PROGRESS PUBLISHERS
Moscow
[3]Translated from the Russian by Galina Sdotmikova Designed by Nikolai Pashuro
B. M.
EflHHCTBO, COJIHflAPHOCTB, HHTEPHAIIHOHAJIHSM
(MEHtflyHAPOflHOE EflHHCTBO KOMMYHHCTOB: HCTOPHHECKHft OUBIT, J3PHHI],HnH, HPOBJIEMBI)
Ha ansjiuucKOM
__COPYRIGHT__ © MocKsa, IIoHHTHEMAT, 1980n 11302---988 ,„ ft,
0302030601
[4]CONTENTS
I. International and National Elements in the Communist Movement
1. Internationalism, the Communist World Outlook........
2. Internationalists and Their Patriotism ...........
II. Forms of International Unity and Their Development
1. Relations Among Communist and Workers' Parties at the Origination of the Present-Day Communist Movement.......
2. Development of Party Independence .............
3. Development of New Forms of Unity............
4. Unity of the Communist Movement and Party Independence Jeopardised........
5. Major Victory of Internationalism
6. Regional Communist Conferences in the 1970s.........
III. Some Contemporary Problems
1. Need To Develop the Ideological Basis of International Unity . .
2. Attitude to Historical Experience
3. Equality and Independence of the Communist Parties . . .
7 9 31 4951 76 93
130 158
168 197
199 218
241 54. Discussion and Criticism in the International Communist Movement .............260
5. Relations Between Communist Parties in Power and Those Fighting Under Capitalism . . . 284
IV. Growing Importance of Internationalism
327
1. Internationalism and Social Progress .............329
2. Internationalism in the Anti-- Imperialist Struggle.......344
3. The Communists' Historical Responsibility ........359
Conclusion.............372
[6] __ALPHA_LVL1__ I. INTERNATIONAL 1. INTERNATIONALISM,
THE COMMUNIST WORLD OUTLOOK
2. INTERNATIONALISTS
AND THEIR PATRIOTISM
The present-day international communist movement emerged after the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, bringing together all revolutionaries bent on fighting against the exploitive capitalist system and for a socialist society.
Communist solidarity is based on proletarian internationalism, which has determined the relations between the Communist Parties, the nature of their mutual ties, and the substance of their unity ever since the emergence of the movement.
Internationalism reflects the objective internationalisation of economic, social and cultural life in the world. At the same time, it is an ideology based on the proposition that "capital is an international force. To vanquish it, an international workers' alliance, an international workers' brotherhood, is needed."^^1^^ Its substance is solidarity, co-operation, mutual support, and concerted struggle by the workers and other working people against the common enemy.
Internationalism arose together with the working-class movement. Life itself made it _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 30, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977, p. 293.
9 clear to the proletarians that the working people of other nationalities were closer to them than the exploiters of their own nationality. Lenin wrote: "The Russian worker's comrade in the fight against the capitalist class is the German worker, the Polish worker, and the French worker, just as his enemy is the Russian, the Polish, and the French capitalist.''~^^1^^As the class struggle spread ever wider and became more complicated, internationalism was filled out with richer content and its direct manifestations became more diverse.
At first, it was a matter of supporting strikes staged by workers in other countries, of a struggle against blacklegging, to which capr italism had given an international turn in an attempt to use foreign workers to put down the resistance of local workers. That was followed by political protests against the persecution of revolutionaries and progressive leaders in other countries, and by solidarity demonstrations. In the imperialist epoch, the main emphasis has shifted to international solidarity in the struggle against militaT rism and wars of conquest.
This deepening process of workers in all countries drawing closer together is a reflection of the fundamental uniformities of world development.
For thousands of years, the peoples of the world were all but isolated from each other _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 2, 1972, p. i09.
10 __RUNNING_HEADER__ International and National Elements and the ties between them were extremely fragile. With the development of capitalist relations, the economic ties between them became stronger and their interdependence increased. The world is no longer a sum total of different countries and peoples, for today even the most remote regions of the world, regardless of their economic level, have come to depend on international processes.With the onset of imperialism, capital outgrew the framework of national states, extending and aggravating all forms of social and national oppression. As capital developed into an international force, the objective need for international unity among the anti-capitalist forces became ever more imperative, and the struggle against capitalism in individual countries acquired ever greater international importance.
The closing slogan of the Manifesto of the Communist Party---"Workers of all countries, unite!"---not only pointed out the way to fight exploitation but, in the context of the Manifesto's basic ideas on the world-historic mission of the working class, expressed the class substance of internationalism.
Internationalism is not only a call for solidarity, but also a weapon in the struggle for socialism. Marx wanted the working-class movement to gain a deep understanding of this role of the working class. He criticised the Gotha Programme of the German SocialDemocratic Party for failing to mention the "international functions of the German working 11 class".^^1^^ Engels secured the inclusion in the Programme of a paragraph saying that the Party was aware of its international nature and was resolved to fulfil all the ensuing obligations. Of course, true internationalism implies a voluntary commitment to think not only of one's own nation, but to "place above it the interests of all nations, their common liberty and equality",^^2^^ to express one's solidarity with other nations not only in word, but also in deed. Lenin ridiculed the sterile, platonic internationalism that neglected real action and amounted to no more than a " blatant signboard", a "promenade through the leafy gardens of internationalist phraseology".~^^3^^
The October Revolution, which ushered in a new era, marked a victory for proletarian internationalism, and also a new stage in its development. The world's first proletarian state based its domestic and foreign policy on the principles of internationalism, seeking to put these into effect. What real internationalism means 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, _-_-_
~^^1^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works in one volume, Lawrence and Wishart, London, 1977, p. 323.
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 22, 1964, p. 347.
~^^3^^ Ibid., Vol. 21, 1977, pp. 197-98.
12 this, and only this, line, in every country without exception.''~^^1^^The victory of the working class in Russia led to a powerful revolutionary surge throughout the world. The first socialist state, which was initially fairly weak itself, did all it could for the other revolutionary movements, although in these early days it was the very fact of its existence that had the most powerful effect. As the Soviet Union developed into a mighty power, its internationalist assistance became ever more effective. Virtually every revolutionary movement in the world has enjoyed the Soviet Union's support in one form or another.
When the first socialist revolution made a breach in the imperialist chain, there emerged a new criterion of internationalism which could not have existed earlier: one's attitude to Soviet Russia. Massive manifestations of workers' solidarity with the young Republic helped to establish the new system.
Internationalists from many countries fought arms in hand to defend the gains of the October Revolution. A sweeping "Hands off Russia!" movement spread across many countries. Much was done to organise production and technical assistance in rehabilitating the national economy ravaged in the intervention and Civil War. The working people in other countries protested against a threatened attack on the Soviet Union, and against _-_-_
^^1^^ Ibid., Vol. 24, 1964, p. 75.
13 the anti-Soviet intrigues of international imperialism.The bourgeoisie soon saw the danger of that qualitatively new stage in the development of internationalism: solidarity with workers struggling in other countries was dangerous enough, but solidarity with a workers' state whose main goal from the very beginning was to promote the victory of socialism throughout the world was much worse. Considering that even before then the ruling classes had denounced the workers' international solidarity as a betrayal of their "national duty" and loss of "patriotic feelings", all those coming out in support of Soviet Russia were now branded as agents of a foreign power.
The main goal here was to distort the substance of the new and specific relations between the working-class movement of all countries and the workers' state, relations based on vigorous mutual support. Reformist leaders---aids of the ruling classes---also worked hard to present any international measure taken by the Soviet Republic solely as an expression of its state interests.
One cannot deny that these efforts had a certain effect on the working-class movement. Some of its leaders, even more or less revolution-minded, were unable to understand the connection between the need to support the first workers' state and successful revolution in their own country. Nevertheless, internationalism continued to develop.
14One major consequence of the October Revolution was an extension of the national liberation movement. Many peoples whom imperialism had kept "beyond the pale of history", ruthlessly exploiting and oppressing them, were being involved in political life. Although their struggle did not pursue proletarian goals, it was directed against imperialism and merged with the struggle of the working class. As the national liberation movement rapidly developed, the old slogan, "Workers of all countries, unite!", was supplemented as follows: "Workers of all countries and oppressed peoples, unite!''
Such an extension of the slogan in the new conditions was so natural that it is hard to say when exactly the new slogan was formulated. It was already used at the First Congress of the Peoples of the East in Baku in September 1920. At any rate, no one interpreted the new slogan as implying some kind of "new internationalism", although the addition was essential. The national liberation movement has now become a powerful stream of the present-day revolutionary process, and the unity between the world working class and the national liberation forces has proved its viability and enriched the content of proletarian internationalism.
The defeat of Nazism in the Second World War dealt a grave blow at imperialism and strengthened the forces of socialism. In making its great contribution to the victory over Nazism, the Soviet Union at the same time 15 fulfilled its international duty, giving a new impulse to the liberation movement across the world.
With the formation of the world socialist system, the content of proletarian internationalism was further enriched. Socialist internationalism came into being as the political and ideological basis of inter-state relations within the socialist community. The concept "socialist internationalism"^^1^^ was first used in the Declaration adopted by the 1957 Meeting of the Communist and Workers' Parties of the Socialist Countries, to which almost all the other Communist Parties of the world subscribed. This concept reflects the socialist community countries' inter-state relations, their fraternal mutual assistance, and their joint efforts in building the new society and on the international scene. Socialism is intrinsically free of the contradictions inherent in capitalism. The International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1969 remarked that differences in economic development level, social structure and international position connected with the national specifics of the socialist countries can give rise to _-_-_
~^^1^^ See, Policy-Making Documents in the Straggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism. Documents of the Meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties Held in Moscow in November 1957, in Bucharest in June 1960, and in Moscow in November 1960, Moscow, 1964, p. 10 (elsewhere: Policy-Making Documents in the Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, in Russian).
16 various divergences between them, but such divergences "can and must be successfully se- - ttled on the basis of proletarian internationalism, through comradely discussion and voluntary fraternal co-operation".^^1^^The concept "socialist internationalism" so adequately reflected the new manifestation of proletarian internationalism that no one in the communist movement questioned it. But in the 1970s, the communist press in some European countries came up with statements that the "socialist internationalism" concept was formulated only in 1968 to designate a special type of internationalism allegedly `` superior'' to the internationalist relations among the other Communist Parties. The authors of such statements even think that there is ``first-class'' and ``second-class'' internationalism.
Socialist internationalism is not some superior type of internationalism, but the very same proletarian internationalism reflecting the specific relations of brotherhood and cooperation among the socialist countries. This co-operation means constant mutual assistance, a concerted foreign policy, and development of joint economic planning, manifesting itself in every sphere of social and cultural life.
The socialist world opposes the capitalist; and this opposition is of a class nature. The _-_-_
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1969, Peace and Socialism Publishers, Prague, 1969, p. 23.
__PRINTERS_P_17_COMMENT__ 2-01267 17 basic contradiction between labour and capital is no longer confined to the capitalist countries, but has spread to the international arena. The bourgeoisie would have liked to obscure this fact, presenting the division of the world into two social systems solely as the formation of two confronting military blocs. This is an old dodge used by the reactionaries, who seek to undermine the working people's confidence in the genuine internationalism of the socialist community's foreign policy, presenting it as conventional state policy. Meanwhile, as the world socialist system has expanded and grown stronger, proletarian internationalism has become a more powerful material, as well as moral force. The revolutionaries of Cuba, Angola, Ethiopia, Yemen and other countries openly admit that their peoples' victories over imperialism would have been inconceivable without the all-round support of the socialist community. General Secretary of the Communist Party of the USA Gus Hall wrote; "Because unity is a material force of history, it adds a new value, a new dimension, and a new responsibility to proletarian internationalism.''~^^1^^The growing role of internationalism can be felt not only in countries where it has manifested itself as a truly material force, but also where the revolutionary movement has suffered a defeat. General Secretary of the Communist Party of Chile Luis Corvalan said _-_-_
^^1^^ Political Affairs, March 1979, p. 24.
18 at the CPC Central Committee's Plenary Meeting in August 1977: "For millions of Chileans, internationalism has acquired a new dimension. Today, more people than yesterday see it as a material force of major importance.``In these four years, many of those who were far from regarding socialism as the decisive factor of progress, defence of liberty and human rights, have come to appreciate the socialist system's contribution to the effort to achieve mankind's most noble goals.
``The working class has seen its internationalist convictions put into practice.''~^^1^^
The current development of the revolutionary process is marked by a further involvement of new forces, new peoples and social sections which up to now, as a rule, have not taken part in politics, with the socialist countries playing an ever greater role in world affairs. In view of this, the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties noted a new extension of the content of proletarian internationalism. The Meeting adopted this slogan: "Peoples of the socialist countries, workers, democratic forces in the capitalist countries, newly liberated peoples and those who are oppressed, unite in a _-_-_
~^^1^^ The Chilean Revolution, the Fascist Dictatorship, and the Struggle to Overthrow It and to Create a New Democracy. Plenary Meeting of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Chile, August 1977, Moscow, 1978, p. 102 (elsewhere: The Chilean Revolution, in Russian).
__PRINTERS_P_19_COMMENT__ 2* 19 common struggle against imperialism, for peace, national liberation, social progress, democracy and socialism!''~^^1^^There is no doubt that in the course of history the concept of "proletarian internationalism" will be further enriched, but it will retain its substance: acknowledgement of the historical mission of the working class as a class capable of uniting on a national and international scale all the forces opposed to exploitation and oppression.
Some think, however, that to define internationalism as proletarian is to limit its unifying power. They even see it as `` ambiguous'', for some reasop maintaining that the concept "proletarian internationalism" was formulated only with the emergence of the Soviet state and was connected with its defence and an expression of loyalty to the Communist International. Now that the Communist International no longer exists and the Soviet Union has become a mighty power, they maintain, solidarity with it should not be seen as the only content of proletarian internationalism. In other words, proletarian internationalism has allegedly long since lost its right to exist and should best be abandoned.
Such arguments are obviously spurious. The concept "proletarian internationalism" did not take shape after the victory of the _-_-_
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1969, p. 39.
20 October Revolution and was not necessitated by the need to defend the Soviet state or express loyalty to the Comintern; it emerged long before the Soviet state and the Comintern came into being. All the documents of revolutionary Marxism, starting with the Manifesto of the Communist Party, are permeated with the spirit of proletarian internationalism. But even those for whom the spirit of Marxism is not enough and who want concrete formulas could satisfy themselves that Lenin used the term "proletarian internationalism" long before the October Revolution. Thus, he wrote in his "Critical Remarks on the National Question" back in 1913: " Bourgeois nationalism and proletarian internationalism---these are the two irreconcilably hostile slogans that correspond to the two great class camps throughout the capitalist world.''~^^1^^The main element in the definition of proletarian internationalism---its class contentis put in question on the pretext that to define internationalism as proletarian is to fly in the face of the new social realities. A classless, amorphous concept---"new internationalism"---is proposed in place of the clear-cut class definition of the substance of internationalism.
Many Communist Parties believe that the concept "new internationalism" may lead to a departure from the class stand. Alvaro Mosquera, Member of the Central Committee of _-_-_
~^^1^^ V, I, Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 20, 1964, p. 26.
21 the Communist Party of Colombia, said at an international theoretical conference that his Party disagreed with the view that with the expansion of the social forces taking part in revolutionary and democratic movements the proletarian nature of internationalism comes to stand in the way of democratic alliances. "Those who use such arguments fail to notice that in reality non-proletarian classes and groups side with the working class and its party in the joint struggle. They fail to notice that far from waning, proletarian internationalism has been growing stronger, for it is a developing phenomenon. The Communists' task is not to give up their principles, but to continue strengthening proletarian internationalism and help the masses to draw closer to the positions of the working class.''~^^1^^At the International Theoretical Conference in Sofia (December 1978), the spokesmen of many Communist Parties came out against the attempts to question the concept of " proletarian internationalism". The representative of the South African Communist Party, Vusizwe Seme, showed that the drawing of ever broader social forces into the mainstream of the world revolutionary process does not _-_-_
~^^1^^ The Great October Revolution and the Modern World. International Theoretical Conference to Mark the 60th Anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, Prague, 1977, p. 461 (elsewhere: The Great October Revolution and the Modern World, in Russian),
22 refute the theory and practice of proletarian internationalism, but, on the contrary, enriches its content and increases its potential, deepening and extending it. He voiced this conviction: "Declarations and solidarity demonstrations---though very important---in and by themselves would not have enabled the peoples of Vietnam, Angola, and Ethiopia to defeat imperialist aggression and pressures. The unstinting assistance of the Soviet Union and the socialist community to the revolutionary forces in Africa, their readiness to do their duty in combating imperialist aggression, the courage and heroism of Cuban soldiers and civilians who shed their blood on African soil are all manifestations of genuine, proletarian internationalism and not some abstract notion of a `new' internationalism.''~^^1^^The French thinker Paul Valery once said that nothing dated so quickly as novelty. This applies to unreal, imaginary novelty, which does not reflect genuinely new phenomena. When theories are valued for their novelty, and not for their truth, it is very easy to discard in the name of novelty such abiding, fundamental concepts as proletarian internationalism. So long as the proletariat has not fulfilled its world-historic mission, proletarian internationalism will be a living force.
International solidarity is a powerful instrument of the working-class and communist movement, it is being constantly used, and _-_-_
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, March 1979,
23 concrete situations can influence only the form of its manifestation.It is precisely because international solidarity is so powerful that the ideological battles between the socialist and the bourgeois outlook have invariably centred on problems relating to it.
This struggle is also reflected within the communist movement, with some Communists tending on various pretexts and in varying degree to renounce proletarian internationalism, the crucial principle of MarxismLeninism.
Speaking of these tendencies, Leonid Brezhnev said at the 25th CPSU Congress: "To renounce proletarian internationalism is to deprive Communist Parties and the workingclass movement in general of a mighty and tested weapon. It would work in favour of the class enemy who, by the way, actively coordinates its anti-communist activities on an international scale. We Soviet Communists consider defence of proletarian internationalism the sacred duty of every MarxistLeninist.''~^^1^^
One important specific feature of proletarian internationalism is that, while orienting the national contingents of the working class towards concerted action, it does not ignore the diversity of today's revolutionary struggle. Far from implying stereotyped forms and _-_-_
~^^1^^ Documents and Resolutions. 25th Congress of the CPSU, Novosti Press Agency Publishing House, Moscow, 1976, p. 37,
' "
24 ways of struggle, solidarity presupposes the need to look for such ways of tackling common tasks that would meet each country's national specifics. Lenin emphasised how important it was correctly to adjust the basic revolutionary principles to national and national-state distinctions, "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".^^1^^Internationalism does not fetter the Communist Parties' creative independent activity, it does not prevent them from following the policy they have worked out with a view to the specifics of their own countries, but gives this policy a sharp ideological edge. That is why internationalism is a source of each party's power and prestige. Speaking of the reactionary propaganda which alleges that a Communist Party taking a firm internationalist stand is bound to lose its influence in its own country, General Secretary of the Portuguese Communist Party Alvaro Cunhal said: "Our Party's influence keeps growing due to its policy of combining devoted patriotism and international activity based on the principles of proletarian internationalism.''~^^2^^
International proletarian solidarity has always been an inexhaustible source of victories for the working-class movement in the _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, 1966, p. 92.
^^2^^ Marxist Review, March 1979.
25 international sphere and in every country. The conclusion drawn from historical experience by the founders of the First International is widely known: "Disregard of that bond of brotherhood which ought to exist between the workmen of different countries, and incite them to stand firmly by each other in all their struggle for emancipation, will be chastised by the common discomfiture of their incoherent efforts.''~^^1^^Subsequent experience has not only confirmed that conclusion, but also has shown the decisive importance of international solidarity for the liberation struggle and the tragic consequences of disregarding such fraternal bonds between the workers of different countries. The victories scored by the international communist movement derive from its loyalty to proletarian internationalism, from its constant readiness for militant solidarity with brothers by class, with all the revolutionary forces.
Internationalism is not only an ideology that meets the proletariat`s'class interests, but also a policy deliberately aimed at bringing the peoples closer together and helping them to overcome national mistrust and narrow-- mindedness. Internationalism also extends to the moral sphere, fostering a friendly attitude to all nationalities, an interest in their life and culture, and intolerance of national arrogance and sense of exclusiveness.
_-_-_~^^1^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works in three volumes, Vol. 2. Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1976, p. 17.
26Hence the varied manifestations of internationalism. These cannot be foreseen in advance, ranging from lofty self-sacrifice to everyday behaviour.
After a victorious socialist revolution, internationalism penetrates ever deeper into the fabric of life in the country, becoming an ethical standard for millions of men and women. It is consistently cultivated by Communist Parties through their policy and ideology.
The Communist Party of the Soviet Union carries on constant internationalist education, fostering respect for national dignity and national culture, and an irreconcilable attitude to any manifestations of nationalism. Internationalist principles have been written as normative into the Soviet Constitution, which says that any advocacy of racial or national exclusiveness, hostility or contempt shall be punished under the law. The USSR Constitution enshrines the Soviet citizen's international duty, pledging him to "promote friendship and co-operation with peoples of other lands and help maintain and strengthen world peace" (Article 69).
Internationalism, which in the socialist countries can be enacted in legislation, in the capitalist countries is reflected in the programmes of the Communist Parties and their everyday activity.
Thus, the Programme of the German Communist Party adopted by the Mannheim Congress in 1978 is permeated with a spirit of internationalism. It emphasises that "the 27 working class of all countries has common interests in the present and the future. Its struggle has long had an internationalist character. That is why the GCP combines in its policy resolute defence of the national interests of the FRG's working people with consistent action in accordance with the principles of proletarian internationalism.''~^^1^^
In West Germany, just as in other capitalist countries, there are many manifestations of nationalism, and this makes the highly ethical internationalist principles of the German Communists even more impressive.
Greetings to the Mannheim Congress were conveyed by a group of foreign workers of different nationalities from various parts of the Federal Republic. On behalf of millions of foreign workers and their families, they voiced their "warmest greetings of solidarity" with the GCP, and many of them took part in discussing its draft programme. "Your Party here, in this country, is the first and as yet the only party that has asked our opinion before adopting such an important document.... At the enterprises, we know GCP members as our friends, who are waging a resolute struggle for the interests of all workers regardless of nationality. We know this is not always easy, especially in time of mass unemployment, when the reactionaries use the slogan 'Down with foreigners!' in an attempt to _-_-_
~^^1^^ Mannheimer Parteitag der Deatschen Kommnnistischen Partei. 20-22 Oktober 1978, Dietz Verlag. Berlin, 1979.
28 pit the workers against each other and so to improve the conditions for exploitation and oppression. That is why we say that the GCP's position shows the viability of the ideas of proletarian internationalism.''~^^1^^That speech by a Turkish worker met with an enthusiastic response among the delegates, who heard his speach standing, with a burst of applause at the end of every sentence. That was yet another concrete proof of the lasting relevance of the internationalist slogan: "Workers of all countries, unite!''
In all the multinational capitalist countries, Communists of different nationalities, make up one international family. In Israel, for instance, there is only one party which includes both Jews and Arabs, and this is the Communist Party. In Belgium in the 1970s, all bourgeois parties and the Socialist Party split on national lines, and only the Communist Party has among its ranks both Walloons and Flemings. Internationalist Communist Parties also operate in multinational countries of the East.
Internationalists are not born, they are made. A book about those who joined the French Communist Party in 1975, based on a poll of 63 new Communists from different social sections, shows how they reacted to the question about their attitude to the word `` internationalism''. Most of them replied after a long _-_-_
~^^1^^ See, V. S. Rykin, "In the Vanguard of the Struggle for the Working People's Interests", Rabochii klass i sovremenny mir, February 1979,
29 pause, with much hesitation. One new Communist said: "The proletarians of the whole world are united. I haven't thought about this. I vaguely recall having read a little about this in Marx." Another answered: " Internationalism is everyday life, but I find this a little difficult to explain." Immigrant workers see internationalism as nothing but solidarity among the foreign workers themselves. Some new members reduced internationalism to solidarity with the Chilean patriots. One young engineer, who saw himself as an internationalist from childhood, spoke of his sympathies for the Vietnamese children. Another young man said: "This also applies to racism----- One should be more humane towards the Blacks." Virtually no one objected to the slogan "Workers of all countries, unite!", but the polled came to the conclusion that most of the new Communists had a vague idea of internationalism.~^^1^^All these replies give an idea how much the French Communist Party---a party of long-standing internationalist traditions---has to do to educate its new members in a spirit of true internationalism.
The broader the interests of any Communist Party, the more successful is its internationalist education, while national narrowmindedness, a bigoted attitude to international events, and an urge to insulate the Party _-_-_
~^^1^^ Anne Andreu, Jean-Louis Mingalon, L'adhSsion. Les nouveaux commnnistes de 1975, Calmann-Levy, Paris, 1975, pp. 147, 148, 149-50, 151-52.
30 from matters that go beyond the national framework hinder such education. Lenin sharply condemned the nationalists who wanted to "erect a Chinese Wall around his nationality, his national working-class movement". He believed that this reduced to nil "the great call for the rallying and unity of the proletarians of all nations, all races and all languages''.^^1^^On the contrary, e'fforts to arouse a lively interest in world affairs and an ability to assess events from a working-class angle are an indispensable condition of internationalist education.
Internationalism is pivotal to the communist outlook, it is the touchstone of the true revolutionary spirit. That is why the Communists are guided by internationalism in all their activity and protect it against any attempts to distort or simplify it.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 2. INTERNATIONALISTSThe Communist Parties are connected with one another by international bonds, but each of these operates in its own country, has its roots among its own people, and voices its national interests.
The Communists have never believed that internationalism means indifference to one's own nation and have never called for national nihilism.
_-_-_~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 6, 1964, pp. 520-21.
31Nations took shape with the emergence of capitalism, and the bourgeoisie was for a long time the leading force of national development, the vehicle of national interests. The struggle headed by the bourgeoisie against the aristocracy, feudal fragmentation and exploitation objectively met the interests of the bulk of the people. But, being an exploitive class, the bourgeoisie used the masses' democratic and economic gains and patriotic feelings in its selfish class interests, for purposes of its own enrichment. At a definite stage of capitalist development, the urge to maximise profits that induced the bourgeoisie to divide the world, to seize new colonies, and to trample the national independence of their own countries began to clash with the true national interests.
These interests are now voiced by the working class. Its revolutionary struggle embodies all of the nation's progressive interests. It seeks to ensure the utmost development of its nation's material and spiritual potentialities not at the expense of other nations, but by eliminating the exploitive system in its own country and establishing friendly relations and fraternal co-operation with all other nations.
In contrast with the patriotism of the bourgeoisie, often used by it to stir up chauvinism and national enmity, the working class' patriotism is of a higher type: a sense of pride in its people's progressive traditions and spiritual values. Working-class 32 patriotism does not tolerate racism, which is spread by the bourgeoisie in order to exploit the working people of other races, and is equally intolerant of cosmopolitanism, an ideological instrument used today by the multinational corporations to obscure their imperialist substance behind a ``supranational'' screen.
The Communists---the advanced section of the working class---most consistently voice its class interests and, consequently, those of the whole nation. But the Communists take a firm stand against national interests growing into nationalist claims, and regard nationalism as a dangerous ideological weapon used by the bourgeoisie to justify its expansionist policy and disunite the working people.
The Main Document of the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties said: "Marxists-Leninists are both patriots and internationalists; they reject both national narrow-mindedness and the negation or underestimation of national interests, and the striving for hegemony."~^^1^^
There has never been an instance in history when the true Communists of some country have betrayed their people's national interests, but the reactionary forces have always accused them of being an alien transplant on the body of the nation, a vehicle of foreign ideology devoid of patriotic feelings.
_-_-_~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1969, p. 37.
__PRINTERS_P_33_COMMENT__ 3-01267 33Every Communist Party emerges to meet an urgent national need of the people, although it takes a long time for the Communists to become a necessary part of the nation's political life. In some countries, the Communist Parties have yet to become a real national force, but this process is inevitable and historically necessary.
The programme with which the Bolsheviks advanced towards the socialist revolution agreed with the people's national interests: such urgent national problems as the need to end the war, sign a peace treaty, give land to the landless peasants, and feed the hungry could not be solved without overthrowing the bourgeoisie and the landowners.
The socialist revolution was also national in the narrower sense of the word. The political forces of the ruling classes, who feared the growing revolutionary fervour of the working class, peasant unrest, and the cons.equences of the disintegration of the army, were prepared to surrender Petrograd to the Germans. But the October Revolution prevented that act of national treason, similar to the one committed in the past by the men of, Versailles, who allied themselves with the German militarists against the Paris Commune. "When their class profits are at stake, the bourgeoisie will sell their country and strike a bargain with any foreigner against their own people. This truth has time and again been borne out by the history of the Russian revolutiqn, after the history of 34 revolution over a hundred years had shown that that is the law of the class interests, of the class policy of the bourgeoisie, at all times and in all countries.''~^^1^^
When Antonio Gramsci, one of the founders of the Italian Communist Party, came up before a fascist tribunal, he was asked a question meant to drive him into a corner: "What will you Communists do if fascism calls Italy to a new war?" Gramsci answered: "You will lead Italy to ruin, and it will be our duty to save her!''~^^2^^ These words show an awareness of the patriotic duty and national role of the Italian Communist Party.
Georgi Dimitrov's brilliant speech at another fascist trial, his Communist conviction produced a powerful impression on the world. At the same time, it was a brilliant and patriotic defence of the Bulgarian people's national dignity. He said: "In connection with the charge against me the newspapers attacked the Bulgarian people, referring to me as a 'Bulgarian barbarian', 'a low type of Balkan native', and 'a wild Bulgarian'.... A nation which for 500 years lived under a foreign yoke, a nation whose working class and peasantry have conducted and are conducting so heroic a struggle against Bulgarian fascism and for Communism, such a nation cannot be barbarous and savage. It is _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 28, 1965, p. 26.
~^^2^^ Quoted in: Palmiro Togliatti, II partita comunista italiano, Nuova Accademia Editrice, Milano, 1958, pp. 84-85.
__PRINTERS_P_35_COMMENT__ 3* 35 the Bulgarian fascists who are savages and barbarians-----That is why I protest against these attacks on the Bulgarian people. I have no reason to be ashamed of being a Bulgarian. I am proud to be a son of the Bulgarian working class.''~^^1^^The French bourgeoisie denounced the country's Communists as ``non-Frenchmen'', seeking to present them as men and women indifferent to national interests and devoid of patriotic feelings. In fact, the Communists became the best champions of all that was progressive in the French people's national heritage. Here is how Maurice Thorez ended his speech in June 1936 on the centenary of the death of Rouget de Lisle, the author of the Marseillaise, France's national anthem: "To the strains of the Marseillaise and the Internationale, under the Tricolour and the red banner we shall build a free, strong and happy France!''^^2^^ In the years of the Resistance movement, it was the Communists who led the French patriots.
Unity of internationalism and patriotism is a distinctive feature of Communist Parties. The Communists are convinced that one cannot become an internationalist without being a patriot, without taking an interest in one's own country, for lack of charity at home _-_-_
~^^1^^ Dimitrov Accuses. His Final Leipzig Speech, Workers' Bookshop, London, 1934, pp. 5-6.
~^^2^^ Oeuvres de Maurice Thorez, Livre troisidme, Tome douzieme (Mai-Octobre 1936), Editions Sociales, Paris, 1954, p. 61.
36 always spells out as indifference to the stranger. Communist patriotism is not declarative: the Communists are patriots of action. It was they who led the anti-fascist forces not only in France and Italy, but also in other European countries. In Yugoslavia, the Communist Party was the only one to fulfil its patriotic duty, inspiring and organising the national liberation war against the Nazi occupation forces.In dependent and colonial countries, where the Communists are numerically weak and are ringed by a wall of misunderstanding and prejudice, they have always been the most consistent champions of national interests and active fighters in the national liberation struggle. The Iranian Communist Khosrov Rouzbeh made a powerful speech at the Shah's military tribunal which sentenced him to death. He spoke as a revolutionary and a patriot: "Only my love for the people, good feelings and intentions were the powerful incentive that induced me to choose the road I have followed.... With my whole soul, bones, blood, tissue and skin, with my whole being up to the last fibre I believe this road to be sacred." In speaking of his Party and its distinctive feature---its revolutionary spirit---he said: "You shall convict Khosrov Rouzbeh, but you can never convict courage, valour, patriotism, humanism and self-- sacrifice.''~^^1^^
_-_-_~^^1^^ A Burning Heart, Moscow, 1962, pp. 53, 77, 176 (in Russian).
37In all countries and on all continents the Communists act as patriots, suffering with their peoples and fighting for their better future.
While being patriots, the Communists do not accept all the traditions that took shape throughout the history of their nations. In a society with antagonistic classes there can be no traditions "in general", but progressive, democratic traditions and reactionary traditions, which the exploiter classes use in their own interests. The 200-year history of the USA has seen the emergence of remarkable democratic traditions, but the whole world also knows that racism, violation of human rights, and support of reactionary regimes in other countries have become traditional for the USA. In France, the wonderful traditions going back to the Great French Revolution coexist with traditions described by the French Communists as ``Versailles'' traditions, which are rooted in the colonial wars and the bloody massacre of the Paris Commune.
This is so in every capitalist countrv. Tn an article "On the National Pride of the Great Russians" written in 1914, Lenin tied in the "sense of national pride" with hatred for slavery, tzarism and the outrages perpetrated by the reactionary forces in Russia. "We take pride in the resistance to these outrages put up from our midst, from the Great Russians; in that midst having produced Radishchev, the Decembrists and the 38 revolutionary commoners of the seventies; in the Great-Russian working class having created, in 1905, a mighty revolutionary party of the masses ....''~^^1^^
Such is the class approach, which entails a whole programme of practical measures for the development of definite traditions, because such traditions are not immutable <ri everlasting. They are created by men and women, and the Communists vigorously work for the development of some traditions and as vigorously seek to prevent the spread of others. Thus, the anti-militarist opposition of West German army officers and men held a press conference in March 1977 to present a Draft Decree on Traditions directed against the encouragement of Nazi traditions in the Bundeswehr and stressing the need to encourage traditions stemming from the history of the working-class movement, the anr, ti-fascist struggle, and the struggle -forr peace and social progress.^^2^^
,
Once this class approach is violated, one could go so far as to approve of all that is national, on the principle of "my nation is, always right", eulogising reactionary leaders, wars of conquest, one's own people's special ``dignity'' and superiority to otherpeoples. This approach develops nationalist-^ ic rather than patriotic feelings, and tends to isolate the nation and undermine its international ties.
_-_-_~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works. Vol. 21, P. 103.
^^2^^ Unsere Zeit, 31 Marcji, 1977.
39Today when the ideas of internationalism are winning ever greater recognition, some people are prepared to use them to cover up their nationalist aspirations. Maoism, for instance, has used internationalist phraseology without stint, but life shows that its internationalism implies nothing but gross interference in the internal affairs of other peoples and Communist Parties. They use the term ``internationalism'' as a synonym for hegemonism.
The practical policies of Maoism have torn off its mask and exposed its chauvinistic face. This historical lesson warns against the danger of substituting chauvinism for patriotism, for this inevitably entails loss of the revolutionary spirit.
Consistent patriotically-minded revolutionaries are formed in the ranks of the Communist Parties. In complicated 'situations, they find solutions dictated by the interests of the working people. In the 1970s, the Communist Parties in the crisis-stricken capitalist countries elaborated concrete, realistic programmes for a democratic way out of the crisis. These programmes meet national requirements and open up ways for a transition to the socialist social system, which has now become a national imperative for the peoples and, at the same time, an international task of the working-class and communist movement.
The Communist Parties are convinced on the strength of their own practice and the 40 experience of the whole international communist movement that national and international tasks are closely interrelated. Thus, the Communist Party of Greece has consistently produced sharp formulations of the problem of national independence and carried on a vigorous struggle for the elimination of US and NATO military bases that jeopardise peace and security. The Party's Programme is a vivid patriotic document. It says that the "CPG together with the whole Greek people takes pride in the invaluable and universal spiritual and cultural treasures of Ancient Greece, in all the beautiful and progressive creations of our people throughout their long history". The Party's whole record shows that it.is a true and worthy heir to the Greek people's national, democratic and revolutionary traditions. In its struggle, in which tens of thousands of heroically fighting Communists have lost their lives, the CPG has shown its profoundly popular and patriotic nature, and has enriched the people's militant traditions. The Party has forged an indissoluble bond with the Greek people and taken deep root among them.^^1^^
Unity of the patriotic and the international is a specific feature marking the activity of the Communist Parties, their ideology, and their policy-making documents.
_-_-_~^^1^^ See, Tenth Congress of the Communist Party of Greece. 15-20, May 1978, Moscow, 1979, pp. 165-66 (in Russian).
41Thus, the documents and everyday activity of the Iraqi Communists prove that their Party defends the country's national interests^ the working people's class goals. The Party Rules say: "It [the Party---Ed.] takes pride in the glorious national legacy of the Iraqi people, their ancient cultural values and revolutionary traditions, which strengthen its resolve and determination to consolidate Iraq's independence, to eliminate the political, economic and ideological positions of imperialism in the country, to carry out the national democratic revolution in its full compass, and build socialism and communism." Close ties and co-operation with all other Communist Parties help them tackle these tasks. It was specially noted at the Party's Third National Congress: "Like all other Communists in all other parts of the world, we believe that proletarian internationalism is also a necessary factor in the implementation of our national tasks.''~^^1^^
Indeed, the national tasks of individual parties and the international goals of the whole movement are closely connected. Many attempts have been made, however, to contrast the national and the international. For bourgeois propaganda, such contraposition is a constant weapon in the anti-communist struggle. It is also used by all sorts of revisionists, who seek to stir up mistrust for _-_-_
~^^1^^ Third National Congress of the Iraqi Communist Party, Baghdad, 4-6 May 1976, Moscow, 1977, pp. 140, 20 (in Russian).
42 the international and give priority to the national. Although such a contraposition can have a temporary effect, it has no future ahead, for it is at odds with the objective tendencies of social development.The record of the Communist Party of Denmark provides an instructive example. In 1958, it was split by the revisionists, who formed the Socialist People's Party, which speculated on the national feelings of some sections of the population. That was a difficult time for the Party. It lost its seats in Parliament, and the bourgeois press predicted that its days were numbered. Ib Norlund, member of the CC Executive and Secretariat, wrote: "The Party had to make a crucial choice: either to give in and put up with the new reformist trends, winning short-term advantages, or to stand firm on the principles of Marxism-Leninism. At that time, this amounted to a choice between proletarian internationalism and the anti-Sovietism of the revisionists ....''^^1^^
The Danish Communists decided to abide by the principles of proletarian internationalism and eventually not only restored the positions they had lost, but even made considerable headway. At its 25th Congress in 1976, the Party declared: "We want to save the nation, and not the existing system." It adopted a programme meeting national tasks. Once again it was emphasised that the _-_-_
^^1^^ World Marxist Review, December 1974,
43 Party's ideology "relies on the principle of proletarian internationalism, which is the basis for uniting communist forces.''~^^1^^ The revisionist Socialist People's Party" has in effect come to nothing, while the truly patriotic and internationalist Communist Party of Denmark has been strengthening its positions.The close ties between the national and the international do not mean, however, that everything that goes forward on the national soil, however progressive, automatically acquires an international dimension. Undoubtedly, the international successes of the working-class movement depend on the achievements of its national contingents, but the dependence here is more complex than a simple addition of efforts. It would be simplifying matters to think that national interests, the policy of individual Communist Parties and the international goals of the world communist movement always coincide. To think so would be to deny the objective criteria for assessing whether a Party's policy is truly internationalist or not. It would then appear that only the Party itself can decide whether its position is internationalist or not. Here is what Boris Ponomaryov, CPSU Political Bureau Alternate Member and CC Secretary, wrote on the question of proletarian internationalism: "Does this mean following a revolutionary _-_-_
~^^1^^ 25th Congress of the Communist Party of Denmark. Copenhagen, 23-26 September 1976, Moscow, 1978, pp. 21, 32 (in Russian).
44 line solely in one's own country, on the national soil, starting from the assumption that such activity will of itself blend with the activity of the other revolutionary contingents? In fact, that would limit the criteria of proletarian internationalism.''~^^1^^If it is only the Party itself that determines the national and international goals of the movement as a whole, internationalism in effect disappears, all national achievements are seen as international, and there is no longer any need for a collective discussion of the common tasks or for co-ordinating a common policy for all Communist Parties.
To view the international as a sum total of national elements is to overestimate the national component in the struggle for society's future. The Marxists see this society not only as classless, but also as one that has overcome all national barriers, where the nations have not only drawn closer together, but have actually merged. They realise, however, that the process is difficult and complicated, and that premature decisions here are dangerous.
The solving of the national problem in the Soviet Union fully confirms what Lenin said before the October Revolution: "The proletariat cannot support any consecration of nationalism; on the contrary, it supports everything that helps to obliterate national _-_-_
~^^1^^ B. N. Ponomaryov, Selected Speeches and Articles, Moscow, 1977, p. 359 (in Russian).
45 distinctions and remove national barriers; it supports everything that makes the ties between nationalities closer and closer, or tends to merge nations. To act differently means siding with reactionary nationalist philistinism.''^^1^^The conditions for solving the national problem in one country differ from the much more complicated conditions necessary for solving it on a continental or global scale. But the communist movement has to do its utmost in any conditions to make the ties between the nationalities ever closer, to extend and deepen their co-operation.
The international is not some abstract notion that is contrasted with the national. Today, when social development increases the objective need for co-operation among nations, it is impossible correctly to express national interests without regard for the international interests of the working class. Many Communist Parties have come to the conclusion that the links between national and international tasks have become closer than ever before.
The organic blend of national and international elements is neither artificial nor speculative, but reflects the historical realities, the fact that the working people are carrying on their struggle on the national soil. If the proletariat is to win political power, says the Manifesto of the Communist Party, it "must constitute itself the nation, it is, so far, _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 20, pp. 35-36.
46 itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word.''~^^1^^But the working class is at the same time international. What brings the workers of different nationalities closer together is not only their common status, but also the fact that they can achieve their ultimate goals only through pooling their efforts. Contradictions between the national and the international do exist and are bound to exist, but they are not antagonistic. They are a manifestation of the complicated process of social struggle, and those who want to keep even pace with history seek to strengthen the ties between the national and the international, realising that the future belongs to internationalism.
__*_*_*__As a national force, each Party is responsible to its own people. But as a contingent of the international movement, the Party at the same time assumes a definite international responsibility, pledging its readiness for international solidarity, mutual support, cooperation, and concerted action in the struggle for the common goals and against the common enemy. This responsibility and readiness can be assumed solely for moral reasons, out of a sense of identity with the international communist movement. This _-_-_
~^^1^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works in one volume, p. 51.
47 movement embraces big and small parties, parties with a long and glorious history and those that are taking their first steps, parties that are in power in the socialist countries and those that are fighting in the citadels of capitalism, and also in the zone of the national liberation movement. All these are united by common ideals, by the great goals they are working for.In a Resolution on International Solidarity, the 17th National Congress of the Communist Party of Ireland in February 1979 emphasised: "The Communist Party of Ireland is proud of being part of the international movement of the Communist and Workers' parties, sharing its achievements, problems and responsibilities.''~^^1^^
Many "Communist Parties invariably mention their international responsibility in speaking of their national responsibility. These two are indeed intrinsically tied in. Since the Communists believe that there is an indissoluble bond between patriotism and internationalism, they maintain that "the national and international responsibilities of each Communist and Workers' Party are indivisible".~^^2^^
Unity of the national and the international lies at the basis of the activity of the Communist Parties and, at the same time, determines their mutual relations.
_-_-_~^^1^^ Information Bulletin, September 1979'.
~^^2^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1969, p. 37.
[48] __ALPHA_LVL1__ II. FORMS 1. RELATIONS AMONG COMMUNIST
AND WORKERS' PARTIES
AT THE ORIGINATION
OF THE PRESENT-DAY
COMMUNIST MOVEMENT
2. DEVELOPMENT
OF PARTY INDEPENDENCE
3. DEVELOPMENT
OF NEW FORMS OF UNITY
4. UNITY OF THE
COMMUNIST MOVEMENT
AND PARTY INDEPENDENCE JEOPARDISED
5. MAJOR VICTORY
OF INTERNATIONALISM
6. REGIONAL COMMUNIST CONFERENCES
IN THE 1970s
The nature and forms of the unity of the revolutionary Marxist organisations entering a new alliance after the collapse of the Second International were determined by specific historical conditions. The imperialist war had exposed the chauvinistic degeneration of the opportunist leaders of the European Social-Democratic Parties. The socialists who remained true to the Marxist principles had only one way open to them: to break with social-chauvinism and set up a new international association on a revolutionary, truly internationalist basis.
At the very beginning of the war, Lenin came out for the establishment of an international organisation that could head the proletariat's struggle against the bourgeoisie for political power and socialism. He wrote in October 1914: "Down with opportunism, and long live the Third International, purged ... of opportunism.''^^1^^ However, it took some five years for this appeal to be translated into reality. The way for the new International was paved by the formation of revolutionary groups in the socialist parties destroyed by the opportunists, with ever closer contacts between these groups.
_-_-_~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 40.
__PRINTERS_P_51_COMMENT__ 4* 51The anti-war Zimmervald Movement within the Social-Democratic forces, which took shape in the autumn of 1915, showed the need to fight not only against overt socialchauvinism, but also against the half-way approach and unprincipled centrism. The formation of the new International was made possible by the victory of the October Revolution and the shaping of a revolutionary situation in Europe.
The victory of the proletariat in Russia was followed by the overthrow of the monarchy in Germany, Soviet revolutions in some European states, the wide spread of the idea of the Soviets across the world, and the formation of Soviets at various plants and factories. The ruling classes were terrified of the working class's mounting offensive, the unrest among the troops, the uprisings in the colonies, and the worsening economic outlook. There was every indication that the predicted victory of the working class was no longer a thing of the distant future, but a political reality. The objective situation in the world offered real opportunities for victorious socialist revolutions. In these conditions, recognition of the need to fight without delay for the dictatorship of the proletariat became a touchstone of the true revolutionary spirit.
In March 1919, a conference attended by 19 organisations with full voting powers and 16 with consultative voice from 21 countries of Europe, America and Asia declared itself to be the constituent congress of the Third, 52 __RUNNING_HEADER__ Forms of International Unity Communist International (Comintern). Its purpose was to organise the revolutionary forces throughout the world for a direct offensive against the capitalist system.
The congress adopted a Manifesto of the Communist International addressed to the proletarians of the whole world. It said: "We Communists, meeting in Soviet Moscow as representatives of the revolutionary proletariat of different countries of Europe, America and Asia regard ourselves as successors to and champions of the cause whose programme was proclaimed 72 years ago.''~^^1^^
International communist solidarity rested on loyalty to the ideas of the Manifesto of the Communist Party. In contrast to the reformist eulogists of class co-operation, who sought to spread bourgeois ideology within the working-class movement, the Communists were convinced that the class interests of the exploited and the exploiters were irreconcilable, and that capitalism could be replaced with socialism only as a result of mass popular struggle.
The objective conditions gave ground to suppose that one country after another would soon fall away from the capitalist system and that the victory of a world revolution was inevitable. But the forces capable of rallying the masses were as yet poorly organised, and there was a gap between the objective _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin and the Communist International, Moscow, 1970, p. 140 (in Russian).
53 possibilities, and the state of the subjective factor of the revolution.The Statutes of the Communist International adopted at the Second Congress in August 1920 said: "The Communist International sets itself this goal: to fight using all possible means, even arms in hand, to overthrow the international bourgeoisie Such a struggle had to be carried on by an appropriate organisation. "The Communist International should in effect amount to a single world-wide Communist Party, where the various Parties operating in each country would constitute separate sections.''^^1^^ The Comintern was a voluntary organisation, and any Communist Party could join it of its own free will and could withdraw from it at any time.
Lenin highly appreciated the fact that the new association had emerged and would develop as a voluntary international alliance of revolutionaries, which meant that from the very beginning it offered opportunities for different forms of mutual relations among the Communist Parties.
The collectively elaborated forms of international unity were in line both with the immediate goals dictated by the revolutionary situation and with the specific features of the formation and the state of the international communist movement. The Communists were joined by the left-wing _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin and the Communist International, p. 228.
54 socialists who had broken with Social-Democracy, by the anarcho-syndicalists,, and various revolutionary groups. Many of the newcomers were motivated by feelings of revolutionary fervour rather than by a clear understanding of what the new-type Party should be like.From the spring of 1918, foreign sections were set up under the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) Central Committee: Hungarian, Romanian, Czechoslovak, German, South-Slav, Italian, French, Anglo-- American, Bulgarian, Finnish, and Polish, which had their cells in many towns.^^1^^
The foreign prisoners-of-war who sided with young Soviet Russia and took part in the Civil War, played an important role in setting up the earliest communist organisations in different countries. Upon returning to their own countries, Communists of different nationalities who had fought side by side in Russia remained internationalists and were prepared to take part in revolutionary battles in any country. The First All-Russia Congress of internationalist-minded POWs opened in Moscow on 13 April, 1918. The Congress, which represented more than 200,000 men, set up a Revolutionary International Socialist Organisation of Foreign Workers and Peasants and called for the formation of the Third International. At a vast _-_-_
~^^1^^ See, Internationalists. Foreign Working People Who Took Part in the Struggle for Soviet Power, Moscow, 1967, pp. 176-77 (in Russian).
55 rally, the delegates declared their firm resolve to carry on a revolutionary struggle to overthrow capitalism in Germany, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria and other countries.~^^1^^In the autumn of 1918, there were already 85 international units throughout Russia with more than 50,000 men, and the total number of foreign working people who fought in the Red Army during the Civil War was several hundred thousand. In the forward detachments that took part in the offensive against Kolchak, there were many internationalists: Hungarians, Germans, Austrians, Czechs, Slovaks, Bulgarians, Romanians, Serbs, Italians, Koreans, Chinese, Turks, Poles, several Frenchmen, one Scotsman and one Black.
The absence of a revolutionary party in Europe, Lenin wrote in 1918, was "a serious misfortune and a grave danger".^^2^^ That misfortune could not be overcome simply by the formation of the Comintern. Although the young Communist Parties proclaimed that revolutionary Marxism was their banner, they were still to develop into Marxist parties in the full sense of the word. They had to be seasoned, to overcome the frequent ultra-leftist and right-opportunist deviations, to foster their leading cadres, and strengthen their ties with the masses. That was a _-_-_
~^^1^^ See, L. I. Yakovlev, Essays in the History of the Working People's International Solidarity, Moscow, 1974, pp. 147-48 (in Russian). ;
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol, 28, 1965. p. 113.
56 complicated process which could not be successfully carried out without a centralised organisation.The burst of indignation caused by the treachery of the reformist leaders was coupled with an urge to set up an international organisation whose structure would be fundamentally different from the amorphous Second International, which had proved to be powerless in the face of historical ordeals.
All those who saw themselves as Communists believed that the need for a single international organisation was self-evident. The Comintern's leadership was formed and developed as a truly international leadership based on the equality of the member parties. One of the most favourite malicious devices of anti-communist propaganda was to present the Comintern as an instrument of the Soviet Union's state interests, and to explain all its mistakes by the domination of the Bolshevik Party, which allegedly laid claim to a special status in the Comintern. One can sometimes trace the influence of that version even in communist writings.
In saying, for instance, that no Party can now lay claim to leadership of the communist movement, some may add that at the time of the Comintern this role was played by the Soviet Communist Party. In this way, the prestige commanded by the Leninist Party because of its revolutionary consistency and experience is presented as a "claim to leadership". Delegates speaking at Comintern 57 congresses often expressed sincere gratitude to the Russian comrades not only for theoretical advice, but also for teaching them revolution through practical experience. The Bolsheviks, who never refused to take an active part in the Comintern's work, did their utmost to ensure that its leadership was formed and functioned as a collective, international body.
From one congress to another, the Comintern's ruling organs were enlarged, and the number of parties represented on these increased.
The First Congress (1919), which was attended by representatives from 21 countries, decided to entrust the leadership of the Communist International to an Executive Committee, which was to be "composed of one representative from each of the most important countries": Russia, Germany, German Austria, Hungary, the Balkan Federation, Switzerland, and Scandinavia. The resolution on organisational matters said: "Parties of other countries which proclaim their adherence to the Communist International before the second congress shall have a seat on the Executive Committee.''
The Second Congress of the Comintern in 1920, attended by delegates from 41 countries, adopted its Statutes, according to which "ten to thirteen most important communist parties, the list to be ratified by the regular world congress, shall each have one representative with full voting powers on the 58 Executive Committee. Other organisations and parties accepted by the Communist International have the right to delegate to the Executive Committee one representative each, with consultative voice." The Party of the country where the world congress decides to locate the Executive Committee was to have five voting representatives on that Committee. The Statutes said that "the seat of the Executive Committee of the Communist International shall be determined on each occasion by the world congress of the Communist International".~^^1^^
The Congress approved a list of countries with full voting powers on the Executive Committee. These were Russia, Great Britain, Germany, France, the USA, Italy, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Scandinavia, Holland, Poland, Finland, the Far East and the Middle East, a total of 16 countries and regions, nine more than the figure approved at the First Congress.^^2^^
But the parties were still w^ak and were so short of cadres that they found it hard to send their delegates to the Executive Committee for the term of a whole year. The representatives of the German and some other Communist Parties even suggested at the Congress that the running of executive matters _-_-_
~^^1^^ The Communist International. 1919-1943. Documents, Vol. I, 1919-1922, Oxford University Press, London, 1956, pp. 37, 38, 164-65.
~^^2^^ See, Second Congress of the Comintern, JulyAugust 1920, Moscow, 1934, p. 457 (in Russian).
59 should be simply entrusted to the Russian comrades. It was only after a vigorous protest by the Soviet delegation, which categorically insisted that the Executive Committee should be made up of representatives of the fraternal parties, that the Congress decided accordingly. Nevertheless, the allegation that the Comintern was in the service of Moscow was circulated from its earliest days. The reformist opponents of the new international revolutionary organisation emphasised it in every way, and any group that did not agree with one decision of the Comintern or another used the allegation about "Moscow's dominance" as the clinching ``argument''.It is common knowledge that the idea of setting up a Communist International was formulated long before the emergence of the Soviet state, and this is enough to show the injustice of presenting the Comintern as an instrument of Soviet Russia's foreign policy. The accusation that the Bolshevik Party sought to secure special privileges in the Comintern is equally false. When the Second Congress of the Comintern adopted its 21 Conditions of Admission and the leaders of the right wing of the Independent Social-- Democratic Party of Germany Arthur Crispien and Wilhelm Dittman started a slander campaign against the Comintern's ``interference'' in the affairs of nations and raised a hue and cry over "Moscow's dictatorship", Lenin addressed a letter to the German and French workers. He showed that "all the clamour 60 about Moscow's `dictates', etc., is simply a red herring. As a matter of fact, only five of the twenty members of the Communist International's Executive Committee belong to the Russian Communist Party.... In fact, a struggle is going on between the revolutionary, proletarian elements and the opportunist petty-bourgeois elements."~^^1^^
The legend about a Russified International is also a favourite with present-day anti-- communists. Thus, in his book, Lenin's Heritage, Francois Feito simply repeats the old allegation without producing any arguments. For some reason, he prefers to quote the leftists, like a motorist who signals a left turn, and turns right. Among his ``witnesses'' are Amadeo Bordiga, who sought to impose on the Communist Party of Italy and the Comintern the sectarian policy of abandoning the common front, and the Neumann-- Remmele group, which did much harm to the anti-fascist struggle of the Communist Party of Germany with its leftist statements. Feito presented these double-dyed sectarians as leaders who had dissociated themselves from the ``responsibility'' attributed by them to the Comintern's strategy elaborated by the Russians from a Russian viewpoint.~^^2^^
Fernando Claudin, once a member of the Communist Party of Spain who now _-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, 1966, pp. 280-81.
~^^2^^ See, Frangois Feito, L'heritage de Lenine, Paris, 1974, p. 299.
61 specialises in denigrating the history of the international communist movement, repeats the same hackneyed allegation that the Comintern was "an external form imposed on the international proletariat and subordinated to the needs of a national state".^^1^^ Meanwhile, the Comintern's leadership was a collective one. In less than 11 months after the Second Congress, the Executive Committee met 31 times and discussed 196 questions, 128 of these political and the rest organisational.^^2^^At the Third Congress in 1921, attended by delegates from as many as 52 countries, it was noted that a "truly international leadership" had been formed for the first time in the history of the contemporary workingclass movement. The delegates of the Russian Communist Party declared that they would be the happiest people in the world when a proletarian revolution won out in Germany (or any other country) and it would be possible to move the Comintern to Berlin.^^3^^ However, the Comintern had to remain in Soviet Russia. The Congress formed an Executive Committee consisting of representatives of 48 parties.
In the course of 16 months after the Third Congress, the Executive Committee held 30 sessions attended by 1,032 delegates, and _-_-_
~^^1^^ Fernando Claudin, The Communist Movement from Comintern to Cominform, Part Two, Monthly Review Press, New York and London, 1975, p. 641.
~^^2^^ See, Third World Congress of the Comintern, Verbatim Report, p. 73 (in Russian).
~^^3^^ Ib id., p. 91.
62 discussed 140 questions, 97 of these political and 43 organisational. The Executive Committee's Presidium met 75 times and discussed 735 questions.The Fourth Congress in 1922 was attended by delegates from 58 countries. In view of the expansion of the communist movement, it was now possible to form the Executive Committee in a different way. It was decided that its members would no longer be delegated by the Parties, but would be elected at the World Congress, thus becoming, "as the elected representatives on the Executive, the truly responsible workers and leaders of the Communist International".^^1^^
Hugo Eberlein of the Communist Party of Germany, who reported on that question, explained the reasons for the changes and said, among other things: "The opponents of the Communist International have continually claimed that the leadership of the Communist International is in the hands of the Russians, and that it is carrying on its work in the various sections and countries at the dictates of the Russians." Speaking of the difficulties in delegating representatives to the Executive Committee, he proposed that the Parties "should gradually extend their cooperation in the leadership of the Communist International, and that they send their best and most capable representatives in _-_-_
~^^1^^ Bulletin of the IV Congress of the Communist International (Moscow), No. 26, 6 December 1922, p. 16.
63 order to guarantee a truly international composition of the Executive Committee of the Communist International". He voiced the regret that the best and most active comrades confined themselves to their own parties, not showing enough interest in international problems.~^^1^^The Congress elected an Executive Committee consisting of 25 members and 10 alternate members, and also an enlarged plenum with representatives from all the sections.
The Fifth (1924), Sixth (1928) and Seventh (1935) congresses did not introduce any significant procedural changes into the formation of the Executive Committee. But as the movement expanded, the structure of the Comintern's ruling organs became more i ramified and drew closer to the Parties. Hundreds of Communists worked in the Comintern's regional bureaus and secretariats, in its various departments.
So, all the necessary steps were taken--- largely on the initiative of the Russian Com- j munist Party---to ensure that the Comintern's •leadership assimilated the best representatives of the international communist movement, all its diverse experience. Back at the Second Comintern Congress, Lenin urged all Communists to "take due account of the experience of revolutionaries in all countries, not only of-the Russian revolution (for here _-_-_
^^1^^ Ibtd.
64 we are not at a Russian congress, but at one that is international)".^^1^^In working to unite all revolutionaries in a new-type organisation, Lenin wanted the relations within it to be marked by a spirit of true comradeship, exceptional tact, and a judicious attitude to metters relating to the correction of errors.
When the German Communist Party was split at its Second Congress in October 1919, Lenin wrote, addressing the members of its Central Committee: "If the split was inevitable, efforts should be made not to deepen it, but to approach the Executive Committee of the Third International for mediation.''^^2^^
Lenin's letter to the splinter group shows his concern for creating a friendly atmosphere in the international communist movement, and the importance of an unbiased discussion of differences. He wrote: "I am not a member of the Executive Committee of the Third International, but I believe it will offer the German Communists its good services in restoring German communist unity.... A careful discussion of differences and an exchange of views on an international scale could assist in advancing the cause of German communism and in mustering its forces.''~^^3^^
Having written in 1920 his famous work,
``Left-Wing'' Communism---an Infantile
_-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, 1966,
p. 261. ~^^2^^ Ibid., Vol. 30, pp. 87-88. ~^^3^^ Ib id., pp. 89-90.
What Lenin particularly disliked was tactless remarks when dealing with foreign revolutionaries, for every tactless remark could sow mistrust and suspicion, hindering the efforts to strengthen unity. Communist leaders from different countries recalled this as one of Lenin's characteristic features. Klara Zetkin, for instance, recalls what Lenin told her before the Third Congress of the Comintern in view of the criticism levelled at the ``left-wingers'' in the Communist Party of Germany. " 'If we want the tactics subject to confirmation by the Congress to be strict and carried out without much friction, if we want them to become the law governing the activities of the communist parties, then our dear `Lefts' should not feel particularly offended and return home without much bitter feeling.... It seems you wrote to me once that we Russians ought to learn somewhat to understand the psychology of the West _-_-_
~^^1^^ See, Lenin Miscellany XXXV, Moscow, 1945, p. 122 (in Russian).
66 and not immediately jab people in the face with a stiff broom. I made a note of that.'``A smile of satisfaction passed over Lenin's face.
`` 'So you see, we do not want to jab the `Lefts' in the face just now; we even intend to pour some balsam over their wounds.. . .' "^^1^^
Klara Zetkin also made an interesting observation during Lenin's debate with a group of leftist-minded members of the German delegation, who advocated the so-called attack theory, whose idea was that the revolutionaries should always attack, regardless of the situation. Lenin's tactic was to listen, compare, and summarise, instead of "reading out editorials", although he made no secret of his opinion. He kept asking questions and attentively followed the reasoning of the German comrades, often asking for explanations and additional data.
William Gallacher, Giovanni Germanetto and many other foreign Communists also noted Lenin's comradely, attentive attitude. It was not only Lenin's personal trait, but a definite principle of mutual relations with the representatives of fraternal parties, which he wanted to make an accepted principle within the Comintern. Lenin worked to create an atmosphere that would be free of any diplomacy of half-truths or contempt for the opinions expressed by others. He saw to it that _-_-_
~^^1^^ Klara Zetkin, My Recollections of Lenin, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1956, pp. 32-33.
__PRINTERS_P_67_COMMENT__ 5* 67 the decisions were elaborated jointly, and that dissenters not only had an opportunity but were in effect in duty bound to defend their views. When it became known that the Italian delegation at the Second Congress of the Comintern thought it wrong to support the bourgeois-democratic movement in the colonial countries, Lenin sent a note to the delegation, asking its members why none of them was represented on the colonial comission to defend their idea.The international working-class movement has known different forms of mutual relations between national revolutionary contingents, but whatever the form these relations took depending on the historical situation, it was in one way or another connected with what Lenin called the international discipline of the workers' parties. In connection with the Stuttgart Congress of the Second International in 1907, he noted such an important tradition of the working-class movement as voluntary fulfilment of jointly adopted decisions: "Formally, the decisions of the international congresses are not binding on the individual nations, but their moral significance is such that the non-observance of decisions is, in fact, an exception which is rarer than the non-observance by the individual parties of the decisions of their own congresses.''~^^1^^
_-_-_~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 13, 1962, pp. 82, 85.
68At the time of the Comintern, whose decisions were recognised as binding by all the Communist Parties, Lenin continued to underline the special importance of the moral factor for international discipline, putting little emphasis on the organisational aspect of international unity. He singled out the most significant element: readiness to carry out joint decisions. Lenin's letter to the Austrian Communists written in August 1920, soon after the Second Congress of the Comintern, is characteristic. In defiance of the Congress' decision, the Communist Party of Austria decided to boycott the parliamentary elections. In doing so, it was not motivated by the country's specific conditions, but in principle denied the possibility of taking part in a bourgeois-democratic parliament. Lenin patiently and thoroughly explained the erroneousness of such a stand, and expressed the hope that the Austrian Communists would "not be afraid to declare their open and forthright recognition of international proletarian discipline. We are proud that we settle the great problems of the workers' struggle for their emancipation by submitting to the international discipline of the revolutionary proletariat, with due account of the experience of the workers in different countries, reckoning with their knowledge and their will, and thus giving effect in deed . . . to the unity of the workers' class struggle for communism throughout the world.''^^1^^
_-_-_~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 269.
69Here, too, Lenin believed that international discipline was based on a readiness to take due account of the world experience of class struggle, the store of revolutionary knowledge, and willingness to reckon with the will of the workers of different countries, that is, not the organisational, but the moral aspect of the "binding nature" of international decisions.
There are many ill-intentioned stories about the nature of inter-party relations under the Comintern. Francois Feito, for instance, avoids the concept of ``internationalism'', rejecting it as a mystification used for hegemonistic purposes. As an anti-communist, he prefers the concept ``supranationality'', which he uses to present the whole of the Comintern's activity as a "unified strategy" that did not take into account "nationally specific viewpoints". Indeed, cosmopolitan bourgeois ``supranationality'' ignores national specifics, while proletarian internationalism treats these with respect. The Comintern's strategy reckoned with the specific features of different regions and individual countries, assimilating the experience of all the contingents of the international communist movement.
Anti-communist writers have variously played up the word ``monolithism'', seeking to portray the Comintern as an organisation that ruled out the possibility of any discussion, debate and comparison of different viewpoints, making it quite impossible for the 70 parties to adopt independent decisions. But that has nothing to do with the truth.
The 21 Conditions of Admission to the Communist International---a document which barred the way to opportunist and centrist elements---assumed that the Comintern, which had to operate against the background of an intensifying civil war, had to be much more centralised than the Second International. At the same time, it was emphasised: "Consideration must of course be given by the Communist International and its Executive Committee in all their activities to the varying conditions in which the individual parties have to fight and work, and they must take decisions of general validity only when such decisions are possible.''^^1^^
One could recall, for instance, the Second Congress of the Comintern in 1920 with its live and creative discussion of the nationalcolonial question and the differences over it; the debate on the "attack theory" before and during the Third Congress in 1921; the debates on the problems of a united workers' front (1922) and on a united workers' and popular front before and during the Seventh Congress of the Comintern (1935). These and many other debates show that the Comintern was an organisation where centralised leadership was combined with democratic decision-making.
_-_-_^^1^^ The Communist International. 1919-1943. Documents, Vol. I, p. 172.
71Apart from holding Comintern congresses, the member parties met annually for extended plenary sessions of the Executive Committee, which, as the Committee pointed out in one of its documents, had acquired the importance of small-scale and business-like international congresses. The regular meetings of the various organs of the Comintern's collective leadership were marked by broad participation of the member parties in dealing with all the questions of the international communist movement, a constant exchange of opinion, sharing of experience, and comparison of different viewpoints. Klara Zetkin wrote with a feeling of satisfaction: "We are used to having our Congresses transformed now and then into a scene of heated and passionate fights in the battle on theory and practice.''^^1^^ She urged the Parties, first and foremost, to give a detailed and thorough analysis of current events without recourse to stereotypes, for that was the only way to achieve clarity and avoid mistakes.
It was not always possible to reach a unanimous agreement. Thus, in the autumn of 1925, a parliamentary communist conference was held in Brussels, but it was unable to adopt any' resolution or settle the differences between the French and the German Communist Parties. Such facts were hot dramatised, but were seen as an indicator of the need to make the Comintern's policy more _-_-_
~^^1^^ International-Press Correspondence, Vol. 6, No. 20, 17 March 1926, p. 319.
72 concrete and to co-ordinate the Parties' activity on an international scale. As the activity and independence of the Communist Parties increased, the problem of co-- ordinating their international activity became more acute. In 1926, Ernst Thalmann said that one grave defect in the work of the Comintern Executive Committee's plenary session was when it concentrated on the activity of individual sections, doing little to bring out the connections between these individual questions and international problems.As the leaders of the Communist Parties gained political experience and broadened their outlook, their speeches in the Comintern's organs increasingly dealt with major international problems and were no longer confined to reports on the activity of their own Party. Their broad generalisations were usually made on the strength of an analysis of a wide array of facts and a good knowledge of the state of affairs in the Party.
At many stages of its activity, the Comintern managed to combine broad generalisations and concrete decisions.
Constant inter-party ties and the ability to approach every question from the positions of the international communist movement enabled the Comintern's ruling bodies competently to influence the Parties' activity, to correct mistakes, and suggest right decisions. Chairman of the Italian Communist Party Luigi Longo wrote: "Much has been said, especially in the recent period, about the 73 Communist International's interference in the activities of individual parties, which has nearly always been presented as a factor that had a negative influence on the policy and action of the Communist Parties of various countries .... But it is a fact that if we want to assess the Communist International's involvement in the so-called Italian question in the years we are speaking of, we are bound to state that that involvement, after the Livorno Congress^^1^^, was always more sensible and better suited to Italian imperatives than the line followed so relentlessly by the Italian leaders.''^^2^^
__NOTE__ Bizarre: "*" and "1" footnotes in above paragraph!! So made them "1" and "2"/The Comintern's ruling bodies usually adopted their decisions concerning a particular Party only after thorough preparations, together with some high-ranking representatives of the Party itself. The draft decision was then discussed in detail. Unanimous decisions were not always attained, although an effort was always made to find a formula that everyone would accept. Such a procedure gives the lie to the allegations made by anti-communist historians that the Comintern's ruling organs were closed bodies that imposed their decisions on the parties behind their backs.
_-_-_^^1^^ Congress of the left wing of the Italian Socialist Party in Livorno, which decided to found the Italian Communist Party.
~^^2^^ Luigi Longo, Carlo Salinari, Tra reaztone e rivoluzione. Ricordi e riflessioni sui primi anni di vita del PCI, Edizioni del Calendario, Milano, 1972, p. 150,
74Collective decisions were circumstantial and helped the parties to develop and increase their independence.
Of course, the Comintern and the individual Communist Parties were sometimes unable to find correct solutions, but this was not because someone had deliberately imposed wrong decisions.
The Comintern's mistakes have been widely discussed in anti-communist writings, especially after the war. Up to the second half of the 1930s, anti-communist historians believe, there was no particular need to study the history of the Comintern, for communism was not a political force anywhere except Russia. But as communist influence increased, the reactionaries intensified their efforts to distort the history of the communist movement and the Comintern, exaggerating its mistakes, accusing it of mistakes it did not make, and perverting the complicated process of the growth and development of the Communist Parties.
The road that the young Communist Parties had to travel was not easy. Before they could become an active political factor in the life of their countries and peoples, the Communists had to be schooled and tempered in the course of revolutionary struggle. Lenin wrote: "We have an army of Communists all over the world. It is still poorly trained and poorly organised. It would be extremely harmful to forget this truth or be afraid of admitting it. Submitting ourselves to a 75 most careful and rigorous test, and studying the experience of our own movement, we must train this army efficiently; we must organise it properly, and test it in all sorts of manoeuvres, all sorts of battles, in attack and in retreat. We cannot win without this long and hard schooling.''^^1^^
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 2. DEVELOPMENTIn the early 1920s, it became obvious that capitalism had withstood the revolutionary onslaught. The gigantic social upheaval that threatened to wipe out the capitalist system ---at any rate in Europe, if not throughout the whole world---began to subside, and the first signs of that were evident as early as 1920 and 1921. It was still possible that the world revolution would develop the way it had been expected to at the height of the revolutionary upswing, but the revolutionaries admitted that indirect methods of struggle would have to be used instead of a frontal attack.
While many of those who were just
joining the communist movement believed that
national specifics were fairly unimportant in
carrying out the revolution which was
acquiring global proportions, Lenin wrote in his
``Left-Wing'' Communism---an Infantile
_-_-_
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, 1965,
p. 520.
Lenin sought to ensure that such a line was consistently followed by the Comintern. When it became obvious that it was objectively impossible to regard the slogan of direct struggle for proletarian dictatorship as a universal one, the Fourth Congress of the Comintern (November 1922) considered a draft programme of the Communist Party of Germany, which concretised the question of transitional stages on the working class's way to political power. The Congress approved the slogan of a ``workers' government" formulated in the programme, maintaining that such a government, without being an organ of proletarian dictatorship, could become a transitional stage on the way to a socialist revolution.
That slogan, subsequently supplemented with the slogan of a worker-peasant government, showed that the Communist Parties realised the objective need to look for different ways leading to working-class power in accordance with the specifics of individual countries.
The need to look for different ways of revolutionary struggle became ever more imperative, particularly in view of capitalist society's temporary stabilisation, which made it ever more obvious that each Communist Party had to find its own ways of struggle to solve the problems facing its country.
77The Programme of the Communist International, adopted by the Sixth Congress of the Comintern in 1928, no longer called for an all-out struggle for proletarian dictatorship (an appeal formulated by the First Congress in the conditions of a revolutionary situation), but said that the prevailing circumstances made it "historically inevitable that the proletariat would come to power by many different ways and degrees of rapidity; that a number of countries must pass through certain transition stages leading to the dictatorship of the proletariat and must adopt varied forms of socialist construction".^^1^^
Life has shown that the ways of transition to socialist society are much more diverse and complicated than those indicated in the Comintern Programme, which reduced the whole spectrum of conditions and ways of revolution to three main types corresponding to "highly developed capitalist countries", "countries with a medium level of capitalist development", and "colonial and semicolonial countries". Nevertheless, the ^very fact that the Programme contained the conclusion on the diversity of ways of revolutionary struggle is of fundamental importance. Apart from refuting the anti-- communist allegations that the Comintern always tended to level down the Communist Parties and ``imposed'' the same tasks on all of these, _-_-_
~^^1^^ Programme of the Communist International, Moscow, 1932, p. 41.
78 that conclusion meant an objective need to increase the independence of the Communist Parties, develop their initiative, and help them to strike deeper root in the national soil of their countries.The Comintern did not deprive its sections of independence. Thus, the Executive Committee reported to the Second Congress: "It has not encroached and will never encroach on the autonomy of individual parties in purely local matters. But it is bound to give instructions to all the parties belonging to the Communist International in matters of international and fundamental importance."^^1^^ Life itself made it necessary to extend the Parties' independence. The forced transition from the general offensive against world capitalism to a struggle against it within the borders of individual countries in effect paved the way for changes in the organisational forms of communist unity. In the conditions of the day, however, it was still impossible to abandon the idea of a single party.
The Communist Parties were still weak, and their transformation into genuine Marxist-Leninist parties was still far from complete. The knowledge of theory by Party members, including many activists and leaders, was still very inadequate. There was a gap between the basic ideological and tactical principles of the Comintern formulated by _-_-_
~^^1^^ Second Congress of the Comintern, July-August 1920, p. 600 (in Russian).
79 the Bolsheviks and the ability to abide by these principles in practice.The problem became particularly acute as the revolutionary tide began to ebb, when some of those who had sided with the Communists solely in the expectation of an imminent victory began to leave the Party ranks, and the situation gave ground for despondency, for right-opportunist trends and, at the same time, for adventurism caused by despair.
In the mid-1920s, the Comintern put forward before all its sections the task of becoming "genuine Communist Parties". Evidently, that was to be a "continuous process, which has only just been initiated in the best of the European Parties of the Comintern. The work which confronts us in this sphere is enormous and demands many years for its accomplishment.''^^1^^ That process of transformation into genuine Communist Parties was known as Bolshevisation. It took a long time, exerting a powerful influence on the future of the international communist movement, notably, on the nature of its international unity. The Fifth Congress of the Comintern (June-July 1924) emphasised that under no circumstances should Bolshevisation "be understood as the mechanical application of the experience of the Bolshevik Party in Russia to all the other parties".^^2^^
_-_-_~^^1^^ International-Press Correspondence, Vol. 5, No. 47, 4 June 1925, p. 615.
~^^2^^ Ibid., Vol. 4, No. 62, 29 August 1924, p. 652.
80A year later, the Comintern stressed that "genuine Bolshevism demands above all a precise estimate of all the concrete circumstances of place and time".^^1^^
The Communist Parties had to avoid two dangers: that of falling apart into small sects of ``pure'' Communists who had ``good'' principles but could not find common language with the massive working-class movement; and that of generating into a shapeless semiSocial-Democratic party unable to combine the struggle to win over the masses; with loyalty to communist principles. To avoid these dangers, each Communist Party had to overcome its weaknesses, to master the best revolutionary traditions of its own and other countries, and "consciously to continue all that which was genuinely revolutionary and genuinely Marxian in both the First and the Second Internationals".^^2^^
The features of a new-type party were gradually growing stronger. Among these were a good command of Marxist-Leninist theory, active work among the masses, and organisational changes giving priority to party cells at industrial enterprises, greater selfcriticism, and stronger discipline.
Much of what every Communist has now come to see as axiomatic was at first puzzling and often met with resistance. Considerable difficulties had to be overcome, for _-_-_
~^^1^^ Ibid., Vol. 5, No. 47, 4 June 1925, p. 615.
~^^2^^ Ibid., p. 616.
__PRINTERS_P_81_COMMENT__ 6-01267 81 instance, in setting up Party cells at industrial enterprises. Jacques Duclos recalled that the rightists and the centrists in the French Communist Party insisted that "territorial sections were the only logical base for the Party's organisation", that "in France, cells could not constitute ihe Party base", and so on. The very word ``cell'' was unusual in the political vocabulary.^^1^^Although mistakes were sometimes made in spite of the Comintern's warning that the valid experience of others should never be applied mechanically and that the Parties had to borrow from Bolshevism only that which "was and is international and of general application",^^2^^ the Parties were becoming increasingly Marxist-Leninist in their complexion. That entailed an ever more profound international approximation of the Parties, which were developing on a common ideological, political and organisational basis. Many Parties began to show greater revolutionary initiative, took a better account of the specific situation in their own countries, and strengthened their ties with the masses. The Comintern vigorously supported their efforts, in effect encouraging the Parties' independence.
_-_-_~^^1^^ Jacques Duclos, Memoires. 1896-1924. Le Chemin qae j'ai choisi de Verdnn an Parti Commnniste, Les Grandes Etudes Contemporaines, Fayard, 1968, pp. 256, 256-57.
~^^2^^ International-Press Correspondence, Vol. 4 No. 62, 29 August 1924, p. 652.
82In doing its utmost to enhance the Parties' fighting capacity, the Comintern was preparing objective conditions for new forms of relations among them. Naturally, the independence issue was bound to arise in the practical international communist movement. The Fourth Comintern Congress decided to elect the Executive Committee at the Congress instead of forming it from representatives elected by individual Communist Parties, as up to then. That decision, which indicated the emergence of leaders known to the whole communist movement, met with objections on the part of some Scandinavian Communists, who believed that elections at the Congress would encroach on the Parties' independence. The Executive Committee circulated a letter among the Comintern's major sections, notifying them of the substance of the dispute, and said that "this extremely important and, at the same time, most delicate matter called for a frank, friendly and comradely exchange of opinion... in order to convince the doubting comrades that the decisions of the Fourth World Congress are correct. ... We realise very well that in definite circumstances supercentralism could prove to be as fatal for the Third International as the total absence of centralism was for the Second International.''^^1^^
The question of balancing out centralised leadership with Party independence was _-_-_
^^1^^ Kommunist (Moscow), March 1969.
__PRINTERS_P_83_COMMENT__ 6* 83 debated at the Third Enlarged Executive in June 1923. Otto Kuusinen formulated the substance of the problem saying that there was only one relative limit: "Centralisation must be extended as far as required by revolutionary activity.''^^1^^The Enlarged Executive adopted a decision confirming that "it has never been the aim of the Executive to deprive the Communist Parties of their independence. It has always understood that the International cannot be strong unless the Communist Parties independently, from their own knowledge and with their own will, conduct a correct Communist policy. Unfortunately, the situation in the Communist International is that the Communist Parties of various countries have departed from the correct path towards the right or towards the left. It is consequently necessary that the International Congress, and the Executive Committee elected by it, should interfere and attempt to correct these errors on the basis of the common experience of the international working-class movement".^^2^^
The Executive Committee's report to its Sixth Enlarged Session (17 February-15 March 1926) said: "Now it is time to tell all our Parties: 'More independence.'" It said that the Parties had to gain greater confidence and increase their independence so as to _-_-_
~^^1^^ International-Press Correspondence, Vol. 3, No. 49, 12 July 1923, p. 492.
~^^2^^ Ibid., p. 505.
84 bring up a new generation of leaders, making a more energetic effort in this direction. The report said: "If we had made all these proposals three or four years ago it would have been empty phraseology. Why so? Because at that time the Parties were too weak, they were still suffering from infantile disorders. Now the situation is utterly different, the Parties are stronger and have developed."^^1^^ It was pointed out at the session that many Parties had a working record of six-seven years and, in solving their own problems, had to act more independently and with greater vigour, relying on their historical experience.As the threat of war loomed larger and the fascist danger increased, the Parties had to show greater initiative and take better account of the real state of affairs in their countries. Ernst Thalmann said at the Twelfth Executive in the autumn of 1932 that Communist Party tactics "should not be the result of a purely mechanical application of the experience of some country in all the sections of the Comintern.''^^2^^ The Executive warned that its decisions should not be indiscriminately applied to individual countries, but should be concretised by each section of the Comintern depending on the situation in which it had to work.
_-_-_~^^1^^ Ibid., Vol. 6, No. 18, 10 March 1926, p. 274.
~^^2^^ Twelfth Plenary Session of the ECCI, Verbatim Report, Vol. 3, Moscow, 1933, p. 85 (in Russian).
85The importance of learning from each other was constantly emphasised. Ernst Thalmann said, for instance, that the German and other Communist Parties would do well to master the Czech Communists' "skilful methods of work among the masses", while the Czech comrades could take a cue from the Germans in mustering a common front.
The question of Party initiative acquired ever greater urgency. The international situation had become so complicated that no one knew in what conditions the Executive Committee would meet for its next plenary session, or what kind of contacts could ,be established between the Parties of the Communist International and its centre in the event of war. Palmiro Togliatti said: "In such a situation, we cannot make any headway unless our Parties and all their organisations display the broadest initiative.''^^1^^
The question of the Parties' initiative and their ability to act independently became ever more important. Every year, the situation made new demands on the Communist Parties. At the Thirteenth Executive in late 1933, that is, when the Nazis had already come to power in Germany, Dmitri Manuilsky (a noted figure in the Russian and international revolutioning movement---Ed.} said that as the situation became ever more complicated, it was important to "warn the Comintern's sections against dilettantish universalism, _-_-_
~^^1^^ Ibid., p. 160.
86 which formulates party tactics on the basis of general development tendencies without regard for the specifics of each individual country''.~^^1^^At that plenary session, it was pointed out more emphatically than ever before that it was very important for the Parties duly to foresee any changes in the situation and take the necessary organisational steps. The Parties that were too slow to make the necessary changes in the slogans of struggle were criticised, and measures were taken to help them learn how to direct the masses' struggle in any situation.
In face of the fascist threat to all the working people, to peace and freedom, the Seventh Comintern Congress (1935) concentrated the Parties' attention on the most important and pressing task: that of mustering a common front of the working class, a broad popular front of all the forces which had not as yet recognised the need for a socialist revolution, but were nevertheless prepared to defend themselves against fascist barbarity.
Given the triumph of socialism in the USSR and its growing international role, the anti-fascist struggle and defence of democratic rights and freedoms did not put off the working class's access to power, but paved new ways to it. Lenin's ideas on the _-_-_
~^^1^^ Thirteenth Session of the ECCI, Verbatim Report, Moscow, 1954, p. 314 (in Russian).
87 diversity of concrete approaches in each country to the solution of one and the same international task could now be put into practice.Special importance now attached to the Communist Parties' ability correctly and independently to assess all the specific features of their countries and find ways of solving common international tasks on the basis of a concrete analysis of a concrete situation. In these conditions, the gap between the objective revolutionary possibilities and the power of the communist movement considerably narrowed down. The Communist Parties of many countries had grown stronger and gained experience, and talented leaders capable of finding their bearings in complicated situations had come to stand at their head. Manuilsky said at the Thirteenth Executive: "Dimitrov's conduct at the Leipzig trial makes one's heart beat with pride at the thought that such Dimitrovs have been fostered by our World Communist Party . . .''^^1^^
In the mid-1980s, only 22 of the Comintern's 67 sections 'in capitalist countries, 11 of these in Europe, could work legally or semi-legally, and the rest had to operate underground. Nevertheless, the Communists had become a much more powerful force. All this enabled the Seventh Congress of the Comintern to instruct the Executive, "while shifting the main stress of its activity to the elaboration of the fundamental _-_-_
~^^1^^ Ibid., p. 308.
88 political and tactical lines of the world labour movement, to proceed, in deciding any question, from the concrete situation and specific conditions obtaining in each particular country, and as a rule to avoid direct intervention in internal organisational matters of the Communist parties.''~^^1^^The Congress pledged the Executive to help the Communist Parties to make better use both of their own experience and that of the world communist movement, avoiding any mechanical transfer of experience from one country to another or substitution of stereotypes and general formulas for concrete Marxist analysis. This amounted to an organisational confirmation of the Parties' growing independence and testified not only to the changing situation in the world, but also to the Comintern's successful activity which has created the conditions for going over to a voluntary unity of independent Parties.
Subsequently, the Comintern met with special difficulties.^^2^^ Stalin's personality cult and unjustified repressions, which also involved foreign Communists staying in the Soviet Union, did great harm to the communist movement. That was bound to affect the growth _-_-_
~^^1^^ Seventh World Congress of the Communist International. Resolutions and Decisions, Co-operative Publishing Society of Foreign Workers in the USSR, Moscow, 1935, p. 7.
~^^2^^ See, M. A. Suslov, Along the Road of Communist Construction, Speeches and Articles, Vol. 2, Moscow, 1977, p. 179 (in Russian).
89 of party independence, but the process continued all the same.In the spring of 1943, when the Second World War reached a turning point, heralding the inevitable defeat of fascism and opening up good prospects for the development of national liberation and social struggles in the Nazi-oppressed countries, the Presidium of the Comintern's Executive Committee put before the Communist Parties the question of dissolving the Communist International.
Maurice Thorez said at the Presidium meeting: "The old form of the workers' international association has outlived itself." In his opinion, the dissolution of the Comintern would "help to extend the national anti-Hitler front in France".^^1^^ Other Presidium members, coming out in favour of the dissolution, also proceeded from the need to create conditions for the total independence of the Communist Parties, which were to play an important role in the social battles to come.
The Presidium's resolution said: "The organisational form for uniting the workers chosen by the First Congress of the Communist International and which corresponded to the needs of the inital period of the rebirth of the working-class movement, has more and more become outgrown by the movement's development and by the increasing complexity of its problems in the separate countries, and has even become a hindrance to the further _-_-_
^^1^^ Communist International. A Short History, Moscow, 1969, p. 544 (in Russian).
90 strengthening of the national working-class parties.''~^^1^^Later on, Togliatti remarked that the conclusion on the need to dissolve the Comintern was due to the fact that "many parties, starting from the French and the Spanish, had already outgrown the phase of pure propaganda and become a major political force of the masses. We decided at that time that these parties, as well as others that were following the same road, had to be given greater freedom and autonomy, so that they could take into account all their national specifics.''^^2^^
The decision to dissolve the Comintern had been considered for several years before it was finally adopted. Togliatti recalls his meeting with Georgi Dimitrov in mid-1940, when the latter already predicted the Comintern's dissolution. That the decision was put off until 1943 largely depended on the course of events. At first, it could have looked like a concession to the founders of the 'anti-Comintern pact', and later on, up to the victory at Stalingrad, the Comintern's dissolution could have demobilised the Communists. Once the war had reached its turning point, such a danger no longer existed, and the decision was taken.''~^^3^^
There were always some distinctions _-_-_
~^^1^^ Daily Worker (London), 24 May, 1943.
~^^2^^ Palmiro Togliatti, Problemi del movimento operaio internazionale (1956-1961), Editori Riuniti, Roma, 1962, p. 265.
^^3^^ Rinascita, December 1961
91 between the tasks facing the working class in individual countries, to which the ECGI Presidium referred in proposing the Comintern's dissolution. These distinctions increased in the course of the war with the new opportunities for securing a victory over Nazism through the mobilisation of the masses. That victory could best be achieved by the vanguard of the working-class movement in each country within the national framework.Emphasising the new prospects opening up as a result of the changes on the battlefield, the ECCI Presidium foresaw the possibility of Communists' taking part in the governments of countries that were throwing off the fascist yoke, and the emergence of democratic states capable of developing along the general lines mapped out by the Seventh Comintern Congress.
But the abandonment of the old organisational form of unity did not mean that the Communists were giving up international unity in general. On the contrary, it showed an intention to find such forms of contacts between the Communist Parties that would correspond to their greater strength and the complexity of the national tasks they had to solve. Most of the messages sent in by the Communist Parties in support of the proposal to disband the Comintern emphasised the need to strengthen the ideological bonds between the Communist Parties and take further steps towards consolidating the international communist movement ideologically and politically.
92The transition to voluntary co-operation between the fully independent Marxist-Leninist Parties ushered in a new stage in the development of the international unity of the world communist movement.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 3. DEVELOPMENTThe transition to new forms of unity proved to be complicated for a number of objective and subjective reasons.
The difficulties connected with this transition, which implied conscious, voluntary and close co-operation based on the awareness of the international duty, largely reflected the growth difficulties in the communist movement itself. To a considerable degree, these difficulties were connected with the great successes scored by the world revolutionary movement after the defeat of fascism.
Listing but some of the factors that determined the new balance of forces in the world will make it clear that major achievements are dialectically combined with negative phenomena and difficulties.
The formation of the world socialist system enabled socialism to increase its influence on all international social processes. The socialist countries became a decisive force in the antiimperialist struggle. That meant, however, that the difficulties faced by the socialist countries, the mistakes they made, and the contradictions in the relations between them, as 93 well as their successes, were no longer just their internal affair, but affected the whole international communist movement. Now that socialism was no longer confined to one state surrounded by capitalist countries, but developed into a world system consisting of several countries, new problems arose in the relations between the Marxist-Leninist parties.
The collapse of the colonial system vastly expanded the revolutionary process and involved many new peoples in active history-- making. This was happening when the prestige of socialism and Marxism-Leninism had gone up, so that some ideologies, developed by national liberation movements, proclaimed to be Marxist (as the Maoists did) some ideas and phenomena that had nothing to do with Marxism. That was bound to affect the international communist movement and its unity.
The involvement of new social sections in the liberation struggle is a positive process, constantly promoted by the Communists; the communist movement's line in the struggle against imperialism is that of broad alliances. But the involvement of non-proletarian masses in the struggle generated its own difficulties. As the petty-bourgeois strata draw closer to the proletariat, they start exercising a definite influence on the communist movement. The new ``recruits'' revive old mistakes, and views that seem to have been overcome for good, and this gives a false impression of the substance of proletarian internationalism 94 and the nature of international communist unity.
The growth of the national self-awareness is characteristic of all the liberated peoples, including those that have fallen into neocolonialist dependence, and is a major factor in the expansion of the revolutionary process. It is also characteristic of all the countries that were liberated from Nazism. At the same time, this creates conditions for stronger nationalism, when the country's interests are contrasted with those of other countries and national experience is turned into an absolute. National considerations could then be overemphasised to the detriment of class considerations. Once nationalism penetrates the working-class movement, it invigorates and strengthens right-wing and ``left-wing'' revisionism.
When upon the defeat of Nazism some Communist Parties became mass parties, that vastly important development also created some difficulties. At the time of its emergence from the underground, the Italian Communist Party had roughly 10,000 members, and by 1946, the figure had gone up to 1,700,000. In the first postwar year, the membership of the Communist Party of Finland increased from 2,000 to 50,000. In March 1946, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, which started out with 30,000 members, already had 1,081,000 members. In Brazil, the number of Communists went up from 2,000 to 150,000. Such was the general trend. All the Communist Parties note the great importance of that process, and 95 also the negative consequences it entailed. The Parties emerged from the war virtually renewed.
The Communist Party of neutral Sweden also felt the consequences of the defeat of Nazism. Gustav Ericson, a Swedish worker and an old Communist, recalls that for many years he and his comrades met with general mistrust. Solely because they were Communists, they were shunned as lepers. But in 1944, when the military situation changed and it became clear that Germany had lost the war, everything began to change and readjust itself. Everyone was in a hurry. Masses of people, including intellectuals, were joining the Party, but the Communists were not prepared for that. The Party Rules said that every applicant should have references from two old Party members. When masses of people applied for Party membership, that rule was not observed. In the primary organisations the Communists had no opportunity to admit new members in accordance with the Rules.^^1^^ Such was the state of affairs in Sweden, which did not take part in the war, and where there had been no anti-fascist resistance movement and no particular aggravation of the class struggle. One can easily imagine what was happening in the countries that were the scene of an unprecedented social upswing after the defeat of Nazism. But the Swedish Communist _-_-_
~^^1^^ See, Arvid Rundberg, Memoires of a Swedish Worker, Stockholm, 1973.
96 Party, like many others, was unable to keep the new members. Many of the new members were left to fend for themselves and during the cold war began to leave the Party.^^1^^Since the Parties grew so rapidly, it was inevitable that those who were joining the communist movement differed in their level of class consciousness, there was more room for ideological wavering, with many of the shaky elements withdrawing from the movement under the influence of changes in the situation, bourgeois propaganda, and so on. It took time to assimilate the new contingent. Thus, the Hungarian and Czechoslovak Communists note that one of the reasons for the crisis phenomena in Hungary (1956) and in Czechoslovakia (1968) was the influx of petty-bourgeois elements into their Parties.
All this in one way or another affected the attitude to the unity of the world communist movement.
The changes in the world led to greater pressure on the part of bourgeois ideology. The bourgeoisie learnt a lesson from its earlier defeats. It was now better prepared to fight the revolutionary forces than after the First World War. This time, imperialism did not allow the anti-fascist resistance movement in the countries of Western Europe to develop into socialist revolution (as it could have happened in France and Italy), resorted to direct armed intervention (as in Greece),- and
_-_-_^^1^^ Ibid.
__PRINTERS_P_97_COMMENT__ 7-01267 97 in 1946 started the cold war, which created vast difficulties for the international communist movement.In these conditions, the absence of close contacts between the Communist Parties after the Comintern's dissolution had an ever more negative effect. Experience showed that the lack of contact among the Communist Parties was harmful. In late September 1947, a number of Communist Parties held an Informative Conference. Its Communique, signed by the Communist Parties of Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Poland, the Soviet Union, 'France, Czechoslovakia, and Italy, said that the Conference had decided to set up an Information Bureau, "to organise interchange of experience among the Parties, and if need be, to coordinate their activities on the basis of mutual agreement".^^1^^ Each of the Parties was to have two representatives in the Bureau.
That decision caused an anti-communist outburst. It was said that the Comintern was being restored. In actual fact, however, there was and could be no intention of restoring the centralised organisation, for the situation •in the communist movement after the Second World "War was radically different from that which, had prevailed at the time of the Comintern,
The tasks of the Information Bureau were spelled out in a "Resolution on Interchange _-_-_
~^^1^^ For a Lasting Peace, for a People's Demoeracyt, No. 1, 10 November 1947.
98 of Experience and Coordination of Activities of the Parties Represented at the Conference". It said that in the existing situation the absence of ties among the Communist Parties was a serious shortcoming. "The need for interchange of experience and voluntary coordination of action of the various Parties is particularly keenly felt at the present time in view of the growing complication of the post-war international situation, a situation in which the lack of connections among the Communist Parties may prove detrimental to the working class.''~^^1^^The imperialist camp and primarily the USA, which for the time being had a monopoly of the atomic bomb, refused to reconcile themselves to the formation of new socialist states and the successes of the national liberation movement. There was a growing threat of another war. The imperialist forces now confronted an anti-imperialist, democratic camp which worked to strengthen democracy, to root out the fascist aftermath, and prevent a new war.
The formation of the two camps was an objective phenomenon, reflecting the class division of society and the existence of numerous social fprces that could join the working class in the struggle against imperialism. The bourgeoisie, which denies in its own interests the existence of antagonistic classes, is apt to present objective historical processes as a mani- _-_-_
~^^1^^ Ibid.
__PRINTERS_P_99_COMMENT__ 7* 99 __ALPHA_LVL0__ The End. [END] ~ [100] Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.dat/en/1981/USI375/20091115/199.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2010.01.22) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ bottom __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+6. M. Leibzon
festation of someone's evil will. Many bourgeois ideologists have alleged that the formation of the two camps was something artificial and suited the interests of the Soviet Union and other socialist countries. Later on, when a number of socialist countries set up the Warsaw Treaty Organisation in answer to the formation of NATO, there was a tendency, supported by the bourgeois press, to reduce the division of the world into two social systems simply to a confrontation of two military blocs. A Declaration on the international situation adopted by the Communist Parties that had set up the Information Bureau emphasised the importance of a joint effort by all the democratic forces, of the peoples' struggle for national independence. The Communist Parties came to the conclusion that they had to fulfil a special task. "They must take into their hands the banner of defence of the national independence and sovereignty of their countries, . . . must take the lead in resisting the plans of imperialist expansion and aggression. . ."'
The Parties decided to pool their efforts on the basis of a common anti-imperialist and democratic platform, and to rally round them all the democratic and patriotic forces.
The changing balance of world social forces, the successes of socialism, and the disintegration of the colonial system meant a new stage in the international communist move-
Forms of International Unity
ment and made it necessary to develop corresponding forms of international co-operation.
The final goal, for which the international communist movement has fought throughout its history, remains the same: to establish the new, just and progressive social system. But on the way to that goal, which is to be achieved through the elimination of the rule of the bourgeoisie, international communist unity takes shape around concrete tasks in accordance with the specifics of the historical stage.
At the time of the Comintern, especially in its early period, there were objective conditions for a direct struggle for working-class power. At that time, the international unity of the Communist Parties was based on the attitude to such a struggle. When the Nazis came to power in Germany, and the Second World War was about to break out, international communist solidarity was primarily determined by the struggle against fascism and war, for democracy, for transitional slogans that did not lead directly to the final goal, but through intermediate stages.
After the Second World War, as the socialist community grew stronger and the peaceful states that were emerging from the debris of colonialism scored their first successes, international communist solidarity increasingly centred on the struggle for peace. Throughout the postwar history of the communist movement, this problem has been steadily moving into the foreground and has been under attack most of all by right-wing and ``left-wing'' re-
Ibid.
100 101B. M. Leibzon
visionists within the communist movement. The international communist movement gained an ever deeper understanding of the importance of the struggle for peace as a condition for the successful advance to the final goal.
The main aim of the 1947 Informative Conference of the Communist Parties was to counter the plans of imperialist aggression. A report submitted by the Soviet Communist Party to a meeting of the Information Bureau in Hungary in November 1949 said: "Saving the world from another war is not a Utopian dream but a real possibility under present concrete historical conditions." The report emphasised: "In carrying out measures in the struggle for peace it is obviously impossible to act according to standard. It is necessary to proceed from the concrete conditions in each country, skilfully combining various forms and methods of the movement with the general tasks.''^^1^^
But alongside the positive aspects of the Information Bureau's activity, which primarily manifested themselves in a renewal of contacts among the Communist Parties, and the correct appraisal of the struggle for peace as a top priority problem, there were also some grave shortcomings. Palmiro Togliatti believed the Information Bureau's experience to have been less successful than that of the
Forms of International Unity
Comintern, and not only because of the break (in 1948) with the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, "but first of all because the Information Bureau did not perform precisely the tasks of information. In the years of its existence, we knew virtually nothing of the communist movement in other countries." *
The changing conditions of struggle and the new tasks facing the Communists made it necessary to look for suitable forms of their international unity.
In February 1956, the Central Committees of the Communist Parties of Bulgaria, Italy, Finland, and the Soviet Union, together with the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers' Party, considered the Comintern Executive Committee's decision to disband the Communist Party of Poland, which had allegedly fallen into the hands of hostile elements. That decision was declared unjustified and the data, on the strength of which it had been adopted, fictitious and doctored by provocateurs.~^^2^^ The statement issued on that occasion was seen by the Communist Parties as a step in strengthening trust among the Parties, ensuring respect for their sovereignty, and laying the groundwork for genuine comradely co-operation.
In mid-April 1956, the representatives of the Communist Parties of Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, the Soviet Union,
~^^1^^ Palmiro Togliatti, Problemi del movimento operaio internazionale (1956-1961), p. 265.
~^^2^^ gee, Prqvda, 2i February 1956.
~^^1^^ For a Lasting Peace..., No. 29 (56), 2 November 1949.
B. M. Leibzon
Czechoslovakia, and France discussed the advisability of the Information Bureau's further existence.
The Announcement on the Dissolution of the Information Bureau of the Communist and Workers' Parties said: "The founding of the Information Bureau of the Communist and Workers' Parties in 1947 was a positive contribution towards overcoming the lack of contacts among Communist Parties that developed following the dissolution of the Comintern; it was an important factor in strengthening proletarian internationalism in the ranks of the international communist movement and in further uniting the working class and all working people in the struggle for lasting peace, democracy and socialism.''^^1^^
The Announcement noted the positive role played by the Information Bureau and its journal in developing and strengthening fraternal ties and a mutual exchange of opinion among the Communist and Workers' Parties, and in considering questions of Marxist-- Leninist theory with a view to the concrete conditions of individual countries, and the experience of the international communist and working-class movement.
The Announcement further said: "However, the changes that have taken place in the international situation in recent years---the emergence of socialism from within the bounds of a single country and the fact that it has
Forms of International Unity
become a world system; the formation of a vast 'zone of peace' comprising both the socialist and non-socialist peace-loving countries of Europe and Asia; the growth and consolidation of many Communist Parties in the capitalist, dependent and colonial countries and their increased activity in the struggle against the war danger and reaction, in the struggle for peace, the vital interests of the working people and the national independence of their countries; and, finally, the now particularly pressing tasks connected with overcoming the split in the working-class movement and strengthening the unity of the working class in the interests of a successful struggle for peace and socialism---have created new conditions for the activity of the Communist and Workers' Parties.''^^1^^
It was decided that both in composition and in the content of its work the Information Bureau did not meet the new conditions and had exhausted its functions. After an exchange of opinion and by mutual agreement, the Central Committees of the Parties represented on the Information Bureau decided to terminate the activity of the Bureau and its journal, For a Lasting Peace, /or a People's Democracy!
The Central Committees expressed their confidence that every Party or group of Parties, developing their activity in accordance with the common goals and tasks of the Marxist-Leninist Parties and the national pecu-
~^^1^^ For a Lasting Peace..., 17 April 1956.
~^^1^^ Ibid.
104 105B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
on the Relations between the League of Communists of Yugoslavia and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (20 June 1956).
In June that year, the CPSU Central Committee adopted a resolution "On Overcoming the Personality Cult and Its Consequences", setting out the principles on which the CPSU sought henceforth to establish its relations with the fraternal parties. It said: "In the new historical conditions, international organisations of the working class, like the Comintern and the Cominform, have terminated their activity. But from this it does not at all follow that international solidarity and the need for contacts between revolutionary fraternal parties taking the Marxist-Leninist stand have lost their significance. Now that the forces of socialism and the influence of the ideas of socialism throughout the world have grown immensely, now that the peculiarity of the ways towards socialism in the various countries is becoming evident, Marxist Parties of the working class should naturally maintain and strengthen their ideological unity and international fraternal solidarity in the struggle against the threat of a new war, in the struggle against the anti-popular forces of monopoly capital, which seek to suppress all the revolutionary and progressive movements.''^^1^^
liarities and conditions of their own countries, would "find new useful forms of establishing relations and contacts among themselves. Undoubtedly, the Communist and Workers' Parties will at their own discretion and taking into account the concrete conditions of their work, exchange views, in the future too, on the general problems relating to the struggle for peace, democracy and socialism." l
The Parties that signed the Announcement assumed that their decision would further strengthen the spirit of mutual co-operation among the Communist and Workers' Parties on the principles of proletarian internationalism, and would strengthen the fraternal ties among them.
In connection with the disbandment of the Information Bureau, dictated by the need to bring the forms of ties and co-operation among the Communist Parties into accord with the new historical situation, Pravda said that the decision showed that "the Communist Parties take a creative approach to elaborating the forms of their mutual ties, being guided by the well-known Leninist proposition about the dependence of organisational forms and methods in the activity of working-class Parties on the specifics of the concrete historical situation".~^^2^^
One important landmark in the formation of mutual relations among the Communist Parties on a new basis was the Declaration
~^^1^^ For a Lasting Peace...
~^^2^^ Pravda, 18 April 1956,
~^^1^^ The Communist Party of the Soviet Union in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and CC Plenary Meetings, Vol. 7, 1955-1959, Moscow, 1971, p. 216 (in Russian).
407B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
in the further development of its activity." ' A spirit of internationalism permeated the work of the Sixth National Convention of the Labor-Progressive Party of Canada, which met in April 1957, after overcoming an acute inner-Party crisis caused by the liquidationist intentions of right-wing revisionists. A policymaking statement issued by the Convention declared the Party's urge to study the experience of the working-class movement in other countries and to strengthen relations with the fraternal parties "on a footing of independence, full equality, fraternal exchange of experience and criticism, mutual respect and solidarity". It was emphasised at the Congress: "We are internationalists.. . . The close bonds of unity of the Canadian working class with the workers of all lands are bonds of class interests... . The independent working-class Canadianism of our Party is inseparable from its proletarian internationalism, which Lenin described as the .. . great principle of the working class in its struggle for socialism.''~^^2^^
The resolve to develop relations with the fraternal Parties was voiced by the Communists of many other countries. The Communist Party, USA, which left the Comintern in 1940, said at its 16th National Convention in 1957 that the US Communists, who had not been
The Parties' need for constant contacts with each .other in this or that form was an objective need of the international communist movement. This was required by the interests of the joint struggle for peace, democracy and socialism.
A Meeting of the representatives of the Communist and Workers' Parties of Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, the Soviet Union, and Czechoslovakia was held in Budapest in January 1957. In June that year, a meeting was held by the representatives of the Parties of a number of Latin American countries; and in October, of the Parties of Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. Bilateral meetings became more frequent.
Many Parties painfully felt the lack of constant forms of communication. At the Fifth Congress of the Portuguese Communist Party in 1957, it was emphasised: "We Portuguese Communists are closely connected with the international working-class movement by our class membership, by our struggle and by our ideas." This was followed by the bitter statement that for a number of years the Party had been almost completely out of touch with that movement. "In consequence of this situation, we were unable to exchange a wealth of experience with the fraternal Parties, the most valuable lessons of the international working-class movement, and suffered great difficulties in raising our Party's ideological and political level, and
108~^^1^^ Fifth Congress of the Portuguese Communist Party, Moscow, 19S9, pp. 110-11 (in Russian).
~^^2^^ National Affairs, June 1957.
109S. M. Leibzori
linked with other Marxist Parties for close to 20 years, clearly understood "the need to combine our unshakable feelings of close fraternal solidarity with all Marxist parties, with the understanding of the equality, creative responsibilities, and the independence of our own indigenous Communist movement". The report delivered by William Z. Foster said that a serious weakening of the Party's proletarian internationalism had resulted "mostly because of the pressure of the very sharp imperialist influences upon the Party". It also noted "scorn for the opinions of foreign comrades regarding our Party's policy".J
There was ever more frequent and growing insistence on the need to search for new forms of relations among the Communist Parties, and there were proposals for broad and regional meetings, with some Parties emphasising the importance of bilateral ties. By 1957, the need for strengthening the unity of the Communist Parties in new forms in accord with the situation had become ever more obvious.
The International Meeting in Moscow from 14 to 16 November 1957 was the starting point for the emergence of new forms of communist unity. It was attended by the Communist Parties of the socialist countries, with the exception of the Communist League of Yugoslavia.
forms of international Unity
The historic importance of the Meeting lay in the fact that it reaffirmed fidelity to Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, and showed that the question of whether there was to be war or peaceful coexistence had become the root problem of world politics. "The Communist Parties regard the struggle for peace as their primary task.''^^1^^
The International Meeting reached this conclusion: the forces of peace have grown to such an extent that there is a real possibility of averting war. This conclusion was of fundamental importance because it did not merely testify to the Communists' urge for peace, but also to their confidence and potentialities to secure peace even before the complete elimination of capitalism, and this was formulated as the key task facing the communist movement.
Mao's speech at the Meeting differed sharply from the tone in which the problems of peace and war were discussed. It amounted to the assertion that the way to the future society ran through war, instead of peace. Mao declared that for the sake of the "victory of the world socialist revolution" he was prepared to sacrifice 300 million Chinese and, together with them, one half of the population of the globe. He said: "If one half of mankind is destroyed, there still remains the other half, but then imperialism will be completely
~^^1^^ See, Proceedings (abridged) of the 16th National Convention of the Communist Party, U.S.A., 9-12 February 1957, New Century Publishers, Inc., New York, 1957, pp. 50, 65.
~^^1^^ Programme Documents of the Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, p. 9.
Ill
liO
B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
creep without a head". Another argument he presented was the following: "We need to have a country, a party, that could convene a meeting at any time.... Since a head is required, who should stand at the head? If it is not the Soviet Union, then who?" Mao took a fairly long time to elaborate his idea on why China could not be at the head, although the whole logic of his reasoning showed that it could not be the head "for the time being''.
At the insistence of the delegation of the CPSU, the document made no mention of any special role for it in the international communist movement.
The document's recognition of the possibility of different forms of transition to socialism, of the peaceful and non-peaceful way, of the need to build up a broad anti-monopoly front and to co-operate with the Socialist Parties both in the struggle for power and in the building of socialism, was a highly important point in the document, for it largely determined the subsequent decisions of the international communist movement. "The possibility of one or another way to socialism depends on the concrete conditions in each country." *
Of fundamental importance for the elaboration of new forms of relations between the Communist Parties were the Meeting's conclusion on the need to strengthen their fraternal
~^^1^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow; p. 19.
destroyed and only socialism will remain in the whole world, but within a half-century or a full century the population will again grow, and even by more than one-half.''
At that time, the Maoist opponents of peaceful coexistence were just preparing to take a stand against the international communist movement. Besides, they could not afford openly to demonstrate their break with the decisions of the Eighth Congress of the Communist Party of China in 1956, which had assumed the need to struggle for peaceful coexistence. The CPC Constitution adopted at the Eighth Party Congress said: "The Communist Party of China advocates the foreign policy directed to the safeguarding of world peace and the achievement of peaceful coexistence between countries with different systems".^^1^^
Mao used the Meeting to engage in far-- reaching intrigues. He kept insisting that the document the Meeting was to adopt should include a formula indicating which country was the head of the socialist camp. He argued that there were so many people and so many Parties there that a head was, without doubt, required. It is all the more necessary, he said, from the standpoint of our camp's external position. We are faced with a fairly strong imperialist camp, which has its own head. In China there is a saying: "A snake cannot
~^^1^^ The Constitution of the Communist Party of China, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1956, p. 12.
1128-01267
1136. M. Leiizori
Forms of International Unity
relation of the struggle for peace and revolutionary transformations. A number of other questions raised in 1957 were also developed. But none of this minimised the importance of the Meeting as a milestone in the history of the international communist movement connected with its new stage and new forms of solidarity.
At the Meeting of the Representatives of 64 Communist and Workers' Parties (16-19 November 1957), who attended the celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, considerable attention was given to strengthening the unity of the international communist movement and developing its forms to meet the situation. Since the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, that was the first meeting representing the whole world communist movement. It was now immensely stronger than it was in the mid-1930s. Palnliro Togliatti voiced his full agreement with the need for stronger unity of the international communist movement, better reciprocal information and closer co-operation among the Parties, but added that there was a need to take account of the real situation in which the movement found itself, and of the past experience. If the communist movement was to develop as large-scale and massive, there was a need in the contemporary conditions for a high degree of independence of individual Parties in determining their slogans and forms of co-operation with other political forces in the light of the concrete conditions of
co-operation on the principles of proletarian internationalism, complete equality and noninterference in each other's internal ' affairs. It was emphasised that together with meetings of Party leaders and reciprocal exchange of information .on a bilateral basis, it was advisable to hold broader meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties to discuss current problems, to share experience, to study each other's views and attitudes, and concrete actions in the joint struggle for common goals---peace, democracy and socialism.^^4^^ This summed up the ideas which had by then taken shape within the Communist Parties and which were reflected in the documents of their congresses and the decisions of their governing bodies.
The Meeting's conclusion on the need to carry on a struggle on two fronts---against right-wing opportunism and leftist sectarianism---were also connected with the problems of strengthening the Communists' international unity.
• The subsequent experience of the international communist movement, the practical struggle and the enrichment of theoretical thought showed the need to develop and give more precise formulation to a number of propositions put forward by the 1957 Meeting, namely, on the dialectical connection between the peaceful and non-peaceful ways of development of the revolution, and on the cor-
~^^1^^ Ibid., p. 22.
1148*
115B. M. Leibzoii
Forms of International Unity
tion." Extolling the Meeting in every way, Mao assessed it as the largest and most representative meeting over the past century since the death of Marx and Engels. Mao even declared the Meeting a "turning point" on a par with the October Revolution, with the Battle of Stalingrad, and the "launching of the Sputnik''.
But it later turned out that all of this was no more than hypocrisy. At a meeting in Tsingtao on 20 July 1957, Mao delivered a speech, at the time not published in the Chinese press, in which he presented as one of China's merits the fact that it did not take part in international meetings of socialist countries, and only sent observers to such meetings.
Mao spoke with great disapproval about the proposed international meeting and the intention to start publishing an international journal. At the same time, apparently trying very hard to minimise the role of the Comintern, he emphasised: "The October Revolution, the Second World War, and the victory of the Chinese Revolution occurred without the participation of the Comintern.''
Indeed, the October Revolution did take place before the establishment of the Comintern, but its role was very great in defending the gains of the revolution, in mobilising the working people in other countries in its support, and in spreading the experience of the revolution, and that is why it had the honour of being hated by all the enemies of socialism.
each country. "There is a need to be able to combine each Party's independent development with maximum solidarity and unity of our whole movement." On behalf of the Italian Communist Party, Togliatti requested that "all the Parties should help the other Parties to know of their problems, that all should exchange the necessary information material, establish direct contacts as often as possible, hold discussions and exchanges of delegations, not excluding meetings between several Parties to discuss common problems.''^^1^^
The Meeting issued a Peace Manifesto which said: "And it is because we believe in the triumph of our ideas---the ideas of Marx and Lenin, the ideas of proletarian internationalism that we want peace and are working for peace. War is our enemy.''^^2^^ The bourgeois press admitted with disappointment that the world communist movement had attained impressive organisational unity and accord.
The Meeting's Declaration was also signed by Mao. What is more, addressing a meeting of Chinese students in the Soviet Union at Moscow University on November 17, he said that the Declaration was a correct one. "It does not contain any elements of revisionism or opportunism," he said. "The Declaration is not marked either by adventurism or opportunism. What kind of declaration is it then? It is in character a Marxist-Leninist declara-
~^^1^^ Palmiro Togliatti, Op. cit., pp. 266-67.
~^^2^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, p. 31.
116B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
essary prerequisite for paving the way to a new society.
A booklet published in Peking in April 1960 to mark the 90th anniversary of Lenin's birth, entitled Long Live Leninism, declared that the conclusion concerning new potentialities for the development of the revolutionary process amounted to revisionism. The struggle for peace, with imperialism still existing, was declared to be a hopeless one, and war with the use of atomic and nuclear weapons inevitable, and its victims justified. "On the debris of imperialism, the victorious people would create very swiftly a civilization thousands of times higher than the capitalist system and a truly beautiful future for themselves.''^^1^^
The proclamation of such views went hand in hand with practical action designed to probe the possibility of cobbling together forces that would split the international communist movement. The llth session of the General Council of the World Federation of Trade Unions was held in Peking on 5-6 June 1960. The Maoist leadership called a conference of the participants who were members of Communist Parties. Such an act was not agreed with the Central Committees of the Parties concerned. Having taken this illegal step, which was unprecedented in the practice of the international communist movement, the
Even the avowed opponents of the Communists cannot deny the great contribution which the Comintern made to the struggle to avert war, and to formulate the correct political line by which the Communist Parties were guided during the war in mounting the anti-fascist resistance movement, and in fighting for the victory of democratic people's revolutions. As for the victory of the Chinese Revolution, one must indeed have a truly amazing stance of national conceit as to take the blinkered view that the international forces did nothing to develop the struggle which led to the victory of the Chinese Revolution.
``And what good did the Information Bureau of the nine countries do?" Mao continued, and himself provided the answer: "What would have suffered if it had not existed? All it did was to provide information as to when it was necessary to convene a meeting, when to assemble, and so on.''
As at the Meeting of the 64 Communist Parties, so at the Meeting of the representatives of Communist and Workers' Parties of socialist and capitalist countries three months later, Mao said nothing that could cast doubt on his internationalism.
The ideas proclaimed by the Meeting had to stand the hardest test.
In the spring of 1960, it became evident that, in contrast to the line jointly formulated by the international communist movement, the Maoists were putting forward another line oriented to a war disaster, as an allegedly nec-
~^^1^^ Long Live Leninism, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1960, p. 22.
B. M. Leibzon
organisers of the meeting tried to use it for open criticism of the CPSU and other Communist and Workers' Parties, and of the ideas which they themselves had declared to be correct less than three years earlier.
It was impossible not to react to this patent attempt to form factions in the international communist movement. At the end of June 1960, representatives of 51 Parties assembled in Bucharest for the Third Congress of the Romanian Workers' Party. At a meeting of the delegations of the socialist countries' Parties, the CPSU made public its information note presenting the facts pointing to the emerging threat to the unity of the international communist movement and setting forth the CPSU's stand on the questions the Peking leaders were attacking. The CPSU proposed the publication of a communique in which the fraternal Parties reaffirmed their loyalty to the 1957 Declaration and set the date for a new international meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties.
Although the Maoists had for months attacked the CPSU and other Parties, while the CPSU did not join in the open polemics, the delegates from Peking declared that the CPC had been "suddenly attacked", and accused the CPSU of allegedly being guided by the principle of "father-party to son-party", wielding some kind of ``baton''.
The Chinese delegation's approach was rejected by all the participants in the Meeting, with the exception of the Albanian Party of
120Forms of International Unity
Labour. In the communique on the meeting, signed by all the delegations, including the Chinese and Albanian, the Parties reaffirmed their fidelity to the principles of the Declaration and Peace Manifesto adopted by the 1957 Meeting. These documents were characterised as a charter "of the contemporary Communist and workers' movement, its programme in the struggle for peace, democracy and socialism."1 The representatives of all the Parties attending the Congress of the Romanian Workers' Party decided to set up a commission to prepare another international meeting of Communists. The commission included the representatives of 26 Parties, and it was so structured as to cover all the regions of the world. It included the Communist Parties of the Soviet Union, China, the GDR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Mongolia, the Korean Democratic People's Republic, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, Albania, Cuba, the United States, France, Italy, the FRG, Great Britain, Finland, Argentina, Brazil, Syria, Japan, India, Indonesia, and Australia. The commission sat from 1 to 22 October 1960, and considered all the questions on which differences had arisen: on the peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems, on the possibility of averting a world war, on the forms of transition to socialism, and so on.
~^^1^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and SocialIsm, p. 32,
121B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
the French Communist Party Maurice Thorez emphasised at the Meeting that it was not considering a dispute between the CPG and the CPSU, but problems facing the whole international communist movement. He said his Party disagreed with the theses presented by the CPC delegate. "These theses contradict the general line adopted by the international communist movement in 1957."'
Each point, each word was contested. The CPC delegation tried to impose the ideas set forth in the booklet entitled Long Live Leninism, clearly wishing to win over a sizable number of supporters if it failed to split the international communist movement. But it turned out that, apart from the Albanian Party of Labour, only the clandestine Parties of Burma, Thailand, and Malaya, whose leadership was in Peking, supported the CPC. The Communist Party of Japan and a number of Parties from Asian countries took an intermediate stand. AH the other delegations actively defended the line worked out by the 1957 Meeting.
Quite naturally, various aspects of relations between the Communist Parties were prominent at the Meeting. Speakers said that if a Party had views which differed from the jointly adopted and concerted line, it had primarily to inform the fraternal Parties of its
The inadmissibility of factional, group activity within the international communist movement had a fundamental and direct bearing on the problem of its unity, and was a subject of lively debate. The CPC delegation did not agree with the condemnation of factional activity. This issue was one of those on which no consensus was reached. But on the whole, the document of the forthcoming international meeting was co-ordinated.
Its main thrust was to verify whether the conclusion drawn by the international communist movement had been borne out in the light of the developments over the previous three years, "above all the possibility of avoiding war, the policy of coexistence between states with different social and economic systems, the efforts aimed at achieving detente in international relations, general disarmament, etc." ' That was an objective task of the Meeting.
The Meeting met in Moscow and was in session from 10 November to 1 December 1960. It was attended by the representatives of 81 Parties. The CPC delegation sought to leave the impression that there were no differences over principle, but merely contradictions between the CPSU and the CPC. Most delegations realised that the assertion was an artificial one. What was at issue was the substance of the political life of the international communist movement. General Secretary of
~^^1^^ Maurice Thorez, Oenvres choistes en trois volumes, III. 1953-1964, Editions Sociales, Paris, 1965, p. 170,
123Rinascita, January 1961.
123B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
ing to the specific conditions in their respective countries in keeping with Marxist-- Leninist principles, and support each other''.
The document was key-noted by the international solidarity of all the Marxist-- Leninist Parties and emphasised each Party's responsibility to the working class, to the working people of its own country, and to the whole international working-class and communist movement.
The Statement set the task of working out "common views through consultations" and co-ordinating "joint actions in the struggle for common goals". It referred to the experience and results of past Meetings and emphasised that in present-day conditions such meetings were an effective form for an exchange of opinion and experience. It expressed, for the first time, the idea of "enriching Marxist-Leninist theory by collective effort and elaborating a common attitude in the struggle for common objectives''.
Another proposition formulated by the Meeting was an important contribution to the development of principles governing relations between Parties. It said: "Whenever a Party wants to clear up questions relating to the activities of another fraternal Party, its leadership approaches the leadership of the Party concerned; if necessary, they hold meetings and consultations." *
stand and to exchange opinion on the substance of the matter in a constructive form.
Concerning the proposal to prohibit factional activity in the international communist movement, the CPC delegate Deng Xiaoping declared, in defiance of all logic, that such a prohibition, in effect, had the purpose of rejecting the principles of equality. Under the pretext of standing up for the Party's equality, he objected, in particular, to the inclusion in the Meeting document of the proposition concerning the need for each Party's correct combination of national and international tasks.
Upending the whole issue, the CPC delegate declared that the formula concerning the inadmissibility of group and factional activity was a "splinter mine". According to Maoist logic it appeared that divisions were not caused by factional activity but by a condemnation of such activity. As a result of the discussion, a proposition was adopted enjoining resolute defence of the unity of the international communist movement on the principles of Marxism-Leninism, proletarian internationalism, and prevention of any acts which could undermine its unity.
Compared with the Declaration of the 1957 Meeting, the Statement of the new Meeting took a step forward in elaborating the principles and forms of relations among the Communist Parties. It said that "all the MarxistLeninist Parties are independent, and have equal rights; they shape their policies accord-
m
~^^1^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, pp. 79, 80.
1256. M. Leibzotl
Forms of International Unity
ership's hegemonistic aspirations clearly exposed, it was important to assert what had already been established in the communist movement. The Statement included the following provision: "All the Marxist-Leninist, Parties are independent and equal, and formulate their policy depending on the concrete conditions in their own countries." '
Elizabeth G. Flynn, a prominent member of the Communist Party, USA, who attended the 1960 Meeting, published her reminiscences three years later in which she reproduced the atmosphere at the Meeting. Despite the heated debates and the long wrangle over the various formulations, "there were no interruptions. Everyone spoke as long as necessary. There was the greatest courtesy to one another." But the Chinese delegation constantly engaged in behind-the-scene activity, seeking to brainwash other representatives. Flynn was also invited to the Chinese Embassy and asked to read a lengthy document containing numerous attacks against the CPSU.
She recalls the following important episode relating to the definition of the CPSU's role in the international communist movement. "To the surprise of everyone, the Chinese delegation insisted on the word `head' and fought tenaciously to keep it." But despite resistance from the Chinese, the term ' vanguard' was adopted. The Communist and Work-
The CPC delegation's groundless assertions about encroachments on its independence and attempts to interfere in its internal affairs were rebuffed. On the false pretext of standing up for the Parties' equality, the CPG delegate came out against the key principles of proletarian internationalism in relations between Parties. He also attacked the need for efforts by each Party to combine national and international tasks, and also the need for cooperation between Communists of various countries in general.
On the whole, the Meeting was a success. This was the result of the growing need for international unity among the Communist Parties, their urge not to inflate their differences but to find solutions based on common principles that united the Parties. Still, the Statement necessarily reflected the acute struggle at the Meeting. Some propositions were not elaborated. The document was almost three times as long as the 1957 Declaration, and was less clear-cut. Some positions were so couched as to allow references to them in defence of propositions conflicting with its spirit. The Peking leaders soon began making use of this for their own purposes.
All of these were the inevitable costs of the struggle that broke out. But the main point was that a major defeat had been inflicted on the attempts to substitute a line oriented upon another world war for the strategic line worked out in 1957. With the Peking lead-
~^^1^^ Political Affairs, November 1963.
120 127B. M. Leibzofl
Forms of International Unity
tionary of all the immediate tasks confronting the proletariat of any country. The fulfilment of this task, the destruction of the most powerful bulwark, not only of European, but (it may now be said) of Asiatic reaction, would make the Russian proletariat the vanguard of the international revolutionary proletariat.''~^^4^^ As a result of the October Revolution, the Party of the Russian proletariat found itself in the vanguard of the international working-class struggle. That actual position did not mean that the Soviet Communist Party was vested with any special rights in the communist movement, for it merely testified to its exceptional responsibility to the whole movement, and to the importance of its experience for the common struggle.
The Statement, signed by all the participants in the Meeting, pointed to the special need---in a situation in which imperialist reaction was joining forces to fight against communism---"to consolidate the world communist movement" and emphasised that "the interests of the Communist movement require solidarity in adherence by every Communist Party to the estimates and conclusions concerning the common tasks in the struggle against imperialism, for peace, democracy and socialism, jointly reached by the fraternal parties at their meeting".^^2^^
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 5, 1975, p. 373.
~^^2^^ The Struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism, p. 79.
ers' Parties, the Statement said, " unanimously declare that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has been and remains, the universally recognised vanguard of the world communist movement, being the most experienced and steeled contingent of the international communist movement".^^1^^ It was noted that the CPSU's experience is of fundamental importance for the whole international communist movement.
The Maoists' insistence on getting the word ``head'' substituted for the word ``vanguard'' was designed for a transparent purpose. Flynn recalls that some delegates felt that "the Chinese had assumed that Mao Tse-tung would be considered the leading Marxist spokesman in the world and would be so accepted by all Parties".^^2^^
Whereas recognition of the CPSU as ``head'' would amount to the assertion of a special status for one party (something to which the CPSU had always objected), recognition of a party's vanguard role merely amounted to a statement of its actual position in the movement in virtue of the objective conditions.
Lenin always considered the Party's objective position in close connection with its tasks and the actual balance of forces in the country and the world at large. In 1902, he wrote: "History has now confronted us with an immediate task which is the most revolu-
~^^1^^ Political Affairs, November 1963.
~^^2^^ Ibid.
1289-01267
129B. M. Leibzoii
- J Falmiro Togliatti said the following about the i960 Meeting: "Those who are honest realised that the Meeting made a solemn and binding confirmation of the line along which ,we had been moving for many years and, consequently, gave an impetus to advancing along it in the most decisive manner---and -that ultimately is the most important thing." i Although the 1960 Meeting did assert the line of the international communist movement on the questions of war and peace, it was quite obvious that the struggle for it did not end there, but was just beginning.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 4. UNITYThe period from 1960 to 1969 was one of the most complicated in the history of the international communist movement. The unity of the movement, and independence of the Parties were jeopardised. The CPC leaders behaved in a crafty manner. The Ninth Plenary Meeting of the GPC Central Committee on 18 January 1961 approved the Statement adopted by the International Meeting and urged "to strengthen cohesion with the Soviet Union in international affairs, to strengthen the cohesion of the whole socialist camp arid the cohesion of the international commu-
forms of international Unitjf
nist movement, to strengthen the cohesion of the working class of the whole world and the cohesion of all the peace-loving and freedomloving peoples, and to fight for fresh victories in the cause of world peace and mankind's progress." '
This is one of the most hypocritical documents ever adopted by the CPC. The Maoists converted the word ``strengthen'' into something of a synonym of the word ``destroy''. While declaring their readiness to strengthen the international communist movement, the CPC leadership at once got down to intensifying its subversive activity in an effort to set up wherever possible its pro-Peking parties and to activate all kinds of leftist, anarchist and Trotskyite elements. Bourgeois propaganda gloated over the crisis phenomena in the international communist movement and what appeared to be an inevitable break-up.
The ground for the convocation of a new international meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties could be laid only through persevering and protracted struggle on two fronts: against the ostensible leftism and against the right-opportunist trends it had revived. In this struggle, the Communist Parties honed their key theoretical and political propositions, including those on matters directly relating to the Parties' unity and interrelationship.
The new forms of unity could not be de-
Rinasclta, January 1964.
13J
~^^1^^ Pravda, 22 January 1961.
9*
131B. M. Leibzon
veloped unless some of the dangerous trends, like neutralism, which appeared in some Communist Parties, had been overcome. They were used to justify the urge to remain on the sidelines of the principled ideological struggle, which was deliberately presented as a fight between the GPSU and the CPC. Those who strove to take a neutral stand usually did so on the plea that to fight Maoism would be to interfere in the internal affairs of a fraternal Party. But Maoism had long since become a force that was not confined to the framework of its own country, but one that aimed at bringing about a split in the international communist movement. That being so, neutralism went to benefit the splitters alone.
Many Parties condemned the attitude of neutralism. Raymond Guyot told a meeting of the Central Committee of the French Communist Party in March 1964: "One cannot be `neutral' in the struggle which is of exceptional significance for the unity of the communist movement. For it is not a matter of differences between the CPSU and the CPC, but of differences between the latter and the vast majority of the Communist and Workers' Parties of the world. Not to qualify and denounce the policy and the disruptive activity of the Chinese leaders, as is sometimes done, would signify refusal to ensure the future of our struggle for socialism and communism.''~^^1^^
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, May 1964.
Forms of International Unity
In some Parties there were suggestions about the need for polycentrism, on the plea that the communist movement had grown to such proportions and the conditions of its development in various countries were so diverse, that this dictated the need for several centres on a regional principle. Togliatti said that the establishment of such centres had never been an ICP's intention. He added: "But one must honestly admit that attempts in this direction were made in 1956, just after the 20th Congress of the CPSU. The proposal did not come from the Italian Communists, but together with the French Communists they tried, if possible, to realise it, always, of course, remaining within the framework of the tasks of reciprocal information and exchange of experience, and with the consent of the French Communists abandoned the idea because of the difficulty of realising it.''~^^4^^
Talk of polycentrism was revived by the stepped-up splitting activity by the Maoists and their claims to the leading role in the communist movement. This time they reflected the urge to safeguard the European region from Maoism by giving the latter an opportunity of playing the leading role in the Third World.
But coming out for polycentrism amounted to indirectly recognising the existence of a single centre in the communist movement and to inducing the Parties to withdraw to their
~^^1^^ Rinascita, December 1961.
132 133B. M. Leibzon
own region. The Parties of the various continents do have their own specific features, but there is also a world communist movement that unites all the Parties in the struggle for common goals. To urge polycentrism means objectively to undermine the unity of the international communist movement. That was how the ICP Central Committee assessed the talk of polycentrism in December
1961. That was also the assessment given by many other Communist Parties. Completely independent, they themselves determine their own policy, while the questions which are common to the whole movement are worked out at joint meetings.
The international communist movement was faced with the trend among the individual Parties to close in on themselves within the framework of their national problems and to contrast these with the common tasks of the communist movement. In some Parties there was a struggle against this mood of national limitation. It was emphasised that however important the internal problems, for whose solution the Party itself determines its policy and tactics, all the Communist Parties should be most intimately bonded with each other, because they hold the same views and are jointly responsible for the world's future.
The danger of isolationism was most emphatically stressed by Palmiro Togliatti at the 10th Congress of the ICP in December
1962. He said: "We have a vivid sense of the
Forms of International Unity
necessity of preventing the diversity of conditions in which our common work is carried on from leading to the isolation of one Party from another, to incomprehension and equivocation. That is why we believe that in order to obtain accurate information, to reach mutual understanding and to exchange experience, we must have frequent bilateral and multilateral contacts. We believe that it is possible to hold meetings at which the problems that are of common interest would be broadly and, if possible, publicly discussed." ' :
At the 18th ^Congress of the Communist Party of Austria in April 1961, Johann Koplenig, its Chairman, said that "the activity; action and struggle of any Communist Party, regardless of whether it is big or small, whether it works under capitalism, whether it leads a socialist state, or whether it is at the head of the liberation struggle of the peoples in the colonial and dependent countries, have an influence not only on the destiny of its own country, but also on the peoples of other countries".^^2^^
The view that has come to prevail among Communists is that the members of any Communist Party cannot afford to be mere spectators in the struggle going on in the world,
~^^1^^ Palmiro Togliatti, Nella democrazia e nella pace verso II socialism/}, Rapporti all'VIH, IX e X Con* gresso del PCI, Editor! Riuniti, Roma, 1963, p. 213:
~^^2^^ J. Koplenig, Bericht des Zentralkpmttees ' der KPO aber die politische Lage nnd die K.ampfan' fgaben der Partei, Wien, S. 20,
.....- ••-
135 134B. M. Leibzon
for it is their duty to take an active part in it. Although the trend towards self-isolation was condemned, in that period some Parties, in effect, closed in upon themselves, tried to avoid meeting the representatives of fraternal Parties and discussing common problems.
The fatalistic attitude to the contradictions arising between Communist Parties was expressed in the assertion that there could be no effective ways of overcoming the contradictions because they had objective roots. Attempts were even made to fall back on Marx, who had said, among other things: "Since the various sections of working men in the same country and the working classes in different countries are placed under different circumstances and have attained different degrees of development it seems almost necessary that the theoretical notions, which reflect the real movement, should also diverge." J This quotation was designed to justify the refusal to carry on an active struggle for unity.
But passive attitudes are organically alien to Marxism. Indeed, having recognised the objective roots of the diversity of views in the working-class movement, Marx said this about the practice of the International Working Men's Association (First International): "The community of action, however, called into life by the Intern. W. Ass., the exchange of ideas facilitated by the public organs of
~^^1^^ The General Council of the First International .1868-1870, Minytes, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1974, p. 310,
Forms of International Unity
the different national sections, and the direct debates at the General Congresses are sure by and by to engender a common theoretical programme." *
It took a great deal of effort to secure common action, to organise exchanges of views, and to overcome the passive attitude to a stronger unity of the Communist Parties whose positions were close to each other.
There was a need to overcome the notion that it was generally impossible to achieve the unity of the international communist movement without the consent of the CPC, for this implied that it depended on the consent of only one Party. The CPSU and many other fraternal Parties worked hard to strengthen the unity of the international communist movement. Meanwhile, the Maoists used unprecedented splitting methods, slandered the movement as a whole, tried to pit one Party against another, set up subversive groups, rejected any proposals for a substantive discussion of differences, and were quite open about their intention to make agreement impossible and to bring about a break. The CPC made a show of ignoring the Communist Parties' urge not to heat up the polemics.
At the 17th Congress of the FCP in 1964, Maurice Thorez said: "For a long time, we have displayed extreme discretion with respect to the theoretical differences between the
76 id.
137B. M. Leibzon
Chinese leaders and the whole international working-class movement, with respect to their subversive work against our Parties .... The Chinese leaders took this moderation and this urge for a fraternal discussion to be a weakness. They have stepped up their splitting activity. They have gone over to abuse and slander." '
In response to a proposal to call a new international meeting, Peking kept asserting its intention to carry on "open polemics for 10,000 years", claiming that it was "better to call an international meeting of the fraternal Parties later than prematurely; it is even better not to call it than to call it". The Communist Parties were faced with a real threat of losing their independence. The Maoists brazenly meddled in the internal affairs of Parties, set up groups and factions, which they instantly declared to be the genuine Marxist-Leninist Parties, while the real Communist Parties were branded as revisionist and ``excommunicated'' from the international communist movement, which was urged to rally round the CPC. The ``parties'' set up by the Maoists in the communist movement were very aptly designated as "pocket parties''.
Condemning Peking's unprecedented splitting methods, Janos Kadar, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party, said on 5 August
Forms of International Unity
1963: "Although China's fraternal Party is a powerful party in terms of numbers, the Chinese leaders should also know, for instance, where their Party ends and where the working-class party of another country begins." i
In January 1963, a CPSU delegation attending the Sixth Congress of the SUPG, proposed an end to the open polemics in the international communist movement. The proposal was supported by the representatives of fraternal Parties addressing the Congress, who came out in favour of convening a meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties after thorough preparations.
In the first half of the 1960s, many believed that it was unrealistic to hope to convene an international meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, while the bourgeois press claimed that it could not be done at all. But the CPSU and other Communist Parties worked hard to bring on the convocation of the new Meeting. The October 1964 Plenary Meeting of the CPSU Central Committee considered, among other problems, the question of strengthening the unity of the international communist movement. In this context, Pravda wrote about the results of the Plenum as follows: "The Communist Party of the Soviet Union is working most perseveringly to strengthen the unity and cohesion of the communist ranks on the principles of pro-
~^^1^^ Janos Kadar, Selected Articles and Speeches (May 1960-April 1964), Moscow, 1964, p. 451 (in Russian),
139~^^1^^ Cahiers dn communisms, Numero special, JuinJuillet 1964.
138B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
tives of the Communist Parties of European capitalist countries assembled in Vienna.
In the mid-1960s, preparations were started for an international meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. These were pivoted on problems arising from the need to ensure peace and to give support to the Vietnamese people's heroic struggle against the US aggression. The Soviet Union steadily increased its assistance to Vietnam.
The Conference at Karlovy Vary on 24-26 April 1967 was an important milestone in the development of the European Communist Parties' international unity. It was attended by delegations from 25 Parties, and a representative from the Communist Party of Sweden. Absent were representatives from the Parties of Yugoslavia, Romania, Norway, Iceland, the Netherlands, and Albania. This was the first ever joint conference of Communist and Workers' Parties of European socialist and capitalist countries. It was prepared and held successfully because it dealt with the concrete problem of working towards peace and security in Europe. Its statement contained a programme demanding above all that all the states recognise the realities in Europe which had taken shape in the postwar period.
Important for the development of the forms of unity of the communist movement was the principle written into the communique adopted by the Conference saying that the problems before it had been examined "in a free and broad discussion and fraternal co-opera-
141letarian internationalism. . . . Our Party will, as in the past, continue to conduct an active line for the convocation of an international meeting of all the Communist Parties to discuss pressing problems in the struggle for peace, democracy, national independence and socialism, and for strengthening the unity of the communist and working-class movement on the unshakable principles of proletarian internationalism." ^^1^^
Even in the most trying period, when the Maoist splitters managed to spread confusion in the ranks of some Communist Parties, bilateral and multilateral meetings of Parties were intensively held. Representatives of the Communist Parties of Latin America met in Havana in November 1964, and the Parties of the Arab countries met that year in December. In March 1965, representatives of 19 Communist Parties adopted an important document on the defence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam against the US aggression. In June 1965, Brussels was the scene of a meeting of representatives of the Communist Parties of European capitalist countries. At a meeting of representatives of 38 Parties in Prague, to mark the 30th anniversary of the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, the strengthening of international unity was an important question. Representatives of the Communist Parties of Arab countries met in April 1966. In May 1966, representa-
Pravda, 17 October 1964,
140B. M. LeibzoA
tion, in the spirit of internationalism, which distinguished both the preparatory work and the Conference itself".^^1^^
The Conference was guided by the assumption that each Communist Party, in the specific conditions in which it had to carry on the struggle, was responsible for its policy to the working class and the other working people of its own country, while being "aware of its international responsibility for safeguarding peace, for forming new international relations conforming to the need of our time".^^2^^
The document adopted by the Conference showed that internationalism, by which the Communists are guided, does not at all signify their isolation from the other forces capable of fighting for peace and social progress, but, on the contrary, is permeated with the idea of the broadest co-operation with all these forces. The Conference issued an appeal addressed primarily to the working class and its allies, to the Socialist Parties, trade unions, Christian forces, young people, women, and all bourgeois groupings which took a realistic approach to present-day realities, were aware of the dangers of a nuclear war, wanted to release their countries from dependence on the United States, and were prepared to support the policy of European security.
It was emphasised at the Karlovy Vary Conference that the fact that some Commu-
Forms of International tlnity
nist Parties had not attended the Conference did not at all mean that for them the doors to co-operation were closed. The Yugoslav Komnnist (4 May 1967) remarked that this "signifies a new and highly important aspect''.
After the Karlovy Vary Conference, preparations for another international conference were started. On 7 March 1964, the CPSU Central Committee circulated a letter addressed to all the Communist Parties proposing that the Editorial Commission of the 1960 International Meeting should take practical steps to convene another Meeting.* But it was clear that in the situation it would take at least several years for such a meeting to convene.
Thfe CPSU Central Committee's proposal met the intentions of many Parties. Maurice Thorez told the 17th Congress of the French Communist Party: "The idea of calling a meeting can be opposed only by those who, in one sense or another, would like to go back on the principles of the 1957 Declaration and the 1960 Statement.''~^^2^^
By mid-1964, it was ever more obvious that an overwhelming majority of the Communist Parties favoured preparations for a new Meeting.
It was obvious that not only the CPC would stay away from such a meeting, but also
~^^1^^ Kommunist (Moscow), October 1964.
~^^2^^ Cahiers du communisme, Numero special, Juin'- Juillet, 1964.
~^^1^^ Information Bulletin, Prague, 1967.
~^^2^^ Ibid.
142 143B. M. Leibzon
some other Parties, although for different reasons. This affected the stand of some Parties which wished to remain neutral. When the Editorial Commission met for its first Consultative Meeting from 1 to 5 March 1965, it turned out that of the 26 Parties which had taken part in the 1960 Editorial Commission only 19 had sent their representatives. The CPC and the Albanian Party of Labour sharply objected to the meeting.
Nevertheless, the assembled representatives of the 19 Parties had every reason to draw the conclusion that, despite the differences of view, it was possible and necessary to achieve unity of action by the Communist Parties in the struggle against imperialism on important theoretical and practical matters facing the communist movement. ' A free exchange of views on the principle of complete equality and independence of the Parties showed that although the situation was complicated, there was reason to hope that the call to strengthen the cohesion of the communist movement could win growing support.
Immediately after the Consultative Meeting, some 40 Communist Parties came out in favour of calling the meeting. In order to facilitate the preparations, the Parties stopped criticising the Maoists. Meanwhile, the CPC leadership declared the March meeting in Moscow ``divisive'' and ``illegal'', and stepped up its slander campaign and pressure on the
Forms of International Unity
``neutral" Parties. But now the Maoists' attacks did not have the same effect as they did in the first half of the 1960s. More and more Parties became convinced that it was inadmissible to make the convocation of the Meeting contingent on the CPC's participation in it. The struggle against imperialism called for joint action by the Communists, with a particularly acute need to help Vietnam,
Numerous bilateral and regional meetings of Communist Parties and Party congresses addressed by representatives of other fraternal Parties showed that it was no longer right to mark time in strengthening the unity of the international communist movement. The potentialities for getting down to practical preparations for the new international Meeting had become broader and more solid. In this respect, the year 1967 marked the turning point.
An exchange of views between the Communist Party delegations, which assembled in Moscow to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, ended with the publication of a communique on behalf of the Parties which attended the March 1965 meeting. They requested the Central Committee of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party to provide an opportunity for holding a consultative meeting in Budapest for preparing a new international meeting. On 25 November 1967, it was reported that the "HSWP CC has given its consent and will
See, Pravda, 10 March 1965.
14410-01267
145B. M. Leibzon
send out relevant invitations to fraternal Parties". '
After the 1960 Meeting, some Communist Parties had split up (as in India). New Communist Parties also emerged in countries where there had been none before. The HSWP was, quite naturally, unable to decide on its own who was to be invited to the new Meeting. After holding consultations with roughly 50 Parties, the HSWP sent out invitations to all the Parties which had attended the 1960 Meeting.
As had been expected, the CPC leaders rejected the invitation, and made some crude attacks in the process. The Albanian Party of Labour followed Peking's example. The Communist Party of New Zealand did not reply to the invitation.
It proved to be impossible to establish contacts with the Communist Parties of Burma, Malaya, and Thailand, whose leadership acted under orders from Peking. It was impossible to send an invitation to the Communist Party of Indonesia, for its leadership had been crushed, and only scattered communist groups remained in the country. The Communist Party of Pakistan agreed to the convocation of a consultative meeting but, being forced to work in difficult underground conditions, expressed its regret at not being able to help prepare an international meeting, as it would have liked.
Forms of International Unity
The Communist Party of Japan said that the conditions for convening a new international meeting had not yet matured. The Communist Party of the Netherlands refused to take part in the meeting on the plea that not all the Parties would be represented.
The Workers' Party of Korea expressed gratitude for the invitation and said that it was unable to send a delegation and expressed the hope that its decision would be regarded with full understanding.
The leadership of the Vietnam Workers' Party received the letter with gratitude and expressed its regret that it could not send a delegation in view of its position. Indeed, the Party's position was complicated, but, while having no opportunity to take part in the meeting, the Vietnamese Communists repeatedly declared that the support of all the fraternal Parties was vital for them.
Sweden's Left Party (Communists) replied that it would not take part in the consultative meeting, but asked to be informed on its decisions so that it could draw a conclusion about taking part in the international Meeting.
So, 67 of the 81 Parties that had taken part in the 1960 Meeting agreed to send their delegations to the consultative meeting. That meant a major step forward in preparing the new Meeting, and showed that most Parties were interested in an exchange of opinion, although their agreement to meet did not imply that all their views coincided. Many difficulties still had to be overcome on
~^^1^^ Pravda, 25 November 1967.
10*
147B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
document. What kind of document was that to be?
It was agreed that the document would not be ideological, but political, and would provide the basis for joint action by the Communist Parties. Many delegations said that the document of the forthcoming Meeting should not be of the type adopted by the 1960 Meeting. In particular, it should not contain a condemnation of any Party and should formulate---positively, and not critically---the common positions at which the Parties will arrive. But politics is tied in with ideology, and political conclusions cannot be artificially detached from a definite ideological basis. The head of the CPSU delegation Mikhail Suslov said: "Like many fraternal Parties, we think that the Meeting's document will mostly contain political conclusions. The essentially important point here is that the document should clearly express the ideological tenor of the communist movement, its loyalty to the theory of Marx and Lenin, and its firm resolve to follow the way of proletarian scientific communism." l
Since the main political task of the communist movement is to fight imperialism, it was decided to concentrate solely on that basic question.
The Communists have never seen themselves as the only fighters against imperialism.
~^^1^^ M. A. Suslov, Along the Road of Communist Construction. Speeches and Articles, Vol. 2, Moscow, 1977, p. 143 (in Russian).
149the way to the new international Meeting.
One distinctive feature of the preparatory work was that the very process of discussing and co-ordinating the Parties positions promoted their unity. Apart from helping to solve concrete questions connected with the forthcoming Meeting, the preparatory work also had a political importance of its own.
At every stage of the preparations, the Parties not only collectively discussed the most urgent theoretical and practical problems of the communist movement, but also enriched the principles of their mutual relations, and specified many distinctive features of the mutual contacts that were best suited to the common tasks and the peculiarities of the situation.
At the consultative meeting, which opened on 26 February 1968, it was suggested that the Meeting should not adopt any document, but should confine itself to an exchange of opinion on pressing problems.
Collective elaboration of documents reflecting the basic positions of the Parties was a tradition that had taken shape at the very outset of the international communist movement. The Budapest Meeting did not break that important tradition. The delegates decided to draft a final document, an appeal entitled "Independence, Freedom and Peace for Vietnam", and also an "Address in Defence of Peace''.
So, the first task was to formulate a final
148B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
nal Meeting of Marxist-Leninist Parties and a world conference of all the anti-imperialist forces are two different things. ... In holding international Meetings for an exchange of opinion and experience, the Marxist-Leninist Parties are not guided by considerations of sectarian isolation or an intention to hide something from their allies. It is not worth substituting some indefinite political measure, blurred and amorphous both ideologically and politically, without any clear-cut tasks and results, for a Meeting of Communists." Komocsin was quite right in saying that the difficulties in convening the Meeting would be much greater "if the political differences with national democratic and other anti-- imperialist parties were added to the problems of the international communist movement. And this could well happen if these parties attended the international Meeting." '
The understanding that only Communist and Workers' Parties would be invited to attend the Meeting was of fundamental importance, emphasising that the Communists' own solidarity would help to cement the broad international solidarity with all the progressive forces, which had always been the Communists' aim.
But while the question about the nature of the forthcoming Meeting as a purely Communist one was solved fairly easily, the prob-
~^^1^^ Zoltan Komocsin, National Interests and Internationalist Goals, Moscow, 1976, pp. 293-94 (in Russian).
151On the contrary, they are sure that the broader the front of struggle against the main obstacle in the way of mankind's progress, the greater the guarantees of success. The Communist Parties believe that their task is to muster the most diverse forces for the antiimperialist struggle, acting as the most consistent force of the united anti-imperialist struggle.
Hence the main issue on the agenda of the Meeting: "The tasks of struggle against imperialism at the present stage and unity of action of the Communist and Workers' Parties, of all the anti-imperialist forces''.
The question of who was to be invited to attend the Meeting was closely tied in with the agenda and the character of the forthcoming Meeting.
There was a suggestion to invite the national liberation fronts and the Socialist Parties that had taken an anti-imperialist stand. It was pointed out that the international communist movement suffered not only from lack of contact in its own ranks, but also from a certain ``narrowness''.
But these ideas met with no support. The opinion was expressed that meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties did not hinder the expansion of the anti-imperialist alliance, but promoted it. To ensure such alliance, the communist movement should consolidate itself on a principled basis.
The Hungarian representative Zoltan Komocsin said: "In our opinion, an internatio-
150B. M. Leibzon
lem of inviting the Communist Parties themselves proved to be more complicated. The communique said: "The Romanian Communist Party ... believes that conditions should be created for the participation of all Communist Parties without exception,"J including the Maoist splinter groups, the so-called parallel parties.
Many Parties came out strongly against inviting them. A number of Parties did not express their opinion on this question, but their views on other matters showed that they, too, were against inviting the parallel parties. The speakers emphasised that to invite the parallel splinter parties would mean recognising their right to existence within the communist movement.
The question of whether a country could have more than one Communist Party was considered back at the Second Comintern Congress in 1920. A resolution on the role of the Communist Party in the proletarian revolution said: "There shall be in each country only one single unified communist party.''^^2^^
That principle meant that if two or more parties which considered themselves to be Communist operated in one country, and the differences between them were not fundamental, there could be no insurmountable obstacle for their merger. In the USA, two Com-
~^^1^^ Pravda, 29 February 1968.
~^^2^^ The Communist International, 1919-1943. Documents, Vol. I, p. 135.
152Forms of International Unity
munist Parties were initially set up, but these merged into one, and their differences were overcome in the course of practical work. But the existence of fundamental differences between the parties on matters of principle rules out the possibility that both parties are guided by Marxist-Leninist ideas. Then there is no ground for their unification, and it would show a lack of principle to invite to the Meeting representatives of those parties which pose as Marxist ones, but are in effect fighting against the Communists. The consultative meeting did not abandon this principled stand, reaffirming the principle on the strength of which the invitations had been issued.
The participants backed the proposal to set up a commission to consider inviting to the Meeting the Marxist-Leninist Parties that had emerged after 1960: the Socialist Unity Party of West Berlin, the Communist Party of the Philippines, and others.
The question of inviting the League of Communists of Yugoslavia was considered specially. It was decided that the criticism of the LCY's position at the Meeting of 1960 was no obstacle to its participation in the new international Meeting. The LCY was invited,, yet it did not take part in the Meeting.
The exchange of opinion on that issue revealed some new important aspects of relations between the fraternal Parties. First of all, it was made clear that the communist movement did not ``excommunicate'' any Par-
153.B. M. Leihzon
ty, and that it was for the Party itself to decide whether it would take part in the common work. Mikhail Suslov said in Budapest: "We would have sincerely welcomed the presence here and at the Meeting itself of the delegations of all Communist and Workers' Parties, including those which are now separated from us by deep ideological and politi•cal divisions. But involvement in the preparation of the Meeting is purely voluntary and lies within the competence of each Party's ruling organs." '
Representatives of other Parties also made statements to that effect, noting that collective excommunication of some Parties from the communist movement was basically wrong and harmful for the movement itself. At the same time, it was emphasised that every Party had the inalienable right to its viewpoint on any question of the international communist movement, and that when the viewpoint •of one Party did not coincide with that of another, this should not be seen as an attack against it or as interference in its internal affairs.
The consultative meeting showed that the 'Communist movement was opposed to any attempts to discriminate against one Party or another or to curtail its rights. The movement is guided by genuinely democratic norms of mutual relations among the Parties and, instead of trying to overemphasise
Forms of International Unity
their differences, stresses the common elements that unite the Parties and strengthen their cohesion.
At the same time, the communist movement cannot put up with any Party intending to secure a special position for itself. Mikhail Suslov said at the Consultative Meeting: "One cannot accept that a Party's refusal to take part in the collective consideration and solution of general problems facing our movement should be allowed to serve as a pretext for postponing the Meeting without good reason or for discrediting its very idea. No Party can impose its will on all the other Communist and Workers' Parties." '
The atmosphere at the Budapest Meeting was one of broad democracy and free comradely discussion. Every delegate could take the floor as often as he thought it necessary. Some representatives spoke up to 30 times.
The participants unanimously adopted a message of solidarity to the Vietnamese people, voicing "on behalf of all the Communists their admiration for its heroic struggle", and ensured it that "the assistance being given to fighting Vietnam by the socialist countries and all the working people of the world would increase until the US aggressors were totally expelled from Vietnamese soil.''~^^2^^
By formulating basic principles for the further preparation of the international Meet-
M. A. Suslov, Op. cit., p. 141.
~^^1^^ Ibid.
~^^2^^ Pravda, 7 March 1968.
154 155B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
to turn it into a principle would mean allowing the right of veto, something that would be a parody of democracy, for then even one dissenting Party could overrule the will of the majority. Member of the CC Executive Committee of the Communist Party of Argentina Rodolfo Ghioldi subsequently spoke of the unanimity question at the 1969 International Meeting. He said he disagreed with the proposal that the Meeting should discuss only those questions that have the support of all its participants without exception, in other words, that it should use the principle of consensus which sometimes has effect in the US Security Council. The international Meeting of Communists has nothing in common with the Security Council. The Meeting, he said, "does not represent a single centre, though this does not mean that it is being conducted anarchistically, or that the minority can impose its opinion on the majority. But that is precisely what would happen if we were to accept the unanimity principle, when one dissenting vote could disrupt all our work. That is not a democratic procedure; democratic procedure presupposes free and open discussion followed by formulation of decisions that reflect the majority opinion." '
In the course of the Budapest Meeting, the Parties arrived at a procedure which won general recognition and proved to be quite ac-
ing, the consultative meeting laid a good groundwork for joint activity. It was decided to set up a Preparatory Commission to draft documents to be adopted at the Meeting. Representatives of any Communist or Workers' Party could take part in that commission. It met five times, and on each occasion up to 60 Parties were involved. It set up another commission, which met three times, and subcommissions to draft the various chapters of the document, which met four times.
Although that painstaking and difficult work took much time and effort, it enabled the Parties to work out a truly collective document. The methods used in the course of the preparatory work enabled the Parties to get a better idea of each other's positions.
The participants assumed that voting would give the majority an opportunity to impose its standpoint on the minority, so violating the latter's independence. No Party can be forced to take a stand it does not share. In the early stages of the Budapest Meeting, there was an urge to adopt all the decisions unanimously. This principle reflects the Parties' equality, ruling out any discrimination or the possibility of fundamental decisions being adopted without general consent. But, apart from protracting the decision-making procedure, it also creates conditions under which one Party could block the opinion of all the other Parties.
Some representatives said that unanimity was a wonderful and desirable goal, but
^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1969, pp. 340-41.
156 157B. M. Leibzon
ceptable for various other cases when fully independent Parties had to elaborate joint decisions. Thus, when a Party disagrees with a draft decision, its dissenting opinion is written into the protocol, the Party having the right to sign only that part of the document with which it agrees. It can also reserve its position in solving some particular problems. The main point, however, was not to elaborate a procedure that would guarantee the Parties' right to voice their disagreement, but to create conditions under which the opinion of every Party would be duly taken into account and be reflected in the adopted documents.
Forms of International Unity
er international unity and emphasised: "Unity means action, not words." '
Characterising the present situation in theworld and the expansion of the revolutionary movement, Enrico Berlinguer said: "In these circumstances, the demand for internationalism resounds more compulsively than ever.''~^^2^^
Many participants in the Meeting spoke highly of the methods of its preparation, of the fact that all the Parties that had wanted to take part in drafting the documents had had ample opportunity to do so. At the Meeting itself, the commissions, working groups and subcommissions carried on their activities in a fully democratic and comradely atmosphere. All conditions were created to have an open and fraternal exchange of views, on the basis of full equality and mutual respect,, which helped to elucidate controversial issues. All the participants had the opportunity to voice their views, to hear what the othershad to say, to uphold their own ideas and assess the ideas of others. It was also noted that such preparations and the very holding of the Meeting raised the unity of the international communist movement to a new level. Head of the delegation of the Socialist Vanguard Party of Algeria Larbi Bouhali said: "As far as we know, not many international meetings of the communist and working-class
~^^1^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course.. Speeches and Articles, Moscow, 1972, pp. 185, 187.
~^^2^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1969, p. 383.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 5. MAJOR VICTORYThe long preparation for the new international Meeting culminated in success. The Moscow Meeting of 75 Communist and Workers' Parties in June 1969 marked a major stride in strengthening the Communists' international unity and consolidating all the anti-imperialist forces. Addressing the Meeting, General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Leonid Brezhnev said: "In their fight for unity, the Communists have a tested weapon. One that has brought victory in glorious battles for the cause of the working class, for socialism. That weapon is proletarian internationalism." He called for a strong-
158B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
and scientifically grounded propositions and ways for the struggle of each Party and for joint action.
Of course, the questions of anti-imperialist struggle could not be isolated from sharp ideological problems, like the specifics of our time, the relation of the struggle for democracy and that for socialism, the substance of proletarian internationalism at the present stage, and many other problems discussed at the Meeting. It was all the more successful in view of the failure of Peking's divisive activities, the results achieved by the Communist Parties in exposing right-revisionist and leftist views, and the positive elaboration of many theoretical questions. The question about the nature of the document to be adopted by the Meeting was of essential importance. It had already become a tradition in the international communist movement to adopt documents containing a scientific analysis of the situation as a basis for further strategy and tactics of struggle. Most documents of the Second International avoided any concrete analysis of the international situation, the state of affairs in individual countries, and the prospects of revolutionary struggle. The international communist movement, on the other hand, had always aimed at the most accurate and comprehensive analysis of the situation in which the Parties had to operate. The Communists had always believed that analysis of the political situation was a prerequisite for a guide to action.
movement were prepared as thoroughly, and attended so effectively by so large a number of Parties. This, we believe, is a highly promising thing for the future relations between our Parties." :
The differences that existed in the international communist movement were bound to be reflected at the Meeting. No one sought to conceal or gloss over diverging viewpoints. But, as Luis Corvalan rightly pointed out, "divergences are not the principal thing at this Meeting. Nevertheless, existing divergences on various issues have been set forth openly and in comradely fashion, and this, in our opinion, is another service rendered by the Meeting. That different viewpoints are enunciated here does not alarm us because it is more useful to expound and compare them with other opinions. We are confident that this kind of divergence of viewpoints will not prevent us from leaving this Meeting more united than before.''~^^2^^
Indeed, the Meeting helped to consolidate the movement. As it was justly pointed out at the Meeting, unity does not emerge of its own accord, but has to be forged by the fraternal Parties themselves, through constant effort, internationalism and mutual understanding. Divergences arising between the Parties on some issues should not be seen as quarrels, but as a quest for the most correct
~^^1^^ Ibid., p. 236.
~^^2^^ Ibid., p. 266.
.160
11-01267
161B. M. Leibzori
The proposal to confine the Meeting's Document to the concrete tasks of joint struggle against imperialism was not supported. The participants started from Lenin's propositions that "the Marxist requirement that every slogan be justified by a precise analysis of economic realities, the political situation and the political significance of the slogan".^^1^^ "Tactics 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) as well as of the experience of revolutionary movements.''~^^2^^
When applied to the elaboration of the anti-imperialist policy of the international communist movement, Lenin's propositions meant the need for a scientific analysis of the latest events in the world, and for a comprehension of the new balance of social forces. On some sections of the final Document adopted by the Meeting, several Parties had their special standpoints, but on the section dealing with the problems of struggle against imperialism and for peace, i.e., on the fundamental issue lying at the root of the unity of the present-day communist movement, the Parties achieved full unanimity (with the exception of the Dominican Communist Party).
Forms of International Unity
The Meeting declared that by stepping up their offensive against imperialism, the antiimperialist forces could obtain a decisive superiority over it and defeat its policy of aggression and war, and worked out a concrete programme of struggle against the reacts onary forces across the world. It emphasised that the policy of peaceful coexistence "does not imply either the preservation of the socio-political status quo or a weakening of the ideological struggle. It helps to promote the class struggle against imperialism on a national and world-wide scale.''
Naturally, the Main Document, which was the result of joint work by many Parties, could not reflect all the ideas and wishes expressed in the course of its preparation. Gus Hall said: "It is a collective document, therefore it cannot, in every word or phrase, have the wording or style of any one of the Parties." He emphasised that the 18-- monthlong preparations for the Meeting were a process of unification. The drafting of the Document niade it possible to specify the Parties' positions and narrow down the areas of divergence. "The habit and the lessons of working together are in themselves an invaluable asset for the world movement." '
The fact that the representatives of some Parties voiced their dissatisfaction with the theoretical level of some of the Document's
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 23, 1964, p. 65.
~^^2^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, p. 63.
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1&89, pp. 31, 426.
11*
163B. M. Leibzon
provisions was justly seen as an indicator of the Parties' growing urge to deepen theore tical work in order to ensure timely scientific assessment of the latest social phenomena. On the whole, however, the Main Document, as described by First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Uruguay Rodney Arismendi, was "an important theoretical and political document, ... a step of tremendous significance towards unity of the communist movement". Having emphasised that the Main Document was a platform for uniting the anti-imperialist forces, and that it attached special importance to solidarity with Vietnam and the peoples of other countries fighting for independence and freedom, Arismendi noted that some compromises were also reflected in the Document, "inasmuch as it is a successful attempt to achieve a coincidence of various standpoints on a principled foundation''.
The unanimous adoption of the address "On the Centenary of the Birth of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin" was an important indicator of the fundamental principles behind the unity of the international communist movement. The Address said: "Loyalty to Marxism-- Leninism, to this great international teaching, holds the promise of further successes of the communist movement."^^1^^ The Address emphasised that the Communists' task was to uphold in the struggle against any adversa-
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, pp. 200, 41.
164Forms of International Unity
ries the revolutionary principles of MarxismLeninism and proletarian internationalism, steadily to put these into effect, and constantly to develop Marxist-Leninist theory.
Many important propositions of the principles and forms of international communist unity were further elaborated at the Meeting and recorded in its documents. It was reaffirmed that the mutual relations among the fraternal Parties were based on the principles of proletarian internationalism, solidarity and mutual support, respect for independence and equality, and non-interference in one another's internal affairs. Having emphasised that proletarian internationalism was a component of the theory and struggle of any Communist Party, General Secretary of the French Communist Party Waldeck Rochet said that however diverse the conditions of the Parties' struggle and the problems they have to tackle, "this diversity should not mean division, just as a requisite independence of each Party should not lead to isolation or nationalism".'
Questions stemming from the Parties' independence and equality were formulated in more concrete detail than in the Statement adopted by the 1960 Meeting. The Parties emphasised the importance of concerted action for the solution of urgent practical tasks facing today's general democratic revolutionary movements, for promoting the necessary ex-
Ibid., p. 119.
165B. M. Leibzon
change of opinion among the fraternal Parties, developing Marxist-Leninist theory, and strengthening the internationalist approach to urgent problems. Special attention was devoted to the interconnection between each Party's national and international responsibility and to the idea that "the diverse conditions in which the Communist Parties operate, the different approaches to practical tasks and even differences on certain questions must not hinder concerted international action by fraternal Parties, particularly on basic problems of the anti-imperialist struggle''.
The Main Document said that while the communist movement had achieved vast historical successes, it had recently met with some grave difficulties, and expressed the conviction that these difficulties would be overcome. Some of the divergences could be overcome through an exchange of opinion or in the course of further development, while others could be lasting. But disputes could be correctly resolved "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''.
During the preparation of the Meeting, some Parties said that bilateral meetings should be the only form of contact. But the Meeting decided that in view of the growing diversity of the world revolutionary process, "bilateral consultations, regional meetings
Forms of International Unity .
and international conferences are natural forms of such co-operation and are conducted on the basis of the principles accepted in the communist movement",^^1^^ enabling the Communist and Workers' Parties to pool their efforts in the struggle for common goals. •
The principles of proletarian internationalism on which the preparation and work of the International Meeting were based, reaffirmed respect for the independence of all Parties, comradely discussion, and collectivism. The Meeting enriched these principles, strengthened them, and opened up favourable prospects for their further development.
The verbatim report of the Meeting was published in full, disproving the anti-- communist allegations that the communist movement operated in secret, behind closed doors.
The 1969 Meeting showed that the attempts to split the international communist movement were a total failure, and that its unity could develop in spite of the resistance put up by the Communist Party of China and the handful of parties subservient to it.
Having set themselves the task of working for anti-imperialist unity of action by the broadest popular masses throughout the world, the Communist Parties attending the Meeting issued an "Appeal in Defence of Peace", which ended with these notable words: "In face of all trials, we Communists have preserved our boundless devotion to Lenin's ideas
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, pp. 36, 37, 38.
167B. M. Leibzon
of peace and friendship among nations. Today, as before, we shall struggle for these lofty aims of the whole of mankind together with all who oppose the policy of militarism, aggression and war. For these aims we are ready to develop contacts and co-operate with the most diverse public and political forces.
``The unity of all progressive, peace-loving forces is the demand of the day. United we shall ensure the triumph of the sacred cause of world peace." i
The spirit of the Meeting and the documents it adopted reaffirmed that the Communists regard the unity of their ranks not as a purely internal affair of the communist movement, but as a necessary requisite for uniting all the progressive forces fighting for peace, democracy and socialism. At the same time, the Meeting showed that rules governing their relations, which had taken shape over the decades, were supported and expressed in concrete terms. These rules constituted the fundamental basis for the subsequent development of relations among the Communist Parties.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 6. REGIONALThere was an increase in the number of bilateral contacts between the Communist Parties in the 1970s. There were also over
Forms of International Unity
70 multilateral meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties, including regional conferences.
In contemporary conditions, these meetings proved to be the most acceptable and effective form of international contacts between the Communist Parties, helping to bring them closer, compare their standpoints and work out common positions.
Regional conferences should not, of course, result in a separation of the Communist Parties by region, for these are conferences within the integral international communist movement. Don Wimalasiri Subasinghe, Member of the Political Bureau and Secretary of the Central Committee, CP Sri Lanka, declared: "Our Party welcomes the fact that fraternal parties in different continents have, in recent times, met to consider, to work out in depth, and to suggest practical solutions to the specific problems that have arisen in these geographical areas. However, we must say categorically that we are opposed to any ' regional communism', which is non-Marxist." ^
Regional conferences are highly diverse, reflecting the conditions in which the Parties have to work, and especially the tasks they face. But that is an expression of the multifaceted nature of the unity which holds the international communist movement together. Every such meeting shows very well the equality of the Parties, their mutual respect, and
~^^1^^ Ibid., p. 50,
World Marxist Review, March 1979.
163 169B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
j
the Cuban revolution, which marked a historic turning point in Latin America.
The document described the historical situation which determined the great battle facing the peoples of Latin America as the final battle for independence that will lead to the triumph of socialism.
The Latin American Meeting was permeated with a spirit of internationalism and a keen sense of the oneness of the processes in world development: the rise of socialism, victories of the national liberation struggle in Africa and Asia, and the successes scored by the working-class movement. The international solidarity of the world forces of social progress brought out even more forcefully the need for the unity of all the peoples and all the progressive liberation forces of Latin America on a national and continental scale.
The document contained conclusions which were of fundamental importance not only for the Communists but also for all the other patriotic and democratic forces of Latin America. At the present stage, the struggle whose ultimate goal is socialism has an anti-- imperialist edge. Hence the support of governments taking an anti-imperialist stand and those pursuing a policy of defending national resources against the imperialist monopolies, and also the need for and possibility of establishing the broadest unity of action of all the anti-imperialist forces. The document welcomed the alliance of all the left-wing forces, but emphasised that "no movement hold-
m
the democratic procedures used to formulate and discuss common problems.
A regional meeting of the Latin American Communist Parties was held in Havana in June 1975, and its nature and specific features were determined by the conditions in which these Parties had to operate. The fascist coup in Chile and the reactionary offensive in a number of countries on the continent induced the Communists to find a collective answer to the main problems which the reality of the day posed before them, and to formulate common strategy and tactics in the liberation struggle. The representatives of all the 24 Communist Parties of the region, with delegations from the USA CP and the CP of Canada attending as observers, discussed their common problems in depth. The declaration "Latin America in the Struggle Against Imperialism, for National Independence, Democracy, People's Welfare, Peace and Socialism" unanimously adopted by the Meeting, had been collectively worked out beforehand and circulated to the Central Committees of all the Parties attending the Meeting, and was finally edited on the strength of the views they expressed.
The document took a broad historical approach and contained a scientific analysis. It considered the lessons of the 150 years of the Latin American peoples' struggle for independence, and described the key revolutionary developments on the continent. It gave an in-depth characterisation of the victory of
•i-70
B. M. Leibzon
ing anti-communist or anti-Soviet positions can be considered left-wing". '
The Communist Parties expressed their intention to carry on a discussion between the left-wing forces in a spirit of unity and in the interests of the struggle against fascism and imperialism. They determined the common tasks of their struggle on the assumption that the Latin American revolution is an extremely complex dialectical process.
The Meeting concentrated on the problems creating conditions for elaborating a joint platform and realising it. Although the ievel of the tasks being tackled by the Parties tends to differ and depends on the concrete conditions and the balance of forces in each country, there are common tasks which increase the need for the Communist Parties of Latin America to strengthen their unity and co-ordinate their action.
Rodney Arismendi wrote that the Meeting "showed the mistakenness of any `special' approach which, on the plea of differences in the struggle of the various Parties, diversity of ways to socialism and different conditions or levels of the revolutionary process in each country or region, denies the single international approach to the world process and the scientific significance of the summing up of contemporary international practice".~^^2^^
Forms of International Unity
The Meeting warned of the dangers of the Maoist line, which was aimed against the goals of the communist movement and was a platform of anti-Sovietism, a fight against socialism and a common front of the anti-- imperialist forces. The Meeting resolutely condemned the Chinese leadership's foreign policy and its flirtation with US imperialism, its vindication of NATO, and its ignominious deals with Chile's military junta, and called on all the Communists of Latin America to combat the Maoist policy of "betraying the cause of unity and solidarity and the finest traditions of the- world revolutionary movement". *
The Communist Parties reaffirmed that they felt the need for a joint search for answers to burning problems. The Declaration of the Meeting said: "Conscious of the necessity to still further strengthen the international communist movement as the vanguard of all revolutionary, socialist and anti-imperialist forces, the Latin American and Caribbean parties favour the holding of a world communist conference and will work together with all Communists of the world to make a positive contribution to the cause of strengthening the world communist and working-class movement.''~^^2^^
.. The Berlin Conference of the Communist and Workers' Parties of Europe (June 1976)
~^^1^^ Information Bulletin, December 1975.
~^^2^^ Kommunist (Moscow), No. 14, 1975,
~^^1^^ Information Bulletin, December 1975.
~^^2^^ Ibid.
173B. M. Leibzon
was a great event for the whole international communist movement. Some of the European Parties are the biggest in the contemporary communist movement in the non-socialist world. Much importance was attached to the fact that the Meeting was attended by Parties from the capitalist and the socialist countries. This was the most representative conference of any ever held by the Communist Parties of Europe. It was attended by 29 Parties, that is, all, with the exception of the Albanian Party of Labour.
The Communists' international unity is always aimed at solving the most vital problems facing the working class, all the other working people, all the nations.
In the present situation, safeguarding peace is the most burning task for the nations, and that was the problem considered by the Berlin Conference in the first place. Its deliberations were permeated with conviction that the solution of all the urgent social problems in Europe and throughout the world depends on the strengthening of detente.
The time since the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties has largely changed the international conditions for the development of the revolutionary process as a whole, and also in each individual country. The victories scored over the strongest imperialist power by the heroic Vietnamese people, who were actively supported by the socialist countries and all the other progressive forces, the Soviet Union's consistent
174-
Forms of International Unity
policy of peace based on the growing might of the socialist community promoted the relaxation of international tension. The changes in the international situation filled the struggle for peace with new content.
The first act of the first socialist government in history, Lenin's famous Decree on Peace, became a symbol of the integral connection between the emergent social system and the cause of peace and security of nations. Imperialism, which has not changed its stripes, is now increasingly losing its historical initiative and is no longer capable of invalidating the historic gains of socialism or of stemming the advance of the progressive forces. Meanwhile, the might of socialism, the strength of the working-class and national liberation movements have grown immensely. The struggle for peace increasingly paves the way for the new society and merges with the struggle for socialism.
That is why the successes connected with detente have aroused such fierce resistance on the part of its adversaries: the reactionary politicians, the arms producers and merchants, the racists, and the bosses of the multinational corporations. Capitalism with its incurable ills, which are being aggravated by the sharpening of its general crisis, is ever more hard put to find a way out in conditions of peace. The claim that detente allegedly brings unilateral advantages to the socialist countries alone amounts to an indirect admission (whatever the intentions of those
175B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
conference to deal with one problem: the struggle for peace, security, co-operation and social progress in Europe. They established the procedure for the preparation of the Conference and decided on Berlin, which lies in the centre of Europe, as its venue.
At the Preparatory Meeting which followed, the problems were discussed in a democratic manner. The delegations of all the Parties which had agreed to attend the Conference were able to take part in the Editorial Commission set up for drafting a document. The Editorial Commission subsequently set up a working group---also open for all the Parties intending to attend the Conference, and a subgroup consisting of eight Parties (CPSU, SUPG, League of Communists of Yugoslavia, the Communist Parties of Romania, France, Italy, Spain and Denmark). The subgroup held three meetings, and the Editorial Commission---four.
A new element in the practical preparation of international conferences was the proposal, put before the Preparatory Meeting, to hold seminars on problems arising from the subjects to be discussed by the Conference. Two such seminars---one in Belgrade, on economic relations between European and developing countries, and another in Rome, on the contemporary situation and the prospects for economic co-operation in Europe---were held in April 1975. The procedural rules of the Conference envisaged that the chairman should give the floor to individual representatives
who spread such ideas may be) that capitalism finds it hard to live in the atmosphere of detente, that it is a system with a built-in policy of war and aggression.
It is no secret that imperialism is still strong enough to frustrate detente and create hotbeds of tension in various parts of the globe.
In these conditions, safeguarding peace tends to become a crucial factor in the class struggle, for on the successes of the peace forces ultimately depends the development of the world revolutionary process and the prospects for the working people's struggle in each country.
The Conference on Security and Co-- operation in Europe, whose final stage was held in Helsinki from 30 July to 1 August 1975, became an important event for peace in Europe and throughout the world. Earlier on, in the summer of 1974, the Polish United Workers' Party proposed to the other European Communist Parties the holding of a Consultative Meeting on the advisability of holding a conference of the fraternal Parties of Europe. This proposal was readily supported. By then, the Action Programme adopted by the European Communist Parties in Karlovy Vary in 1967 had been largely fulfilled. Meanwhile, the situation on the continent had changed, and this required new decisions.
The Consultative Meeting of 28 European Communist Parties was held on 16 October 1974, and came out in favour of calling a
17612-01267
177B. M. Leibzon
in the order in which they requested to speak. There was virtually no limitation on the length of the main addresses.
The Berlin. Conference once again demonstrated the close connection between the struggle for peace and the struggle for social progress. Erich Honecker, General Secretary of the SUPG Central Committee, emphasised: "In accordance with our understanding, the Document which we are to discuss and adopt contains a limited range of questions, but these questions are of great importance for mankind, these are truly vital questions of the nations.''~^^4^^
Bourgeois ideologists realised that the Berlin Conference, which they had said would be a fiasco^ had demonstrated the unity of the Communist Parties round /the tasks of struggle for the solution of the key problems of our day. The Conference also showed that the development of new forms of the Communists' unity on the basis of independence of the Parties, far from weakening their influence in the world, in effect promotes the growth of the Communist Parties' prestige at home and in the international arena.
Historical experience shows that the broader the problems on which the Communist Parties' solidarity and co-operation are centred-, the freer are the forms of this co-- operation, and the less need there is for formulat-
~^^1^^ Conference of Communist and Workers' Parties of Europe. Berlin, June 29-30, 1976, Moscow, 1977, p. 222 (in Russian).
178Forms of International Unity
ing joint decisions setting out numerous questions in detail, and the greater is the need to concentrate on main issues. This was shown in the formulation of a stand on the global problem of safeguarding peace and anti-war action, which is a common one for all the Parties.
Speaking of the importance of the Conference, Enrico Berlinguer noted: "The most positive aspect from the standpoint of method was the recognition of the fact that the Document could be worked out only with the observance of the following three conditions: limitation of themes; consent of all the participating Parties; and, in any case, no claimeven an indirect one---for anyone to limit each Party's complete independence in conducting its own line in domestic and foreign policy and in working out its political and theoretical questions. The content of the Document does not, of course, reflect the specific positions of the various Parties." *
Its participants spoke at length about the methods used in preparing the Conference, and noted that its Document was the result of intense activity on the part of the Editorial Commission and the Working Group, work which was difficult but constructive and based on the principles of democracy and equality.
The comradely atmosphere in which the preparation for the Conference was held (and
~^^1^^ Ib id., p. 234.
12*
179B. M. Leibzori
the preparation lasted for 20 months) promoted mutual understanding and co-operation. Speakers at the Conference noted that the preparation for it had required of each participant much patience and an attentive attitude to the views of others. It was noted with satisfaction that the Party representatives had learned to engage in effective discussions, and to seek unifying positions that enabled the movement to maintain the necessary unity.
While approving the democratic methods used in the preparation and holding of the Conference, the representatives of some Parties expressed doubts as to the desirability of such lengthy preparations, and the correspondence of such practices to the new conditions.
The late Josip Broz Tito, Chairman of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, noted with satisfaction the frank and free exchange of views at the Conference, the breadth of its positions, and spoke in favour of "the need for diverse and even new forms of co-- operation among the Communist, Workers' and other progressive parties and movements".1 Enrico Berlinguer spoke about the need for a broader discussion of major theoretical and political problems facing the international movement for socialism. Georges Marchais, General Secretary of the French Communist Party, proposed "the search for new and more
~^^1^^ Conference of Communist and Workers' Parties of Europe. Berlin, June 29-30, 1976, p. 211.
Forms of International Unity
vibrant, flexible and effective forms of collective meetings helping to hold profound, frank and direct discussions on this or that major problem of our day, and not always culminating in the adoption of some document". *
Speakers emphasised the importance of the Conference in strengthening the friendship, co-operation and solidarity between the Parties. Although the Parties did have different views, specific experience, their own conceptions and tactics which were determined by the situation in their countries, they all had one common main goal. They were all held together by the bonds of fraternal friendship in their joint struggle in defence of the interests of the working class and all the other working people.
The slander campaign started in the bourgeois press over the Conference, and inventions about its convocation having resulted from the intention of re-establishing some kind of organisational centre of the communist movement, were resolutely rebuffed by the CPSU delegation. Leonid Brezhnev said: "As far as it is known, nobody and nowhere is proposing the idea of establishing such a centre." He expressed satisfaction with the character of the Conference work, and added: "Respect for the views of each participant, the democratic and genuinely comradely atmosphere in which the discussion took place, the extensive comparison of the experience of
~^^1^^ Ibid., p. 267,
180 181B. M. Leibzon
. ...
various Parties, and friendly attention to the partners' interests had enabled all of us to arrive at common assessment and conclusions on several topical issues greatly important today for the peoples of Europe and the world. We have been able to draw up an important document on these issues, based on the principles of Marxism-Leninism." '
The Document entitled "For Peace, Security, Co-operation and Social Progress in Europe" which was unanimously adopted by the Conference, reflected the fundamental features of the revolutionary character of the communist movement as the basis for its cohesion. These specific features were manifested at every stage in the history of the international communist movement, regardless of their peculiarity, or the organisational forms of communist solidarity. Some statements in the Document were the result of a compromise, but it was Lenin who used to say that "among Communists .. . compromises under certain conditions are necessary".^^2^^ Although some propositions in the Berlin Document did not fully reflect the standpoint of each Party, it testified to the unity of the movement on the main issue.
Fundamental importance attaches to the fact that the Parties reaffirmed their " rejection of any policy or ideology which in es-
Forms of International Unity
sence means the subjection of the working class to the system of capitalism^ -^^1^^ This conr trasts the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideology with the anti-capitalist, socialist ideology as the basis for the Parties' unity in their joint struggle for peace, co-operation and social progress in Europe. "In this spirit, they will develop their internationalist, comradely and voluntary co-operation and solidarity on the basis of great ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin, strictly adhering to the principles of equality and sovereign independence of each Party, non-interference in internal affairs, and respect for their free choice of different roads in the struggle for social change of a progressive nature and for socialism.''
Effectiveness is a distinctive feature of the internationalism of the communist movement, for it is not merely proclaimed, but is always given a clear-cut political orientation upon the solution of important problems in the revolutionary struggle which call for joint evaluations and joint action. The participants in the Berlin Conference emphasised their Parties' firm determination "to continue waging a consistent struggle in order to achieve the objectives of peace, democracy and social progress, which is in line with the common interests of the working class, the democratic, forces and the mass of the people in., allcountries".z-'
:
~^^1^^ For Peace, Security, Co-operation and Social Progress in Europe, p. 42.
2 Ibid., pp. 40-41, 30-31.
183~^^1^^ For Peace, Security, Co-operation and Social Progress in Europe, Novosti Press Agency Publishing House, Moscow, 1976, pp. 22, 26.
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, p. 468.
182B. M. Leibzon
The Conference set concrete goals requiring joint action by the Communist and Workers' Parties and all the other progressive and democratic forces in Europe. It outlined measures to deepen detente by taking effective steps towards disarmament and consolidation of security, eradication of fascism, defence of democracy and national independence, development of mutually advantageous co-- operation, and better mutual understanding among nations.
Berlin once again showed the Communists' broad approach to the problems of contemporary social development and their deepseated concern for rallying all the anti-- imperialist forces.
The Communists are being constantly harassed, but they do not close in upon themselves, as the anti-communist forces would like them to do, but explain to one and all that anti-communism is a weapon of imperialism and reaction in their fight not only against the Communists, but against all democrats. The Conference Document said: "The Communist Parties do not consider all those who are not in agreement with their policies or who take a critical attitude towards their activity as being anti-Communist." ' They are sure that their policy and ideals of justice will help increasingly to extend the unity of the working people, and to isolate and defeat anti-communism,
Forms of International Unity
Profoundly convinced that they express the vital interests of the peoples, the Communist Parties seek to induce the most diverse progressive forces to unite in joint action. They try hard to have the working people, regardless of their political and religious views, pool their efforts in their common struggle. The Conference participants welcomed the successes in the advance of co-operation between Communist Parties and Socialist and Social-Democratic parties achieved in a number of countries. They declared that they would continue to support concerted action by trade-union organisations on the national and international levels, seeking a dialogue and joint action with Christian and other communities of other nationalities.
The Communist Parties called on women and young people, workers and employees, peasants and the middle strata, scientists, technicians, workers in culture, all political parties and mass organisations and associations actively to work towards peace, security, co-operation and social progress in Europe.
In a resolution on the outcome of the Berlin Conference of the Communist and Workers' Parties of Europe, the Political Bureau of the CPSU Central Committee declared that the CPSU would vigorously and perseveringly carry on the struggle to attain the goals set out by the Conference, and expressed its satisfaction with the fact that the Conference became "a factor in strengthening the contacts between the fraternal Parties pji the
185p, 41,
184B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
combat force, a role which has. won broad recognition in the international communist movement, there have also been some assessments which reduce its importance to its having produced some kind of "new unity in the international communist movement". It is claimed that the Conference allegedly established new principles in relations between the Communist and Workers' Parties.
What are these ``new'' principles? It turns out that they are the equality of the Parties, their independence, their non-interference in each other's affairs, their independent formulation of their own policy, that is, the principles underlying the development of the communist movement. Luis Corvalan says: "The principle of the independence of each Party is frequently presented as being something new or as an invention of some contingent of the communist movement." But, he goes on to say, this principle springs from the very substance of Marxism-Leninism as a guide to action, which makes it imperative to consider the concrete historical reality, and the specific features of the place of action. Corvalan draws this conclusion: "Consequently, each Party's independence is a fundamental principle." >
The 18th Congress of the Communist Party of Israel (December 1976) noted, in particular, that the ideological and political enemies of the communist movement allege, whenever the independence of the Communist
~^^1^^ Luis Corvalan, A Revolagao chilena, p, 66,
,187
European continent, and in the development of internationalist co-operation among the fraternal Parties on the basis of generally accepted norms of relations among them." l
. The period since the Berlin Conference has shown that its political evaluations were correct, and the successes scored in the struggle for peace and social progress have proved that the way it mapped out was right. Many Communist Parties often quote the Conference Document emphasising thereby their urge for closer co-operation. In a resolution adopted on 19 August 1978, a plenary meeting of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Netherlands emphasises that cooperation, above all in the struggle for peace, should be ranged against the imperialists'- attempts to erode the international communist movement.^^2^^
The concrete programme of action for peace, security and social progress in Europe meets, the Conference participants believe, "the best interests of all the peoples and will be a major contribution to the cause of peace, national independence, democracy and socialism all over the world.''~^^3^^
Despite the incontestable role which the Berlin Conference has had in the development of the communist movement, as an effective
.. ' For Peace, Security, Co-operation and Social Progress in Europe, -p. 63.
~^^2^^ De Vaarheid, 24 August 1978.
'
••" ^^3^^ For Peace, Security, Co-operation and Social Progress in Europe, p. 60.
-•-,-.-
B. M. Leibzon
Forms of International Unity
their own specific features. The tense and complicated situation in which they have to work requires close co-ordination of their activity.
A meeting held in December 1976 determined the Communists' tasks in completing the national-democratic revolution in the Arab countries and defending it against its chief enemies: imperialism, Zionism and Arab reaction. It was emphasised at the meeting that the Arab Communists regarded Arab solidarity not as a tactical, but as a lasting strategic slogan in the fight for national liberation.
A statement issued by the meeting elaborated a number of concrete problems facing the Arab Communists.
Another meeting of the Arab Communists held in April 1978 examined the problems which arose in connection with the task of uniting the patriotic, progressive forces of the Arab peoples in the fight against imperialism, reaction, and Israeli aggression. The capitulationist policy pursued by President Sadat of Egypt, Israel's expansionist claims and many other problems arising from the need to eliminate the Middle East crisis were discussed circumstantially and in concrete terms. Special attention was given to the need to enhance the role of the Communist and Workers' Parties in the Arab liberation movement. This calls for constant consolidation of the solidarity and cohesion of the Communist Parties of the Arab countries, the
Parties is mentioned, that this is a "new matter", a ``surprise'', etc.^^4^^
To declare that the equality of the Parties is a ``new'' principle means not only to clash with the truth, but also to leave the impression that all this time these principles were being violated and that some Parties in the communist movement ranked higher and others lower, that is, wittingly or unwittingly to join hands with bourgeois propaganda.
The character of the preparation for the Berlin Conference and its work once again reaffirmed the truth, which has been tested in practice, that the organisational forms in which the individual Parties develop, like the forms of their relations with each other, are determined by the specific features of the historical situation and the tasks this situation produces.
In this sense, the importance of the Berlin Conference lies not only in that its assessments and conclusions on a number of meaningful problems, which are of key importance for all the nations, provided a most important reference point for the Communist Parties' joint struggle, but also in that it was a milestone in the further development of the international unity of the communist movement.
The meetings of representatives of the Arab Communist and Workers' Parties had
~^^1^^ See, "Theses to the 18th Congress of the Communist Party of Israel", Informatigti Bulletin, September-October t976,
188 189B. M. Leibzoa
maintenance of their ideological and political independence, and the strengthening of their unity on a sound principled basis.
The meeting came out in favour of further consolidating the unity of the world communist movement on the basis of Marxism-- Leninism and proletarian internationalism. It noted the importance of carrying on a tireless struggle for the ideological purity of the communist movement, against any attempts to distort it, and the need to rebuff any attacks on existing socialism, whatever their origin.J : '
In early April 1979, the Communist and Workers' Parties of the Arab countries issued a statement on the conclusion of the separate ``peace'' treaty between the Sadat regime and Israel under US sponsorship.
This treaty was condemned by the Communist Parties, which regarded it as a serious violation of Egypt's independence and national sovereignty, a danger to the interests of the Arab peoples, a perfidious blow at the struggle of the Arab people of Palestine, and a threat to peace and security in the Middle East and throughout the world. They appealed "to the Arab people in all countries, to all forces of freedom and progress to launch a struggle against this treaty".^^2^^
The Communists of the Arab countries have been working for the broadest front of
~^^1^^ See, Information Bulletin, December 1978.
~^^2^^ Information Bulletin, October 1979.
190Porms of International Unity
struggle against imperialism and Zionism, and against the treacherous policy of surrender.
The situation in which the Arab Communists have to work induces them to have frequent meetings and to work out joint positions. This situation determines not only the concrete tasks of the Communist Parties in the Arab countries, but also their attitude to the problems of unity of the world communist movement.
The need for unity also determined the character of the first ever Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties of Tropical and Southern Africa in 1978. With the exception of the South African Communist Party, which was founded in 1921, all the other Marxist-Leninist Parties of the region are young. Yet they are fighting in a situation in which mass action against the reactionary and inhuman system of apartheid has reached unprecedented intensity in South Africa, and the armed struggle in Namibia rose to high tide. Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Benin and Madagascar have joined other socialist-oriented African countries.
Acting jointly, the Communists, revolutionary democrats and all the other progressive forces can solve the most important ethnic and national problems in the spirit of internationalism. The immediate task for most African countries is a national-democratic, rather than a socialist, revolution. The Communists urge all the progressive forces to
191B. M. Leibzon
jointly defend it against imperialism and reaction. It is necessary to rebuff the imperialists who seek to isolate the national liberation movements in Southern Africa from their natural and most reliable allies, from the anti-imperialist countries of Africa, from the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries.
There is a Congolese saying that "it takes water to float a boat". The revolutionary flood which has swept across some African countries opens up good prospects for the communist struggle. It is noteworthy that in these conditions they have an ever keener sense of the need for international solidarity. The document adopted at the meeting said: "The Communists of Africa devoted to proletarian internationalism express their militant fraternal solidarity with Communist Partie^ and all other anti-imperialist forces struggling in Asia, Latin America and Europe for national independence, against monopoly capital, for democracy, peace and socialism." For centuries Africa suffered from colonial exploitation and was doomed to isolation from the rest of the world. The African Communists solemnly declared that "they are part and parcel of the international working-class, communist and national liberation movements, that they are sincere friends of the Soviet Union and all other socialist countries, of all socialist-oriented states, that they have been and will always remain active fighters for a lasting and unbreakable
Forms of International Unity
alliance of the liberation movement of Africa with the socialist world, the international working-class, communist and national liberation movements in all continents, that they have been and always will be consistent internationalists and devoted patriots of their peoples and countries." *
The spirit of internationalism which permeates this document shows very well the ever broader spread of the ideas of international proletarian solidarity, becoming an integral feature of new contingents of the communist movement.
The message of the 1970s is that, for all the diversity marking the contemporary communist movement, the need for its unity has not diminished, but has steadily grown. This unity may and will assume different forms, depending on the level of the movement and the condition of the struggle. Life shuns stereotypes. Alongside the specifics of the unity displayed at the Berlin Conference of Communist and Workers' Parties of Europe, the forms of unity adopted by the Communist Parties of Latin America, the Arab world or Tropical and Southern Africa are equally valid.
But now and again those who oppose stereotypes are prepared to set up as absolutes the distinctive forms of unity in this or that region, and this unwittingly minimises the importance of that which unites the Commu-
~^^1^^ The African Communist, No. 75, 1978. 13-01267
193
1;92
6. M. Leifczori
nists of the whole world, regardless of the specific regional approach to various issues. One cannot agree with those who maintain that conferences held in various regions have nothing in common with each other just because some of them came out in favour of an international meeting of Communists, whereas at the Berlin Conference the question did not arise.
The concept of unity by which the communist movement is guided does not rule out the Parties' different approach to one and the same issue. Thus, the Communist Party of Norway, which attended the Berlin Conference, came out for an international meeting of Communists. Its Chairman Martin Gunnar Knutsen said: "We oppose complacent nationalistic self-isolation. We believe that the Communist Parties of various countries must meet to exchange views both on a bilateral basis and on a European or international scale. Such meetings not only help to learn from each other but also provide an opportunity to hammer out a common approach to key problems for whose solution we are responsible to history, that is, problems in the struggle against imperialism, and for lasting world peace." *
For some people, what is unquestionable and obvious is trite. The Communists cannot afford to take such a view. The need for international solidarity is unquestionable and
Forms of International Unity
obvious. And the fact that the regional conferences of the 1970s reaffirm this truth does not make it less important---on the contrary, it makes it even more convincing and meaningful. However the conferences may have differed from each other, they all showed the Communists' growing need for international solidarity.
The international communist movement does not recognise any rigid forms of relations between its Parties. It denied the immobility of these forms in the period when the movement developed within the framework of the Communist International, which had its own Programme and Statutes. It stands all the more for flexibility of inter-- party relations now that these Parties are developing as autonomous organisations voluntarily entering into close ties with each other.
It would appear that the nature of interparty relations is a purely internal matter of the international communist movement. But the class struggle makes this problem a constant target of attack by the enemies of communism. Every step the communist movement has taken to develop international cooperation between the Communists was instantly subjected to abuse and slander and used as a pretext for insinuation and provocative assertions. All the forces hostile to the communist movement make no secret of their
World Marxist Review, March 1979.
19413*
195B. M. Leibzon
intention constantly to put pressure on it in an effort to smear any form of relations, and to destroy their substance: communist international unity.
It takes steadfastness not to succumb to this pressure, and a deep sense of conviction in order to follow the true path, without being deflected to the various little paths and byways being stridently recommended by the false champions of the interests of the communist movement.
The international experience of the Communists shows not only that unity is a vital need, a condition for successful development of the movement, but also that unity is not just a static state, but a process producing problems that need to be solved and that become urgent depending on the actual conditions in which the Communists have to fight in the international arena and within the framework of individual countries.
In order to find right answers to new questions, one must have not only a sense of the new, but also fidelity to principles and an ability to harmonise continuity in the movement with flexibility and innovation.
__ALPHA_LVL1__ III. SOME 1. NEED TO DEVELOP
THE IDEOLOGICAL BASIS
OF INTERNATIONAL UNITY
2. ATTITUDE
TO HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE
3. EQUALITY AND INDEPENDENCE
OF THE COMMUNIST PARTIES
4. DISCUSSION AND CRITICISM
IN THE INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNIST MOVEMENT
5. RELATIONS
BETWEEN COMMUNIST PARTIES IN POWER
AND THOSE FIGHTING
UNDER CAPITALISM
The unity of the international communist movement has the distinctive feature of being a unity of those who share one philosophy. Joint action by democratic forces does not require identical ideological stands as a~ preliminary condition. In the struggle for concrete goals, efforts can be pooled by differently oriented organisations and people with different ideologies. But the unity Of the Communists cannot develop unless it has a common ideological basis. This basis is the revolutionary theory developed by Marx and Engels and further elaborated by Lenin in the context of the epoch of imperialism. The theory of Marxism-Leninism is being constantly enriched by the Communists of the whole world on the basis of new historical experience. It provides a theory of struggle, a method of cognition, and is an integral philosophy which brings together fighters against capitalism, and for a socialist remaking of the world.
The strength of Marxism-Leninism consists in the fact that it is not based on any individual country, that it does not sum up facts relating to some single historical period, but generalises the lessons of world history, of all the countries, the practice of all the social
199 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.dat/en/1981/USI375/20091115/299.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2010.01.22) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ bottom __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+B. M. Leibzon
forces and the working class, in the first place. Marxism-Leninism is a truly international doctrine which can be used to solve the problems of our day and to carry the working class towards its ultimate goal. Anticipating the zigzags the revolution in Russia would have to make and the even greater complexity of the turns it would have to take when it enlarged its boundaries, Lenin spoke, in 1918, about the great importance of not losing "our way in these zigzags, these sharp turns in history, in order to retain the general perspective, to be able to see the scarlet thread that joins up the entire development of capitalism and the entire road to socialism".^^1^^ That is precisely the purpose of revolutionary theory.
The internationalism of this theory reflects the objective internationalisation of society's life and constitutes the ideological basis of communist international cohesion. In his lifetime, Engels pointed out that the principles df scientific communism provide "the strongest international bond of the entire proletarian movement of both Europe and America"'/?
The international substance of MarxismLeninism explains its rapid spread across the world, and the increase in the number of its supporters in the developed capitalist countries, in the medium-level capitalist countries,
.; ' V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 27, p. 130.
~^^2^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Bhgels, Selected Works in onb volume, p. 431,
Some Contemporary Problems
and in the newly liberated countries. The world-wide spread of Marxist ideas was made possible by the fact that these ideas are universal and that they help find a scientific solution to the most burning problems of our day in any country.
At one time the bourgeoisie was in a position to ignore Marxist ideas, to pretend that they simply did not exist. But ideologists of capitalism are now well aware that it is no longer possible to fight Marxism simply by cursing it. The imperatives of the class struggle have forced the powers that be to set up hundreds of institutes in various fields, and to put on the payroll a great many Marxologists of various caliber and stripe, setting them the task of "discovering contradictions" in the scientific revolutionary ideology and ``proving'' that its ideals cannot be realised, making use for that purpose of downright falsifications and pseudo-scientific criticism.
A few decades ago one could hardly have imagined that Marxist ideas would be expressed at world-wide or regional congresses of philosophers, historians and economists. Today, Marxists present papers at virtually every important forum of scientists. What is more, it is Marxist ideas that frequently determine the overall atmosphere at a particular congress, and influence even those who oppose these ideas.
With the ever wider spread of Marxist ideas and the growth of their attractive powpr, those who conduct anti-Marxist campaigns
201B. M. Leibzon
Some Contemporary Problems
European Communists, says Berlinguer, are presented with something like an " ideological ultimatum": "If you do not renounce Lenin, if you do not break your ties with the CPSU, you are not Westerners, but Asians.''^^1^^
J. Bilen, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CP of Turkey, said that the reactionary forces keep stressing that "they will recognise our Party's right to exist provided it renounces Leninism".^^2^^
The forces hostile to communism are even prepared to reconcile themselves with the Communists still regarding themselves as Marxists, so long as they renounce Lenin's legacy.
The effort to contrast Lenin and Marx will also be seen in the communist movement. Something similar already occurred in the past. In 1925, Antonio Gramsci wrote: " Leninism contains within itself its own conception of the world without which it is today no longer possible to understand Marx; it is because of this conception that Leninism is a special theory, although it is closely connected with Marxism. Concerning the relations between Marxism and Leninism, one could say that Lenin continued and actualised Marx.''~^^3^^
Now an effort is being made to convince
have to readjust their positions again and again. The latest strategic scheme of bourgeois ideologists is now becoming ever more clear. It is an effort, while not abandoning the traditional methods of fighting Marxism, to try and pluralise it by suggesting that there are as many ``Marxisms'' as there are countries, or at least continents or regions. Bourgeois ideologists claim that the pluralist conception of Marxism, its disintegration, is a "decisive contribution to the future of socialist thinking''.
One will easily realise that this approach to Marxism is aimed against the universal laws established by Marxist-Leninist theory and providing the scientific basis for the Communist Parties' activity. Its immediate purpose is to destroy the unity of the international communist movement by undermining its ideological basis.
The power of Marxism lies in its adequate reflection of reality, in the fact that it is true. And truth cannot be plural. Newton's law of gravity did not become an English law just because it was discovered by an Englishman. If there can be a truth that is applicable only for Russia, or the United States, or France, or some other country, this means that there is no truth at all.
Special efforts are being made to spread the idea that Leninism is a purely Russian version of Marxism so that if the Communists of European countries want to remain Marxists they have to go back to Marx. The
202~^^1^^ L'Unita, 18 September 1978.
~^^2^^ World Marxist Review, April 1979.
~^^3^^ Antonio Gramsci, Per la verita. Scritti 1913- 1926. A cnra di Renzo Martinelli, Editori Rjuniti, 1974, p. 33,
203B. M. Leibzon
the Communists that Marx is more meaningful than Lenin. But no one has yet advanced by going back. Marxism is a constantly developing doctrine, and Marx and Engels, far from claiming to have answered all the questions that could arise in the future, in fact ruled out such an approach when formulating the essential ideas of their doctrine. Lenin was an outstanding thinker who elaborated every aspect of the science founded by Marx and Engels, but he never claimed that his ideas and conclusions transcended the historical framework.
The address "On the Centenary of the Birth of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin", which the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties unanimously adopted, says: "All the experience of world socialism and of the working-class and national liberation movement has confirmed the world significance of Marxist-Leninist teaching....
``Today we have every justification for saying about Lenin's teaching what he himself said about Marxism: it is omnipotent because it is true. Marxist-Leninist theory and its creative application in specific conditions permit scientific answers to be found to the questions facing all contingents of the world revolutionary movement, wherever they are active." *
Just because the creative application of Marxism-Leninism is such a powerful factor,
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, Moscow, 1969, p. 41,
204Some Contemporary Problem^
bourgeois ideologists seek in every way to confuse the very concept of "creative application", readily striking the attitude of champions of revolutionary theory against dogmatic distortions. They declare dogmatic not only that which is actually such (a mechanical transfer of what is right in one set of conditions to a quite different set of conditions) but also any and all recognitions of objectiveness and historical necessity. They are most eager to present as dogmatism communist international solidarity which allegedly implies the imposition of a single model on different contingents of the working class, so jeopardising their independence.
Real, and not imaginary, dogmatism does the communist struggle tremendous harm and stimulates the revival of diverse revisionist notions. That is why bourgeois ideologists so willingly use the bogey of dogmatism, for they regard it a means of inducing revisionist distortions.
But it is the effort to contrast Lenin and Mar^c which amounts to dogmatism pure and simple, though covered with a screen of innovation. Indeed, if one were to deny that Lenin raised Marxism to the level of the experience and the demand of the revolutionary struggle of the epoch which followed upon that of Marx and Engels, "the inevitable conclusion would be that the Marxian teaching is a set of ossified propositions and that the historical period of great revolutionary battles and the emergence of a new social sys-
205S. M. Leibzon
tern had yielded no new theoretical principles and discoveries. It would then follow that Marxists of today should analyse the present trends of social development on principles that reflect the conditions of the nineteenth century, giving a wide berth to the new Leninist ideas summing up the deep-going revolutionary changes of our century." *
Henry Winston says that those who abandon Leninism in favour of some sort of scientific socialism go even beyond that point and abandon Marxism as well. The congresses of a number of Communist Parties in the second half of the 1970s were keynoted by firm conviction that Leninism is the Marxism of the present epoch, that it is of abiding and universal importance without any limitations in time or geography. They flatly rejected any attempts to distort Marxism-Leninism, to contrast Marxism and Leninism, to contrast one part of it with another, and so to disrupt the integrity of Marxist-Leninist theory. At the same time, some Communist Parties, while putting a high value on Lenin's achievements, abandon the concept of Leninism, alleging that it may create the impression that there is no need to enrich and develop it.
Such an approach gives rise to a tendency to abandon revolutionary theory and its principles. Some assert, for instance, that it is not right to establish universal laws of so-
~^^1^^ B. N. Ponomaryov, The Living and Effective Teaching of Marxism-Leninism, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1978, p. 118.
Some Contemporary Problems
cialism in the way the state establishes laws binding for all. But the Marxists have never established any laws of their own accord; they seek to discover them in life and to act accordingly, i.e., with full awareness of the objective social laws.
In every field of knowledge, science " reveals the operation of fundamental laws in a seeming chaos of phenomena".^^4^^ Of course, not everything that the Marxists regard as an objective law at this or that moment is necessarily such. New experience accumulates with the passage of time. It so happens that that which was regarded as a general law actually reflects specific historical national conditions, and that which was not fully developed because of these very conditions turns out to be a general law. After the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, the Communists believed that the Soviets were the concrete form of working-class power which was bound to be established in all the countries. But subsequent historical experience showed that the power of the new rising class can also be exercised in other forms, including a parliamentary republic. What was actually a general law was the establishment of the power of the working class in alliance with all the other working people, that which Marx, Engels and Lenin called the dictatorship of the proletariat and which is a higher stage of democracy.
V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 20, p. 201.
206 207B. M. Leibzori
Life constantly confirms the great power of Marxist-Leninist theory and the Communist Parties' capability of finding their bearings, in the light of that theory, in the struggle for socialism in line with the new balance of world social forces and the specific features of their own countries. The Communists do not at all believe that revolutionary theory gives ready answers to all practical questions. Life is always more complex or, as Lenin liked to put it, more cunning than the best scientific forecasts. The Communist Parties are intolerant of dogmatism with its habit of clinging to the truth of yesterday and refusing to look for new solutions to meet the new conditions. But a revolutionary theory can be elaborated on its own basis, on the ability to see the difference between the principles which are the very soul of the theory, and the concrete conclusions which may become outdated and need to be replaced in due time.
Principles do not wear out, and are not subject to the vagaries of fashion. They cannot be changed at will, like clothes. They are produced by science and yield a method which helps understand reality and develop the principles themselves. In other words, fundamental principles, as the Communists see them, do not change their substance but can and must be enriched by life.
Denial of the possibility of cognising objective laws is incompatible with Marxism. Denial of the general laws governing the
Some Contemporary Problems
building of socialism, in effect, tends to convert socialism, now a science, into a Utopia, as it once was. No wonder contemporary revisionists are said to have taken up Bernstein's notorious motto---"movement is everything, the goal nothing"---and regard existing socialism, which has been built by the world working-class movement, as ``nothing'' and the abstract goal of converting socialism into some kind of incorporeal Utopian construct---``everything''.
Historical laws are not a pattern for drawing a given set of lines. Laws do not operate spontaneously but through men. Lenin said it would be absurd to produce a recipe or general rules that would apply to every case in life. "One must 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." *
Such knowledge, experience and flair cannot be replaced by anything, let alone the urge to spin out new ideas at any price, and take a high-handed attitude to the scientific
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, pp. 68-69.
14-01267
209
208B. M. Leibzoii
Some Contemporary Problems
the present, to the actual, would not understand the actual.
Revisionism within the Marxist movement throughout its history was marked by the fact that any new phenomenon within the framework of the epoch was immediately used by it to deny the fundamental uniformities of the epoch. For such apostles of novelty, the truth of any theory lies precisely in its novelty, although real truth has no age.
Creative Marxism does not allow itself to be hypnotised by conclusions of the past and is engaged in a constant search for and comprehension of new phenomena. But it stands for continuity in the development of revolutionary thought and looks to the future without neglecting what has been achieved, but relying on it. Theoretical principles cannot change with the change in the outlook, for otherwise theory would itself disappear and become a means for justifying any step in practical policy.
The steady development of the MarxistLeninist theory on the basis of what is new, what truly emerges in life, is regarded by the Communist Parties as their most important task, as a necessary condition for formulating correct policies, because a party is a militant organisation which does not simply learn a science but translates it into action, and carries science to political strategy and tactics. That is why involvement in the elaboration of theory is not at all limited to the efforts of ideological workers alone. Lenin used to
achievements of the past. Pseudo-innovation, which is so characteristic of opportunists, largely springs from their habit of ignoring "all that has been produced by the antecedent development of revolutionary thought and of the revolutionary movement". l
Some assume that a law is something that is connected with the past, something that is obsolete, and that the really modern approach is to blaze one's own trail. Antonio Gramsci ridiculed those who believed that a problem is valuable only because "it has emerged in the present, and not in some past age", and recounted the following anecdote: a French bourgeois ordered the word `` contemporary'' printed on his visiting card. "He used to think of himself as a nonentity, but one day he discovered that he was someone, namely, a `contemporary'.''~^^2^^
One is left with the impression that there are many such people craving topicality at any price, without possessing a creative mastery of Marxism-Leninism and believing that all they have to do is to declare themselves to be ``contemporaries'', something that becomes especially topical with the addition of the word ``today''. They should recall the words of the French historian Jules Michelet, who said that he who wants to hold to
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 5, p. 408.
~^^2^^ A. Gramsci, Quandernl del Carcere, Vol. 2, Edizione critica dell'Institute Gramsci, Torino, 1975, p. 1417.
21014*
211B. M. Leibzon
say that one cannot be a revolutionary " without participating, in the measure of one's powers, in developing and applying that theory". '
In the postwar period, the international communist movement has been enriched with a number of new theoretical ideas which are of fundamental importance. Scientific substantiation has been given to conclusions for revolutionary struggle in each country. These conclusions follow from the changing balance of world social forces, the increasing role of peaceful coexistence for the class and national liberation struggle, and the greater importance of the international factor in the current revolutionary process.
Among the urgent problems being elaborated is that of the correlation between the struggle for democracy and the struggle for socialism in our day. It is closely tied in with such questions as the greater opportunities for the peaceful development of the revolution (without an armed uprising or civil war); the need for broad alliances of all the anti-monopoly forces led by the working class not only for everyday struggle, but also for achieving socialism; and the importance of protecting bourgeois-democratic freedoms.
These ideas are being jointly elaborated by all the Communist Parties. They have been reflected in the documents of the international communist movement, the 1969 Meeting in
Some Contemporary Problems
particular. In reply to those who hint or openly declare that the CPSU was opposed to any quest connected with these ideas, Boris Ponomaryov writes: "And to be true to the facts we must note that the GPSU was among the first to advance them. It was the first, in fact, to put them up for discussion before the whole world communist movement, whereupon they were further elaborated and became integrated in the public mind and in the social practice of our time."»
Guided by the new, creative ideas of Marxism-Leninism, the communist movement achieved great successes, and some Parties came to exercise an active influence on the political life of their countries. They were now faced with new problems. Thus, it was necessary to concretise a number of general theoretical propositions and to answer new questions relating to the consolidation of all democratic forces in the anti-monopoly struggle.
1
Speaking of the Communist Parties' urge to improve the strategy and tactics of their revolutionary struggle, Leonid Brezhnev said: "Their theoretical guidelines in this context contain interesting points, though probably not everything here should be regarded as finalised and incontrovertible. This is understandable: a quest is a quest. What is important is that
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 354.
~^^1^^ B. N. Ponomaryov, The Living and Effective Teaching of Marxism-Leninism, p. 107.
313 212B. M. Leibzon
it should proceed in the right direction."*
The Communist Parties of the capitalist countries have to elaborate new propositions in the extremely difficult conditions of intensive pressure on the part of bourgeois and reformist ideology. The Communists are being persuaded that bourgeois democracy makes it possible to win power solely through electoral struggle and obviates the need for a revolutionary reorganisation of the state apparatus in accordance with the requirements of the new society. They are being urged to become a ``conventional'' party, and to give up their revolutionary principles, their democratic centralism and internationalist ties.
The ``demands'' put before the Communist Parties by their adversaries make a long list. The Parties repulse this pressure, elaborating their ideological stand in the struggle against bourgeois and reformist ideology, and against both right-wing and left-wing revisionism.
Towards the end of the 1970s, the bourgeois and reformist press made no secret of the fact that life had dashed its hopes for socalled Eurocommunism, which, the hostile forces believed, would help them range the Communist Parties of the developed capitalist countries against the Marxist-Leninist Parties of the socialist world.
The international communist movement is well aware of the need to work on new prob-
~^^1^^ L. I. Brezhnev, The Great October Revolution and Mankind's Progress, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977, p. 25.
Some Contemporary Problems
lems, it knows the source of its successes and does not conceal the causes of its failures. Thus, the theses of the 15th Congress of the ICP said: "The policy of unity was sometimes followed so that the Parties' features were effaced and their initiative was dampened. The defence of the historical heritage and political line against the massive distortions and attacks made from different quarters has not always been timely and resolute enough.''^^1^^
Generalisation of past experience is a necessary requisite for developing the theory, and not only the theory but the whole of the Parties' further practical activity. It was justly noted at the CC plenary session of the Communist Party of Chile devoted to the sacred lessons of the revolution: "All of us understand that analysis of the three years of the revolution is not only an academic or purely historical exercise. It is not a duty with respect to the past which has to be fulfilled in order to complete another chapter in our history. It is a most urgent task that has a direct bearing on our present and future struggle." The session also noted the international importance of Chile's experience: "In a number of countries---Italy, Colombia, the USA, Israel, Spain and others--- Chile's example facilitates the political tasks facing the Communists. Chile's drama is its contribution to the international working-class and communist movement.''~^^2^^
' La politico, e I'organizzazione dei commnnisti italiani, Roma, 1979, p. 131.
~^^2^^ The Chilean Revolution..., op. cit, pp. 249, 169.
21C
214B. M. Leibzon
For theory to develop, it should assimilate the aggregate experience of the whole communist movement. Gus Hall writes on this score: "Marxism-Leninism cannot grow fruitfully while being isolated within national walls." But "a book containing all the reports, lectures and resolutions summarising the experiences of each segment of the world revolutionary movement and parties would not, by itself, result in a further `growth' of Marxism-Leninism .... To develop theory it is necessary to absorb, to soak in the 'sum total' of varied experiences.''^^1^^ Every period has its inimitable peculiarities, and every country, its own specific features. But ideological conceptions that are not based on general historical uniformities, ignore international experience, and assume the exclusiveness of this or that country are much too narrow and ultimately futile.
Every Party elaborates its own policy, which, as a rule, coincides with that of the other fraternal Parties in matters relating to international problems and the common international tasks of the communist movement, but is bound to have its own national specifics in everything that relates to the country in question. In contrast to policy, theory is universal, and once it is confined to the national framework it can no longer be regarded as theory.
Some Contemporary Problems
Science has no national boundaries, and in our epoch, when the processes going forward in every sphere of life have become much more complicated than ever before, the process of theoretical work is marked by exceptional complexity. The internationalisation of social development calls for an internationalisation of theoretical development. Lenin's reminder that revolutionary theory "cannot be thought up", that it "grows out of the sum total of the revolutionary experience and the revolutionary thinking of all countries in the world"J is most relevant today.
Marxist ideas, first formulated in Europe something like 150 years ago, have crossed over to all the other continents and are penetrating to the farthest corners of the globe. They are being constantly enriched by the experience of world-wide revolutionary struggle, when every contingent of the working class makes its contribution to the overall treasure house of revolutionary science. The words written by Engels about the position of this or that Marxist contingent in the world working-class movement have a more urgent ring than ever before. According to Engels, this position is determined by the correctness of the theory, its creative development, its ``sense''. It is also determined by "the true international spirit, which allows no patriotic chauvinism to arise and which readily welcomes every new advance of the proletarian
~^^1^^ Communists of the World About Their Parties, International Publishers, Prague, 1976, pp. 45, 44,
216V, I, Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 354.
3*7
B. M. Leibzon
movement, no matter from which nation it comes".^^1^^ The CPSU regards theoretical work as an important part of its international duty. It maintains that the contest between the capitalist and socialist forces in the world arena, as well as the attempts by various revisionists to emasculate the revolutionary teaching and distort the practice of socialist and communist construction, make it necessary for the Communists to continue devoting close attention to theory and its creative development.
Concern for the development of revolutionary theory, comparison of viewpoints and exchange of experience amount to concern for strengthening the unity of the international communist movement. Theory cements the common struggle of Communists the world over, laying down clear guidelines and providing an ideological basis for their unity.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 2. ATTITUDEWhat binds the Communists together is not only their common ideology, but also their common historical destiny, their joint struggle on the international plane. All this is an indispensable component of the specific makeup of the Communist Parties and their traditions by abandoning which they would stop being Communists.
~^^1^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works in three volumes, Vol. 2, Moscow, 1977, pp. 169-70,
Some Contemporary Problems
The attitude to the historical past is directly connected with the problem of unity of the international communist mpvement. Every Party has its own individual history, but there is also the common history of the movement as a whole; every Party can fall back on its own experience and the collective experience of the whole movement. That is why the assessment of the Parties' own historical record and the experience of the international communist movement has a direct influence on relations between the Communist Parties and their future development.
History is mankind's biography, but it is not only a chronicle of nations and states, of the decline and fall of civilisations or of the succession of epochs. History is also a great treasure house of social experience, including experience in the revolutionary struggle. The international communist movement, which regards itself as heir to all the progressive accomplishments over the ages, and as trail-- blazer into the future, seeks to gain a deeper insight into the lessons of the past and to make them serve the present and the future. The past for the sake of the future is the Communists' approach to history. Marx's doctrine is a summing-up of experience, illuminated by a profound philosophical conception of the world and a rich knowledge of history".^^1^^
History does not repeat itself, even events which look alike always run in different situa-
~^^1^^ V, I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25,1977, p. 412.
219B. M. Leibzon
Some Contemporary Problems
sent it in a terrible light. As the crisis of the capitalist system sharpens, ever more efforts are used to present the history of the communist movement so that it could terrify the credulous.
How can one explain, for instance, the vast number of anti-communist books about the Comintern? That international organisation operated for only a quarter-century and has long since ceased to exist, but the interest in it is far from being academic, because distortions of its history are used to fight the communist movement today. The outstanding events of the revolutionary past are interpreted in such a way as to intimidate the inexperienced and to divert from politics those whom the capitalist system itself induces to join the fight against it.
But the bourgeoisie, sparing no effort to refute Marxism and to deny the importance of historical experience, takes a very ``Marxist'' approach when it comes to maintaining its own class domination. For US imperialism, the victory of the Cuban Revolution turned out to be unexpected, but the imperialists drew the lesson from their defeat and took steps to prevent the revolution from being repeated in other Latin American countries in the forms in which it won out in Cuba. US imperialism seeks to learn the lesson from the overthrow of its henchmen by the people of Nicaragua. The counter-revolution always learns from the experience of the revolution.
Whereas it is the instinct of self-preserva-
tions, and the connection between historical phenomena is not so obvious as to be indisputable.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the very question concerning the possibility of learning any lessons from the vast array of facts relating to human practice, of comprehending history as experience helping to understand the present and anticipate the future has always been an acute issue in the ideological struggle.
Bourgeois ideology denies historical experience any effective significance, suggesting that history has never taught anyone anything, because every event is unique. Many bourgeois ideologists, in effect, speculate on the fact that history does not repeat itself, that "experience is a doctor who comes after the illness", because history is allegedly a chaotic pile-up of events.
For the bourgeoisie its historical past is the ghost of Hamlet's father, which appears on the stage not merely to tell the truth about the past but also to demand the restitution of justice today. The propertied classes are afraid even to refer to their revolutionary past, because for them it abounds in tormenting reminiscences. That is why they have been casting about for new ways of fighting the lessons of revolutionary history, especially in their struggle against the traditions of the revolutionary working-class movement. Foremost among the methods used to distort the truth is a smearing of the past so as to pre220
2216. M. Leibzon
tion that impels the doomed class to learn the lessons of history, the rising class regards these as substantiating its cause and as providing the objective basis for the struggle for social progress.
The world communist movement has accumulated vast experience. It is the collective memory of revolutionaries; it warns them against repeating mistakes, and helps them to regard every phenomenon in the light of history, and to make use of comparison as an essential method of knowledge. The Russian working class "relied at once on the experience of the workers of the whole world, both on their theoretical experience, on the achievements of their class consciousness, their science and experience summed up by Marxism and on the practical experience of the proletarians of neighbouring countries".^^1^^
Comparing experience helps to bring out the similarity of phenomena and their distinctions, to discover the laws of development, to draw conclusions and make generalisations. That is why problems relating to the history of the communist movement are so important in the ideological struggle, which is being intensified in the world today.
The smearing of the past of each Party and of the history of the international communist movement has become a constant anticommunist method. The Communists are advised to "release the present from the past",
Some Contemporary Problems
to stop being captives of the past, and to stop absolutising continuity. They are induced to stop looking back at the past, so as not to liken oneself to Lot's wife, who cast a parting look on her native city and was turned into a pillar of salt. Anti-communists realise that if the Communists repudiate their revolutionary biography and their memory, they are bound to repudiate themselves.
That is not a new method---the enemies of communism have always tried to distort its history. Simply, the transfer of the ideological battle to the field of history has assumed much greater proportions.
When the Italian Communist Party emerged from the underground and began making plans for its activity in the new conditions, it was strongly advised to get rid of the burden of the past. In this context, Togliatti wrote: "Nothing is more false. And not only because the Party, like man, cannot escape from the past from which it has sprung and without which even its present would not exist. After all, there is nothing in our Party's past that could be an obstacle or a hindrance to us in our present actions.''~^^1^^
Returning to the same problem 15 years later, Togliatti said: "Our past is always vibrant, we do not repudiate it, it is that which has made us what we are today, it lives within us, it impels us forward.''~^^2^^
~^^1^^ Rinascita, October-November-December 1944.
~^^2^^ Palmiro Togliatti, Nella democrazta e nella pace verso il socialismo, p. 174.
V. I. Lenin, Collected Worts, Vol. 36,1966, p. 282.
222 223B. M. Leibzon
But in resisting the attempts to present the past of the communist movement as a succession of mistakes and to minimise its past achievements, the Communists do not lurch to, the other extreme. They have no illusions about their historical development, and do not believe that it has been an unending run of successes, without any shortcomings or mistakes. Indeed, they insist on learning the lessons of their past.
But the nihilistic attitude to history is also expressed in the attempts to ignore Marxism as a doctrine which allegedly neglects history. Consider the assertion, for instance, that "the study of history is not only scientifically but also politically valueless". A group of bourgeois analysts declare: "It is not the' present', what the past has vouchsafed to allow us, but the 'current situation' which it is the object of Marxist theory to elucidate and of Marxist political practice to act upon. All Marxist theory, however abstract it may be, however general its field of application, exists to make possible the analysis of the current situation .... An historical analysis of the ' current situation' is impossible.''^^1^^ Those who make such statements apparently imagine that they stand at the beginnings of history. Being incapable of relying on the lessons of the past and connecting them with the present, they
Some Contemporary Problems
highhandedly reject history and so do a lot of harm.
Working to create a new type of party in Russia, Lenin made a point of this party absorbing all the valuable ideas of earlier revolutionary movements in Russia and all the positive aspects of world revolutionary experience. He stressed the danger posed by the Economists, the Russian version of opportunism, with their calls for "throwing overboard everything that has been acquired by European and Russian experience".^^1^^
For its part, the experience of the revolutionary struggle in Russia exerted a constant influence on the world revolutionary process, with the first triumphant socialist revolution producing unparalleled results in this respect. But pre-October experience also had an influence. Participants in a discussion on the origins of the French Communist Party and its traditions, sponsored by the Maurice Thorez Institute in 1973, said that the traditions of the French working-class movement should not be considered in isolation. "We are well aware of the radiating influence abroad of the French Revolution, of the Paris Commune and of songs like the `Marseillaise'. The Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917 were carried out with the singing of the `Marseillaise' and the `Internationale'.. . But the French tradition was also entriched by the Russian revolution of 1905. . . . The French Communist arid, ear-
~^^1^^ Perry Anderson, Considerations on Western Marxism, Western Printing Services Ltd., Bristol, 1976, p. 110.
224~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 4, 1972, p. 275. 15-01267
225
6. M. Leibzoii
lier, Socialist parties were frequently enriched by wnat was most valuable in the international working-class movement."'
This also applied to tne other Communist Parties of Europe, Asia and America. Gramsci wrote in lUlt) about tne need to use tne vaiuanie liussian experience/
in Ia22, tne year tne Communist Party of Japan was founded, ben Katayama, one oi its outstanding founders, criticised tne Parties wnicn "do not look beyond their national borders". He said that Communists "must be men of large vision and wide liorizon".^^3^^
At the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, much was said about tne internationalisation of the experience of the world working-class movement for the purpose of creatively assimilating all the valuable ideas accumulated in the course of practical class struggles all over the world. The Congress resolution enjoined the Communists "to assist the Communist Parties in making use of their own experience as well as the experience of the world communist movement, avoiding however the mechanical application of the experience of the country to another and the substitution of stereotyped methods and general
Some Contemporary Problems
formulations for concrete Marxian analysis". l
There can be no development of revolutionary theory without an apprehension of historical experience. The writings of Marx and Engels rest on the conclusions drawn from a study of history. In order to clarify the peculiarities of contemporary events, Marxists constantly turn to the past, seeking to consider these events in the context of world history. Marx made a thorough study of everyday facts and compared them with historical data, believing that it was necessary to go beyond the individual facts to discern the line of development.
Lenin used the same historical method in his writings. Dealing with the most vibrant problems of his day, he always made a point of summing up much historical material, as will be seen from his The State and Revolution. One is tremendously impressed by the preparatory materials for this book, which was written in August and September 1917. They show the painstaking work of the theorist and politician to draw the lessons of history and to apply them in the revolutionary struggle of his own day. Lenin never confined himself to "historical examples", but always made an in-depth study of these examples so as to bring out what was of abiding importance.
~^^1^^ Cahiers d'histoire de I'Institut Maurice Thorez, No. 3, Paris, 1973, pp. 178-79.
~^^2^^ See, Antonio Gramsci, L'Ordine Nuovo. 1919- 1920, Giulio Einaudi Editore, Torino, 1970, p. 13.
~^^3^^ Bulletin of the IV Congress of the Communist International, No. 24, 7 December 1922.
~^^1^^ Seventh World Congress of the Communist International. Resolutions and Decisions, p. 7.
15*
227 226B. M. Leibzon
Precisely because revolutionary theory is nothing but a comprehension of social, and . above all revolutionary, practice, any underestimation of past experience must minimise the role of theory and reduce it to the level of expedient policies. Lenin regarded the urge to escape "from a too extensive ideological equipment and from a too difficult and exacting historical experience,"~^^1^^ as a manifestation of opportunism.
The doctrine of socio-economic formations and the proposition that the historical process is world-wide---both are key tenets of Marxist-Leninist theory---make it possible to reduce, with scientific precision, the apparent diversity of casual historical facts to definite regularities, and to regard social development as a natural and historical process, an approach without which no social science could ever emerge.
Whatever the difference between various phenomena within the same socio-economic formation, whatever the specific features they may acquire depending on the peculiarities of the country or historical stage of development, they always contain something general. Therefore, they may be regarded as a particular or concrete expression of the universal, of the laws and principles which are inherent in that formation as a whole.
But in considering each formation in its development, Marxism does not at all insist that
Some Contemporary Problems
all the relations and the role of classes remain immutable from beginning to end. Within one and the same capitalist formation, for example, the bourgeoisie has travelled from a progressive and rising class to a class that personifies social reaction and that has become an obstacle to society's advance. Within one and the same capitalist formation, the working class, once a class that helped its opposite---the bourgeoisie---to defeat the feudal lords, at subsequent stages becomes the leading class of the nation expressing the interests of the whole people. Imperialism is a stage of the capitalist formation, but it is a qualitatively new stage, and this needs to be reckoned with when comparing phenomena and facts from the period of rising capitalism and from the period of imperialism, which is capitalism in decline.
In applying this method of abstraction for the purpose of determining the laws inherent in this or that social formation, Marxism has always taken into account the fact that no formation ever existed in the world in a pure form, that it always developed in interaction and in struggle alongside the survivals of earlier formations which did not disappear overnight. Present-day capitalism finds itself in a situation in which the rising communist formation---socialism, being its first stageincreasingly becomes the motive force of world development. That is why in any concrete historical analysis Marxism considers not only the socio-economic formation as such,
229V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 4, p. 261.
228B. M. Leibzon
with its inherent laws, but also takes into account the broader framework of the historical epoch, which Lenin identified by the class which is central to it, "determining its main content, the main direction of its development, the main characteristics of the historical situation in that epoch, etc".^^1^^ This is what makes it possible to discern the general and fundamental regularities of the epoch, while bringing out the individual nature of the events occurring within it.
Marxism does not deny the uniqueness of events, believing that phenomena tend to repeat only as an exception and not as a rule: even if an event recurs, it always recurs in totally different circumstances. But Marxism does not absolutise the individual features of historical facts; it believes that most of them can be classified by type, i.e., that they can provide an objective basis for the formulation of generalised concepts. In so doing, Marxism seeks to gain an insight into the basic historical connections, and to consider every phenomenon from the standpoint of how it originated, which main stages it has passed in its development, and what it has eventually become.
This means that a correct understanding of' any contemporary phenomenon can be gained only if it is viewed in the context of the general, i.e., the basic regularities of the epoch, just as it is impossible to obtain a correct and profound understanding of the development
Some Contemporary Problems
of these regularities without bearing in mind that they exist and are expressed through the particular, the concrete.
If it is absolutely necessary to consider the facts in their interconnection for producing a genuine typisation of scientific phenomena, in present-day conditions these interconnections must be very extensive indeed, because history has become truly world-wide.
Lenin believed the comparative method was highly important in the correct use of historical experience. He wrote: "A comparison of the political and economic development of various countries, as well as of their Marxist programmes, is of tremendous importance from the standpoint of Marxism.... But such a comparison must be drawn in a sensible way." J One elementary point is to establish whether the historical epochs of the countries being compared are in fact comparable. A concrete historical approach is a nec: essary condition for comparison, which otherwise comes to a mere "game of analogies". Commenting on some arbitrary comparisons of incongruous facts, Lenin said that it was "playing at vulgar analogies, or rather, simply clowning".~^^2^^
It is not a superficial similarity, but above all the same class substance of the events and their in-depth kinship that allows for well-grounded analogies. It is equally important to go beneath the superficial distinctions
~^^1^^ V. I Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 20, p. 405.
~^^2^^ Ibid., p. 194.
23~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 145.
230B. M. Leibzon
to discern the internal similarity. Thus, Lenin said that the Narodists' economic doctrine was the Russian version of European romanticism. Of course, Russia's specifics had an effect on the distinctive features of the Narodist doctrine, "but ihese distinctions are no more than those between varieties within the same species and, therefore, do not disprove similarity between Narodism and petty-- bourgeois romanticism".^^1^^
The establishment of a generic similarity of the class roots of phenomena enabled Lenin to use, in his struggle against anarchism, many of the assessments which Marx and Engels had given to that trend very much earlier, because, despite anarchism's evolution, its social nature remained roughly the same. A comparative class analysis of economism in Russia, German revisionism--- Bernsteinianism and French ministerialism--- Millerandism, helped to establish their generic similarity, and this was subsequently borne out by life. In our day, the establishment of the class nature of a phenomenon paves the way for scientific comparisons and better understanding both of the similarities and the distinctions of current and past events. Again and again, life has confirmed Marx`s' observation that "events strikingly analogous, but taking place in different historical surroundings" lead to "totally different results".^^2^^
Some Contemporary Problems
Lenin's article entitled "The Class Origins of Present-Day and `Future' Cavaignacs", which he wrote in June 1917, is of exceptional methodological value and political meaning today. He recalls Cavaignac's class role and the mass shooting of Paris workers in 1848: "In Russia, there are many things now that make our revolution different from the French Revolution of 1848: the imperialist war, proximity of more advanced countries (and not of more backward ones, as was the case of France at the time), an agrarian and national movement. But all this may modify only the form in which the Cavaignacs come forward, the moment, the external causes, etc. It cannot change the essence of the matter, for the esssence lies in the class relationships." l
But the class relationship in France in 1848 and in Russia in 1917 was characterised by a large stratum of the petty bourgeoisie, vacillating, terrified by the "Red spectre", and succumbing to the cries against the ``anarchists''. "Wherever there is & swamp, there's sure to be the devil. Once there is a shaky, vacillating petty bourgeoisie dreading the revolution's progress, the Cavaignacs are sure to appear.''~^^2^^ This was confirmed within two months by the Kornilov mutiny. The bourgeoisie tried to use the intermediate strata for its own class purposes. What is more, the
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 2, p. 250-51.
~^^2^^ Marx and Engels, Selected Correspondence, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1975, p. 313,
232~^^1^^ V. T. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 25, pp. 95-96.
2 Ibid.
233B. M. Leibzon
Marxists . are sure that Lenin's conclusion was home out'once again in Chile in 1973, although the conditions there differed from those in Russia in 1917 to an even greater extent than those in Russia from those in France in 1848, US imperialism and domestic reaction in Chile managed to overthrow the Popular Unity government by capitalising on the vacillations of the middle strata. The class nature of Cavaignac, Kornilov, Pinochet and others of their ilk in various countries, personifying the bloody dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, is roughly the same, for they are the same social type and, conseauently, the typological comparison is applicable in all such cases.
The typological and genetic analysis of such events helps draw lessons and convert these lessons into experience, which, being summed up, can forewarn against mistakes and illusions.
The Communist Party is not an academic society, and it uses the comparative historical method above all as an instrument helping to formulate practical policy, current and long-term.
In doing so, the Communists seek to consider ,each phenomenon historically and in connection with other phenomena, with the experience of history.
The way being travelled by the Communists of the Western countries does not and cannot repeat the way travelled by the Russian Revolution, if only because its victory
Some Contemporary Problems
created a totally new balance of class forces in the world. No revolution can ever be repeated. Each Communist Party independently analyses the peculiar conditions in which it has to tackle its particular tasks. Lenin warned that it was wrong to imitate the tactics of others, but he also drew attention to the need boldly to draw lessons from revolutionary experience, going beyond its letter to absorb its spirit. Thus, the Hungarian Communists believe that it is especially important to cherish the memory of the outstanding events of the world revolutionary movement, but not for the purpose of making a supercilious judgement of its past from the height of its present achievements, but for the purpose of gaining a deeper knowledge of the past as a basis for better solutions for contemporary problems and a more precise definition of its goals.^^1^^
The Great October Socialist Revolution has a special place in the historical events of the past. The Resolution of the 23rd Congress of the French Communist Party said: " Socialism exists. It entered history in October 1917, when the workers and peasants of Russia, led by their Communist Party, won power and abolished capitalist exploitation. Other countries followed the Soviet Union in these decisive transformations. Besides, it is necessary to note that the socialist countries have effected transformations that have proved the
~^^1^^ See, World Marxist Review, April 1979.
234 235B. M. Leibzon
existence and the superiority of the new system." i
It is quite natural that a constant source of revolutionary experience, of lessons and practical conclusions is offered by everything that was connected with the preparation of the first socialist revolution, its victory and experience of building the new society. Janos Kadar writes: "The rich theoretical and practical experience of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, founded by Lenin, the development of the world's first socialist state, which has blazed the trail and is pointing the way into the future, is of especial importance for us. The revolutionary forces of the world have always looked to the unfading treasures of the USSR's historical experience .... That is how it will continue to be in the future.''~^^2^^
This experience is important because it brought out the general regularities in the development of the revolutionary struggle, without a comprehension of which the Communists cannot work successfully in any country.
Luis Corvalan emphasises: "There have never been and there will never be any similar revolutions. But to fail to consider the experience of the October Revolution, to fail to draw from it the necessary lessons for the constantly changing situation in each country
~^^1^^ L'Hnmanite, 15 May 1979.
~^^2^^ Janos Kadar, Socialism and the World Revolutionary Process, Moscow, 1976, p. 288 (in Russian).
Some Contemporary Problems
is to make a mistake, wherever this may occur. The October Revolution is not only a glorious past, it is a factor of our day. It is not a model which can be imitated, but a source of fundamental revolutionary experience." i
Every period has its unique features and every country has its distinctions, but conceptions which start from the exclusiveness of this or that country or assertions that general regularities do not apply to it have frequently led to fatalism, with tragic results.
Some, including Social-Democrats in the 1930s, asserted that Germany was not Italy, and that fascism in Germany was impossible. Literally on the eve of Hitler's takeover, they asserted that fascism could not be established in Germany. Hitler's victory dispelled these complacent illusions, which sprang from limited social vision.
The mechanical copying of the experience of others cannot help to understand the specifics of one's own policy. But then, it cannot be understood either by neglecting world experience, by failing to understand that which Marxist-Leninist revolutionary thought and practice have already achieved.
Exceptional and fundamental importance attaches to what Fidel Castro said in his report to the First Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba about the significance of world revolutionary experience. The Cuban revolu-
~^^1^^ Luis Corvalan, A Revolugao Chilena, p. 121.
236 237B. M. Leibzoa
tion, he said, was at first unable to make use of the rich experience in building socialism by other peoples who had started out on that road earlier. "Had we been humbler, had we not overestimated ourselves ... we would have searched with a modesty befitting revolutionaries for everything that could be learned . .. and applied in our country's specific conditions." i Castro spoke of the importance of creative boldness for revolutionaries, and also their duty to subordinate their acts to the laws of historical and social development, and to draw on the inexhaustible source of political thought and world experience for the knowledge required in guiding the revolutionary process.
These are instructive words not only about the importance of world revolutionary experience, but also about one's own experience in considering the experience of others, and about the fact that the use of the achievements of world revolutionary thought and practice, far from minimising one's dignity, in fact, enriches and raises the stature of the true revolutionary.
The Communists do not regard historical experience as given once and for all, for developments and new data shed a new light on the experience of the past to discover things that once escaped Attention and were
Some Contemporary Problems
underrated. A more profound and all-round comprehension of history helps constantly to develop revolutionary theory.
This development has always gone forward in a struggle against right-wing revisionism and ostensible leftism. The revisionists keep imagining that they are present at the moment when history has abandoned the laws of its development, so that one can, at long last, feel free to disregard every principle. The revisionists, in effect, refuse to make comparisons of events because they regard each event as unprecedented. Present experience is not compared with the past but is merely contrasted with it. Conversely, dogmatism denies that new developments are specific in any way and insists on finding direct analogies between them and the past, refusing to see the specific features of events and regarding them as no more than an illustration and absolute confirmation of general uniformities. In this way, revisionism and dogmatism join hands in playing down the role of historical experience.
Luigi Longo, the late Chairman of the Italian Communist Party, had some interesting observations to make about his Party's historical experience. It is highly possible that in face of the new problems much of that by which ICP was guided in the past could be seen "as a sign of political narrow-- mindedness. I believe, however, that it would be wrong to estimate our past from only that point of view, in terms of the relative
~^^1^^ First Congress of the Co.'.-i.manist Party of Cuba, (Collection of Documents), Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1978, p. 115.
238 239B. M. Leibzon
breadth of our views. Such a criterion is applicable solely to present-day problems. It should not be forgotten that the time when we fought was a 'time of iron and fire' as Gramsci put it. in that school of honesty, sincerity and genuine collective solidarity, in the long period when the Party was formed amid struggles, dangers and sacrifices, there emerged Communist cadres and a style of work that made our Party what it is." ^^1^^
Luigi Longo believed that one of the sources of the ICPs' effective policies was that it constantly looked to the lessons of Marxism and Leninism, to internationalism, which it regarded as the condition for a constant exchange of opinions and experience with the Communist Parties.
The Marxists-Leninists believe that the criterion for assessing communist leaders in the past is not what they failed to give, from the standpoint of the present, but what they did to help solve the problems of their own day, and the importance of their contribution to developing communist thinking and practice.
Marxism-Leninism makes a thorough study of new developments, but does not close its eyes to the continuity of historical development, and does not believe that every new development should obliterate ail preceding developments. Lenin wrote about the need to
Some Contemporary Problems
``evaluate these new changes, "make use" of them, grasp them if we may use that expression, and at the same time, not allow oneself to drift helplessly with the stream, not to throw out the old baggage, but preserve the essentials in the forms of activity and not merely in theory, in the programme, in the principles of policy".^^1^^ That is why it is so important to be able to remain loyal to the best traditions while displaying revolutionary innovation and continuing creatively to develop all the valuable elements accumulated by the international communist movement. That is the way to go on strengthening the international unity of the Communists and enhance the independence of each Communist Party.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 3. EQUALITYEvery Communist Party is a national force, the nation's vanguard, and the question of mutual relations among the Parties cannot be separated from that of mutual relations among nations. Of course, the MarxistLeninist Parties, which consciously follow the principles of internationalism, build their relations with each other as contingents of
World Marxist Review, April 1976.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 17, 1968, p. 146.
24016-01267
2416. M. Leitzon
the working class fighting for a common cause and concerned with always keeping in close touch with their fellow-fighters. But since each Party is a national contingent, their mutual relations are to a certain extent determined by the general principles championed by the Marxists in their efforts to strengthen mutual confidence among the nations and close unity among the working people of different nations. ".. .There is nothing worse than lack of confidence on the part of a nation." *
We want a voluntary alliance of nations, Lenin wrote, an alliance based on the fullest confidence, on a clear awareness of fraternal unity, on a perfectly voluntary accord. To achieve such an alliance, one should display the greatest patience and caution, "so as not to spoil matters and not to arouse distrust".~^^2^^
The Parties' political and organisational independence, their total sovereignty is a major condition enabling the Parties to move closer together. A Party should never interfere in the internal affairs of another Party or Iry to impose the viewpoint on the latter. Lenin resolutely rejected the attempt by the leaders of the German Social Democratic Party to arbitrate in the dispute between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks following the split at the Second Congress of the RSDLP (1903). On the eve of the First World War,
Some Contemporary jPromems
when the International Socialist Bureau tried to put pressure on the Bolsheviks, Lenin wrote: "We are an autonomous party... No one has a right to impose anybody's will upon us ..." l
The Parties' independence makes it impossible for any Party to claim hegemony, a special position in the movement, or any privileges. It is only the Party itself, which knows the conditions of its own country, and its national and historical specifics, that can work out a correct, Marxist policy, taking due account of the actual needs of its working class, of the working people, and the surrounding reality. Hence the norms that have taken shape in the international communist movement: all the Parties are equal, and each Party's position in the movement is determined solely by its prestige, the consistency of its political line, and its international stand.
Independence is a condition of unity. The principle of Party equality is a sine qua non of their lasting and effective international cooperation. Party independence is not opposed to internationalism, but is an integral part of it. It is a condition of voluntary and, consequently, lasting international co-operation.
Internationalism cements the unity of the world communist movement. But since the struggle of the working class unfolds prima-
~^^1^^ V. . I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 43, 1969, p. 420.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, p. 174.
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 30, p. 293.
24216*
243B. M. Leibzon
rily in its own country, every country has its specific features, these leave a definite imprint on the nature of the working-class movement and on the development of Communist Parties in different countries. That is why it would be wrong to regard the unity of the international communist movement as clonelike similarity of all the Parties or to think that a total identity of their positions in all matters is genuine unity.
The forces hostile to Leninism keep spreading the myth that the urge to unity among the revolutionary forces rules out any diversity in approaches and viewpoints.
When the Bolshevik Party was just taking shape, Lenin wrote: ".. .There will always be diversity in local conditions; there will always be differences in the conditions of the working class in one district as compared with those in another; and, lastly, there will always be the particular aspect in the points of view among the active local workers; this very diversity is evidence of the virility of the movement and of its sound growth.''~^^4^^
As we see, far from denouncing such diversity, Lenin saw it as a motive force of development. "The maintenance of continuity and the unity of the movement do not by any means exclude diversity, but, on the contrary, create for it a much broader arena and a freer field of action.''~^^2^^
Some Contemporary Problems
If diversity is natural even in one country and cannot be an obstacle to unity on a principle*} basis, it is all the more natural and inevitable on an international scale, when different countries with their own historical and national specifics are drawn into general revolutionary movement.
After the October Revolution, Lenin repeatedly returned to the question of the unity of the revolutionary process and the diversity of its forms. He said, in particular, "Different nations are advancing in the same historical direction, but by very different zigzags and bypaths, and the more cultured nations are obviously proceeding in a way that differs from that of the less cultured nations." ' Hence the inevitable differences in the approach to one and the same question and the clashes between different viewpoints. Such is the natural process of development, in the course of which common positions are specified and revolutionary theory is enriched. So long as the Parties remain on a common ideological platform, there can be no differences or contradictions between them that cannot be resolved through comradely discussion and the adoption of agreed decisions. Believing such differences of opinion to be inevitable, Lenin maintained that these could be overcome in the course of a thorough discussion and exchange of opinion on an international scale.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 4, p. 321.
~^^2^^ Ibid., pp. 321-22.
1 V, I, Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, p. 195.
244B. M. Leibzon
The independence of the Parties is an indefeasible law of the successful development of the communist movement by which all the Marxist-Leninist Parties are guided. Rodney Arismendi holds that the independence, autonomy and creative activity of every Party is not only its right, but "its duty, one of the factors that facilitate its becoming a real political force in its own country".J
Indeed, who but the Party itself is to formulate its political line to meet the actual conditions of its country? Here it is not enough to reproduce the general theoretical propositions of the revolutionary doctrine, and any mechanical repetition of experience that has worked in other countries is intolerable. The capacity to formulate its own policy is an expression of the Party's real independence. Of the least help are declarations about its right to autonomy, for everything depends on the capacity to act as an independent force. Genuine independence does not conflict with international unity, but is its necessary prerequisite. However from the fact that the Communist Parties can really play a vanguard role only if they act as an independent and truly national force it does not at all follow that they should act in accordance with the saying: "Every pine tree rustles to its own wood." The urge to interpret the Parties' independence as abandonment of efforts to tackle common internation-
Some Contemporary Problems
al tasks, as a peculiar sort of ``neutrality'' in common endeavour cannot in any sense be regarded as evidence of independence. Such a stand fails to meet either the common interests of the working class, or the interests of its national contingents.^^4^^
In accordance with this principle, the 22nd Congress of the CPSU said in the Party's Programme: "The Communist Parties are independent and they shape their policies with due regard to the specific conditions prevailing in their own countries .... They co-- ordinate their actions, consciously and of their own free will, as components of a single international army of labour.''^^2^^ The Communist Party of the Soviet Union believes that it has an international duty resolutely to defend the unity of the international communist movement on the basis of the principles of Marxism-Leninism: "The CPSU will continue to concentrate its efforts on strengthening the unity and cohesion of the ranks of the great army of Communists of all countries.''~^^3^^
In the contest between the two world social systems and the acute class struggle in the international arena, the forces hostile to communism constantly bring pressure to bear
~^^1^^ B. N. Ponomaryov, Selected Speeches and Articles, Politizdat, Moscow, 1977, p. 245.
~^^2^^ The Road to Communism, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1962, p. 489.
s Ibid., p. 490,
247World Marxist Review, September 1977,
B. M. Leibzon
on the issues in relations among the Marxist-Leninist Parties (although one would assume these to be a purely internal matter of the communist movement).
Bourgeois ideologues insist that it is a human trait to seek to dominate others, that any social organism seeks domination, which is -an element of any human association, starting with the family, and going on to various local and professional associations, political organisations and the state. Hence the a priori assertion that there can be no equality in the international communist movement because the strongest Party must seek to bend the others to its will. The Communists are being incited to abandon proletarian internationalism as being allegedly incompatible with the Parties' independence.
Writings published in large printings suggest that independence from the CPSU---in fact, opposition to it (which is even better)--- is the only true criterion of independence. The Communist Parties are depicted as being dependent on the CPSU, as being the "agents of Moscow". When the falsehood of such assertions becomes too transparent, other and even more refined aspersions are cast on the Communist Parties but to the same effect. The main political report delivered by Gus Hall to a meeting of the National Council and the Central Committee of the CP USA on 17 June, 1978, says: "There is some letup in the slander that we are foreign agents. But in its place the charge is that we
Some Contemporary Problems
are politically and ideologically influenced by the Soviet Union." -^^1^^
There is no Communist Party that has not been accused of being dependent on external forces, that has not been declared "pro-- Moscow", and its internationalist stand, " subordination to Moscow''.
Adherence to proletarian internationalism is depicted as "abandonment of independence", as the CPSU's "claim to domination". To reinforce this suggestion, rumours are spread about from time to time that someone (naturally, the CPSU) is seeking to set up some kind of single organisational centre of the communist movement, and that the only way out for each Party is to ``fight'' for independence.
When, on behalf of the CPSU, Leonid Brezhnev spoke at the Berlin Conference of Communist and Workers' Parties of Europe about the importance of scrupulously observing the equality and independence of each Communist Party, the bourgeois press pretended that it did not hear him say that. The fact that each Party's equality and independence is a principle written into the CPSU Programme is never mentioned in the bourgeois press. But no sooner does a spokesman for another Communist Party say the same thing, than much noise is made about there being some secret meaning in these words testifying to "insoluble contradictions" with-
Daily World, 22 June 1978.
248 249B. M. Leibzon
Some Contemporary Problems
ment, all the countries of the socialist world system are equal. This is really so, and this is a good thing. But recently little has been said about the fact that although we are equal, we have an unequal responsibility and burden. For, measured by any standard, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet people, which have equal rights with us and do not lay claim to more, bear an immeasurably greater responsibility than any of us." '
The CPSU does not lay claim to special rights, and that is a principle by which it has been consistently guided. Santiago Carillo, General Secretary of the CP Spain, wrote in 1977 that after the dissolution of the Communist International the form of the Parties' relations had changed: "I do not recall a single change of position, a single important political decision, which, since that dissolution, was co-ordinated by our Party with the CPSU in advance. Perhaps only now and again and accidentally, when this coincided with trips for other reasons (our emigrees lived in the Soviet Union), we informed the CPSU after the event.''^^2^^ At the 25th Congress of the CPSU, a forceful rebuff to the insinuations about the CPSU meddling in the fraternal Parties' affairs was given by Fidel
in the communist movement. This is accompanied with recommendations to the Parties to stand up for their independence, and no secret is made of hopes that the natural differences of approach among the Communist Parties on various questions will develop into a split.
But the Communist Parties are well aware that the advice coming from the enemy camp is not aimed to safeguard the independence of individual Parties, but to divide the communist movement, to weaken it, to undermine the community of goals and to range the Parties against each other, above all, against the CPSU. At the Consultative Meeting in Budapest, Gus Hall commented on the noise raised by the bourgeois press in ``defence'' of the Communist Parties' independence: "The problem is not a matter of autonomous relations between parties ... but rather the struggle against the demagogic campaign of our class enemy about our autonomous standing in our countries." i
The CPSU is consistently guided by the principle of the independence and equality of all the Parties, regardless of their size, wealth of historical experience, or extent of the influence they exert on political life in the world. Janos Kadar said at the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties: "We often stress that all the Parties of the international communist move-
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, p. 332.
~^^2^^ Santiago Carillo, Euro-commanismo y estado, Editorial Critica, Grupo Editorial Grijalbo, Barselona, 1977, p. 165,
251~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, May 1968,
250B. M. LeibzoB
Castro, who said that the relations between Cuba and the USSR are "a model of internationalism at work, of mutual understanding, respect and confidence. Never has the Soviet Union, which has rendered decisive assistance to our people, made any demands of us, set conditions or dictated what we should do. Never in the history of international relations, which have for centuries been determined by egoism and force, have there been such fraternal relations between a powerful country and a small country."i
Behind the relations between the two countries lie the relations between two ruling Communist Parties, and everything that Fidel Castro said about the mutual trust between them is equally manifested in the international solidarity of the Cuban and the Soviet Communists.
But attempts are being made again and again to depict the CPSU as a party which meddles in the internal life of the other fraternal Parties and threatens someone's independence. These claims become especially strident when the Communist Parties take a common stand on this or that international issue.
A distinctive feature of our day consists not only in the fact that the importance of the Communist Parties' independence in tackling complicated national tasks has been
~^^1^^ Our Friends Speak. XXVth Congress of the CPSU, Novosti Press Agency Publishing House. Moscow, 1976, p. 35,
Some Contemporary Problems
growing. The common tasks of all the Communist Parties and all the other democratic forces stand out in bold relief as never before. Consequently, on the one hand, there is a need for the Parties' complete independence, and, on the other, for maximum co-- ordination of their efforts in the struggle for common goals. Such is the dialectic of this twofold process.
The Parties' independence has nothing in common with indifference to the tasks facing the whole movement. The international communist movement is not a mere sum total of the Parties operating in their respective countries. It is a unity arranged against the common enemy, and the constant sense of each Party's belonging to the whole movement strengthens not only the movement as a whole, but also each individual Party. This fully bears out what Engels had in mind when he said that "the fusion of many forces into one single force creates, to use Marx's phrase, a 'new power', which is essentially different from the sum of its separate forces".*
To suggest that the international communist movement should be no more than a sum total of Communist Parties would be to reduce the Communists' potentialities for joint struggle. After all, a sum total is no more than a quantitative concept, and is the re-
~^^1^^ Frederick Engels, Anti-Duhring, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1978, p. 155.
253i. Leib
zoii
Some Contemporary Problem^
tial aspect of each Party's autonomous policy is expressed in its solidarity with all the other Communist Parties, with the working class and all the other working people, and with the rest of the democratic forces, because proletarian internationalism, independence, equality and non-interference, as a basis for relations between the Communist Parties, do not conflict with each other, but are closely interconnected.
In a movement without a central leadership, relations between the Parties can only result from voluntary commitments and generally accepted international rules written into Party documents and documents adopted in common at international conferences. Their observance is guaranteed by the good will of all the Parties.
Emphasising the Parties' independence in freely uniting for international co-operation, the Communists never lose sight of the fact that such unity will be soundly based if the Parties' sovereignty is not confined to their independent formulation of their policy. For the Marxist-Leninist Parties the concept of independence is much broader and includes, above all, class independence, the capacity to withstand the bourgeois, reformist ideology, the ability consistently and creatively to be guided by the principles of Marxism-Leninism in solving all the problems which life produces, however. complicated and peculiar these may be. At the same time, genuine Party independence means total ``dependence'' on
255suit of an addition of components which are passive with respect to each other, whereas the unity of the Communist Parties cannot but be synthetic, with its component parts having an inner mutual concern for each other. There is an Oriental saying that "one wave running on another gathers strength", and the strength of each Communist Party is determined not only by successes in its * own activity but also by the state of the whole world communist movement. This strength is increased through constant mutual support, through the world-wide responsiveness which is inherent in genuine internationalism.
The very nature of the communist movement makes it impossible for its components to withdraw into isolation, and it is not surprising that whenever a Party has done that, it has, sooner or later, realised that it cannot carry on the fight on its own. The Parties' independence has nothing in common with a withdrawal from the solution of common problems, and while the Parties have carried on the struggle in highly diverse conditions and tackled the most diverse problems, that is no justification for separateness. Independence cannot mean isolationism, let alone withdrawal to a nationalistic shell. Martin Gunnar Knutsen, Chairman of the CP Norway, said: "We oppose complacent nationalistic self-isolation." i The essen^
254World Marxist Review, March 1979.
B. M. Leibzon
the ideals for which the whole international communist movement and each individual Party work.
The Communists of the FRG declare: " Indeed, the GCP is in effect dependent. It is dependent on the interests and demands of the working class, because it itself is a part of the woiking class. It is dependent on socialism, because it is a Marxist Party, and scientific socialism is the basis of its activity. Our strength and confidence are rooted in this `dependence'." ' Karl-Heinz Schroder, a member of the Secretariat of the GCP Board, elaborates this idea of the interconnection between the Parties' sovereignty and their international solidarity, and says: "Our opponents ... try to drive a wedge in relations between brother Parties by harping on the `problem' of independence of Parties as opposed to international communist unity. They contend that a Party's isolation is the main source of its strength.''~^^2^^ He shows very well that the Party trying to solve its problems through its own efforts alone and turning its back on international solidarity does grave harm not only to the revolutionary cause in its country but also throughout the world.
The Communist Party of Canada takes the view that "a party shows its independence by its attitude and criticism of capitalism, not
Some Contemporary Problems
by its unfounded criticism of socialism".i The Danish Communists say: "If we allowed others to direct us, we would become a party betraying its class substance.''~^^2^^
The ``dependence'' on class interests is the guarantee that a Party will remain militant whatever the course of events, and will not succumb to any alien pressure. The fundamental importance of this kind of `` dependence'' was broadly demonstrated at the 18th Congress of the CP Israel (1976). Its resolution emphasised that the international solidarity of the Communist and Workers' Parties, of all revolutionary forces, far from contradicting each Communist Party's independence, in effect, helps each of them to maintain its autonomy and ideological and political independence, and to withstand the political and ideological offensive of the class enemy. "The relinquishment of the obligation of proletarian internationalism, of the obligation of international solidarity with the fraternal Communist and Workers' Parties, with the socialist countries, and especially with the Soviet Union, is not an expression of a Party's independence, but of the renunciation of its political and ideological independence.''~^^3^^
As the communist movement gains in
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, April 1979.
~^^2^^ 25th Congress of the Communist Party of Denmark, Copenhagen, 23-26 September 1976, p. 34.
~^^3^^ Information Bulletin, geptember-Ootpber 1976,
p. 1281" -- '•' ' '-' •.-"-•- ;- •'• -•• :.....-
~^^1^^ Marxistische Blatter, January-February 1972.
~^^2^^ Communists of the World About Their Parties. ... p. 78.
25617-01267
257B. M. Leibzon
strength and the masses move to the left, anti-communism steps up its wild activity and increases its pressure on the revolutionary forces. The Communist Parties are constantly being attacked with heavy weapon by the class enemy. And while the conditions in which most Communist Parties now operate do not bear any comparison with those in which the Bolshevik Party was shaped in Russia, Lenin's idea about the need to advance along the hard and steep way of the revolutionary struggle, "firmly holding each other by the hand", is still relevant. "We have combined by a freely adopted decision, for the purpose of fighting the enemy, and not of retreating into the neighbouring marsh, the inhabitants of which, from the very outset, have reproached us with having separated ourselves into an exclusive group and with having chosen the path of struggle instead of the path of conciliation.''^^1^^ *
One of the tasks that the reactionaries have always---and now especially---set itself is to bring about a change in the character of the Communist Parties so as to rupture or weaken their international ties. This has been more or less frankly advocated by statesmen and the presidents of the big monopolies, by journalists who have opted for anticommunism as a career. The right-wing Socialist leaders also want the Communists to abandon their principles.
§ome Contemporary Problems
The question of the Communist Parties' attitude to their independence as a necessary condition for successful co-operation between all the Parties now becomes especially acute, and is one of the burning issues in the ideological struggle. The anti-communists' hope is that if the Communists contrast their independence and international unity, they could easily lose their combat strength and be ``tamed''.
But, says Alvaro Cunhal, "for the Communists, fidelity to the interests of the working classes and the liberation cause of socialism and communism is not something that can be used to buy the good will, condescension, favour or tolerance of the big capitalists, latifundists, and imperialists. Our Party will not be a piece of decoration for bourgeois democracy, as the reactionaries would like it to be." * That is why the Communist Parties make such a point of stressing that their genuine independence is expressed in their clear-cut class stand, their independence of bourgeois reformist ideology, their loyalty to the international duty. The Chilean Communists, for instance, declare: "Every Communist Party is sovereign in elaborating its own line, in denning its strategy and tactics. At the same time, all the Parties are linked together by their common doctrine and duty of mutual solidarity, non-interference in each other's affairs, and mutual respect. That is
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 5, p. 355.
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, March 1979.
25817*
259B. M. Leibzori
why the Communist Party of Chile repulses the pressure of those who would have liked it to demonstrate its autonomy by critical remarks, at the very least bordering on antiSovietism.
``So, we reaffirm that there are no dominant or subordinate Parties, and once again express our conviction that all of us Communist Parties should give priority in our relations to our international duty.''~^^4^^
The class enemy is doing its utmost to present the problem of Party independence as an unresolved one. In fact, however, the principle of independence has been examined in revolutionary theory and has taken effect in the practice of the international communist movement.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 4. DISCUSSIONWhile elaborating their policy on their own, the Communist Parties are bound to feel a need for an exchange of views on various political issues, for theoretical discussion, for a comparison of their experience with that of other Parties.
This is a natural need of the vital and developing communist movement. Since the ex-
Some Contemporary Problems
perience of any Party, however valuable and original, can be one-sided, it is particularly important to gain collective experience in the course of co-operation among the Communist Parties of all countries.
As it was pointed out at the 25th Congress of the CPSU, the ties among the fraternal Parties of the socialist community countries present an impressive picture of deep, allround and systematic contacts among thousands upon thousands of fighters for the common cause, the builders of socialism and communism, ranging from Party leaders to local Party functionaries and rank-and-file Communists. This exchange of experience is most valuable. Speaking of regular meetings between Party leaders, both multilateral and bilateral, Leonid Brezhnev said that these "enable us to consult on all major problems that arise, to share in each other's joys and sorrows, as the saying goes, and jointly chart our further advance".*
Exchange, of experience, free discussion and an effort to bring out the achievements and mistakes of the movement enable the Parties to learn from each other. The revolutionary ideas and experience of different countries, while being basically the same, cannot be identical in all their particulars, for they reflect the historical situation in these countries and the national peculiarities
~^^1^^ Luis Corvalan, A Revolugao Chileria, p. 66.
~^^1^^ Documents and Resolutions, 25th Congress of the CPSU, p. 11.
260 261B. M. Leibzon
and traditions. "The international revolutionary movement of the proletariat does not and cannot develop evenly and in identical forms in different countries .... Every country contributes its own valuable and specific features to the common stream, but in each particular country the movement suffers from its own one-sidedness, its own theoretical and practical shortcomings of the individual socialist parties." l
The vast role that Leninist ideas have come to play in the imperialist epoch is largely due to the fact that they generalise the experience of the whole world on the strength of data drawn from the practice of the developed capitalist countries, those with a medium level of capitalist development, and the national liberation movement.
As the internationalisation of many processes of social development accelerates, the experience of socialist construction, the working-class movement and the national liberation struggle is often relevant beyond the national boundaries. It is therefore particularly important to create conditions for a fruitful exchange of the ideas, that arise in different countries, for a joint effort by all the Marxist-Leninist Parties to develop the revolutionary theory. Any small-town arrogance and underrating of collective efforts in elaborating theoretical problems would not only be harmful, but also dangerous.
Some Contemporary Problems
Speaking at the Berlin Conference of European Communist and Workers' Parties, Leonid Brezhnev emphasised the importance of international communist co-operation. He said: "There is another sphere of our co-- operation which deserves special mention. I mean pooling efforts to sum up our revolutionary experience, the further development of the theory of scientific communism, which K. Marx, F. Engels and V. I. Lenin founded." ^^1^^
Numerous forms of joint theoretical work by the Marxists of different countries have arisen in the course of their activity. Meetings between the leaders of the fraternal Parties of the socialist countries have become a regular practice. Books are being published by multinational teams of authors; there are constant contacts between the fraternal Parties' Marxist research centres, which have become ever more important in the socialist countries, and also in Italy, France, the FRG, and other countries; many Marxist writings are being translated into foreign languages and circulated in other countries.
The theoretical and information journal of the Communist and Workers' Parties, World Marxist Review, which has 57 national editions and is circulated in 145 countries, makes a substantial contribution to joint theoretical research.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 15, p. 187,
~^^1^^ For Peace, Security, Co-operation and Social Progress in Enrope, p. 23,
263 262B. M. Leibzon
The representatives of 57 Parties in the journal have equal rights on the Editorial Council, which meets regularly to plan the journal's work, discuss the articles and documents meant for publication, and decide the contents of each issue. The representatives of 15 Parties make up an Editorial Board. The journal organises in different forms a collective analysis of various urgent problems of our day. It holds regular international theoretical conferences (from 1974 to 1978, there were 11 of these), sets up research groups, holds symposia, seminars, round-table meetings, and so on. The free exchange of views helps the Parties to generalise their experience, formulate interesting proposals, and draw theoretical conclusions.
The forms of such an exchange may differ widely. Free discussion among a small number of representatives without any time-limit or documents drafted in advance, and exchanges of opinion on various questions with the participation of a panel of specialists have proved to be useful. Broader meetings attended by the representatives of many Parties, where different opinions can be formulated, are equally justified. Take the international theoretical conference in Sofia in 1978, " Socialist and Communist Construction and World Development". General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Greece Charilaos Florakis said at .that conference: "This is a very important conference, for it gives us the opportunity to
Some Contemporary Problems
exchange views on important issues even though not all views may coincide and no declaration will be adopted. We believe it will arm the Communist and Workers' Parties with effective means for repulsing imperialism's sharp ideological attacks." *
It would be narrow-minded to think that there is only one suitable form for an exchange of views. The Communists are guided by Lenin's idea that "no movement, including the working-class movement, is possible without debates, controversy and conflict of opinion",^^2^^ although one should wage a relentless struggle against disputes degenerating into quarrels, gossip and bickering.
Numerous international conferences and meetings of various political organisations are being constantly held across the world. Regular congresses of the Socialist International and conferences staged by Christian and other political parties are seen by the bourgeois media as something quite natural. But whenever the Communist Parties are about to hold any meeting, the media promptly start a campaign to discredit the very idea of a dialogue in the communist movement. When it becomes evident that the Communists hold similar views on some questions, their unity is at once stigmatised as imposed by Moscow. And Avhenever it turns out that their viewpoints on some issues do
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, March. 1979'.
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 19, 1963, p. 492.
264 265B. M. Leibzon
not coincide, this is presented as a break-up of the communist movement, as its hopeless crisis.
The greater the urge within the communist movement to exchange experience and coordinate the action of all its contingents, the more intensive is the pressure from the hostile class forces, which seek to use the problem of "Party independence" to disunite the Communists of different countries.
By drumming away at the idea that contacts, exchange of experience and comradely discussions among the Communist Parties are unnecessary and boil down to ``interference'' in the Parties' internal affairs, the anti-- communist forces pursue a definite political goal: to impair international proletarian solidarity in order to facilitate their own interference.
A comparison of viewpoints is not simply a dispassionate exchange of information. If the Parties stopped at that and did not analyse past experience or speak out about its vices and virtues, their collective thinking would not have developed. Fraternal relations among political fellow-fighters expounding the same ideology cannot be based on reticence, for they are moved by a desire to promote the common cause. In analysing past experience in the course of a discussion, the Parties may naturally come up with critical remarks. The Communists believe that if the Parties did not exchange opinion or express their views, it would be impossible to determine the points on which they agreed or dis-
Some Contemporary Problems
agreed. If a Party debates all the problems solely within its own ranks, this would weaken it politically and ideologically, and would lead to dangerous self-isolation and inevitable parish-pump thinking.
Speaking of the negative phenomena hindering the exchange of views in the communist movement, notably, the urge to avoid debate on the plea of preserving Party independence, Rodney Arismendi wrote: "We cannot substitute certain diplomatic practices for scientific analysis (national borders are unknown to science), although these practices are sometimes necessary to avoid clashes and giving offence." Emphasising the importance of each Party's independent elaboration of its line as a principle of unity, Arismendi believes that "the ability to generalise, as far as possible, multifaceted experience is a characteristic feature of every living theory which will be truly constructive only if it is the result of collective and creative work.''^^1^^
Many Communist Parties emphasise that they want mutual experience to be discussed openly and creatively, so that these discussions would help to analyse the problems, situations and phenomena the Parties have to face, to exchange views and develop theory. Thus, with a view to promoting the Parties' unity in the anti-imperialist struggle and further strengthening their ideological unity, the Communist Party of Denmark included
~^^1^^ Rabochy klass i sovremenny mir, January 1978.
267 366B. M. Leibzon
this provision in the programme it adopted in 1976: it is important "to hold joint discussions for the further creative development of Marxist thought in conformity with the new problems of our day".l
The Communists have gained much experience in the struggle against bourgeois ideology and various anti-Marxist trends. The logic of such struggle calls not only for ideological conviction, but also for sharp polemics meant to expose the adversaries. Discussions between fellow-Communists are quite a different matter. Here, tone and manner should be different, for the point of the discussion is not to defeat an ideological adversary, but to get at the truth, to specify some proposition or argument without prejudice, or to correct a mistake. The theses of the 15th Congress of the Italian Communist Party say: "The discussion should be frank and open, but loyal and respectful with regard to the other Party, aimed at understanding the other's arguments, overcoming divergences, and resolving problems in a positive way.''^^2^^
Michel Montaigne wrote: "Faith in the decency of another is a telling enough indication of one's own decency.''^^3^^ It is common knowledge that undue emphasis on one's own
Some Contemporary Problems
infallibility and a reluctance to hear what others have to say often implies a lack of confidence in oneself. People with an ability for oversimplification, for whom everything is always clear and who are "dead sure" about any question, usually look back and not ahead of them. An inability to defend one's viewpoint and a tendency to disregard what the opponent is saying can cause tension instead of making things easier. All this has nothing to do with the critical and creative spirit of Marxism-Leninism and the constantly developing, future-oriented communist movement. The Communists see it as the international duty of all those taking part in the discussion to create an atmosphere of comradely mutual attention. When it is a matter of developing criticism and self-criticism within each Party, everything is quite clear. But with respect to inter-Party criticism, this question may arise: is such criticism compatible with the principle of Party independence and non-interference in each other's internal affairs?
The fact that the Communist Parties are independent by no means implies that they can take an indifferent attitude to each other or shut their eyes to the mistakes of other Parties. The international communist movement, which has common goals and a common ideology and which is fighting against one and the same enemy, regards every new victory by the working class in any country as a common victory. Similarly, each Party's
~^^1^^ 25th Congress of the Communist Party of Denmark, Copenhagen, 23-26 September, 1976, p. 152.
~^^2^^ La polttica e I'organizzazione del comanistt Italiani, Editor! Riuniti, Roma, 1979, p. 53.
~^^3^^ Les essais de Michel de Montaigne, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1965, p. 66,
268 269B. M. Leibzon
mistakes and failures are not confined to the country in question but in one way or another affect the whole movement. Considering that "no one in the world can compromise the revolutionary Marxists, if they do not compromise themselves",i it will become quite clear that no Party should overlook the mistakes of another Party if these harm the common cause.
The Communist Parties reject any interference by one Party in the internal affairs of another Party, but they do not share the stand that rules out any criticism of a fraternal Party and maintains, as a matter of principle, that a fraternal Party's views relating to the international communist movement as a whole should never be discussed in any form. Making this a principle of mutual relations among the Parties would turn the international communist movement, with its strong urge for unity, into a sum total of Parties taking a neutral attitude to each other.
One could imagine what would happen if all the Communist Parties believed that criticism and non-interference were incompatible and would therefore in principle refrain from expressing their opinion about the activity of other Parties. To believe that critical remarks, however well-meant, or any other judgements about the policy of some Party amount to interference in its affairs would be contrary to
Some Contemporary Problems
the spirit of mutual trust among the Parties. All the contingents of the international communist movement would then have to follow the principle of "our Party is our business, and your Party is your business''.
The Communists also believe that the principle of Party equality is violated when some Party regards any critical remarks directed against it as interference, while maintaining that its own criticism of other Parties is justified.
Regarding criticism as an indispensable condition of correct relations among the Parties, many Parties have publicly proclaimed their readiness to consider it in all earnestness. Todor Zhivkov, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party, said: "We shall be grateful to every Communist Party that will show us our slips and mistakes sincerely and fraternally, and give us its advice. We do not consider that as any interference in our internal Party or government affairs." ^^1^^ But the Parties are aware that criticism should be used very carefully, with due tact, so as not to give rise to mistrust or disunite the Parties.
Much was said about criticism in the communist movement at Party congresses and in the Party press in the late 1950s. Thus, at their llth Congress in 1957, the Finnish Communists devoted much attention to criticism
V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, p. 517,
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, p. 300.
270 271B. M. Leibzon
in the communist movement, emphasising that any fraternal Party should be criticised earnestly and with a sense of responsibility. "The main principle here is to believe that the fraternal Parties will themselves correct any mistakes they may make, just as we ourselves must be primarily urged to correct our own mistakes. Internationalism pledges us, first and foremost, to support the fraternal Parties and workers of other countries, and also the peoples fighting for freedom, against imperialism, our common enemy, and for socialism. Then---and only then---will criticism be justified.''^^1^^
The Communist Parties seek to establish ties among themselves and forms of mutual relations under which each Party could freely bring its critical remarks to the notice of another Party. Palmiro Togliatti said at the Eighth Congress of the Italian Communist Party in 1956: "We can approach other Parties with fraternal criticism if we think it to be well-grounded. We want to establish ties with other Parties that would enable them as well to criticise us if they think it right.''~^^2^^
Most Parties regard the opinion of other fraternal Parties brought to their notice in
Some Contemporary Problems
accordance with the norms accepted in the communist movement as comradely assistance, rather than interference in their internal affairs or infringement of their independence. But if the critics take no account of the accepted norms, their criticism can be destructive.
With a view to the consequences of the Maoists' disregard of the accepted norms of mutual relations among the Parties, the Meeting of Representatives of the Communist and Workers' Parties in 1960 adopted a statement on the procedure governing the settlement of disputed issues.
Bilateral meetings are the most effective form for settling disputes. These meetings should be held on the basis of mutual trust, goodwill, respect, and an ability not only to formulate one's own stand, but also to hear what others have to say, because the purpose of a comradely exchange of views is not to defeat or discredit the partner, but to help him realise his mistakes, to show him that his views or arguments are unsound. The ultimate purpose of such an exchange of views is to promote the common cause, to facilitate the achievement of the crucial common goals that unite all true Communists. The joint communique on the talks between the delegations of the CPSU arid the FCP led by Comrades Leonid Brezhnev and Georges Marchais said that "differences of approach and existing divergences cannot be an obstacle to co-operation in the achievement of the basic
~^^1^^ llth Congress of the Communist Party of Finland. Helsinki, 29 May-2 June, 1957, Moscow, 1958, p. 82 (in Russian).
~^^2^^ Palmiro Togliatti, Nella democrazia e nella pace verso il socialismo. Rapportt att'VIH, IX e X Congresso del PCI, p. 95.
27218-01267
273B. M. Leifczon
goals that are common to both".^^1^^
The history of the international communist movement abounds in examples when timely criticism given by way of assistance enabled a Party to overcome its mistakes and avert the dangers threatening it. It is hardly surprising that such Parties particularly disapprove of any attempts to belittle the role of criticism, and firmly declare that they attach much importance to criticism levelled at them.
The leaders of the Communist Party, USA have often declared that they wholeheartedly request the fraternal Parties to argue against them, to give a critical analysis of their Party's work, and make as many proposals and remarks as possible. They think it would be most useful for them to know the opinion of those who have observed their work and problems from different conditions, on the basis of different experience. It would be wrong, they believe, to confine the discussion of the US Party's experience to the Party itself, for that would weaken the Party both politically and ideologically.
The US Communist Party knows from its own experience that friendly criticism by a fraternal Party is very important. The letters to the US Communists written by a prominent leader of the French Communist Party, Jacques Duclos, were of great help in the
Some Contemporary Problems
complicated struggle against the right-wing revisionism of Earl Browder in the 1940s and John Gates in the 1950s. The US Communists were grateful for these letters, maintaining that they helped to prevent a split in the Party and to thwart the attempts by the right-wing opportunists to subordinate the Party to their anti-Marxist views. Jacques Duclos criticised the opportunists, who were pushing the Communist Party towards " democratic reformism" and an idealisation of "democratic freedoms", and emphasised the need to strengthen the proletariat's international solidarity. While the Marxists-Leninists in the US Communist Party welcomed these letters, regarding them as fraternal assistance, the right-wing opportunists angrily rejected these as "gross interference and violation of the right to independence''.
Genuine Party criticism has a constructive purpose, primarily helping to overcome what the Party believes to be a shortcoming. This means, however, that criticism should be well-grounded and responsible. Criticism which singles out separate facts or phenomena from the overall process of social development without considering the substance or tendency of these phenomena, cannot be objective, but will always be biased. This also applies to criticism which does not take due account of the objective conditions that caused the phenomenon in question, which abstracts itself from the historical prerequisites for that phenomenon, and which does not go
Pravda, i January 1980.
27418*
275B. M. Leibzon
into the reasons that induced the Party to take some particular step.
In its Political Resolution, the Eighth Congress of the Portuguese Communist Party in 1976 noted with gratitude that throughout the whole complicated process of the Portuguese revolution, the Portuguese Communist Party "has enjoyed the fraternal Parties' active support".i The Communists' constant solidarity with the people of Portugal and their concrete assistance, notably, in the form of criticism, have strengthened the bonds of fraternal international friendship. At the same time, the Resolution points out: "Some Parties, even if only a few, have shown a serious lack of understanding of the Portuguese revolution. Under the influence of reformist and opportunist concepts, some of them have even publicly criticised our Party's activity precisely on the question of the basic revolutionary gains, while manifesting solidarity and sympahy with the forces that had launched a broad anti-communist campaign in Portugal.''~^^2^^ The PGP condemned such an attitude, but did not join in open polemics with these parties.
The Portuguese Communists also disagree with some fraternal Parties' claim to speak out on what, in their opinion, would meet the interests of the Portuguese people. Alvaro Cunhal said at the international theore-
~^^1^^ VIII Congresso do POP 11 a 14/Nov. 1976, Editorial ``Avantel'', Lisboa, 1977, p. 259.
2 Ibid.
Some Contemporary Problems
tical conference in Sofia: "One of the comrades speaking at this conference declared that his Party favoured Portugal joining the Common Market. We do not deny any fraternal Party the right to declare for Portugal's entry into the Common Market, provided this benefits the people whose interests a given party expresses. But when the interests of the Portuguese people and Portuguese democracy are involved, it is only our Party that has the right to speak out on this question." i
Criticism which does not seek to encompass the movement as a whole and derives from abstract moral considerations without regard for the concrete conditions in which the criticised Party has to fight can also do no good. The Hungarian Communists have always welcomed principled and comradely remarks by the fraternal Parties as necessary and useful, making it clear, however, that when their affairs are assessed from the standpoint of an outside observer, without regard for the objective conditions, such remarks prove to be totally unconstructive, especially when the critics "try to give advice, in accordance with their own wishes and on the basis of abstract moral considerations, on how one should have acted in various circumstances"~^^2^^
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, March 1979.
~^^2^^ Zoltan Komocin, National Interests and Internationalist Goals, p. 108 (in Russian).
177 276B. M. Leibzon
Some Contemporary Problems
burden of responsibility for this situation other than where it really belongs",l i.e., on the fraternal Parties.
Undoubtedly, the Parties may sometimes differ in their views on various issues. The point here is to distinguish between differences over some minor questions and those relating to the basis, the very substance of Marxist-Leninist theory and policy. Differences over particular questions are often due to the peculiarities of a Party's position. The Communists believe that when there is agreement on basic issues, no harm can be done by differences of opinion on some questions, or the overrating or underrating of some factor in the revolutionary struggle.
A joint communique on the visit to the Soviet Union in October 1978 by General Secretary of the Italian Communist Party Enrico Berlinguer says that the leaders of the CPSU and the ICP "reaffirmed the standpoint that some differences in the Parties' positions do not contradict and should not hinder the efforts to strengthen and extend cooperation and internationalist solidarity among the Communist and Workers' Parties of all countries and continents".~^^2^^
Besides, there is no reason why differences of opinion should be perpetuated. If the partners show goodwill, take an unbiased approach
Since the world revolutionary process has developed in such diverse conditions, and each Party knows best of all the situation in which it has to operate, there is always the danger that critical remarks may not be com' petent enough and that the experience of other Parties may be seen solely through the prism of one's own experience. What the Communists hold to be even more inadmissible is a supercilious lecturing approach, which in itself violates the principle of Party equality and mutual respect. Analysing one critical statement of that kind, Secretary of the Communist Party of Argentina Orestes Ghioldi particularly deplored the author's " aggressive and high-flown language, and his neglect of elementary principles of comradeship and proletarian internationalism, which a Communist should never forget in his polemics with other Communists on ideological or tactical problems".^^1^^
At the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1969, delegates spoke with disapproval of those who tried to "blame their shortcomings on proletarian internationalism and on the basic propositions of Marxism-Leninism".^^2^^
A group of British Communists wrote in view of the shortcomings in their Party's work about a tendency "to place the main
~^^1^^ Za rubezhom, April 1978.
~^^2^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, p. 203.
~^^1^^ Marxism Today, October 1979, p. 324.
~^^2^^ Pravda, 10 October 1978,
378 279B. M. Leibzon
Some Contemporary Problems
It is easy to see that a refusal to speak out on the activity of other Parties is not as ``neutral'' as it may seem, but amounts to criticism of the principles upheld by other Parties. Every intermediate position has its own logic. This also applies to the attempts to sit on the fence in the principled struggle against views that are hostile to Marxism-- Leninism. It is hardly surprising that such ``neutrality'' gives rise to nationalistic tendencies.
In saying that the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party is doing its utmost to promote the Marxist-Leninist unity of the Communist and Workers' Parties, Janos Kadar noted that an integral part of this activity is an effort to develop contacts with the fraternal Parties, to ensure an exchange of experience, and "in a sense, to organise resistance to anti-Marxist views. In saying that we advocate Marxist-Leninist unity in the international communist movement, we mean that unity in the world working-class movement cannot be achieved on an unprincipled basis." ^^1^^
Discussions and criticism in the communist movement are an indication of its power, growth and creative spirit, rather than of weakness. Many Communist Parties have noted the usefulness of such discussions, but only provided these are held on healthy Par-
and are prepared to alter their views under the influence of sound arguments, the exchange of ideas will not degenerate into an exchange of monologues, and their positions may draw closer together and eventually coincide. When it is a matter of winning over for the right view temporarily misguided fellow-Communists, Leonid Brezhnev said, " comradely, friendly polemics, even restraint, can prove useful".^^1^^
Co-operation and international solidarity play a special role in working out common positions. Lenin believed that "differences on less important issues can, and unfailingly will, vanish; this will result from the logic of the joint struggle against the really formidable enemy, the bourgeoisie.''~^^2^^
Differences on basic issues of theory and policy are another matter. These usually show that bourgeois and petty-bourgeois views have penetrated the communist movement. If all the attempts to overcome such differences prove to be futile, a resolute and irreconcilable struggle should be waged to defeat opportunism. Prominent leaders of a number of Communist Parties have emphasised that when patently anti-Marxist, antiLeninist views, which harm the world communist movement, have to be rebuffed, these should be criticised in public.
~^^1^^ L. I. Brezhnev, Following Lenin's Course, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972, p. 218.
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 30, p. 8$,
28Q
~^^1^^ Janos Kadar, Socialism and the World Revolutionary Process, p. 47.
§81
B. M. Leibzon
Some Contemporary Problems
social progress in our day." J Similar assessments of the importance of discussion in the communist movement have been written into the documents of many Parties.
For the Communists, discussion, exchange of views and criticism are not an end in themselves, but a way to strengthen the unity of the international communist movement and to enhance its militancy. Hence their principled attitude to discussion and their concrete approach to every individual case which calls for a comparison of viewpoints.
At the 26th CPSU Congress, Leonid Brezhnev has denned the Soviet Communists' stand on this issue as follows:
``As our Party sees it, differences of opinion between Communists can be overcome, unless, of course, they are fundamental differences between revolutionaries and reformists, between creative Marxism and dogmatic sectarianism or ultra-Left adventurism. In that case, of course, there can be no compromises ---today just as in Lenin's lifetime. But when Communists fight for the common revolutionary cause, we believe that patient comradely discussion of differing views and positions serves their common aims best of all.''~^^2^^
~^^1^^ Protokoll der Verhandlungen des V. Parteitages der Sozialistischen Einheitspartei Westberlins in Berlin-Neukolln vom 15. bis 17. April 1977. Zeitungsdienst Berlin, Verlags-und-Druckerei-GmbH, 1977, S. 43.
~^^2^^ Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the XXVI Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Immediate Tasks of the Party in Home and Foreign Policy, Novosti Press Agency Publishing House, Moscow, 1981, p. 24.
§8?
ty principles. Thus, the llth Congress of the Swiss Labour Party in May 1978, having fully approved the Final Document of the Berlin Conference of European Communist and Workers' Parties, examined the political and ideological problems being discussed in the international communist movement. The Swiss Communists believe that discussion and comparison of ideas engendered by the rapid development of the revolutionary and progressive forces throughout the world and the growth of the socialist system should not be seen as negative, provided these are held on a fraternal basis.
At the Fifth Congress of the Socialist Unity Party of West Berlin in 1977, it was pointed out that although differences of opinion in the communist movement evidently existed, the enemies were mistaken in thinking that the great family of Communist and Workers' Parties would disintegrate. "Much of what is now being discussed in our movement is connected with the future strengthening of the world communist movement, its expansion, the spread of its influence to ever new social strata and groups, and also with the fact that the conditions in which the various Parties have to fight are most diverse. That is why discussions are quite normal. We believe that they will promote our cause, so long as one always proceeds from the common interests of the international workingclass movement, from its rich experience, and from the common historical responsibility for
B. M. Leibzon
Some Contemporary Problems
tory, realised that the first socialist revolution had to be defended and that assistance to it would simultaneously broaden the opportunities for social change in their own countries. In its address "To the Workers of the World", the First Congress of the Comintern called for the defence of Soviet Russia. One of the conditions of admission to the Comintern, adopted by its Second Congress in 1920, when it was already possible to take into account the lessons of the Civil War and the destruction of the Hungarian Soviet Republic and a number of other Soviet republics, said: " Every party which wishes to join the Communist International is obliged to give unconditional support to any Soviet republic in its struggle against counter-revolutionary forces." »
So, anyone who wished to be a Communist pledged himself to unconditional support of the Bolshevik Party, the organiser of the struggle against the internal counter-- revolutionaries and world imperialism.
The failure of the reactionaries' attempts to crush the young socialist country by force of arms enabled it to go over to a rehabilitation of the ruined economy. Socialism could now show its advantages not only in the socio-political, but also in the socio-economic sphere. Ahead lay a titanic task which many
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 5. RELATIONSThe Great October Socialist Revolution for the first time in history brought to power a revolutionary Marxist Party, engendering a new unprecedented problem: that of mutual relations between the victorious Party and the revolutionary Marxists of other countries remaining within the capitalist system.
The revolution, which shook the world, was met with enthusiasm by those who really wanted socialism to win out in their countries. Something that had for decades remained just the cardinal goal of the struggle could now be translated into reality on onesixth of the globe. The political transformations that put an end to the power of the landowners and capitalists, and to Russia's dependence on foreign capital, and which extricated the Republic from the imperialist war, opened up fresh prospects for revolutionary struggle across the world.
Political changes were the main source of the influence exerted by the victorious revolution and the Bolshevik Party, its leader, on the revolutionary forces in other countries. But the communist groups and parties, which began to consolidate after the October vic-
~^^1^^ The Communist International. 1919-1943. Documents, Vol. I, p. 171.
285B. M. Leibzon
believed to be insuperable. It was not only vitally important for the famine-stricken and devastated Republic, but was also of vast international significance. Lenin wrote in October 1921: "Among the peaceful means of struggle against the yoke of international finance capital, against international reaction, there is no other means with such rapid and certain promise of victory as aid in the restoration of the economy of Soviet Russia." i
The "Hands off Russia!" slogan, which helped to start in many countries a mass movement of solidarity with Soviet Russia, was supplemented with appeals for assistance in the Republic's struggle against hunger and devastation. In early December 1921, the Presidium of the Comintern's Executive Committee adopted this appeal to the proletarians of all countries: "Hurry to the assistance of your chief fortress, Soviet Russia! Help it grow strong and consolidate. You will be repaid a hundred-fold.''~^^2^^
The support given to Soviet Russia was indeed repaid a hundred-fold. As Lenin wrote in 1922, Soviet Russia has always considered it "a matter of the greatest pride to help the workers of the whole world in their difficult struggle to overthrow capitalism".^^3^^ With the development of the socialist economy, the pro-
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 35, 1966, p. 527.
~^^2^^ The Communist International. 1919-1943. Documents, Vol. I, p, 303.
~^^3^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 33, 1973, P- 417.
286Some Contemporary Problems
gressive nature of the socialist system became ever more evident. The Communist Parties of all countries drew for confidence and arguments in their everyday struggle on the economic successes of socialism and its steadily growing social gains. The Communist Party of the revolutionary state, which even in its most difficult days had done its utmost to help the Communists of capitalist countries, was now able to extend its assistance in various forms: to train cadres, grant political asylum to persecuted Communists, and give direct military and economic assistance, as to China from the 1920s to the 1940s, and to Spain in the 1930s.
As the socialist system grew stronger, it was no longer in need of those manifestations of support which had been so necessary in its early days. Now that the country had become a mighty industrial power, it could increasingly influence the state of affairs in the world as a force which the reactionary camp could no longer afford to ignore. Apart from influencing the world by the example of its socio-political transformations and rapid economic growth, it also made an ever greater impact on the course of world events through its foreign policy.
Lenin's Decree on Peace was the first foreign policy act of the working class that had taken state power into its own hands. That policy proceeded from objective reality: the existence of two opposite systems in the world---socialism and capitalism---and the ne-
287S. M. Leibzoa
cessity of their peaceful coexistence. It made no secret of its revolutionary tenor, its readiness to support liberation movement and create conditions for the successful development of socialist forces.
Anti-Sovietism, which emerged with the formation of the Soviet state, used all the means of slander and misinformation at its disposal to compromise the new system, sow mistrust for it, and intimidate the masses.
Such devices, as a rule, could not disorient those who realised that the development of revolutionary Russia was a call into the future. The Communist Parties took a firm stand against the anti-Soviet slander. But as the Soviet state strengthened, even some of those who were involved in the communist movement gave in to the anti-Soviet invention that Soviet foreign policy was just conventional state policy and pursued national goals. Bourgeois propaganda denounced the Communist International as an instrument of Soviet foreign policy, saying that all its Parties were not national parties, but organisations that were dependent on a foreign power and defended the latter's interests.
The Civil War was barely over when the opposition elements in the Comintern alleged that by recognising the ebbing of the revolutionary tide in the world and denying the existence of objective conditions for an offensive against capitalism, the Comintern had sacrificed the interests of the world revolution to the national interests of Soviet Rus-
Some Contemporary Problems
sia. Both the right-wing opportunists and the leftists accused the Comintern of acting on Moscow's orders and in its state interests. Such ideas were particularly widespread among some members of the Communist Workers' Party of Germany, which took a leftist, sectarian stand. The Third Congress of the Comintern in 1921 rejected these allegations, borrowed from the anti-communist arsenal. Its address "To the Members of the Communist Workers' Party of Germany" showed the true role of the Comintern: "It is not the International that is a weapon of the Soviet Republic, but Soviet Russia is the strongest bastion of the Communist International." i
The Soviet Republic's international role determined the nature of. the relations between the Bolshevik Party and the other Communist Parties as contingents of one and the same revolutionary army fighting for a common cause but following different roads in accordance with their objective position. It took time, however, to understand this international role and its importance.
The anti-communist forces went to every length to distort and disrupt these relations of solidarity. The Communists were aware that history itself was turning the problem of mutual relations between the Party that stood at the head of the socialist state and the other Communist Parties into the touchstone of true internationalism.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin and the Communist International, Politizdat, Moscow, 1970, p. 404 (in Russian).
28819-01267
289B. M. Leibzoii
At their Third Congress in January 1926, the Italian Communists started from the premise that "the degree of development of the spirit of proletarian internationalism within a Party's ranks is an indicator of its ideological level". They remarked that this spirit manifested itself "most forcefully in a feeling of international solidarity". But the Congress also noted some of the weak points of the internationalist spirit. The theses on Italy's position and the tasks of the CPI, adopted by the Congress, said that this weakness "lays the Party open to repercussions from the campaign that the bourgeoisie has launched against the Communist International, declaring it to be an organ of the Russian state. Some propositions of `left-wing' extremism on this issue echo the habitual arguments of counter-revolutionary parties. These propositions should be combatted with great vigour ..." *
In the 1920s, public organisations advocating friendship with the Soviet Union were set up in some countries on the initiative of the Communists. The "Friends of New Russia" society, set up in Germany in 1923, included such outstanding men as Albert Einstein. In 1927, the Soviet trade unions invited about 1,000 representatives of various countries to the Soviet Union to mark the 10th anniversary of the October Revolution. At a
Some Contemporary Problems
meeting they held before their departure from the Soviet Union, they decided, on the proposal of Henri Barbusse and Klara Zetkin, to organise in every country friendship societies to defend the USSR from hostile attacks.
In France, an "Association of Friends of the Soviet Union" was set up in January 1928 in place of the "New Russia Circle". A year later, it already had 25,000 members, and by 1936, had become a major organisation with 70,000 members.
Fernand Grenier, an active member of the French Association, described the difficult conditions in which such friendship associations had to work. He recalls the early days when the Association Secretary's report on a visit to the USSR was interrupted with revolver shots by anarchists. He shows the atmosphere of slander and constant persecution by the reactionaries, and the Association's vigorous struggle against those who slandered the Soviet Union.l -. •
The friendship societies did a great deal for the struggle against anti-Sovietism, explaining the true nature of the socialist state and its role in the modern world.
When Hitler fascism came to power in Germany and the danger of war increased, the question of regarding Lenin's Communist Party as a revolutionary party which
~^^1^^ See, Fernand Grenier, Ce bonheur---la, Editions Sociales, Paris, 1974, pp. 130-31.
~^^1^^ Trenta anni di vita e lotte del PCI, Roma, 1951, p. 99.
29019*
291B. M. Leibzoil
countered the moves of the warmongers with a firm policy of peace became even more urgent. At that time, the Communists of all countries felt most poignantly the sentiment expressed by Georgi Dimitroft: "There is not, nor can there be any other, more certain criterion, than one's attitude toward the Soviet Union, in determining who is the friend and who the enemy of the cause of the working class and socialism . .." J
In the decade preceding the Second World War, not only those who looked toward socialism, but everyone who wanted to save the world from fascist barbarity and prevent war pinned their hopes on the struggle and successes of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The Indian newspaper Patriot wrote: "Nobody need be ashamed to acknowledge that when the Soviet Union was alone in the world, facing constant enemy attack, Communists the world over befriended it 'without evasions, unconditionally, openly and honestly'---sometimes not yet worrying over the rights and wrongs of a particular issue. A savant like Remain Holland, 'above the battle' in petty political matters, said in those days: 'Defence of the USSR or Death'.''^^2^^
While not being a Communist, Romain Rolland was, to quote A. V. Lunacharsky, "noble and wise enough to see the USSR
~^^1^^ Georgi Dimitroft, The United Front. The Struggle Against Fascism and War, Lawrence & Wishart, London, 1938, p. 279.
~^^2^^ Patriot (New Delhi), 2 August 1977.
292Some Contemporary Problems
and the Party that led it as mankind's vanguard". ' He had a good grasp of the contradictions that could arise between the Soviet Union's realistic foreign policy and the illusions of some ``revolutionaries''.
In face of the looming war, the Soviet Union was actively looking for possible alliances and aimed at a rapprochement with those capitalist countries which could have been expected to oppose the aggressor. In the spring of 1935, the Soviet Union and France signed a treaty of mutual assistance. That move was misunderstood in some pseudo-revolutionary circles, which believed that a socialist country should not sign such treaties with capitalist states.
One doubting student sent a letter about this to Romain Rolland. The writer answered that it was very dangerous to neglect revolutionary expediency in the name of an abstract, romantically interpreted moral ideal. He wrote: "The Soviet Union is facing and will yet have to face even more complicated moral issues. Whenever a proletarian revolution is crushed---in China---in Germany--- in Austria---in Spain---(whose turn next?)--- we hear the unfortunates complaining that the Soviet Union does not declare war on the whole world to save them. These are romantic dreams, which cannot result in anything but disaster. The USSR's duty to it-
~^^1^^ A. V. Lunacharsky, Collected Works, Vol., 5, 1965, p. 531 (in Russian).
293B. M. Leibzon
self and to the whole world is to be impregnable so as to ensure the victory of its cause (which is also our cause). The hour will come: it is drawing close. But one must have the courage not to compromise the USSR by precipitating that hour before its due time." ^^1^^
In these few lines, the writer went to the root of the problem connected with the relations between the CPSU and the fraternal Communist Parties.
In their policy-making documents and statements, the Communists of different countries have repeatedly emphasised that defence of the Soviet Union and the socialist community countries has been and remains the major task of all the Communist Parties. In defending socialism, the Communists are defending themselves, the cause which they champion. Moreover, as Miklos Ovari, CC Secretary of the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party, said at the international theoretical conference in Sofia: "It is difficult for the socialist countries alone to paralyse the influence of bourgeois propaganda on the masses, to disperse the haze of slander hiding the truth of socialist reality. That is why co-- operation is so necessary among all fraternal Parties---of the socialist world community and in countries with a different system. Such co-operation would extend socialism's range of influence and help people throughout the
~^^1^^ Quoted in: T. Motylyova, Remain Rolland, Khudozhestvennaya Literature Publishers, Moscow, 1969, p. 325 (in Russian).
294Some Contemporary Problems
world know much more about the socialist countries. This, in our view, would not only be in the interests of the socialist countries, it would also, and above all, serve to deepen the world revolutionary process." '
So, the defence of the socialist countries is not only the Communists' international duty, but also their national task, for the objective position of the socialist countries makes them the bulwark of world peace, the force on which all progressive anti-capitalist movements can rely. Lenin wrote even before the October Revolution that in its foreign policy the proletariat should aim at an "alliance with the revolutionaries of the advanced countries and with all the oppressed nations against all and any imperialists".2 The young Soviet state adopted that as the basic principle of its foreign policy and has consistently followed that principle throughout its whole history.
Considering that it is in the Soviet Union's state interests to ensure the country's security and strengthen it as the bulwark of all revolutionary forces, such foreign policy meets the interests of all the Marxist-Leninist Communist Parties. This is graphically reflected in the documents of international communist meetings. Thus, the Main Document of the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1969 says that the
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, March 1979.
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected: Works, Vol. 25, 1974, p. 87.
295;
B. M. Leibzon
world socialist system is the decisive force in the anti-imperialist struggle. "Each liberation struggle receives indispensable aid from the world socialist system, above all, from the Soviet Union." r
This is not to say, however, that no contradictions can arise between concrete steps taken by the diplomacy of the socialist countries and the current interests of some Party operating in a capitalist country. But these contradictions cannot be such as to worsen the relations between the Parties of the socialist countries and the fraternal Party working under capitalism.
When the Soviet Union signed its treaty with France in May 1934, that did not mean that the FCP had to change its attitude to the imperialist French government, on whose behalf the treaty was signed by such a reactionary as Pierre Laval. The signing of the treaty, justified in the light of the task:' of Soviet foreign policy, did not hinder the Communist International or the French Communist Party in any way.
'
A few months later, the Seventh Congress of the Comintern examined the relationship between the foreign policy of a Party in power and the foreign policy positions of Communist Parties fighting under capitalism.
The Soviet Union's entry into the League
Some Contemporary Problems
of Nations following the withdrawal of two aggressive states, Japan and Germany, and its rapprochement with France, Czechoslovakia and some of the smaller capitalist states whose independence was threatenend by fascist Germany caused perplexity among some Communists in the capitalist countries. Anticommunism stepped up its attacks, specially against the Communist Parties of France and Czechoslovakia, alleging that their fight against the national bourgeoisie clashed with Soviet foreign policy. At the same time the anti-communist forces tried to present any steps taken by the Communist Parties in the capitalist countries as meant to suit Moscow. In 1935, when the FCP, seeking to establish a broad anti-fascist front, followed a truly patriotic policy and agreed not to include nationalisation of industry into the programme of the Popular Front, one of the French Socialist leaders, Paul Faure, declared that the Communist Party was sacrificing the French proletariat's revolutionary interests to the national interests of distant Russia. In that situation, some Communists began to think that the signing of mutual assistance treaties between the USSR and some capitalist countries meant a renunciation of the line for an eventual revolution in Europe.
In his report on the fight against war and fascism at the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, Palmiro Togliatti (Ercoli) said that all the Communist Parties, especially the Parties of those countries with which the USSR
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Corkers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, p. 21,
-
: :
296:
297B. M. Leibzon
had signed treaties, showed a high level of maturity: "They have understood that as far as they were concerned it was important not only to understand and approve an act emphasising the peace policy of the Soviet Union but that it was essential to determine their own political line, taking account of the situation in which they are placed, a situation which is profoundly different from that of the Bolshevik Party and working class in the USSR.''^^1^^
For the Communists, it went without saying that the aims of the Soviet Union's peace policy and those of the Communist Parties of the capitalist countries were identical. Togliatti said: "But this identity of aim by no means signifies that at every given moment there must be complete coincidence in all acts and on all questions between the tactics of the proletariat and Communist Parties that are still struggling for power and the concrete tactical measures of the Soviet proletariat and the CPSU which already have power in their hands in the Soviet Union.''~^^2^^
It is not easy to determine one's own political line, especially when it should have its specific features. At the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, examples were cited when the policies of Parties fighting for a common cause but in different conditions did not coincide
Some Contemporary Problems
(like those of the working class of an oppressor nation and the working class of the oppressed nation on the issue of the self-- determination of nations). There have been even more complicated dilemmas in history. When in 1939 the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany signed a non-aggression treaty, which played an important role in breaking the common front that the imperialists were cobbling together against the USSR and which helped to postpone the fascist attack against it, there was at first some confusion in a number of Communist Parties, and some of these were unable to determine their own political line.
With the defeat of fascism and the formation of new socialist states, socialist foreign policy came to play a vastly more important role. Naturally, questions of the foreign policy followed by the Communist Parties of the socialist countries have increasingly come to the fore in their mutual relations with the fraternal Parties of the capitalist countries. Politically more mature and with a wealth of experience, the Marxist-Leninist Parties realise that the policy of peaceful coexistence is of vital importance for peace in the world and creates favourable conditions for the development of the world revolutionary process.
The Communists resolutely rebuffed the loud provocative accusations made by leftists of every stripe, who alleged that the Soviet Union had abandoned internationalism and at the end of the Second World War missed the
~^^1^^ Seventh World Congress of the Communist International, p. 67.
~^^2^^ Ibid.
398 299 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.dat/en/1981/USI375/20091115/375.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2010.01.22) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ bottom __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+B. M. Leibzon
opportunity to have Soviet tanks carry socialism to all the European countries. At the time of France's "dirty war" in Algeria, the leftists urged the Soviet Union to use the atomic bomb so as to ensure the Algerian people's freedom. At the time of the US aggression in Vietnam, the Soviet Union was also accused of failing to drop the atomic bomb on the USA.
The nature of this pseudo-radical and, in effect, provocative stand is obvious. The Communist Parties highly appreciate the vast assistance given by the Soviet Union and the whole socialist community to the peoples fighting for freedom, and their real contribution to the victory of the peoples of Algeria, Vietnam, Laos, Angola, Ethiopia, South Yemen, and other countries. Luis Corvalan noted the importance of the constant support given by world socialism to all the progressive forces fighting under dictatorial regimes. One of the speakers at the CC plenary meeting of the Communist Party of Chile said that the prestige of the Soviet Union and other socialist countries among the Chilean prisoners of various political trends had increased. "Radio Moscow's information on solidarity compaigns has made a special contribution towards this. All the prisoners and ...the people in general have great appreciation for it." Another speaker said: "Let's imagine for a moment how much more difficult our struggle would have been if Radio Moscow did not exist. The USS.R has put in-
300Some Contemporary Problems
to the hands of our people a powerful and long-range weapon.''~^^1^^
Here is what Jaime Barrios, representative of the Communist Party of El Salvador, said about the militant international support given by the socialist community countries to all revolutionary and progressive movement: "We are well aware of the efforts and sacrifice involved in the concrete and diverse support which the socialist countries, the Soviet Union in the first place, have been giving other peoples. They give up a share of their welfare in favour of the peoples and states fighting for liberation.''~^^2^^
Imperialism cannot reconcile itself with such international solidarity. Leonid Brezhnev said at the 25th Congress of the CPSU: "Some bourgeois leaders affect surprise and raise a howl over the solidarity of Soviet Communists, the Soviet people, with the struggle of other peoples for freedom and progress. This is either outright naivety or more likely a deliberate befuddling of minds .... No one should expect that because of the detente Communists will reconcile themselves with capitalist exploitation or that monopolists will become followers of the revolution.''~^^3^^
Such support is a permanent factor in
~^^1^^ El Plena de agosto de 1977 del Comite Central del Partido Commnnista de Chile, pp. 105, 121.
~^^2^^ World Marxist Review, April 1979.
~^^3^^ Document^ and Resolutions. 25th Congress of the CPSU, p. 39.
3016. M. Leibzon
world development, a manifestation of the internationalist substance of the socialist states' foreign policy. The bourgeoisie presents their internationalist assistance to the peoples fighting for liberation as expansionism, as an urge to widen their sphere of influence. By ignoring the class substance of such assistance and its internationalist motives, the anticommunists seek to equate imperialist penetration and fraternal solidarity. In the past, the basic contradiction---that between labour and capital---manifested itself only within the capitalist society. Now that the world has split into two social systems, it is also evident in the international sphere. Capitalist rulers have always vigorously denied the class nature of the basic antagonism of the exploitative society. Today, they have concentrated their ideological efforts in an attempt to obscure the class basis of international solidarity, to distort its substance.
The Maoists' self-seeking two-superpowers conception, which puts the socialist Soviet Union and the imperialist United States on an equal footing, suits the US expansionists very well, for this gives imperialist propaganda a much desired ally capable of misleading the inexperienced by its pseudo-- revolutionary ideology.
The anti-communist forces, deliberately diverting attention from the class nature of international phenomena, seek to exert an influence on the working-class movement as well, in an effort to spread confusion over the
Some Contemporary Problem^
fact that the socialist countries help peoples fighting for their liberation.
Welcoming such assistance and condemning the imperialist actions, Gus Hall showed that it was false to use the same criterion for internationalist assistance and imperialist intervention: "Two people can enter the same house with opposite intentions---one to rob, the other to help. We applaud those who help, and condemn those whose intention it is to rob." i
Foreign policy has such a wide range, and the development of international relations calls for such flexibility that some of the steps taken by the socialist countries may not coincide with what the Communist Party of this or that capitalist country may want.
For instance, some Communists, especially those who have to work in complicated conditions, may feel that the USSR's attitude to the governments of their countries should be in accord with the way these governments treat the national Communist Parties. Or, for instance, the USSR was reproached for trading with countries where Communist Parties were being subjected to persecution. Such notions quite obviously reflect the oversimplified idea that, whatever the circumstances, all the Communists should have the same tactics because they have the same aims. The Soviet Union rejects co-operation with reactionary regimes like the Pinochet dictator-
Political Affairs, March 1979.
303B. M. Leibzon
ship in Chile and the racist government in South Africa, as a matter of principle. It broke relations with Israel and condemned those who occupied the Arab lands. But it does not make its relations with the governments of various countries dependent on how they treat the Communists and other democrats. What is more, the Soviet Union is not guided only by current events, but also by its anticipation of changes that could take place in the future.
The leftists charge that the socialist countries' trade with the capitalist countries helps the latter to overcome the difficulties stemming from the crisis. These charges are not new. At the Third Congress of the Comintern in 1921, some claimed that Soviet Russia's purchases of goods in Western Europe tended to slow down the advance of the crisis of imperialism all over the world.
That was the result of a distorted notion • about the ways the revolutionary process develops. No economic crisis of itself leads to revolution, unless the corresponding political prerequisites and the necessary level of organisation and activity of the masses are there. That is why the Soviet state's purchases of goods abroad or a refusal to make such purchases could not have a direct impact on the advance of the revolutionary struggle in the capitalist countries. Trade with the capitalist world might have been presented as proof of the collapse of communism, Lenin said, "only if we had promised, with the forc-
Some Contemporary Problems
es of Russia alone, to transform the whole world, or had dreamed of doing so. However, we have never harboured such crazy ideas.''^^1^^
Some still assert that the socialist countries should, for the sake of international workingclass solidarity, boycott capitalist multinational companies and generally refuse to extend their economic ties with the capitalist world. Georges Seguy, General Secretary of the General Confederation of Labour (France), says: "That would be absurd, for it would imply that the socialist countries should abandon the idea of economic, technical and scientific co-operation with the capitalist countries. That would be contrary to the ideas of peaceful coexistence, co-operation between states with different social systems, and for that reason would amount to a renunciation of the evolution, the progress of the international detente.''~^^2^^
Would that accord with the interests of international working-class solidarity? It would not. On the contrary, it would weaken the revolutionary forces, because peaceful coexistence and detente help to multiply them, whereas the stepping up of tensions helps the forces of reaction.
The socialist countries cannot build their relations with the capitalist countries depending on the stand of the Communist Party in
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 31, p. 414.
~^^2^^ George Seguy, Lettre precede d'une interview de Georges Seguy par Philippe Dominique, Editions Stock, Paris, 1975, p. 181.
30420-01267
305B. M. Leibzon
this or that country. What would he left of peaceful coexistence, if the socialist countries' foreign policy with respect to, say, France was determined by the current requirements of the French Communists' struggle, their policy with respect to the United States, by the stand of the US Communists fighting against their monopoly capital, etc.? It is wrong to apply peaceful coexistence between states with different social systems to relations between antagonistic classes within capitalist countries, where there can be no peaceful coexistence at all. But it is equally erroneous to transfer the relations between classes on a national basis to the international arena, where the class struggle proceeds in other forms, above all, in tlie form of peaceful coexistence.
The demand that a socialist state's foreign policy steps should be made contingent on the requirements of the Communists in this or "that capitalist country would, in effect, amount to interference in the internal affairs of the Communist Parties of the socialist countries. The USSR's foreign policy cannot be determined in Paris, Rome, or Tokyo. Another thing to remember is that the stand taken by the Communist Parties in the capitalist countries on concrete foreign policy issues is not always identical. Thus for a long time the Italian and French Communist Parties took a different view of the European Parliament. The Communist Parties of all the countries within the Common Market do not
Some Contemporary Problem^
always take the same stand with respect to that body.
That is not surprising at all, because the standpoints of the Communist Parties, the true champions of their peoples' national interests, may not coincide on various problems, so that it is not right to insist that the wide range of standpoints should automatically be reflected in the foreign policy of the socialist states.
The forces of world reaction have been carrying on a strident propaganda campaign in an effort to cover up their aggressive aims and to present the Soviet Union as a country with aggressive intentions, and have been making loud noises about some Soviet threat. Hence the attempts to put on the NATO and the Warsaw Treaty countries equal blame for the arms race. A truly internationalist class analysis of this acute issue was given by Maurice Thorez and Palmiro Togliatti. Their point of departure was that only the forces of imperialism can act as aggressor, so that the task of all the Communist Parties, both in the socialist and in the capitalist countries, is to bridle the aggressor and to defend peace. ' As for the Soviet Union's state interests, its supreme interest---to consolidate peace---is identical with those of all progressive mankind.
Whatever the specific features of the policy pursued by this or that Party, it must be based on a common principle, namely, the strug-
See, L'Unita, 27 February 1949.
30620*
307B. M. Leibzon
gle for peace, resolute rebuff to the aggressive forces of imperialism, active efforts to safeguard mankind from new devastating wars. If this principle is consistently adhered to, the natural differences in the condition of the Communist Parties in the socialist and the capitalist countries cannot produce any serious contradictions. When some misunderstanding of a Communist Party's stand on a concrete issue does arise, such `` contradictions'' can be easily eliminated through an exchange of opinion, through necessary contacts and bilateral meetings.
Alongside foreign policy problems, concrete questions of socialist construction tend to become ever more important in the relations between the Communist Parties of the capitalist and the socialist countries. For the Parties which are faced with the real prospect of involvement in running the country, the problems of socialism increasingly go beyond the bounds of mere propaganda, acquiring concrete form, calling for clear-cut answers concerning the measures which determine the country's future. It is quite natural therefore that there is a special interest in the practice of the countries where socialism has become a reality, together with a desire to learn lessons from the experience of socialist construction and to determine the ways of shaping a socialist society in line with their countries' specific features.
Each Communist Party has the right to criticise various aspects of the fraternal Parties'
308Some Contemporary Problems
activity. Todor Zhivkov said at the 1969 International Meeting: "It stands to reason that in examining our slips and giving advice designed to overcome them, those who earnestly wish to help us, should proceed from the fact that we are building a socialist society, not any other, and should take into account the real conditions in which this is being done." * Against the background of the sharp class contest on a world scale and the ceaseless anti-communist campaign aimed against the socialist countries, many Communist Parties quite rightly believe that if they were to start making public criticism of the activity of the Communists in the socialist countries, they would wittingly or unwittingly find themselves chorusing with the anti-- communists.
Let us recall that back in 1929 Romain Holland wrote to another writer urging him to take an objective view of what the Soviet people were doing in building a new society: "Let us help them, as much as we can! And above all let us not do anything that could harm them! At any rate, see to it that by some imprudent words or writings you do not furnish weapons to the reactionary canaille, who does not shun any means for his murderous purposes!''~^^2^^
^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, p. 300.
~^^2^^ La Pensee, June 1972, p. 109.
309B. M. Leibzon
Although since then the Soviet Union has become a mighty power and socialism in the world is no longer represented by one country but by many countries, everyone who sincerely wants to see the new society replace capitalism makes a point of being circumspect so as not to provide weapons for the reactionary camp by means of careless statements or writings.
Socialism, based on social property in the means of production, on democracy, which is fundamentally distinct from bourgeois democracy, and which has a number of other key distinctions, is not at all a society that is indifferent to the national traditions or the historical setting in which the transition to socialism is effected. All countries will reach socialism, Lenin said, but each will travel its own way.
The claims of bourgeois propaganda that in all the countries of Eastern Europe socialism is cut according to the same pattern is designed to conceal the diverse differences in the development of this society, which constantly develops, seeks new ways and perfects itself. The unbiased observer will easily see the salient outward distinctions in the socialist way of life in the various states that have put an end to capitalism. It is theoretically wellgrounded and policially justified that the Communist Parties in the various countries seek their own roads to socialism, and depict their people's socialist future in the light of its own specific features and traditions.
Some Contemporary Problems
In view of the attempts to contrast an abstract picture of socialism with what has already been achieved by socialism, B. N. Po^ nomaryov wrote: "Our Party has never considered that existing socialism has already scaled all the heights of our social ideal, otherwise there would be no reason for us to put forward a programme of transition to communism. So criticism of existing socialism from an abstract standpoint is unwarranted." * But criticism of existing socialism from the standpoint of a socialism that is yet to come could produce doubts about the justice of the socialist system generally, because such criticism must of necessity be speculative, starting from an abstract moral ideal, and containing no guarantees at all that such an ideal will actually be translated into practice.
Many Communist Parties quite rightly believe that the enemies of socialism are always quick to make use of any public criticism of this progressive system. Chairman of the Communist Party of Finland Aarne Saarinen, for instance, believes that if there is good ground for criticism it can be expressed in a constructive spirit at bilateral and multilateral meetings. "I do not believe that public criticism even serves the interests of those who make it.''~^^2^^
Nevertheless, such criticisms are being made and are dictated by the most diverse con-
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, July 1977.
~^^2^^ Pravda, 18 August 1977.
310B. M. Leibzon
siderations, frequently including the readiness to sacrifice common and long-term interests to political advantage that could be gained from parading as an independent critic of existing socialism, a person of unusual breadth of vision who does not recognise any limitations.
But if such criticism of existing socialism springs from a sincere desire to correct its shortcomings, even such criticism must take into account the form in which it can truly do good instead of harm. While encouraging the development of criticism in the Party in every way, Lenin also urged the need for every critic to "see to it that the form of his criticism takes account of the position of the Party, surrounded as it is by a ring of enemies".~^^4^^
If this applies to inner-Party criticism, there is all the more reason for the Communist Parties of the capitalist countries to take into account the sustained hostile campaign being carried on by the bourgeoisie against the countries where socialism has won out.
Lenin's idea about the approach to take in assessing developments in socialist countries remains fully meaningful today. Addressing the Eighth Party Congress in March 1919, Lenin noted that foreign comrades were coming to Soviet Russia to find out about the forms of the socialist system, and added: "It
Some Contemporary Problems
would be absurd to set up our revolution as the ideal for all countries." But he believed that it was necessary for Soviet Communists to act "in such a way as to prove to our comrades from abroad that we are strong, to enable them to see that in our revolution we are not in the least exceeding the bounds of reality". >
The socialism which has been built in the Soviet Union arose in the light of the realities and with the use of the opportunities which were available. Such a criterion in assessing the Party's activity is always objective, because it does not start from that which someone would like to see but from that which it is necessary to do in this or that set of concrete conditions. If a critic's opinion is to be well-justified, he should imagine himself acting in place of the person he is criticising, and that is an important guarantee against hasty conclusions and inadequate objectiveness.
In the early 1920s, Lenin criticised the socalled ``left'' Communists abroad, who wanted to reproduce every aspect of Bolshevik policy. In this context, he wrote: "The `Left' Communists have a great deal to say in praise of us Bolsheviks. One sometimes feels like telling them to praise us less and to try to get a better knowledge of the Bolsheviks' tactics.''~^^2^^
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, 1974, pp. 191-92.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32. p. 243.
~^^2^^ Ibid., Vol. 31, p. 59.
312 313B. M. Leibzon
At an international theoretical conference in Sofia, delegates from the Marxist-Leninist Parties of the socialist countries said that their Parties did not want anyone to issue uncritical apologetics of socialist reality. The superiority of the socialist system over the capitalist system does not consist in socialist society being totally free of problems or shortcomings, but in the fact that it is capable of coping with the new problems that arise in the course of its development, and that it is capable of correcting the mistakes which are virtually inevitable in the process of development. ' What is required is the truth. Existing socialism should be presented just the way it is, with an understanding of its historical and concrete achievements, treating its outstanding problems with courage and realism, and speaking with confidence and optimism about the prospects for its further development and improvement.~^^2^^
Socialist construction is such a complicated and multifaceted process that anyone who risks commenting on it from the sidelines may find himself in a false situation.
Prominent leaders of the Communist Parties of capitalist countries have repeatedly declared that they do not consider themselves to be sufficiently competent to judge about each concrete step taken by the fraternal Par-
Some Contemporary Problems
ties acting in socialist conditions, but that they feel that their task is to give a correct assessment of the role of existing socialism in the modern world and of its influence on the development of the revolutionary process. If the Soviet Union and the other socialist community countries did nothing but defend peace and, by their very existence, create the objective conditions favouring the revolutionary struggle for progress, that alone would earn them profound respect and gratitude. But the Soviet Union's role is much broader and more diverse.
It is a highly instructive exercise to sum up even a part of the statements of this question by delegations which represented the fraternal Parties at the CPSU congresses held in the past decade. These statements show very well why the Parties value the CPSU's activity and what determines their attitude to it. First of all, their attitude to the CPSU is determined by the Soviet Union's role in the modern world. Rodney Arismendi said: "Many new facts in world development have shown that the USSR and the CPSU continue to be the main bulwark in the fight of the peoples for peace, independence, democracy and socialism.
``In saying this we do not underestimate the independence and patriotic character of each concrete revolution or deny the historical and political distinctiveness and independence of each Party. We only emphasise what has been created by history itself, what is of
315~^^1^^ See, World Marxist Review, March 1979.
~^^2^^ Ibid., April 1979.
314B. M. Leibzon
decisive importance for the present balance of world forces and is vital for the strategy of the three main revolutionary streams of modern times, and what is inseparable from proletarian internationalism." *
What history has itself created and what has now for many decades exerted such an influence on the course of mankind's development, tends to acquire even greater importance in present-day conditions. Gustav Husak, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, emphasised that the Soviet Union is "the most significant force in the struggle for peace and security on the Earth".~^^2^^
Gus Hall, General Secretary of the Communist Party, USA, said that each Congress of the CPSU was a unique landmark, an event of tremendous historical importance.~^^3^^
At the same time, other speakers considered not only that which reflected the objective position of the USSR as a socialist country in the world, but also the substance of the CPSU's subjective efforts and the line of its behaviour. They noted that the prospects for the USSR's continued socio-political development, its defence potential and the orientation of its foreign policy acquire a highly concrete practical importance for the development of the whole world historical process.
Some Contemporary Problems
Many speakers noted the importance of the congresses of the CPSU as a source of optimism and confidence for the progressive forces. Alvaro Cunhal declared: "We want you to know, comrades Soviet Communists, that you are greatly needed by the working class and working people in all countries. . . .
``The very existence of the Soviet Union, all your efforts to build the world's first communist society and your dedicated struggle for peace and security have the same effect on our Earth as that of solar rays." '
Characterising the importance of the 26lh CPSU Congress, Luis Corvalan, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Chile, has said: "This outstanding Congress has shown that there are forces capable of making life triumph over death and enabling man to solve the various and complex problems he now faces.''~^^2^^
Such statements should not be viewed only as purely emotional, as a mere expression of sentiment for the Soviet Union. The optimism which the CPSU's policy generates in the world revolutionary movement is based not only on confidence in the Soviet Union's might, but also on the conviction that its experience is meaningful, and that the CPSU is capable of making serious theoretical generalisations of the processes under way in the world.
~^^1^^ Our Friends Speak, p. 248.
~^^2^^ Ibid., p. 50.
^^3^^ Pravda, 28 February 1981.
~^^1^^ Our Friends Speak, pp. 206, 207.
~^^2^^ Pravda, 28 February 1981.
316 317i§. M. Leiibzoii
Experience becomes a force capable of spreading on the basis of theoretical comprehension when the particulars stemming from the specific features of the situation and the conditions do not obscure that part of the experience which is generally significant and universal.
The CPSU's broad approach to present-day phenomena is the most important reason why the conclusions of its 25th Congress have won such international recognition in the world communist movement. The CPSU pays close attention to the revolutionary experience of all the countries and to all the expressions of revolutionary thought. A spokesman for the Democratic Party of Guinea said: " Everything we have seen and heard at the Congress demonstrates your sense of historical responsibility towards progressive-minded humanity." >
This high sense of historical responsibility explains why the CPSU's decisions have a profoundly international basis and why, being the Party of one country, it takes a global view of the world and seeks to assist the progressive forces, to strengthen them, to consolidate their unity and international solidarity. Dominique Urbany, Chairman of the Communist Party of Luxemburg, said: "The work of your Party, which remains unswervingly true to the Marxist-Leninist principles of proletarian internationalism and revolutionary strug-
§ome Contemporary
gle for socialism, has always been and continues to be of decisive significance for strengthening the unity of the world communist movement." l
The delegates of many Communist Parties emphasised that the importance of the CPSU's congresses for the international communist movement is determined by the Soviet Union's objective role as a mighty revolutionary force in the modern world; by the CPSU's revolutionary policy, especially its policy of peace; by the profound and well-grounded optimism of the whole of the CPSU's political activity; by the international importance of the CPSU's experience; by the depth and breadth of the theoretical thinking of Lenin's Party and its fidelity to revolutionary theory; and by the CPSU's internationalism and constant concern to strengthen the international communist movement.
The Communists of the non-socialist world invariably feel that existing socialism is constantly present in all the important social and democratic acts in our day, in all the battles being carried on by the working people. Bourgeois attacks against socialism are aimed not only against the socialist countries, but against all the Communist Parties. It is true that he who turns his back on existing socialism, the bulwark of the world's revolutionary forces, abandons his own revolutionary ideals. Herbert Mies, Chairman of the German Com-
Oar Friends Speak, p. 305.
~^^1^^ Ibid., p. 169.
318 319B. M. Leibzon
munist Party, believes that there can be only one answer to the question of how the Communists in the non-socialist countries should regard attacks against existing socialism: "to look upon these attacks on existing socialism as a challenge and counter them hy convincingly showing the successes, importance, and significance of existing socialism. This, we believe, would be in the national and social interests of every nation." '
The Communist Parties of the non-- socialist world have to act in different conditions and to solve problems which largely differ from each other. Hence the prevalence of this or that aspect in their relations with the Parties of the socialist countries. For instance, a change in the status of the Communist Party of Finland led to the emergence of forms of relations with the CPSU which had earlier been inconceivable, and the experience of which could be more widely applied in the future. In' the cold war period, the Communist Party of Finland was under constant pressure from the forces of reaction, which sought to keep it in isolation, and to present it as an anti-national force. With the change in the international climate in the 1960s, the Communist Party's influence increased. What it said was heard not only in the trade unions and other mass organisations, but also in government. The development of friendly relations between the USSR and Finland and the
Some Contemporary Problems
growth of their mutual economic interest in each other led to the emergence of new forms of co-operation between the Communist Party of Finland and the CPSU, at first sight somewhat unusual relations between two Communist Parties, one of which was in power and the other fighting in a capitalist country.
The Communists of Finland are convinced that the economic and scientific co-operation with the Soviet Union not only fully meets the interests of their own people, helping to increase employment opportunities, but also has a favourable influence on the whole social atmosphere in the country. The fresh potentialities which appeared in the 1960s for the development of friendly relations between the USSR and Finland induced the CPF to formulate a number of important concrete proposals for the development of foreign trade, and economic, scientific and technical cooperation and cultural exchanges between the two countries.
These proposals were discussed among other matters in the course of bilateral meetings between delegations of the CPSU and the CPF. For instance, at talks held in February 1965, the Finnish Communists came out for the laying of oil and gas pipelines from the USSR, for the USSR's assistance in building an atomic electric power station and in the electrification of Finland's railways, for an extension of ties between twincities, and exchanges of workers' delegations.
At these negotiations, which became ever
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, March 1979.
32021-01267
321B. M. Leibzon
••:• ;`':•'• '• -. - :
•
more regular", they discussed the possibility »f using >iFinnish labour in construction and in timbering operations in the USSR, j Summing np-ih'e results of negotiations in 1972, the GPF ^delegation, referring to SovietFinnish'relations, said that "the CPSU has always taken a positive attitude to the initiatives of the Communist Party of Finland in extending these relations. The realisation of such initiatives has already produced considerable positive results meeting the interests of the working people of Finland." '
A. communique on a meeting held between delegations of the CPSU and the CPF in 1979 also -rioted the importance of economic co-- ope•ration and trade between the two countries, notably, the fact that "the CPF delegation expressed the wish that the Soviet side should ;Study the- possibility of realising some new steps in this sphere". It also noted the importance and "necessity of mutual action by the Communist Parties of the socialist counties and''the Communist Parties of the non•socialist part'of the world".^^2^^
.•Realisation of the proposals formulated by -the'Finnish Communists helps to enhance the Communist Party's authority and shows that the-Communists are capable of elaborating JBConomio problems on a state scale for the benefit of the working class and all the other working people, and expands the Communist
'"'* Quoted in: Voprosy istorii KPSS, September
1976. :
. , , '
'v.; 2• PraMa, 3 February 1979.
Some Contemporary Problems
Party's potentialities for exerting an influence on economic policy.
International questions are ever more important in relations between the CPSU and Communist Parties in the capitalist countries. A joint communique on the visit to the Soviet Union in October 1978 by Enrico Berlinguer, General Secretary of the Italian Communist Party, said: "During the meetings, an exchange of opinion was held on the prospects for the development of relations between the Soviet Union and Italy. The two Parties expressed the common view that the development of such relations in every sphere is highly important and meets the mutual interests of both countries and their peoples." '
With the growing prestige of the Communist Parties of the non-socialist world, and their potentialities for exerting an influence on the policy of their states, their relations with the ruling Parties of the socialist countries increasingly range over matters of foreign policy, economic co-operation, etc.
Relations between the Communist Parties---between those in power and those fighting under capitalism---are not rigid, for they develop and assume new forms with the growth of socialism and the development of the international communist movement as a mighty force of our day. But however the forms of relations between the Parties may change, they are always necessarily based on
~^^1^^ Pravda, 10 October 1978.
32221*
3236. M. Leibzon
fraternal solidarity, because, while having to act in different conditions, they are engaged in promoting their common international endeavour. This is a fundamental question which is dialectically connected with the skill to combine internationalist purity with genuine patriotism. Rodney Arismendi believes that "if in fact we abide by the principled positions of the Communist and Workers' Parties relative to the revolutionary, democratic, and national-liberation movements, of all the progressive currents of our epoch, we must measure the progress of our times with yardsticks springing from the close relationship established by the united, internationalist trends with all countries where socialist revolutions have triumphed, notably with the land of the Great October Revolution.
``For the same reason we believe that the theme of the attitude to the Soviet Union and other socialist countries is linked with an essential, fundamental and, at the same time, important strategic question affecting the destinies of the world---the development of the world socialist revolution and the downfall of imperialism." l
Some Contemporary Problems
acter: the common ideological and political orientation of the various Communist Parties, and their intolerance of right-opportunist and leftist departures from revolutionary theory and policy.
The history not only of the contemporary communist movement, but also of the earlier struggle of the working class testifies to the fact that such departures, even if they relate to individual and apparently particular matters, inevitably affect the sphere of the international relations between the Parties. Lenin said that in the past the disputes within the socialist movement "remained confined within purely national frameworks, reflecting... national features, and proceeding, as it were, on different planes".i He showed that opportunists in various countries were no longer simply an ideological trend within the framework of national phenomena. They were inwardly connected with each other, they learned from each other, and joined forces in attacking revolutionary Marxism.
Since then, the connection between processes under way in the ideological life of individual Parties with the ideological problems of the whole movement and with its unity has become even closer.
The Main Document of the 1969 International Meeting expressed the Parties' readiness, in accordance with the concrete situation, to "fight against Right- and Left-opportunist distortions of theory and policy, against revi-
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 5, p. 352.
3,35
For all the importance of the Communists' international unity, the matters which arise in connection with it are not at all self-- sufficient. They reflect problems of a broader char-
World Marxist Review, March 1979.
324B. M. Leibzon
sionism, dogmatism and Left-sectarian adventurism". ^^1^^
Marxism has never regarded the emergence of trends in the working-class movement that were alien to the interests of the working class merely as mistakes on the part of individuals or groups. Alien views reflect objective processes under way in social life, and are rooted in the social structure of society. With the great changes that have occurred in this structure in the capitalist countries, with the successes of some Communist Parties and the change in their status in society, with the temporary reverses suffered by other Communist Parties, and with the constantly growing pressure by the bourgeoisie on the communist movement, the objective ground for various mistakes is enlarged. This enhances the responsibility of the Communist Parties not to play ``host'' to alien ideas.
The emergence of different views in the communist movement always puts internationalism to the test. Overtly no one turns his back on solidarity; indeed, the need to strengthen it is constantly emphasised. In these conditions, special importance attaches to these words of Lenin's: "The thing is not to `proclaim' internationalism, but to be able to be an internationalist in deed, even when times are most trying.''~^^2^^
__ALPHA_LVL1__ IV. GROWING IMPORTANCE1. INTERNATIONALISM AND SOCIAL PROGRESS
2. INTERNATIONALISM
IN THE ANTI-IMPERIALIST
STRUGGLE
3. THE COMMUNISTS' HISTORICAL RESPONSIBILITY
~^^1^^ International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Moscow, 1969, p. 38.
~^^2^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 24, p. 82.
__NOTE__ LVL2 moved from here back to under LVL1The international communist movement has become an important factor in world development and its activity has had an ever greater impact on the course of history. Naturally, the movement's internal processes should also be regarded against a broader background of world events. The greater the influence of the communist movement, the closer its interconnection with world social development, for it expresses the basic interests of the whole of mankind.
The communist movement started out in the mid-19th century with barely 300-400 members, individuals or small groups of fellow-Communists from a number of European countries. Although the League of Communists at that time could not exert an active influence on world development, and its internal life was necessarily confined to its own ranks, the members of the first communist organisation tried to understand the laws of historical development so as to act in accordance with these laws.
Today, the communist movement encompasses more than 90 countries, and the number of Communist Parties is steadily increasing. Many of these have become ruling parties, and many others have turned into mass.ive and influential political forces. But even
329B. M. Leibzon
where these Parties are still small, their role in their own countries and on the international scene is determined not only by the results and extent of their own activity, but also by the influence and prestige of the world communist movement as a whole.
That is why the Communists' ability to keep pace with history and move in the direction of mankind's progressive development has now become so important for the movement and its perspectives. The activity of each Communist Party and the relations between them can be fruitful only within the mainstream of social progress.
Over the centuries and millenia, the ties and interdependence among the various peoples have deepened and become closer. The emergence of nations was not only marked by a consolidation of people speaking one and the same language, living on a definite territory, ajid united by their common economic, cultural and historical settings. It also entailed closer contacts between the peoples. That protracted process, as Marxism proved, was based on the development of the productive forces with their main element---people, entering into definite social relations. Progress makes it possible and necessary constantly to extend human contacts, whose beginnings lay in the simple bartering of products among primitive tribes, and which have now attained a high level of co-operation among many countries, including the exploration of outer space. Historical development quite naturally
Growing Importance of Internationalism
appears ultimately to be the ever closer drawing together and interconnection of once isolated peoples.
As the isolation of individual regions is ever more rapidly overcome, the historical process becomes world-wide, and this suggested to Marx the following conclusion: "World history did not always exist; history, as world history, is a result." '
Marxism itself emerged in the period of a great historical leap forward, in a period when the development of capitalism and the formation of bourgeois nations led to the unprecedented extension of ties among the peoples.
The authors of the Communist Manifesto wrote: "The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of nature's forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalisation of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground---what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labour?''~^^2^^
~^^1^^ Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977, p. 215.
~^^2^^ Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works, in three volumes, Vol. 1, 1977, p. 113.
331B. M. Leibzon
What once boggled the minds of Marx's contemporaries is now regarded as only the initial stages of our civilisation. The first railway appeared in 1825, with the locomotive's speed not exceeding 20 kilometres per hour. But it is the railways, together with steamnavigation and electric telegraphs that, according to Marx, served as the basis for the emergence of giant joint-stock companies: "They gave ... an impetus never before suspected to the concentration of capital and also to the accelerated and immensely enlarged cosmopolitan activity of loanable capital, thus embracing the whole world in a network of financial swindling and mutual indebtedness, the capitalistic form of `international' brotherhood." '
The epoch of imperialism led to a further concentration of capital and its export to every corner of the world, to a partition of the world among the strongest powers, the enslavement of whole peoples, and the solution of domestic and international problems facing the capitalists of the individual countries by means of wars and aggression. In that epoch, the antagonism between internationally united capital and the international working-class movement was brought into the forefront.^^2^^
The rupture of the weak link in the chain
Growing Importance of Internationalisnl
of imperialism in October 1917 ushered in a new epoch, the epoch of transition from capitalism to socialism, and marked the start of the world social revolution, which has already paved the way to socialism for many countries, and so also for new relations among nations. The formation of the two world social systems and their struggle are the content of the present epoch; they lay an imprint on all social phenomena.
Mankind is now going through a scientific and technical revolution that, in scale and consequences, cannot be in any way compared with the industrial revolution of early capitalism.
We now have industries which even the boldest imagination could not have conceived at that time. Our contemporaries take for granted the diverse materials created by chemical reactions, radio, electronics, automation, cybernetics, and many of the other things which were unknown to man only a few decades ago.
Technical progress requires ever more extensive socialisation of production. The concentration of capital and the social division of labour tend to spill over the national framework. Production is becoming increasingly international.
Although the process of unification with its ever extending ties between the nations has been in operation over a period of many centuries, under the current scientific and technical revolution the internationalisation
~^^1^^ Marx and Engels, Selected Correspondence, p. 298.
~^^2^^ See, V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 20, p. 401,
338 3336. M. Leibzoti
of economic life tends to become ever more rapid. High-speed railways, motor transport and jet aircraft have in a sense compressed the distances between the remotest points on the globe. It now takes a few hours to cover the distance which in the past required months of travel.
The concentration of capital and the socialisation of production under state-monopoly capitalism have already transcended the national framework. Regional economic groupings, like the European Economic Community, are taking shape. These groupings are a protective reaction on the part of imperialism to the historical changes that have taken place in the social reality of the world, and to the steady tilting of the balance of forces in favour of socialism.
Multinational corporations tend to play an ever greater role in the capitalist world today. The biggest of them are mighty economic empires, states within states, or states over and above states, as some Western sociologists call them, and which exert a direct influence on every aspect of national life in many countries.
To suit their own purposes, the multinationals move enterprises to new areas where labour is cheapest, export capital and repatriate profits, produce monetary upheavals, dislocate the economy, carry on the arms drive and provoke conflicts. In their efforts to control the maximum of Lebensraum, they meddle in the political affairs of countries, bribe
334Growing Importance of Internationalism
statesmen and remove unsuitable ones, stage political plots and coups. These multinationals are the mainspring behind many of the reactionary coups in African and Latin American countries.
As a rule, the multinationals refuse to recognise national trade unions, trample on trade-union freedoms, and promote the internationalisation of the bourgeoisie's class struggle.
In this way, the objective and historically progressive trend towards the internationalisation of production under capitalism reproduces the defects of this exploitive society on a more extensive scale. Capitalist integration does not lead to an evening out of the economic levels of states but, on the contrary, intensifies their uneven development, sharpening, instead of toning down, inter-imperialist contradictions, which assume new and broader forms.
The Communists regard the internationalisation of the productive forces as a historically progressive process, but they cannot support this process in its capitalist form. Following the 1905 Revolution, Lenin attacked those who were prepared to approve the Stolypin reform, a byproduct of the revolutionary mass struggle, a reform which paved the way for the development of capitalism in the presence of residual serfdom. Lenin wrote: "In his own, Junker fashion, Bismarck accomplished a progressive historical task, but he would be a fine `Marxist' indeed
335B. M. Leibzon
who, on such grounds, thought of justifying socialist support for Bismarck!''^^1^^
The antagonism between the international character of the contemporary productive forces and their private-capitalist use is aggravated, and this enlarges the objective grounds for the Communist Parties' struggle in solidarity against capitalism and enhances the importance of their democratic and socialist alternative in international development.
This struggle in solidarity is also promoted by the fact that the unprecedented growth of the productive forces, the results of the scientific and technical revolution, and the most acute social contradictions which defy solution under capitalism bring even more to the fore problems which cannot be solved within the national framework and require international co-operation on principles which rule out the habitual imperialist methods of the strong suppressing the weak and dependent.
The problem of war and peace, the need to avert mankind's nuclear annihilation, to save modern civilisation and to preserve life itself on this planet is the most burning and truly universal problem which affects one and all. People with the most diverse political attitudes and religious creeds, and even those who are prepared to oppose war not on the strength of any convictions but mere-
Growing Importance of Internationalism
ly out of a sense of self-preservation can rally together in the struggle for peace, for disarmament, for the survival of life.
The number of problems requiring an international approach has been steadily growing. Environmental protection is one problem which has acquired truly political significance and which cannot be tackled within the confines of individual countries, because it involves protection of the World Ocean and the World Atmosphere, and calls for mammoth measures on a global scale.
The fight against disease, hunger, illiteracy, and many other problems in the contemporary world should now be everyone's concern, because there is no sanctuary from them behind any kind of cordon sanitaire designed to safeguard the level of wellbeing attained in this or that country.
Another world-wide problem is the establishment of a new international economic order, demanded by the newly independent countries, which seek equitable economic ties with developed capitalist countries.
Many of these international problems were not there as such some two or three decades ago, but today they are not only in the forefront of the working people's international struggle but are increasingly reflected in international treaties between states with different social systems.
Let us note that the Joint Soviet-American Communique issued in connection with the signing of the Treaty on the Limitation of
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 105.
33622-01267
,337
B. M. Leibzon
Strategic Offensive Arms (SALT-2) says: "The two sides noted the importance of increasing international co-operation on such global issues as the promotion of world-wide economic development, the protection of the environment, and the peaceful use of space and the World Ocean.''
The Communist Parties have welcomed the extension of the requisites for mutually advantageous economic, scientific and technical co-operation, the convocation of an all-- European congress on environmental protection, and similar meetings on co-operation in transport, energy and other fields.
In our day, the problems of international politics, in all its aspects and manifestations, tend immensely to grow in importance. The struggle in the international arena between the two opposite social systems goes further to enhance the importance of foreign policy factors in the life of each nation. There is no place on the globe that is not directly affected by the state of the international situation, the successes and difficulties in the struggle for peace, for the elimination of hotbeds of international tension and armed conflicts. The revolutionary changes taking place in the world have an effect on international relations, and the changes in these relations, for their part, promote revolutionary changes.
It is not surprising, therefore, that foreign policy problems become increasingly important in the activity of all the Communist Parties. Not only the Parties which are in power
Growing Importance of Internationalism
and which determine the foreign policy of the socialist states, but also the Parties fighting under capitalism believe that their task is to formulate a clear-cut and consistent stand on all outstanding international issues, being guided by the principles of peaceful coexistence and the need to ensure the security of nations and brining them closer together. But their tasks are much broader than that. In our epoch, large masses of people---the public opinionhave much greater opportunities for exerting an influence on foreign policy, and here the Communist Parties have an especially big role to play. It is not demands, but organisation and action that yield success in any undertaking.
The internationalisation of mankind's political life promotes and makes especially necessary more vigorous international activity by the Communist Parties as the keynote of their struggle for social progress.
Important processes are under way in the internationalisation of mankind's spiritual life. Every piece of news is instantly transmitted to all the continents by radio, while television creates an eye-witness effect.
In the past, many peoples were unable to carry to other peoples the accomplishments of their spiritual culture, and these remained locked within the framework of individual civilisations, whereas today they are all developing towards an integral world culture.
Communist Party congresses give more attention to the fact that the contemporary world is increasingly bonded together by ele-
33822*
339B. M. Leibzon
ments of interdependence and mutual influence not only in the field of economics, research and development, medicine and information, but also culture, the arts and literature.
The international communist movement is striving to make use of consistently democratic and socialist elements in each national culture as a basis for creating "the international culture of democracy and of the world working-class movement".^^1^^
Lenin said that two trends within the capitalist society were a general law of capitalism: on the one hand, the establishment of national states, and on the other, "the development and growing frequency of international intercourse in every form, the break-down of national barriers, the creation of the international unity of capital, of economic life in general, of politics, of science, etc.".^^2^^
The second trend, which, according to Lenin, characterises mature capitalism on its way to becoming a socialist society is manifested decade after decade with ever greater force. "Already under capitalism," he wrote, "all economic, political and spiritual life is becoming more and more international. Socialism will make it completely international.''~^^3^^
Mankind develops within the framework of national states, though the process requires
Growing Importance of Internationalism
ever greater international efforts. This contradiction carries the exploitive society to sharp national conflicts, whereas under socialism it is easily resolved.
Victory over the bourgeoisie quite naturally leads to a flourishing of all nations which are able, in their new-found freedom, to display their spiritual potentialities more fully than ever before. But does it follow from this that progress, seen outside the narrow national framework, in the universal sense, can proceed only through the development and consolidation of the national? Those who make such an assumption say that the nation is the highest form of social substance and the determining factor of the world's communist future.
Marxists have always believed that it was dangerous and harmful to leap over stages of social development that have not yet outlived themselves. It would be all the more harmful to ignore the existence of nations, national separateness, and the fact that such separateness is the most viable reality which has historical roots and is not easy to overcome. But it is not the same thing to say that nations cannot be ignored, and to set them up as the basic factor of progress.
In the socialist community, progress does not result in the isolation of nations but in a deepening of their economic integration, exchanges of spiritual values, resulting in a line that would reduce the possibility of contradictions between general and national interests to a minimum.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 20, p. 24.
~^^2^^ Ibid., p. 27.
~^^3^^ Ibid., Vol. 19, p. 246.
340 341B. M. Leibzon
Growing Importance of Internationalism
with each other in presenting the darkest possible pictures about the future of our planet.
The international communist movement eschews pessimism. The Communists regard the objective internationalisation of social development as a process which springs from the growth of modern large-scale, high-- technology production, and as a basis for all the nations' drawing ever closer together. This objective process puts the duty on the forces consciously working for social progress to pursue a consistent internationalist policy and to have a clear view on mankind's perspective.
The Communists see the future world as a community of lasting peace, all-round co-- operation, and extensive exchanges of the boons of civilisation and culture. They refuse to take the pessimistic view adopted by bourgeois futurologists, and contrast this with their deepseated faith in mankind's social progress. The Communists' optimism does not stem from emotions, but from a scientifically grounded Marxist-Leninist programme for the transformation of society. The Communists counter the pessimistic predictions that modern civilisation leads to the annihilation of mankind with their moral ideas and concrete principles underlying the balanced use---despite all the difficulties that this entails---of the vast potentialities of the modern epoch for the benefit of mankind, for the all-round and humane development of the individual. The way to such a future runs through the strengthening of the international unity of all the for-ces
343Bourgeois historians and sociologists have produced the most diverse conceptions of historical progress, which they usually derive from the spiritual specifics of individual nations or, as some say, from the national spirit and even from racial specifics. This denial of general factors in the development of West and East, and the effort to contrast them with each other is extensively used to deny that the uniformities of social development are applicable to Asia, Africa and Latin America, to depict Marxism as a purely European doctrine and, moreover, to assert the need for "national Marxisms". The growing interdependence of countries also leaves its mark on the working-class movement, which it increasingly transforms into an international movement.
With the growing importance of global problems and the deepening of the general crisis of capitalism, bourgeois ideologists increasingly turn to the shape of things to come in contemporary society. No political leader in the capitalist world can now afford to ignore the future. There is more and more talk about ``universality'' and the "interdependence of the world", and even about the need for "a revolution of world solidarity", which is contrasted with the political, social revolution and is confined to a call on mankind to become aware of its global responsibility.
More and more bourgeois writers pretend that it is mankind (and not the capitalist system, which has been doomed by history) that has no prospects before it. Futurologists vie
343B. M. Leibzon
fighting for social progress. Capitalism, which "has become the most reactionary hindrance to human progress"^^1^^ is the chief barrier in the way of progress.
The future originates in the revolutionary process which is directed against capitalism.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 2. INTERNATIONALISMThe international communist movement is the only political force which manifests itself in all the three great streams of the contemporary revolutionary process: in the socialist countries, in the working-class struggle in the capitalist countries, and in the national liberation movement.
Each Party, concentrating on various immediate problems, both domestic and international, makes its own contribution to the common - anti-imperialist struggle, so enhancing and developing its international character.
The socialist countries, those within the socialist community, above all, are the decisive force in the anti-imperialist struggle. Their domestic and foreign policy is permeated with internationalism. Their consistent struggle for the preservation and consolidation of international peace and security is a truly internationalist struggle for peace, the main requisite for preserving life on earth, and also
Growing Importance of Internationalism
creates most favourable opportunities for developing the anti-imperialist movements.
The fraternal socialist countries' concerted foreign policy is aimed at checking the forces of war and reducing imperialism's potentialities for resolving its contradictions by force of arms. In a world where immensely more money is spent on armaments than on aid to the developing countries, a world where tremendous resources go into military spending instead of the satisfaction of the people's vital social needs, the socialist countries' action against the arms race is a constructive contribution to the solution of global problems.
The fraternal socialist countries' policy designed to extend their all-round ties with each other is also anti-imperialist and internationalist. The successful development of their economic integration meets the vital interests of their peoples, because they have common interests, the same social system, and practise effective mutual assistance.
The differences which once existed between the fraternal socialist countries in their economic development level are being steadily reduced. Through concerted efforts they have risen to a higher stage in putting through long-term plans for the international division of labour, the rational use of natural and energy resources, and joint capital investments in production.
Their concerted economic strategy, based on complete sovereignty and equality, is the very opposite of imperialist integration, with its
345V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 29, p. 517,
344B. M. Leibzon
oppression of the weak by the strong, the growing gap between the economic development levels of the various countries, and constant violations of their independence.
With the passage of time, the CMEA countries have a growing weight in the world economy. The non-socialist part of the world increasingly feels the impact of socialism not only as a socio-political system, but also as a united economic force. The CMEA countries' Statement on the 30th anniversary of their community says that for the first time in history the GMEA's activity "has embodied in practice a new type of international economic relations based on the principles of socialist internationalism, respect for state sovereignty, independence and national interests, non-interference in the internal affairs of countries, complete equality, mutual advantage, and comradely mutual assistance".^^1^^
The solid alliance of the ruling Communist and Workers' Parties provides the political basis for their co-operation. The summer friendly bilateral meeings between the leaders of fraternal Parties and the CPSU have become traditional. The exchanges of views on meaningful problems of world development and the international communist and workingclass movement, and on the further deepening of co-operation between the socialist countries help to formulate common position and develop international unity.
Growing Importance of Internationalism
The annual meetings of CC Secretaries of the Marxist-Leninist Parties of the socialist community countries have a big part to play in the co-ordination of activity in ideological work, in the exchange of information and experience in ideological education and the development of science and culture in the so-
i cialist countries.
i
The results of the joint efforts by the fra-
ternal socialist countries exert a growing influence on the international situation, eroding the positions of imperialism and facilitating the anti-imperialist struggle.
The working-class struggle in the capitalist countries is becoming ever more international. The growth of the supranational associations of capitalists and the specific means they use in fighting the working-class movement make it imperative for the working class to develop its own forms of defence and offensive to meet the new conditions. The workers have also been practising more widely the staging of strikes at enterprises controlled by the same monopoly but located in different countries, diverse acts of international solidarity, the holding of international protest rallies, etc. European trade unions seek to effect a common programme of action against the multinational monopolies and to co-ordinate the workers' struggle in the various countries against monopoly capital. Mass action for purposes which are common to the working people of different countries is being ever more frequently mounted in the capitalist world.
Pravda, 30 June 1979.
346 347B. M. Leibzon
Demands like wages, working conditions, social security, pensions, and the condition of migrant workers transcend national boundaries. In the struggle for the solution of all these problems the trade unions develop their co-operation and take joint action on the scale of Western Europe as a whole.
However, the working-class movement, which historically had its beginnings within the national framework, still labours under obvious difficulties in the struggle against capital that has acquired international mobility. In view of the intensification of integration processes within the European Economic Community and especially of the steps towards Europe's political unification, the Communist Parties of the capitalist countries in the region are confronted with a number of new problems calling for co-ordination of their policies on a broader international basis.
The emergence of a new multinational authority---the European Parliament---with broader powers and elected directly by the population of the EEC countries, produces many intricate theoretical and political problems for the European Communists, including the need to analyse the consequences of the changed situation and formulate the relevant tactics for joint action. Because the integration processes are no longer confined to the sphere of the economy and affect inter-state political relations, they will have an increasing effect on the activity of the Communist Parties. On the one hand, these processes appear to give the
Growing Importance of Internationalism
European Communists broader scope in fighting for democratic change leading to socialism and help the Parties to interact more closely. On the other, they also create conditions for the consolidation of the class enemy and for the pooling of its efforts in the fight against the working-class and democratic movements.
This contradictory situation does not give ground either for starry-eyed optimism or for down-in-the-mouth pessimism. It calls for a new approach to the questions that arise.
One of these is: "Can the working class in one West European country win power in the conditions of stepped-up economic integration and the existence of NATO?" The formation of the European Parliament and the extension of its prerogatives leave the impression that the only real prospect is for a simultaneous victory of the socialist revolution in all the West European countries.
Some Communists, too, say that it is increasingly probable that the socialist revolution will take place simultaneously.
But it is well known that neither the processes of integration nor the common class interests of the capitalists of different countries can eliminate the contradictions between the imperialist states or stop the operation of the law of the uneven development of capitalism. Lenin's theory of the possibility of socialism winning out in one country was based on the assumption that with the links of the imperialist chain having unequal durability, the breakthrough could occur in its weakest link.
349B. M. Leibzon
Orientation exclusively on a simultaneous revolution could suggest that success in revolutionary development would cease to depend on the weakest links in the capitalist chain and would come to depend on the strongest.
In present-day Europe, the revolutionary process has gone forward most actively in Italy, while capitalism in the Federal Republic of Germany appears to be most stable. Can one say in advance that it is the situation in the FRG that can and must determine the pace of the revolutionary process in the whole of Europe.
When the editors of the World Marxist Review were asked to give an opinion on whether the revolution would occur simultaneously or initially in one individual country, they asked a representative of one of the Communist Parties of Western Europe to give an answer. He said: "We are no fortune-tellers and cannot say in advance whether one West European country or several at the same time will embark on socialism. In the final analysis, this also depends on which external and internal forces are at work and on the scale of the revolutionary working-class movement and the anti-imperialist struggle.''^^1^^
He also emphasised the special importance attaching, in the changed conditions, to the strength and cohesion of the world communist movement on the basis of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, and its ca-
Growing Importance of Internationalism
pacity to exert the decisive influence on world development and to create favourable conditions for the advance of socialism.
The Communists do not turn their back on the idea of a Europe, but they will work for a Europe of the working people and not of the monopolies, a Europe of co-operation and progress based on genuine respect for each nation's rights, instead of renunciation by some European countries of their sovereignty and independence. They want to see a progressive and peaceful Europe advancing towards socialism. The struggle for such a Europe calls for broad mass movements developing within the national framework, whose success in growing to European proportions depends on their strength at home.
In the changed conditions, it is still true, as Lenin said, that agreement on revolutionary action in a number of countries "can be achieved only by the force of the example of serious revolutionary action, by launching such action and developing it".^^1^^
The greater the scope for joint action by several Parties, the greater the role of individual Parties, their impact on the masses, their organisational activity and the stronger their ties with all the Communist Parties.
A key feature of contemporary world development consists in the fact that alongside socialism and capitalism, which confront each
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, April 1974.
~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 21, p. 278.
351-S50
B. M. Leibzon
other, there are many developing countries, some of which have taken the capitalist way and others the socialist orientation, all of whom are joined in the common struggle for national independence, for overcoming the consequences of political enslavement and the continued neocolonial economic oppression.
The national liberation movement has already played a great historical role: it has broken up the age-old colonial system and dealt a heavy blow at imperialist domination. Most developing countries are tackling mainly national problems, and these can only be successfully solved through the anti-imperialist struggle.
But does the newly independent countries' anti-imperialist struggle become international?
The imperialist bourgeoisie hastened to depict the disintegration of the colonial system and the tempestuous awakening of national awareness among many peoples which had been "outside of history" as a development infused only with nationalism, and lacking any socio-class content. The present epoch, whose main content is transition from capitalism to socialism, was declared to be an "epoch of nationalism". However, the actual content of the existing reality will not change because of a change of label.
Although the working class, the natural vehicle of internationalism, is weak or non-- existent in many developing countries, the very logic of the anti-imperialist struggle tends to
352Growing Importance of Internationalism
awaken an interest in international solidarity and a need for it.
Not all the colonial countries provided the soil for the emergence of Communist Parties, but wherever such Parties took shape under the influence of the October Revolution, the Communists took an internationalist stand. Seeking to be in the front ranks of the national liberation struggle, they have consciously adopted the ideals of internationalism and carried them to the masses.
The internationalist assistance of the Communist Parties of the 'colonial powers had a considerable role to play in the formation of these Parties. The French Communists did a great deal- in promoting the emergence of Communist Parties in Algeria, Morocco, and Indochina. The Dutch Communists helped in the emergence of the Communist Party of Indonesia.
But internationalist ideas also penetrated into the ranks of those who were remote from the communist movement. The more far-1 sighted national liberation leaders gave internationalism its due.
In 1944, before India's independence, Jawaharlal Nehru wrote that he regarded his enslaved country in the light of nationalism, which he believed to be inevitable and natural for the fighters for national liberation. But that outstanding leader,-a man of broad htiri-i zpn, also realised, and welcomed the fact that alongside the rnatioiialist ideal "other ideals, more based on the ineluctable facts of today,
1/2 23-01267
3sft
B. M. Leibzon
have arisen, the international ideal and the proletarian ideal".^^1^^
This principle has to make its way through intricate obstacles produced by national divisions, tribal interests, racial prejudice and other dissension. Racism continues to be wielded by imperialism as an instrument for separating the peoples. It is used to keep the peoples of South Africa in submission and to justify the Zionist aggression against the Arab peoples. Racism has been adopted as a weapon by the Peking leaders. Henry Winston says that, when speaking of nations, nationalities and tribes in Africa, Asia and Latin America, the Maoists demagogically emphasise their racial, national and tribal features, in an effort to contrast the struggle for the preservation of original culture and traditions with the struggle for unity and solidarity against imperialism. "Leninism, however, seeks to advance the self-action and identity of each oppressed people, while recognising the dialectical relationship of each oppressed people and the solidarity of all oppressed peoples within the anti-imperialist struggle.''~^^2^^
The reactionary forces deliberately fan national antagonisms wherever they can. But •the anti-imperialist tener of the national lib-
Growing Importance of Internationalism
eration struggle is ever more pronounced and it is not surprising that the ideas of internationalism tend to emerge wherever this is a most consistent process. Jeremiah Mosotho, representative of the Communist Party of Lesotho, says that "the ideas of proletarian internationalism are becoming ever more widespread in the world today. The front-rank revolutionary forces of Asia and Africa are turning more and more to them." '
The national liberation movement in Angola shows very well how consistent and resolute anti-colonial struggle helps to extend the ground for the emergence and spread of internationalist ideas. The Angolan national movement was one of the first to emerge in Africa, and its formation was a highly intricate process. In the colonial period, the Angolan people were divided, and the isolation of vast regions from each other was conducive to the growth of tribal hostility, a factor the Portuguese colonialists skilfully used.
With the formation in the mid-1950s of the MPLA (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola), the people are increasingly united. The armed struggle against colonial domination, which began in 1961, helped to consolidate the people's unity. At the same time, the masses became increasingly aware of the importance of international solidarity in winning national independence. The Portuguese Communist Party largely promoted the emer-
~^^1^^ Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India, Meridian Books Ltd., London, 1951, p. 37.
~^^2^^ Henry Winston, Strategy for a Black Agenda. A Critique of New Theories of Liberation in the United States and Africa, International Publishers, New York, 1973, p. 117.
~^^1^^ World Marxist Review, September 1977.
35423«
3558. M. Leibzon
gence of internationalist awareness among the fighters for freedom in the colonies.
The MPLA's establishment of internationalist ties with the socialist countries had a big part to play. Step by step, the national-- revolutionary organisation became convinced of the importance of internationalist ideas and of the role the working, class has to play in history from its own experience in fighting against colonialism. Emerging victorious from the arduous struggle which lasted for 21 years, the MPLA transformed itself into a Party of Labour whose 'Rules put the duty on all its members to take a firm stand "in defence of the national interests, proletarian internationalism and solidarity with all the peoples and oppressed classes of the world fighting against- foreign domination and against the system of the exploitation of man by man''.
-Consistent national struggle led to the developnient of the national-revolutionary party into a vanguard party guided by Marxism-- Leninism. The national-liberation ideas, which did not become less important in the Party's activity rose to the level of internationalist ideas.
This process is also characteristic of other national liberation movements. The united political organisation of the National Front of the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen adopted internationalism by way of internationalist solidarity in the anti-imperialist struggle. It connects international unity with the struggle" for pan-Arab unity. Having, r been
356Growing Importance of Internationalism
transformed into the Yemeni Socialist Party, it put on its members the duty "actively to spread the best traditions of the Yemeni and Arab national liberation movement and the ideas of internationalism, and to combat any manifestations of nationalism, chauvinism, separatism, racism and Zionism''.
The victory of the democratic people's revolution in Afghanistan produced not only a growth of national self-consciousness, but also a sense of community with the liberation forces'world-wide struggle. The leaders of the iPeopie's Democratic Party declare their adherence to the ideas of proletarian internationalism in the struggle for national independence. The non-aligned movement has become tremendously important throughout the world. The struggle carried on by many participating countries is being increasingly filled with a militant anti-imperialist spirit, and this means that these countries' solidarity is also< bound to grow and that they will draw closer to the socialist countries.
The Sixth Conference of Heads of State and Government of the Non-Aligned Countries held in Havana in 1979 showed the failure of the imperialist and Maoist attempts to split the non-aligned movement and to tone down its anti-imperialist tenor. Expressing the views and feelings of the participants in the Conference, Fidel Castro said: "We are firmly anti-imperialist, anti-colonial, anti-- neocolonial, anti-racist, anti-Zionist and anti-fascist because these,^^1^^ principles are a part of our think-
357B. M. Leibzon
ing; they constitute the essence and origin of the movement of non-aligned countries and have formed its life and history ever since its founding. These principles are also very fresh in the life and history of the peoples we represent here.''~^^1^^
The struggle for a new international economic order, which is aimed against imperialism, for each people's right freely to dispose of its national resources, and for mutually advantageous cooperation is blazing the trail towards new relations among nations and, consequently, extends the ground for the spread of the ideas of internationalism.
The newly independent countries' urge to put an end to the monopoly of news by the imperialist news agencies with their misinformation, and the intention to set up and strengthen their own mass media will make it possible to disseminate more objective information about the life of all peoples and will promote" their closer relations.
For the time being, the national liberation movement is mainly developing under the sway of nationalist ideology. But as social tasks increasingly come to the fore, the ideas of internationalism will tend to spread more rapidly in these countries.
The Communists are working towards strengthening their international unity not for the purpose of fencing themselves off from the other anti-imperialist forces or for rang-
Growing Importance of Internationalism
^
ing themselves against these forces. On the contrary, they regard their unity as a condition for developing a broader anti-imperialist unity, including the Socialists, people of different religious creeds, women, the youth, and the peoples of the newly independent countries. The need for just such a unity springs from the profoundly international character of the anti-imperialist struggle.
__ALPHA_LVL2__ 3. THE COMMUNISTS'Political parties which have an understanding of the laws of social development and are convinced that their conceptions of mankind's future are scientifically grounded---as the Communist Parties are convinced---have a great historical responsibility.
Socialist ideals are not translated into reality of themselves; capitalism does not give way to socialism as winter to spring. The new social system has to be established by the struggle of the broad popular masses.
The Communists have never set themselves the goal of substituting their own activity for the mass movement, nor have they ever believed that victory is assured by the mere formulation of a correct theory and a correct policy. They always seek to- be the revolutionary ferment in all the progressive mass movements, to enlighten and organise them, and to help them unite in the general tide running towards socialism.
359New Times, No. 36, September 1979.
B. M. Leibzon
Today's world development makes the progressive forces' struggle within the national framework increasingly blend with the same struggle in other countries, so becoming international. The Communists work towards making this objective process consciously international.
Regardless of the numerical strength of the Communist Parties and the size of their country, they constantly feel that their national activity blends with'the international struggle and seek to help the working people become aware of this connection. Claude Renard, Deputy Chairman of the Communist Party of Belgium, writes: "From the moment a Communist Party begins to struggle on its national terrain to limit and crush the domination of the capitalist monopolies, because it harms the interests of the masses, it has a vital interest in including its own action in the social and political emancipation movement which ranges the peoples of the world against imperialism. That is how it simultaneously assumes national and international responsibilities.''^^1^^ .
The unity of the national and the international constitutes the substance of the historical responsibility undertaken by those who are fighting for the society of the future, which they conceive of as an international brotherhood of socialist nations.
Growing Importance of Internationalism
The Communist Parties, seeking to establish such a society, cannot but realise the importance for their struggle of strengthening fraternal relations with each other, and of observing, on the basis of equality and mutual respect, the rules for a just settlement of any contradictions that may arise between the Parties.
This is necessary not only for solving the immediate problems of the day, but also for confirming the people's faith in the justice and feasibility of the future internationalist system, which can only be established if its advocates resolutely adhere to internationalism.
Neglect of international solidarity not only hampers the current struggle and undermines its success in the future. A Party which closes in upon itself and relaxes its ties with the international communist movement, inevitably distorts its image. Frigyes Puja, a prominent Hungarian statesman, is quite right in saying: "Divisions in the movement tend to demoralise Communist Party members, narrow down their activity and reduce the attractive power of the Parties. The Communist Parties are at one with the international communist movement, and if the living ties between a Party and the rest of the movement are ruptured, this tends to erode the communist character of that Party." l
~^^1^^ Frigyes Puja, Unity and Discussion in the International Communist Movement, Moscow, 1970, p. 118 (in Russian).
~^^1^^ Le drapeau rouge, 26 February 1978, Supplement.
•'-••'
36024-01267
361B. M. Leibzon
Growing Importance ol Internationalism
make it more attractive for people in the nonsocialist world.
The steady improvement of the socialist system, the extension of its democratic basis, the perfection of the planning mechanism, the uprooting of bureaucratic practices and other negative phenomena that hamper man's fullest self-expression---all of this is not an exclusively internal affair of the socialist countries. It is also an expression of their international role and of their historical responsibility before the future of mankind.
The Communist Parties in the non-socialist world believe that their responsibility lies in putting forward well-grounded and realistic alternatives to the capitalist system against which they are fighting. They map out ways for revolutionary changes that could inspire the masses and stimulate their struggle. Today it is no longer enough to propose general strategic alternative to capitalism. It must now rest on concrete socio-economic programmes for solving the most vital problems facing the nations. Today there is more meaning than ever in these words of Marx's: "People! Make up your minds as to details, as well as to principles, before you come to power.''^^1^^
The Communist Parties seek to elaborate programmes which deal with the details that determine the life of the people and the possibility of overcoming the diseases that stifle
The Communist Parties of the socialist countries have a special responsibility. They become an ever more crucial force determining the lines of world social progress, and are a powerful barrier to all imperialist urges to resolve international contradictions by means of war, the arms race and escalation of fear. Being consistent advocates of peace and cooperation, among nations, the socialist countries openly proclaim their great historical responsibility to do everything to avert another world war.
At the same time, the socialist countries are consistent opponents of what the imperialists term the maintenance of the status quo in the world. This, in effect, means freezing mankind's social progress, perpetuating capitalism, and putting an end to the national liberation struggle and to the prospect of a better future for the working people. The socialist world makes no secret of its role as the material, political and moral bulwark of all the progressive forces and all the revolutionary movements in the world.
But the historical responsibility of the socialist countries' Communist Parties does not end there. In building the new society in the setting of a bitter international struggle between the two systems and in overcoming the legacy of the past in the minds of men and women and the inevitable difficulties and contradictions, the Communist Parties of the socialist countries seek more fully to display the advantages of the socialist system and to
~^^1^^ Karl Marx, Frederick Engels, Collected Works, Vol. 10, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1978, p. 578.
36224"
363B. M. Leibzon
them. Every aspect of labour relations, the problem of employment, workers' control, democratic programming, investment decisions, taxation, scientific and technical progress, education, public health, culture, information, sport, recreation and many other problems are thoroughly and soberly worked out by the Communists and become spheres of their struggle in parliaments, municipal councils and mass movements.
While the bourgeoisie has been spreading despair and disbelief, poisoning the minds of men and women with irrationality and mysticism, and distorting the actual processes of social development, the Communists believe that their national and international duty is to spread confidence among the fighting masses, strengthen their will and develop their consciousness by presenting a clear-cut perspective and providing sound organisation.
Today, the moral factor is ever more important in political struggle.
The communist ideology, as the October Revolution and the subsequent international experience show, is attractive not only because it indicates ways of solving the problems that agitate the minds of large popular masses, but also because of its moral purity.
In October 1917, the working class, leading all the other working people of Russia, ousted the corrupt and dishonest ruling classes of the old regime. The working class moral power and confidence in the justice of its cause played a great revolutionary role. The Bolsheviks
364Growing Importance of Internationalism ,
were great politicians because they built a state which, in contrast to the demoralised capitalist society, affirmed new moral principles, lofty ideals and a genuine urge for progress in the name of man and for his benefit.
The society built by the October Revolution towered over the world of capitalist injustice and moral corruption, attracting the hearts of all honest men.
Today, the capitalist world is in the throes of tremendous difficulties, and not only economic ones. Although the bourgeois press superstitiously prefers not to call what is now happening in the capitalist countries a crisis of the system, it cannot gloss over the concrete expressions of that crisis, especially in the sphere of political mores.
Hardly a week passes by without some major scandal erupting in this or that capitalist country. One after another, these scandals have involved the highest officials. Presidents and vice-presidents, prime ministers and ministers, senior civil servants compromised by corruption, tax dodging, financial machinations, graft, bribery and other unseemly acts have had to leave the political stage.
These are not casual episodes, but the tragedy of the whole of capitalist society, the whole of its system of moral principles. Moral degeneration, which is the result of socioeconomic degeneration, frequently : evokes acute reaction among the masses and sparks off spontaneous protests and anger. The action by young people which plunged many- Western
365B. M. Leibzon
Growing Importance of Internationalism
based on the conviction of the need for new social relations.
In municipal elections, Communists ever more frequently campaign under the slogan: "For an honest, efficient and democratic administration". In countries where corruption has penetrated every pore of municipal government, honesty is seen as an amazing novelty brought into municipal councils by the Communists.
It is quite natural that all kinds of corrupt officials, ensconced in various echelons of power in the exploitive society, fear the installation of an honest administration, an honest municipal council. That is why there are so many attempts on the part of the anti-- communists to compromise the Communists by means of various false charges. But the facts show that the Communist Parties have nowhere stained themselves by any dishonesty or self-seeking. From this it does not follow, of course, that everyone who disagrees with the Communists is a dishonest person.
Consequently, with the approach of largescale social changes, political struggle increasingly involves moral problems, and here anyone who refuses to reconcile himself with bribery, corruption and dishonesty in life and politics is a natural ally of the Communists. The Rules of many Communist Parties contain articles enjoining members to be models of moral purity, display concern for other people, combat self-seeking, and set high civic standards.
367countries in a feverish state in the late 1960s and which has frequently flared up since, was largely caused by their disillusionment with the moral values of the capitalist system. The growing attractive power of the revolutionary Parties displaying a refreshening concern for moral purity stands out against the dark background of a patent decline of morals in Western society. The bourgeois press has to acknowledge that morality has once again gradually become one of the prime revolutionary arguments, and that virtue has once again resumed all its subversive capacity.
The Marxists are well known to be opponents of moral and ethical conceptions which regard man's moral improvement as the prerequisite and imperative for social change. Lenin always attacked such notions, together with the attempts to derive the inevitability of socialism from moral principles, instead of the historical necessity which is determined by the whole of social development. But it was always Lenin's assumption that the revolutionaries' high morality alone could give them the moral right to lead the masses.
The Communists in the capitalist countries now point to the alarming social consequences of the extensive spread of crime, acts of violence, drug addiction and other phenomena which tend to erode the social fabric. Communist Party congresses are increasingly concerned with questions of morality. The Communists seek to shape a consciousness which rejects injustice and abuse, and which is
B. M. Leibzon
Patrice Lumumba, an outstanding leader of the liberation struggle in Africa who was savagely tortured to death by the mercenaries of imperialism, was not a Communist. But his enemies saw his total honesty as membership of the communist movement. Lumumba said: "They treated me as a Communist because I did not allow myself to be bribed.''^^1^^
The bourgeoisie has always feared the moral superiority of the working class, and for that reason has frequently resorted to the trick of ascribing its own vices to that class. In their Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels exposed the hypocrisy of the bourgeoisie, which sought to cover up its own immorality behind a screen of accusations against the Communists, such as "destroying the fanjily", "sharing wives", and all sort of other sins. To this day the reactionary bourgeoisie is spreading a host of fairy stories, old and new, in an effort to present the Communists as people without morality and honour, as fanatics who ignore all things human.
Of course, such inventions are blasted by life itself. Today, it is hard to make anyone believe the old primitive stereotypes which depicted the Communists as pirates with knives in their teeth and as "devourers of infants". Even reaction has to sing new songs in these new times. And so we find, made to order, numerous stories about the Commuists^^1^^ ``intolerance'' of democracy, about "vio-
~^^1^^ Patrice Lumumba, champion de la liberte africaine, Editions dn Progres, Moscou, 1964, p: 44,
368Growing Importance of Internationalism
lation of human rights" in countries where the Communists are in power, etc.
Being unable to halt the deepening crisis of morality in the capitalist society, its masters succumb to the temptation to substitute empty moralising for an acutal drive against immorality, and to distract attention from the actual social sores by means of invention about violations of morality and humaneness in the societies which are free from the sores of capitalism.
The US voter, who yearns for an honest administration, should of course be attracted by electoral promises of a drive against political dishonesty and violation of human rights, promises of a domestic and foreign policy based on moral principles. But it was, after all, Democritus who used to say that one should habituate oneself to good deeds instead of holding forth on virtue, and that is precisely what the leaders of the capitalist world are unable to do.
When senior officials in the United States shed tears over police repression and torture in many Latin American countries, these are crocodile tears, because it is the United States that has helped some of these countries to become one big torture chamber, with the torturers having been trained by US instructors in the most modern ways of humiliating* human dignity.
What have elementary morals in common with the arms race? Is it not obvious that an economic policy which ``freezes'' unemploy-
369B. M. Leibzon
Growing Importance of Internationalism
Goal", in the first issue of that paper on 18 April 1904, he wrote: "Just now, humanity does not yet exist, because one cannot call the chaos of hostile nations by that fine word. Even if peace does reign, life is shot through with the traces of yesterday's wars and alarm over tomorrow's wars. Within each nation there is an inevitable struggle between the capitalist oligarchy and the proletariat, and all countries are rent asunder by class antagonisms. Socialism alone can resolve all these internal and external contradictions in the life of man and create a general humanity." That is precisely why the French Communists' newspaper is designated by a word signifying the ultimate goal of the communist movement. The way to the ultimate goal runs through struggle, in which there is a clash not only of moral values but also of the interests of the contending forces. This lends the struggle for socialism various forms, ranging from the most acute, armed, to relatively peaceful ones, whose potentialities are extended as socialism and peace are consolidated in the world. But whatever forms the struggle for the new society may assume, the following words of Lenin's still ring true: "Complete victory over capitalism cannot be won unless the proletariat and, following it, the mass of working people in all countries and nations throughout the world voluntarily strive for alliance and unity.''^^1^^
ment at a level that suits capital, so deliberately inflicting a grave social trauma on millions of men and women, which cannot be eased by any benefits? Is it not obvious that such a policy is immoral?
Just because capitalist reality has always provided and continues to provide a plethora of facts for an indictment, so arousing alarm and protests, its political leaders ever more frequently strike the pose of champions of morality and uninvited tutors of countries which have broken with capitalism. It is an old saying that hypocrisy is a tribute which vice pays to virtue. In this case, hypocrisy is also used as a lightning-rod for the discontent of voters worried by the acute internal and foreign policy problems of capitalism.
Of course, hypocrisy is frequently not at all a character trait of this or that Western politician. It is a property of bourgeois morality as such, and it is most manifest in the presence of ever growing difficulties and acute situations. But hypocrisy is not a stable political product. Life rips off the masks and shatters the illusions, leaving the devotees of international demagogy less and less room for manoeuvre.
The goals towards which the international communist movement, inspired by the ideas of internationalism, is working are the supreme expression of genuine morality. At the beginning of this century, Jean Jaures explained why the French Socialists called their paper L'Humanite. In an editorial entitled "Our
370~^^1^^ V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol, 31, P- 151.
371 __ALPHA_LVL1__ ConclusionConclusion
tablishment of ``supranational'' European parties, like the European People's Party and the Federation of Liberal and Democratic Parties of the European Community. The architects of such associations make no secret of their aim to co-ordinate international policies, anti-communism in the first place. The neofascists have stepped up their attempts to unite their activity under the so-called Black International.
The Italian Communists believe that the closer relations between the West German CDU/CSU, the British Conservatives, the French ``moderates'' and the most conservative section of the Christian Democrats in Italy threaten with a growth of conservatism in the country.
The support which reaction gives to various leftist extremist trends also tends to become international. In an effort to depict terrorist groups as a type of communist movement and so to scare the population with the threat of communism, the intelligence services of many countries, and the CIA in the first place, organise provocations with the help of leftists, a policy which clearly betrays a master plan and a "division of labour''.
The internationalisation of political reaction is especially evident in the anti-communist campaigns which at once involve all the capitalist countries and which testify to concerted efforts.
The Communist Parties of all countries constantly feel the growing internationalisation of anti-- communism and the urge on* the part of the bourgeoisie to co-ordinate its strategy of suppressing the revolutionary forces on an international scale. The possibility for the Italian Communists' participation in government at once evoked a threatening warning
373Reaction regards the working people's unity and international solidarity as a threat to its domination. The great Chilean poet Pablo Neruda expressed this growing bourgeoisie's fear of internationalism in these striking colours: "How many people sing Internationale?. .. How strange this is ... How unfortunate ... They sing in different tongues, they sing in the Spanish language of Latin America ... Urgent measures must be taken ... This must be banned ... There is need to have more talk about lofty things... More frequently to sing paeans of praise for the free world ... Truncheons must be used more often ... Don't spare the dollars ..." * The struggle against those who "sing the Internationale" is one of the most acute manifestations of the social struggle in the contemporary world. The forces of reaction are increasingly internationalised with the growing might of socialism, the working-class and the national liberation movement, a process which is accelerated despite the contradictions between the capitalist countries. The imperialists find common ground and agree to use economic and financial instruments in order to exert their own influence on developments in countries which have taken the revolutionary road.
The urge to internationalise the policies directed against the liberation forces is expressed in the es-
~^^1^^ Pablo Neruda, Confieso qne he vivido. Memorias, Editorial Losada, S.A, Buenos Aires, 1974, p. 447,
372Conclusion
from the authorities in the United States and other NATO countries, which held out the prospect of economic and, possibly, other kinds of sanctions, should the Communists be included in the Italian government. Similar statements were made with respect to France.
In face of the more co-ordinated efforts by reaction, the working-class movement and its communist vanguard have only one well-tested weapon---their stronger international solidarity. Herbert Mies says: "We are sure that the development of internationalist proletarian solidarity is now more necessary then ever before, and not least importantly because the `international' of monopoly capital, despite the sharpening of contradictions within imperialism, is closing its ranks in the fight against its common enemy---the socialist countries, the national liberation movements, and the working class of the capitalist countries." '
There are many facts in history to show that many urgent problems in social development and objective -tasks facing mankind were not tackled because the progressive social forces were not quick enough to organise.
Today, it is impossible to carry on. a successful struggle against capitalism and for the triumph of the new system in isolation, within the framework of one's own Party. Each Communist Party is influenced by the successes and by the failures of other fraternal Parties and of the whole international communist movement. Each Party, relying on the new
~^^1^^ Conference of European Communist and Workers' Parties. Berlin, June 29-30, Moscow, 1976, p. 178 (in Russian).
Conclusion
balance of world forces, can make a contribution to further tilting this balance in favour of peace, democracy and socialism.
The new and ever more complex tasks in remaking people's life throughout the world tremendously multiply the historical responsibility---both national and international---of each Communist Party, of all the Communists of the world.
The imperialist reactionary forces have arrogated the right jointly to oppress the peoples, and are pooling their efforts to suppress their liberation struggle. They are extremely intolerant of any expressions of revolutionary solidarity, especially the unity of the international communist movement.
But anti-communism's gloating exaggeration of the difficulties faced by the international communist movement and its avowed hopes that the differences of opinion within this movement could become an insuperable contradiction always founder on the inner logic of the unity of those who have dedicated themselves to the straggle against imperialism.
The urge for unity is most forcefully expressed in the most crucial moments of history, when there is a need to tackle problems on which not only the present but also the future of the continents and of the world at large depends. The fraudulent and strident campaigns designed to scare people with some "Soviet threat" have developed into protracted psychological wars, whose purpose is to condition public opinion in the non-socialist countries to the prospect of accepting the far-reaching plans for another round of the arms race being imposed by the United States and NATO and intensifying the danger of a nuclear war. At this point, which is of truly historic im-
375 374Conclusion
portance for future development, the unity of the international communist movement as a force capable of resolutely resisting any sinister scheme threatening mankind is especially pronounced.
The Communist Parties have actively supported the initiatives put forward by the 26th CPSU Congress which has declared in no uncertain terms that safeguarding international peace is the condition for the very survival of humankind. The activity of the Communist Parties and their profound unity on the key issues of our day was forcefully displayed in the broad public campaign mounted against those who are about to start a new round of the arms race.
In response to China's aggression against socialist Vietnam, most of the Communist Parties at once took a clear-cut stand by condemning the aggressor and demanding the unconditional and complete withdrawal of its troops from the occupied territories.
Such expressions of unity at crucial moments of history show that the communist unity has deep roots, and this is promising requisite for the successful-settlement of all difficulties and the overcoming of all differences within the international communist movement.
The further strengthening of the unity of the international communist movement is an imperative of our day and a condition for the successful struggle of all the Communist Parties together and individually.
'= E
O)
B. M. LEIBZON Unity Solidarity, Internationalism
Professor Boris Leibzon of the Moscow Academy of Social Sciences is a leading Soviet authority on the international communist movement. In his current book he deals with a number of controversial issues, spanning in time from the Comintern to our day, and examines the past and present relations among the Communist Parties. He looks at the Comintern's record, at the emergence of new and prospective forms of international unity, and the difficulties these entail. He also considers the Comintern's attitude to the historical experience of the communist movement, the debates and criticism within its ranks, the relations between the Communist Parties in power and Western Communist Parties, and the problems of internationalism and world social progress.
The author does not shun sharp political issues. He discusses them in style displaying a tactful and constructive approach and advancing clear and well-substantiated arguments.
Boris Leibzon has written a number of books, among them Lenin's Teaching on the Party and the PresentDay Communist Movement, The Turning Point in the Comintern's Policy, and What the Revolutionary Spirit Is Today?. All these have been translated into foreign langu
eluding the English, iaroused interest outjfc Soviet Union, too.
[380]