterised by tasks that belong to two stages 288 becoming merged: the struggle for national liberation, and the struggle against feudal and capitalist relations of exploitation. These tasks have drawn closer and become intertwined as never in the past. Marxist literature has called this stage of the struggle the national-democratic revolution. Its political content consists in the assumption of power by the middle, the semi-proletarian and the proletarian urban and rural strata. On acquiring power, they carry out sociopolitical reforms which first restrict the positions of the bourgeois and feudal classes, and then oust them from the economic and political life of their countries. Representatives of such strata can lead their countries along the noncapitalist road, i.e., implement a programme of general democratic, anti-imperialist, anti-feudal and, in part, anti-capitalist reforms.
These reforms are effected with an eye to the socialist prospect. However, they do not yet mean a socialist revolution, one that results in the establishment of the power of the working class and its allies. Moreover, it would be erroneous to believe that socialism can be built under the leadership of representatives of national democracy only, without their adopting the ideology of scientific communism and without reliance on the working class and its party. The main criteria of the class essence of power in a country on the non-capitalist road are: anti-imperialism and progressive internal policies, i.e., agrarian reforms to abolish the feudal and big capitalist landed estates; the transfer of the land to those who till it; turning the state sector in industry into the main sector of the economy; large-scale economic planning to expand the state sector and restrict the private capitalist one; higher living and cultural standards for the people; broader democracy in public life, and the like.
Non-capitalist development presupposes the lengthy coexistence of the state and private sectors of the economy, with the key economic and legislative positions being held by the state. Hence the possibility remains for the national bourgeoisie to influence a country's policies and progress. Advancement along the non-capitalist road is therefore attended by a sharp class struggle so that, until the working class, in alliance with the other democratic forces, takes 289 up a leading position, the danger of a country swerving from the socialist orientation will exist.
In such a situation the question of relations between the revolutionary democrats and the Marxist-Leninist parties acquires a decisive significance. The interests of the struggle call for sincere co-operation and genuine unification of all revolutionary anti-imperialist forces.
To sum up, non-capitalist development presupposes the following:~
---the possibility for economically backward countries to achieve socialism by by-passing the capitalist stage;~
---the possibility of such countries advancing towards socialism, with reliance on the proletarian and non-- proletarian masses;~
---the ability of the revolutionary leadership to vigorously and consistently implement both anti-imperialist and anticapitalist measures, which will inevitably bring it closer to scientific socialism;~
---the elevation of the working masses, above all the working class, to leading positions in all spheres of public life;~
---close and comprehensive co-operation with the socialist countries;~
---a consistent policy of struggle against imperialism in all spheres (economic, political, diplomatic, ideological, and so on).
Thus, the non-capitalist road is a specific and historically transitional stage in the development of the countries with a backward and multiform economy, a stage at which the tasks of the national-democratic revolution are accomplished in such a way that political, economic and cultural conditions are created for the construction of socialism to be launched.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Socialist Concepts in Newly Free Countries,The spread of various socialist concepts and variants of "national-type socialism" is a new feature of the present stage of the national-liberation movement. This is largely due to the all-round influence of socialism on the objective and subjective processes in the developing countries and to the tasks of the national and social stages drawing closer __PRINTERS_P_289_COMMENT__ 19---0873 290 together. Such concepts express the desire of certain sections in the newly emergent countries to find new ways of progressive advancement. In a number of countries, socialist concepts have even been proclaimed official ideologies. However, a socialist orientation does not yet mean a correct understanding of the fundamentals of scientific socialism or a readiness to put them into effect.
Very often the socialist concepts brought forward in some of the newly independent countries are largely eclectic. Elements of scientific socialism are interlinked with pettybourgeois, religious or Utopian ideas mixed with Marxist theses that are mainly used to criticise imperialism and neocolonialism, as well as capitalism as a whole.
The idea of a mixed economy (state, co-operative and private sectors) is being brought forward by some advocates of socialist concepts as the underlying economic principle of a new social system. Not infrequently, they come out against the abolition of private ownership and insist that the small-scale ownership of land should be preserved. Many of them see the cause of social inequality only in an ``unfair'' distribution of social wealth, but not in the position of certain social groups in the system of production relations. That is why, in analysing the class structure of society, they take as the criterion the size of money incomes and regard changes in the mode of distribution as the way to socialism.
A. Mohammed, First Secretary of the Iraqi Communist Party, noted at the 1969 International Meeting: "Some progressive regimes in Arab countries, and likewise some nationalist political parties and petty-bourgeois groups opting for `socialism', persist in their attempts to vulgarise the principles of scientific socialism and, all too often, to distort them.... Some of these regimes and groups do so in order to limit the vanguard role of the Communist Parties and deny the laws of transition to socialism or building socialism, including the essence of the Leninist proposition that a Marxist Party and one or another form of proletarian dictatorship are indispensable.''^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, pp. 318--19.
291The experience of the anti-imperialist struggle, and greater co-operation with the world socialist system are helping to bring about the ever wider spread of the ideas of scientific socialism in Asia and Africa. The practice of the nationalliberation movement and the class struggle may also encourage a further evolution in this direction of the views held by revolutionary democrats.
Such evolution is already taking place in a number of countries, Egypt being an example. "Egyptian socialism'', which arose as a revolutionary-nationalist trend in 1952, assumed a revolutionary-democratic character in the early 1960s, when it had parted company with the big bourgeoisie. At present, Egyptian leaders talk about the need of bringing their views closer to scientific socialism. The Arab Socialist Union (ASU) has become a rallying centre for all antiimperialist forces of Egypt's working people who are interested in reforming Egyptian society on socialist lines. The General National Congress of the ASU, held in July 1971, welcomed the expansion of friendly relations and co-- operation between the ASU and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
In Tanzania, the communal-peasant nature of pettybourgeois socialism is gradually yielding place to a revolutionary-democratic content. However, petty-bourgeois socialist concepts do not always develop towards revolution as is evidenced by Indonesia, where the petty-bourgeois and revolutionary-nationalist ideology, which was predominant between 1957 and 1965, developed into a reactionary bureaucratic ideology.
The evolution of socialist concepts is determined by the socio-political stand of representatives of a given trend, the alignment of political forces, and other objective and subjective factors.
Present-day petty-bourgeois socialist trends may be revolutionary-democratic (Egypt, Algeria, Syria and Guinea); communal-peasant (Tanzania before the adoption of the Arusha Declaration in 1967); revolutionary-nationalist ( Indonesia in the period 1957--1965), and reactionarybureaucratic (Indonesia after 1965). As a rule, reactionarybureaucratic petty-bourgeois socialism results in the establishment of civilian or military bureaucratic dictatorships.
__PRINTERS_P_291_COMMENT__ 19* 292Bourgeois socialist concepts are not homogeneous either. Worthy of note among these are: "democratic socialism" in India, "Senegalese socialism" and "Kenyan socialism''.
Ideologists of the national bourgeoisie are trying to prove that the socialist countries' social and political system is unacceptable to their countries. They advocate a kind of blend of capitalism and socialism in the form of a "co-- operative community'', a "reasonable combination" of socialism and capitalism based on ``cordial'' relations between the capitalists and the workers, and between the rich landowners and the peasants. The bourgeois ideologists of " nationaltype socialism" are trying to persuade the people that the laws of social development, discovered by Marxism-Leninism, are inapplicable to the Asian and African countries, and are bringing forward "national socialism" as an alternative to scientific socialism.
Bourgeois theories of "national-type socialism" usually deny class struggle and preach conciliation of class contradictions, as well as harmony and collaboration between the exploiters and the exploited. The ideologists of bourgeoisnationalist ``socialism'', who sometimes proclaim in word the need to abolish the exploitation of man by man, come out forthright against the dictatorship of the proletariat, describing the bourgeois state as a supra-class organ and glossing over its class essence. Bourgeois-nationalist reformism is advanced by these ideologists as an alternative to revolution. The true essence of "national-type socialism" also reveals itself in the national bourgeoisie's desire to have the masses play no part in dealing with the cardinal problems involved in the further development of their respective countries.
A prominent role is assigned in some countries to religion in disseminating the ideas of "national-type socialism''. The religious and ethical foundations of this kind of `` socialism'' often reflect the dominant classes' desire to use religion as an ideological and political weapon against scientific socialism.
With the help of the concepts of "national-type socialism" the bourgeoisie is trying to check the spread of the ideas of scientific socialism and the growth of class consciousness in the working people, divert the working people from the 293 revolutionary class struggle, isolate the Communist Parties and the progressive forces from the masses, and make the working class take to the road of reformism.
Communists have a differentiated approach to socialist concepts widespread in Asia and Africa, this depending on what interests such concepts express and whose class interests they serve. They make a class assessment of any particular doctrine with due account of the practical activities of groups that are in power and of the essence and aims of the socio-economic measures such groups implement. Communists expose those who falsely asseverate that they want to build a "socialist society'', while ignoring the long due need of completing the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal revolution. Communists uphold any try to develop the sound and democratic principles contained in some socialist doctrines. Marxists-Leninists realise that hundreds of millions of people have only recently entered political life and are not yet prepared to adopt the ideas of scientific socialism.
Help from socialist countries to the newly free nations of Asia and Africa has been most useful in spreading the truth about socialism. This friendly, disinterested and sincere aid and the experience of the working people are the best arguments in favour of scientific socialism.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. THE ALIGNMENT OF CLASS FORCES.Alive to the processes under way in Asia and Africa, the Communist Parties give pride of place in their activities to the establishment of a united anti-imperialist, nationaldemocratic front of progressive forces. The tactic of a united front has the aim of bringing the progressive forces closer to the masses of working people, and of winning them over to those forces.
The social composition of a united anti-imperialist front in Asian and African countries depends on the development of the national-liberation revolution, the class composition of the population, the character and acuteness of social contradictions, and the political maturity and organisation 294 of the working class and the other national forces. As classes and their interrelations develop, the composition of this front may also undergo change in the course of the liberation struggle. Some social (and political) groups may leave the united front for a number of reasons. On the other hand, fresh forces are constantly adhering to the front, increasing its ranks and extending its basis.
The forms of a united front may be different at various stages of the struggle and in particular countries. However, the broad and active participation of the people in the revolutionary movement is essential for a united front in any country, because the masses become convinced, in the course of the struggle, of the need to unite anti-imperialist action.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Working Class and the United FrontThe proletariat of Asia and Africa have shown that they are the most revolutionary class in the national-liberation revolutions and in the struggle for a united national-- democratic front.
However, the working class of these two continents is comparatively small numerically. In Asia, for instance, wage workers comprise not more than 30 per cent of the gainfully employed population, the corresponding figure for Africa being under 20 per cent. Some 13 per cent of the gainfully employed population are engaged in industry, construction and transport in South and East Africa, and 13.7 per cent in North Africa. The proportion of blue- and whitecollar workers varies greatly in various countries. In Mali or the Republic of Chad, it ranges from 2 to 4 per cent as against 30-odd per cent in Egypt. True, the numerical strength of the working class has been rapidly increasing of late in Asia and Africa (a growth of 70 to 75 per cent over the last 15 to 20 years).
The small numerical strength of the working class is not the only specific feature of the situation in Asia and Africa. A low level of culture, and petty-bourgeois, tribal, religious, communal and other prejudices are characteristic of broad sections of workers in Asia, and especially in Africa. All this makes it difficult for the working class to become a 295 leading force in the anti-imperialist struggle. Nevertheless, industrial and agricultural workers are today a major social factor in a number of countries and play an important part in the liberation struggle.
At the first stage of the liberation struggle, when national independence was the aim, the workers' class interests and their struggle coincided in the main with the interests and the struggle of the entire nation. For the working class, as well as for the entire nation, foreign imperialism was the main enemy. Since then the situation has changed in many countries. Inasmuch as the bourgeoisie has revised its attitude after independence, and is concentrating on ensuring its class interests to the detriment of national interest, it contrasts itself to the truly national forces, the working class in the first place. The stronger the bourgeoisie's national positions become, the more acute the contradictions between it and the working class will be.
In most of the newly emergent countries now on the capitalist road of development, the workers' standard of living has not changed in comparison with colonial times. Low wages, rising prices for food and prime necessities, unemployment and debts to moneylenders, shopkeepers and contractors are goading the workers into a struggle against the local bourgeoisie.
In such countries, the workers' struggle for better conditions is, in the main, tantamount to a struggle against imperialism, which remains the biggest exploiter of the former colonies. At the same time, the working class is also countering the reactionary trends of the local bourgeoisie, forcing the latter to restrict pursuit of its selfish class interests and, in some measure, reckon with the interests of the working people, who form the majority of the nation. In the course of this struggle, during strikes for instance, the degree of the workers' organisation rises, unity is forged, and the workers' class consciousness is enhanced.
__b_b_b__The class struggle in the newly free countries has shown that there too strike action is a powerful weapon against foreign capital's domination of the economy, against corruption and abuses in the machinery of state, for broader 296 democracy, and advances in social progress. Between 1966 and 1969, over 12,000 strikes were officially registered in the newly independent countries of Asia, 20 to 30 per cent of them political in character.
The trade-union movement, which is now on the upsurge, is becoming important in strengthening working-class positions in the nation-wide struggle. Thus, the numher of organised workers in India went up from 800,000 in 1947 to 6,000,000 in 1968. Of the 2,000,000 wage-workers in Sri Lanka, about 1,000,000 have been unionised. A fairly high level of workers' organisation has been achieved in the large-scale industries of a number of countries. In India, for instance, the trade unions involve 80 per cent of iron-and-steel workers, about 70 per cent of the workers in the cement industry, and over half of all textile workers and coal miners. The trade unions have grown into a potent force in the political life of the newly free states.
However, the trade-union movement in Asia and Africa is characterised by a lack of unity, the existence of unassociated trade-union centres. Workers' trade-union unity presents a serious problem in Iraq, Lebanon, India, Pakistan, Iran and other countries. Disunity in the trade-union movement is to a considerable extent due to the intrigues of imperialist agents and the leaders of such trade-union centres as the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, who are connected with such agents. The problem of joint trade-union action remains very important.
The working class's leading role in the national-liberation movement hinges on its organisational and ideological maturity and the existence of strong Marxist-Leninist Parties. During national-liberation revolutions Communists have proved consistent fighters for overall national interests. They have come out resolutely for abolition of the imperialists' political and economic domination and of the feudal survivals, and for democracy and social progress.
While active in the struggle for a united national-- democratic front, the proletariat upholds its own class interests and, at the same time, seeks to preserve unity of the patriotic forces, which is necessary for accomplishment of the tasks of the national-democratic revolution, a rebuff to 297 neo-colonialism, and an advance towards social progress. The working class is interested in the patriotic sections of the national bourgeoisie remaining within the anti-- imperialist coalition. However, while fighting jointly with these sections against colonialism and neo-colonialism, the working class preserves its class independence, pursues its own line on socio-political questions, and tries to win support for this line from the majority of the people.
In countries on the non-capitalist road of development, the working class plays a progressive part, is a pillar of revolutionary government and a mainstay in the struggle against the enemies of freedom.
Though numerically small, the working class in Asia and especially in Africa comes out everywhere as the most progressive force, not only because its numerical strength, organisation and class consciousness are steadily rising but, in the main, because even a small national working class is part of the international workers' movement whose support it has and on whose revolutionary experience it can draw. The successes of the international workers' movement and world socialism's growing might have helped enhance the prestige of the national working classes, small or large. The influence exerted by the national working classes is merging with that of world socialism.
Objective conditions are gradually appearing in a number of newly free countries for the working class to become a leading force in national-liberation revolutions. That can result from greater political and trade-union unity of the working class, its growing influence on the working people, closer contacts between the working class and democratic forces and organisations (trade union, college students', peasants', women's, etc.), and unification of all progressive forces about the working class.
``There is no doubt that in the young national states ahead lies the broadest development of the working-class struggle against imperialism and its allies,'' said Leonid Brezhnev at the 1969 International Meeting. "It is the working-class movement that will ultimately play the decisive part in this area of the world too.''^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow 1969, p. 153.
298 __ALPHA_LVL3__ Peasants in a United Front.Peasants constitute the absolute majority of the population in Asia and Africa. Thus, even in North Africa---the most developed part of that continent---66 to 67 per cent of the gainfully employed population are engaged in agriculture. In South and South-East Asia the figure is 71 per cent.
Noting this fact, Leonid Brezhnev stressed, at the 1969 International Meeting, that "The peasants in that part of the world are a mighty revolutionary force, but in most cases they are an elemental force, with all the ensuing vacillations and ideological and political contradictions. Nor could it have been otherwise for the time being, because the great majority of the peasantry still lives in conditions of monstrous poverty, denial of rights and survivals of feudal and sometimes even pre-feudal relations.''^^*^^
The working peasantry has great revolutionary potentialities. It is active in the struggle against imperialism, for the national liberation of peoples, and for greater independence of the newly emergent states.
Consequently, the future of any national-democratic front depends to a decisive extent on the part the peasants will play in it. "The experience of the revolutionary movement in various parts of the world has shown that the surest way of effectively involving the peasants in the struggle against imperialism, for true social progress, is to establish a strong alliance between them and the working class,'' said Leonid Brezhnev at the 1969 International Meeting. "That is also the task in the zone of national liberation.''^^**^^
The question of an alliance between the working class and the peasantry is dealt with by Marxists after careful consideration of the specific historical features of a given country and an analysis of its current development.
In a number of developing states, the working class is not yet mature enough to head the peasantry's liberation _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parlies, Moscow 1969, p. 153.
^^**^^ Ibid.
299 movement. In the countryside, political influence is wielded by bourgeois-nationalist and petty-bourgeois elements of various shades and hues, while big landowners, tribal chiefs and officials are often still in control there.In these conditions, the alliance between the working class and the peasantry is acquiring some specific features. Even a numerically small working class is showing leadership of the peasantry in newly free countries, coming out as an international force, representative of the international workers' movement (primarily through the influence of scientific socialism and the practice of the socialist states). The working class's leadership of the peasantry is also being established through the active influence of the national workers' and the international communist movements on the course of the anti-imperialist liberation struggle and the peasant movement.
The present stage of radical social changes in this area of the world favours the working class's leading role in respect of the peasants. An essential condition here is a correct Marxist-Leninist policy towards the peasantry on the part of the working class and its Party.
Establishment of a worker-peasant alliance presupposes, first of all, a consistent and radical solution of the agrarian question, without which the developing nations cannot achieve economic self-sufficiency and social progress.
A radical agrarian reform is in the interests of all main classes of the newly free states: the proletariat, the peasantry, the urban middle sections, and the national bourgeoisie. The working class and the peasantry have a vital stake in such a reform because its implementation will improve the life of the mass of the people and increase production and employment. The working class cannot rid itself of exploitation unless, together with the peasantry, it abolishes the survivals of feudalism. A radical agrarian reform is also to the advantage of the middle sections, because their prosperity depends on higher living standards and, hence, a higher purchasing capacity of the peasants. The national bourgeoisie's attitude to the agrarian question is more complicated. Despite various distinctions, the agrarian reforms being carried out by this class in a number of Asian and African countries are of a bourgeois nature and are directing 300 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1973/WCM485/20080513/399.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2008.05.14) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ top __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [*]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ the countryside along the capitalist road of development.
The measures being taken from ``above'', while somewhat improving the condition of part of the peasantry, cannot solve the agrarian problem radically, to the advantage of the peasant masses. That is why discontent with the existing situation, especially among the poor peasants and agricultural workers, continues to grow. The peasants are building up their struggle against semi-feudal and capitalist exploitation and for radical agrarian reforms on democratic lines. They are displaying an ever stronger urge for an alliance with the proletariat, who can give them decisive support in the struggle for land.
The working class and its Party are endeavouring to free the peasants of the bourgeoisie's influence and win them over. To achieve this, they energetically advocate a radical agrarian programme and advance slogans and demands which bear on the peasantry's immediate needs and meet their interests.
The programmes of radical agrarian reforms drawn up by Communist Parties envisage implementation of the following main demands: unindemnified confiscation of the big landed estates owned by the feudalists and foreign companies; transfer of the expropriated land, gratis, to the landless and land-hungry peasants and agricultural workers; abolition of all forms of feudal exploitation (metayage, corvee, and payment in kind); cancellation of peasant debts to landlords, moneylenders, banks and the government; participation of peasant committees in the implementation of agrarian reforms; state financial and technical assistance to the peasants; assistance in the sale of farm produce on the home and foreign markets; state assistance in irrigation and landimprovement work, virgin land development, road construction and supplying electricity to rural areas; different forms of co-operation on a voluntary basis (credits, supply and sales, and producer co-operatives); the stamping out of illiteracy, and other socio-cultural measures.
Besides general demands, the Communist Parties' programmes contain such that reflect the specific conditions in a particular country. Thus, there are in Sri Lanka and North Africa big capitalist farms and plantations, mainly 301 foreign-owned, which occupy a considerable area. These farms and plantations yield a sizable part of the national agricultural produce. In the Communist Parties' view, these should not be parcelled out as a result of a radical agrarian reform, since the distribution of small plots among the peasants would reduce production in very important branches of the national economy. The Communist Parties propose that agricultural workers' co-operatives or state farms should be organised on the big landed estates.
In Tropical Africa there exist undeveloped capitalist relations, the predominance of tribal relations, the sway of foreign landowners and monopolies, and land hunger among the local peasants. Communal ownership of land is still predominant in agrarian relations there. In such conditions, the agrarian problem cannot be fairly solved if the land formerly seized by the colonists, and part of the land in European tenure are not turned over to African peasants.
In other countries, where imperialism still exercises considerable political influence and agrarian reforms are not being carried out or are of a restricted character, the Communist Parties are directing the mass struggle towards achieving complete political independence and abolishing the power of the feudalist upper crust, who collaborate with the imperialists; they see this as a precondition for socioeconomic reforms, including the agrarian.
As a class, the peasants are interested in the struggle against the feudalists and the imperialists. However, the development of capitalist relations in the countryside is leading to class differentiation there. The Communist Parties take the social heterogeneity of the peasantry into account and evolve their agrarian policies on that basis. They resolutely come out in defence of the toiling peasants and agricultural workers, and against the exploiters, and support the peasants' struggle for better economic conditions, lower taxes, and higher wages for agricultural workers.
Some experience in organising peasant action in defence of immediate economic demands has been acquired by the Communist Party of India. Wide-spread in that country are such forms of mass action as the movement to solve the food 302 problem, the struggle against unjust taxes, marches and the mass movement which was conducted by agricultural workers and poor peasants in various Indian states between 1968 and 1970 for the transfer to peasants of untilled, disused and little used land. A national peasant movement for land and against the feudal forces was successfully organised, on the Communist Party's initiative, in India in July and August of 1970. In July alone, the peasants seized almost 200,000 acres of land which they began to cultivate. Peasants and agricultural workers occupied farms owned by rich feudal landowners and monopolies. Trade unions, youth and student organisations gave the peasant masses substantial support in their struggle.
This struggle for land has laid the beginnings of unity between the industrial proletariat and the urban masses, on the one hand, and the agricultural workers and peasants, on the other. The outcome of similar campaigns speaks of their important role in awakening the political consciousness of the peasants and in strengthening their unity.
During agrarian reforms in a number of newly free countries, peasant co-operatives are set up, which may have positive results in boosting agricultural production, protecting the peasants' interests from the rich landowners and monopolies, and instilling in the peasants habits of collective work. However, in many co-operatives decisive positions are taken over by well-to-do peasants, who use these organisations in their selfish interests. In some countries, the peasants are being forcibly united in co-operatives, in which case co-operatives become a convenient form for government officials to collect taxes from the peasants.
Communists criticise any government practice of setting up co-operatives by forcible means. They favour a voluntary association of peasants, and state aid to co-operatives. Communists are working within the co-operatives to organise the peasants against the arbitrary control by the rich landowners.
In North Africa and in some Asian countries, agricultural workers make up a numerous section of the rural population. The experience of the revolutionary struggle, in Algeria for instance, shows that these workers can play an important part in the successful development of national-liberation 303 revolutions. The Communist Parties defend the specific demands of the agricultural workers, such as for higher wages, guaranteed minimum pay, shorter working hours and collective bargaining. They also advocate trade unions for agricultural workers. Agricultural workers' unions set up in many countries are an important organisational form of their struggle. Industrial workers' unions are establishing contacts with such unions, give them direct assistance, and sometimes act jointly with them.
Communist day-by-day work in the countryside, co-- operatives and peasant organisations is an earnest of their successes in winning peasants over to their side. This work helps Communists maintain close ties with the peasant masses, enhance the influence and prestige of the Communist Parties, and raises the level of consciousness and the organisation of peasant action. The drafting of agrarian programmes by the Communist Parties is of great importance in evolving a correct policy towards the peasantry and winning it to the side of the working class. "A great responsibility devolves on us Communists in this sphere,'' said Leonid Brezhnev at the 1969 International Meeting, " Tremendous attention to the proletariat's peasant ally, and additional elaboration of some aspects of strategy and tactics in application to the specific conditions in the former colonial countries is demanded of the communist movement.''^^*^^
Unity between the peasantry and the working class can be brought about, and a broad democratic movement for agrarian reform organised under working-class leadership, provided the peasants understand in practical terms that their aims can be achieved only in alliance with the working class and under its direction. Accomplishment of this immense task calls for sustained all-round efforts of the Communists, and consideration of the specific conditions obtaining in a given country. It is a necessary condition for drawing the peasant masses into an agrarian anti-feudal revo* lution and for their active participation in the national anti-imperialist democratic front.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers'^^1^^ Parties, Moscow 1969, pp. 154--55.
304Today the problem of a worker-peasant alliance in the newly free countries has emerged from national boundaries because of the present weakness of the workers' movement there. Leonid Brezhnev drew Communists' attention to the fact that "in present-day conditions, the problem of relations between the working class and the peasantry in the former colonial countries is largely of an international nature. It is a question of consolidating the alliance of the whole international working class with the peasantry, with all the working people of the young liberated countries.''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The National Bourgeoisie in a UnitedSince the bourgeoisie in the newly emergent and dependent countries is able to lead a considerable part of the antiimperialist forces, especially the petty-bourgeois sections in town and countryside, the Communist Parties, in drafting their strategy and tactics, devote much attention to a study of its positions.
The bourgeoisie's role in the liberation movement in the developing and dependent countries is determined by a number of factors: a country's level of economic development; the degree of the class differentiation of the population and the alignment of class forces; the scope of the movement and the forms it assumes (peaceful or forcible); the degree of development of the bourgeoisie itself; the political experience of the bourgeoisie, and the nature of its relations with foreign monopoly capital.
In most Asian and African countries, the bourgeoisie is far from homogeneous as a class. This applies to monopoly and non-monopoly circles, the big and middle bourgeoisie, and bourgeois elements more or less closely connected with imperialism. The interests of some sections of the bourgeoisie coincide in part with those of the feudalists, while those of other sections are unconnected with the latter. Part of the local bourgeoisie, whose economic interests suffer from _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 154.
305 imperialist domination, are interested in the independent economic and political progress of their country, complete control of the home market, etc. This section, which is capable of expressing the interests of the entire nation at a certain stage of the revolution, is known as the national bourgeoisie.The national bourgeoisie's anti-imperialist and antifeudal stand is determined, first of all, by their class interests. Like the toiling masses, the national bourgeoisie suffered from the colonial regime, imperialism fettering their desire to be masters at home and equal partners in deals on the world capitalist market. The contradiction between imperialism and the national bourgeoisie made possible the latter's participation in the anti-imperialist struggle.
The bourgeoisie's attitude may change according to the concrete conditions at different stages of the anti-imperialist struggle. Thus, in most Asian and African countries almost the entire bourgeoisie, including the big bourgeoisie, took part in the initial stage of the national-liberation struggle. After independence, the big bourgeoisie are interested in the struggle for economic self-sufficiency only insofar as this meets their narrow and selfish class interests. At the same time, they tend to unite with foreign monopolies against the democratic forces.
The political weight and economic positions of the national bourgeoisie in Asia and Africa vary because of uneven capitalist development. The domination of foreign monopoly capital in the economies of many colonial and dependent countries, the slow rates of industrialisation, lack of capital, and the restricted home market---all these and other factors have held back the growth of the national industrial bourgeoisie. For many decades, therefore, it has been mainly the rural and the trade bourgeoisie that has developed in a number of Asian and African countries.
The objective condition of the different sections of the national bourgeoisie also determines their contribution to the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal struggle. Most radical is that part of the national bourgeoisie who do not possess big capital. As for the big bourgeoisie, it is more inclined to a compromise with imperialists and reactionaries at home.
__PRINTERS_P_305_COMMENT__ 20--0873 306The national bourgeoisie regard liberation from the colonial yoke as a stage in capitalist development, and in the consolidation of their economic strength and the establishment of their domination over the people. During the struggle for political independence, the national bourgeoisie promise the workers, peasants and other strata of the people economic, social and other reforms, but when they come to power with the help of the working people, they often forget their promises and try to obstruct further progress of the revolution.
In their attempts to curb the people's movement, the bourgeoisie come out against democratic freedoms, and, fearing complete democratisation of the social system, join up with forces they fought against only yesterday. Though contradictions between the national bourgeoisie and imperialism remain (which means that the objective conditions for the bourgeoisie's participation in the anti-imperialist struggle also remain), the former are prone to resolve them by a compromise with imperialism, not by a decisive struggle against it.
Thus, though the national bourgeoisie can play a definite progressive part in the liberation movement, it is a vacillating and double-minded force, afraid of the revolutionary sweep of the mass liberation movement and striving to direct it along the reformist road. As a rule, a liberation movement led by the national bourgeoisie does not result in a radical, revolutionary refashioning of the colonial regime and the establishment of a national-democratic system, but results in the proclamation of a bourgeois republic, with the country remaining economically dependent largely on foreign capital. It was in this direction that the liberation struggle developed for two decades in India and some other countries.
Two big forces are exerting pressure on the national bourgeoisie after it comes to power: on the one hand, the imperialists, who are determined to regain and preserve their economic positions in the newly free countries, and the feudalists who cling to their privileges, and, on the other, the people, who are fighting for a radical improvement of their condition. Through their constant pressure on the bourgeoisie these forces make it even more vacillating and double-minded 307 in accomplishing the democratic tasks of the nationalliberation revolution. The national bourgeoisie's dual nature is revealed in different degrees by its various sections.
The duality of the national bourgeoisie's policy is particularly evident in this class's attitude to foreign capital, the industrialisation of its country, the role of the state sector, and the solution of the agrarian problem. After gaining power, the national bourgeoisie seeks to seize the key economic positions formerly held by foreign monopolies. At the same time, its Right wing is afraid of a complete break with foreign imperialism, since it needs the latter's support and assistance in the struggle against the revolutionary-- democratic movement at home. Besides, these sections are interested in preserving and even expanding their economic relations with the foreign monopolies.
In many Asian and African countries, the national bourgeoisie, especially its Left wing, is encouraging the development of the state sector so as to weaken foreign capital and then oust it, and to strengthen its own positions in the economy. In promoting the state sector, the national bourgeoisie, primarily its Right wing, seeks to use it to develop big national capitalism and build large capitalist factories.
Neither is the national bourgeoisie consistent in the solution of the agrarian problem. On the one hand, it is interested in agrarian reforms and abolishing the feudal and semifeudal relations in agriculture, which hinder the development of the urban and rural productive forces. On the other hand, a considerable part of the national bourgeoisie have an interest in big landownership, buying tracts of land, and are often connected with the feudalists, regarding the latter and the tribal chiefs as a mainstay in the struggle against the revolutionary-democratic forces. That is why the national bourgeoisie fear the complete abolition of feudal and landlord property rights. Unable to implement a radical agrarian reform, they can only agree to a restriction of the landowners' power and, partly, of the size of estates. The ruling national bourgeoisie often compromise with the rich landowners to the detriment of the interests of the peasants and the nation as a whole.
__PRINTERS_P_307_COMMENT__ 20* 308The national bourgeoisie is interested in the industrial development of its country, though it is vacillating in this respect too, seeking to accumulate capital for national economic expansion through the intensified exploitation of the people. In many newly emergent countries, the condition of the people, who were reduced to abject poverty by a long period of imperialist exploitation, has hardly improved since the national bourgeoisie came to power. That is why such a source of accumulation as the reduction of the people's already insignificant share of the national income cannot give a boost to national industry.
There is, of course, another way of finding capital for industrial growth: cutting down the profits and the consumption of the parasitic classes. That is a path the bourgeoisie is loath to follow. Moreover, a considerable part of the national bourgeoisie is reluctant to invest capital in large industrial projects whose commissioning takes a long time. It prefers to make profits from trade and financial and speculative operations. This policy cannot, of course, ensure rapid economic progress.
Though the national bourgeoisie have nothing against taking advantage of the popular enthusiasm aroused by national independence, so as to accomplish the tasks of national regeneration, they are unwilling to share power with the democratic forces, who express the people's interests. They do not want to draw the masses into active participation in national advancement because this will inevitably increase the people's influence, enrich the experience, and inspire in them a confidence in their strength and potentialities. The national bourgeoisie, especially the Right wing, are therefore pursuing a policy of limited democracy, obstructing the activities of progressive parties and organisations. Now and then the Right-wing forces organise anti-democratic campaign in an attempt to weaken the democratic forces, with the main blow being directed at the Communists.
Also contradictory is the national bourgeoisie's policy in the betterment of the people's life. On the one hand, the national bourgeoisie are interested in expanding the home market and, consequently, in increasing public consumption. On the other hand, the scramble for profit impels them to 309 intensify exploitation and the attack on the people's living standards.
The contradictions inherent in the national bourgeoisie are manifested with particular force in its ideology---- bourgeois nationalism. In a number of newly independent countries the national bourgeoisie, as the ruling class, is supported by most of the peasants and often by a sizable part of the working class. However, the capitalist development of many of these countries tends to sharpen the class struggle. "Social differentiation is developing in the newly independent countries,'' says the main Document adopted at the 1969 International Meeting. "There is a sharpening conflict between the working class, the peasantry and other democratic forces, including patriotic-minded sections of the petty bourgeoisie, on the one hand, and, on the other, imperialism and the forces of domestic reaction, the elements of the national bourgeoisie which are increasingly accepting a deal with imperialism.''^^*^^ The growth of the people's political consciousness as class contradictions become aggravated, helps dispel illusions in respect of the national bourgeoisie. That is why the latter, to keep the masses under their influence, are using more and more ideological and political indoctrination of the public, encouraging democratic illusions and posing as the sole exponent and leader of the nation.
Nationalism in Asia and Africa is progressive when it strives to rally the people in the struggle against imperialism and any attempts to restore colonialism. However, today it is being increasingly used by the bourgeoisie, primarily by the Right wing, to strengthen their class domination and build up the struggle against the working class and the Marxist-Leninist ideology. That is why Communists, while supporting the bourgeoisie of an oppressed nation in its struggle against colonial rule, come out no less vigorously against the reactionary aspects of bourgeois nationalism.
On coming to power, the national bourgeoisie preach the idea of class peace and of preserving the national unity allegedly necessary to accomplish the essential tasks of economic construction. They are using the ideas of nationalism _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 28.
310 to make the working people, in the first place the industrial workers, reject strike action and other forms of the class struggle. As the revolutionary process develops, class differentiation increases, and class contradictions grow more acute, nationalism becomes ever more anti-democratic in the newly free countries, and its anti-imperialist trend grows weaker. A situation may arise in which nationalism leads to disunity, not consolidation, of the revolutionary forces of the newly emergent nations.Under certain circumstances nationalism can lapse into chauvinism, whose ideologists preach the exclusiveness of individual nations and hostility towards other peoples. That is why in their documents, Communist Parties always stress the dual nature of the nationalism of the oppressed peoples. "The nationalism of an oppressed nation contains a general democratic element directed against oppression, and Communists support it because they consider it historically justified at a given stage,'' said the CPSU Programme. "That element finds expression in the striving of the oppressed peoples to free themselves from imperialist oppression, to gain national independence and bring about a national renascence. But the nationalism of an oppressed nation has yet another aspect, one expressing the ideology and interests of the reactionary exploiting top stratum.''^^*^^
The imperialists are trying to take advantage of nationalism in Asia and Africa. "Imperialism provokes friction in developing countries and sows division between them by encouraging reactionary nationalism.''^^**^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Communist Parties' Tactics TowardsThe Communist Parties are of the opinion that, at the present stage of historical development, the revolutionary potentialities of the national bourgeoisie on the whole, as a class, in most of the newly free countries are not yet exhausted and that, objectively, a considerable part of it _-_-_
^^*^^ The Road to Communism, p. 493.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 13.
311 is still interested in the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal struggle. It is possible, therefore, that the national bourgeoisie can join a revolutionary movement and a broad national anti-imperialist front. However, Communists always remember that the revolutionary potentialities of the different sections and groups of the national bourgeoisie are not the same in different countries.The common denominator in the Communist Parties' tactics towards the national bourgeoisie is support of any anti-imperialist movement, even if it is led by that class, while preserving their political and organisational independence.
Communists also hold that victory in the struggle against so powerful an enemy as imperialism can be won only by the joint efforts of all national-democratic forces. The underlying principle of the Communist Parties' policy in nationalliberation revolutions is the establishment of a national anti-imperialist front, with the participation of all strata of the people, including that part of the bourgeoisie who have taken an anti-imperialist attitude.
Historical experience has shown that a national front could be formed with no great difficulty during the struggle against colonial rule and for political independence, when broad sections of the national bourgeoisie readily collaborate with the working class and its party. The situation changes in the second stage of the revolution, after the national bourgeoisie has assumed power. However, even in this stage, the involvement of the national bourgeoisie in the anti-imperialist struggle remains an important task of the working class and its party. At the same time, the national bourgeoisie's inconsistent policy, its indecision in regard to the imperialists, its class hatred of the working class and distrust of the people complicate this task.
Of principled importance in evolving the tactics towards the national bourgeoisie is a correct assessment of the latter's role at the present stage of the national-liberation revolution and its place in the national-democratic front. In dealing with this question, Marxists take a differentiated approach to the national bourgeoisie, with due account of its contradictory character as a class on the whole, and the attitudes of its various groups and sections, which depend 312 on the amount of their capital and the sphere of its application (industrial, financial and trade), political sentiments, and so on. The Communist Parties are devising a flexible policy towards the national bourgeoisie as a whole, and towards its sections and groups.
It would be wrong to underestimate the role of the national bourgeoisie. It is likewise wrong to overestimate its revolutionary potentialities. Subjectivism in assessing the national bourgeoisie's role in the national-liberation revolution may lead to tactical mistakes of a dual kind. A onesided appraisal of this class as an exclusively reactionary force, without a differentiated attitude to its sections, results in Left-sectarian mistakes: the role of a united front with the national bourgeoisie is belittled and the possibilities of the working class are restricted in the struggle for the unity of all national forces and in exposing the reactionary policy of the Right-wing bourgeoisie. A similar policy can lead to the isolation of the Communists and to stronger positions of the reactionary forces, to the detriment of the people's interests.
Exaggeration of the national bourgeoisie's revolutionary potentialities and underestimation of its conciliatory attitudes can, on the contrary, lead to Right-wing opportunist mistakes, a desire to preserve unity with the national bourgeoisie at any cost, even by concessions on matter of principle. Mistakes of this kind are usually made when contradictions between the national bourgeoisie and imperialism are aggravated and the former displays readiness to collaborate with the working class. In this case, there is a danger of the working-class movement and its party losing their class character and becoming a sort of appendage to the bourgeoisie. Communists who make such a mistake lose their prestige among the people.
In denning their tactics towards the national bourgeoisie, the working class and a Marxist party must take into account the extent to which the latter and its various sections are consistent, and the measure and degree in which it can work jointly with the working people at a given stage of the revolution. Marxists do not idealise the national bourgeoisie, for it always remains a class of proprietors who pursue primarily their own interests.
313Communist Parties also take into account the policy towards the national bourgeoisie pursued by imperialism which seeks to make use of the narrow-minded class trends in the policy of the national bourgeoisie, appealing to the latter's class interests in order to divert it from the antiimperialist struggle and direct it against the democratic forces.
The Communist Parties define their attitude to the national bourgeois governments in accordance with the needs of a country's independent development in the interests of the working people. They support all government measures that weaken imperialism's positions within the country and beyond its borders, back national bourgeois governments to the extent to which the latter's activities are directed towards protecting the national interests, fighting against imperialism and colonialism, establishing friendly relations with socialist countries, as well as boosting national industry and trade, abolishing feudal survivals, ensuring broader democracy, raising the people's standard of living, and so on.
At the same time Communist Parties maintain their own complete political and organisational independence. They criticise the indecision of governments in dealing with various problems, propose more radical solutions of such problems, and come out against the ruling circles' attempts to swing to the Right in domestic and foreign policies. By launching a mass democratic movement, they compel the ruling national bourgeoisie to move towards the Left.
The Communists' tactics in respect of the national bourgeoisie aim at unity and a struggle in the interests of the workers, peasants and urban middle strata, in fact of all working people. In pursuing this policy, the Communist Parties work to eliminate vacillation in the national bourgeoisie, neutralise its reactionary trends, and use its progressive trends in the interests of the revolution.
In their attitude to the national bourgeoisie, the Communist Parties naturally take into account the specific historical development of the respective countries, which has left its stamp on that class.
A special approach towards the national bourgeoisie has 314 been evolved by the Communist Party of India to help develop the national-democratic struggle with the aim of isolating and defeating the reactionary monopoly section of the Indian bourgeoisie, on the one hand, and, on the other, of establishing unity with the patriotically-minded bourgeoisie interested in the abolition of the foreign monopolies' positions, restricting the influence of Indian monopoly capital, implementing a radical agrarian reform, and extending democracy. Two aspects---national and class---have formed the basis of the Indian Communists' tactics of struggle and unity in respect of the national bourgeoisie. The national aspect consists in the struggle to strengthen national sovereignty, achieve economic self-sufficiency, and abolish all forms of feudal inequality and backwardness. The class aspect consists in exposing capitalism and the road of capitalist development and showing that the national bourgeoisie's class interests clash with the national interests of the struggle for broad social progress, which presupposes a greater role for the workers and other working people and an alliance of workers and peasants. The two aspects are interlinked. On the whole, this is the road of strengthening and expanding democracy through the creation of a broad national-- democratic front.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE STRUGGLE TO FORM A UNITED FRONTThe task of building a united front of all anti-colonial and anti-imperialist forces in the colonial and dependent countries was first advanced by Lenin, who corroborated this idea and showed its tremendous political significance. The Communists are guided by his ideas till now.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ A United National-Democratic FrontA considerable part of the bourgeoisie withdraws from the united front in most of the newly emergent countries and seeks to establish itself as a dominant force, often colluding with imperialism.
315Following the liberation from colonialism, it is no longer a question of a general national front, but one of building up a national-democratic front directed against imperialism and the reactionaries at home. Such a front can include the working class, the peasantry, urban petty-bourgeois sections, the national intelligentsia, and that part of the bourgeoisie which is unconnected, or is loosely connected, with the foreign monopolies and wants to build up an independent national economy.
As the 1969 International Meeting noted in its main document, "The way to carry out the tasks of national development and social progress and effectively rebuff neo-- colonialist intrigues is to raise the activity of the people, enhance the role of the proletariat and the peasants, rally the working youth, students, intellectuals, urban middle strata and democratic army circles---all patriotic and progressive forces. It is this kind of unity the Communist and Workers' Parties are calling for.''^^*^^
Though the newly liberated countries of Asia and Africa differ socio-economically and politically, their peoples are facing the common task of building a united national-- democratic front. The concrete tasks of such fronts vary from country to country. Thus, in the socialist-oriented countries, a united front is out to strengthen the revolutionary-- democratic system, defend its gains, and ensure conditions for advancement towards socialism. In the countries on the capitalist road of development it is a struggle against the reactionaries, and for broader democracy, social progress, and so on. In the countries still fighting against colonial rule, a united front is formed in the course of the struggle for political independence and for national sovereignty, examples being the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola and the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO), to mention but two.
The great variety of socio-economic conditions in the Afro-Asian countries makes for a diversity of forms of the united front. In some countries, a united national-- democratic front is organisationally a political bloc or a coalition _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 29.
316 of progressive political parties and organisations. In other countries, unity of the different anti-imperialist forces is achieved through co-ordinated action. In still other countries, a united anti-imperialist front is a broad and organisationally loose political movement of different classes and social strata, often antagonistic in nature but with the common enemy---foreign imperialism---at a given stage.In all cases, the events have shown that a militant antiimperialist front cannot be formed only through a top-level agreement. It takes shape in the course of the people's struggle and joint militant action by different classes and social groups. During that struggle the people see from their own experience the need of united action by all the antiimperialist forces. The strength and effectiveness of a united front greatly depend on whether it has a co-ordinated programme of action which takes due account of the interests of all component forces.
Lenin often dealt with the part Communists can play in the national-liberation struggle, repeatedly stressing that the Communist Parties of Asia and Africa should learn to adapt themselves to the specific conditions of those continents, where the peasants constitute the bulk of the population and nationalism is often the dominant ideology. These tasks remain valid to this day.
The search for ways of forming a united national-- democratic front and the determining of the correct MarxistLeninist policy towards the workers' allies are regarded by Communists as an important task, whose accomplishment calls for an exact appraisal of the alignment of class forces in each country and at each stage of the revolution, and a differentiated approach to each national political party. This is essential for a militant front to be set up, i.e., to achieve an alliance between the working class and the peasantry. At the same time, it is extremely important to find a general line in relation to the national bourgeoisie. Taken as a whole, however, the problem of a united front extends beyond a mere determination of the attitude to one social force or another. It includes such a complex problem as determining the relations between political parties and organisations representing the various social strata.
317 __ALPHA_LVL3__ Communists and the RevolutionaryThe emergence of revolutionary democracy into the forefront of the liberation struggle in a number of Asian and African countries, and the cardinal socio-economic reforms carried out under its leadership have confronted the Communist Parties of those countries with the complex task of correctly determining the place and role of revolutionary democracy in the national-democratic revolution, and of evolving flexible tactics.
Present-day revolutionary democracy is a socio-political force which has arisen and taken shape in the nationalliberation struggle and is opposed to imperialism and colonialism. In a broad sense, it is made up of politically awakened sections of the peasantry, the urban petty bourgeoisie and radical nationalist intellectuals who have joined the anti-imperialist, anti-feudal and anti-capitalist struggle. In a narrow sense, it is made up of revolutionary-democratic parties, organisations and groups opposed not only to imperialism but also to the development of capitalism in their countries.
Revolutionary democrats who have come to head governments are working to achieve the complete political and economic liberation of their countries from imperialism, and to ensure for them a position of equality and dignity in the world. They are also working to oust foreign monopolies from the national economy, build up a modern national industry, solve the agrarian problem in the interests of the peasantry, and the like. In other words, the revolutionary democrats advance consistent programmes of democratic reforms, which they are ready to implement by revolutionary methods and a resolute struggle against the reactionaries at home and imperialism, relying, though in a varying degree, on the support and participation of the masses.
Not content with an anti-imperialist programme of national liberation, the revolutionary democrats are giving effect to important progressive reforms and are even advancing the slogan of building socialism. Whether or not they sincerely believe in socialism, or proclaim socialist slogans under the people's pressure or because of the needs of social 318 development---these subjective motives are immaterial. The important thing is that the reforms being carried out by revolutionary democrats objectively serve the cause of social progress and, under certain circumstances, can open up the road to socialism.
Communists in the countries governed by revolutionary democrats consider that the latter's role hinges on their consistency in defence of the national interests. They support the revolutionary-democratic governments' measures to strengthen national independence, bring about social progress, and fulfil their programmes, the more so that the latter include many of the basic aims which the Communist Parties have always regarded as primary, and for which they have courageously fought for decades.
Communists urge all the patriotic forces in their countries to support progressive regimes. The Communist Parties of the Arab countries declared at their May 1967 meeting that in newly free states, such as Egypt, Syria and Algeria, where profound socio-economic reforms have been carried out, the Communists and the other progressive forces have set themselves the task of defending, strengthening and increasing these gains and creating the political and social conditions needed for their countries' advance towards socialism.
In stressing the great significance of the changes initiated by revolutionary-democratic governments, Communists note that this is only the beginning of a hard and long road towards complete national and social liberation. To make strides along this road, all patriotic and progressive forces, above all Communists and revolutionary democrats, must be closely united without any discrimination, and the conditions provided for Communists' active participation in building up a new life. Such an alliance is vitally important for strengthening the revolutionary-democratic regimes, extending and consolidating the class and political basis of their struggle for national independence and social progress, resisting the counter-revolutionaries, and neutralising the capitulationist groups among the revolutionary democrats.
Communists and revolutionary democrats are objectively in the same camp, and have a common enemy. They agree on the main thing, namely, that only a decisive struggle against 319 imperialism and an advance towards socialism will help solve the vital national and social problems of their countries.
While advocating unity and a militant alliance with the revolutionary democrats, Communists do not conceal their ideological differences with the former on a number of important issues. They are opposed to any underestimation of the workers' role in the destinies of their countries, take a firm stand for broader democracy in public life, and seek to ensure the activities of all progressive and patriotic organisations. Communists are well aware that the gains achieved cannot be maintained if they are bestowed on the people from above, and are not based on the latter's active and organised support.
However, Communists do not regard such differences as an obstacle to a militant alliance and close unity with the revolutionary democrats in the common struggle against imperialism, and for a socialist future. They understand the importance of enriching the progressive forces of these countries with the ideas and experience of scientific socialism, and emphatically uphold and popularise Marxist-Leninist views, without imposing them on others. As the economy develops, the size, organisation and political consciousness of the working class grow too, and the working people's role in political life rises, and a firm basis is laid down for stronger positions for scientific socialism.
Events have shown that all progressive and democratic forces, Communists and revolutionary democrats in the first place, can join forces in a variety of ways. That is why concrete forms of unity are evolved with regard for the conditions obtaining in the countries concerned.
The road to unity of the progressive forces often proves long and difficult, calling for patience and flexibility on the part of Communists. Political maturity, far-sightedness and the ability to achieve mutual trust are needed for the achievement of the main aim, that of rallying all the healthy and patriotic forces of the nation for the struggle against imperialism, and for non-capitalist development.
Good will on the part of one side alone is insufficient for effective co-operation, yet some revolutionary democrats are still suspicious of Communists, and at times hostile to 320 them, because they do not understand the Communist Parties' historical role in the liberation struggle. This is due to deep-seated prejudices resulting from anti-communist imperialist propaganda, the influence of religious bias, mistrust of the Communists' internationalist positions and ties, considerations of inter-party rivalry, and the striving for political monopoly.
In their attempts to manoeuvre and to prove their ideological ``independence'', some revolutionary democrats come out against both capitalism and communism; they do not realise that they are thereby helping the reactionaries. Other revolutionary democrats, who acknowledge the historical role of world communism, defame the Communists of their own countries, to whom they deny the right to actively participate in the struggle for social progress. Historical experience has shown that such anti-communist prejudices lead to a weakening of the revolutionary forces against the imperialists and other reactionaries.
``...The attempts to spread anti-communism and antiSovietism,'' says a joint Soviet-Egyptian communique, "are designed only to split the ranks of the Arab revolutionary fighters. These attempts are also aimed at breaking solidarity and co-operation between the Arab peoples and their sincere friends---the countries of the socialist community. That is why both sides emphatically condemn anti-- communism and anti-Sovietism as detrimental to the liberation aspirations and national interests of the peoples and serving only the interests of the international imperialist forces.''^^*^^
Conscious of their responsibility to the peoples and history, Communists display the greatest initiative in building up and strengthening an alliance of revolutionary forces. As stressed by the May 1967 Meeting of Arab Communist Parties, the interests of liberation and progress call for closer co-operation between Communist Parties and other progressive forces and parties, and for the establishment of that cooperation where this has not yet been done.
The Syrian Communist Party has acquired instructive experience of co-operation with the revolutionary democrats _-_-_
^^*^^ Pravda, October 14, 1971.
321 who hold power in their country. Accomplishment of the progressive socio-economic programme of the Left Baathists^^*^^ in Syria will greatly facilitate her advance towards socialism.The Syrian Communists, who advocate the tactics of a united front of all progressive forces, consider that, at the present stage of development, they must work to build up and strengthen unity in the interests of the country's progress, and not to fight to win state power.
After the February 23, 1966 coup, when the Left Baathists came to power, the Communists began to co-operate with that party, Communists entering the Baathist-formed government. This co-operation is mainly directed towards the struggle against imperialism, feudalism and the big bourgeoisie, and the establishment of relations of friendship and economic, cultural and military co-operation with the socialist countries.
Comimmist-Baathist co-operation is a limited one, for real power in the army and the machinery of state is wielded by the Baath. Neither Communists nor any other progressive forces can as yet exert any considerable influence on the government's policy. The Communist Party is semi-legal, and mass democratic organisations do not fully enjoy democratic freedoms. The Communist Party therefore believes that limited co-operation with the Baathists in the government and outside it must not prevent Communists from fulfilling their role of an independent revolutionary force, whose duty it is to boldly criticise shortcomings in the government's policy, and propose concrete ways of remedying them. The communist leaders have informed the Baathists that the Communist Party will firmly support any measure it has been consulted on and approves, and that it will bear the entire responsibility for such a measure. As for measures it has not been consulted on, the Communist Party will support them only if they conform to the interests of the country's progressive development.
_-_-_^^*^^ The Left Baathists, who came to power in Syria in February 1966, have announced their intention to work for non-capitalist development of their country.
__PRINTERS_P_321_COMMENT__ 21--0873 322The Syrian Communist Party is working to build a progressive national front which, in its opinion, should include the Baath, the Communist Party and all other progressive parties, groups and movements. The Israeli aggression has increased the desire to form such a front, which must be of an anti-imperialist, anti-feudal and anti-capitalist nature and should become a mass force and a mainstay of a progressive national administration. That is why the Communists have called it national and progressive. In their opinion, the granting of extensive democratic freedoms to the workers, peasants, revolutionary intellectuals, and all progressive parties, groups and movements, including the Syrian Communist Party, is an indispensable condition for establishing such a front.
Held in June 1969, the Third Congress of the Syrian Communist Party pointed out that the formation of a progressive national front capable of heading the advance towards socialism was one of the main conditions for completing the national-democratic revolution and creating the conditions for that advance. The Syrian Communists see such a front, not as a form of limited collaboration but as a broadbased organisation of all progressive forces, one in which the weight and influence of the working class, allied with the peasants and other working people, will play a growing part in shaping the country's policy along the lines of scientific socialism.
The Syrian Communists' efforts to form a united front are encountering serious difficulties. A number of progressive national leaders are prejudiced against Communists, some of them believing that the Communists' call for a national front is a ``manoeuvre'' aimed at ``absorbing'' the other progressive parties. Such an allegation is groundless: the Syrian Communist Party has declared that it has no intention of ``absorbing'' any other body, and will not allow itself to be ``absorbed''. It has explained that such a front is a form of organised collaboration of all progressive forces in the struggle for the common goals they have proclaimed. The aim of the front is to make the country's present progressive course firm, win it greater support from the people, and give full scope to the masses' initiative.
323 __ALPHA_LVL3__ A United Front in CountriesCommunists in the Afro-Asian countries developing along the capitalist road attach great importance to an appraisal of the complex processes in the nationalist and socialist parties of such countries. The Left-wing trends in these parties, which express the aspirations of the petty bourgeoisie, progressive groups in the national bourgeoisie, democratic intellectuals and, not infrequently, certain sections of the working class, call for an intensified anti-imperialist struggle and even for non-capitalist development. The Right-wing groupings, on the contrary, are hampering the progress of the revolution, this sometimes leading to a split in the nationalist and socialist parties. Similar processes are at work in the nationalist and socialist parties of India, Sri Lanka, Iraq, Morocco, and some other countries. A close study of such processes makes it easier to unify all progressive forces on the common platform of the anti-imperialist struggle.
The diversity of political and economic conditions and the specific social development of countries which have taken the capitalist road have influenced the Communist Parties' tactics in the struggle for a united anti-imperialist and national-democratic front. India and Sri Lanka can be cited as examples.
Since independence, India has been developing along the capitalist road, which has led that country to a crisis in the political, economic and other spheres. The economic growth rates have gone down markedly despite the rapid population increase. The economic slump has been attended by a steady rise in prices on the home market, with the country's foreign indebtedness going up.
Monopoly capital's domination over the Indian economy keeps growing, the wealth and economic power being controlled by 75 monopolies. With the state sector making a slow progress, the Right-wing forces have built up pressure for a larger private sector in the newly founded industries, thereby creating a danger of the state sector falling into the hands of stooges of big monopoly capital.
A steep decline in the economic growth rates has reduced the already low per capita income and has increased unemployment and inflation. Little, if anything, has changed __PRINTERS_P_323_COMMENT__ 21* 324 in the people's life since independence, social wealth being distributed in a way that has made the rich richer and the poor poorer. The agrarian reform has given the peasants no land. For years food has been scarce, with millions of people starving.
Mass discontent has produced strikes, marches and nationwide movements led by Left-wing parties and trade unions, against the anti-popular and pro-monopolist policy of the National Congress leaders.
The National Congress suffered an election setback in 1967 when, for the first time, its monopoly of power ended in nine out of the seventeen states, with Left-wing and democratic governments formed in two states by a United Front, in which the Communists play a leading part. The mid-term elections held in four states in February 1969 showed that the crisis in the country and the ruling Congress Party was developing and that a further differentiation of forces was taking place in the struggle between the reactionaries, on the one hand, and the Left-wing and democratic forces on the other.
The differentiation of forces in the Indian National Congress was accelerated by the growing economic crisis and mass protests. Progressive members began to openly criticise the leaders' reactionary policies and to demand that energetic measures be taken against the sway of the monopolies, and for the working people's just claims to be met, and the Party's repeated promises kept.
At the same time, the Right-wingers in the National Congress and the government were plotting to unite with the ultra-right Swatantra^^*^^ and Jan Sangh^^**^^ with a view to overthrowing Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and forming a reactionary coalition government.
The 1969 presidential elections were won by V. Giri, candidate of the progressive forces, who had been supported by the Communist Party of India, the parallel (so-called Marxist) Communist Party of India, the United Socialist _-_-_
^^*^^ Swatantra (Independent), a reactionary party which expresses the interests of the monopoly bourgeoisie and the rich landowners interested in a pro-Western orientation of the government.
^^**^^ Jan Sangh (the People's Party of India), a Hinduist religious-communal party.
325 Party, the People's Socialist Party, the United Front of West Bengal and Kerala, as well as by Left-wing and democratic parties and organisations of a number of other states. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi initiated a number of moves in home and foreign policies, which were approved by progressives and furiously attacked by the reactionaries. As a result of the nationalisation of 14 large banks, which was a heavy blow at the monopolies, the government assumed control of over 85 per cent of all bank deposits, thereby increasing the state's net revenue. This control of the greater part of bank deposits, enables the state to utilise them for national development.The Gandhi Government has declared its intention to reorient its economic policy, enlarge the state sector, restrict the monopolies' power, and so on. It has also announced its readiness to expand friendly relations with the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, as well as with progressive regimes in Asia and Africa. The Indian Government condemned the US aggressive war in Indochina, Britain's decision to sell arms to the South African racists, and so on.
The reactionaries within and without the National Congress have come out jointly against the Government's policy, accusing Indira Gandhi of "dictatorial methods'', "sympathy with the Communists" and the intention to make India a ``satellite'' of the Soviet Union. They have urged the Government to crack down on the democratic movement, ban the Communist Party, and authorise preventive detention without trial. In their attempts to deceive and disunite the people, the reactionaries have stirred up religious and language chauvinism, caste prejudices and communal enmity, and anti-communism and anti-Sovietism. They have obstructed the Government's efforts to put its programme into effect.
A sharp political struggle in the National Congress led to a differentiation of forces in it and a split at the end of 1969. This split resulted in a National Congress of Indira Gandhi supporters, and an Organisation Congress or a syndicate of Right-wing members of the National Congress.
The Indian National Congress found mass support in its struggle against the Right-wingers. Broad sections of the people entered into active political life, demanding early 326 completion of the agrarian reforms, reduction of the fixed land-holding ceiling, abolition of the land tax paid by the small peasant households, and so on.
The parliamentary elections of March 1971, held in a situation of crisis created by the Right-wingers, brought a landslide victory for the democrats and other progressives. The National Congress won 350 out of the 518 parliamentary seats, thus securing over two-thirds of the votes necessary for amending the Constitution; 48 seats were won by the Rightist parties. The Communist Party was working to defeat the joint forces of the Organisation Congress, the Swatantra and Jan Sangh, and achieved this aim, retaining its former positions in the parliament by winning 24 seats.
This was a massive vote in favour of a shift to the Left, so that the ruling National Congress can now live up to its promises and lead the country along the road of democracy and progress.
The most important feature in India's current development is that the people's election victory was conducive to greater activity of the masses and that democrats and the other progressive forces have begun to realise the need to rally their forces.
An active policy of consolidating all Left-wing, democratic and patriotic forces is being pursued by the Communist Party, which believes that the conditions have matured for a national-democratic front, with the working class and the peasantry forming its main force, supported by the urban middle strata and the patriotically minded bourgeoisie.
Held in October 1971, the Ninth Congress of the Communist Party of India pointed out in its political resolution that a national-democratic front is an alliance of all patriotic, democratic and Left-wing forces, irrespective of political affiliation, which are interested in the completion of the national-democratic revolution. In the Indian Communists' opinion, an important condition for such a front is a broad people's movement, to include the radical part of the bourgeoisie and those bourgeois representatives in the government and the Congress Party who are interested in a consistent struggle against imperialism, Indian monopoly capital and feudalism, and for revolutionary democracy and cardinal structural changes in the state apparatus and other spheres.
327The broad platform advanced by the Ninth Congress for the unification of all Left-wing and democratic forces, contained the following demands: 1) nationalisation and transfer to the state sector of all foreign-owned factories; 2) a radical agrarian reform; revision of laws on the size of land holdings; distribution of all surplus and uncultivated land among the agricultural workers, land-hungry peasants and the untouchables; fixed wages for farm labourers; 3) expansion of the state sector and wider democracy in its management by introducing workers' control at all levels; 4) revision of the wage-setting system for industrial workers, with due account of price rises, etc., and the fixing of minimum wages; 5) recognition of the trade unions' right to collective bargaining and to strikes; 6) the abolition of unemployment; 7) democratisation of the education system, a reform in the system of examinations, and so on.^^*^^
The growing struggle and united action on the basis of the Ninth Congress programme will, in the Communists' opinion, change the alignment of class forces in favour of the working class and its close ally, the peasantry. This policy is aimed at defeating the reactionaries and enabling the working class to put an end to the bourgeoisie's monopoly of power. It will then be possible to replace the present bourgeois government by a government of a Left-wing democratic front, in which power will be wielded by parties and forces representing the working class, the peasantry, the radical urban middle strata, and the patriotic non-monopoly national bourgeoisie.
The Indian Communists are aware of the many difficulties awaiting them in implementing this programme. There are many problems awaiting solution in the working class, one of them being the achievement of working-class unity. To the credit of the Communist Party is the success scored in May 1971, in the struggle for a united front, when, on the initiative of the All-India TU Congress, the vanguard of the country's working class, a conference of all mass tradeunion organisations adopted a charter of joint action, which set down the basic tasks of the trade-union movement (see Chapter V).
_-_-_^^*^^ See the New Age supplement, October 31, 1971, pp. 17--18.
328United action by the Left-wing, democratic and nationalpatriotic forces is an urgent need, which may well be successful thanks to the objective possibilities that have of late appeared in India.
The struggle for a united national front is developing in specific conditions in Sri Lanka. Between 1960 and March 1965, when the Sirimavo Bandaranaike Government was in power, expressing the interests of the radical sections of the national bourgeoisie, the Communist Party of that country was the initiator of the struggle for a broad-based united front of all progressive elements.
The Sri Lanka Communists have used flexible tactics in the struggle for a united front, achieving joint action on concrete questions. Thus, in September 1962, the Communist and Left-wing parties voted down some of the budget items and organised a campaign against cancelling rice allowances and a campaign of solidarity with Cuba. Late in 1962, the Communists and the Left-wing parties agreed to act jointly in the local elections, thereby ensuring victory for their candidates. In 1963, the Left-wing forces conducted a successful campaign in defence of national sovereignty and for nationalisation of foreign oil companies. As a result, the Government was compelled to take over the distribution of all oil products on the home market.
The Communist Party was gradually laying the foundations for broad unity of the progressive forces. Thus, the August 1963 agreement establishing a United Left Front of the Communist Party of Sri Lanka, the Lanka Sama Samaja Party^^*^^ and the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna^^**^^ was a major success for the Communists. The Front proclaimed two programmes, one immediate and the other a general programme, the former containing the immediate demands of the workers, peasants and other strata of the people, and the latter outlining the basic targets for completing the anti-imperialist _-_-_
^^*^^ The Lanka Sama Samaja Party (Socialist Party of Sri Lanka) expresses the interests of part of the working class, the petty-bourgeois sections, and Western-educated intellectuals.
^^**^^ Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (People's United Front) expresses the interests of part of the working class and the national intelligentsia. This organisation does not wield any considerable influence at present.
329 and anti-feudal stage of the revolution. The general programme reflected the interests of all progressive forces in the country.The United Left Front was an important step towards closing the split in the working class and achieving communist-socialist unity. It made working-class guidance possible in the progressive forces' struggle against the domination of imperialist monopolies in the national economy, and for greater political independence, the abolition of feudal relations, economic self-sufficiency, and broad democracy, so as to lay the foundations for the country's non-capitalist development, with a subsequent transition to socialism.
Led by the United National Party, the reactionaries saw in this increasing Left-wing unity a grave threat to their economic and political positions, so they turned to their advantage the vacillation displayed by the leaders of the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna, who backed the reactionaries, in the March 1965 elections, thereby weakening Left-wing unity. As a result, the United National Party came to power.
The Communist Party of Sri Lanka showed that the UNP government was expressing primarily the interests of the top strata of the bourgeoisie and the landowners, who were closely connected with foreign capital. The Government's anti-popular policy in the economic, political and social spheres made it hated by the masses and gave rise to a progressive opposition to the regime. Three progressive parties---the Sri Lanka Freedom Party,^^*^^ the Lanka Sama Samaja Party and the Communist Party of Sri Lanka---established links of unity in the struggle against imperialism and the local reactionaries. They came out as a united front in all mass campaigns and also in parliament, where they formed a united opposition. In June 1968, after a long and thorough discussion, the three parties signed a general programme for a united front.
The programme stated that the three parties wanted to introduce socialist democracy: the ensuring of Sri Lanka's independence, sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity; _-_-_
^^*^^ The Sri Lanka Freedom Party represents the interests of the progressive groups of the Sri Lanka bourgeoisie, the intelligentsia, a part of the working class, and petty-bourgeois sections (the Party's leader is Sirimavo Bandaranaike).
330 the abolition of economic and social privileges, inequality and exploitation; guarantees of equal opportunities for all citizens; development of a democratic form of government and democratic rights of the people, including their right to have a government through free, unprejudiced and regular elections, and so on.The Front's aim was the formation of a people's government of three parties and other progressive forces, headed by the Sri Lanka Freedom Party president Sirimavo Bandaranaike, a government that would effect a number of extensive socio-economic changes in the interests of the working people, and, first of all, reorganise the estate apparatus on a democratic basis, ensuring the active participation of the people in running state affairs; it was to improve the condition of the peasants by turning over the land to those who tilled it, repealing the irrigation tax, and ensuring technical and other assistance by the state; industrialise the country by uniting the principal branches of the economy in the state sector, and bring under state control all private banks, including the foreign, as well as the import and export of staple commodities.
In the May 1970 parliamentary elections, the United Left Front won 115 out of the 151 seats, the United National Party retaining only 17 seats. Headed by Sirimavo Bandaranaike, a ULF government was formed of representatives of the three parties, including the Communist Party, whose general secretary Pieter Keuneman was given the post of minister of housing construction and public works.
From the very outset, the government encountered serious difficulties in implementing its programme. The Sri Lanka economy has remained agrarian, with agriculture being greatly specialised: up to 60 per cent of the cultivated land is under tea, rubber and coconut-palms, which brings in 90 per cent of the foreign currency earnings.
During its first year in office, the ULF government carried out a number of progressive measures: it introduced currency restrictions on the import of luxury goods, granted privileges for the import of food and prime necessities, undertook initial steps to expand the state sector, whose share of aggregate industrial output was 30 per cent in 1971, announced a plan of accelerated economic development 331 envisaging the abolition of the big estates, nationalisation of the key industries, a further expansion of the state sector, nationalisation of foreign and internal wholesale trade, etc.
The ULF government, which has been conducting a policy of non-alignment, has established diplomatic relations with the German Democratic Republic, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam, and has severed diplomatic relations with Israel.
All these progressive measures have been carried out in conditions of a bitter struggle against the growing resistance from the reactionaries, who are utilising the economic difficulties and the political immaturity of certain sections of the people, especially the youth, to spread disappointment and mistrust of the government. In April 1971, there took place a reactionary counter-revolutionary uprising, many of whose participants belonged to the petty-bourgeois nationalists and to ultra-Leftist elements.
In these most difficult conditions, the Communist Party is building up the mass movement and rallying all progressive forces, with the aim of strengthening the ULF positions and carrying out the ULF programme. It is doing much to unite the working class, the peasantry, the revolutionary youth, and the progressive intelligentsia in a broad front, on the following platform: 1) nationalisation of the banks and a ban on the export of profits and dividends; 2) a state monopoly of imports and exports; 3) lower prices for prime necessities (textiles, medicines, etc.); 4) an end tjo unemployment; 5) transfer of the uncultivated land, both state- and privatelyowned, to the landless peasants; 6) democratisation of the state apparatus. These and other measures should weaken the economic and political positions of the reactionaries.
Thus, the struggle to form national-democratic fronts in the newly free countries of Asia and Africa is a decisive condition for their advance along the road of social progress and independence. Building up these fronts is a complex and many-sided process, which is proceeding amid sharp struggles. The Communists' determination to set up and consolidate united fronts is an earnest of success for the cause of unity of all progressive and genuinely national forces in Asia and Africa.
[332] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER VIII __ALPHA_LVL1__ LATIN AMERICAN COMMUNISTS AND THE PROBLEMSMost Latin American countries threw off the colonial yoke, gained political independence, and embarked on the road of capitalist development in the early nineteenth century, a development that was held up by restricted home markets and slow rates of industrial growth caused by the domination of the big landed estates and by internecine wars. This was taken advantage of by the big capitalist powers, with the result that, by the time capitalism entered its imperialist stage, the Latin American countries were in the toils of financial and diplomatic dependence on Britain, the USA, Germany, France and other imperialist powers, which moreover had retained colonial possessions in the Caribbean. After World War II, US imperialism established its supremacy in the area at the expense of its war-weakened rivals, largely by involving Latin American states in an unequal political alliance---the so-called inter-American system, which was based on anti-communism.
Latin America has been assigned no small role in US imperialism's global strategy. It is the third biggest area for US overseas investments, which bring in higher profits than in any other part of the world. As the biggest owners of land in Latin America, the US monopolies are supporting the big local landed proprietors, who own more than half of the cultivated land. The bloc of US monopolies, local landowners and other members of the oligarchy (in some countries of the area, the merger of bank and industrial capital has given rise to local monopolies) pursues reactionary 333 pro-imperialist internal and external policies. For many years, the Latin American ruling classes have played the role of "junior partners" to the US in the cold war against the world socialist system.
Guided by the working class and its political parties, the Latin American masses are actively opposing imperialist domination, fighting to strengthen their countries' national sovereignty and economic and foreign-policy independence, and coming out for thorough political and socio-economic transformations. In this struggle, they draw on traditions of solidarity which date back to the 1810--1826 war of independence.
Since the early years of the twentieth century, Latin America has emerged as a major area of the struggle against imperialism, first and foremost, that of the United States. Among the highlights of fifty years of the revolutionary anti-- imperialist struggle waged by the Latin American peoples are: the Mexican anti-imperialist bourgeois revolution of 1910-- 1917, which was accompanied by a peasant war; the guerrilla war against the US invaders in Haiti and the Dominican Republic in the twenties; the armed struggle of the Nicaraguan people in 1927--1934 under Cesar Augusto Sandino; the Communist-led popular uprising in San Salvador in 1932; the heroic revolutionary march of the Luis Carlos Prestes column in 1924--1927 in Brazil; the bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1933 in Cuba; the victory of the Popular Front in Chile in 1938; the democratic anti-imperialist revolution of 1944--1954 in Guatemala; the civil war in Paraguay in 1947, and the Bolivian revolution of 1952, to say nothing of major strikes by industrial workers, and armed uprisings in many cities and rural areas.
Taking advantage of the shift of the world alignment of forces towards socialism, the democratic and revolutionary movements in Latin America launched a new phase of the anti-imperialist struggle in the mid-fifties, its highlights being the popular revolution in Cuba, which has embarked on socialist construction, and, in recent years, the establishment of the Popular Unity Government in Chile, the assumption of power by a progressive regime in Peru, and massive revolutionary action by the working class and other sections of the people in many Latin American countries.
334The mounting anti-imperialist struggle and class battles, the growing contradictions between the US monopolies and the influential local bourgeoisies, and the increased interimperialist rivarly in the area have all contributed to the crisis of the inter-American system of imperialist domination and opened up new possibilities for independent foreign policies and long-overdue social changes. The emergence from external isolation, and the expanding diplomatic, economic and cultural ties of Latin American countries with the socialist states and with the young states of Asia and Africa are making this trend prevalent in Latin American policies.
The 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties has summed up the main features of the revolutionary process in that area as follows: the winning of state independence in the early nineteenth century by most of these countries, and the struggle against colonialism waged by some peoples; the struggle against the common oppressor and exploiter---US imperialism, which has established its domination over these countries; a prolonged period of capitalist development; survivals of feudalism in many countries; a struggle for genuine national sovereignty and economic independence, intertwined with pitched class battles against capitalist exploitation, primarily against the monopolies, foreign and local, and against the big landowners; a struggle in support of democratic demands and against dictatorial regimes; the size of the urban and rural proletariat; the existence, in twenty-four countries, of Communist Parties; America's first socialist state established in Cuba.
The Cuban revolution has made a breach in the system of Latin American regimes forming part of the world system of capitalism. However, owing to the uneven economic and political development and the rapid changes in the international situation, the revolutionary process in Latin American countries, while showing an overall upward trend, has not been uniform, with the ebb and flow of the revolutionary struggle involving different countries at different times and with .varying intensity.
With the exception of Cuba, which is laying down the foundations of a socialist society, other Latin American countries are either tackling the tasks of the anti-- 335 imperialist, agrarian and democratic revolution, or are approaching that stage. In type, however, i.e., in their objective socio-- economic content, as well as their motive forces, the revolutions in the various Latin American countries are different, although the struggle against imperialism, notably US imperialism, is the main external goal for all of them. The multiplicity of types of the economy, their different combinations, which are a feature of countries with a medium level of capitalist development and with strong pre-capitalist survivals, and the various forms of dependence on foreign monopolies have resulted in an objective difference in the tasks confronting revolutions in the various countries.
The colonial countries in the Caribbean, which are at a relatively advanced stage of capitalism, are waging a struggle for national and political independence, i.e., for statehood, with progressive and anti-imperialist forces demanding immediate political independence (as in Puerto Rico), or internal self-government, as in the case of Martinique and Guadeloupe, which want autonomy within the French Community as a step leading to full political independence.
The peoples of the newly independent Caribbean states (Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, etc.) which are still in the toils of neo-colonialism, seek to escape from its meshes, attain genuine national sovereignty, and implement revolutionary anti-imperialist social reforms to pave the way for socialism.
In the small and backward agrarian countries such as Haiti, Honduras and Nicaragua, the economies are largely precapitalist, with 60 to 87 per cent of the total labour force engaged in agriculture. The political superstructure, as represented by traditional tyrannies, reflects their socio-- economic backwardness, as well as these countries' political and military dependence on US imperialism, which occupied their territories until recently. The working class is relatively small (constituting 15--30 per cent of the total gainfully employed population) and is largely engaged in cottage industries and small enterprises. It is poorly organised politically and the trade-union membership is small. The Communist Parties are of recent origin (dating back to the forties and fifties).
336Nevertheless, the urban and rural proletariat engages in vigorous strike action, especially at monopoly-owned plantations. Downtrodden by the local big landowners and the US monopolies, the peasantry is only awakening to action. These countries face a revolution that is anti-imperialist and anti-feudal in its content. However, immediate priority must go to the abolition of pro-imperialist dictatorial regimes and the democratisation of the political systems. The most diverse social forces are objectively interested in the accomplishment of this task, the struggle against the dictatorial regimes often being led by the petty bourgeoisie with support from the working class and the peasantry. Popular action often develops into general political strikes, and, in some cases, is accompanied by armed uprisings against the regimes and their imperialist masters. The most prominent role on the political scene is often played, not so much by political parties as by other institutions, such as the universities, the army, the church, and so on. In the van of this struggle are the Communist Parties, who proceed from the prospect of the present struggle developing into an antiimperialist and anti-feudal revolution, and from the possibility of these countries taking to the non-capitalist path.
In Latin American agrarian countries, which have in recent decades seen a vigorous development of capitalism, especially in the light industries, and where revolutionary processes have been aborted by US intervention, the revolution's anti-imperialist objectives are also intertwined with the anti-feudal. However, the overthrow of imperialistimposed regimes in these countries may bring revolutionary-democratic and anti-imperialist popular governments to power.
In a number of countries, including such big ones as Argentina, Brazil and Mexico, capitalism has reached a medium level of development and has emerged as the main mode of production, although remnants of pre-capitalist relations are still very much in evidence in agriculture and in the political superstructure. At the same time, there is a marked trend towards a state-monopoly system of rule, which is viewed by the foreign and home monopolies and other oligarchical circles as a way out of the present deep crisis of the dependent capitalist structure. In such countries, many 337 important tasks of the general democratic stage of the revolution are yet to be accomplished, though there do exist certain material prerequisites for the building of socialism. The main revolutionary motive force in these countries is the proletariat (which forms between 50 and 75 per cent of the gainfully employed population).
Sixty per cent of the workers in the manufacturing industries are concentrated at factories, between one-quarter and one-third being employed at large enterprises with 500 or more workers. The proletariat is relatively well organised, between 40 and 60 per cent being in the trade unions, most of which are affiliated with independent trade union centres.
Communist Parties arose in these countries immediately after the Great October Revolution, and are in most cases broad-based nation-wide parties.
However, the proletariat's lack of political unity still affects its militancy: a considerable part of the industrial workers and other working people follow the lead of nationalist populist parties and movements (the Peronista movement in Argentina, the Trabalhists in Brazil, the Institutional Revolutionary Party in Mexico, etc.), which have a reformist stand.
Along with the working class and the peasantry, an important motive force of the revolution in these countries are the urban middle strata, which are the social base for populist movements. During the first phase of the revolution, which is anti-imperialist, anti-oligarchical, agrarian and broadly democratic, the popular bloc may be joined by members of the non-monopolistic local bourgeoisie. Radical anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchical measures corresponding to this stage of the revolution are capable of undermining the capitalist system and paving the way for a gradual transition from the democratic to the socialist revolution.
Thus, the Programme of the Communist Party of Argentina (as adopted by the Party's Thirteenth Congress in March 1969) defines the future revolution as democratic, agrarian and anti-imperialist, with an orientation towards socialism and the construction of a socialist society. It proceeds from the assumption that the revolution will produce a democratic popular multi-party government of a new type, in which the __PRINTERS_P_337_COMMENT__ 22--0873 338 organised working class will be represented. The Communist Party of Uruguay also views the general democratic and the socialist revolutions as two phases of a continuous process, in which the working class plays the leading role.
On the whole, it can be stated that Latin America has now entered a new stage, the highest, of an intense, prolonged and uphill struggle waged by the masses against imperialist rule and the oppression of local bourgeois and landowner oligarchies. "The anti-imperialist struggle of the peoples in the Latin American countries,'' it is stressed in the Resolution of the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress on the Report of the Party's Central Committee, "is growing ever stronger. Important revolutionary-democratic changes have been taking place in the life of a number of peoples on that continent.''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. FEATURES OF THE COMMUNIST PARTIES' STRUGGLEIn the conditions of a new and higher stage of the antiimperialist revolutionary movement, which, in the words of Jorge Del Prado, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Peru's Central Committee, is marked by an expansion of the anti-imperialist struggle in Latin America, the creation of a broad united front of democratic and patriotic forces assumes special importance. "To find the road towards unity of each people, to feel the concrete lines of approach to each revolution, to forge the unity of the working class, the broad masses and all the patriotic and democratic forces,'' said Rodney Arismendi, First Secretary of the Communist Party of Uruguay's Central Committee, at the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress, "such is apparently the great bidding of history_at this hour in Latin America''.^^**^^ The urgency of the struggle' for an anti-imperialist democratic front has been stressed by all Latin American Communist and Workers' Parties. "We do not elevate our experience as a model," _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 215.
^^**^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, p. 278 (in Russian).
339 said Luis Corvalan, General Secretary of the Chilean Communist Party, to the CPSU Congress, "but ...this experience has something obvious to all: for victory to be won, whatever road to it is chosen, unity in struggle of the working class, all the revolutionaries and all the popular forces is absolutely essential.''^^*^^ As Ruben Dario Sousa, General Secretary of the Partido del Pueblo (People's Party) of Panama, pointed out, "The Party works towards strengthening popular unity in order to frustrate the conspiracy of the local reaction and repel any imperialist interference, as well as ensure the implementation of deep-going transformations.''^^**^^ __ALPHA_LVL3__ For a BroadThe Communist Parties and the working class are initiators of the movement for the unity of progressive forces in the Latin American countries in a broad national-democratic front. The unity of democratic and patriotic forces in Latin America has taken various forms: the Encuento Nacional de los Argentines---ENA (National Meeting of Argentinians); Popular Unity in Ecuador, which was formed around a programme aimed at uniting all popular and democratic forces and unanimously approved on 27 April, 1971 by the Socialist Party of Ecuador, the Communist Party of Ecuador and other progressive organisations; the Coalition of Democratic Parties in San Salvador; the Unity of Patriotic Forces which is taking shape in Panama; the Frente Amplio (Broad Front) in Uruguay, which is viewed by the Communist Party of that country as a "big step forward towards a democratic front for national liberation"^^***^^; the anti-imperialist Popular Front in Bolivia, which proceeds from a "unity of the working class, the most dynamic and radical sections of the urban petty bourgeoisie, the students, the popular and revolutionary political parties;" the United Front of Popular Forces in Peru; Popular Unity in Chile, which was described by Orlando Millas, speaking on behalf of the Political Commission at _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., p. 301.
^^**^^ Ibid., p. 283.
^^***^^ Jorie Cueto, "Reaction Loses the Battle''. Pravda, March 29, 1971.
__PRINTERS_P_339_COMMENT__ 22* 340 the Plenum of the Chilean Communist Party's Central Committee in September 1970, as a political union of a clearly expressed anti-oligarchical and anti-imperialist trend; the Popular Front in Venezuela, etc.However, with all the variety of forms of the anti-- imperialist democratic front, there can be no doubt that genuine united action can only be achieved in a struggle against imperialism and the local bourgeois-landowner oligarchies. This can take the form of a struggle against colonial regimes (Guadeloupe, Martinique and Puerto Rico), against reactionary anti-democratic policies of the big bourgeoisie (Mexico), and dictatorships representing a highly negative factor in the continent's history (the terrorist regimes in Haiti, Paraguay and Nicaragua). However, this struggle is essentially anti-imperialist, anti-oligarchical and anticapitalist in character, and its successes are undermining the positions of imperialism and of the local bourgeois-landowner oligarchy, depriving them of the main instruments of economic and political power.
The broadest social forces in Latin America are involved in the liberation struggle and in forming national-democratic fronts in individual countries. These involve the working class, the peasantry, the petty and middle bourgeoisie, the patriotic military, and even such sections of the bourgeoisie which, under certain conditions, find themselves involved in contradiction with monopoly capitalism and are objectively interested in opposing imperialist penetration. The inability of the Latin American bourgeoisie to head a broad anti-imperialist revolutionary movement does not mean that all of its sections are unable to wage a struggle against imperialism's rapacious policies.
An example of a broad coalition of democratic, antidictatorial and anti-imperialist forces is the movement of the Encuento Nacional de los Argentinos (National Meeting of Argentinians) (ENA) which was created in Rosario on November 21, 1970. Citizens representing a broad political spectrum elected delegates to the movement's constituent assembly. Besides Communists, the ENA national leadership includes Peronistas, People's Radicals, Demo-- Christians, progressive democrats, Socialists and independents, as well as trade-union, peasant, student and civil-rights leaders, 341 the leaders of movements for the preservation of national resources, etc.
Another example is the Broad Front of progressive forces in Uruguay, whose constituent assembly was attended by delegates of the Communist Party, the Christian-Democrats, the People's Government movement, the Blanco Popular Progressive Movement, the Left Liberation Front (FIDEL), the Socialist Party, the National Party, civilian and military independent groups, and other organisations. The Broad Front is the outcome of a prolonged and persistent struggle by the working people and other strata in Uruguay for genuine democracy and against the repressive policies of pro-imperialist governments. The foundations for the Broad Front were laid by FIDEL, formed in 1962. The Declaration adopted by the constituent meeting points out that "the main aim of the Broad Front is constant political struggle, and not only participation in the electoral campaign.''^^*^^
In Peru, grassroot support for the progressive, antiimperialist and anti-oligarchical transformations in the country has accelerated the emergence of a united popular front and its alliance with revolutionary-minded military circles. Seven organisations form the backbone of this movement: the General Confederation of Labour, the General Trade-Union Centre of New Towns, the Association of exSergeants, ex-Privates and ex-Seamen, the Tupac Amaru Peasant Federation, the National Association of Co-- operatives, the National Volunteer Brigade for Agrarian Reform, and the Press and People's Co-operative. United action of these organisations will make it possible to pool the efforts of all Peruvians prepared to wage a resolute and selfless struggle for far-reaching socio-economic transformations.
The creation of a united popular front in Peru at the first stage of the anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchy revolution stems from processes which took place in the sixties, a time when the proletariat was growing numerically and becoming politically stronger and better organised. The struggle waged by urban and rural working people was developing and the level of their revolutionary consciousness was _-_-_
^^*^^ Frente Amplio: Declaracian Constituitiva. Montevideo, febrero 5 de 1971, p. 1.
342 rising. The General Confederation of Labour was reorganised and strengthened, and the peasants launched a struggle for land. After its ranks had been purged of dissenters and opportunists of all kinds, the Communist Party of Peru set about revising its structure and charting a new political course. The accumulation of forces was manifested in the creation of the National Front in Defence of Petroleum, the National Liberation Front and the Left Unity electoral success in November 1967.In Chile, a long struggle for a united national-democratic front culminated in the creation of the Popular Unity bloc, which was formally promulgated on December 17, 1969, when the Communist, Socialist, Radical and Social-- Democratic parties, the United Popular Action Movement (MAPU) and the Independent Popular Action (API) signed a Fundamental Popular Unity Programme. Popular Unity brings together democratic forces closely linked with the life of the people. "Marxists, Catholics and Freemasons, men and women from all walks of life and of widely differing political philosophies were able to reach understanding. For the Popular Unity alliance is an amalgam of the social diversity and political pluralism that is part of Chile. Without such an amalgam victory would have been inconceivable.''^^*^^
The formation of the Popular Unity bloc representing the most diverse strata of the population opposed to imperialism and advocating the abolition of backward socio-- economic structures, and the democratisation of Chile's political life led to the victory of the most consistently anti-- imperialist and anti-oligarchical forces in the presidential elections on September 4, 1970. On November 3, 1970 a government, formed of representatives of all political parties in Popular Unity and headed by the socialist leader Salvador Allende, formally took office.
The emergence and strengthening of Popular Unity owes much to joint action by Communists and socialists in the struggle for the interests of the working people and all the population of Chile. As far back as the presidential elections of 1952, Communists and socialists formed a People's Front _-_-_
^^*^^ Luis Corvalan, "Chile: The People Take Over'', World Marxist Review No. 12, 1970, p. 3.
343 which nominated Salvador Allende as its presidential candidate. The setting up, in 1953, of the single Centre of Chilean Workers (CUTCH) and the formation in 1956, on its basis, of an alliance of the Communist, socialist and other democratic parties in a Popular Action Front (FRAP) were landmarks in the struggle for the unity of the working-class and the Leftwing anti-imperialist movement. The joint declaration of the parties forming this anti-imperialist bloc stressed that FRAP was a single political organisation of advanced forces called upon to co-ordinate the political, parliamentary, tradeunion and electoral activities of its constituent parties. The Front was prepared to act jointly with other parties and organisations whose aims and tasks coincided with its own. The statement said that the parties within the bloc retained freedom to express, disseminate and uphold their ideological principles.^^*^^The formation and consolidation of FRAP and CUTCH have contributed to the rise of the working-class and antiimperialist movement and promoted united action by the people of Chile. Within the Radical and the Christian Democratic Parties (PDC), which have a following among the middle strata and sections of the working class, anti-- imperialist democratic trends have emerged which advocate radical socio-economic transformations to pave the way for the construction of socialism. Leadership of the Radical Party has been taken over by its progressive wing, and, following its Congress of 1967 under the slogan of "A New Road for Chile: Socialism and Democracy'', the Radicals joined the mainstream of the popular movement. Within the PDC Left-wing currents have appeared which have led to the formation of MAPU and the Left-wing Christian Organisation, which belongs to the Popular Unity bloc. "We believe that all popular political and social forces,'' said Jacques Chonchol, the Left-Christian leader, "must unite if they really want to replace the capitalist system by the socialist one.''^^**^^
The Communist Party of Chile has played an outstanding role in bringing about popular unity and winning the _-_-_
^^*^^ See M. F. Kudachkin, "The Communist Party of Chile in the Struggle for the Unity and Victory of Popular Anti-Imperialist Forces'', Voprosy istorii KPSS No. 2, 1971, p. 49.
^^**^^ Ibid., p. 51.
344 elections. Staunchly adhering to its course of unity of the working class and the whole people, it has evolved the concept of the Chilean revolution and pursued its tactics with firmness and flexibility, constantly strengthening its links with the masses.But the biggest single factor, as Luis Corvalan pointed out, was "the policy adopted at the two last Party Congresses, of promoting closer understanding between socialists and Communists, and organising a Popular Unity front meant to bring together all progressive forces in the opposition and in the government against the reactionary forces in both.''^^*^^
In conducting their political line, the Chilean Communists have staunchly opposed covert as well as overt enemies, dyed-in-the-wool reactionaries, as well as ultra-Left elements who have denied the possibility of the Popular Unity bloc winning an election. Confident that their political line is the correct one, Chilean Communists have spared no efforts in translating it into life and in cementing the Party ranks.
No single political party, whether the Communist or any other, can claim all the credit for the election victory. Each of the parties within the Popular Unity bloc has made an essential contribution, greater or smaller. "The absence of any one Party would have proved fatal.''^^**^^
Unity and mutual understanding among different popular movements are being forged in common action by the masses, irrespective of their political or religious views. Over 14,800 Popular Unity committees sprang up during the Chilean elections, involving hundreds of thousands of fighters for the people, many of them belonging to no parties. Joint action is launched at factories, farms, offices, universities and in residential areas. Such activities centre round " immediate demands and, more important, on assuring political power by the people''.^^***^^
However, the struggle was not confined to the elections but was aimed at mass action all along the line. In addition to election canvassing and explaining the Popular Unity main programme to the masses, the Popular Unity _-_-_
^^*^^ World Marxist Review No. 12, 1970, p. 3.
^^**^^ Ibid.
^^***^^ Ibid.
345 committees guided the people's struggle in support of their immediate demands. Under the popular government, these committees have retained their role of initiators of the social struggle. A dramatic instance of joint action during the election campaign was the national strike organised by the Single Centre of Chilean Workers. Resistance to the bourgeoisie's ideological sabotage, especially to all brands of anti-communism and anti-Sovietism, and to sectarian and Right-wing trends remains an essential condition of democratic unity in the struggle against the people's main enemies---imperialism and the oligarchy. "In short,'' Luis Corvalan stressed, "the Popular Unity alliance is not just a result of agreement between party leaders, but of mass struggle and mass determination, the result, primarily, of numerous joint actions and the closer understanding and cohesion they produced.''^^*^^The success of the policy of united national-democratic fronts in Latin American countries, particularly in Chile, has dealt a serious blow at US imperialism and Latin American reactionaries, and created favourable conditions for greater proletarian solidarity and fraternal ties between the Latin American peoples. It attests to the validity of the political line adopted by the Marxist-Leninist parties in that part of the globe, a line aimed at rallying the masses within anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchic movements.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ For Working-Class HegemonyIn pursuing their policy of united action by the masses, Communists proceed from the assumption that the workerpeasant alliance and the proletariat's alliances with nonproletarian sections of the people make it possible to create a strong and united militant anti-imperialist and antioligarchical national-democratic front. If revolution is to triumph in the Latin American countries, the anti-- imperialist front must be expanded, not narrowed, by involving, in some form or another, all elements capable of making _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid.
346 a contribution to the struggle against the common enemy. The key factor in the creation and strengthening of the national-democratic front is mutual understanding between proletarian and petty-bourgeois revolutionaries.While warning against any underestimation of the revolutionary potential of the masses of the rural and urban petty bourgeoisie, Communists are working hard to ensure working-class hegemony in the anti-imperialist revolutionary process. The proletariat is the most powerful social class in Latin America, with an increasing revolutionary potential and objective maturity. In a number of countries, the industrial core of the working class at enterprises employing 50 or more workers accounts for the majority of industrial workers. The Communist Parties have an overall membership of over 350,000.
The programmes of most Latin American Communist Parties stress the working class's leading role in the liberation movements. Thus the Programme of the Communist Party of Argentina states that the national-democratic anti-oligarchical front which is being formed on the basis of a powerful and broad popular coalition has set itself the aim of gaining power and establishing a democratic popular government of a new type which is "inconceivable without the participation and the leading role of the working class heading all political and social forces that in one way or another oppose imperialist and oligarchical domination.''^^*^^
As the Programme of the Guatemalan Party of Labour notes, "The urban and agricultural working class of Guatemala, recently emerged from the midst of peasants and artisans, in spite of its relative small numbers, is the leading class in the revolutionary process...."^^**^^ "Our Party,"
Gilberto Vieira, General Secretary of the Columbian Communist Party has stressed, "tirelessly works to set up a broad popular and patriotic front led by the working class. A basis for it can be provided by the currently emerging opposition coalition, which is an expression of the mutual understanding of broad anti-oligarchy and anti-imperialist forces.''^^***^^ _-_-_
^^*^^ Programma del Partido Comunista de la Argentina, Buenos Aires, 1969, p. 28.
^^**^^ El Programma de Liberacion Popular, Guatemala, 1970, p. 9.
^^***^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, p. 195.
347 ``Orientation on broad popular unity with the hegemony of the working class and the revolutionary political forces--- this is the determining feature of the policies of the Bolivian Communist Party in the struggle to set up a popular anti-imperialist government,''^^*^^ Jorge Kolle, First Secretary of the Bolivian Communist Party's Central Committee, has pointed out.The working class of most Latin American countries is capable of providing leadership for the united front and exercising its hegemony within that front. However, hegemony is won in a struggle, in which it is indeed the strongest social class that wins and establishes its leadership.
In the struggle to win recognition of its leadership of the national-democratic front from the peasantry, the urban petty bourgeoisie, the intelligentsia, the students and other strata, the working class has to overcome serious objective difficulties and weaknesses in its own ranks.
With the exception of Chile and Uruguay, the workingclass movements in Latin American countries are divided. Efforts by the more consistent adherents of unity in the proletarian ranks come up against the reactionary policies of overt and covert anti-communism and anti-Sovietism, planted in the working-class movement by imperialism and its agents.
The split in the proletarian ranks is aggravated by the impact of petty-bourgeois ideology, brought into the midst of the working class mainly by the still numerous and as yet insufficiently class-conscious urban proletarian strata. A considerable part of them are wholly workless or underemployed, and very many of them have retained links with the peasantry and dream of acquiring their private plots of land. The theories and practices of Economism paralyse unity of action by large contingents of the working class belonging to trade-union groupings which are dominated by the church, the Right-wing liberal bourgeoisie, or tradeunion bureaucrats who carry out the line of US imperialism. The working class's political consciousness and its striving for unity are seriously hampered by reactionary legislation _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., p. 93.
348 and state interference in the affairs of the trade unions and other proletarian organisations.Yet, despite the difficulties the Latin American workingclass movement is coming up against, and all its weaknesses, the struggle for unity remains the main task, not only because of its significance in the struggle for the proletariat's immediate demands but also because it leads to the working class winning the leadership in revolutionary processes.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Position of the PettyIn the struggle for a national-democratic front, it should constantly be borne in mind that a considerable part of the petty bourgeoisie is going over to a revolutionary stand and working selflessly for the liberation of the Latin American peoples, making the construction of a socialist society its final goal. The petty bourgeoisie "has still ample possibilities for acting as a revolutionary force and even playing a leading role in those countries where the proletariat is relatively weak numerically and politically.''^^*^^
While recognising the petty bourgeoisie's revolutionary potential, the Communist Parties remember that "there is a link of unity between the revolutionary trends of the proletariat, on the one hand, and those of the petty bourgeoisie, on the other hand.''~^^**^^ As a rule, revolutionary trends that arise on a petty-bourgeois basis underestimate the role of the working class and the Marxist-Leninist parties. They are often given to nationalism, adventurism, and terrorism, and take up the ideology of anti-communism and anti-- Sovietism. In periods of reverses, such movements fall into confusion, vacillation, subjectivism and despair. Nevertheless, these are revolutionary trends, in respect of whom "the proletariat must put the accent on unity with them rather than on fighting their mistakes.''^^***^^ Although these trends are engaged in a constant ideological struggle and are vying with each other for leadership of the movement, _-_-_
^^*^^ Luis Corvalan, "Alliance of the Anti-Imperialist Forces in Latin America'', World Marxist Review No. 7, 1967, p. 27.
^^**^^ Ibid.
^^***^^ Ibid.
349 an attempt to turn that struggle into one for the annihilation of a particular revolutionary current always strengthens the positions of imperialism, local Big Business, and the landowning oligarchy.Some Communist Parties have recently been evolving a new approach to the national bourgeoisie. It is recognised as indisputable that the role played by the middle bourgeoisie in the Latin American revolutions of the last decade has sharply decreased because of the new intensity of the class struggle and the middle bourgeoisie's fear of socialist transformations. In the opinion of a number of fraternal parties, the so-called national bourgeoisie cannot today be counted among the motive forces of the revolution, yet in some Latin American countries the possibility is not ruled out of tactical alliances with those sections of the middle bourgeoisie which come out for democracy and the national interests.
__*_*_*__The Latin American Communist Parties are aware of the historical necessity of mutual understanding, co-operation and joint action on the part of the proletariat and other Left-wing forces, especially the socialist-oriented ones, but they resolutely oppose anti-communist groups which bring into the peoples' struggle such things as factionalism, splits, various manifestations of sectarianism, parochialism, passivity, opportunism and adventurism.
Despite political crises, difficulties and contradictions, the Latin American liberation movement is making headway. Most of the Communist Parties in the area have gone through the Comintern school and have preserved, developed and strengthened the class principle in the working people's struggle. Only under the leadership of such parties, Lenin stressed, is "the proletariat capable of displaying the full might of its revolutionary onslaught ... only then will it be capable of displaying its full might ... which is infinitely greater than its proportion of the population...''.^^*^^
The Communist Parties of the Latin American countries have developed and gained strength because they have _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 188.
350 followed the main principles of the activities of a Marxist party of a new type, as formulated by Lenin. There have been errors and shortcomings in the revolutionary practice of the Communist Parties in this area, but they have always been organisers of the revolutionary struggle. Today, the Communist Parties enjoy varying degrees of influence on the masses, some having a greater impact on their country's political development than others, and not all of them are numerically large. However, as the final Document of the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties pointed out, the Marxist-Leninist parties of Latin America "are heading the democratic and anti-imperialist struggle, and, despite persecution by reactionary camarillas, they are fighting with dedication and courage for the demands of the masses and for revolutionary changes''.^^*^^ _-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow 1969, p. 17.
[351] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER IX __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE COMMUNISTS' WORK AMONG THE MASSES __ALPHA_LVL2__ [introduction.]Marxism-Leninism has provided a theoretical basis for the masses' decisive role in the historical process and in building a society free of exploitation; the practice of the working-class movement has corroborated that role. "The only effective force that compels change,'' Lenin stressed, "is popular revolutionary energy.''^^*^^ However, in a society dominated by an experienced and cunning enemy---the monopoly bourgeoisie---the masses have difficulty in identifying their own interests and seeing through the manoeuvres of the ruling classes; it is not easy for them to understand the issues in the struggle and the course to be followed. The Communist Parties are called upon to organise the masses for the struggle^ help them become aware of their genuine class interests, identify their foes and friends in the struggle, lead the people to a realisation of the need for transforming society along socialist lines, and show how this historic task is to be accomplished.
If a Marxist-Leninist party is to be the vanguard of the working people and express their interests, it must be able to lead the masses. To provide leadership means winning the masses' confidence, which can only be done if the party works with the masses, lives and works in the thick of the masses. "To do service to the masses and express their interests, having correctly conceived those interests,'' Lenin wrote, "the advanced contingent, the organisation, must _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 213.
352 carry on all its activity among the masses, drawing from the masses all the best forces without exception, at every step verifying carefully and objectively whether contact with the masses is being maintained and whether it is a live contact. In this way, and only in this way, does the advanced contingent train and enlighten the masses, expressing their interests, teaching them organisation and directing all the activities of the masses along the path of conscious class politics.''^^*^^Communists are guided by Lenin's thesis that to become the revolutionary proletariat's vanguard, never losing touch with the masses but drawing closer and closer to them, inculcating a revolutionary consciousness in them and leading them in the revolutionary struggle, is a most difficult but also most important task. They are fully aware that winning and expanding influence on the masses is a complex process, which demands, not only an understanding of the laws of the class struggle, enormous energy and ability to penetrate wherever the masses are to be found but also skill in working with the masses, ascertaining their temper, promptly noting changes in their sentiments, and reacting to their needs. Communists do not idealise the masses, but take them as they are, with all their prejudices, without any apprehension of such prejudices, or irritation at their backwardness. There is nothing to be gained by taking offence with the masses when they fail to immediately understand the Party's policy or to rally about its slogans. The way must be found to reach the working people's minds and hearts and be able to talk to them in a language they understand, gradually bringing the Party's policies home to them.
Using the present level of popular consciousness and understanding of current problems as a strating point, Communists have set themselves the aim of heightening that consciousness and of giving support to everything in mass movements that expresses the masses' interests, advances the struggle and its fundamental ends.
It is very dangerous for a Party to find itself lagging behind the masses and their growing consciousness and _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 19, p. 409.
353 revolutionary spirit. Mindful of this, Communists support whatever there is useful in the course of the struggle, but, with typical frankness, oppose anything that may damage the popular struggle and distract the masses from their main task. The Party warns the masses against premature action, and rejects attempts by extremist elements to impose such forms of struggle that can only throw the movement back and lead to unnecessary sacrifices. At the same time, the Communist Parties oppose sectarianism in their own ranks, and survivals of the anarchist theory of "active minorities'', which breeds contempt of the masses and neglect of their actual temper.The Communist Parties must bear in mind that the concept of ``masses'' varies at different stages of the struggle. Addressing the Third Congress of the Comintern on the necessity to win the masses over to the Communists' side, V. I. Lenin pointed out that the concept of ``masses'' was liable to change, together with the nature of the struggle. "At the beginning of the struggle it took only a few thousand genuinely revolutionary workers to warrant talk of the masses__ When the revolution has been sufficiently prepared, the concept `masses' becomes different: several thousand workers no longer constitute the masses.... The concept of `masses' undergoes a change so that it implies the majority, and not simply a majority of the workers alone, but the majority of all the exploited.''^^*^^ To carry out radical transformations today, it is necessary, as the fraternal parties emphasise, to win over to the side of the revolution the majority of those social strata which suffer under monopoly domination.
The attitude of the masses towards a Communist Party and the degree of support its policies command among the masses are the measure of that Party's maturity and success. That is why Communists assess the results of all political campaigns primarily from the point of view of its consequences for work among the masses, drawing the necessary conclusions in order to build up their influence on the working people. In doing so, the Communist Parties proceed from the awareness that popular confidence is not gained _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 32, pp. 475, 476.
__PRINTERS_P_353_COMMENT__ 23---0873 354 overnight, or once and for all. A party may lose the confidence of the mass, won by its active struggle, if it commits errors, or lives on its past record. __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. THE CONTENT AND FORMLenin demanded of Communists that they should constantly extend and improve their work in the masses. To that end, the Communist Parties use a wide range of means. The forms and methods of work among the masses are not chosen arbitrarily, but are determined by the degree of political consciousness of the masses, and by the socioeconomic and political situation. Proceeding from the concrete conditions, a Party determines which forms of work are most suitable at a particular juncture, and then goes on to perfect them.
The forms and methods of Party work depend primarily on the nature of the tasks to be accomplished. Form must be in accord with content in any particular step taken. For example, a meeting can successfully tackle problems that cannot even be raised at a mass rally, because a meeting gives an opportunity to discuss a certain problem in a thorough-going manner, while those at a mass rally give expression to their feelings on a definite topical issue.
Communists base their criticism of capitalism and their exposure of the limited nature of bourgeois democracy on the use of calm and convincing arguments, seeking to mould public opinion gradually and skilfully in order to lead the masses up to an understanding of the radical evils of capitalism. Such work is conducted through the press, with extensive use of statistical material and an analysis of home and foreign policies. The anti-popular nature of the capitalist state is exposed by focussing attention on concrete facts and events. Political debunking helps the masses understand the real nature of capitalist politics which, as is common knowledge, dons the garb of democracy. Lenin attached tremendous importance to this form of work, stressing that thorough political exposures educate the masses' political consciousness and their revolutionary activity.
355The ruling classes keep a close watch on shifts in the temper of the masses, and seek to establish control over the ideological sphere through a uniform system of education and control of all information media. To preserve the capitalist system, the bourgeoisie resorts to every available means to spread anti-communism. It has created a vast anti-communist propaganda machine and attempts to provide a ``scientific'' basis for the policies and practices of anti-communism. Communists must meet this challenge with purposeful counter-activities and convincing arguments, in the struggle against bourgeois ideology.
The French Communist Party has begun to hold weekly "debate assemblies" which attract large numbers of representatives of various strata of the population, and are addressed by Communist Party leaders and activists, who reply to the most topical questions of the day: Left-wing unity; the impact of the technological revolution and the paths to socialism; the political developments in various countries, etc. A meeting with Deputy General Secretary of the Communist Party Georges Marchais, held at the Toulouse Sports Palace in June 1971, was attended by 4,000 people.
Italian Communists hold discussions on such vital problems as "Dictatorship and Democracy in Our Time'', "Problems of Scientific Research in Italy and in Socialist Countries'', "The Emancipation of Women'', and "Problems of Youth''. Debates are held over radio and television, with representatives of different political parties taking part, and press conferences and round-table meetings are arranged. "Political tribunes" are held at theatres, clubs and public buildings, at which Communists (and frequently Parly leaders) reply to questions from audiences.
To propagate the ideals of socialism and the successes of the socialist countries, wide use is made of the press, special illustrated weeklies, and talks by delegates from socialist countries and progressives visiting the country. Communists stress the concrete achievements of the socialist countries in the economy, science and culture.
It is not enough for a Communist Party to call itself a vanguard, an advanced contingent, Lenin stressed. It must act in such a way as to make all other contingents __PRINTERS_P_355_COMMENT__ 23* 356 recognise that the Communists are marching in the lead. To do that, it is not enough merely to expose the exploiting classes; a positive programme of action has to be brought forward. That is why it is a vital aspect in the work of the Communist Parties in the masses that they should offer alternatives to all the bourgeois policies, alternatives that will objectively provide progressive solutions of all the basic problems facing a nation. The Communist Party has to find the forms of work most effective in bringing home to the masses the significance of its proposals and demands.
Communists use the traditional forms of organisation of the masses. When they are given a new content, they are suited to the Party's tasks, and serve the interests of the people. In Argentina, for instance, Communists make wide use of Sunday gatherings of families, friends and neighbours, in which Party members take part. Such gatherings are frequently timed to coincide with a birthday or the birth of a child in a worker's family, and are held out of town in spring and summer.
Using the traditions of their country, British Communists practise meetings in streets, working-class districts, and, in the larger industrial cities, at places specially assigned for the purpose. Factory-gate meetings are widely practised. Towards the end of the lunch-hour, when the workers go out for a breath of fresh air, a sound lorry rolls up to the factory gates, and a speaker addresses the workers by loudspeaker, on some particular problem of the Communist Party's policies. Such speeches last no more than 15 minutes, after which questions are answered.
The form of Communists' work among the masses also depends on the media employed.
The communist press is a highly important medium of the Party's links with the masses. Although in the advanced capitalist countries it accounts for a very small proportion of the daily press (about three per cent), the considerable influence wielded by the communist press is due, in the first place, to its content, the truth it brings to its readership. The communist press plays the part of educator, propagandist, agitator and collective organiser of the masses, raising them up for the struggle against the oppressing 357 classes. Such printed propaganda reaches large numbers of people, including those who cannot attend meetings and rallies. The local press and especially factory newspapers published at large enterprises have a big role to play. Austrian Communists, for instance, run more than 200 such papers, whose readership is often between 20 to 75 per cent of the number of workers employed at a factory.
To win the confidence of ever broader circles, Communists proceed from Lenin's thesis of the need to be everywhere where the masses are, trying to work in mass organisations, including those led by Right-wingers and avowed reactionaries, whose members may still be prejudiced against Communists.
Communists attach major importance to their work in mass democratic organisations (trade unions, women's and youth organisations, co-operatives, etc.), through which they can have day-by-day contacts with the masses of the population.
Experience shows that, in the present-day conditions, Communists can achieve tangible results in parliaments, even if their representation there is marginal. Thus, though Communists have had no more than two to five deputies in Uruguay's General Assembly during the past decade, the proposals they table are frequently the focuss of attention and are adopted by a majority of deputies. This is because such bills have been drawn up and discussed at factories, in the trade unions, and at workers' meetings and, what is especially important, are supported by mass action while they are being debated in parliament.
The Communists' municipal activities also do much to promote the Communist Party's links with the masses and intensify their activities. Communists' day-by-day work in local government gives their Party an insight into the needs of various strata of the population, enabling it to establish firm links with them and demonstrate the effectiveness of its programme. French, Italian, Finnish and other Communists have succeeded in expanding the sphere of municipal activities, in which work they place constant reliance on the masses and the promotion of grass-root initiative. At municipal level, Communists tie up their proposals with propaganda of the Party's ideas, which they bring 358 up for discussion at factory meetings and by mass organisations, and consult members of local communities. They advocate full publicity in the work of the municipalities and control of their activities by the electorate.
By and large, the Communist Parties have shed their former neglect of municipal work, as well as illusions that "municipal socialism" could destroy capitalism. Correctly assessing the role of the municipalities, without overrating it, the Communist Parties regard activities in local selfgovernment bodies as an important form of work in the masses and a potent means of promoting their further political involvement. Municipalities in which communist influence is strong can become strongholds in the class struggle. In France, for instance, more than 1,000 communes have communist mayors, about 19,500 Communists are municipal councillors, and about 200 members are on local councils at the level of departments.
An outstanding role has been played of late by mass political campaigns, in the course of which the Party concentrates its efforts on explaining vital political issues, and rallying the masses for the struggle. These may be campaigns in defence of political prisoners or for their release, protests against reactionary acts, election campaigns, or campaigns mounted to support particular Party slogans.
Peace campaigns are very widespread. The most diverse and extensive circles are involved in campaigns of solidarity with the peoples of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and the Arab countries. These campaigns help rally public opinion on the crucial issues of the struggle for peace, liberty and democracy.
Many Communist Parties have begun to practise fundraising campaigns to finance the Party press. Special months are held annually, during which open-air festivals, parties, concerts, and lotteries are arranged, and Party leaders address well-attended meetings. Funds are raised, not only for the press but for other major Party measures, notably for congresses.
While using a variety of forms of work designed to reach large groups of people, the Communist Parties pay great attention to individual work. A heart-to-heart talk can be useful in ascertaining a person's sentiments, dispelling 359 his doubts and winning him over. To collect funds, distribute Party publications, and explain the Party election platform or a major Party move, Communists use individual forms of work, e.g., house-to-house or door-to-door canvassing, in which Communists reach the grass-roots, and expand and strengthen the Party's links with the people. Individual work has acquired greater importance in view of the spread of the technical propaganda media (radio, television), the intensification of labour, and other factors which make it more difficult to assemble large groups of people after working hours.
The need to reach the individual and to bring the Party's ideas home to the masses within the shortest time possible call for the wide use of modern technology in mass work. Communists try to make their books, newspapers, journals and leaflets colourful and readable. Eye-catching posters have a big role to play. In their work in the masses, Communist Party organisations use films, sound amplifiers, portable radios, and expositions. They work to gain access to such powerful propaganda media as radio and television, which are used during election campaigns and, in some places, daily or on Sundays. The Communist Party of Uruguay, for example, gives 15-minute daily and 30-minute Sunday broadcasts. Very popular with the listeners are "Communist Party Sunday Talks'', with Party leaders, activists and journalists taking part. For a number of years before the Popular Unity Government was formed, the Communist Party of Chile broadcast weekly talks on such subjects as "Chile Swings to the Left'', "In Defence of the Universities'', "The Destinies of the Youth'', "Problems of Cultural Life'', "Solidarity with Revolutionary Cuba'', and the like.
Thus the forms and methods of mass work are determined by the concrete conditions in each country, the content of Party activities, and the forms of Party links with the masses.
If a Communist Party does not address itself to the specific problems facing a particular social group, the latter fail to respond to the Party's calls; every group has its own approach to general problems. That is why Communists "must go among all classes of the population; they must 360 dispatch units of their army in all directions''.^^*^^ Lenin showed concern for the Communist Party's links with various strata of the population. During preparations for the Second Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, Lenin questioned Party locals about their work among the peasants, agricultural labourers, university and high-school students, officials, white-collar workers, the clergy, the military, and so on.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. COMMUNISTS AND THE YOUTH __NOTE__ No LVL3s in this LVL2.A stubborn struggle for young people's minds is in progress in the capitalist world today. The population explosion that followed World War II swelled the ranks of the young generation, with the result that today up to half of the population in most countries are under twenty-five. Thanks to the growth of knowledge and the modern information media, the youth are well informed of happenings in the world. The scientific and technological revolution has increased the young people's share and role in social production and in life generally.
But young people's natural aspirations towards physical and spiritual development clash with the interests of capitalism. Today the insoluble problem of one's "place in life" may turn into tragedy for any young person in capitalist society. Millions of lads and girls find that they are `` redundant'' even before they have started life. Finding no employment for their abilities, part of the youth sink into the world of crime.
The youth's discontent with the socio-economic order often expresses itself in acts of rebellion. Youth groups have appeared, such as ``beatniks'', "Devil's Angels'', and ``hippies'', who flout many moral and ethical norms in protest against bourgeois reality. This has given rise to theories, advanced by bourgeois sociologists and politicians, of a moral crisis among the youth, and about a so-called "lost generation''.
The facts, however, do not bear out this theory. The "lost generation" are beginning to find their identity and _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 5, p. 422.
361 are increasingly manifesting their protest, not in acts of wanton rebellion, but in active involvement in social battles. The progress of the socialist countries and of the liberation movement is in sharp contrast with the unresolved economic and social problems and the crisis of bourgeois ideology, all of which have led to the youth's increased political involvement in the capitalist countries.The everyday realities show that young industrial workers and college students are the most active force in the struggle against growing oppression by the monopolies, for a renewal of democracy, and for peace and socialism. The years 1967--1970 were marked by an unprecedented upsurge of the youth movement in capitalist countries. The USA, FRG, France, Italy, Spain, the other countries were swept by massive youth action for democratic rights and social reform, and against the imperialist policies of militarism and aggression.
The youth are fighting for specific rights---the right to work and education, and the satisfaction of new needs. Young working men, especially those that are jobless, get low pay, or have insufficient levels of skill, are in the front line of the battles for economic demands and social progress, for socialism and against capitalism.
It will be seen that the role played by the youth and their numerous organisations in the life of their countries and internationally goes far beyond the purely youth problems. In most West European countries, the youth come out against nuclear weapons and US military bases. The West German youth have been expressing in numerous mass actions their protest against emergency laws, the growth of militarism and the danger of a new war. In Turkey, the youth are demanding their country's withdrawal from NATO. In the United States, the youth (both black and white) were vigorously opposed to the Indochina war, the draft, racial discrimination, and the corporations' control of the universities. The youth in Latin America are fighting against US imperialism and plans to set up inter-Amercan armed forces, and for their countries' national sovereignty, economic independence, and co-operation with the socialist countries and also in defence of the Cuban revolution. In Africa and the Middle East, the youth come 362 out against imperialism's neo-colonialist policies and against the reactionaries at home who collude with the imperialists in trying to stem the advance of the social revolution. They are active in building a new life. The youth in Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) are engaged in an armed struggle for freedom and independence. Young patriots in South Africa and Rhodesia are waging a battle against the racist regimes there. In Asia, the youth are fighting to carry through the anti-imperialist revolution and to solve the problems of economic and social development.
``Action by young people,'' says the Document of the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, "reflects the deep-going crisis of contemporary bourgeois society. Working youth, primarily young industrial workers, who are subjected to super-exploitation and see no prospect for themselves under capitalism, are entering the class struggle to an ever greater extent, joining the trade unions and communist and other democratic organisations. Broad masses of students take a stand not only against the defects of the obsolete system of education and for the right to organise and share actively in the affairs of educational centres but also against the policy of the ruling classes.''^^*^^
Because of the spread of education, the development of information media and an unprecedented acuteness of social conflicts, the young people of today show an early awareness of social and political problems, and participate in their solution. Their protest is marked, not only by social but also by moral and ethical motives, this increasing the protest, not only against capitalist exploitation but also against the spirit of money-making, violence, the erosion of moral values, and the suppression of the individual in capitalist society.
The student movement has acquired particular scope in recent years. The high demands presented by the scientfic and technological revolution to the educational level of both blue- and white-collar workers have led to a rapid _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 26,
363 growth of college and high-school enrolment, which rose from 2.5 to 7.5 million between I960 and 1971 in the USA. In Western Europe, there were 3 million college students in 1971. Students are no longer a privileged elite, for their social composition has changed. The shortcomings of tertiary education and the limited education budgets in capitalist countries are arousing indignation also among college students from the well-to-do classes.The student youth are coming to see a direct link between militarisation of the economies and the slender education and cultural budgets. They are discontented with the high cost of education and its failure to live up to the demands of the times. With the training of young professionals assuming a mass scale, college and university graduates no longer feel sure of the morrow. The problem of their future work is unresolved and ``intellectual'' unemployment already exists in some countries. On the other hand, those who do get employment, find their jobs totally uncreative in character. This material and social situation makes the interests of the students and young professionals similar to those of the working class. As Gus Hall, Secretary General of the Communist Party of the USA pointed out, the students' demands "go into some very basic issues of our capitalist society. They are demanding that higher education be recognised as an inherent right and a realistic possibility for all youth. They are demanding the end of the system in which the wealthy trustees benevolently dole out college entrance permits. They are demanding an end to the racist bars and the system of tokenism in all the institutions of higher learning. They are demanding that educational institutions break their ties with the military-industrial complex. They want to close the doors of our colleges and universities to recruiting for the military and for the manufacture of lethal gases and other instruments of mass death. They want to abolish the elitist Reserve Officer Training Corps.
``These are fundamental demands that not only affect our schools but go to the heart of the basic problems of our capitalist society....''^^*^^
_-_-_^^*^^ Ibid., p. 431.
364In composition and forms of action, the youth movement presents a motley picture. Its protests are all too often vague and abstract, and marked by emotionalism. Along with methods of struggle borrowed from the revolutionary arsenal of the working class, youth action often assumes forms that do not correspond to the real situation in the capitalist countries and play into the hands of the ruling classes the struggle is directed against.
But whatever the forms the youth protests assume, they must be viewed in the overall context of the development of the class struggle, as a reflection of the current crisis of capitalism, and as a protest (spontaneous or conscious) against the whole system of monopoly domination. It is the youth (workers, peasants and students) that suffer most from the juggernaut of monopoly rule. The youth experience the consequences of capitalism's inability to resolve or even explain the basic contradictions of life. The vast and ever widening gap between the youth's aspirations and their achievement accounts for the explosion of their discontent. The rebellious youth are beginning to reject the dogmas of imperialism and militant anti-communism, and are showing an interest in socialism and Marxism.
The capitalist ruling circles, who believed in the validity of their policy of "social partnership'', have been taken aback by the flare-up of the youth's struggles. Totally unexpected by the bourgeoisie has been the mounting youth protest in countries with a favourable economic situation and relatively high employment rates. Bourgeois politicians, scholars and propagandists have addressed themselves to the youth problem, flirting with and cajoling the young generation in a bid to organise them in the interest of imperialism. Work among the youth has become part of government policies in the West. Thus, in the US a special interdepartmental committee under the President is in charge of all the Administration's propaganda, political and other work among the youth. In France there is a Ministry for Youth Affairs and Sports, and in Norway---a State Council for Youth and Sports. Similar functions are performed by the State Commission for Youth Affairs in Finland, the National Youth Service in Belgium, the All-Sweden Youth Council, etc.
365To deal with opposition sentiments among the youth, bourgeoisie resorts to criminal legislation, the courts and administrative bodies. In 1969 the US Congress passed a law making Federal aid to students contingent on their loyal behaviour. The most effective vehicle of state interference in the youth movement is the church, whose institutions and funds finance youth organisations and institutions.
Bourgeois propaganda is doing its utmost to distort the significance of the youth's present struggle, referring to the "perennial rebelliousness" of youth, and the allegedly global character of the youth revolt, which knows no boundaries, social or geographical. The youth movement is explained away as the "eternal conflict of generations''. All this is aimed at concealing the social roots of the youth movement, and deluding immature and unstable members of the movement.
The bourgeoisie has tried, with some success, to keep a considerable part of the youth bound to its ideology. To the same end, the ruling circles of the imperialist countries support any newly emerging extremist pseudo-- revolutionary trends among the youth.
``It is true,'' said Leonid Brezhnev, "that frequently youth actions reveal a lack of political experience and are not linked with the vanguard of the revolutionary struggle. That is why these actions often lack organisation and assume politically immature forms. Extremist elements essentially hostile to communism, and sometimes direct imperialist agents, try to exploit this.''^^*^^
Leftist calls for the immediate overthrow of capitalism (without due account of the realities and correct choice of forms of the struggle) may be very popular with the youth, especially at times of democratic and revolutionary upsurge. Leftist elements exploit young people's intolerance of the existing order and the social impatience of the petty bourgeoisie and part of the intelligentsia, who have been crushed by the monopoly policies. They flatter the youth, calling them "the most advanced" and "the most revolutionary" _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 151.
366 force, but they also take advantage of the youth's inexperience, lack of political sophistication and skill in practical revolutionary activities. One cannot but see that they still command a considerable following among young people.How are the youth to be freed from the influence of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideology? How can the youth movement be liberated from extremism and adventurism, which are undermining the strength and effectiveness of its struggle? How can all contingents of the youth movement be united in the struggle against imperialism for the genuine interests of the people?
The Communist Parties have the answers to these questions, explaining that for all the demands of the youth to be met, the youth movement must fuse with the working-class struggle, because only in this way can the big bourgeoisie be forced to retreat, the anti-imperialist front expanded, and society refashioned on revolutionary lines. The youth do not exist outside of classes and social strata; they do not form a special class or become revolutionary spontaneously. Communists have a high regard for the role to be played by the youth and their organisations, which is why they are out to raise the level of young people's awareness and responsibility, and their understanding of the laws of social development, and why they step up their struggle against reactionary bourgeois ideology, as well as against reformist and Leftist ideologies.
The Communist Parties are aware that, unless the youth are won away from the bourgeoisie and extremists of every shade, they may, as historical experience shows, provide a mass base for reactionary regimes and militarist policies.
It should not be forgotten, for instance, that, following the 1965 events in Indonesia, the reactionary military set up youth units which were used to massacre Communists and other progressives. Today young people account for much of the membership of such reactionary organisations as the West German National Democratic Party and the Italian Social Movement. Young people are recruited in the Mano Blanco fascist terrorist organisation in Argentina, and the "Communist Hunting Team" in Brazil. The Shiv Sena youth organisations set up all over India are used by the 367 reactionaries for terror against the progressive forces. Communists are aware that the youth's heterogeneous social make-up hampers their immediate adopting the stand of the working class. Even when they come out against the reactionary structure of the universities and lash out against the evils of capitalism, they fall easy prey to opportunism, especially its Leftist variety. The youth must be helped to understand the social nature of their struggle.
The Communist Parties recognise that, in a number of instances, the youth's lack of experience and susceptibility to pseudo-revolutionary phraseology have already resulted in sizable sections of the youth breaking sway from the working class and the Communist Parties. W. Kashtan, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Canada, has pointed out that most young people in Canada show a willingness to fight for a just cause but reject the idea of becoming part of a political party. W. Kashtan regards such a stand as indirect criticism of the Communist Party, which should be heeded, because it reflects the sentiments of the young generation, which comprises almost 50 per cent of the Canadian population.^^*^^
The Communist Parties take into account both a certain instability of the youth's views and their revolutionary potential. This is true of the working-class youth, but to an even higher degree of college students, many of whom have a petty-bourgeois background. Marx and Lenin constantly warned against the natural propensity displayed by the petty bourgeoisie, especially its intelligentsia, towards ultra-Leftist, anarchist and pseudo-romantic phraseology and stances, but they also viewed the students as a powerful revolutionary force, leadership of which can and should be assumed by a proletarian party. Lenin spoke of the enormous potential of the students as "the vanguard of revolutionary bourgeois democracy"^^**^^ and drew attention to the students' readiness to espouse revolutionary ideas and to be the first to express protests and demand radical changes. He urged Communists to "work among the widest student circles to broaden their academic outlook and to propagate _-_-_
^^*^^ World Marxist Review No. 10, 1964, p. 11.
^^**^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 9, p. 384.
368 scientific socialism, i.e., Marxism.''^^*^^ He stressed the need for working-class support for the student movement, and set the task of changing the students from ``academics'' (fighting for their narrowly professional interests) into ``politicians'' through Marxist propaganda.^^**^^The Communist Parties also view the advanced student youth as their ally in awakening those members of the middle strata that are still under bourgeois influence, and enlisting them for the revolutionary cause. On the other hand, young workers who were at schools only yesterday form a link between college students and the working class.
Interpreting the present upsurge of the student movement as a protest against the capitalist system, the Communist Parties are aware of the objective and subjective difficulties in the path of an alliance between the working class and radical students, and work out measures to overcome these difficulties.
The Communist Parties are mounting a massive campaign among the students to explain and propagate the Marxist doctrine. Communist leaders and activists give talks to students on communist aims, socialism, the policies of the monopolies, etc. One rewarding form of Communists' work among students is discussions on problems of the student movement, its aims and forms of struggle, its fusion with the working-class movement, democracy, freedom of the individual, and so on. Communists at universities are organising and actively participating in study circles, seminars, teach-ins, etc.
The Communist Parties are proposing their alternatives for a reform of higher and secondary education. Thus, the Communist Parties of France, Italy and Denmark have put forward and organised a broad discussion of their blueprints for a democratic reform of education. The Communists draw upon concrete experience to give students lessons in joint action with the working class, and seek to promote contacts between students arid workers.
To such activities goes a good deal of credit for the joint action by French workers and students in May 1968, _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 7, p. 56.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 15, p. 217.
369 when hundreds of thousands of marchers passed through Paris carrying such slogans as "Working people, teachers and students are joined in solidarity!''. In the summer of 1969, West Berlin technical students went on strike under the slogans of "Equal education opportunities for all!'', "Workers and engineers do not need shareholders!'', etc. In the autumn of 1970, Italy was swept by a powerful movement for higher and secondary education reforms, which was marked by solidarity of the youth of the major trade-union centres and progressive political organisations. In 1971, strikes and demostrations by British workers over a proposed antilabour bill were supported by the mass action of young workers, who were joined by numerous student groups. Even within such a socially disparate organisation as the Students for a Democratic Society in the USA, calls are heard for contacts with the industrial workers. In Spain, joint action by workers and students has further aggravated the political crisis of the Franco regime.Today some of the more spectacular forms of student protests are on the wane. Some currents which advocated anarchism and isolation from the rest of the democratic forces have lost whatever support they had, and have disintegrated.
In championing the interests of young workers, Communists are fighting for legislative guarantees of the right to employment, equal pay for equal work with due regard for skills, a reasonable minimum wage for young workers, a ban on child labour, etc. Many young people are unable to find work or have to settle for unskilled jobs because the schools give no preparation for further education or acquiring skills. That is why the Communist Parties are demanding a radical reform of vocational training: expanded training in key areas of science and technology, greater opportunities for girls to acquire skills, allowances for those attending vocational training courses, observance and improvement of legislation on apprentice labour, etc. Communists in the trade unions urge that conferences should be held on problems of young industrial and office workers.
The Communists' struggle for education reform and unhindered cultural development include such demands as free, compulsory and unified school education for children up __PRINTERS_P_369_COMMENT__ 24--0873 370 to 14 years of age, democratisation and higher standards in school curricula, bigger allocations for secondary and higher education, government grants to indigent students, guaranteed employment on graduation, the right to engage in sports, enjoy leisure, and the like.
Communists are winning ever greater influence on the young people affiliated to Social-Democratic and ChristianDemocratic organisations. Many of them reject the anticommunism of these parties' leaders and demand that the struggle be stepped up against the policies of the monopolies and the reactionaries. Thus, the Bremen Young Socialists' Congress of the Social-Democratic youth organisation in the FRG, held in December 1970, demanded that the government stop financing revenge-seeking organisations and condemn the activities of the neo-fascist German Youth of the East organisation. The Congress stressed that the European Economic Community called into question the West German state's sovereignty and that the government's policy towards the developing countries was an instrument of economic expansion and political defence against revolutionary movements. The Social-Democratic youth organisation of Finland has come out with a condemnation of the Right-wing Social-Democratic leaders' policy of class collaboration and anti-communism. This new feature of the youth movement offers new possibilities for the Communist Parties to expand their influence on young people.
In their work among the youth, the Communist Parties proceed from the assumption that the moulding of young people's opinions, and their stand are greatly influenced by the successes of the socialist countries in the building of a new society and the gains of all the peoples in the struggle for peace and national and social liberation. The Communist Parties are utilising the growing attraction that progressive ideas and the Marxist-Leninist doctrine have for young people. Communists tell them of the successes of the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, and show the role these successes play in accomplishing the economic and socio-political tasks of socialist society, a society that meets the people's material and cultural needs, and ensures the efflorescence of individuality, and genuine participation 371 of the masses in running the affairs of society. They stress that only socialism can provide a real alternative to the social system whose injustices the young people are coming out against. Thus Communists expose the anti-Sovietism and anti-communism of the bourgeoisie and its accomplices, who are out to discredit the advantages and successes of socialism, and disorient the youth so as to strip them of all interest in political affairs.
Communists stress that this work must be conducted by appropriate methods designed to reach the youth, and to appeal not only to the mind, but also to the heart, and take into account the emotionalism and impulsiveness of young people. The Communist Parties acknowledge that Communists do not always have regard for the specific nature of work among the youth, which stems from the latter's position in society, age features and conditions of life.
One of the Leninist principles of the Party's guidance of youth organisations, including communist youth leagues, is support for their organisational autonomy, which gives full scope to their initiative in working out their own programmes, forms and methods of work, the running of their internal affairs, and active work at grass-root level. "The middle-aged and the aged,'' Lenin wrote, "often do not know how to approach the youth, for the youth must of necessity advance to socialism in a different way, by other paths, in other forms, in other circumstances than their fathers. Incidentally, that is why we must decidedly favour organisational independence of the Youth League, not only because the opportunists fear such independence, but because of the very nature of the case. For unless they have complete independence, the youth will be unable either to train good socialists from their midst or prepare themselves to lead socialism forward.
``We stand for the complete independence of the Youth Leagues, but also for complete freedom of comradely criticism of their errors!"^^*^^
Far from ruling out day-by-day guidance and assistance from the Party, the independence of youth organisations _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 164.
__PRINTERS_P_371_COMMENT__ 24* 372 actually presupposes it. Communists believe that their task does not consist in presenting the youth with cut-and-dried solutions but in patiently teaching them to grasp the problems facing them, be able to uphold their interests and see the unbreakable bond between the youth movement and the general liberation movement of the working class and all working people.At the same time, Communists remember that, with all the fine qualities of the youth (enthusiasm, militancy, a sense of novelty and wish for change), these are insufficient to ensure a high level of revolutionary consciousness. Communists help the youth to avoid errors due to inexperience and political immaturity, the Communist Parties warning the youth leagues against copying the methods of Parly work, over-emphasis of the youth's independent role, and against avant-garde sentiments.
Lenin did not deny the specific features inherent in the youth, but he was resolutely opposed to the trend towards substituting for a class analysis of the youth speculations about their age specificities. He demanded a rigorously class approach to the youth, in order to ascertain the class and social links of a particular group and its role in the revolutionary struggle. He called for protection of the youth from all kinds of ``non-party'' conciliators, who preached the false slogan of ``non-factionalism''.
In most of the non-socialist countries, the communist youth leagues comprise a relatively small section of the working youth. This gives added importance to the task of building up communist influence in all mass youth organisations (including bourgeois-sponsored ones): the trade unions, sports, educational and other organisations, and wherever the youth live, work, study, or spend their leisure time.
The Communist Parties have accumulated much experience in a differentiated approach towards various sections of the youth. The youth commissions in Chile's trade unions have for many years been working to have the jobs of those drafted into the army kept open for them, and for material aid for newlyweds. In Argentina, the Party has considerable experience in organising voluntary assistance by the working youth to people in the rural areas. One established form 373 of such work is ``town-village'' get-togethers, in which young city people go by bus to some village for the weekend, bringing with them sports equipment, magazines, and an entertainment programme. Such a meeting starts off with a football game, then national dishes are cooked, with a lot of lively discussion taking place during the meal that follows. Then there is a concert at which revolutionary songs are sung, the affair winding up with a dance. `` Villagetown'' meetings are also practised, with delegations of young peasants being invited to come to town.
One of the important tasks pursued by Communists is to achieve united action by the youth movement. United youth action can be triggered off by the most diverse issues. Thus, when the length of military service in Belgium was raised to two years, the Communists and socialists called on the youth to oppose this move. Strikes by young workers swept the nation, and, at the call of the youth organisations, servicemen who had completed 18 months in the armed forces launched a disobedience campaign. As a result, the government was forced to revoke its decision. The most massive campaigns various youth organisations were involved in were for an end to the US aggression in Vietnam, fund-raising drives in aid of the Vietnam patriots, protests against the visits to Latin American countries by US leaders, the campaigns of Japan's youth against US warships calling at Japanese ports, etc.
Communist youth leagues are initiators of joint action by different youth trends, which is why the Communist Parties consider encouragement of the growth of such organisations as a central task in their drive to win over the youth to their side.
A major factor contributing to raising the level of work among the youth is the training of skilled organisers and propagandists thoroughly acquainted with the specific character of work among the youth. Communist Party organisations detail special groups to work among the young people, with many Party committees setting up youth commissions or charging their functionaries with the task of studying the youth movement, drawing the Party's attention to the most important areas of work with the youth, and assisting the leaders of youth organisations.
374 __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE COMMUNISTS' WORK AMONG WOMEN __NOTE__ No LVL3s in this LVL2.The international democratic women's movement of today is an important part of the anti-imperialist and antimonopoly struggle.
Under capitalism, women have escaped from the narrow confines of the home, only to find themselves in the position of hired workers whose labour has been made a source of profits. Scientific and technological progress draws more and more women into social production. Women today average one-third or more of the total gainfully employed population. In 1969, the percentage of economically active women was 39.3 per cent in Japan, 36.2 per cent in the USA, 35.8 per cent in West Germany, 35.4 per cent in Britain, 34.9 per cent in France, and 27.1 per cent in Italy.
However, the objectively progressive trend created by the scientific and technological revolution, towards women's greater economic activity, has been distorted under capitalism. Working women are being subjected to cruel exploitation and are the objects of various forms of discrimination. No capitalist country observes the principle of equal pay for women. In Great Britain, the gap is very considerable, as is evidenced by the fact that, in 1968, they alone gave employers an extra £1,200 million of super-profits. In Britain only 1,500,000 working women, i. e., a mere 18 per cent of the total (mostly civil servants) get the same pay as men do. In 1970, the British Parliament discussed a bill to abolish by 1975 the gap between men's and women's pay, something- the country's trade unions have been fighting for during the last 80 years. In the US, the equal pay law does not affect women employed in agriculture and in the consumers' services and facilities, i.e., half of all working women.
Present-day industry calls for skilled labour, hence, for a high level of training and constant re-training. Under capitalism, women find it difficult and sometimes impossible to acquire or improve skills. Women form less than one per cent of the total student body in the technical faculties of colleges and universities in the USA, Japan and Great Britain. The system of training is organised in such a way as to perpetuate the present structure of women's labour. 375 Most women are restricted to the traditional spheres of the textile and garments industries, or employed as junior medical staff, salesgirls, clerical workers, etc. Many callings are still practically barred to women. In the USA, women account for 26 per cent of unskilled workers, 18 per cent of the skilled workers, 2 per cent of technicians and 0.5 per cent of engineers. In France 82 per cent of working women are employed in low-skill jobs and a mere 10 per cent have higher skills.
Under capitalism, many categories of women have to go out to work for economic reasons: to gain livelihoods for themselves or their dependents. In the FRG, Great Britain, Switzerland and Australia, 70 per cent of all girls between 15 and 19 cannot continue their studies because they have to work for a living.
Under capitalism, the new technology causes labour redundancy, the first to suffer being unskilled workers, among whom are many women. In the USA, the unemployment rate among women is twice as high as among men. The plight of elderly women is especially desperate: they are doomed to permanent unemployment.
Thus, women form a numerous section of the labour force, highly variegated both in social structure (factory workers, peasants, office personnel, professionals, etc.) and in age, and subjected to the greatest exploitation and discrimination.
The Communist Parties think highly of the potential contribution women can make to the people's anti-- imperialist struggle, and to the international working-class and democratic movement. Yet serious obstacles are to be overcome before this potential can be realised. Many women have only recently entered the economy, have no experience of the class struggle, are politically immature and susceptible to the influence of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideology. The age-old misconceptions of their backwardness and. inferiority are still widespread in their midst, as is the conviction that social and political activities are not for women. Maternity calls for long breaks in their working careers, thus severing links with their working collectives, their interests and struggle. In the absence of social services and of child-care institutions, household duties often prevent 376 women from active social and political involvement. The bourgeoisie takes advantage of the relatively low professional and cultural level of many women, and their rudimentary class awareness. Bourgeois ideologists strive to distract working women from active participation in the life of their countries, and to convince them that, despite woman's growing role in social production, her interests must be confined to her children and her home. In this, the bourgeoisie is aided by the church, with its ramified network of charity organisations.
However, since they are becoming involved in social production, women are beginning to understand its social significance and feel a need to raise their skills and cultural levels. They are becoming increasingly aware of the existence and the extent of the capitalist exploitation they are subjected to, and display a readiness to fight against imperialism and the monopolies. A great stimulating factor in the involvement of the masses of women in the anti-imperialist struggle is the way the women's problem has been solved in the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries. Following the path indicated by Lenin, these countries have achieved genuine equality for women in social and political life, in production and in the family. The example of the socialist countries has contributed to women's increased role throughout the world in the struggle for peace, democracy and socialism.
Winning women's active political involvement is one of the most important tasks facing the Communist Parties, because "you cannot draw the masses into politics without drawing in the women as well.''^^*^^ Communists regard the women's question as an integral part of the overall struggle of the working class and all the working people for democracy and socialism. "The proletariat cannot achieve complete liberty,'' Lenin wrote, "until it has won complete liberty for women.''^^**^^ Communists make the point that the absence of equal pay for equal work is by no means a purely "women's problem'', since the capitalists use women's cheap labour to bring down the wage levels of all workers, since the _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, p. 161.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 30, p. 372.
377 availability of such cheap labour contributes to male unemployment, etc.In seeking to draw women into the struggle for social and democratic changes, Communists are developing new forms and methods of work among this contingent of the working people. Aware that women most readily join special women's organisations, Communists maintain contacts with them and seek to increase their influence in such organisations. By giving prominence to demands directly meeting women's needs, women's organisations are gradually involved in the working people's general democratic struggle.
One of the Communists' tasks is to get working women into the trade unions, since the percentage of women tradeunionists is still low in capitalist countries. Though women are active during strikes and mass demonstrations, their burden of household cares does not let them play a sufficient part in the day-by-day struggle. Communists work to involve women, through the trade unions, in drawing up programmes and formulating immediate demands, and support their election as trade-union delegates and promotion to trade-union leadership.
Through the women's democratic organisations and the trade unions, Communists seek to get the masses of women into the movement in support of socio-economic demands. Thus, in 1970, as a result of joint action by various women's organisations, trade unions of different political orientations, Communists and socialists, France introduced 14-week maternity leave in all industries, on full pay. In 1969, a united front of Italy's women's organisations, trade unions and labour law experts, as well as joint parliamentary action by Communists and socialists achieved legislation prohibiting the dismissal of married women from jobs.
A major feature of our times is women's massive involvement in the struggle for peace. Highlights of this struggle were the mass movements against the US aggression in Indochina, and the Israeli aggression in the Middle East, and for European security, the banning of nuclear weapons, and the like. Representatives of various social strata, including the bourgeoisie, are taking part in the peace movement. Whatever the ideological and political differences among them, all democratic women's organisations 378 invariably come out for peace. In many countries, there are peace movements in which women are widely represented: Women Against War in Britain, Women Strike for Peace in the USA, Women's Movement for Peace in Japan, the FRG, and so on.
To pool their efforts in the struggle for peace and social progress, women have set up international organisations, the broadest-based of which is the Women's International Democratic Federation (WIDF). Created in 1945 and active in 95 countries, it has taken a consistent stand in the struggle for peace and women's equality and has drawn masses of women into the peace movement, seeking to bring home to them the grave dangers of war today, and to explain the role women can play in the movement to prevent war and achieve disarmament. The WIDF links the peace movement with a struggle for national independence, the solution of women's socio-economic problems, and in defence of children's rights. While setting tasks common to women all over the world, the WIDF takes account of the specific economic and political conditions in different regions and countries.
The women of Asia, Africa and Latin America have a big role to play in the anti-imperialist liberation movement. Some of the most important issues in the struggle to solve the socio-economic problems facing the independent countries of Asia and Africa involve women's social emancipation, their participation in socially useful work, culture and social and political life. The destiny of national-- liberation revolutions hinges, to a large extent, on whether the progressive patriotic forces succeed in involving the masses of women in the struggle to liquidate the economic and social backwardness of the former colonies and semi-- colonies. The Communist and Workers' Parties of Asia and Africa regard the women's movement as a major reserve of the democratic forces in the struggle for independence and progress.
In rallying women in the struggle for demands of direct concern to them, Communists explain, from concrete examples, that their problems cannot be solved without a struggle against imperialism and the sway of the monopolies, and for democratic and social change in society as a whole. 379 Women who have realised this join the Communist Parties, in many of which they form a considerable part of the membership: 50 per cent in the Communist Party of Argentina, 34 per cent in that of Great Britain, 27 per cent in the French Communist Party, 22 per cent in the Communist Party of Finland and 20 per cent in the Italian Communist Party.
By involving women in the struggle against imperialism and the monopolies' rule, Communists are forming yet another contingent of the socialist revolution's political army.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 4. COMMUNISTS AND RELIGIOUS BELIEVERS __ALPHA_LVL3__ [introduction.]Millions of people practise one form of religion or another, some of them regarding religion as their private concern and a source of individual moral judgements, while others---a substantial section of believers---view religion also as a basis for their political convictions. Hence the Communist Parties consider it essential to formulate their stand on religion, as the longest-established and widespread form of social consciousness, and to determine their attitude to religious believers.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Communists and ReligionThe founders of Marxism-Leninism formulated the basic principles in the Communists' stand towards religion and religious believers, principles which remain valid to this day. They considered that, in a society of class antagonisms, religion stems from social relations. Lenin stressed that, in capitalist society, the roots of religion are primarily social. The social downtroddenness of the masses, who feel powerless against the juggernaut of capitalism, is "the deepest root of religion today''.^^*^^ "...The yoke of religion that weighs upon mankind,'' Lenin wrote, "is merely a product and reflection of the economic yoke within society.''^^**^^
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 15, p. 405.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 10, p. 86.
380Viewing religion as an "opiate of the people'', as a factor that impedes the evolution of a "slave of capital" into a fighter against it, Lenin considered that the question of the attitude towards religion was not of independent significance but stemmed from the pivotal question of the struggle of the exploited masses against the exploiters, and the unity of all the working people in the struggle against capitalism. "Unity in this really revolutionary struggle of the oppressed class for the creation of a paradise on earth is more important to us than unity of proletarian opinion on paradise in heaven,'' Lenin wrote.^^*^^
Answering a question as to why the Bolsheviks did not proclaim their atheism in their programme and did not bar Christians and believers from joining the Party, Lenin explained that one should not give undue prominence to the question of religion and "allow the forces of the really revolutionary economic and political struggle to be split up on account of third-rate opinions or senseless ideas.''^^**^^ Lenin rejected attempts to interpret Marxism's seemingly ``moderate'' attitude towards religion as prompted by `` tactical'' considerations, i.e., a wish not to scare believers away. He stressed that Communists' attitude towards religion and believers stemmed from the fundamental consideration of promoting the proletariat's class struggle. Lenin urged the need to recruit religious people into the revolutionary party. "We must not only admit workers who preserve their belief in God into the Social-Democratic Party, but must deliberately set out to recruit them; we are absolutely opposed to giving the slightest offence to their religious convictions.''^^***^^ Asked whether a priest could be admitted into a revolutionary party, Lenin said: "If a priest comes to us to take part in our common political work and conscientiously performs Party duties, without opposing the programme of the Party, he may be allowed to join the ranks of the Social-Democrats.''^^****^^
In proclaiming their attitude towards religion in their policy programmes and statements, and in their practical _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 10, p. 87.
^^**^^ Ibid.
^^***^^ Ibid. Vol. 15, p. 409.
^^****^^ Ibid., p. 408.
381 politics, the Communist Parties proceed from the above Marxist-Leninist principles. They stress that they do not regard religious beliefs as a factor precluding participation in the struggle for peace, democracy, national independence and socialism, through adherence to mass democratic movements or membership of the revolutionary party of the working class. The new Programme of the Communist Party of the United States stresses that US Communists oppose any attempts to sow discord and antagonism over the question of religion, that they work towards unity of action with religious groups and organisations in pursuit of common goals, and that the Party itself consists of believers and non-believers who have a common socio-political world outlook.The French Communist Party, too, has set out to bring about unity of all the workers and democratic forces, whatever their philosophy, religion or party affiliations, in order to overthrow the rule of the monopolies.
The Socialist Vanguard Party of Algeria considers that religious convictions cannot be an obstacle to participation in the struggle to achieve the socialist ideal.
At the same time, Communists stress that, after the victory of the socialist revolution, the citizens of their countries will be guaranteed full freedom of conscience and religion.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Dialogue Between CommunistsThe involvement of the masses of religious people in the anti-imperialist and anti-monopoly struggle is a remarkable feature of our time. The dialogue between Communists and religious believers, on the fundamental political issues of our time and on other problems has been a sign of the times during the last decade. In some countries, Communists have initiated joint action and co-operation with the democratic masses of religious believers of various denominations, in the first place Christians, and notably Catholics.
This question has come in for considerable attention in recent years from the Communist Parties of many countries, including Italy, France, Spain, Austria, West Germany, Portugal, the USA, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia.
382The Karlovy Vary Conference of European Communist and Workers' Parties, which was held in 1967, appealed to all Christian forces---Catholics and Protestants---and people of every religious denomination whose striving towards peace and social justice is motivated by religious convictions, to pool their efforts in the struggle for peace, European security, democracy and social progress. This question stood high on the agenda of the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, which could already analyse and sum up some of the experience of Communist Parties in this field.
Communist activities in respect of religious believers proceed along the following lines. In the first place, there is extensive comparison of views between Communists and religious people on such important issues as the future of mankind, war and peace, capitalism and socialism, neocolonialism and the developing countries, as well as on the development of individuality. The liveliest dialogue is between Communists and Catholics. The juxtaposition of views takes on various forms: from books and pamphlets, including books jointly authored by Marxists and Catholics (one of the earliest examples being the collection Dialogue Before the Test brought out in Italy in 1964), international and national meetings, to talks and discussions between Communists and believers in small towns and villages.
In the course of these free exchanges of views, the Communists explain and uphold their views on the key political issues of our time. In doing so, they are fully aware that the religious and the Marxist ideologies, the religious and the dialectical materialist world outlooks, are radically opposed and irreconcilable. As Palmiro Togliatti said in 1963, "We have, however, always rejected attempts to forecast a rapprochement between Communists and Catholics on the basis of some form of compromise between these two ideologies.''^^*^^
As the report of the Central Committee of the French Communist Party to its Nineteenth Congress stressed: "To stimulate and encourage an agreement which we want _-_-_
^^*^^ Palmiro Togliatti, Selected Articles and Speeches, Vol. II, Moscow, Politizdat, 1965, p. 837 (in Russian).
383 to develop with the working people and Democratic Christians, there is no need to propose an impossible ideological truce, in which the workers' movement would lose the scientific basis of its struggle and, consequently, a guarantee of success.''^^*^^Communists believe that the aim of their dialogue with believers on current political issues is to help the latter to take a more resolute stand against the glaring injustices of capitalism, and to promote their active involvement in the struggle against these injustices, the policy of aggression and war, and neo-colonialism. The documents of some Communist Parties point out that the moral and ethical precepts and the social doctrines of some religions ( Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc.) contain many positive humanitarian values.^^**^^ The source of these values is to be traced back to the origins of religion. For instance, Engels wrote of Christianity: "Christianity was originally a movement of oppressed people: it first appeared as the religion of slaves and emancipated slaves, of poor people deprived of all rights, of peoples subjugated or dispersed by Rome.''^^***^^ The decisive factor that shapes the political notions and attitudes of the masses is social relations. The growing social contradictions have confronted religious believers in many capitalist countries with the problem of commitment to the struggle against imperialism and its policies.
Hence, Communists consider a dialogue with religious people an important but not a primary element of their policy. Their motto is "juxtaposition of ideas, plus concerned action''. In their policies, Communists lay the main emphasis on the second half of the formula. They call on believers to add their efforts to the struggle against imperialism's aggressive policy, which could plunge the world into the holocaust of a world war, against wars of conquest unleashed by the imperialists in various parts of the globe, and for peace among countries and peoples. Communists urge believers to join the struggle against fascist regimes and tyrannies, and in defence of the people's needs and interests. They call on believers to join them in the struggle against _-_-_
^^*^^ Cahiers du communisme No. 2-3, 1970, p. 54.
^^**^^ See New Programme of the Communist Party of USA .
^^***^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, On Religion, Moscow, p. 316.
384 the rule of capitalism, social injustice, the exploitation of man by man, and the exploitation of other nations, and for democracy, social progress, and the establishment of a socialist society based on justice.As the Nineteenth Congress of the Communist Party of France, which was held in 1970, stressed: "Since the working people, believers and non-believers, have identical class interests and the same need for socialism, and since democrats, believers and non-believers, feel equally strongly about the problem of democratic freedoms, and since champions of peace, believers and non-believers, have a common striving to preserve human life, they can and must unite.''^^*^^ Communists advance as a basis for joint action the most urgent and vital socio-economic and political issues.
In addressing believers, the Communist Parties stress that they can and must make a worthy contribution both to the struggle for socialism and the building of a socialist society based on justice. The Eleventh Congress of the Italian Communist Party pointed out that Communists sincerely believe in the contribution that other ideological forces, notably Catholics, can make to creating and shaping the fabric of a new society. "We do not confine ourselves to offering the Catholics an agreement on the short-term programme. We propose to launch a broader dialogue that will deal with the socialist prospect as well.''^^**^^
The communist call for united action is addressed, not only to religious workers, peasants and intellectuals, but also to the masses of democratic Catholics, including the clergy, who are prepared to work for peace, democracy and progress.
In countries where the influence of Catholicism is strong and where what are known as "Christian parties" exist, Communists challenge these parties' claim to be the sole spokesmen for all believers. These parties, as a rule, present themselves as standing for all classes and expressing the interests of all Catholics. In fact, they are parties of monopoly or big capital. Communists bring home to _-_-_
^^*^^ Cahiers du communisme N.~2--3, 1970, p. 439.
^^**^^ The Eleventh Congress of the Italian Communist Parly (Rome, January 25--31, 1966).
385 believers the true nature of these parties' policies and uphold the freedom of political choice and political affiliation for Catholics, in accordance with their class interests.The Communist Parties of the Moslem countries seek to draw the masses of the people into the struggle against imperialism, and for progressive democratic development of their countries. In this, they draw upon the democratic aspirations contained in Islam and the progressive ideas of Arab Islamic thinkers.
As pointed out in the Document of the 1969 Meeting, "Communists are convinced that in this way---through broad contacts and joint action---the mass of religious people can become an active force in the anti-imperialist struggle and in carrying out far-reaching social changes.''^^*^^
When they address themselves to religious believers, Communists are mindful of the important changes that have been taking place in the past ten to fifteen years in their attitudes, changes which have affected the position and stand of the church. This is particularly true of sentiments among Catholics, and even within the Catholic Church itself.
The radical changes taking place in the world in favour of the forces of progress, national liberation and socialism have had a great impact on the minds of the masses of religious people.
The emergence of the world socialist system and the socio-economic advances of the socialist countries have, on the one hand, shown such people that relations of greater justice are possible than those which have been hallowed for centuries by the church, and, on the other hand, have stimulated believers' interest in communism and its ideas.
The successes in socialist construction and the victories won by the national-liberation revolutions have shown believers the importance of working people's solidarity in bringing about genuine justice on earth.
The spectacular advances of science and technology in delving into the secrets of the origins and development of life, and in mastering the laws of the development of _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 27.
__PRINTERS_P_385_COMMENT__ 25--0873 386 Nature and society tend to promote secular attitudes and materialist concepts.Meanwhile life is confronting religious people with increasingly complex problems. State-monopoly capitalism gives aid and succour to dictatorial and tyrannical regimes, encroaches on democracy, uses technological progress to step up the exploitation and oppression of the working people and perpetuates the yawning gap between a handful of the privileged and the masses of the dispossessed. The US imperialism waged a destructive war of aggression against the freedom-loving peoples of Indochina. Capitalism confronts humanity with a possibility of a nuclear holocaust that could wipe out hundreds of millions of lives, and the achievements of civilisation. Religious people face the alternative of following the course proposed by the reactionary Catholic circles, or joining the progressive and democratic forces in the struggle. It is becoming increasingly apparent to religious people that the second alternative is the only viable one.
Since the mid-fifties, masses of religious people, including Catholics, faced with the radical shift in favour of the forces of progress and socialism, on the one hand, and the glaring injustices of capitalist society, on the other, have been lending a more attentive ear to the communist calls for united action and a joint struggle. There has been a marked decrease in the influence the Catholic Church wields over people's minds (especially among the youth), since more and more believers are becoming increasingly involved in the class struggle. This has affected the sentiments of part of the clergy, primarily parish priests who are in closer touch with the masses of religious people.
Thus, in a number of Latin American countries, for instance, part of the clergy have become actively involved in the struggle against imperialism and tyranny. In Colombia, Camilo Torres, sociologist and priest, brought forward a progressive anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchy programme: in the spring of 1965, the revolutionary United Front of the Colombian People began to take shape for the programme to be translated into action. Torres saw as the final goal of his programme the construction of a socialist society in Colombia, and thought that unity of all revolutionary 387 forces, Communists included, was essential to achieve this goal. Following Torres's death his organisation fell apart. The major changes in the temper of the masses have confronted the Catholic hierarchy, which had always been wholly committed to co-operation with the ruling exploiter classes and been an obstacle to the people's militant unity in the struggle against capitalism, with the possibility of sizable sections of believers swinging away from its influence. This has led to a situation described by the 1969 Meeting in the following terms: "The Catholic Church and some other religious organisations are experiencing an ideological crisis, which is shattering their age-old concepts and existing structures.''^^*^^ This crisis of the church has led to an incipient reappraisal of values by part of the hierarchy as well, and set in motion a slow process of religious ``renewal'', and ``modernisation'' of the church, both on purely religious matters and on a number of current political and international problems.
Communists fully realise that, in criticising certain aspects of capitalism, the Catholic Church takes into account the considerable changes in the popular mood and seeks to bolster its influence among the masses. However, it is obvious that even these forced changes in the church's position objectively create more opportunities for the Catholic masses to become more actively involved in the class struggle. That is why Communists are not slackening their efforts to recruit more and more religious people for the revolutionary liberation movement, and to establish a militant unity with them. This is of greater importance because statements by the advocates of a ``new-look'' Catholic Church are usually accompanied by ambiguous declarations and openly anti-communist pronouncements. Meanwhile, within the Catholic Church itself, there is a powerful conservative lobby that is linked with the most reactionary imperialist circles. The latter are doing their utmost to prevent the church from changing its positions, and believers from taking part in the struggle.
Much of the credit for the active participation of Italian Catholic trade unions and organisations in joint strike _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 26.
__PRINTERS_P_387_COMMENT__ 25* 388 action with revolutionary trade unions goes to the patient and persistent work the Italian Communist Party has been conducting among Catholics. One typical example is the evolution in the one-million-strong Catholic Association of Italian Workers (ACLI), which has in recent years been actively supporting the Italian workers' struggle and, at its Congress in the autumn of 1970, openly came out in favour of socialism.It cannot be gainsaid that the valid policies of the world communist movement have in a certain measure activated the political evolution, not only of the Catholic laity but also part of the clergy, as is to be seen in Spain. Speaking at the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU about the new phenomena in Spain Dolores Ibarruri, Chairman of the Communist Party of Spain, stressed the following: "A substantial body of opinion, including the Catholic Church in Spain, which used to be one of the mainstays of fascist counter-revolutionaries in the struggle against the Republic, is now experiencing an evolution of a progressive character. Today, this part of the Church is actively supporting the political, economic and social demands of the working class, and in many cases even comes out for socialism.''^^*^^
Argentinian publicist Juan Resales, dealing with the same problem in the Latin American context, wrote, "The radicalisation of the Christian Church, which objectively corresponds to the social situation on the continent, owes much to the extensive, skilful and consistent work of Latin American Communists. They are aware that enlisting Catholic organisations and masses in the common front of struggle is a major condition, if the working class and its allies are to succeed in carrying out an anti-oligarchy and anti-imperialist revolution, and establish a genuinely democratic rule and create conditions for transition to socialism.''^^**^^
A consistent line of united action with the religious people will undoubtedly help Communists to bring about the unity of a broad front in the struggle for peace, democracy and socialism.
_-_-_^^*^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSV, p. 175.
^^**^^ World Marxist Review No. 2, 1971.
[389] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER X __ALPHA_LVL1__ THE COMMUNIST PARTIES' STRUGGLE AGAINSTThe conditions of the world-wide class struggle and the world communist movement's commitment to united antiimperialist action call for an enhanced ideological and political role of the Marxist-Leninist parties in the world revolutionary process. This, in turn, presupposes a steppedup struggle against bourgeois and opportunist ideology, and constant creative development of revolutionary theory. Opportunist distortions of Marxism-Leninism within the communist movement assume different forms, ranging from Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism, to dogmatism, sectarianism, adventurism, and nationalism. These forms of opportunism reveal a close affinity with the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideology, which is why combating opportunist trends within the communist movement goes hand-- inhand with exposure of the anti-communism of the imperialist bourgeoisie and the reformism of the Right-wing SocialDemocrats.
The success of Communists' activities hinges on an exposure of opportunism of every shade. A principled struggle against opportunism is of vast importance today, when there has been an unprecedented growth of the historical role of communist ideas and Communists' responsibility for the destinies of mankind and the future of peace and revolution.
The 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties stressed that, for a successful struggle against imperialism, Communists "will consistently uphold their 390 principles, work towards the triumph of Marxism-Leninism, and combat, in accordance with the concrete situation, Right- and `Left'-wing opportunist distortions of theory and politics, revisionism, dogmatism and Left-wing sectarian adventurism.''^^*^^ The political nature and the practical implications of opportunism stand revealed and its tremendous harm both to the communist movement and broad anti-imperialist action has been exposed.
In keeping with the decisions of the 1969 Meeting, the Communist and Workers' Parties have launched an active struggle against defectors from Marxism-Leninism and have upheld and strengthened Marxism-Leninism, the ideological and theoretical basis of the international communist movement.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. THE SOCIO-POLITICAL SOURCES OF OPPORTUNISM __ALPHA_LVL3__ [introduction.]In accounting for the existence of various brands of opportunism in the communist and working-class movement, Marxism-Leninism proceeds from the premise that opportunism cannot be explained away as fortuitous, or a result of errors by individuals and groups, or even as stemming from the national features and traditions of the workingclass movement. The origins of opportunism are to be traced back to the socio-economic and class structure of capitalist society, and the way the working-class movement has developed.
__NOTE__ Start of LVL3 should be *here* but moved to top of next page since two LVL's start between "*" in body and "*" in footnotes area. _-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969.
391 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Social Base of OpportunismThe socio-economic and political roots of opportunism are variegated.
The struggle against imperialism swells the ranks of the proletariat's allies, this bringing closer the social and national liberation of the oppressed nations and of all the working people. By the same token, the non-proletarian forces within the revolutionary movement bring with them their own views and ideas, which differ from those of the = __NOTE__ This is *bottom* of previous page! see note above. proletariat and are a breeding ground for opportunism. Ever more millions of people belonging to various social strata are involved in political action, many of them becoming politically conscious with a great charge of revolutionary energy, but, at the same time, with rather vague notions as to how the problems agitating them are to be solved. They vacillate from one extreme to another---from stormy political outbursts to political apathy, from reformist illusions to anarchist impatience. "All this,'' Leonid Brezhnev pointed out, "tends to complicate the activity of the Communist Parties, multiplies their tasks and makes much greater demands on their practical work. In this situation, Communists must display Marxist-Leninist firmness and loyalty to principle and a creative approach to the problems of social development if they are to keep control of developments, and tackle their problems in the light not only of short-term requirements but also of the longterm interests of the revolutionary movement. Otherwise, grave errors in policy are inevitable''.^^*^^
The main social base of opportunism in the workingclass movement is provided by a definite stratum of the working class, which has a petty-bourgeois background. When a petty bourgeois joins the working class after being ruined by big business, he brings his ideology into the working-class movement.
As a result of the proletariat's long and arduous struggle and the growth of production in the advanced countries, wages have gone up for certain categories of workers, and some of the more glaring forms of exploitation have given way to more sophisticated and veiled methods. These and other circumstances have resulted in reformist illusions gaining some ground in the working class. Unable to grasp the contradictory nature of capitalist development, part of the workers, in Lenin's words, elevate to a one-sided theory, to a one-sided system of tactics, now one and now another feature of capitalist development,^^**^^ often taking a reformist stand.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, pp. 155--56.
^^**^^ See V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 16, p. 349.
392The economic basis for a privileged proletarian elite--- "the working-class aristocracy" or ``bureaucracy''---is, according to Lenin, provided by the monopolies' super-profits, thanks to which "the bourgeoisie of an imperialist `Great' Power can economically bribe the upper strata of `its' workers...''^^*^^ With its super-profits boosted by the scientific and technological revolution and greater exploitation, the monopoly bourgeoisie are able to somewhat increase the ranks of the elite and harness it to their policies by granting privileges, seats on arbitration councils, in parliament, etc., and to bribe sections of the working class.
However, the "working-class aristocracy" and `` bureaucracy'' are merely an economically privileged fringe of the working class.
There are other ways in which the proletariat is exposed to the impact of the bourgeois ideology. The workers live in bourgeois society, where the mass media, cultural institutions and education are owned and controlled by the capitalist class. The ruling class seeks to inculcate its ideological concepts in any form upon the workers, which also contributes to opportunist attitudes.
Finally, one should not overlook the fact that, as a result of the scientific and technological revolution, the intelligentsia's role in society has increased. Quite a number of their representatives have joined Communist Parties, many of them making a thorough study of Marxism-Leninism and developing into genuine revolutionaries. However, there are such that retain their petty-bourgeois allegiances and are a source of non-proletarian influences within the Communist Parties.
The rate of capitalist development varies in different countries and in different sectors of the economy. " Economic relations which are backward, or which lag in their development, constantly lead to the appearance of supporters of the labour movement who assimilate only certain aspects of Marxism, only certain parts of the new world outlook, or individual slogans and demands, being unable to make a determined break with all the traditions of the _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 115,
393 bourgeois world outlook in general.''^^*^^ Such relations, then, are also a breeding ground for various deviations from the scientific revolutionary world outlook.Now that the world revolutionary process includes a large number of nations liberated from the colonial yoke, and with a low level of development, a small proletariat, and predominantly petty-bourgeois populations, the danger of petty-bourgeois deviations from Marxism-Leninism has grown.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Political Sources of RevisionismA relatively prolonged period of economic buoyance and heightened activity of reactionary bourgeois ideology have contributed to a certain spread of reformist illusions within the working class, and have introduced a measure of confusion in the minds of some of its representatives, thus providing a basis for Right-wing deviations in some Communist Parties. On the other hand, ``Leftist'' sentiments, too, have objective grounds, inasmuch as economic difficulties exist, which cause sharp changes of mood, and vacillations, affecting in the first place people with petty-bourgeois backgrounds.
Another factor contributing to opportunism in the workingclass movement is the pressure which the bourgeoisie brings to bear on the working class, and the changed politics and tactics of the ruling classes in bourgeois society. The zigzags of bourgeois politics produce vacillation in the working-class and the revolutionary movement. History contains examples of the bourgeoisie's adoption of violent methods evoking anarchist-Leftist or revisionist-defeatist reactions in the revolutionary movement. On the other hand, the bourgeoisie's transition to the policy of reform, especially in times of smooth development and economic buoyancy, have in most cases led to a resurgence of Right-wing opportunism and revisionism.
In the present-day world, the mounting onslaught of socialism and all the revolutionary forces has led to a vast social upheaval in the old world. Offering furious resistance, _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 16, p. 348,
394 the bourgeoisie is resorting to all and any economic and political measures to uphold its positions against the progressive forces. State-monopoly capitalism has taken up anti-communism as the backbone of its policies. The major stake in imperialism's class policies is now on subverting the communist and the entire revolutionary movement from within. Support for any branch of anti-communism, whether from Right-wing revisionists or ``Left''-wing adventurers, and of all forms of anti-Sovietism has become an essential element of imperialist policy in the struggle against the communist movement.The bourgeoisie is constantly searching for ever new methods of countering the revolutionary movement. High on the list of such methods is the recruitment and winning over of forces which can be used to further imperialist ends: nationalists, opportunists of every kind, and renegades and defectors from Leninism. The growing influence of Leninism and of world socialism has forced the imperialists to seek the support both from Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism wherever that is possible.
The past four to five years have seen intensified attempts to launch a multi-pronged attack on Marxism-Leninism, the ideological and theoretical basis of all the activities, the strategy and tactics of the communist movement. Behind a front of so-called "Marxist-Leninist parties" the Chinese leaders have set out to form splinter groups, with which the Trotskyites often make common cause. Nationalist forces have been more active in some places, and Right-and ``Left''-- wing opportunism has been much in evidence.
Imperialist strategy is directed towards support for all deviations from Marxism-Leninism within the Communist Parties. It is common knowledge that the world bourgeoisie has been actively supporting the ideas of Mao Tse-tung in China, Ota Sik in Czechoslovakia, Milovan Djilas in Yugoslavia, Fischer and Franz Marek in Austria, Roger Garaudy in France, Teodoro Petkoff in Venezuela, the ``Manifesto'' group in Italy, and so on.
The monopoly bourgeoisie is trying to foster the illusion that all the aspirations of the working people can be met without a revolutionary transformation of the existing order. To cover up its exploitative and aggressive nature, 395 capitalism has advanced various apologetic concepts (``People's Capitalism'', "the Welfare State'', "the Affluent Society'', "the Consumer Society'', etc.). The revolutionary working-class movement is exposing these false concepts, and waging a resolute struggle against them, thereby aggravating the crisis of the imperialist ideology, from which the masses are increasingly turning away.
Present-day revisionism also feeds on a wrong assessment of the international situation, a lack of understanding of the essence, forms and methods of today's class struggle in the world between socialism and imperialism, and the historic role of the Soviet Union and the socialist community in that struggle.
The struggle for peace, democracy, national independence, and socialism is fraught with great difficulties, and is by no means smooth sailing. The contingents of the revolutionary movement have to face setbacks and even suffer temporary defeats, which raise doubts in the minds of unstable people, driving them into the quagmire of revisionism. In others, they create a desire to resolve all the problems and difficulties of the revolutionary struggle "at one fell swoop'', and to bypass the necessary stages of the development of the revolutionary movement, this inevitably leading to political adventurism and sectarian tactics.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Sources of OpportunismNor are the Communist Parties in the socialist countries immune to bourgeois influences. Revisionism may appear in them too, in one form or another. The process of socialist construction and the emergence of a new type of relations among the socialist countries is an objectively complex process. As pointed out in the Report of the CPSU's Central Committee to the Twenty-Fourth Congress, "The presentday socialist world, with its successes and prospects, with all its problems, is still a young and growing social organism, where not everything has settled and where much still bears the marks of earlier historical epochs. The socialist world is forging ahead and is continuously improving. Its development naturally runs through struggle between the 396 new and the old, through the resolution of internal contradictions.''^^*^^
Many difficulties these countries face are linked with the unceasing efforts of imperialism to bring economic, political, and ideological pressure to bear on the socialist countries. Imperialist attempts to undermine socialism and sow discord and alienation among the socialist countries continue without any let-up. Wherever vigilance is dulled, or Communists underrate the importance of the class approach to social phenomena, these imperialist designs yield some results, Right-wing opportunism and even openly anti-- socialist elements rear their heads, and nationalist sentiments grow.
It should be borne in mind that in countries which have embarked on socialist construction there still remain, to a greater or lesser degree, internal anti-socialist forces which bank on imperialist support. In this situation, there is a particularly real danger of Right-wing revisionism, which, under the pretext of giving socialism a ``face-lift'', seeks to deprive Leninism of its revolutionary essence. Thereby Right-wing revisionism undermines the foundations of socialism, paves the way for the penetration of bourgeois ideology, and poses a direct threat to the socialist gains. This was precisely the situation that prevailed in Czechoslovakia in 1968--1969. Imperialism bends every effort to help the internal anti-socialist forces.
This makes it all the more important for the working class and the Communist Parties to present to the petty-bourgeois strata a clear prospect of society's development, and involve them step by step in socialist construction, gradually reshaping their consciousness. Wherever serious ideological and political work is neglected and the Party lags in tackling the new problems of socialist construction, wherever there is a lack of the ability to overcome difficulties and take advantage of the inherent potentialities of the socialist system, a breeding ground for revisionism is created. When they come up against difficulties, leaders with petty-bourgeois leanings tend to become hysterical and doubt-ridden. Because of the difficulties that arise, the revisionists are prepared to forfeit all achievements, to yield on matters of principle, _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, pp. 18--19.
397 and capitulate to the class enemy. Thus, the root cause of the political crisis and the mounting counter-revolutionary pressure in Czechoslovakia in 1968 was the deviation from the fundamental Leninist principles and the general patterns of socialist construction. This jeopardised not only the working class's revolutionary gains but the very existence of the socialist system.Nationalism is one of the sources of opportunism, both Right- and ``Left''-wing. We all know what nationalism and social-chauvinism did to the Second International during the First World War. After World War II, the Right-wing Social-Democratic leaders in a number of countries became members of bourgeois governments, which, under the banner of defence of the "national interests'', waged bloody wars against national-liberation movements.
Unfortunately, nationalist trends have appeared within the communist ranks as well. Nationalism has proved particularly dangerous to some ruling Communist Parties. It has provided a spawning ground for Right- and ``Left''-wing deviationist sentiments and eventually led to such parties and countries opposing the communist movement and the socialist countries, while within them flourished anti-- Sovietism, which is hostile to communism. "It is precisely the nationalistic tendencies,'' Brezhnev pointed out, "especially those which assume the form of anti-Sovietism, that bourgeois ideologists and bourgeois propaganda have placed most reliance on in their fight against socialism and the communist movement.''^^*^^
Opportunist deviations away from Marxism-Leninism are most prone to appear within the communist and workingclass movement at turning points in history, when the task of the creative development and practical application of revolutionary theory gains particular importance. Opportunism assumes various forms in the ranks of the Communist Parties. As to the nature of the deviation from creative Marxism and its impact on the revolutionary movement, opportunism within the Communist Parlies may be of the Right- and ``Left''-wing varieties. As regards questions of theory, both these deviations end up as revisionism and _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., p. 27.
398 dogmatism, while, organisationally and tactically, they assume the form of liquidationism arid sectarianism. There also exist other forms of opportunism, such as anarchism, neo-Trotskyism, and the like. These forms of opportunism affect unstable sections of the revolutionary forces, fellowtravellers of the revolution.Differences arising within the communist movement are due, in large measure, to the influence of revisionism, both in the Right- and ``Left''-wing varieties. Such influences are by no means confined to ``pure'' theory. Revisionism in theory, as is known, paves the way for opportunist practices, thereby causing tremendous harm to the anti-- imperialist struggle, since revisionism is a departure from a consistent class stand and a replacement of Marxism-Leninism by all kinds of anti-Marxist and anti-scientific concepts.
The CPSU agrees with the position of the fraternal parties whose documents have drawn attention to the need to fight the danger of opportunism. The Communist Parties believe with good reason that the interests of their own solidarity and those of the entire anti-imperialist movement call for an intensified struggle against revisionism and opportunism, both Right-wing and ``Left''-wing. A principled stand on this issue has always strengthened the Party's political position and mpbilised Communists in their class struggle. As Leonid Brezhnev stressed at the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, "The fight against Right- and `Left'-wing revisionism, against nationalism, continues to be urgent.''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. RIGHT-WING OPPORTUNISM,Right-wing opportunism, revisionism, is an ideological and political trend within the communist and revolutionary movement, a trend that is hostile to revolutionary Marxism and the fundamental interests of the working class, and replaces the class struggle against capitalism and for the _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 27.
399 victory of the socialist revolution by the preaching of class peace between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. In its content, revisionism is a complex of theoretical premises and corresponding political attitudes, which contradict the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism. Revisionist concepts and principles weaken and disarm the working class and its revolutionary party.Right-wing opportunism means sliding into liquidationist positions, and collaboration with the Social-Democrats in politics and ideology. Revisionism, Lenin pointed out, always means political capitulation to difficulties, to the class enemy. Revisionism seeks to make the working-class movement part of capitalism's political system.
It is the mission of opportunism to make the working people abandon the stand of a consistent class struggle in favour of minor reforms, which do not affect the foundations of the bourgeois system. "Opportunism,'' Lenin wrote, "means sacrificing fundamental interests so as to gain temporary and partial advantages. That is the gist of the matter, if we consider the theoretical definition of opportunism.''^^*^^
Lenin pointed out that collaboration between antagonistic classes, and abandonment of the dictatorship of the proletariat and of revolutionary action are the political essence of revisionism. He exposed the capitulationist nature of the tactics employed by Right-wing opportunism, which is "to determine its conduct from case to case, to adapt itself to the events of the day and to the chopping and changing of petty politics, to forget the primary interests of the proletariat and the basic features of the whole capitalist system, of all capitalist evolution, to sacrifice these primary interests for the real or assumed advantages of the moment.''^^**^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The ActivisationSince the early sixties, a new wave of revisionism has arisen within the communist movement. A feature of presentday revisionism is its seeking to give a new lease of life _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected. Works, Vol. 31, p. 440.
^^**^^ Ibid., Vol. 15, pp. 37--38.
400 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1973/WCM485/20080513/485.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2008.05.14) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ top __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [*]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ to various anti-Leninist ideas, which had been defeated in an open confrontation with Marxism-Leninism. Revisionism seeks to use these ideas in order to infiltrate into the Communist Parties and impose their line on them, taking advantage of any ideological immaturity and dogmatism. To say that revisionism embodies bourgeois influence on the working-class movement and subjugates it to bourgeois ideology reveals only part of the harm revisionism has caused. Present-day Right-wing opportunism, revisionism, seeks to call into question the international character of Leninism and to revise its fundamental principles. It has substituted for Marxism-Leninism, as a single internationalist doctrine, various brands of "national Marxism''. The present-day revisionists, like the Social-Democrats, deny that Leninism is the further and logical development of Marxism.The falsifiers of Leninism are silent about the fact that there is not a single question of theory or tactics of the class struggle that were taken up by Marx and Engels, and was not further developed by Lenin. "It is characteristic of the falsifiers,'' writes the Marxist scholar H. Adamo, "that they suppress the fact of Lenin's close personal links with the socialist movement in West Europe, his active involvement in the West European socialist movement during his emigration. The intrinsic oneness of Marxism-Leninism is based on its class essence, the international character of the working class's position in society, and its interests and aims. That is why Leninism, as the Marxism of the present epoch, has emerged as a basis of the ideology and politics of the communist movement. The incompetence and absurdity of allegations about Lenin's `Russification' of Marxism are obvious from the example of the Great October Socialist Revolution. It has never been a local revolution and has always been a decisive impulse, a component and a motive force of the world revolutionary process.''^^*^^
Revisionism's struggle against Leninism is something more than a mere ideological discussion. It is an encroachment on the entire international communist and _-_-_
^^*^^ H. Adamo, Antilentnismus in der BRD, Frankfurt/Main, 1971, S. 18--19.
401 working-class movement, a rejection of the achievements of revolutionary theory and practice in the last few decades. It is an attempt to throw the international working-class movement back to its condition before the Great October Socialist Revolution.Following in the footsteps of bourgeois ideology, the opporlunists seek to denigrate Marxism-Leninism, to dub Marxism's scientific and political integrity as `` doctrinairism'', and a rejection of "bold perfection" as ``dogmatism''. The revisionists of today, such as Roger Garaudy, are trying to turn Marxism into an abstract moral and ethical concept and to deprive the scientific theory of social development of its revolutionary class essence.
The following are some of the latest methods of the opportunist distortion of Leninism. Some opportunists ``accuse'' Lenin of having allegedly ``distorted'' Marx, and use this allegation to ``defend'' Marx against Lenin. Others agree that Leninism has its raison d'etre, but insist on describing it as a "purely Russian phenomenon'', one that is characteristic of Russia but irrelevant in the context of other countries. The most zealous critics are the Austrian revisionists, E. Fischer and Franz Marek, authors of a book with the pretentious title of What Lenin Really Said,^^*^^ who make the unsubstantiated assertion that while Marx "was primarily a theoretical thinker'', Lenin was at best "merely a strategist and tactician of the revolution''. Attacking the general theoretical premises of Leninism, the renegades Fischer and Marek seek to distort the revolutionary content of Leninism, and stoop to open slander when they claim that Lenin did not characterise philosophical systems as class categories.
Also part of the opportunists' stock-in-trade is a grudging admission of Leninism's relevance to economically and socially underdeveloped countries, while categorically denying its universal international significance.
In recent years there has emerged from among professional ``Marxologists'' a group of "new supporters" of Leninism, who hold that Leninism was valid in its time, but is not _-_-_
^^*^^ Fischer E., Marek Fr., Was Lenin wirklich sagte, Wien, Miinchen, Zurich, Verlag Fritz, Molden, 1969.
__PRINTERS_P_401_COMMENT__ 26--0873 402 suited to the changed times, and needs ``improvement'' and "creative development''. Under the pretext of promoting "anti-dogmatic Marxism-Leninism'', ideas are introduced that are alien to revolutionary Marxism and have been borrowed from the ideological and theoretical arsenal of the bourgeoisie and the social-reformists. This is the line adopted by such exposed revisionists as Garaudy, Fischer, Marek and other self-styled theoreticians of Right-wing opportunism. Predictably, the present-day advocates of the `` modernisation'' of Leninism take as their main target the very core of Leninism---the theory of the socialist revoluton.The opportunists also inveigh heavily against such bedrock Leninist theses as the proletarian dictatorship and the leading role of the Communist Party in the revolution and in socialist construction. The revisionists persistently bypass the central issue of revolution---assumption of political power by the working class and its allies, and attempt to reject the proletarian dictatorship in any form and under any name. Capitulation on so basic an issue as the dictatorship of the proletariat makes the renegades to Marxism ultimately revise their entire system of thinking and abandon the class stand step by step.
The present-day revisionists call their own writings "the new Marxism'', "democratic socialism" or "renewed communism''. Ignoring the class struggle between socialism and imperialsm, they would like to see a blend of socialist society and bourgeois democracy, thus espousing in deed, the notorious "convergence theory'', which is an ideological weapon of imperialism. The revisionists have no understanding of the essence of present-day life, capitulate in the acute class struggle, and succumb to the pressure of bourgeois ideology.
The revisionists make a wrong appraisal of state-monopoly capitalism and the forms of its political domination. They gloss over the mounting internal and external contradictions of present-day capitalism and spread illusions that the people's vital needs can be met through reforms and adjustments within the imperialist system. Revisionist trends have been manifested, among other things, in connection with the appearance of the possibility of a peaceful transition to socialism. Addressing the 1969 International Meeting, Todor Zhivkov, First Secretary of the Bulgarian 403 Communist Party's Central Committee, had this to say on the subject: "Instead of a policy mobilising all the class forces for the realisation of this possibility, instead of perseveringly drawing the middle classes into the struggle of the working class, there are in some Communist Parties tendencies towards a departure from class positions and adaptation to the aspirations of the petty-bourgeois elector. The possibility of accomplishing the socialist revolution peacefully is now beginning to be reduced solely to the possibility of victory at elections. The parliamentary struggle is being regarded as the main and even the only road to socialism. The fact that the working class and its allies have a whole arsenal of peaceful and legal means of struggle is being buried in oblivion. Also being buried in oblivion is the extremely essential circumstance that peaceful transition depends not only on the desire of the Party and the working people but also on the behaviour of the national and world bourgeoisie and that it, consequently, by no means rules out an armed class struggle.''^^*^^
Under the pretext of giving consideration to specific national conditions, the revisionists call for a departure from the general patterns of the socialist revolution and socialist construction. From the fact that conditions of struggle vary in different countries, Communists conclude that a variety of forms of the struggle for the overthrow of imperialism and the construction of socialism is inevitable, a conclusion that is in keeping with Marxism-Leninism. However, to use the variety in the forms of the revolutionary transition to socialism as a pretext for a rejection of the general laws of the socialist revolution means Right-wing opportunism, real revisionism.
The French Communist Party has thoroughly confuted the revisionist views of Roger Garaudy, including those on the transition to socialism. In his speech at the Plenary Session of the FCP's Central Committee in October 1969, Waldeck Rochet said that Garaudy "systematically confuses the question of the different ways of transition to socialism with the concept of different models of socialism. But to apply _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, pp. 292--93.
__PRINTERS_P_403_COMMENT__ 26* 404 the concept of `model' to the question of the ways and methods of the transition from capitalism to socialism is a dubious method, which gives rise to confusion, notably because it obscures the common features that are present inevitably in any socialist revolution, as, for instance, the need for the working class and its allies to win and then wield political power, the liquidation of large-scale capitalist property, socialisation of the main means of production and exchange, etc.'' These general principles of the socialist revolution, Waldeck Rochet went on to say, which are obligatory for any country, are modified according to historical conditions and national specificity. This was clearly stated in the Document of the 1969 Meeting. Meanwhile, Waldeck Rochet stressed, the manner in which Garaudy uses the concept of ``model'' "opens the door for new interpretations, including a denial of the general laws of socialism.''^^*^^Garaudy's denial of the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism meant his defection to the camp of the enemies of the working class. The renegade's political and ideological evolution is worth tracing. His departure from the working-class ideological stand began with his advocacy of "special views" in aesthetics and literature. He then switched over to philosophy, where his erroneous ideas were at odds with Marxist-Leninist theory. Garaudy tried to revise a number of fundamental theses advanced by the International Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties, and the programme statements and the political line of the French Communist Party, thereby denying the international significance of the experience of socialist and communist construction in the USSR and the other socialist countries. His speeches revealed that his transition to the platform of opportunism and revisionism was complete. Garaudy freely used the bourgeois mass media to launch his slanderous attacks.
Garaudy's anti-Marxist views provided a basis for his ``new'' strategy and tactics, which he sought to impose on the communist movement. In the first place, Garaudy tried to call into question the leading role of the working class of the _-_-_
^^*^^ L'Humanite, octobre 15, 1969.
405 advanced capitalist countries in the revolutionary process, and advanced the false thesis of a "new historical bloc" as an entity formed by brain and manual workers. He has used the fact of the growing number of the scientific and technical intelligentsia to proclaim scientists and researchers "exponents of a decisive force in transforming the world''. He has also denied the programmatic thesis of the French Communist Party on the unity of democratic action in the struggle against the monopolies, by advancing the farfetched notion that the concept of a political party is itself ``obsolete''. No wonder Garaudy has attacked the Leninist doctrine of a political party, and has engaged in mud-- slinging against the communist movement, the CPSU and the FCP.The Nineteenth Congress of the FCP (1970) unanimously condemned Garaudy's Right-wing opportunist views and underlined his complete departure from Marxism-Leninism and his revisionism. After the Congress, Garaudy carried his anti-Party struggle even farther. Resorting to typically Trotskyite methods, he set about slandering the French Communist Party and its political line. The revisionist Garaudy was expelled from the Party as a renegade to Marxism-Leninism.
While giving a firm rebuff to Right-wing opportunist and ultra-Leftist attacks, the FCP is creatively developing Marxist-Leninist theory and is fighting to end the political rule of the monopolies and establish a progressive democracy to pave the way for France's transition to socialism. "This is why,'' wrote the FCP's General Secretary Georges Marchais, "the FCP, proceeding in its concept of France's road to socialism from the general laws of the socialist revolution, takes account of the new factors and the specific conditions of the country and the times, so as to better do its duty and to live up to its role of vanguard of the progressive social movement.''^^*^^
The Twenty-First Congress of the Communist Party of Austria (May 1970) spoke of the need to wage a resolute struggle against revisionism and opportunism, strengthen party leadership at all levels, and finally break with those _-_-_
^^*^^ Pravda, Decwnber 29, 1970.
406 who refuse to abide by Party decisions and weaken its ranks by their splitting activities. A group of Right-wing opportunists in the Communist Party of Austria (E. Fischer, F. Marek, and others) are known to have taken over certain positions in the Party, thus driving it towards a split, imposing revisionist concepts on it, an abandonment of the class struggle and the Leninist principles of Party structure, and egging the Party on to severing its links with the international communist movement and the CPSU.The Right-wingers within the CPA denied the need for its existence as a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party. They wanted to replace the Party by the so-called "new Left'', under whose banners they would assemble all kinds of opportunists and liquidators. The Right-wingers revised the principle of democratic centralism, encouraged factionalism, within the CPA, claimed the dubious ``right'' to publicly come out with impunity against the Party and its policies, even in the bourgeois press, and demanded for themselves the right to run their own ``independent'' election campaign. The Right-wingers openly espoused anti-Sovietism, grossly distorting the socialist nature of the Soviet state, thus causing great damage to the Party. The political resolution of the CPA's Twenty-First Congress read in part: "Unfounded accusations levelled at our Party and the socialist states, in the first place at the Soviet Union ... have led to an increasing impact on many of our voters of the Communist-baiting fomented by our enemy. The Party crisis has created a sense of uncertainty even in many of our comrades within the Party, and has paralysed their activity.''^^*^^
Loyal to Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, the Austrian Communists routed the Right-wing opportunist group and rejected its opportunist and liquidationist views. By restoring Party unity on the basis of Marxism-Leninism and defeating the Right-wing opportunist trends, the 21st Congress of the CPA enabled Austria's Communists to concentrate all their efforts on the struggle for the interests of the people. It has mapped out a concrete programme of action for the near future.
_-_-_^^*^^ Der 21. Parteitag der Kommunistischen Partei Osterreichs, Wien, 1970, S. 349.
407The pressure of revisionism is also manifested in the fact that, in some West European Communist Parties whose popular support is not growing, or is even dwindling, "it has recently become the practice to seek the cause of political setbacks, not in internal causes, but in the international situation, especially in the policies of the Communist Parties of the socialist countries. It is a fairly widely held view that if the Communist Parties of the socialist countries pursued policies more acceptable to public opinion in the West, this would make things much easier for the West European Communist Parties.''^^*^^ The policies of the socialist countries' Communist Parties are determined by the interests of the world working class and their own peoples, and the aims of the international class struggle, and naturally, cannot be tailored to suit what is known as "public opinion" in the West.
Today's revisionists seek to disarm the revolutionary movement by revising the Leninist organisational principles of Communist Party structure. This is something the Rightwing revisionists of all hues are agreed on. Thus, the renegade Teodor Petkoff, who has been expelled from the Communist Party of Venezuela, rejects Lenin's demand for Party unity and advocates factions and groups within the Communist Parties, viewing this as an expression of ``independence'', which he quite unambiguously interprets as a revision of Leninism, the whipping up of anti-Sovietism, denigration of the international communist movement, and a struggle against the Communist Party of Venezuela, whose Fourth Congress, held in January 1971, dealt a shattering blow at the factionalists, defeated anti-communism and anti-Sovietism within the Party ranks, and upheld the Leninist principles of the structure of a proletarian Party.
Typical of revisionism is a distortion of the content, forms and methods of the international class struggle. The revisionists ignore the fact that imperialism, although enfeebled, has become more aggressive, sophisticated and perfidious. They gloss over in every way the real class goals and main, directions of imperialism's aggressive strategy at the _-_-_
^^*^^ Frigyes Puja, Unity, and the Discussion in the World Community Movement, Moscow, 1970, p. 121 (in Russian),
408 present historical stage, and disregard the special features of its tactics. The revisionists do not wish to see that, in its struggle against the socialist countries, imperialism, while it has not abandoned direct armed methods, is increasingly using poisoned ideological weapons and trying to find ways of arresting the socialist countries' economic development.The imperialists pin special hopes on attempts to bring disunity into the ranks of world socialism. They try to find weak spots in the socialist front, organise subversive ideological work inside the socialist countries, and try to impede the latter's economic advance, sow discord and differences between them, and encourage nationalistic trends. Thus, the imperialists give aid and succour to opportunist elements in these countries. The Right-wing opportunists seek to conceal that the main aim of imperialism's aggressive policies is to weaken the positions of socialism in every possible way, suppress the peoples' nationalliberation movements, disrupt the working people's struggle in the capitalist countries, and hold up the irreversible process of capitalism's decay.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Special Danger of RevisionismAll and any deviations from Marxism-Leninism are fraught with the greatest danger when they occur in the Communist Parties of countries where the socialist revolution has already taken place. Errors in a ruling Party's policies are not confined to theoretical and political discussions, but are embodied in erroneous moves in internal or external policies, thus directly harming the cause of socialism, and adversely affecting the alignment of forces in the class struggle between the two world systems.
The revisionists in the socialist countries try to speculate on the difficulties and snags in the development of a new society. They view problems arising in the course of socialist development as grounds for criticising socialism as such.
The revisionists direct their fiercest attacks against the .thesis of the leading role of the working class and its Communist Parties in the socialist countries. They try to weaken 409 the Party, undermine the Leninist principle of democratic centralism, its organisational basis, advocate loosening of party discipline, and call for the Communist Parties to be turned from militant revolutionary organisations into debating clubs.
Failure to resolutely rebuff the revisionists may lead to surrender of the socialist gains, and capitulation to the anti-socialist forces. Any undermining of the Communist Party's leading role in socialist society serves the interests of socialism's enemies and, in the final analysis, paves the way for the restoration of capitalism.
Most assiduous in this direction are the revisionist and anti-Party elements in Yugoslavia, whose activities have been highly detrimental to that country's League of Communists.
Josip Broz Tito, Chairman of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, has stated that the League has not always risen to its tasks in the past and today. It is now an urgent necessity to place the League of Communists on such a basis as to enable it to eliminate all the contradictions which have arisen in Yugoslav society. Tito has stressed the importance of enhancing the League of Communists' leading role. The League is the main cementing force in the country. Ideologically, the League of Communists must make its presence felt in all quarters. We must not, he said, allow petty groups to check the socialist direction of the country's development. It is still less permissible to tolerate the activities of hostile elements that are agents of alien interests. The entire system of Communists' ideological and political training, Josip Broz Tito stressed, must be in full keeping with the ideas of the great teachers---the founders of Marxism.^^*^^
If the revisionists' sallies are not given a firm rebuff, that can lead to a surrender of the positions gained by socialism and to capitulation to the anti-socialist forces. Any undermining of the Communist Party's guiding role in socialist society objectively serves the interests of the _-_-_
^^*^^ See Pravda, June 18, 1971.
410 enemies of socialism and, in the final analysis, opens the road for the restoration of capitalism.In assessing socialism, the revisionists use the ``model'' of capitalist society, in the first place, of vaunted bourgeois democracy. They propose replacing the leading role of the working class and its revolutionary party in the socialist countries with a so-called pluralism of political parties, by which they mean giving full freedom to the anti-socialist forces. These recommendations are aimed at enabling the class enemy to freely fight socialism. The Communist and Workers' Parties in the socialist countries reject such encroachments by revisionist accomplices of the bourgeoisie.
How dangerous revisionism can be to the socialist cause was demonstrated by the 1956 events in Hungary, and again in 1968 by the events in Czechoslovakia. Behind a smoke-screen of demagogy, these were broadly conceived attempts by the former exploiting classes, in an alliance with the Right-wing opportunists and with support from world imperialism, to destroy the foundations of the socialist system, to isolate the country in question from the socialist community, and thus seriously undermine the positions of socialism in Europe.
The Right-wing opportunists used criticism of the errors of Czechoslovakia's former leaders to begin an open struggle against the socialist order. After fastening on the reformist slogans of "democratic socialism'', they began to talk about the "national limitations" of Leninism, denied its international significance, and rejected the general laws of the socialist revolution and socialist construction. In doing this, they took cover behind false slogans of ``genuine'' or ``humane'' socialism, calling for a ``liberalisation'' of social life, and great latitude for various anti-socialist parties and groups. In fact, this unbridled campaign led to the undermining of the leading role of the working class and its vanguard---the Communist Party. This was direct aid to the Right-wing and reactionary forces, which sought to restore capitalism and tear the CSSR away from the socialist community. "But,'' as Leonid Brezhnev said, "the staunchness of the Marxist-Leninist core of the Czechoslovak Communist Party and determined action by Czechs and Slovaks devoted to the cause of socialism and by allied countries loyal to the 411 principles of socialist internationalism frustrated the dangerous plans of enemies aimed against the common interests of socialism and, in the long run, against peace in the European continent. This was further proof of the great significance of the internationalist solidarity of the socialist countries. Today our friends and our enemies have no doubt about the efficacy of its strength, and that is very good.''^^*^^
In the document "The Lessons of Crisis Development in the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia and Society Following the CPC's Thirteenth Congress'', the Czechoslovak Communists analysed the causes of the crisis and the lessons to be drawn from it. The Report of the CPC's Central Committee to the Party's Fourteenth Congress (May 1971) said the following: "The Czechoslovak events of 1968 have once more corroborated Lenin's theory to the effect that, without principled and firm leadership which unreservedly espouses Marxism-Leninism, even a most numerous revolutionary force turns into an unorganised mass incapable of concerted action, and which under certain conditions can suffer a defeat under the pressure of counter-revolutionary forces.''^^**^^ "Our experience shows,'' said Gustav Husak at the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress, "what a major threat to socialism arises if, under the slogans of `improving' and `reforming' socialism, the Party leadership loses its unity and ability to act; socialism loses its revolutionary content; the Party abjures its leading role in society; the Party under the impact of petty-bourgeois opportunism is in a state of ideological disarray, is weakened organisationally, and incapable of united action; the principles of democratic centralism are rejected; the class principles of the socialist state are buried in oblivion, and proletarian internationalism is replaced by nationalist and chauvinistic hysteria.''^^***^^
The Communist Party of Czechoslovakia is successfully overcoming the serious political crisis in the Party and society. The Party's struggle and activities are further _-_-_
^^*^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course, p. 290.
^^**^^ Gustav Husak, Report on the Activities of the Party and the Development of Society after the CPC's Thirteenth Congress, and the Further Tasks of the Party. May 25, 1971, Moscow, Politizdat, 1971, p. 32 (in Russian).
^^***^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, p. 65.
412 proof of the validity of the Marxist-Leninist ideas, and of the general principles of socialist construction. To solve the problem of the further development of society, Czechoslovakia's Communists stress, it is imperative to enhance the role of socialist ideology in all areas, raise the ideological and theoretical level of Communists, and cement the moral and political unity of the people. A resolution of the CPC's Fourteenth Congress reads: "The main danger, which we must continue to fight, is Right-wing opportunism and revisionism. A principled struggle against Right-wing opportunism demands exposure of its class and social roots, and a vigorous struggle against all counter-revolutionary attempts by remnants of the exploiting classes, which rely on petty-bourgeois ideology and anti-communist sabotage.''^^*^^The revisionists oppose the principle of proletarian internationalism, reducing all its content to a one-sided interpretation of the equality, independence and autonomy of the Communist Parties, and forgetful of their fraternal solidarity. But historical experience, as reflected in the documents of the communist movement, shows that if the victory of socialism in any particular country is to be considered final and the restoration of capitalism ruled out, the Communist Party, as the leading force in society, must unswervingly pursue Marxist-Leninist policies in the development of all spheres of social life and constantly improve the forms of its activities; it must make tireless efforts to strengthen the country's defences, uphold the revolutionary gains, itself preserve and foster among the people vigilance in respect of the class enemy and intolerance of bourgeois ideology; it must faithfully adhere to the principle of socialist internationalism, and promote the unity and fraternal solidarity with the other socialist countries.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Other ManifestationsIn Communist Parties that are working in underground conditions, Right-wing revisionism is most likely to appear in Party-development work, assuming the form of splitting _-_-_
^^*^^ Pravda, May 31, 1971.
413 activities, dissemination of liquidationist views, illusions that only legal activities are practicable, attempts to turn the Party into an appendage of the liberal bourgeoisie and an amorphous opportunist organisation; it results in a loss of the revolutionary perspective.Right-wing opportunist views in Communist Parties that are taking part in the national-liberation struggle are manifested in an overestirnation of the national bourgeoisie's role and anti-imperialist potential, an underestimation of the reactionary aspects in its policies and of its attempts to collaborate with imperialism and the local reactionaries, a denial of the role of the working class, and curtailment of links with the socialist countries. Revisionism is also manifested in a conciliatory attitude towards the bourgeois concepts of "national-type socialism'', defeatism towards imperialism, abandonment of the struggle for progressive social reform, and a lack of desire or ability to detect dangerous reactionary sallies. Revisionist errors are also manifested in a wish to isolate a Communist Party from the fraternal parties, in a weakening of internationalist ties, and neglect of the experience of the world communist movement. Revisionist trends cause great damage to the national-- liberation movement and the cause of social progress.
Such are some of the more typical forms revisionism assumed in the Communist Parties today.
While staunchly upholding the purity of Marxism-- Leninism, Communists urge further development of revolutionary theory, assimilation of new experience of the revolutionary struggle, and a reappraisal and rejection of outdated concepts. However, the Communist and Workers' Parties' development of Marxism-Leninism is radically different from that of the revisionists.
A creative development of Marxism-Leninism consists in a scientific generalisation of new facts, whereas the revisionists use new facts merely to cover up their defeatist essence, without being able to interpret them scientifically. A creative development of Marxism presupposes preservation of its revolutionary core and of its fundamental principles, which have been fully vindicated by historical experience and revolutionary practice. Conversely, revisionism, using the pretext of "improvement of form'', is revising 414 the very essence of Marxism, and its bedrock principles. The revisionists suppose that difficulties arising in the revolutionary movement can be resolved, not by the creative application and development of Marxism-Leninism but by revising its principles and using bourgeois and opportunist theories. The genuine development of Marxism-Leninism strengthens the positions of the working class, and promotes its revolutionary class consciousness, rendering its policies and tactics more flexible and purposeful. Revisionism, on the contrary, weakens the working class and its pressure on the bourgeoisie, and exposes the people to bourgeois influence.
Revisionism assumes various forms, with the revisionists constantly trying to give a face-lift to their theories, in search of new forms and methods for their subversive activities. That is why the Communist and Workers' Parties must be constantly on the alert against the danger of revisionism and must nip any of its manifestations in the bud.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. ``LEFT''-WING OPPORTUNISM: ITS FORMS __ALPHA_LVL3__ The EssenceAnother form of distortion of Marxism-Leninism is ``Left''-- wing opportunism, which is an ultra-revolutionary theoretical and adventurist political line in the working-class and communist movement. Its theoretical base is frequently provided by doctrinairism, while sectarianism is its political and organisational offshoot. The class roots of pettybourgeois ultra-revolutionism are traceable to the position of the petty proprietor. "...The petty proprietor, the small master (a social type existing on a very extensive and even mass scale in many European countries), who, under capitalism, always surfers oppression and very frequently a most acute and rapid deterioration in his conditions of life, and even ruin, easily goes to revolutionary extremes, but is incapable of perseverance, organisation, discipline and steadfastness. A petty bourgeois driven to frenzy by the horrors of capitalism is a social phenomenon which, like anarchism, is characteristic of all capitalist countries. The instability of such revolutionism, its barrenness, and its 415 tendency to turn rapidly into submission, apathy, phantasms, and even a frenzied infatuation with one bourgeois fad or another---all this is common knowledge.''^^*^^
Petty-bourgeois vacillations have repeatedly occurred in the proletarian parties, especially at sharp turns of history. The extent of the danger presented by ``Left''-wing opportunism, dogmatism and sectarianism has varied in different historical periods. Over fifty years ago, Lenin, with great foresight, pointed to the danger ``Left''-\ving opportunism presented to the communist movement. He said that if Leftist dogmatism could be described at the time as merely an "infantile disorder" in the communist movement, the reason lay in its being a young and emerging trend.
Since the late twenties and mid-thirties, dogmatism and sectarianism have already become "chronic ailments" in some Communist Parties in the capitalist countries, as pointed out by the Comintern's Seventh Congress of 1935. Neglect of the struggle against ``Left''-wing opportunism had resulted in this ailment ceasing to be an "infantile disorder''. The communist movement had to pay a high price for the Leftist errors, for the ``Left''-wing sectarian, dogmatic views within the communist movement, which seriously damaged the cause of socialism.
At present, it is still less pardonable to speak of the danger of dogmatism in merely theoretical or academic terms. ``Left''-wing opportunism uses theoretical premises to ideologically cover up a deeply erroneous political line. ``Left''-wing opportunism's special danger today stems from its anti-Marxist views having become the core of adventurist and splitting policies.
A telling example is the Chinese leaders' chauvinistic and splitting policy, which has seriously harmed socialism, and their vulgarisation and distortion of the key Marxist-- Leninist principles, by giving them a ``Left''-wing-dogmatic and nationalistic twist. No little detriment is caused to the revolutionary movement by other ``Left''-wing trends which have recently become more active, notably of the Trotskyite type, which seek to replace the scientifically substantiated Marxist foundation of the revolutionary movement by subjectivist extremes and adventurism.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 32.
416 __ALPHA_LVL3__ Dogmatism and SectarianismAlthough ``Left''-wing opportunism has been linked, at each historical stage, with concrete concepts and theoretical and tactical principles, it has always retained its adventurist content, being marked by subjectivism, a rejection of any analysis of objective processes, and going from one extreme to another. It tries to fit reality into the straitjacket of ready-made schemes and formulas. Marxist revolutionary dialectics is replaced by sophistry. A dogmatic approach to theory and to the content, methods and forms of the struggle, which is typical of the ``Leftists'', inevitably leads to hidebound sectarianism in the practical questions of revolutionary movement.
The study of concrete situations is replaced in dogmatism and sectarianism by quotation and pedantry, this leading to the Party's divorce from the masses. By separating theory from practice, the dogmatists try to make the new revolutionary phenomena conform to the Procrustean bed of old concepts. Dogmatism, which is alien to the creative spirit of the revolutionary and constantly developing Marxist-- Leninist doctrine, stems from a refusal to study and sum up the new facts of reality, and draw the relevant conclusions.
Dogmatism makes an absolute of individual Marxist formulas, and ignores reality, which is more complex and rich in content than any formula can be. It mechanically applies principles evolved for definite conditions of time and place, to other and vastly different circumstances. The dogmatists are unwilling and unable to develop theory so as to bring it into accordance with actual social and economic processes, and pedantically repeat yesterday's conclusion in a new political situation.
The dogmatist, Lenin wrote, likes to "pick out passages from books like a scholar whose head is a card index box filled with quotations from books, which he picks out as he needs them; but if a new situation arises which is not described in any book, he becomes confused and grabs the wrong quotation from the box''.^^*^^ In doing so, the dogmatists _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, p. 364.
417 usually cover up their theoretical incompetence by some false slogan of struggle against revisionists.A defence of Marxism on scientific lines calls for a creative approach and for the further development of Marxist theory. "We,'' wrote Lenin, "do not regard Marx's theory as something completed and inviolable; on the contrary, we are convinced that it has only laid the foundation stone of the science which socialists must develop in all directions if they wish to keep pace with life.''^^*^^ In other words, Lenin urged revolutionaries, not only to be guardians of the Marxist heritage, but to creatively develop and advance it. If that were not so, Marxism would turn into a collection of lifeless formulas.
The scientific defence of Marxism strengthens the positions of the working class and its revolutionary party, helps achieve a deeper appraisal of the validity and importance of conclusions that are being upheld. A dogmatic defence of outmoded concepts ideologically disarms the revolutionary movement, disorients Party cadres, gives them wrong directives, weakens a revolutionary party's links with the masses, and imposes on it obsolete concepts which run counter to the masses' historical experience.
Dogmatism and sectarianism also manifest themselves when erroneous forms and methods are proposed in a struggle for fundamentally valid goals and in pursuit of a correct political line. Any discrepancy between the tactics and the ends of the struggle can cause considerable harm to the communist movement, especially when it involves gross violations of inner-Party discipline, as well as rebellious methods often bordering on attempts to split the Party.
Dogmatism and sectarianism lead in practice to Communists becoming isolated from the masses, and to revolutionaries being induced to engage in Leftist adventurism, while the masses are left in a state of apathy. Dogmatism and sectarianism hamper a correct assessment of a changing situation, and of advantage being taken of new possibilities to further the interests of the working class and all the democratic forces; they restrict the sweep of the revolutionary movement, and impede the training of the political army _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 4, pp. 211--12.
__PRINTERS_P_417_COMMENT__ 27--0873 418 of the socialist revolution and the victory of the working people in that revolution. Behind a mask of intolerance of bourgeois ideology, dogmatism, with its ossified attitudes, actually helps the bourgeoisie, discredits revolutionary theory, deprives the revolutionary parties of their actual strength, and drives the unstable into the embraces of a hostile ideology.A declaiming of shrill ultra-revolutionary phraseology is a typical feature of ``Left''-wing opportunism. Lenin aptly characterised such heroes of ``revolutionary'' phraseology and ultra-revolutionary adventurism in the following words: "The greatest, perhaps the only danger to the genuine revolutionary is that of exaggerated revolutionism, ignoring the limits and conditions in which revolutionary methods are appropriate and can be successfully employed. True revolutionaries have mostly come a cropper when they began to write `revolution' with a capital R, to elevate `revolution' to something almost divine, to lose their heads, to lose their ability to reflect, weigh and ascertain in the coolest and most dispassionate manner at what moment, under what circumstances and in which sphere of action you must act in a revolutionary manner, and at what moment, under what circumstances and in which sphere you must turn to reformist action.''^^*^^ Revolutionism of phrase and gesture all too often turns into submissiveness, apathy and betrayal of the revolution.
V. I. Lenin described ``Left''-wing opportunism as pettybourgeois revolutionism, which would resolve all problems by relying on subjective moods and impulses. Petty-bourgeois revolutionism is marked by utter inability to conduct systematic, steadfastly proletarian and single-minded revolutionary work. Historical experience has confirmed the extreme instability, sterility and adventurism of the Leftist brands of opportunism. The reactionary views held by the presentday Leftist opportunist ideologists, who usually combine revolutionism with ultra-nationalism, as well as the views of the Trotskyites and anarchists, have long been demolished by Leninism and confuted by revolutionary practice.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 33, pp. 110--11.
419 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Anti-Leninist Course FollowedThe very essence of ``Left''-wing opportunism and pettybourgeois nationalism is expressed by the policies and ideology of the present leaders of the Communist Party of China, who have come out against the line of the world communist movement as jointly evolved by the Communist and Workers' Parties, including the CPC. They have advanced their own ideological and political platform, one that is incompatible with Leninism, on the main issues of the international class struggle and socialist construction. This is a platform of struggle against the socialist countries and of splitting the international communist and the entire anti-imperialist movement; it is an attempt to revise Marxism-Leninism from nationalist and ``Left''-wing opportunist positions.
Behind a screen of ``Left''-wing phraseology, the CPC leaders have begun a stubborn struggle against MarxismLeninism, in a bid to destroy the socialist policies and ideology and have them replaced by policies and an ideology which have nothing in common with scientific socialism.
To offset the programme documents of the world communist movement, they have advanced the thesis that it is not the working class and the world socialist system that are focal in our times, but the national-liberation struggle in the former colonial countries. This thesis has declared the main contradiction that between the "urban world" and the "rural world'', between the "wealthy nations"---to which category the advanced socialist countries belong, alongside of the imperialist countries---and the "poor nations'', which comprise all the developing countries, irrespective of their political regimes.
In reality, the task consists in creating conditions for closing the economic gap between the industrial and developing countries by stepping up the economic processes in the latter. Instead of this genuinely revolutionary goal, the Leftists have brought forward the idea of an egalitarian re-distribution of the advanced countries' wealth, regardless of their political and social systems.
__PRINTERS_P_419_COMMENT__ 27* 420This is a flagrantly anti-Marxist and anti-scientific concept, which would replace the class approach to the problems of present-day social development by nationalism and even racism, contraposing the national-liberation movement to its genuine allies---the socialist community and the international communist and workers' movement, and, in effect, depriving the national-liberation movement of the socialist prospect. In advancing their views, the GPG leaders seek to undermine and destroy the militant alliance between the world proletariat and the peoples' liberation movement, and to gain control of that movement.
The historically inevitable growth of the non-proletarian strata's revolutionary activity is quite groundlessly interpreted by the CPC leaders and their supporters as a `` weakening'' of the working class's leading role in the struggle against imperialism. They regard as the main revolutionary force, not the working class, but the army, or the intelligentsia and college students, or else the peasantry, or lumpen-proletarian declasse elements, or various combinations of these forces.
Closely linked with these views is the CPC theoreticians' erroneous assessment of the social motive forces and the roads of revolution. An example in point is the anti-Marxist thesis of a "people`s'' peasant war as the main road to be followed by the world revolution today, a thesis that has provided the basis for the adventurist concept of an `` encirclement'' of the industrial capitalist nations by the "rural world'', with the aim of destroying imperialism. This, in effect, means total disregard of the laws of the class struggle, an attempt to substitute racist and geopolitical concepts for the basic conflict between labour and capital, and an absolutisation of the specifics of guerrilla tactics in agrarian countries and their employment on a world-wide scale.
The ``Left''-wing extremists hold that only a revolutionary war and an insurrection can bring about a victorious revolution. These "revolutionaries in phrase" have asserted that recognition of other methods of ending the rule of the exploiters is opportunism and betrayal of the working class; they brand Marxists-Leninists, who consider that in certain conditions the transition to socialism can be peaceful, as ``soothsayers'', who allegedly proceed from historical idealism.
421Open advocacy of destruction and sheer violence on the part of supporters of the Peking line goes hand in glove with military-bureaucratic methods and hegemonistic aspirations, and the imposition of a regimented society on China, all of which has nothing in common with the principles of scientific socialism. In the guise of a Communist Party, a totally new political organisation is being set up in China, which has been assigned the role of an instrument of the system of military-bureaucratic dictatorship imposed on the nation.
The "cultural revolution" has dealt a heavy blow at the CPC, with many Party veterans and Marxist-Leninist internationalist cadres and hundreds of thousands of Communists falling victims to repression.
At the CPC Ninth Congress of 1969, Mao Tse-tung and his entourage gave legal form to their home and foreign policies, which are fundamentally hostile to Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism. While talking of socialist construction in China, they simultaneously advanced the Trotskyite thesis that socialism cannot be fully victorious muil the world revolution triumphs.
The objective laws of socio-economic development and the vital interests of the Chinese people imperatively demand a genuinely socialist policy based on the principles of scientific communism. However, the policies of the present Chinese leaders have resulted in a grave distortion of the economic and political foundations of socialism as laid down during the first decade of the Chinese People's Republic. The Peking leaders try to place all the country's resources in the service of their great-power and hegemonistic ends. This policy is jeopardising the Chinese people's socialist gains, and is slowing down the country's development. After abandoning the Marxist-Leninist principles of socialist construction, the Chinese leaders have advanced, as the main objective of the country's economic, social and political development, "preparations for war" and the conversion of the whole country into an armed camp. Militant anti-Sovietism has been proclaimed a programme task. Peking is re-echoing the imperialist allegations about the Soviet Union's ``aggressiveness''. The Chinese leaders are sowing discord between the USSR and China and making 422 overtures to the imperialists on an anti-Soviet basis, thus seriously damaging the cause of united action by all the antiimperialist revolutionary forces and their cohesion.
In reality, the ideas the Chinese leaders want to be accepted as ``genuinely'' Leninist have nothing in common with Leninism. The dissemination of these views and their political application is fraught with great danger to the revolutionary cause.
Such is the lesson to be drawn from the recent setbacks suffered by a number of revolutionary contingents, especially the heavy defeat suffered by the big Communist Party of Indonesia, which enjoyed such great authority in its country. Some of its leaders had supported an attempted coup planned by a group of army officers against the reactionary generals. In analysing events, Indonesian Marxists have pointed out that even members of the Party's Central Committee had not been advised about the leading bodies' decision to support the officers' conspiracy. Nor did Party bodies and members know anything about it. When the "Revolutionary Council" was proclaimed, the masses were told nothing about its aims and programme.
This was due in large part to the CPI leaders' gradual adoption of extremist positions in politics and ideology. The Appeal of the Marxist-Leninist group within the CPI, entitled "For a Correct Road for the Indonesian Revolution" (1966), pointed out that the Party was burdened with pettybourgeois ideology and had not yet emerged as a genuine Leninist-type organisation. The CPI's leaders had launched the slogan of the ``Indonesiasation'' of Marxism-Leninism and attacked the programme documents of the international communist movement, which they had themselves signed in 1957 and 1960. The Second Plenum of the CPI's Central Committee (December 1963) had advanced the erroneous thesis that advantageous co-operation with other classes and groups called for firm adherence to the principle of placing the national interests above those of class and party. At the same time, it was claimed without any grounds that a splendid "revolutionary situation" existed in the country.
In its home and foreign policies, the Party leadership fell increasingly \inder the influence of the anti-Leninist adventurist course of the Peking leaders, who sought to harness 423 Indonesia to their great-power interests in South-East Asia. The result was a serious weakening of the CPI's internal and international positions, something the country's reactionaries promptly took advantage of to carry out their sinister plans.
Whatever masthead they appear under, the Leftists have one thing in common: they stake heavily on spontaneous rebelliousness and preach neglect of Marxist-Leninist theory and tactics of the class struggle, denying the conscious aims of revolutionary struggle, forgetting the lessons of history, and undermining faith in the revolutionary potential of the working class.
The ``Left''-wing opportunists try to build up international tensions and to create an atmosphere of a war psychosis. Typical of their stand on the war and peace issue is their ``readiness'' to sacrifice millions of human lives and doom entire nations to extermination. But while indulging in ultra-revolutionary phrase-mongering, the Peking group itself feels no inclination, "in the name of the world revolution'', to return "like for like" in the struggle against imperialism. Its own struggle against imperialism does not go beyond a verbal barrage. In fact, its policy is spearheaded against the interests of world socialism. It not only admits the possibility of wars between socialist countries, but calls for "preparations for a big nuclear war" against the USSR.
The international splitters and ``Left''-wing adventurists have unleashed an ideological and political drive against the communist movement, and have proclaimed their ideological and organisational dissociation from it. In opposing all efforts to strengthen cohesion in the communist movement, they launched a virulent campaign against the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties of 1969, and its decisions.
The special danger of ``Left''-wing sectarian adventurism lies in its advocates---under the cover of ``Leftist'' phraseology, and presenting their view as "the acme of MarxismLeninism today"---trying to split the Communist Parties and set up hostile ``Left''-wing parties. These Leftist-anarchist groupings are rallying grounds for all kinds of defectors from the communist movement---Trotskyites, renegades of every shade, and adventurists---and centres of anti-Sovietism 424 and anti-communism. These centres resort to the basest of methods to discredit the Marxist-Leninist parties.
The splitters' ideology and practices bring grist to the mill of the anti-Communists in their efforts to smear socialism. Imperialist propaganda assiduously disseminates the Leftist views, especially such that are anti-socialist and anti-Soviet. Working in the most diverse conditions, the Communist Parties are feeling the effects of all this.
That is why more than 60 Parties that attended the 1969 Meeting have come out with well-grounded and vigorous criticism of the anti-Marxist stand and splitting activities of the Chinese Communist Party's leaders. The external policies and the splitting activities of the present CPC leaders have been resolutely rebuffed by the vast majority of the Communist and Workers' Parties. With the imperialists stepping up their hostile activities against the socialist countries and the freedom-loving peoples, and contriving new aggressive plans, the need today is greater than ever before for cohesion and concerted action of all the antiimperialist forces, for the unity of the international communist movement.
This is the basis of the CPSU's principled and consistent line towards China. The CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress gave a thorough review of the Sino-Soviet relations and fully endorsed the Central Committee and the Soviet Government's principled Leninist course and concrete steps in the SovietChinese relations. The CPSU will continue its uncompromising struggle against anti-Leninist ideological principles and against splitting policies and great-power chauvinist foreign policies, and will do everything to prevent any encroachments on the interests of the Soviet people, who are building communism. The CPSU has taken a stand of consistent defence of the principles of Marxism-Leninism, promoting the unity of the world communist movement, and safeguarding the interests of the socialist community.
At the same time, the CPSU is decidedly against carrying the serious ideological differences into the sphere of state relations between the USSR and the People's Republic of China, and is doing everything in its power to restore good-neighbourly and friendly relations between the Soviet and Chinese peoples. With a view to normalising relations 425 between the USSR and China, a meeting of heads of government was held in Peking in September 1969 on the initiative of the USSR, and border talks are in progress. The USSR has made a number of other moves towards improving relations with the People's Republic of China.
Expressing the will of the CPSU and the Soviet people, Leonid Brezhnev said the following to the CPSU's TwentyFourth Congress: "We shall never forsake the national interests of the Soviet state. The CPSU will continue tirelessly to work for the cohesion of the socialist countries and the world communist movement on a Marxist-Leninist basis. At the same time, our Party and the Soviet Government are deeply convinced that an improvement of relations between the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China would be in line with the fundamental, long-term interests of both countries, the interests of socialism, the freedom of the peoples, and stronger peace. That is why we are prepared in every way to help not only to normalise relations but also to restore good-neighbourliness and friendship between the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China and express the confidence that this will eventually be achieved.''^^*^^
This sound and constructive stand of the CPSU and the Soviet Government with regard to the PRC is meeting with understanding and support in the fraternal socialist coun tries, the Communist and Workers' Parties, and all progressive and peace-loving forces throughout the world, including the Chinese working people.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Neo-Trotskyism. Present-DayLeftist trends and ideological and political currents are also manifested in various neo-Trotskyite, anarchist, anarcho-syndicalist and other ultra-Leftist movements, all of which also reject the leading role of the working class in the revolution, and bank on sections that stand outside of production, such as college students, the jobless, and the _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, pp. 16--17,
426 like. It is the prime purpose of such movements to deal a blow at the Communist Parties, and disrupt the establishment of a broad anti-imperialist front.Recent years have seen Trotskyite action become more frequent in some capitalist countries. Present-day Trotskyism, just as before the war, is a hotch-potch of groups and grouplets whose membership does not as a rule exceed several dozen people. After going through a grave crisis, the Trotskyites again reared their heads in the early sixties, in connection with differences in the communist movement. The Trotskyites' ultra-Leftist views are in accord with the sentiments held by sections of the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia and by declasse and adventurist elements. The neoTrotskyite leaders make no secret of their search for support in extremist elements.
Historical experience shows that the ``Left''-wing deviation often comes to the surface as a reaction to the Right-wing Social-Democrats' "original sin" of denying the revolutionary forms of the mass struggle.
The Trotskyite groups are in a constant state of splitting and internal bickering. Their ``theoretical'' concepts demonstrate the utter ideological impotence of neo-Trotskyism, which covers up its ideological nakedness with ultra-Leftist verbiage long refuted by life.
A typical feature of Trotskyism has been its denial of the gains of the international working class and a gross denigration of what has resulted from the revolutionary struggle. The main targets of Trotskyite slander is the world socialist system, the Soviet Union, the world communist movement, and the Marxist-Leninist strategy and tactics of class struggle. The Trotskyites have spread slanderous allegations about the "distorted workers' states" in which "socialism has degenerated''. The epigones of Trotskyism have revealed themselves for what they are by their vicious allegations that the interests of the world socialist system have come into conflict with those of the revolutionary working-class and national-liberation movement.
As accomplices of imperialism and reaction, various Trotskyite groups, for all their internal tussles and bickering, are one in their deadly hostility to the socialist countries. In their scribblings, the Trotskyites make the wildest 427 assertions, e.g., that toppling the working-class power in the socialist countries is a "decisive condition" for the development of the "world revolution''. They work themselves into a lather in calling for a world war, believing that war is the only means of eliminating capitalism and an inevitable stage on the road towards revolution. Small wonder the Trotskyites are furiously attacking the policies of the socialist countries, and resorting to abuse and slander.
A major feature of all Trotskyite trends is a vicious criticism of efforts to set up a broad anti-imperialist and antimonopoly front. A particularly fierce struggle is being waged by the Trotskyites against the Communist and Workers' Parties.
Trotsky is known to have championed the idea of bypassing certain stages of the revolution. His successors also oppose revolutionaries' participation in the general democratic and anti-monopoly movement, without which no revolution is possible. The neo-Trotskyites claim that a struggle for democracy is not only useless, but definitely harmful to the working-class movement. Thereby they are impeding the process of bringing the masses towards the socialist revolution.
It is not by chance, then, that the imperialist reactionaries go to great lengths in spreading the counter-- revolutionary writings of Trotsky and his adherents. Attempts to spread the discredited Trotskyite ideas in capitalist countries---a kind of current Trotsky fad---objectively stem from the wish of socialism's enemies to use Trotsky as a weapon in the struggle against Leninism, the Communist Parties and especially against the USSR and the other socialist countries, i.e., against the actually existing socialism--- the main force of the anti-imperialist struggle. That is why Trotskyism, which seeks to pool its efforts with those of all enemies of Leninism, is entitled to a special place in the arsenal of anti-communism. This aspect of Trotskyism has been justly noted by the West German Marxist writers Josef Schleifstein and I. Haeseler: "As regards the anti-communist elements in Trotskyism, which is definitive, the Trotskyite groups are marked by such strange alliances as those with the Right-wing Social-Democrats, on the one hand, and the Maoists, on the other. However remote these allies are from 428 each other, they are one in their anti-communism. Together with the growing chances of united Left-wing action, the activity of those who are out to split that unity is also increasing. A struggle against the splitters is the common task of all those who see united action as the real way towards bringing about a major shift in the alignment of forces. The struggle against Trotskyism has become necessary, not because it represents a theoretically significant trend but in order to wage a more effective struggle for united action by the Left-wing forces, for an alliance of all democrats and socialists.''^^*^^
Since the strategy of achieving unity of the working-class and all the anti-imperialist forces is a real threat to the rule of monopoly capitalism, all efforts to split the antiirnperialist movement assume a growing importance to the reactionary circles. The imperialist bourgeoisie sees as its ally, not only the anti-communism of the Right-wing Social-Democratic leaders, who sow reformist illusions concerning the character of present-day capitalism, but also the anti-communism of the Trotskyite and other ultraLeftist groups.
The Trotskyites appeal to those strata that reject capitalism as a society in which the monopolies rule, but try to prevent such strata from realising the basic oneness of their interests and those of the revolutionary working-class movement and the Communist Parties. The Trotskyites are subversive in the trade unions, the Social-Democratic parties, and other organisations, in an attempt to disrupt united action by Communists and socialists. By contrasting the struggle for democracy with the struggle for socialism, the neo-Trotskyites seek to weaken the growing trend towards anti-imperialist unity in the working-class and democratic movement. While using anti-capitalist slogans, the Trotskyiles have always tried to split and weaken any movement which presents a real threat to the rule of the financial oligarchy.
Thus, anti-communism is inherent in the Trotskyite grouplets, which are willing to make common cause both with the Right-wing reformists and with the supporters of the _-_-_
^^*^^ Lenin iiber Trotzki, Frankfurt/Main, 1969, S. 35.
429 Peking line, as well as with other pseudo-revolutionaries. The Left-wing democratic forces' increasing efforts to achieve unity evoke greater activity in those who seek to split that unity. That is why the struggle against Trotskyism and other pseudo-revolutionary trends and groups has become essential for a more effective struggle for the unity of all democratic and anti-imperialist forces.The Communist Parties are also combating anarchist, anarcho-syndicalist and other ultra-Left trends and ideas in a number of capitalist countries. There even exists an anarchist international (AIT---the International Workers' Association) made up of anarchist groups, which are in the main active in some Latin American countries. These are small but noisy fringe groups, with only a marginal influence, but their danger derives from their subversive work against the revolutionary movement, together with the Trotskyites and the pro-Peking and other ``Left''-wing adventurist groups. The anarchists' ideology and activities still exercise a corrupting and degrading influence on some sections of the industrial and other workers, especially on backward elements among them, and sections of the petty bourgeoisie.
The ideology of the petty-bourgeois anarchist `` revolutionaries'' is, in effect, a variety of the ideology of present-day ``Left''-wing opportunism. Like the ``Leftists'', the anarchists try to accelerate the pace of history and bypass objectively necessary stages of development, to urge the revolution forward artificially, and ``introduce'' socialism and communism overnight. They propose to ``advance'' to socialism and communism along a straight road, without zigzags or retreats. Like the ``Left''-wing opportunists, they indeed refuse to prepare the masses for a revolution, or to educate and organise them for the struggle against capitalism and imperialism, relying only on the vanguard and underrating the role of the masses in the anti-imperialist front and in the socialist revolution.
Today's anarchists inveigh against the Communist Parties and their scientific strategy and tactics. The ideologists of ``Left''-wing radicalism, such as the West German Trotskyite-style anarchist Cohn-Bendit and others of his ilk, go out of their way to publicise themselves as "genuine" 430 revolutionaries allegedly able to overcome the `` conservatism'' and ``decrepitude'' of the Communist Parties. In practice, this all boils down to a distortion of Leninism and the policies of the Communist Parties.
The Leftist groups in the developed capitalist countries form a united front against the Communist Parties' struggle to bring about joint action by the working class and all the democratic forces, alleging that the Communists' united action with other democratic forces contributes to reformism. In fact, ``Leftist'' line perpetuates the split in the ranks of the working class and its isolation from its natural allies, which only serves the interests of Big Business.
The ``Left''-wing opportunists and sectarians are at pains to conceal the fact that the question of power is the focal issue in any revolution and that the exploiting classes must be stripped of political power in favour of the working class and its allies. The French anarchists, for instance, maintain that their task consists in introducing workers' control at enterprises, irrespective of the type of ownership. This is a frank admission that they are not encroaching on capitalist private ownership of the means of production, and do not seek a replacement of bourgeois rule by socialism.
The imperialist reactionaries are striving in various ways to undermine the people's faith in the soundness of the Communist Parties' policies. "One evidence of this tactics of our enemies,'' wrote Enrico Berlinguer, General Secretary of Italy's Communist Party, "is the instigation and a benign approval of the slanderous attacks which petty groups are launching against us. The latter aspire to represent the 'genuinely ``Left''-wing revolutionary forces', but in reality often confine themselves to anti-communism and antiSovietism.''^^*^^
Within the Italian Communist Party, the ``Manifesto'' splinter group formed by some members of the ICP's Central Committee, has been defeated. This group, which covered up its opportunist essence with phrases about the need for a course to the ``Left'' of the ICP's, was made up of Rightand ``Left''-wing opportunists. Its members engaged in groundless criticism of the Party's line of setting up a broad _-_-_
^^*^^ Pravda, November 17, 1970.
431 anti-monopoly movement of the Left-wing democratic forces. In contrast with the ICP's strategy in the struggle for socialism, the opportunists advanced a sectarian platform, which in effect could lead to the isolation of Communists, called for a change in the nature of the ICP as a working-class party, advocated the creation within the Party of "one or even several minorities'', and preached factionalism and liquidationism.Members of this group were particularly active in spreading vicious anti-Soviet fabrications, pressing for a rupture of fraternal relations between the ICP and the CPSU and the other Communist Parties, and grossly slandering the construction of socialism and communism in the USSR and the other socialist countries. The Manifesto group's opportunist views have been rejected by Italy's Communists, and its members expelled from the Italian Communist Party.
In Latin America, petty-bourgeois views are propagated by various ultra-revolutionary adventurist groups which have mushroomed in some countries in recent years. The political platform of the ``Left''-wing dissenters, who actually have nothing in common with communism, fully coincides with that of the Trotskyite groups which, having found ideological allies in the Leftist elements, have also stepped up their pro-imperialist activities.
Stressing the intimate connection between imperialism and the ultra-Left theorists and pseudo-revolutionaries, and their hatred of the USSR and socialism, Fidel Castro, First Secretary of the Cuban Communist Party's Central Committee, said that the ultra-revolutionaries "consider all but criminal the very existence of the Soviet Union. And this is done from `Left'-wing positions---is this not the limit of baseness!"^^*^^
The ultra-Leftists have cast off the Marxist-Leninist theory of the socialist revolution, declaring that it has nothing in common with the present-day Latin American situation. As they see it, revolutionaries should not waste time on any forms of struggle other than the armed one. The latter, the ultra-revolutionaries assert, can be triggered _-_-_
^^*^^ Fidel Castro Ruz, May the Immortal Lenin Live Forever!, Moscow, Folitizdat, 1970, p. 18 (in Russian).
432 off artificially at any time and in any country, irrespective of the conditions.Representatives of petty-bourgeois trends, which are the backbone of ultra-Left groupings, make much of the idea that elite groups can carry out a revolution on their own. The spread of these erroneous views may lead to serious consequences because, in such conditions, there is disregard of systematic work in organising and preparing the masses for revolutionary action. Insufficient work on mastering Marxism-Leninism, and an absence of the necessary theoretical grounding and revolutionary experience lay the ground for the dissemination of ideas hostile to Marxism-Leninism, especially among impoverished petty bourgeoisie and certain sections of the youth who are burning with impatience and harbour wild plans of gaining power almost at once. Thus, in a number of Latin American countries, the ``Leftists'' have tried to impose on the Communist Parties a commitment to immediate "revolutionary action''.
This line, which ignores the need of work among the masses, especially among the working class, and rejects the political education of the masses, is foredoomed. It can lead only to a dispersal of the revolutionary forces, an undermining of the masses' morale, and a weakening of their revolutionary energy.
No Latin American Communist Party denies the MarxistLeninist propositions on the armed road of revolutionary struggle. Communists emphasise that the working class in the revolutionary movement must be able to skilfully use all forms of struggle without exception. In upholding the principles of the Leninist tactics in the revolutionary struggle, the Latin American Communist Parties reject both the Left-wing sectarian and the Right-wing reformist concepts, which have some following in the continent.
Communists are aware that ultra-Leftism, which is an expression of despair and impatience in view of the arbitrary and violent acts perpetrated by the reactionaries, stems from the youth forming the ultra-Leftist groups being ignorant of the history and the lessons of the revolutionary movement and having a vague idea of Marxism-Leninism. Communists proceed from the proposition that the practice of the mass struggle, and patient explanatory work among the 433 ``Left"-wing youth, intellectuals and college students will go a long way towards eradicating Leftist errors in all those who are really prepared to fight for democracy, full national liberation, and socialism. As the April 1970 political resolution of the Brazilian Communist Party Central Committee points out, "...Achieving unity with the advanced contingents of the nationalist and democratic front, in particular with representatives of Left-wing movements, is the main element in communist work, considering the tremendous importance of unity in developing the struggle against the dictatorship. We must conduct unceasing explanatory work to attract these forces towards adopting the stand of united action, bearing in mind that intensified mass movement is a precondition of success in this work.''^^*^^
Petty-bourgeois revolutionarism in all its forms has completely broken with Leninism and the Marxist-Leninist line of developing the world socialist revolution. Banking on a split in the revolutionary forces and on their disunity, it directs its efforts against the main bastions of world socialism, against the communist movement. It thereby objectively becomes an accomplice of imperialism in the struggle against the revolutionary and progressive forces. Herein lies the main danger of ``Left''-wing opportunism.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ §~4. THE IDEOLOGICAL KINSHIP BETWEENRight- and ``Left''-wing opportunism have much in common. For all their outward difference, the opportunists of the Right and ``Left'' wings concur in the main thing: they both distort the Leninist theory of the socialist revolution, and downgrade the role of the working class and its vanguard--- the Marxist-Leninist parties---in the socialist revolution and socialist construction. Both abandon the principles of proletarian internationalism, thereby weakening the struggle against imperialism and impeding the development of the revolutionary process. Both are marked by nationalist narrow-mindedness in their assessment of many key _-_-_
^^*^^ World Marxist Review No. 11, 1970, p. 14. 28--0873
434 problems of the revolutionary struggle. Such narrow-mindedness sometimes ends in actual chauvinism. This is especially true of the opportunists and Left-wing sectarian adventurists, who cover up their activities by ultra-revolutionary phraseology. Any type of opportunism weakens the revolutionary movement and plays into the hands of the bourgeoisie. The imperialist bourgeoisie view any brand of opportunism (which is also common to both the Right- and the ``Left''-wing varieties) as a political ally in the struggle against the communist movement.Both Right-wing opportunism and the ``Left''-wing variety make concessions to nationalism and sometimes openly espouse it. Lenin long ago noted this connection. "The ideological and political affinity, connection, and even identity between opportunism and social-nationalism are beyond doubt.''^^*^^
The Communist and Workers' Parties, which firmly maintain the purity of Marxism-Lenini; m, are waging a resolute struggle against anti-Sovietism, \\hich provides a common platform for Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism. The present tactics used by the imperialists in the struggle against the communist movement are support for any forms of antiSovietism. The bourgeois ideologists and bourgeois propaganda, Leonid Brezhnev stressed, "have been trying to induce the opportunist elements in the Communist Parties to make something of an ideological deal. They appear to be telling them: just give us proof that you are anti-Soviet, and we shall be prepared to proclaim that you are the true `Marxists', and that you are taking completely 'independent attitudes'''.^^**^^ Communists point out that anti-Sovietism is doing great harm to the cause of the peoples' social and national liberation, and that, if unity of the communist movement is to be achieved, it must be recognised that the common interests of the entire world revolutionary movement are most fully and profoundly expressed in the strategy and tactics of the CPSU. Addressing the CPSU's TwentyFourth Congress, Georges Marchais said: "Indeed all the liberation movements, all the battles for social liberation, _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 154.
^^**^^ 24th. Congress of the CPSU, p. 27.
435 national liberation and peace enjoy the support of the world socialist system, in the first place of the Soviet Union. That is precisely the reason why anti-Sovietism, whatever its form and whatever its origins, is a crime against the interests of the working class and of the peoples. We have fought and will continue to light it in the most resolute manner.''^^*^^ Loyalty to Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism is incompatible with anti-Sovietism, that poisoned weapon of the imperialist reactionaries and their accomplices.Both the Right- and ``Left''-wing varieties of opportunism are marked by subjectivism and an inability to analyse reality scientifically. Adapting itself to the day-by-day happenings, Right-wing opportunism and revisionism ignore or misunderstand deep-lying historical processes. ``Left''-- wing opportunism turns a blind eye to significant and fundamental changes, and is divorced from reality, clinging to yesterday's positions.
``Left"-wing opportunism (especially its extreme adventurist forms) is not always linked with dogmatism and conservative thinking. The ideological sources of ``Left''-wing opportunism are, as a rule, of an eclectic nature, forming as they do a fanciful congerie of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois theories, Utopian and reactionary ideas, and long-familiar revisionist and dogmatic views. The essence and forms of ``Left''-wing opportunism are determined by numerous socioeconomic, political and ideological factors. In combating the various forms of opportunism, the Communist Parties make a point of identifying the concrete sources and manifestations of a particular type of opportunism. One thing is beyond doubt: ``Left''-wing opportunism is, more often than not, associated with immature forms of the working-class and democratic movement. The reactionaries consciously take advantage of this to undermine the positions of the progressive forces, fan ultra-radical and anarchist sentiments among the politically immature youth, and set it against the socialist countries, the Communist and Workers' Parties.
Being equally hostile and alien to creative Marxism, Right-wing opportunism and its ``Left''-wing variety, far _-_-_
^^*^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, p. 289.
__PRINTERS_P_435_COMMENT__ 28* 436 from being mutually exclusive, complement and boost each other. It is precisely the Leftist mode of thinking that ignores reality, often seeks to turn Marxism-Leninism into a dead abstraction, and provides a pretext for revisionist allegations of the ``dogmatic'' nature of the revolutionary doctrine.With their fear of the new and their inability to creatively develop Marxist-Leninist theory, the ``Lefl''-wing opportunists create a situation in which the revisionists can don the disguise of ``creative'' Marxists.
In their turn, the Right-wing revisionists, by attempting to invalidate the revolutionary content of Marxism, enable the dogmatists to pose as ``orthodox'' Marxists and present their dogmas as revolutionary principles, thus grossly distorting Marxist-Leninist theory and tactics. The revisionists describe as ``dogmatists'' those genuine Marxists who resolutely uphold the revolutionary essence of Marxism-Leninism.
An inability to creatively apply Marxism-Leninism in an analysis of new facts gives rise to an imaginary contradiction between dogmatically understood theoretical principles and falsely interpreted facts. This provides a basis for a Right- or ``Left''-wing revision of certain fundamental Marxist principles. The Right-wing revisionists contrapose the new facts and phenomena to the very fundamentals of revolutionary theory, and demand its revision and an abandonment of Marxism-Leninism.
A successful struggle against Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism is impossible without overcoming dogmatism, and without a sound application of Marxism-Leninism in the specific conditions of a particular country or stage of development. Only a genuinely creative application and development of Marxism-Leninism in dealing with concrete problems of the revolutionary struggle can make it possible to deal a death blow at the spurious ``creativeness'' of the revisionists and the imaginary Marxist-Leninist ``orthodoxy'' of the ``Leftists''.
Stressing the connection between the Vietnam people's successful struggle and the loyalty of the Vietnam Working People's Party to Marxism-Leninism, Ho Chi Minh wrote: "The Party has been tirelessly combating reformist bourgeois trends and petty-bourgeois political adventurism in the 437 national movement, the Leftist phraseology of the Trotskyites in the working-class movement, and the Right- and `Left'-wing deviations within the Party.... Marxism-- Leninism has helped us to stand up to all trials.''^^*^^
Patent testimony to the kinship between Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism is provided by the evolution of individuals and entire ideological and political trends from revisionism to joining the enemies of socialism. The history of the working-class movement is replete with examples of certain leaders or even parties, starting out with a dogmatic ossification of Marxism-Leninism and doctrinaire `` orthodoxy'', and backsliding into the camp of revisionism and becoming avowed enemies of Marxism.
Such was the case with certain "Left-wing Communists" in the Comintern and with the Trotskyites and Zinovievites in the USSR, who rapidly went over from ``revolutionary'' slogans to support of dyed-in-the-wool Right-wing reactionaries. Many inveterate sectarians, dogmatists and Left-wing adventurists, all those who were opposed to Leninism, the USSR, the world's first socialist country, and the Leninist Party, ended up in the camp of the enemies of socialism, the revolution and Marxism-Leninism.
Trotskyism, as is common knowledge, came out under the false flag of a more ``Left''-wing and more ``revolutionary'' trend than Leninism. The Trotskyites proclaimed themselves ``genuine'' fighters for the world revolution, while in actual fact they were fighting against Leninism. Trotskyism propounded the so-called "permanent revolution'', whose cornerstone was a denial of the possibility of socialism triumphing in one or several countries prior to the world revolution.
The Trotskyites saw the main task of victorious proletariat, not in building socialism but in waging revolutionary wars against imperialism and in instigating revolutions in other countries. The Trotskyites considered a world war the most important way of achieving the goals of the world proletariat. All their ``theories'' were marked by a lack of faith in the revolution's internal forces and in the possibility of victory for the socialist revolution in Russia.
_-_-_^^*^^ Ho Chi Minh, On Lenin, Leninism and Unbreakable SovietVietnamese Friendship, Selected Articles and Speeches, Politizdat, Moscow, 1970, p. 206 (in Russian).
438A lack of faith in the triumph of socialism on a national scale gave rise to the thesis of the "degeneration of the Party" and the inevitable "restoration of capitalism" in the USSR. At the Seventh Enlarged Plenum of the Comintern's Executive Committee in 1926, the Trotskyites tried to accuse of Right-wing deviation, not only the CPSU but the entire Comintern. Intertwined in Trotskyism were ``Left''-wing adventurism, Social-Democratic survivals, and brazen slander against the leadership of the Communist Parties and the Comintern.
Double-dealing, splitting and factionalist activities were characteristic of Trotskyism. Levelling slanderous accusations against the Comintern and the CPSU, Trotskyism publicised itself as the "sole revolutionary party'', and tried to appropriate the right to be called a "Leninist opposition'', and a "revolutionary minority" allegedly destined to bring about a revolutionary revival of the ``bourgeoisiefied'' Communist Parties. In demanding freedom of factions in the Communist Parties, the Trotskyites undermined the foundations of ideological unity and sought to destroy the Parties' organisational structure serving the interests of leadership of the revolutionary mass struggle. Trotskyism became an utterly reactionary force and a mainstay of the reactionary bourgeoisie in its struggle against the international revolutionary movement.
Much of the Trotskyite ideological and political arsenal has been borrowed by the present-day ``Left''-wing opportunists and sectarians, who have objectively formed a united front with revisionism and against Marxism-Leninism and the world communist movement.
A departure from Marxist-Leninist ideology and sinking into the morass of revisionism lead to anti-Sovietism and anti-communism. A good example in point is the evolution of Milovan Djilas. the Yugoslav revisionist and renegade from communism. Just like the renegade Karl Kautsky, who, exposed by Lenin, tried to give an ideological `` substantiation'' of the need for armed intervention against the young Soviet Republic, Djilas is now calling on the "free world`s'' reactionaries to join in the struggle against the socialist community. Some renegades from Marxism, in fact the accomplices of the Right-wing revisionists in 439 Czechoslovakia, demanded that bourgeois governments should sever diplomatic relations with the USSR and other socialist countries; they are now calling for the overthrow of the working-class rule in the socialist countries.
In the present-day conditions, Right-wing revisionism is a kind of stimulator of Leftist deviatory trends. Beside the immediate harm it does to the communist movement, revisionism provokes, as it were, the emergence of ``Left''-- wing opportunism and its growth as a false antithesis to the Right-wing deviation. "The international communist movement, "said Todor Zhivkov,"cannot remain indifferent to this. It is an old truth that, no matter how much they war among themselves in the realm of theory, those who depart to the `Left' of Marxism-Leninism and those who depart to the Right, in effect help each other and ultimately come together under one and the same banner, the banner of anti-- communism.''^^*^^
Although the Right-wing and the ``Left''-wing brands of opportunism are one in their hostility to creative Marxism, either of these opportunist trends may emerge as the main danger at different junctures, this depending on the socioeconomic conditions in individual countries. Which form of the distortion of Marxism is more dangerous to a Communist Party at a particular time depends on the concrete historical conditions, and on the particular form that has the greatest weakening effect on the revolutionary movement in the given conditions, and impedes the development of the class struggle.
Thus, any deviations from Marxism-Leninism undermine the Communist Parties' militancy and weaken the positions of the working class and the unity of the anti-imperialist forces.
Of course, the struggle against opportunism in all its varieties is, in the first place, a matter for the respective Communist and Workers' Parties to decide for themselves. The Communist Parties cannot make progress unless they wage a resolute struggle for the purity of Marxism-Leninism. Al the same time, however, historical experience has shown _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 292.
440 that, if this struggle is discontinued in any section of the revolutionary movement, that has a negative effect on the movement as a whole.The experience of the CPSU's struggle against anti-- Leninist factions has shown that the danger of opportunism arises wherever it is not combated. A Communist Party cannot allow itself to slacken even for a moment the propaganda of Marxism-Leninism. It must vigilantly preserve the purity of the revolutionary doctrine, tolerating no compromise in the struggle against bourgeois ideology; it must be constantly on the offensive against Right- and ``Left''-wing opportunism.
The international communist movement arose and has developed in an uncompromising struggle against the antiMarxist-Leninist ideology and practices of opportunism, revisionism and ``Left''-wing adventurism, nationalism and sectarianism. Past and present experience has shown that major successes in the revolutionary struggle are achieved by those Parlies which resolutely combat all types of opportunism and ``Left''-wing sectarian adventurism, as well as centrism.
``In the present epoch,'' Leonid Brezhnev has stressed, "when the international class struggle has grown extremely acute, the danger of Right and `Left' deviations and of nationalism in the communist movement has grown more tangible than ever before. The struggle against Right- and `Left'-wing opportunism and nationalism cannot therefore be conducted as a campaign calculated for only some definite span of time. The denunciation of opportunism of all kinds was and remains an immutable law for all Marxist-Leninist Parties.''^^*^^
Loyalty to Marxism-Leninism, that great internationalist teaching, is a guarantee of further successes for the communist movement. The Communist and Workers' Parties see their task in firmly upholding proletarian internationalism and the revolutionary Marxist-Leninist principles against any attacks, unswervingly implementing them, constantly developing Marxist-Leninist theory, and enriching it with .the current experience of the class struggle and socialist construction.
_-_-_^^*^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course, p. 303.
[441] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ CHAPTER XI __ALPHA_LVL1__ PROLETARIAN INTERNATIONALISM AND THE UNITYTho communist movement is profoundly internationalist. Communists of all nationalities defend the common vital interests of the working class and of all working people in all lands. Their activities are guided by Marxism-Leninism, that consistent internationalist theory.
From the very outset, the communist movement has been developing on the basis of proletarian internationalism and been guided by its ideas. Proletarian internationalism has become a powerful instrument in uniting the working class, all working people, and revolutionary and democratic forces in various countries, in their struggle against the exploiting classes. Under the banner of internationalism and with communist guidance, the forces of democracy and socialism have effected radical changes in the world.
Proletarian internationalism keeps on developing together with the world revolutionary process. Internationalism is becoming deeper in content, and its manifestations varied, while the role of internationalism in transforming the old world and building a new society is increasing.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 1. PROLETARIAN INTERNATIONALISM---Proletarian internationalism expresses the community of interests and the solidarity of the working class and the 442 working people of all lands, their concerted action in the struggle for the revolutionary transformation of society.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Objective BasisWorking-class internationalism stands on a firm objective basis; it emerges from the community of the vital interests of working people in all lands. That is why the struggle waged for their interests by the various national contingents of the working class acquires the nature of a common revolutionary struggle spearheaded against a single enemy--- capitalism and imperialism, and against the entire system of exploitation and social and national oppression. This struggle cannot but demand that the industrial workers and all working people in different countries should unite on a world-wide scale.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels provided the scientific grounding for the ideas of proletarian internationalism, developed its principles and raised internationalism to the level of the working class's ideology. Proclaimed by Marx and Engels, the slogan "Workers of All Lands, Unite!'', expressed the essence of proletarian internationalism. Proceeding from its principles, Marx and Engels were the first to evolve a common strategy of the class struggle for the world proletariat. Their lives and especially their work in the First International were shining examples of devotion to proletarian internationalism, and a struggle to implement the ideas of internationalism.
In the epoch of imperialism, the defence, development and implementation of the principles of proletarian internationalism are associated, above all, with the activities of the Bolshevik Party led by Lenin, who proved that, under capitalism, there is an ever greater trend towards the internationalisation of capital, that the exchange of material and spiritual values among nations expands, and economic relations among states grow. This calls for the ever greater international solidarity of the proletariat and of working people in all lands in their struggle against capital, the more so that, with the transition to imperialism, the working 443 class itself has grown in size and the working-class movement has assumed vast proportions.
Lenin and his fellow-fighters organised a proletarian party in Russia on the basis of consistent and effective internationalism. They worked for the establishment of proletarian internationalism in the world working-class movement, specifically in such matters as working-class support for colonial peoples and a common struggle waged by workers in all countries against the impending imperialist war.
The Marxists defended the position of consistent internationalism in the Second International too. In noting the contribution made by the Second International to the propagation of international ideas among the workers, Lenin, already at the beginning of this century, spoke of the growing difference between word and deed in the policies pursued by its leaders, as an outcome of their having fallen into opportunism. This double standard was fully revealed at the beginning of World War I when, despite the resolutions adopted by the Stuttgart and the Basle Congresses of the Second International, and their solemn assurances concerning the solidarity of workers of all countries, the Rightwing leaders of the Social-Democratic parties took up a chauvinist stand and supported their ``own'' bourgeoisie in the war, thereby betraying the interests of the working class and of internationalism.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The October RevolutionThe victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution ushered in a new stage in the development of proletarian internationalism. The victory itself, which signified the triumph of internationalist ideas in multi-national Russia, became possible as a result of the consistent internationalist policy pursued by the Leninist Parly of Bolsheviks, which rallied the working people of various nations and nationalities of Russia in the struggle for socialism.
When the rule of the working class and peasantry was established in Russia, proletarian internationalism became one of the decisive factors in the state policy of the world's 444 first socialist country. The ideas of internationalism have been embodied in the relations of genuine equality and friendship among the peoples of the Soviet Union. Guided by these ideas, the Soviet state has invariably come out in support of the working-class and liberation movements all over the world.
For the first time ever, world revolutionary movement found in Soviet Russia a material foundation for the furtherance of its struggle. Concern for the strengthening and progress of the Soviet Land became a common cause for the world proletariat. The working class of the capitalist countries actively supported the working people of the Soviet Union in upholding their rule, building a new society, and defending their gains against imperialist encroachments. Since then, solidarity with the world's first socialist country has, in the opinion of all genuine revolutionaries, been a characteristic feature and an important objective criterion of proletarian internationalism.
The October Revolution gave a powerful impetus to the national-liberation movement in the colonial and dependent countries, becoming a link between the working-class movement in the capitalist countries and the liberation struggle of imperialist-oppressed peoples that have joined the mainstream of world revolution. This new unity of revolutionary forces has found expression in Lenin's slogan: "Workers of All Lands, and Oppressed Nations, Unite!''
The emergence of Communist Parties in many countries, and the Communist International they formed following the October Revolution, gave the revolutionary movement a strength that raised to a new level the struggle for the cohesion and organisation of the political army of world revolution. The Communist Internationa] and the Communist Parties it led carried on vast work to develop and spread the ideas of proletarian internationalism and to launch mass campaigns of international solidarity and unity to educate the working class and all working people in the spirit of internationalism. The Communist International rendered outstanding services to the cause by evolving the strategy and tactics for a united front of workers and the peoples of all lands, against fascism and war. The implementation of this strategy and tactics were the basis for the unity of 445 anti-fascist forces during World War II. Communists in different countries gave extensive aid to the Soviet Union in the years of struggle against fascism. In its turn, the Soviet Union, which made a decisive contribution to the victory over fascism, performed its historic internationalist duly to the world's nations and helped the peoples of a number of countries cast off the imperialist yoke once and for all, and start building a new and socialist society.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Internationalism TodayThe present stage of the world revolutionary movement has seen the widest spread of proletarian internationalism. With the victory of the socialist revolution in a number of countries and the emergence of a world socialist system, proletarian internationalism has risen to a new stage of development and become the foundation for inter-state relations among those countries. Thus, it has now become socialist internationalism, which is ideologically based on a common socio-economic and political system, and on the identical vital interests and goals of the peoples of socialist countries. For the first time in history, a new type of interstate relations has arisen, grounded in the principles of mutual aid and support, and of consistently implemented equality, sovereignty and non-interference in one another's internal affairs. New opportunities have appeared for the socialist nations to draw closer together in a way without parallel in history. Close co-operation among the socialist countries is a major factor in speeding up the socialist community's progress. In its turn, the strengthening and development of the world socialist system facilitate the revolutionary process and lead to fresh successes of the world revolutionary forces.
Implementation of the principles of socialist internationalism as the foundation of relations between the socialist countries has shown its immense effectiveness and its significance to the socialist community. This is seen from the considerable experience accumulated both in the sphere of economic co-operation and mutual aid among socialist 446 countries, and in the co-operation of their political and military activities.
It is a feature of the present-day world revolutionary movement that its scope has grown as a consequence of its involvement in the liberation struggle of ever more millions of working people in the capitalist countries, the newly independent Afro-Asian countries, and the close community of interests of all revolutionary and democratic forces. Whatever sector of liberation movement they belong to, these forces have common interests in the struggle for peace, democracy, national independence and socialism. This community of interests underlies the steady expansion of the sphere of operation of proletarian internationalism's principles. These are the principles that guide the socialist countries and the working class in their relations with other revolutionary forces.
Close co-operation among all forces in the revolutionary movement---especially between the world socialist system, the working-class movement in the capitalist countries, and the national-liberation movement---is of paramount importance to the world revolutionary movement. This cooperation has already yielded good results. The formation of the world socialist system has been an important premise for the achievement of political independence by peoples of many colonial countries. The socialist countries assist them at the new stage of their development---the struggle for economic independence and the solution of social problems, and the abolition of exploitative relations of any kind. There also is growing co-operation among other contingents of the liberation movement. The interests of the working class in the developed capitalist countries and of the working people in the developing countries, which often conflict with the domination of the selfsame monopolies, have drawn closer together. The intensified internationalisation of capital (the penetration of US capital into the industries of other capitalist countries; the creation of inter-state monopoly amalgamations, such as the EEC) has laid the foundation for closer co-operation and new forms of organisational unity of the industrial worker? and other working people in various countries.
447 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Internationalist ResponsibilityThe enhanced significance of unity of the revolutionary forces at the present stage of the liberation movement is also determined, apart from the factors mentioned above, by the mounting struggle between socialism and imperialism. Though imperialism has suffered immense and irreparable losses in recent decades, it still possesses a powerful economic and military potential and retains political and ideological influence over a large part of the population in the non-socialist world. The present situation in the capitalist world provides convincing confirmation of Lenin's idea that the bourgeoisie in all countries, despite the contradictions rending them apart, unite on a world-wide scale to preserve their class domination. The imperialists use international monopoly alliances as a tool to subvert the revolutionary movement. Headed by the US, the imperialist powers have set up a far-flung system of militarypolitical blocs and military bases directed, in the first place, against the socialist countries. The bellicose forces of imperialism do not confine themselves to preparations for aggression. From time to time, they resort to. arms (the US intervention in Vietnam, the Israeli aggression against Arab countries, and the like). The imperialists' subversive activities against the world liberation movement have become far more intensive, with the ideological offensive against the socialist countries and Communist Parties having been stepped up.
The imperialists' efforts to conduct a "global strategy" against the liberation movement so as to undermine and weaken the revolutionary forces must be countered by the working class and the Communist Parties through action to form a world front of the revolutionary struggle, and achieve cohesion and unity of all the liberation forces.
Upon the Communist Parties, which stand in the van of the world's revolutionary forces, has devolved the special responsibility of uniting those forces and giving effect to the ideas of proletarian internationalism.
Communists are the most consistent of internationalists. In the present conditions, the Communist Parties have 448 extensive opportunities for achieving the internationalist solidarity of the revolutionary forces. The attainment of this goal has been facilitated by the communist movement itself having grown in the scope, the quality and the sphere of its activities in the post-war period. Communists are establishing fraternal ties with other revolutionary and progressive forces and organisations, including the young revolutionary democratic parties that are heading the peoples' struggle against imperialism and for progressive social changes in their countries.
The aid and support given by the Marxist-Leninist parties to other revolutionary forces, as well as the constructive co-operation, mutual aid, the pooling of experience and the exchange of views between them, are enriching the theory and practice of the revolutionary struggle and reveal the extensive possibilities in the policy of internationalism.
The Communist Parties are making a contribution to the further development of the theoretical basis of proletarian internationalism. Proceeding from a profound analysis of the content of the policies and activities of the main contingents of the world revolutionary movement, the communist movement has produced a unity platform for all revolutionary forces in the common struggle. This platform was given the most concentrated expression in the following slogan from the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties: "Peoples of the socialist countries, workers, democratic forces in the capitalist countries, newly liberated peoples and those who are oppressed, unite in a common struggle against imperialism, for peace, national liberation, social progress, democracy and socialism!''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 2. THE CAUSES OF THE DIFFERENCESThe development of the world revolutionary movement has shown that all its major victories have been scored as a result of the alliance and mutual support of the main _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 39.
449 revolutionary forces, and the co-operation and unity of the national contingents of the working class, and all working people, on the basis of proletarian internationalism.The experience of history also shows that the working-class movement and the revolutionary and liberation forces have had to pay a heavy price, at one historical period or another, for a lack of unity in their movement, which has led to many setbacks and defeats, and slowed down the world revolutionary process.
Speaking at the Lenin Centenary meeting, Leonid Brezhnev recalled the well-known words of the leader of the October Revolution: "Communists,'' Lenin wrote, "are in duty bound, not to gloss over shortcomings in their movement, but to criticise them openly so as to remedy them the more speedily and radically.''^^*^^ "True to this behest of the leader,'' Leonid Brezhnev continued, "we have to say today that certain weaknesses and difficulties have manifested themselves in the communist movement over the past few years, disrupting its unity in a number of links and preventing Communists from making full use of the possibilities of the revolutionary struggle.''^^**^^
The complications in the world communist movement have stemmed from a number of reasons, both objective and subjective.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ New Problems of the DevelopmentThe pace of world history has greatly accelerated in the last few decades. The revolutionary changes in the world have provided the liberation forces with unprecedentedly favourable conditions in the struggle to transform the old world and build up a new society. At the same time, the new conditions have confronted these forces with new and complex problems both in the overall struggle against imperialism, and in the struggle waged by each contingent of the world liberation movement.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 185.
^^**^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course, p. 303.
__PRINTERS_P_449_COMMENT__ 29--0873 450A new historical phenomenon is the emergence of the world socialist system, in whose construction Communists without relevant experience have come up against a number of problems of the development and regulation of relations among the socialist countries. We are referring to the evolution of a qualitatively new kind of international relations--- those between fully equal, sovereign and independent states. The solution of the nationalities question in some of the socialist countries has proved more complex than Communists expected.
The development of state-monopoly capitalism and the scientific and technological revolution in the capitalist countries have called for a thorough study of the new processes and trends in capitalism's economies and policies. In the new historical conditions, the Communist Parties in the capitalist countries have been faced with the problem of how to prepare and carry out the socialist revolution, win over and organise the masses for the anti-imperialist struggle, lead them towards the struggle for socialism, and achieve a proper combination of the various forms of class struggle.
The upsurge of the national-liberation movement has led to the collapse of imperialism's colonial system and the emergence of new national states, whose further advance towards economic independence and social liberation has posed new questions of overcoming their backwardness, forming new coalitions of the progressive forces, and finding new forms of state systems. The world communist movement has also come up against new problems in the accomplishment of tasks in the struggle against imperialism and against opportunist aup revisionist trends, and for peace and the unity of the world revolutionary forces and Communist Parties.
It is only natural that Communists, as the vanguard of the revolutionary movement, have had to give full and convincing answers to the prodlems set by life, the new conditions, and the needs of the liberation struggle. Grappling with these problems is no easy matter. Lenin spoke repeatedly about the difficulties raised by the accelerating course of historical development.
451 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Uneven DevelopmentLike the world revolutionary process as a whole, the communist movement has been developing unevenly, especially of late years. Various contingents of the liberation movement stand at different stages of development; the conditions of their struggle are not the same, and they have to cope with specific, and concrete tasks.
The world revolutionary process has reached its highest development in the countries that are building socialism and communism, but whose conditions are far from alike. Each of them has travelled an historical road of its own, differs in the level of economic, social and political development, and retains specific features of national culture and psychology. The variety in the socialist countries' development levels and their specific conditions have created additional difficulties in the establishment of a new society within these countries and in effecting all-round co-operation among them.
Still greater diversity marks the conditions for the activities of the national contingents of the liberation movement, which are fighting capitalism and imperialism. The further course of the revolutionary process does not smooth over but, on the contrary, increases the variety of conditions and the features of each country's struggle to attain the common goals of liberation.
The Communist Parties of various countries also work in a wide variety of conditions. The activities of Parties which are in power and are guiding the construction of socialist societies have acquired a new qualitative contents. Countries headed by these Parties bear the brunt of the struggle against imperialism and carry the main responsibility to the peoples and the liberation movement, responsibility for the destinies of peace and the world revolution. At the same time, each ruling Party comes up against specific problems of development in its own country.
The Communist Parties in the non-socialist countries have to carry on the struggle in the most diverse conditions. Their experience of the struggle varies, as do their numerical __PRINTERS_P_451_COMMENT__ 29* 452 strength, their influence on the masses, and the methods and forms of their work.
The variety in the conditions Communist Parties have to work in often leads to their employing different approaches to problems of the communist movement, which makes it more difficult for them to give a common appraisal of concrete political situations and evolve a common ideological platform for the movement as a whole.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ More Sections of the PeopleWith the expansion of the world revolutionary process, more and more people are becoming involved in it, the movement also being joined by people that are immature and unstable, and lack political and ideological training, many of them being full of petty-bourgeois prejudice and superstition. These become a source of anti-Marxist, non-- proletarian sentiments and vacillations, bring disorder into the movement, and hinder the revolutionary struggle.
Communists take into account the complex composition and nature of the social environment the liberation fighters come from in a class society. Such people, especially those from non-proletarian strata of the population, naturally bear in their consciousness and psychology traces of the ideology and psychology predominant in their society, with its bourgeois and petty-bourgeois elements and prejudices.
Nationalist prejudices are most tenacious. Born of concrete historical conditions of oppression and exploitation of certain nations and peoples by others, nationalist prejudices, distrust and alienation among peoples have become deeply embedded in the minds of a certain part of society. They reveal themselves most often in the petty bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia, but also among backward workers, who have not been through the school of internationalist education. Such survivals live on for some time even after the victory of the socialist revolution, since it is impossible overnight to remove economic and cultural inequality or to eradicate traces of abnormal relations among nations as inherited from capitalism. In certain conditions, 453 nationalist survivals may even flare up unless they are dealt with. Noting these phenomena, Lenin warned of the vitality and stability of "petty-bourgeois prejudices, i.e., national egoism and national narrow-mindedness"^^*^^ in countries with a low level of the development of productive forces, which were for a long time subjected to oppression by foreign powers.
Differences in the communist movement and disunity trends in Communist Parties are in some cases due to the social composition of the Parties themselves. When their membership kept growing after World War II, the new recruits included non-proletarian elements that were ideologically immature and lacked internationalist training and experience of the class struggle. This would occur more often in economically backward countries with an undeveloped or poorly developed working class, and with predominantly non-proletarian strata. Immature, inexperienced and unstable, such elements could become a source of vacillations and extremes in the communist movement. Furthermore, they have proved more vulnerable to the influence of bourgeois ideology (anti-communism, nationalism, Zionism, and the like), revisionism and reformism, on the one hand, and to the impact of all sorts of petty-bourgeois trends and sentiments, on the other. This has provided grounds for deviations from Marxism-Leninism, both to the Right and to the ``Left'', and for nationalism.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Imperialist Ideological OffensiveConfronted by the revolutionary changes in the world, the imperialist bourgeoisie have not only refused to lay down their arms, but have greatly stepped Up their efforts to hamstring the revolutionary forces, above all the entire communist movement. To that end, they resort widely to powerful economic and political means. The bourgeoisie are especially active in the ideological offensive against the communist movement and the liberation forces.
_-_-_^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 185.
454Anti-communism, which has always been the basis of bourgeois ideology in its struggle against the revolutionary movement, has now adopted new and more sophisticated forms. Imperialist propaganda skilfully varnishes the truth about the capitalist world of today. To mislead the working class and all working people, it is out to prove that the scientific and technological revolution is leading to the emergence of a "mass consumer society" and to the disappearance of class antagonisms in capitalist society. To discredit socialism, the bourgeois ideologists advocate the idea of a kind of classless and humane socialism as distinct from the allegedly ``inhumane'' society in the socialist countries. The theory of the ``convergence'' of capitalism and socialism and similar ideas are also being disseminated.
The bourgeois ideologists' main purpose is to weaken the influence of Marxist-Leninist ideas and hamper their further spread in the world. Thrown back in their frontal attacks on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism, the ideological defenders of capitalism are seeking to outflank it by encouraging all kinds of ideological trends, organisations and groups who come out for the ``renovation'' and ``perfection'' of Marxism-Leninism, which means, in fact, the voiding of its essence and a departure from its fundamental principles.
The bourgeoisie are trying to corrupt the communist and all revolutionary movements from within. The imperialists bank on differences therein and on nationalism; they count on achieving disunity in the communist movement, to set revolutionary contingents against one another, and hamper the unity of working people in the various countries.
Bourgeois propaganda is trying in every way to discredit proletarian internationalism, and to distort the very notion. As stated in the joint statements of the delegations of the CPSU and the French Communist Party, "Imperialist propaganda and also the Right- and `Left'-wing revisionists and opportunists try to contrapose proletarian internationalism to the independence, sovereignty and equality of the Communist Parties. With this aim in view, they have created a myth about the so-called theory of limited sovereignty and the demagogic fable about the two `superpowers' which, 455 allegedly, decide the fate of the world behind the backs of the nations.''^^*^^
The imperialist bourgeoisie are intentionally whipping up the already tenacious nationalist prejudices and feelings of distrust between nations.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The SignificanceTo overcome the present complications in the communist movement, it is important to correctly ascertain their objective causes, which stem from the complex nature of revolutionary processes and the difficulties of the struggle against imperialism. In noting these causes, one should stress that they stem, in the main, from the subjective factor.
Lenin constantly stressed the importance of the conscious and purposeful activities of the working class and the masses it leads, headed by a revolutionary party. At the present stage of the revolutionary struggle, the significance of the subjective factor, above all the guiding role of the Communist Parties, has grown immensely.
No objective reasons can of themselves damage the unity of the communist movement if the Communist Parties pursue a correct policy. Whatever the differences among them, Communists are united by the joint main goals of the revolutionary struggle, and by a common Marxist-Leninist theory. Therefore no allusions to objective causes can either explain or, the more so, justify any Party's departure from the general movement, from the principles of MarxismLeninism and proletarian internationalism.
The Communist Parties, especially those that are in power, have tremendous opportunities to inculcate a MarxistLeninist education in its members and all working people, and to neutralise non-proletarian and nationalistic trends. However, the success of such activities depends, above all, on the ideological and political maturity of the Communist Parties and their leaders, on their appreciation of the need to place the common interests of the world communist _-_-_
^^*^^ Pravda, July 6, 1971.
456 movement above the local and narrow national ones, and on their concern for the common cause.In revealing the roots of the events of recent years within the Communist Party of China, due account should be taken of the objective factors of its development, such as the historically conditioned social and economic backwardness of Chinese society, which only recently did away with feudalism; the low level of the productive forces; the small proportion of the working class; the predominantly peasant make-up of the population; the absence of stable democratic tradition; the deep-rooted nationalism fostered by the country's past, and the lengthy isolation of the present CPC leaders from the rest of the world.
These objective circumstances have created conditions for distortions in the construction of socialism in China, and for the growth of nationalistic trends in the country. However, they did not make inevitable the transition of the CPC leaders to anti-Leninist and nationalist positions. The Communist Party of China, which headed the national-- liberation revolution in the country, had every opportunity, after it came to power, to educate the industrial workers and all working people in the spirit of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism. The CPC leadership could draw from the experience of the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, which had helped bring about the victory of the revolution in China, and had given it every kind of fraternal aid in building socialism, thus enhancing the influence of internationalist ideas on China. Instead of making use of these favourable circumstances and blocking the spread of nationalism among the petty-bourgeois elements and backward sections of the workers, the Chinese leaders themselves succumbed to nationalism. Instead of trying to remedy this malady, they began with nationalistic errors, after which they fell into open nationalism and chauvinism.
Conditions of a subjective nature have ultimately proved decisive in other cases of Communist Parties deviating from the Leninist internationalist principles. Indeed, though, in a number of cases, Communist Parties have to work in objective conditions that are approximately the same, the stands some of them take on key issues of the communist 457 movement and proletarian internationalism differ substantially.
All this calls for a high sense of responsibility in Communist Parties and their leaders for the policies they pursue and for the unity of all revolutionary and democratic forces.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Nationalism WithinNationalism within its own ranks presents a great danger to the communist movement. Thus, nationalism and chauvinism have affected the leadership of the Communist Party of China, who have isolated their country from the rest of the socialist system, and the Communist Party of China from the world communist movement. Nationalist phenomena and trends have also appeared in some other sections of the communist and liberation movement.
In its essence, nationalism within the communist movement consists in a departure from the class positions in appraising social phenomena of the times, and in political action stemming from such appraisals; it also means a refusal to co-operate and act in unity with all contingents of the revolutionary movement, above all with the socialist countries. Nationalism manifests itself wherever there is a departure from proletarian internationalism as one of the main features of the class struggle and the socialist revolution. Nationalism is closely linked with opportunism and revisionism. Nationalism, as was stated by Meir Vilner, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Israel's Central Committee, in his speech at the 1969 International Meeting, is "manifested in a narrow and inept approach to the problem of national interest, with what are thought to be national interests given precedence over the interests of the communist, anti-imperialist movement. It is doubly dangerous when this tendency surfaces among Communists in a socialist country.
``Experience shows that nationalism may assume the form of either the Right or `Left' revisionism. Both varieties inevitably merge when directed against the general line of the communist movement, against Communist Parties 458 following that line and, particularly, against the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.''^^*^^
In the Communist Parties of the socialist countries, nationalism is expressed in a distortion of, or an erroneous and one-sided emphasis on, the narrowly understood interests of one's own country, in contrast with those of the socialist community or the entire communist and revolutionary movement, or else in an imposition of one's views and decisions on other Parties.
In the Communist Parties of the non-socialist countries, nationalism manifests itself in a contrasting of national tasks with the international, in an evasion of internationalist duties, in separatism, and in a rejection of united action and political co-operation with other fraternal parties. In both cases, nationalism often takes the form of anti-- Sovietism.
In some Communist Parties, a striving to cope with the difficulties facing them, build up their influence on the masses, and win more supporters over to their side leads to an ostentatious demonstration of ``independence'' and to a departure from the common struggle.
``Attempts to `strengthen' the Party's positions by weakening, or even breaking off, its internationalist ties, by rejecting united action with other contingents of the communist movement, lead to a loss of ideological independence of the bourgeoisie and inevitably injure the political prestige of the Party concerned,''^^**^^ Leonid Brezhnev has pointed out.
Nationalism in the communist movement invariably leads to disunity of the Communist Parties, the socialist countries, and of all the revolutionary anti-imperialist forces. Disunity of the revolutionary forces gravely weakens the liberation movement, slows down the peoples' advance towards socialism and communism, and benefits nobody but the enemy. The greatest harm has been done to the world's liberation forces by the nationalist policy of the Chinese leadership, which has created serious difficulties in the socialist system _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 523.
^^**^^ Ibid., p. 161,
459 and within the communist ranks. All this has encouraged the reactionaries, the imperialists to show greater activity in their intrigues, and to undertake action against the liberation movement. __ALPHA_LVL2__ § 3. THE ROADS OF THE STRUGGLE FOR THE UNITYAt the present stage, the conditions of the struggle demand unity of all the forces of democracy and socialism. The Communist Parties are also facing the urgent task of eradicating the differences within the communist movement itself, and of closing its ranks. The differences vary in character: some of them are on particular questions of minor importance, which can be solved through a comradely exchange of opinion, or disappear as the course of events brings clarity into the essence of issues; others are more deep-lying and substantial, affect vital problems of the communist movement, and call for much time and an uncompromising struggle.
The basic line in removing differences, one that was outlined at the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, is as follows: "The outstanding issues can and must be resolved correctly by strengthening all forms of co-operation among the Communist Parties, by extending inter-Party ties, mutual exchange of experience, comradely discussion and consultation and unity of action in the international arena.''^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Cohesion of the Communist MovementDifferences on various issues cannot affect joint action by Communists in their common struggle against imperialism. On the contrary, it is the joint struggle against imperialism that should resolve differences.
_-_-_^^*^^ Ibid., p. 38.
460Firm unity of the world communist movement rests on effective internationalism; this presupposes, not only the proclamation of the principles of proletarian internationalism but their unswerving implementation.
As Lenin wrote in the spring of 1917, "Only lazy people do not swear by internationalism these days. Even ... Kerensky" calls himself "an internationalist. It becomes the duty of the proletarian party all the more urgently, therefore, to clearly, precisely and definitely counterpose internationalism in deed to internationalism in word.''^^*^^
A stand in which a declaration of loyalty to internationalism and unity does not go hand in hand with joint action on the burning issues of the international communist movement cannot be called consistent. The weakness and inconsistency of such ``internationalism'' are glaringly revealed at moments when the struggle against the enemies of democracy and socialism flares up.
The efficacy of proletarian internationalism manifests itself, first and foremost, in a defence of the cause of socialism. "Proletarian internationalism,'' said a delegate of the Syrian Communist Party to the 1969 Meeting, "signifies that support and defence of the socialist gains in any place, in any country, is a duty of all the socialist countries and of the entire international communist movement.''^^**^^ What is meant here is purposeful action to rally and strengthen the world system of socialism, which is the mainstay of the world socialist revolution; on its consolidation hinge the further successes of the entire world liberation movement.
Proceeding from the principles of consistent internationalism, the socialist countries and the other national contingents of the working class do and must give ever more aid and support to the people's liberation struggle, wherever it is waged. This help includes moral, material and political backing, a movement of solidarity with a struggling people, a campaign to unmask the imperialists and reactionaries, and other concrete forms of struggle. Thanks to help and _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 24, p. 74.
^^**^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 570.
461 support from the socialist community and the working people and Communist Parties in many other countries, the Vietnamese people was victorious in the struggle against armed intervention by US imperialism. With help from the socialist countries and other progressive forces, the peoples of a number of Arab countries are defending their independence and social and political gains against acts of aggression committed by Israel and supported by imperialism.Unity of all anti-imperialist forces and the formation of a broad anti-imperialist front are needed for an organised rebuff to the aggressive and reactionary intrigues of imperialism, and for an offensive against it.
This problem was focal at the 1969 Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, which called for united action by all Communists throughout the world, by all enemies of imperialism, and all those who are ready to fight for peace, liberty and progress. The Meeting advanced a concrete programme of struggle, which can serve as a basis for unity of action by all Communists and anti-imperialist forces. The Meeting laid special stress on the need for "greater militant solidarity of the peoples of the socialist countries, of all contingents of the international working-class movement and national liberation in the struggle against imperialism."^^*^^
__ALPHA_LVL3__ The Extension of Links BetweenAn indisputable condition for consolidation of the communist movement is an all-round extension of links and contacts among the fraternal parties. This is necessary for coordinated action on the international arena and also for a comparison of their positions, and for differences on various issues to be resolved.
Marxism-Leninism regards the organisational forms of the communist movement, including relations among Communist Parties, as deriving from the level of the movement's development, its maturity, and from the essence and nature of _-_-_
^^*^^ Ibid., p. 36.
462 problems it has to solve. These forms are improved as the movement itself develops. However, improved forms of the relation among Communist Parties must not be detrimental to proletarian internationalism.The Marxist-Leninist parties are contingents of one movement united by common interests and aims of the struggle. At the same time, each of them is a national contingent operating in its own country. This position of the Communist Parties also determines the norms of relations among them. As was stressed in the Document summing up the 1969 International Meeting, "Relations between the fraternal Parties are based on the principles of proletarian internationalism, solidarity, and mutual support, respect for independence and equality, and non-interference in each other's internal affairs.''^^*^^
Guided by the principles of Marxism-Leninism and proceeding from the concrete national conditions, each Party outlines its policies and independently selects the lines, forms and methods of work. The independence of the Parties in the communist movement has greatly developed at present. The Communist Parties themselves determine the most efficacious methods of struggle in their own sectors of activities, and have accumulated immense political and organisational experience. All this testifies to the strength and maturity of the communist movement.
However, such interpretations of independence as evasion of common international tasks, and ``neutralism'' in dealing with common affairs cannot be considered correct. Such ``independence'' is fraught with the danger of a link-up with nationalism.
Marxism-Leninism closely associates the independence of Communist Parties with the unity of the world communist movement. The Marxist-Leninist parties' growing independence presupposes their ever greater responsibility for the common cause of all Communists, the cause of revolution, socialism and world peace. It is for this reason that the final Document of the 1969 Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties spoke so insistently of the heightened significance of _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, pp. 35--36.
463 a voluntary co-ordination of action by the Communist Parties, their united action in resolving the urgent practical problems confronting the revolutionary and general democratic movement of today, and their concerted action on the international arena, particularly on the fundamental problems of the anti-imperialist struggle.The growth of the international communist movement is accompanied by the development of the forms of relations between the Parties. A centralised leadership of the communist movement would not, at the present stage, be in keeping with the level and character of the movement.
The Meetings of representatives of the Communist and Workers' Parties held in 1957, 1960 and 1969 defined new forms of internationalist links between the Marxist-Leninist parties, corresponding to the new stage of development. They include bilateral consultations, regional meetings, conferences and international congresses. These forms are widely practised in the communist movement so as to develop a common ideological platform, pool experience, and co ordinate political action of common significance to all. However, these forms do not exhaust the entire range of links between Communist Parties. Practical experience suggests many new forms.
International Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties are of particular importance in the present conditions. As shown by the experience of the 1957, 1960 and 1969 Meetings in Moscow, they are an efficacious form of exchanges of opinions and pooling experience; they enrich MarxismLeninism through common efforts, collective discussion and the hammering out of current political and theoretical questions, and the evolution of a common stand in the struggle for common goals and against imperialism. As stressed at the Twenty-Fourth Congress, the CPSU "is in complete agreement with the conclusion drawn by the participants in the Meeting about the advisability of holding such international forums of fraternal Parties as the need arises''. "It would be useful for them,'' said Leonid Brezhnev, "to become an established practice of the world communist movement.''^^*^^ Communist Parties' participation in _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, pp. 26--27.
464 international meetings and other forms of joint work is a major indicator of Communists' internationalism.In its practice, the communist movement has evolved methods and means of co-ordinating different views and resolving issues. Issues between Communist Parties can and must be resolved in a way that will not be detrimental to independence and equality of Communist Parties or their joint work. This can be done, for instance, through comradely advice to a Communist Party from one or several Parties, or through bilateral or group consultative sessions. Polemics in the press are also quite permissible if, of course, conducted in a calm and business-like tone, are closely reasoned and without any distortion of the opponent's position or labelstriking and giving offence.
International proletarian discipline is based on each Communist Party realising the historic role of the communist movement, and on a consequent sense of responsibility for the future of the world revolutionary movement. This discipline is not formulated in any international regulations, but stems from the very nature of the communist movement, which is profoundly internationalist. This approach means, in particular, that unity of the Communist Parties is based on their consistent performance of voluntarily assumed obligations to the world communist and working-class movement. As the concluding Document of the 1969 Meeting says, "Each Communist Party is responsible for its activity to its own working class and people and, at the same time, to the international working class.''^^*^^
Communists' profound realisation of the importance to each Party and to the movement as a whole of unity in the communist movement, and Communists' conscientious and honest attitude to the performance of internationalist obligations by the Communist Parties are an earnest of further consolidation in the communist movement, and its achieving a still higher level.
_-_-_^^*^^ International Meeting of Commu nisi and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 37.
465 __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Ideological UnityThe best way to eliminate differences and achieve unity of the communist movement is to sum up the theoretical work done by the Communist Parties and, on that basis, to develop Marxist-Leninist theory and defend its principles and essential ideas, since Communists' ideological unity on the basis of Marxism-Leninism is the foundation of their international cohesion. "Communists throughout the world,'' says the 1960 Statement of the Communist and Workers' Parties Meeting, "are united by the great doctrine of Marxism-Leninism and by a joint struggle for its realisation.''^^*^^
Communists' ideological unity was concretely expressed in the ideological and political platform of the present-day communist movement drawn up jointly at the 1957, 1960 and 1969 Meetings in Moscow. This platform is based on the Communist Parties' common assessment of the main phenomena and developments of the times, and contains their joint conclusions on the struggle against imperialism, and for peace, democracy, national independence and socialism.
The ideological unity of the communist movement does not preclude but, on the contrary, presupposes the existence of different views and opinions in the approach to concrete problems. However, differences in the views of Communist Parties do not at all mean inevitable divergences among them on matters of theory, and cannot serve as justification of such divergences, especially when ideas and attitudes that run counter to the essence of Marxism-Leninism and signify a departure from the main patterns of the socialist revolution and socialist construction are presented as a creative development of Marxism-Leninism.
Neither can a situation be considered normal, in which the leaders of a particular Communist Party assume the right of exclusive interpretation of Marxism-Leninism, and impose their interpretation of that theory on other Parties. This is what is being done by the present CPC leaders, who are trying to impose their cliches and dogmas on the fraternal parties, under the guise of "revolutionary _-_-_
^^*^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, p. 79. 1/2 30--0873
466 Marxism-Leninism''. Things have gone so far that the Peking leaders' views have been proclaimed the "acme of Marxism-Leninism''. In actual fact, the Chinese leaders are contrasting to Marxism-Leninism their own particular ideology, which is the foundation for the great-power nationalistic policy pursued by the CPC leadership, and has nothing in common with Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism.To achieve the ideological unity of the Communist Parties, it is imperative for further profound research to be continued into the processes and policies of modern capitalism and the main problems of the world revolutionary movement, and to develop creatively and scientifically the strategy and tactics of the communist movement on the basis of Marxism-Leninism and in line with the new world situation and the concrete conditions in different countries. The communist movement today has the greatest ever opportunities to cope with these problems. It has accumulated a wealth of experience incorporated in the development of Marxist-Leninist theory by the fraternal parties; it has highly skilled cadres and numerous research institutions in the socialist and also in some of the capitalist countries, and also brings out theoretical periodicals. Communists have ample opportunities to work collectively on questions of the theory of the communist movement, exchange opinions, and co-ordinate their views through theoretical conferences, seminars, discussions, and personal contacts. The proposal to hold regular theoretical conferences and seminars of Communist Parties, which was put forward by the CPSU delegation, was approved by the 1969 Meeting. It is also obvious that the vital and basic questions of the communist movement should be dealt with collectively by Communist Parties at their joint meetings. As was noted at the 1969 Meeting, a collective analysis of concrete reality helps consolidate the unity of the world communisc movement.
In view of the complexity of the ideological problems confronting it, and, in the first place, to solve the key problem of a rebuff to imperialism, the communist movement has in recent years laid stress on political unity, on joint action by the Communist Parties in the struggle against imperialism. These efforts have yielded significant result, as is common knowledge.
467At the same time, the struggle has intensified for Communists' ideological unity and for their ideological and theoretical differences to be resolved. Joint action by the Communist Parties has provided ever more favourable conditions for their ideological cohesion. Yet experience has shown that a successful struggle against imperialism and for peace, democracy and socialism cannot be waged without a firm repulse to bourgeois and opportunist ideology, or without the further creative development of Marxist theory. The ideological front has become ever more important and decisive for the revolutionary battles.
In view of all this, the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress declared in its decisions that, at the present stage of the communist movement, work on Marxist-Leninist ideological unity should be intensified, while the struggle for ever greater political cohesion should be continued. This point of view has been supported by the Marxist-Leninist parties of many countries. The significance of work for Communists' ideological unity was emphasised at the congresses of a number of Parties held in 1971. The July 1971 joint statement of the CPSU and the French Communist Party said that the two Parties would work tirelessly to consolidate the political and ideological unity of the world's Communist Parties.
__ALPHA_LVL3__ Combining NationalA correct blending of national and internationalist interests in the revolutionary movement is an important precondition for the internationalist cohesion of the working class and the revolutionary forces. Marxists-Leninists regard the movement's national and internationalist interests as closely interlinked and mutually complementary. "In the workingclass movement,'' Frederick Engels pointed out, "genuinely national ideals... at the same time are also genuinely internationalist ideals.''^^*^^
The Communist Parties organise the struggle of the working class and the working masses within the country in question. In this, they act as the most consistent _-_-_
^^*^^ Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Werke.
__PRINTERS_P_467_COMMENT__ 30* 468 representatives of the national interests: they head a class which in its very nature and its position in social production, is the most progressive, and expresses and defends the interests of the majority of the nation. While preserving its proletarian class nature, the party of the working class is a most consistent and truly national force.National nihilism has always been alien to Communists, who have set examples of devoted patriotism, particularly in their countries' times of trial. Communists honour their people's national traditions and carefully preserve the heritage of the past, which is capable of serving the cause of progress and consolidation of the progressive forces, and put that heritage in the service of the revolutionary transformation of society. The Communist Parties give special attention to various problems whose solution contributes to a country's progress, prestige and grandeur.
Communists uphold the interests of the bulk of the nation, demanding higher living standards for the working people, broader democratic rights and freedoms, the independence of their country, and better public education, health services and social security. Their consistent struggle for peace, democracy and socialism, i.e., the working people's supreme goals, manifests the truly national character of the Communist Parties. These are aims that are common to the entire revolutionary movement.
Communists believe that each national contingent of the revolutionary movement performs its internationalist duty primarily by doing all it can to overthrow the rule of capital at home, establish the power of the working people, and build up a new society, thereby advancing the common cause of revolution and socialism all over the world.
But Communists always remember that their national activities are only a component of the world-wide struggle between socialism and imperialism, and that their successes at home greatly depend on the outcome of the world-wide struggle between progress and reaction, as well as on the successes of other revolutionary forces. That is why they consider it their duty---which is also an immediate inner need---to promote in every possible way the growth, cohesion and consolidation of the forces of revolution and socialism throughout the world, to be active in joint action by the 469 revolutionaries of all lands, and to help co-ordinate their general offensive against imperialism.
The national and the internationalist responsibilities of each Party are inseparable. Marxists-Leninists are patriots and internationalists at one and the same time, and reject both national narrow-mindedness, and rejection or underestimation of the national interests. Revealing the interaction of the national and the internationalist, V. I. Lenin wrote: "There is one, and only one, kind of real internationalism, and that is---working whole-heartedly for the development of the revolutionary movement and the revolutionary struggle in one's own country, and supporting (by propaganda, sympathy, and material aid) this struggle, this, and only this, line, in every country without exception.''^^*^^
If a Communist Party confines itself to national tasks or contrasts them with internationalist tasks, it harms the common cause and inevitably weakens its own positions. Such a Party constricts the scope and content of its work and breaks away from the world revolutionary and communist movement, that mighty source of strength and influence.
To find a correct blend of the national and the internationalist in their activities, the Communist Parties must, among other things, apply the general principles of the strategy and tactics of the revolutionary struggle, with due regard for the nationally specific conditions, in keeping with the concrete features of the country in question. Such co-- ordination of the general and the specific enables the Communist Parties to more effectively combat the extremes of national nihilism, on the one hand, and national narrow-mindedness and particularism, on the other. The same aim is served by the study and application of the experience of other Communist Parties and the entire revolutionary movement.
A study of the internationalist experience of the communist movement and its comparison with their own national experience help the Communist Parties determine the measure in which the national features should be taken into account, so that the latter should be correctly related to the general patterns of the movement. To underrate or neglect the experience of the world liberation and communist _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 24, p. 75.
470 movement means weakening a particular contingent's ties with the world communist movement, and divorcing it from that movement. Any underestimation or ignorance of internationalist experience sometimes leads to another consequence: an overestimation of its own experience, conceit, arrogance, and attempts to impose its experience on others. The study and creative assimilation of the experience accumulated by the world liberation and communist movement is of particular importance to Communist Parties that are effecting guidance of the construction of socialism. __ALPHA_LVL3__ The Need to Combat NationalismAchievement of the unity and cohesion of the socialist countries, the Communist Parties and all revolutionary forces, on the basis of proletarian internationalism, presupposes a determined struggle against the various brands of nationalism.
``The class-conscious workers,'' V. I. Lenin wrote, "combat all national oppression and all national privileges, but they do not confine themselves to that. They combat all, even the most refined, nationalism, and advocate not only the unity, but also the amalgamation of the workers of all nationalities in the struggle against bourgeois nationalism in all its forms.''^^*^^
As practice has shown, the principal method of combating nationalism is the unswervingly internationalist education of the working masses. This means, above all, instilling in people a correct and profound understanding of the internationalist nature of the world revolutionary movement, and of the unbreakable community of the interests of the working class and all working people in all countries, in the struggle for their immediate and basic interests and against the common enemy. Internationalist education must foster in working people a realisation of the deep-lying connection between the national and internationalist tasks of their struggle.
Instilling internationalist consciousness in the working people also means overcoming their nationalist prejudices _-_-_
^^*^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 19, p. 548.
471 and national distrust. This is unquestionably a lengthy process, which calls for great efforts, steadfastness and tact on the part of Communists in their approach to others. "...We must be very cautious and patient, and make concessions to the survivals of national distrust,'' wrote V. I. Lenin, for the latter "is often extremely tenacious, and haste might only intensify it, in other words, jeopardise the cause of complete and ultimate unity.''^^*^^ __ALPHA_LVL3__ Irreconcilability Towards Anti-SovietismAnti-Sovietism is one of the principal forms of nationalism today. As Leonid Brezhnev said in the Central Committee's Report to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, "It is precisely the nationalistic tendencies, especially those which assume the form of anti-Sovietism, that bourgeois ideologists and bourgeois propaganda have placed most reliance on in their fight against socialism and the communist movement.''^^**^^
Anti-Sovietism is focal in bourgeois ideology and in the policy of anti-communism. That is natural, since, in the struggle against democracy and socialism, imperialism launches its main attack against the Soviet Union, that bulwark of the world revolutionary movement and the leading anti-imperialist force. The ideologists and policymakers of imperialism attempt to belittle the Soviet achievements and give a distorted and negative appraisal of the Soviet system and the home and foreign policies of the CPSU and the Soviet Government, this with the aim of weakening the Soviet positions in the world and hampering the construction of communism. The imperialists pin special hopes on undermining Soviet influence on the revolutionary forces and creating in them mistrust of the first socialist country. Thus, the strategic aim of the anti-communist ideologists is to create disarray among the revolutionary forces and weaken them by spreading anti-Soviet ideas and inciting anti-Soviet feeling.
_-_-_^^*^^ Ibid., Vol. 30, pp. 293, 294.
^^**^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p.
27.
472Those who take up anti-Soviet positions within the revolutionary and communist movement fully live up to imperialists' expectations. The anti-Sovietism of Fischer, Garandy, Petkoff and the like has been more than a departure from proletarian internationalism; it has gone hand in hand with anti-Party activities within their countries and led them to betray the cause of the working class. All Communists and revolutionaries must learn a serious lesson from the 1968 events in Czechoslovakia. Taking advantage of the inaction and connivance of a group of the then opportunist leaders of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, the Right, which took a manifestly anti-Soviet stand, corrupted the Communist Party and jeopardised the socialist system in Czechoslovakia and the interests of the socialist community. In its analysis of those events in the document "The Lessons of Crisis Development" (December 1970), the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia drew the following conclusion: "An all-round examination of facts about the situation in our Party and throughout the country before August 1968 and in a later period confirms that any other decision which did not provide for immediate outside help from the USSR and our other allies, in conditions when Party activity was paralysed and the state set up in Czechoslovakia was on the verge of disintegration, stood no chance of success, for it would not have saved socialism in the CSSR.''^^*^^ Led by the USSR, the socialist countries came to the assistance of the fraternal Czechoslovak people, defended socialism, and foiled its enemies' schemes. This was a practical manifestation of socialist internationalism at a moment of a grave trial for the socialist countries and all Communists.
Communists also face another problem: they are well aware that the anti-Soviet line of the present Communist leaders of China is aimed at engineering a split among the socialist countries and the world liberation forces. In the extent of their fabrications and slander against the Soviet Union, the Chinese official press vies with the most rabid anti-communist publications in the bourgeois press. The _-_-_
^^*^^ The Lessons of Crisis Development in the Czechoslovak Communist Party and Society after the CPC's 13th Congress, p. 45 (in Russian).
473 Chinese leaders are hand in hand with the imperialists in their anti-Soviet policies. Engaging in political flirtation with the Peking leadership, the US is encouraging their present line. The anti-Soviet stand taken by the Chinese leaders fills the imperialists with ambitious hopes for the future. China's present hostility to the Soviet Union, US columnist Harrison E. Salisbury writes, opens up broad prospects for the US-led reshaping of the world to the liking of the American ruling circles. The possibility of a rapprochement between the USSR and the People's Republic of China chills the spines of the imperialist ideologists. An about-turn in China's policy, Salisbury goes on, could restore the Chinese-Soviet alliance as a major factor in the alignment of world forces and usher in a new age of co-operation between Russia and China, directed against the rest of the world, particularly against the US, which in that case would face the most serious foreign policy crisis in this century.^^*^^Immediately after the victorious socialist revolution in Russia, which led to the formation of the workers' and peasants' state, V. I. Lenin called upon the Communists of all lands to give resolute support to the world's first Soviet state. The solidarity with Soviet Russia shown by the working people and the Communists of other countries was a crucial test of proletarian internationalism, and was repeatedly demonstrated in practice.
There are such who think that, with the increasing might of the USSR and the formation of the world socialist system, the Soviet Union today no longer needs support from the working people and the revolutionary forces in the capitalist countries, as was the case before World War II, and that the slogan of such support can be dropped. True, the Soviet Union and the socialist system today hold fairly strong positions, yet solidarity with the Soviet Union and the socialist system is in accord with the interests of the overall struggle against imperialism and is consolidating all the revolutionary forces. That solidarity is part of the working peoples' internationalist education, for it fosters a _-_-_
^^*^^ See Harrison E. Salisbury, War Between Russia and China, New York, 1969, pp. 211 and 195.
__PRINTERS_P_473_COMMENT__ 31--0873 474 class consciousness in them and a readiness to struggle for socialism.As internationalists, Communists unmask the reactionary nature of anti-Sovietism and, with good reason, point out that anti-Sovietism in any form is spearheaded against the entire communist movement and the liberation struggle.
The call for solidarity with the Soviet Union and the socialist world does not imply that Communists should refrain from criticising them. Friendly advice, exchanges of opinions and comradely discussion of problems, all this in the interests of fraternal co-operation, should be accepted practice in relations between the Communist Parties.
In the past, Communists in other countries sometimes revealed a one-sided attitude to the socialist world and in assessing its achievements. They did not see socialism as it was in reality, and failed to take into account all the difficulties involved in the construction of a new society. This led to an idealisation of socialist reality and to the appearance of oversimplified notions about socialism.
Of late years, some Communists' stand has shown another extreme: carping criticism of the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, and a one-sided critical reaction to their actions and to certain phenomena and developments in their lives. "It has become fashionable in some quarters to criticise the Soviet Union in the illusory hope that it will make a Party `respectable', forgetting that history redounds with facts showing that anti-Sovietism has always been the common factor drawing together all enemies of peace and socialism,''^^*^^ William W. Kashtan, Secretary General of the Communist Party of Canada, said at the 1969 Meeting.
It is a feature of the world socialist revolution that it originated and won its first victories in the less developed, rather than more developed, capitalist countries. As the initiator in the construction of a new society, the Soviet Union has borne a special responsibility to the world revolutionary movement, and has placed it in the difficult position of a pioneer who had to act in adverse historical conditions and deal with many entirely new problems, _-_-_
^^*^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow 1969, p. 354.
475 thereby clearing the way for other contingents of the revolutionary movement. The Soviet Union was also destined to become the leading anti-imperialist force which shouldered the main burden of the struggle against imperialism.Proletarian internationalism does not rest only on the successes of the revolutionary struggle, but is tested when a Communist Party comes up against complex problems. The internationalism of Communists and the working class is based upon their deep insight into the complex nature of the world revolutionary movement, a correct understanding by each national contingent of the revolutionary movement of its internationalist duty and tasks, and its ability to correctly interpret and assess the contribution made by other contingents of the movement to the common struggle. In some cases, a consistent defence of internationalist class positions in the world may create problems for a party within its own country (for example, in relations with its non-- proletarian allies.) But such difficulties can be overcome, whereas a departure from internationalist positions and attempts to sacrifice the general interests of the movement for the sake of immediate national gains usually cause grave detriment to those who embark on this road; it is no easy matter to repair such damage.
The entire experience of the revolutionary movement shows that the struggle for socialism and communism is incompatible with anti-Sovietism. "There never was and will never be anti-Soviet communism,''^^*^^ said Janos Kadar, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party. The struggle against anti-communism and anti-Sovietism is of principled significance to the communist movement.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ § 4. THE CPSU'S CONSISTENT INTERNATIONALISM.The CPSU's unswerving internationalist policy has been a major factor in consolidating the communist movementv and the revolutionary and democratic forces.
_-_-_^^*^^ Janos Kadar, Selected Articles and Speeches, Moscow, Politizdat, 1970, p. 123.
__PRINTERS_P_475_COMMENT__ 31* 476Since its inception, the Bolshevik Party has based its activities on the principles of an alliance and unity between the working class and all exploited masses in the revolutionary struggle, irrespective of nationality. The alliance and co-operation of the working class and all working people in multi-national Russia, as achieved by the Bolsheviks, was one of the preconditions for the victorious socialist revolution in October 1917.
Guided by the ideas of proletarian internationalism, the CPSU headed the construction of a multi-national state of a new type, based on the principles of the equality and sovereignty of peoples, their right to self-determination, the abolition of all national and national-religious privileges and restrictions, and the free development of national minorities. Helped by the more developed nations, the Russians in the first place, many other peoples overcame their age-old backwardness in a short historical period, equality being achieved by over 100 Soviet nations and nationalities---an outstanding example of fraternal cooperation.
In the Soviet Union and its Communist Party Communists and revolutionaries all over the world have a bulwark of the liberation movement. Wherever and in whatever form it has taken place, revolutionary action by the working people in the struggle for their interests and rights has always been given immediate support and assistance from the Soviet people. Support for the revolution in China, aid to the Spanish people in the civil war against the fascists in 1936-- 1939, solidarity with the striking British workers in 1926--- these are but several instances of the internationalism revealed by the Soviet people at a time when their country stood opposed, single-handed, to unrelenting pressure from the capitalist world about it.
The land of the first victorious socialist revolution became the main bastion of the struggle against imperialism, which persisted in its efforts to strangle the Soviet Union. World War II was a most severe trial for the Soviet people, who, in fighting for their independence and freedom, were defending the future of civilisation. The Soviet Army's war victories enabled a number of countries to take the road of independence, revolutionary changes and the construction 477 of socialism. Progressive mankind has had a high appreciation of the Soviet contribution to the victory over fascism and the Soviet sacrifices in the war.
``You who lived through the war and you, the younger ones who have studied history, know only too well that the Soviet people and the Soviet Army bore the brunt of the struggle against fascism. Over 20 million dead, a sea of blood shed by the Soviet people for their freedom and ours, for the freedom of all European nations---never shall we forget this,''^^*^^ said Gustav Husak, First Secretary of the Czechoslovak Communist Party's Central Committee.
In the present conditions, the Soviet people are performing their internationalist duty to the world revolutionary movement by scoring more successes in the construction of communism. This is a logical stage in the development of Soviet society, a matter of pride and patriotism for Soviet people. It is also the Soviet contribution to the refashioning of the world and to mankind's progress.
The foreign policy of the CPSU and the Soviet Government is deeply internationalist in nature. The Soviet Union has given extensive help to the People's Democracies in their formation and their development along the road of socialism. Together with other socialist countries, the Soviet Union is taking measures to advance their economic, political and defence co-operation. The socialist gains of the entire socialist community are safeguarded by the Soviet Army, which is ready at any moment to come to the aid of the fraternal countries in the struggle against imperialism and counter-revolution.
The Soviet state is extending firm political and moral support and material aid to nations that are fighting for liberation. It is helping many new Afro-Asian countries to advance their economies, science^ technology, culture and the training of national personnel.
Pursuing a policy of peaceful coexistence of states with differing social systems, the Soviet Government champions peace among all nations, defends the independence of states, exposes the imperialists' designs and intrigues, and curbs their aggressive aspirations.
_-_-_^^*^^ Pravda, August 30, 1909.
478As stated in the Theses of the CPSU's Central Committee for the Centenary of the Birth of V. I. Lenin, "True to Lenin's precepts, the CPSU works unceasingly to strengthen peace. The aim of its foreign policy activities is to ensure peaceful conditions for the building of socialism and communism, and create a favourable atmosphere for the struggle of the working people of all countries for emancipation and the social and economic progress of all nations.''^^*^^
The 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties expressed broad support for the policy of the CPSU and the Soviet state, which seeks to strengthen the positions of socialism; give all-round support to nations that are fighting against imperialism, and for their social and national liberation; ensure peace and security for all peoples; prevent a thermo-nuclear war, and promote the peaceful coexistence of states with differing social systems.
The CPSU has always attached decisive importance to the task of ensuring the solidarity and unity of all revolutionary and liberation forces, above all, the Communist and Workers' Parties.
Since its inception, the CPSU, following Lenin's behests, has regarded itself an integral part of the communist movement. Unswerving adherence to its duty as a contingent of the movement has marked all CPSU activities; hence its unflagging attention, throughout its history, to problems of the communist movement.
The CPSU has always been aware of its special responsibility to the communist movement. As is common knowledge, the CPSU has come out against all hegemonistic manifestations, and believes that no one Party can assume leadership of the entire movement today. All Parties are independent and enjoy equal rights. However, the objective position of the CPSU as the senior contingent of the communist movement, which has advanced towards the ultimate goal farther than the other Parties and has amassed vast experience in the revolutionary struggle and the construction of socialism, has placed special responsibility on it, and demands of it efforts in the interests of the entire movement.
_-_-_^^*^^ On the Centenary of the Birth of V. I. Lenin. Theses of the CC CPSU, Moscow, p. 42.
479In determining its policies, the CPSU also takes into consideration the communist movement's heightened role in the world. The role of the masses in world development, and of the revolutionary vanguard of the masses grows together with mankind's advance towards social emancipation, the consolidation of the socialist system, and the mounting material and socio-political preconditions for the revolution. This vanguard is able to guide the mass movement and their struggle, i.e., the communist movement.
The CPSU's policy also takes into account the role of the communist movement for the USSR. Co-operation between the CPSU and the other fraternal parties has become a great revolutionary force.
Finally, the CPSU is aware of the features in the situation now taking shape in the communist movement of the present stage. In the past few years, the CPSU's policies have been determined in many respects by the serious difficulties in the movement, perhaps the greatest in its history. In these conditions, the Soviet Communist Party has seen its task in helping Communists to overcome difficulties, restore their unity, and enhance the Communist Parties' militancy and their role in the revolutionary process.
In recent years, the CPSU has been working persistently to achieve unity of action by the Communist Parties in the struggle against imperialism. It has advocated broader contacts among the Communist Parties. Together with the other fraternal parties, the CPSU has worked hard to evolve a common ideological and political platform of the world communist movement. The CPSU has made a constructive contribution to the deliberations of international Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties. These efforts have resulted in the growing unity of the Marxist-Leninist parties.
In working for unity in the communist movement, the CPSU is defending the purity of Marxism-Leninism and giving a firm repulse to all renegades, revisionists, splitters and nationalists.
The Twenty-Fourth Congress marked an important stage in the CPSU's internationalist policy, its decisions mapping out extensive prospects of the USSR's development over 480 the next five years and for a longer period. The essence of these decisions, their creative Leninist spirit, and the scope and depth of the problems raised in the Central Committee's Report and the Documents adopted by the Party's supreme body---all these made the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress an event of truly historic significance.
The Congress decisions are a source of inspiration to the Soviet people in their heroic achievements for communism, their happy future, and peace and progress for all mankind.
The Congress was at the same time also a major event in the world communist movement. With the passage of time, this aspect of the Congress is revealed more and more vividly. In the decisions of their Congresses and Central Committee plenums, the fraternal parties stress the following basic international aspects of the Twenty-Fourth Congress:
First of all, they note that, by formulating a clear line towards continuing the construction of a communist society, achieving a further upsurge of the economy and perfection of socialist democracy, the Congress set an inspiring example of communist purposefulness, optimism and confidence in the future, for all the world's progressive forces to emulate.
The fraternal parties have gone on to emphasise that the Congress's programme of struggle against imperialism and its crimes, and for peace and world security is in accord with the interests of all peoples. It has, in fact, become a platform that is rallying all fighters against imperialism, and for democracy, national independence, peace and socialism. "The peace programme, put forward in L. I. Brezhnev's report, is marked by its timeliness and concreteness. If it is received with the same good will with which it has been brought forward, it will mean a turning point in the life of all mankind,'' wrote the Danish communist Land og Folk^^*^^
The Congress proposals for achieving consolidation of the unity of the world's Communists have been welcomed" by Communists as a major contribution to their common cause. "The CPSU has always played and continues to play a key _-_-_
^^*^^ Land og Folk, April 1, 1971.
481 role in consolidating our movement,''^^*^^ Eduard Gierek, First Secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party's Central Committee, said at the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress. In their official documents most fraternal parties have unanimously supported the Twenty-Fourth Congress's decision to work for ideological and political unity of the communist movement. Speaking of this aspect of the Congress Rodney Arismendi, First Secretary of the Communist Party of Uruguay's Central Committee, noted the following:``The CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress has triumphantly culminated the stage of struggles, quests and efforts in the period of victories scored in the international scene as a result of the growing prestige of the socialist system in the struggle for world peace, in the period of consolidating and restoring the unity of the world communist movement and rallying around it the world liberation movement.''^^**^^
The Congress's ideas about ways of consolidating the antiimperialist forces have met with extensive support. They have been acclaimed, not only by Communists, but also by many democratic, revolutionary-democratic and mass organisations. This reveals reassuring prospects of the further consolidation and activisation of the world anti-imperialist front.
The Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU provided fresh evidence of the Soviet Union's adherence to the Leninist policy of support for working-class movements in the capitalist countries, a policy of alliance, unity and solidarity with all revolutionary, anti-imperialist forces in the world.
The Congress emphatically reaffirmed the solidarity of the CPSU and the entire Soviet people with the heroic Vietnamese people and their militant vanguard, the Working People's Party of Vietnam, and with the courageous patriots of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, who were fighting against the US imperialists. "The tenacity and courage of the freedom-loving peoples of Indochina,'' says the Congress Address, "augmented by the unfailing support of the Soviet _-_-_
^^*^^ Greetings to the Twenty-Fourth Congress of the CPSU, p. 52.
^^**^^ El Popular, Montevideo, April 23, 1971.
482 people, the peoples of the other socialist countries, the world communist movement and all other progressive forces, are the guarantee of their victory over the enemy.''^^*^^The Congress strongly denounced Israel's imperialist aggression against the Arab peoples, carried on with support from the US imperialists. It proclaimed Soviet solidarity with the courageous Arab struggle to remove the consequences of Israeli aggression, and for freedom, independence and social justice.
The Congress of the Soviet Union's Communists reaffirmed firm solidarity with the Communist Parties and revolutionary forces of all countries. In the Report of the CPSU's Central Committee L. I. Brezhnev noted that the Soviet Communists highly appreciate the fraternal parties' immense work. The CPSU will always march in close militant ranks with them. "Conscious of its internationalist duty,'' L.I.Brezhnev said, "the Communist Party of the Soviet Union will continue to pursue a line in international affairs which helps further to invigorate the world-wide anti-- imperialist struggle, and to strengthen the fighting unity of all its participants.''^^**^^
Thus, the first and principal aspect of the 24th Congress's international significance is that, by laying down the CPSU's political line for the present stage, it has contributed to the Marxist-Leninist ideas on the world revolutionary process and its patterns, and to the struggle of all revolutionary forces. This has ever more enhanced the CPSU's ideological and political role in the communist movement. The Congress conclusions and decisions have made for greater cohesion of Communists and all anti-imperialist forces.
The fraternal parties' participation in the Congress was another aspect of its international significance. Noteworthy in this respect are the following basic considerations:
First, the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress stands out as the biggest communist forum in the past ten years: it was attended by delegations of 79 Communist Parties with 68 from the non-socialist world, whereas the 1969 Meeting assembled 75 Communist and Workers' Parties (including the _-_-_
^^*^^ 24th Congress of the CPSU, p. 29.
^^**^^ Ibid.
483 CPSU); seventy-eight parties (besides the CPSU) were present at the Lenin Centenary celebrations in Moscow.Second, in their addresses, delegates of the fraternal parties wholeheartedly approved the CPSU's Marxist-Leninist policy, a fact of special significance since it was the outcome of a long struggle for a single Marxist-Leninist line in the communist movement, and against splitters of every kind. It will be remembered that on the eve of the Twenty-Fourth Congress, the Chinese leaders demanded a "clear-cut line of division" in the communist movement and that each party should announce which side it belonged to. The Communist Parties' reply was unequivocal: they sided with the genuine Marxism-Leninism.
Third, most of the fraternal parties' delegates came out for the further consolidation of communist unity and for practical measures to achieve that end. A great number of parties supported the decisions of the 1969 International Meeting. This, of course, was of great importance in principle.
Fourth and last, though the addresses made by the spokesmen of some parties contained viewpoints that did not fall in with the opinion of the majority, nobody contrasted any positions to those of the communist movement. This reflected a general change of climate in the communist movement, though far from all difficulties have been resolved.
The participation of nineteen revolutionary-democratic and four Left-socialist parties in the Twenty-Fourth Congress testified to the growing co-operation of the Communist Parties and the socialist countries with other contingents of the liberation movement. The extension and consolidation of contacts with revolutionary-democratic parties in the developing countries and the establishment of co-operation with mass organisations and movements, and with the socialists and Social-Democrats in the common struggle against imperialism were defined by the Congress as major internationalist tasks of the CPSU.
The ideas of the Twenty-Fourth Congress have spread throughout the world and set off an acute ideological struggle. Many fraternal parties have passed special resolutions on the results of the Congress, or approved its decisions in other ways. The most important Congress materials have 484 been published in all the socialist countries, and in a number of other countries. The results of the Congress have been discussed at meetings of Communists and other working people. All these facts speak of the world-wide appreciation of the Congress, help educate the working people in the spirit of socialism and proletarian internationalism, and further the struggle for the unity of the communist movement and the revolutionary forces.
__*_*_*__The entire history of the workers' and revolutionary movement is a record of a struggle for unity. Proletarian internationalism has been making headway in the working-class movement in a struggle against nationalism, and Rightand ``Left''-wing opportunism, and in consolidating and rallying all revolutionary forces for the triumph of the common cause.
The activities of the vast majority of Communist Parties today reveal their deep awareness of the importance of unity in the world communist movement, if the imperialists' designs are to be foiled and the cause of the working class is to triumph throughout the world. The striving towards unity of Communist Parties is expressed in practical steps directed towards achievement of that unity. The Communist Parties' efforts towards that end were embodied in the successful work of the 1969 International Meeting of the Communist and Workers' Parties.
The Lenin Centenary celebrations were another major contribution to communist unity, providing an occasion for extensive propaganda of the ideas of Leninism and proletarian internationalism, and for mobilising Communists for the struggle for socialism against imperialism.
That the policy of unity and cohesion in the communist movement has triumphed was aptly demonstrated by the CPSU's Twenty-Fourth Congress and the other fraternal Party congresses that followed it. These reaffirmed that such congresses are an important form of communication and co-operation among the Communist Parties, and of pooling their experience. They have been a major contribution to firmer unity of the world socialist system, the 485 international communist and workers' movement, and all revolutionary and anti-imperialist forces.
``The Communists of all countries draw from the experience of the class struggle the conclusion that strengthening the militant co-operation, cohesion and active co-ordination of effort by all the fraternal parties of the world is a prime requisite for solving the difficult, diverse problems confronting them. Only by acting as a united international movement will world communism be able to attain its great goals.''^^*^^
The line of unity in the world communist movement is one of proletarian internationalism. It is directed towards creating conditions for Communists to accomplish the lofty revolutionary and liberatory mission that the entire course of contemporary social development has entrusted to them.
_-_-_^^*^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course, p. 49.
__ALPHA_LVL0__ The End. [END] [486] ~ [487]REQUEST TO READERS
Progress Publishers would be glad to have your opinion of this book, its translation and design.
Please send your comments to 21, Zubovsky Boulevard, Moscow, USSR.
[488]ERRATA~
SHOULD READ:
p. 218. the third line from top p. 330. the eleventh line from top
3an. 0873
on
state~
peflaKTop II. l\aMKu.'tta TexiiH'iecKHii peaaKTOp A. TOKCP
flonnHcano u ne'ia™ Hen. Ji. 25, 02. yq.-
22. VI. 73. r. OopiviaT Ji. 23,10. Hsu.
84x lOSi/.iz. 1>S'M. Ji. 75/s.
K 15195. Sanaa K 0873.
2 p. 89 K. Tnpa>n 13800
HanaTt'ibCTno «llporpecc» MocKoa T-21, 3yOOBCKHtt Syjibisap, 2j~
TpyflOBoro Kpaciioro anaMCim MocKoucuaa Tiinnrpa^HH Ns 7 «Hcupa peiioji]<mnn» Coio:)non«rpa(t)np:)Ma npii rocynapCTBeuHOM KOMIITKTR GouPTa Mn-
HIICTpOB CCCl' HO m'JlaM H3flaTejIbCTB, IIOJIWrpatflMll It KIIH/KHOtt
Mocuna, K-l, TpexnpyaHbift nep., 9