179

p The unfolding of the socialist revolution is today quite different from what it was half a century ago, but a number of general features characteristic for any time and place continue to be fully valid today.

p In his analysis of the international significance of Bolshevik experience, Lenin pointed to the immense variety of forms and methods of Bolshevik struggle, but warned the world communist movement not to copy them blindly or pursue the tactics of the Bolshevik Party down to the last detail, for these had been dictated by a specific historical situation. He wrote: “Certain fundamental features of our revolution have a significance that is not local, or peculiarly national, or Russian alone, but international. ... It would, of course, be grossly erroneous to exaggerate this truth and to extend it beyond certain fundamental features of our revolution.” Marxism-Leninism teaches the Communists to apply 180 “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".  [180•1 

p The struggle for socialist revolution today is taking place in a complex and contradictory situation. Certainly, not all the processes at work in capitalist society make for the success of the struggle. Certainly, not all workers see socialism as a real and worthwhile alternative to capitalism. Certainly, not everywhere do immediate socialist changes in society take top priority in the class struggle.

p Although the material conditions for socialism have long matured within the advanced capitalist countries, there are innumerable objective and subjective factors that keep the masses from revolution; they stem from the peculiar development of the labour movement and especially from the nature of the bourgeoisie, the most experienced and powerful in the world. Many aspects of the socio-economic policies of statemonopoly capitalism encourage some workers to be “ integrated" and to come to terms with capitalism rather than fight it. Meanwhile, the campaign for radical reform and socio-political change has been growing under pressure of the contradictory evolution of state-monopoly capitalism, the scientific and technical revolution and its consequences for the working class and the gains scored by the workers.

p Undoubtedly, major socialist changes in the advanced capitalist states can be implemented much more easily and quickly than they were in Russia. But it is more difficult to start a socialist revolution in these countries. There revolution has its ups and downs and is faced with extremely difficult circumstances. All its subjective conditions mature as capitalism progresses in a “normal” way, without any staggering socio-economic disasters that would rock the foundations of bourgeois class domination.

p Marxism says it is necessary to “uphold revolutionary interests in a way appropriate to the changing situation".  [180•2  The world communist movement today is doing just that: 181 its overall strategy is based on a creative scientific analysis of the changes that have taken place in the world over the last twenty years.

p The intense theoretical work of the Communist Parties in the capitalist countries, their creative evaluation of the changing balance of class forces and the specific experience of the class struggle have brought certain modifications to the strategy and tactics of socialist revolution. By clearing the way for an elaboration of the issues facing the communist movement, the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956 ensured the essential conditions for a creative development of Marxist thinking. The international meetings of Communist and Workers’ Parties held in 1957 and 1960, and communist national congresses made a constructive analysis of the principal advances in Marxist theory and working-class practice since the war and, on that basis, outlined the strategy and tactics of socialist revolution for today. The present general policy of the world communist movement is thus based on the experience of the post-war struggle for socialism.

p A substantially new, more auspicious situation for promoting socialist revolution is growing as a result of the profound world changes sparked off by the October Revolution, the subsequent advances in the U.S.S.R. and other socialist countries, and the new world balance of power between socialism and capitalism. Revolution, however, is a consequence primarily of internal development, of exacerbation of socio-economic and political contradictions within capitalism. The present strategy and tactics of the Communist Parties take into consideration the new correlation of class forces in the capitalist countries, the democratic traditions of the working people, the changes in their social awareness, their discontent with the capitalist system, the growing inclination to socialism, the contradictory objective evolution of state-monopoly capitalism, and the scientific and technical revolution.

p The C.P.S.U. Central Committee’s Report to the Party’s 24th Congress said: “The international working-class movement continues to play, as it has played in the past, the role of time-test and militant vanguard of the revolutionary forces. The events of the past five-year period in the capitalist world have fully borne out the importance of the working 182 class as the chief and strongest opponent of the rule of the monopolies, and as a centre rallying all the anti-monopoly forces.”

p The experience of the October and other socialist revolutions has demonstrated the vitally important need to establish firm alliances between the working class and other sections of the population equally interested in the overthrow of capitalist power. In the contemporary world, there is much greater possibility for substantially widening the social basis for such alliances. Current capitalist development is creating the objective conditions for extending working-class influence on the semi-proletarian and petty-bourgeois strata of the population.

p The growing domination of monopoly capital beyond the boundaries of large-scale factory production—in agriculture, commerce, handicrafts and small business—greatly reduces the economic role of small business, progressively squeezes out small and medium farmers, craftsmen and retailers on an unprecedented scale, and depresses their living standards. The fact that this process is being encouraged by the state lends it a particular social acuteness. On the other hand, state-monopoly capitalism and the accompanying scientific and technological revolution greatly increase the size of “the new middle strata"—white-collar workers, engineers, technicians, doctors, teachers, and various groups of intellectuals—and bring them down to the socio-economic level of the working class. The interests of the financial oligarchy increasingly clash with those of the workers, and with those of craftsmen, farmers, retailers and shopkeepers, members of the liberal professions and white-collar workers. As this process develops, it objectively induces the non-proletarian and semi-proletarian sections of the population to join forces with the working class in fighting monopoly capital. Fresh and relatively more favourable opportunities are opened up for forming extensive popular anti-monopoly coalitions.

p All these semi-proletarian and petty-bourgeois groups are the workers’ potential allies in the class struggle, but their role and importance vary at different times. In the past, when most countries had a predominantly rural population, the attitude of the peasant in the proletarian revolution had an important bearing on its outcome. A “second edition" 183 of the peasant war in these circumstances had to supplement the proletarian revolution. During the October Revolution, the workers acted in alliance with the poor peasants and with the support of the middle peasants.

p Today, the peasant question has somewhat altered in many industrially advanced countries. As a result of its mass impoverishment, the rural population is often in the minority. Precisely for this reason, the relative importance of peasant farmers as allies of the industrial workers has declined while that of other intermediate sections of the population has risen. As a result, the working-class alliance with the intermediate sections is often no longer mainly with the peasant farmers, but the size and economic role of agricultural producers are still such that the attitude of farmers and peasants retains its importance in deciding the eventual outcome of the capitalist-worker class struggle.

p Changes in the socio-economic status of many sections of the population and the growing gap between them and the monopolies, however, do not mean that expressions of their discontent will automatically coincide. The new favourable opportunities for forming broad popular alliances still have to be realised by the world revolutionary movement. The Communist Parties are doing a great deal to work within farmer, youth and student organisations, cultural and sport clubs, various social clubs and the co-operative movement. They have been using every opportunity—housing issues, health service problems, rising prices or taxes, unemployment, or undemocratic voting systems—to explain the underlying causes to the workers and to stimulate action against the monopolies. Equally important, they have warned workers of the dangers of relapsing into sectarianism, and advocate the use of flexible tactics among the mass of working people that are as comprehensive as they are effective. Their work in local government is of particular value to the working class. In France today more than 1,000 mayors, and 19,500 municipal and 280 general councillors are Communists. In Italy, as many as 25,700 Communists hold positions on legislative and other government bodies, 805 rural districts have Communist mayors and eight provincial councils Communist chairmen.

p In conducting their work among the various groups, the 184 Communists are well aware of the different interests and conditions of each, and adapt their policies accordingly. They appreciate that every class, and sometimes even every age group, has its own way of expressing social discontent. The petty bourgeoisie tends to vacillate in the class struggle, and the big capitalists tend to play on its social conservatism and political apathy in fighting the revolutionary workingclass movement. In many cases, the petty bourgeoisie has been a mass basis for extreme forms of capitalist monopoly dictatorship. The non-proletarian sections of the population are especially prone to prejudices and fanciful ideas about the working class and the bourgeoisie, and these are fanned by bourgeois propaganda.

p Intermediate groups of the population are often liable to display radical and even revolutionary tendencies. So, with increasing monopoly exploitation and the upsurge in socialism and the labour movement, some of these groups may be won. over to the side of the workers. Recent events have produced many instances of joint action between urban and rural working people. Mass worker demonstrations invariably accompanied farmer unrest in France, Italy and Belgium during the early sixties. And many large-scale worker demonstrations have repeatedly been backed by intermediate groups.

p It has been proved possible to achieve concerted action by the most diverse groups in opposition to monopoly capital, even by groups under clerical influence. In some parts of Western Europe (Spain, Italy, France, Belgium and West Germany), South America and Australia, the influence of the church is still strong. But certain changes have recently occurred in the political views of Roman Catholic workers. Ever larger numbers are being drawn into the class struggle. Catholic trade unions in Italy, France, Belgium and elsewhere are taking an active part in strikes and frequently join forces with other unions. Under the impact of changes at home and abroad and the developing class struggle, the influence of the Left-wing groups has increased even within the clerical camp, and they often urge collaboration with democratic forces and working-class parties, including the Communists.

p The Communist Parties do not believe that religious views are necessarily an obstacle to joint mass action in 185 an anti-monopoly alliance. It is social status and the attitude to monopoly capital, not religious ideas, that primarily cause the dichotomy in contemporary society. A British clergyman, Thomas Corbishley, has said that one of the chief conditions for a dialogue of any type is the existence of a common idiom. Undoubtedly, it is ordinarily much easier for the small Catholic farmer to find a common idiom with an atheist workingman than with a fellow believer from the financial oligarchy.

p Concerted action by workers and intermediate groups is a necessary part of the strategy of the Communist Parties today. Socialism holds promise of emancipation from capitalist tyranny to all groups of working people, not only the proletariat. Intermediate groups can take a more active part in building socialism now that there is a world socialist system, advanced large-scale industry and a huge working class. Small firms, for example, can play a major role in tackling economic issues, especially in the provision of consumer goods and services. The Communist Parties while favouring, in principle, large-scale production and cooperation in industry, trade, agriculture and the services, resolutely oppose the use of any kind of coercion in promoting co-operation. They consider it possible for small private business in town and country to exist for a comparatively long time once socialism wins out. The British Communist Party says in its policy document, The British Road to Socialism, that “the owners of smaller enterprises, small shopkeepers and traders, as well as co-operative concerns, should go on as before; they will be freed from restrictions imposed on them by the monopolists and they will benefit from the rising turnover resulting from the new conditions”.

p The new situation throws a new light on the question of a multi-party system during the transition from capitalism to socialism. An alliance of industrial workers, working farmers, intellectuals, small urban producers and retailers rests on the collaboration of organisations and parties that express the interests of these social groups. The Communist Parties also take account of the traditions of countries with long parliamentary traditions and several parties in the working-class and democratic movement. With this in view, they think it probable and necessary that the multi-party system should continue both during the socialist revolution 186 and in the construction of socialism. A resolution adopted at the 18th Congress of the French Communist Party declares that “the Communist Party rejects the view that only one party should necessarily exist during the socialist revolution and is in favour of a multi-party system. . .. All parties collaborating in building socialism will have full and equal right to participate in government, the place and authority of each depending on its contribution to the common cause and the trust it commands among the people."  [186•1 

p This attitude to the multi-party system is no opportunist ploy, but results from a realistic analysis of the line-up of class forces, particularly the checkered social make-up of the new alliance of the labour classes. Characteristically, during the October Revolution the Bolsheviks did not preclude the possibility of a bloc with other political forces. In fact, an alliance did exist for a short time with the “Left” Socialist-Revolutionaries, but the latter’s change of policy coupled with the specific events of the class struggle led to the establishment of a one-party system.

p The working class has the decisive part to play in establishing an anti-monopoly coalition, fighting for the victory of the socialist revolution and building the new society. But it cannot fulfil this task without unity within its own ranks. Past experience has long since demonstrated the old labour maxim that “united we stand, divided we fall”. Nonetheless, the political split in the working class is still to be overcome, and in all capitalist countries some workers are still duped by bourgeois ideology and support bourgeois parties. In the U.S.A., for example, there is no mass Communist or SocialDemocratic movement; most workers, headed by the A.F.L.- C.I.O. leadership, back one of the two bourgeois parties (recently it has been the Democratic Party). The U.S. working class still retains much of its earlier chauvinism, racial prejudice and political apathy. In these circumstances, the U.S. Communist Party regards as top priority the promotion of independent political thinking by the workers and the attainment of a higher level of class awareness, so as to release them from the influence of bourgeois ideas. Its Draft Programme says: “The next phase of development 187 is creation by the workers of political instruments for the conscious, effective expression and representation of their interests as a class. This necessitates a higher degree of class awareness, of social comprehension. This is the great historic challenge before the American working class, presented by its own evolution..."  [187•1  Elsewhere the impact of bourgeois parties on the labour movement is not so great, but nowhere has the problem of bourgeois influence been altogether overcome.

p Working-class disunity has a deleterious effect on its class struggle. The fundamental ideological differences between the Communist and the Social-Democratic Parties are certainly not insuperable and should not prevent united action within the labour movement. Their joint efforts are increasingly necessary if the workers’ struggle is to be successful. The Communist Parties have frequently stressed the need for unity between the Communists and the Social-Democrats. The 1960 Moscow Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties declared: “Both in the struggle for the improvement of the living conditions of working people, the extension and preservation of their democratic rights, the achievement and defence of national independence, for peace among nations, and also in the struggle to win power and build socialism, the Communist Parties advocate co-operation with the Socialist Parties."  [187•2 

p Naturally enough, Communist-Social-Democrat unity has to be seen in concrete terms in each country, and depends on the state of the class and democratic struggle, on the part the parties have to play within the labour movement and in national politics, on the theoretical and political attitudes of Social-Democratic leaders towards capitalism, on the one hand, and the world socialist system, on the other, and, finally, on the extent to which the Social-Democratic leaders have been infected with anti-communist ideas. The Communist Parties take due consideration not only of the official policy of the Social-Democratic Parties, but these parties’ social make-up and opinion among the rank and file.

p Waldeck Rochet, General Secretary of the French Communist Party, made the point at the Party’s 18th Congress, 188 when he said that “Socialists and Communists want socialism, and differ only on the ways and means of passing from capitalism to the new society. The source of disagreement lies above all in the fact that Communists, because they are Marxists, are revolutionaries, whereas Socialists generally have a reformist ideology. . .. Communists and Socialists have gone their different ways ever since the Great October Revolution, but the central issue today is to find out whether the profound changes that have occurred in favour of socialism over the past 50 years can lead to a rapprochement between Communists and Socialists. "  [188•1  The Communist Parties believe they can.

p The policy of alliance with the Social-Democratic Parties is primarily motivated by the desire among workers for joint action irrespective of political attachment. It was this desire that led to the signing of pacts between the French Communist Party and the Federation of Democratic and Socialist Left Forces in December 1966 and February 1968. These pacts spell out the fundamentals of joint action and the common aims of the two organisations in the fight against personal power and for the establishment of genuine democracy: democratic constitutional reform, guarantees of individual and collective freedoms, and freedoms for local self-government bodies, lifting of restrictions on the right to strike, extension of the rights of factory committees, etc. The conclusion of pacts such as these opens up fresh prospects for the unity of workers and democrats in France in the struggle to transform society.

p The situation has also been improving in other capitalist countries for strengthening working-class political cohesion and for joint action by Communist and Social-Democratic Parties. A number of factors have recently combined to cut the ground from under the propagators of anti-communism— a creed that had hitherto permeated the ranks of the SocialDemocrats. These are the socio-economic and political attainments of the socialist states, condemnation of the personality cult, restoration of Leninist rules in Party and public life, perfection of socialist democracy and, finally, the noticeable detente in some parts of the world. As a result, some Social-Democratic Parties have been renouncing 189 the extreme anti-Soviet and anti-communist views they had held for many years.

p Attempts to indoctrinate workers with theories of “ democratic socialism" have increasingly failed to gain support. Many workers refuse to believe that capitalism will automatically evolve into socialism or that the bourgeois state stands above class. The growing economic and political domination of the monopolies, their assault on the workers’ living standards and democratic liberties, and the sharpening of the class struggle have evoked a desire to take stock of accepted values and probe into Social-Democratic cliches. The Communist Parties have overcome elements of sectarianism and this has also led to a rapprochement between Social-Democrats and Communists. The Communists have been advocating various forms of co-operation with the Social-Democrats—from agreements on total or partial issues with the official stamp of approval by top party leaders to contacts between local party offices and the rank and file, from elaboration of joint anti-monopoly programmes of action to united action within mass democratic and professional organisations. The Communist Parties have sought unity with Social-Democratic Parties at all levels, from top to bottom.

p The Finnish parties have gone a long way towards unity. In early 1966, the 14th Congress of the Finnish Communist Party declared that the principal way of tackling the country’s economic and political problems was to extend and reinforce co-operation of all working people, and that the immediate aim was to reach agreement with the SocialDemocrats on a joint policy affecting all aspects of national affairs. The long-standing Finnish Communist policy of forging an alliance with the Social-Democrats bore its first fruits with the victory of the bloc of workers’ and Centre parties at the national polls in 1966. The formation of this government, which included Communists, signposted a change in Social-Democratic policy, a reversal of its earlier policy of nonalliance with the Finnish Communist Party, and a shift of opinion on home and foreign policy. Communist Vice-President Erkki Salomaa said that the Communists were sure a government resting on a parliamentary majority of workers’ parties was a better government than one dominated and led by the bourgeoisie; he added that despite their 190 modest representation in the government, the Communists believed they could do more to safeguard the workers’ interests inside the government than outside it.

p Communist-Social-Democrat collaboration as the basis of unity within the democratic and working-class movement is a key condition of political and economic progress. In the interests of all workingmen, the Communist Party has been concentrating its efforts on attaining close co-operation and unity of the various groups of workers, their trade unions and political organisations on the principle of equality and mutual trust. Experience in promoting co-operation between the Communists and the Social-Democrats in France, Finland and elsewhere is of great international importance for the unity of all the democratic forces in the fight for social progress.

p While the Communists advocate unity with the SocialDemocrats, they also insist that the working-class parties remain independent in organisation and ideology. They believe that while all workers’ parties can and should participate in the struggle for socialism, the workers would not benefit from mere mechanical mergers. Efforts to bring political unity to the working-class movement cannot stifle criticism of the ideological views and opportunist actions of social reformists and their policy of class collaboration with the bourgeoisie. For a long time, Social-Democratic leaders have been directing much of their effort against the communist movement, and these long years of open and secret hostility have left their severe and almost indelible mark in the form of personal antipathy, resentment and value judgements between leaders and ordinary members of Communist and SocialDemocratic Parties. Despite the objective factors that make for working-class political unity, the actual fulfilment of this aim requires persistent efforts and tremendous patience. The Communists’ co-operation policy certainly does not always evoke a sympathetic response among Social- Democrats.

p One plain demonstration of how difficult political unity is to attain occurred in Italy in 1966, when the Socialist and Social-Democratic Parties merged in a patently anti- communist alliance. The leaders of the new United Socialist Party (U.S.P.) have proclaimed their intention of destroying the traditional Italian unity of Communists and Socialists 191 at all levels—party, trade union, municipal and parliament, democratic, youth and farmers’ movement—and of renouncing the principles of socialism and socialist struggle, in favour of an accommodation with capitalism.

p This policy turned out to be unacceptable for some socialist leaders, party workers and ordinary members, with the result that many refused to join the new party and others did join but continued to work with the Communists. The 1968 parliamentary elections gave ample evidence of what the Italian electorate thought of the U.S.P. leadership. The anti-communist policy, the deliberate division of the labour movement, the sacrificing of workers’ interests for the sake of an unprincipled participation in bourgeois government have considerably reduced the U.S.P. ranks. Clearly, more and more workers believe that working-class parties should take part in government not to pursue capitalist policies, but to implement a programme of social progress in accord with popular aspirations.

p There is, on the whole, a tendency in several countries for the Social-Democrats and the Communists to join hands in promoting democracy and socialism. This tendency is bound to grow as workers’ political awareness increases, as they resolutely reject anti-Soviet and anti-communist propaganda, and as the Communist Parties become massive, surmounting what remains of sectarianism within their ranks and in their attitudes towards the working people.

p The socialist revolution is not a one-act play. It is a long, intricate process consisting of a multitude of battles, attacks, retreats, partial gains, regroupings, and so on. Engels made this point in 1883, when he criticised the German SocialDemocratic leaders in these words: “The big mistake the Germans make is to think that the revolution is something that can be made overnight. As a matter of fact it is a process of development of the masses that takes several years even under conditions that favour its acceleration."  [191•1 

p This development is primarily the shaping of the subjective factors of revolution, the creation of its political forces, and the establishment of firm class alliances between the industrial workers and other working people. The Communist 192 Parties are, therefore, faced with hundreds of complex practical and theoretical problems: how to lead the people up to revolution, how to channel the constant and spontaneous labour discontent into a single anti-monopoly and socialist tide, in what directions should the revolution develop, what are the specific forms it should take, what is the attitude to take to the bourgeois state? All these questions, in fact, boil down to the one problem of applying the general principles of revolutionary theory to a specific situation.

p The Bolshevik Party developed the basic Marxist propositions on socialist revolution and successfully adapted them to the situation in tsarist Russia. Similarly today, every Communist Party is seeking its own answer to these problems based on the specific situation at home and in the world at large, and on the general tenets of Marxist-Leninist theory and the attainments of the world communist movement. Moreover, each Party makes its own contribution to the solution of these problems, so presenting a great variety of ways and forms of fighting for socialist revolution and construction.

p The Communist Parties in the capitalist countries are constantly aware of two dangers that threaten to divert them from a Marxist interpretation of socialist revolution. Both dangers were pointed out at the 1957 and 1960 Moscow meetings of Communist and Workers’ Parties. The first is to exaggerate the importance of national peculiarities, so bowing to petty-bourgeois nationalism and neglecting the general principles of socialist revolution. The second is to ignore specific national conditions, the actual disposition of class forces and the state of the class struggle. This can only result in a reiteration of meaningless cliches and put the Communist Party out of touch with popular opinion and aspirations. The Communists are well aware of the need to avoid both these pitfalls in outlining the basic problems involved in achieving socialist revolution.

p The fight for socialism in most capitalist countries rests on strong democratic traditions, which the lesson of fascism has taught the workers to cherish. Socialist revolution can have popular appeal only when it offers a development of existing democracy, turning nominal democratic liberties into something that is at once effective and meaningful for the workers.

193

p Marxism-Leninism has always attached primary importance to the fight for democracy and for the utmost extension of democratic liberties, both for the benefit of the workers’ class enlightenment and for the establishment of conditions more favourable to socialist revolution. The battle for broader democracy is crucial in preparing the masses for the actual socialist stage of revolution.

p Significantly, when, after the last war, Communist Parties entered governments in some West European countries on a wave ol popular and working-class support, they were mainly concerned with improving workers’ conditions and extending democracy. Many were then already advocating peaceful revolution, properly appreciating the importance of democracy in the struggle for socialism. It was at that time that Italy adopted a democratic constitution, part of France’s industry was democratically nationalised and progressive statutes were adopted for employees in the state sector. The Communist Parties regard the battle for democracy as a component part of the battle for socialism.

p The revolutionary working-class movement seeks to make maximum use of bourgeois democracy despite its limited class nature. Today, the campaign for democracy is on the offensive: the working class and the Communist Parties have not confined themselves to safeguarding their secured democratic liberties from the encroachments of monopoly capital; they have been making an all-out effort to have them extended, to make them more effective and to invest them with fresh meaning. As the late Palmiro Togliatti said at a Plenum of the Italian Communist Party’s Central Committee in 1956, “We must take heed of what Lenin said about the illusory character of bourgeois democracy. Today we are in a position partly, and even substantially, to put an end to that illusory character, to lay a truly democratic terrain for the successful struggle for socialism, as the Marxist classics had foreseen."  [193•1 

p The key issue of any revolution is that of state power. The struggle for democracy is, therefore, a struggle to extend the workers’ influence to all economic and political affairs 194 in capitalist society; in the final count, it is a struggle to establish the workers’ power.

p Radical democratic changes and reforms are basic planks of the present platforms of the Communist Parties. The substance of these reforms is determined by each Communist Party in the light of national conditions and the tasks confronting the working-class movement at any given time. The Italian Communists, for example, advocate a programme of structural reform centred on fulfilment of the basic provisions of the 1947 Constitution, nationalisation of the major monopolies and establishment of democratic control over them, strengthening of regional autonomy, a special economic programme for Southern Italy, democratic programming and agrarian reform. The French Communist list of demands for democratic reform includes the following: extensive democratic change, implementation of radical economic and social reform, a substantial increase in the powers of Parliament and its conversion into an effective democratic body with legislative powers and effective control of government activity. The Swedish Communist Party advocates the socialist transformation of society, but gives immediate priority to restrictions on monopoly price-fixing power, expansion of industrial democracy, lower taxes and a rational geographical deployment of industrial enterprises.

p Even if these programmes were carried out, it would not signify that socialism had arrived, but the fight for the socialist revolution would be a lot easier if the monopolies were shackled and the workers enjoyed better conditions and broad economic and political democracy.

p The new approach to democratic reform is an indication of how far the working-class and communist movement has come. At one time, reforms in capitalist society were almost exclusively the preserve of the bourgeoisie and the SocialDemocrats (except for the short periods when Communists entered governments). In several countries today, the initiative has passed to the Communists, who are backed by the mass working-class and democratic movement. Furthermore, the initiative cannot be wrested from them, even when the authorities borrow the most popular reform slogans from the Communists and take the credit for putting them into effect. When the Communists put forward broad positive programmes for democratic social change and when they 195 mount massive campaigns to have them implemented, they are helping to turn the communist movement into a major constructive national force. Enrico Berlinguer, member of the Political Bureau of the Italian Communist Party, underlined this point when he said that, “The Communist Party is one which, even in opposition, never sheds its characteristics of ruling party, and never confines itself to mere protest and propaganda, but constantly undertakes constructive action to ensure a positive solution of all outstanding issues and to exert effective pressure, in the cause of the nation’s progress, on all policy-making agencies responsible for economic and political decisions, from the lowest to the highest rungs of the state."  [195•1 

p The communist attitude to reforms differs in principle from that of the Social-Democrats, both in the nature of the recommended reforms and in the methods of attaining them. The reformists usually try to abolish capitalism’s most glaring evils by inconsequential piecemeal reforms, in place of revolution. Without renouncing such reforms, the Communist Parties endeavour to obtain mass support for thorough-going comprehensive reforms that would work a basic transformation in the socio-economic and political structure of capitalist society. As the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Canada, William Kashtan, said: “The revolutionary party, the Communists, see in reform not only achievements in themselves, but seek to make each deep-going reform a step towards the final aim—socialism. The Communists . .. put forward a programme calling for a complex of far-reaching reforms which would shake capitalism and lead the working class forward step by step in its struggle against capitalism."  [195•2 

p The clear-cut anti-monopoly content of this type of radical reform programme makes it a rallying point for the widest sections of the population, since its realisation would substantially curb monopoly power and improve living standards. The movement for radical democratic change is today one of the most effective methods of mobilising the working people against monopoly capital. Since the 196 ultimate aim of the movement is for the working people to win economic and political power, its triumph would be an important step towards socialism.

p The communist movement today poses the question of whether it is necessary and possible for the working people to gain power within the framework of the bourgeois state, whether it is necessary and possible for them gradually to take control of the key positions in the state apparatus and then fundamentally to reshape it. Socialist revolution implies the revolutionary destruction of institutions ensuring the supremacy of the exploiting elements (especially the whole bourgeois apparatus of class oppression), and the removal of their hirelings from power. At the same time, given a great extension of state control over the economy, health and education and given the successes attained in some countries in winning political democracy, the working class and its allies could, the Communist Parties of the capitalist countries believe, make use of some elements of the bourgeois state machine and bring them under control. There are now many positive elements functioning in state administration and the representative democratic institutions of bourgeois society that could be used by the workers to consolidate their power.

p The present more favourable climate for organising popular anti-monopoly struggle facilitates the use of many peaceful and painless ways of destroying the bourgeois state machine of class tyranny and bringing about socialist revolution. Marxism-Leninism and the communist movement have never held the view that socialist revolution must always be associated with armed uprising and civil war. The October Revolution took the form it did because of the action of the Russian and international bourgeoisie. In several countries today, however, peaceful revolution is quite possible. As the 1960 Moscow Meeting noted, “In a number of capitalist countries today, the working class led by the Communist Party, its vanguard, can unite most of the population, win state power without civil war and ensure the transfer of the major means of production into the hands of the people, through a working-class and democratic front and other possible forms of agreement and political co-operation between different parties and social organisations."  [196•1 

197

p The peaceful development of the socialist revolution may be assured by creating such a preponderance of revolutionary forces that this would make it virtually impossible for the defeated ruling class to put up armed resistance to the revolution. Not that all resistance from the exploiters could be ruled out. As the Draft Programme of the U.S. Communist Party underlined, “...it would be naive to assume that monopoly would be restrained by Constitutional scruples from resorting to violence to thwart the most democratic mandate for a socialist transformation. The best, though not the certain, guarantee for averting violence in such circumstances is the creation of a majority so overwhelming, so united, so firm of purpose as to restrain monopoly from the resort to force."  [197•1  The anti-monopoly coalition is designed to ensure a preponderance of class forces to isolate the financial oligarchy and prevent it from turning its resistance into a bloody civil war. This would create the conditions necessary for peaceful socialist revolution.

p The new correlation of forces in the world today is especially favourable for peaceful revolution. Waldeck Rochet made this point when he said at the 18th Congress of the French Communist Party, “As a result of the victory of the October Socialist Revolution and of socialism in many countries, the world capitalist system has been greatly weakened. Today there are new conditions allowing countries like France to take other, easier paths than the one the Russian Communists took in 1917. All the efforts of the French Communist Party are directed to the creation of a situation that would be favourable for peaceful transition to socialism so as to realise the socialist ideal."  [197•2  The growth in the economic and military might of the socialist community makes it more difficult to export counter-revolution, and so imperialism has to pursue a more flexible policy in dealing with the revolutionary movement and frequently stops short of attempts at open armed intervention. The history of the October and other socialist revolutions shows that, once it has started a civil war, the bourgeoisie usually banks on support from external counter-revolutionary forces. To reduce 198 the possibility of armed intervention, then, lessens the chances of internal reaction putting up armed resistance.

p The Communist Parties seek to promote socialist revolution in the most peaceful and painless way, but they also allow for the possibility of non-peaceful transition to the new society. Furthermore, armed struggle in the form of an uprising or civil war is, evidently, more likely where countries are ruled by terroristic dictatorships of extreme reactionaries stamping out all legal opposition, and where even elementary bourgeois-democratic liberties are being abolished. A statement put out by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Portugal describes conditions in such a country.

p “An examination of the conditions of fascist rule in Portugal has led it [the Party] to conclude that the road to the establishment of a democratic system in our country will not be a peaceful road but the road of popular insurrection . . . [with the] use [of] armed force to overthrow the fascist dictatorship. . . ."  [198•1 

p The Parties only resort to armed struggle after a serious analysis of the correlation of class forces and in a situation where all peaceful means of struggle have been exhausted. Marxism-Leninism and the history of the revolutionary movement stress that insurrection is an art and must be treated as such. The Communists can learn from the valuable experience of the civil war in Russia and elsewhere. Peaceful and non-peaceful revolution leads to the establishment of a workers’ dictatorship in one form or another, and both ways imply operation of all the fundamental regularities inherent in socialist revolution.

p What exact means of struggle are chosen will depend on the specific situation. As Lenin stressed, “the revolutionary class must be able to master all forms or aspects of social activity without exception .. . the revolutionary class must be prepared for the most rapid and brusque replacement of one form by another."  [198•2  Past experience of the world revolutionary movement warns that to concentrate on a single form of class struggle to the exclusion of all others could only make the Communist Parties inflexible in their tactics 199 and action and would cut them off from the mass of the people, ultimately hampering the workers’ struggle for socialism.

p The prospects of the workers’ revolutionary struggle in the capitalist states largely depend on social and economic developments within the socialist countries and the state of the world communist movement. Now that industrial and other workers have come to power in a number of countries, their Marxist-Leninist Parties have special responsibility for the cause of world socialism. Every success or failure in building the new society, every sign of strength or weakness in the unity of the socialist countries and the world communist movement has an immense impact on the way revolution develops in the capitalist countries and on the campaign for peace and democracy throughout the world.

p In recent years, one serious obstacle in the way of world socialist revolution has been the attempts of the Mao Tsetung faction within the leadership of the Communist Party of China to revise the basic propositions embodied in the official statements of the 1957 and 1960 meetings of Communist and Workers’ Parties and to foist their gravely erroneous and discredited policy on other Communist Parties. In fact, the Mao faction has laid down, in contrast to the general policy of the world communist movement, its own “special” policy that distorts Marxism-Leninism and substitutes for it Maoism, i.e., the ideas and practices of pettybourgeois nationalism. This is apparent in its departure from a class analysis of contemporary affairs, in its efforts to set off different streams of the world revolutionary tide against one another, to isolate the national liberation movement from the socialist countries and the working-class movement in the capitalist countries, and in its rejection of internationalism in favour of chauvinism.

p The Communist Parties in the capitalist countries roundly condemn these attempts by the incumbent C.P.C. leadership to impose on them its own adventurist brand of socialist revolution. Quite ignoring the specific situation within the capitalist states and the international situation as a whole, the Mao group insists that revolution can be given a push from outside, and that a world war would not be such a bad thing after all. Such views are deeply contrary to Marxist-Leninist tenets concerning ways and means of revolutionary struggle. 200 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1971/SCSP287/20070526/287.tx" They indicate lack of confidence in the workers’ revolutionary potential and in the ability of the Communist Parties to inspire the popular struggle for socialism.

p In their desperate attempts to impose their fallacious schemes on the other Communist Parties, the Mao faction has launched a divisive campaign against Parties taking a Marxist-Leninist stand. In some countries, renegades have formed their own splinter groups consisting of people who have either left or been expelled from Communist Parties and, although they are small, they command substantial material and propaganda means. They have been actively campaigning against the communist movement and spreading petty-bourgeois, nationalistic and racist ideas among the workers. This divisive activity has done great harm to the unity of the anti-imperialist and democratic forces throughout the world. The policy of Mao and his faction has nothing in common with Marxism-Leninism and is harmful to socialism, and the international labour and national liberation movements, and even threatens the socialist gains of the Chinese people themselves. The Communist and Workers’ Parties are perfectly aware of the real designs behind such policies and have vigorously condemned the dangerous Maoist policy.

p Despite the troubles caused in the world communist movement by the Chinese leaders’ divisive action, communist unity has been making headway. The Communist Parties are the revolutionary vanguard of the industrial and other workers in every country and their policy is to safeguard the national interest. Each Marxist-Leninist Party independently draws up and pursues policies and tactics of revolutionary struggle that best accord with the national conditions and historical traditions of its own country. Further, the communist movement does not consist of an aggregate of sections cut off from one another. On the contrary, it has always been conspicuous for its internationalism which reflects the identity of national and international interests and aims of the working people. Suffice it to recall a few major manifestations of communist internationalism: the “Hands off Russia" and “Defend the Chinese Revolution" movements, aid to republican Spain and the united communist struggle against fascism. Unity of the communist movement has a sound objective foundation: the common 201 ideology of Marxism-Leninism and identical aims in the struggle.

p Throughout its long history, the world communist movement has had various forms of unity corresponding to stages in its development. When the Communist Parties were first taking shape, the Communist International was paramount in setting them on their feet, helping them to keep alien elements out of their ideology, and laying down the correct strategy and tactics for the communist movement as a whole. The Comintern did much to foster communist solidarity and nurture steadfast revolutionaries. After the last war, there arose a new way of reinforcing unity between the various Communist Parties: conferences of Communist and Workers’ Parties. These meetings enabled the Communists to exchange views on every conceivable issue, to take stock of specific experience in the class struggle, collectively to elaborate Marxist-Leninist theory, and to outline a concerted political line.

p Now that all the forces working for socialism have become active, communist unity is crucial to the progress of the revolutionary movement. The fight to strengthen unity must not be regarded only as the Communist Parties responding to the divisive actions of the Mao group. Stronger unity implies an exchange of views, discussion, clarification and elaboration of the general policy of the world communist movement. In recent years, there have been a number of bilateral, multilateral and regional meetings between communist representatives, conferences on matters of theory; there has been a better exchange of information, thereby promoting understanding between the various Communist Parties. These conferences have enabled all the Communist Parties to proceed from their own national experience and contribute to overall theory, making their experience available to other Marxist-Leninist Parties.

The world communist movement has come a long way in its relatively short history. Its parties have accumulated extensive experience in fighting for socialism. The socialist revolution has triumphed in many countries and the U.S.S.R. is building communist society. Communism has become the most influential and dynamic movement of modern history.