13

[introduction.]

p Alois Indra — member of the Presidium of the Central Committee, Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, and Chairman of the Federal Assembly of the Republic  

p IN February 1948, our people made their decisive choice and embarked on the road of socialism. The 40th anniversary of that remarkable event is a good occasion to turn anew to Lenin’s theory of socialist revolution, to the idea of a democratic revolution evolving into a socialist one and to the way in which it was creatively applied in Czechoslovakia.

p Note should be made of the difficult circumstances in which the CPCz was working out the strategy and tactics that were to make the triumph of the new system possible. Czechoslovakia’lost independence in 1939 as a result of the betrayal of the national big bourgeoisie and the Western powers’ connivance with aggressive Hitler Nazism.

p What came to the fore at the time when Nazi occupation threatened the very existence of the Czech and Slovak peoples was the contradiction between fascism and our peoples, who were seeking national liberation 14 and the restoration of state independence. That was why the order of the day was not a socialist but a national democratic revolution under the leadership of the working class. It should be national because its aim was to wrench all political and economic power from the hands of the Nazi invaders, and democratic because it was to give power to the working people and was directed against the reactionary big bourgeoisie, who had betrayed national interests by collaborating with the invaders.

p The party leadership drew the right conclusion: at that time the goal of a ‘direct’ socialist revolution would have been premature as it would have resulted in the isolation of the working class from the non-proletarian classes and strata and its defeat. The goal of a gradual transition from a national democratic to a socialist revolution was realistic. Working out its strategy and tactics, the CPCz relied on Lenin’s doctrine and on the lesson of the battles waged by the proletariat in 1918-1920 (when workers spontaneously sought victory but leadership of the national democratic revolution was in the hands of the bourgeoisie, which circumstance was used by capital to consolidate its class supremacy).

p The correct appreciation of the character of the future revolution enabled the party to achieve the establishment of a broad national front of resistance to the invaders. That front united the working class, the peasantry, the middle strata and the anti-fascist, democratic bourgeoisie. The National Front of Czechs and Slovaks provided the political framework for that alliance. Through it the Communists and other parties rallied around a joint programme for the renewal of the liberated republic and its further development (the April 1945 Kosice Governmental Programme and the Development Programme approved in July 1946). The National Front was an embodiment of broad unity at that stage. Conditions were being created simultaneously for making it a ‘springboard’ to struggle for the triumph of socialism.

p It was the hegemony of the working class that contributed decisively to the victory of the national democratic revolution, which took the form of armed struggle at its first stage: the Slovak national uprising in August 1944 and the rebellion of the Czech people in May 1945. The working class had a vital interest in the consistent accomplishment of revolutionary goals and contributed to the immense growth of the prestige of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia. Another invaluable factor was the historic contribution of the Soviet Union to the defeat of Nazism worldwide and the Red Army’s mission of liberating Czechoslovakia. The Communists’ dedication and valour in the struggle against fascism and their role in the Resistance at home and abroad were forceful proof that the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia was a most consistent defender of national interests and that the reborn republic could not be governed without it. As for the right political parties of the big bourgeoisie, their ‘hurray-patriotism’ crumbled down in the face of Nazism and they themselves ultimately lost face.

p The main result of the national democratic revolution was the rebirth of the state independence of the Czech and Slovak peoples.

p There were differences of principle between the emergent people’s democracy and the pre-Munich bourgeois republic, namely, far-reaching political and economic transformations. Although parliamentary 15 democracy was retained, the machinery of the state was drastically overhauled. The backbone of power now was the national committees, which had been born of the national liberation struggle, and it was through them that the working people decided the affairs of state at the local level. The Communists, for the first time ever a ruling party, were represented at every level of state administration. Only those parties which had rallied around the programme of the National Front remained active. United public organisations, such as the trade unions and the youth union, in which the Communists had much influence, began to play a significant role in politics.

p The relationship between the Czechs and the Slovaks changed dramatically and became that of equals, while the bourgeois concept of ‘Czechoslovakism’, which denied the Slovak identity, had been abandoned.

p Although a part of the bourgeoisie still had a role in the administration of state affairs (they had much weight in the judiciary for example) and in politics, it was the working people of .town and countryside who had the decisive say.

p The sway of the big bourgeoisie was abolished through the confiscation of the property of the invaders and traitors, a revision of the 1919 agrarian reform and the nationalisation of mines, major industrial plants, banks and insurance companies. There took shape three sectors, the state (potentially socialist), the capitalist and the small commodity sector. The bourgeoisie nevertheless had strong positions in the economy.

p When the victory of the national democratic revolution had resolved the principal contradiction in the country, that between fascism and democracy, the antagonism between labour and capital, between the working class and the bourgeoisie began to emerge increasingly as the new basic contradiction.

p The forces of reaction put up resistance to the consistent introduction of the governmental programmes, which had been worked out and endorsed with their participation, and tried to reverse the national democratic revolution and to restore capitalism.

p But the Communist Party, openly.committed to the strategic goal of building socialism, concentrated its efforts on developing and extending the national democratic revolution. The Communist Party of Czechoslovakia combined the revolutionary democratic movement with the struggle for socialism and sought to make the national democratic revolution a prelude to a socialist revolution. The broad sections of the working people developed a revolutionary spirit in a series of clashes with the bourgeoisie and grew aware that only the new system could fully meet their needs and aspirations. That enabled us to formulate and put forward demands with an increasingly socialist content.

p The Communist Party oriented itself towards the peaceful growth of the national democratic revolution into socialist revolution. That option was kept open both by the hegemony of the working class in the national democratic revolution and by external circumstances, namely, by the existence of the Soviet Union with its economic and defence potentials, which prevented the imperialist forces from reversing the revolutionary 16 process. What was necessary in terms of domestic conditions to translate that historical opportunity into reality was to get most of the people to support the demand for socialism.

p A number of factors tended to contribute towards that goal. To begin with, in pursuit of its strategic and tactical objectives, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia used opportunities for the development of the revolution both from ‘above’ and from ’below’. In its efforts it relied on the Communists’ dedicated work in the midst of people that was conducted in extremely diverse forms with the overall goal of winning mass support for the party’s course. Party members sought to influence public mentality also through the united public organisations and through such institutions as factory councils and peasants’ commissions. That the Communists’ policy was correct and attractive to the mass of people was manifest in growing recruitment: the party had a truly mass base.

p Exposure of the perfidy of the leaders of those non-communist parties which did not respect the commitments which they had assumed voluntarily by approving the governmental programmes contributed substantially towards the swing of most of the working people to our side. Such leaders eventually grew isolated from the rank and file, who firmly supported the National Front.

p Good use was made of the Communists’ positions in Parliament, the government, ministries and national committees. Being the ruling party, the Communists articulated the demands that were long overdue and, sustaining the revolutionary spirit of the people ’from above’, worked for their implementation through the bodies of state power.

p The Communists viewed elections to representative bodies as a substantial means of increasing their influence on the working people. The CPCz became the strongest political party in Czechoslovakia and polled 38 per cent of the votes .in the 1946 elections to the Constituent National Assembly. When later on the reactionary forces began to pose ever greater difficulties in the National Front, Parliament and the government, the CPCz Central Committee set the task of winning the absolute majority in the next elections, scheduled for 1948, so as to secure for the Communists decisive influence in the National Front without excluding the other parties ’ from the exercise ,of state power.

p .’

p Characteristically, the ministers of the National Socialist, the Populist and the Slovak Democratic parties resigned from the government on February 20, 1948, not waiting for the people to express their will in the elections but wishing to provoke the fall of the Klement Gottwald government.

p The working people saw through the ministerial resignation intrigue. The reactionaries had in view the far-reaching goal of forming a government that would turn social development back towards capitalism. The people gave strong support to the Communist Party, which demanded that the resignations be accepted. The working people translated their support into practical actions, such as demonstrations, a one-hour general strike and the establishment of action committees of the National Front to purge reactionaries from individual bodies and organisations, and also the formation of a people’s militia as an armed force of the working class. The 17 bourgeois political leader. President Edvard Benes. could not help bowing to the united will of the people: on February 25, 1948 he accepted the ministerial resignations and on Gottwal.d’s proposal appointed new government members from among the representatives of the revived National Front, which now included the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement.

p There was one more noteworthy factor: the crisis was settled in accordance with the then effective bourgeois constitutional provision of 1920. Gottwald presented the governmental programme to Parliament and 230^^1^^ deputies supported it, thus expressing their confidence in the Prime Minister. Altogether 106 Communists and 124 deputies from other parties took part in the voting.

p The triumph in February crowned the process of the peaceful evolution of Czechoslovakia’s national democratic revolution into a sociali’st revolution, ultimately placed power into the hands of the working class and paved the way for full-scale efforts of construction in the country. The party’s wise tactic helped the transition to socialist positions on the basis of the National Front by the absolute majority of the people. That triumph also decided that Czechoslovakia was to become a part of the emergent world socialist community, and that fact was of great importance at the time when imperialism had unleashed the Cold War.

p The revolutionary process in Czechoslovakia and February 1948 confirmed the viability of Lenin’s theory of transition from democratic to socialist revolution, moreover, in an industrialised country with a rather broad bourgeois democratic tradition. Conditions for that transition were provided by a well-substantiated creative policy of the party, which had mastered the dialectics of the general, the specific and the singular in the circumstances of Czechoslovakia.

p Social developments in the run-up to February 1948, and the events of that month demonstrated the diversity of the forms and methods through which a democratic revolution evolves into a socialist one. They proved that Parliament can be one of the instruments of such a peaceful transition. In terms of Czechoslovakia’s experience, however, the concept of a ’peaceful transition to socialism’ seems broader than ’a parliamentary road to socialism’.

p We turn and will continue to turn to February 1948 as to not just an historical event which ultimately paved the way to building socialism in Czechoslovakia but a source of experience which is relevant to our time as well. The point is the lesson which continues to be our guide for action now that we have set out to accomplish a truly historic task of attaining a qualitatively new state of socialism and of asserting in peaceful competition with capitalism our superiority in the economy, in the political and spiritual spheres and in the extension of the rights and freedoms of citizens.

p As I have already said above, the CPCz’s policy aimed at the evolution of the national democratic revolution into a socialist revolution was based on the creative development and application of revolutionary theory, which took due account of the dialectics of the general, the specific and the singular. Now that the strategy of the 17th CPCz Congress for the acceleration of the socio-economic progress of society is being translated 18 into practice, the importance of theory to practical politics is growing immensely. We are facing tasks of a revolutionary character and their fulfilment should rely upon a purposeful theoretical concept of perestroika that is based on new ideas meeting the needs of today and tomorrow and going farther than the habitual but outdated precepts and dogmas.

p In evolving the concept of perestroika, we rely on the experience of fraternal parties, first and foremost the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which pioneered it both theoretically and practically. We are aware, however, that the far-reaching social processes in a number of socialist countries, whether they are called perestroika or anything else, are a reflection of not only what is common to all of those countries but also of concrete circumstances and national economic, political, social and cultural characteristics. Hence the conclusion that in borrowing experience from friends, it is important to discern what is specific to them but does not tally with our realities.

p Clearly, in the course of transformation we should always match our actions to the concrete circumstances, the specific characteristics of development and the present state of society. What I mean is, for instance, that Czechoslovakia has the National Front and non-communist parties, as the political system goes, and also a developed socialist agriculture, a longstanding tradition of cooperation, etc. Consideration for these and other circumstances and characteristics, however, should not result in the underestimation, let alone negation of that common aspect which is the essence of perestroika, that is, the attainment of a new qualitative state of socialism.

p The period in the run-up to the February 1948 developments saw struggle between the progressive and the reactionary forces over the character of democracy in Czechoslovakia. What was at issue was whether a truly democratic system would assert itself in the liberated republic and whether power would really belong to the people or whether pro forma democracy would be established. The Communist Party strove to create the conditions to enable tens of thousands of citizens to participate through the national committees in governing the state and to run, on the basis of the National Front, the affairs of society. Use of the existing democratic institutions and the establishment and consolidation of new ones, such as national committees, factory councils and united public organisations, led to an unprecedented upsurge of the political activity of the mass of people.

p Historical practice before and after February 1948 confirms that democracy is a condition for the progress of socialism. It will not be an exaggeration to say that it is also a direct prerequisite of this progress. The correctness of this conclusion is especially vivid now that far-reaching change in our society depends on the further development of socialist democracy, the extensive introduction of the principles of self-governance in the operation of the state system and also of organs of the National Front and its constituent organisations, in economic management and in cultural and intellectual affairs.

p The national committees, the popular base of our state, remain the principal vehicle of furthering socialist democracy in Czechoslovakia. The growth of their role as democratic institutions of self-governance depends 19 to a large extent on the breadth of their rights and duties and on how effectively deputies and all the citizens participate in deciding outstanding issues in the life of their villages, towns, districts and regions and in the fulfilment of the tasks set before them. If any of these aspects is underestimated, the committees’ underlying principles of self-governance are eroded. If their rights and powers are restricted, democratic institutions (such as meetings, commissions and the work of deputies) are barren. The outcome will be much the same if the national committees do too much work through officials rather than through the collective bodies of the elected representatives of the people and through citizens themselves. Practice shows that the national committees are a success only if the content of their work and democratic forms merge into a single whole.

p We think it important to continue to take care of a correct relationship between the local representative bodies and the executive branches reporting to them, which sometimes acquire an inordinate influence. The staff of the national committees should do their duty, translating into practice the will of the collective representative authority, and be more resolute in dbing away with manifestations of bureaucratism. The demand formulated by Klement Gottwald, "Not the people for the office but the office for the people",^: still holds true.

p That we attach due importance to representative democracy does not at all mean that we underestimate the institutes of direct, immediate democracy. Conversely, any use of its forms, as the events before and after February 1948 demonstrated, furthers democracy in the social life as a whole. Undoubtedly, as time goes on the institutions of direct democracy, be it direct decision-making or advisory functions (such as public debates on draft legislation) will keep growing broader both nationally and in places.

p We understand demoralisation as a comprehensive process. It cannot be restricted to the political sphere but must embrace entirely all the spheres of the social life, first and foremost the economy. The main thrust of the efforts here should be to broaden and deepen the* participation of the working people in the administration of the state enterprises and cooperatives on the basis of the principles of socialist self-management. Under draft legislation due to be promulgated this year, the state enterprise ought to have such bodies of self-management as the meeting of the work collective and the council elected by it. They will have the authority to discuss and settle major questions of the collective’s activity. To make selfmanagement in industry effective, it is essential to revise the system of national economic management. The task is to do away with superfluous centralisation, which is a brake on independence, and to introduce costaccounting, self-financing and self-sufficiency, which will immediately relate the material interest of the work collectives to the results of economic performance. Clearly, self-management in production is an objective necessity under conditions of the new economic mechanism: this democratic system makes the worker the true master at the workplace.

p The National Front, which remained after February 1948, too, the political form of our social life as we advance towards socialism,^^3^^ makes room for the participation of all the citizens, party members and non-party people alike, in the administration of the affairs of the socialist state and 20 society. The policy of the National Front is a line of principle for the CPCz because, in view of our traditions and circumstances, it guarantees that socialism is the creative activity of the mass of people. We have always thought that those who underestimate the role of that union and who, being Communists, are arrogant towards members of other parties and towards non-party people, are absolutely wrong.

p It should be remembered that the best members of the non-communist parties, those who dedicated themselves to the ideals of the National Front, contributed to the victory of the working people and then shared with the CPCz responsibility for building socialism. They should have been more active in the National Front and made more often constructive initiatives. The same holds true for the contribution of the non-party people, and the party has always taken special efforts to secure their cooperation. Lenin is known to have considered it absolutely essential to win non-party people over to the side of the party and to have them verify the work of party members.^^4^^ The point of Lenin’s idea is that the party should be in close touch with the mass of the people, kno\y their views and moods, closely listen to their opinions and reckon with them.

p Now that we are embarking on the further democratization of the social life, the role of the National Front is markedly growing. The task is first and foremost for its bodies and the organisations united in it to make a more substantial contribution to the formulation of policies. This presupposes addressing proper authorites with initiatives and proposals concerning the solution of questions of national or local importance, participating in discussions on draft decrees of the government, ministries and national committees before endorsement insofar as they touch upon the key questions of the life of the socialist society and the needs and hopes of its citizens. Public organisations have a substantial role to play here: their task is to meet the specific interests of the population. They should be more efficient in raising topical problems and in putting forth all the diverse views and opinions, which will help appropriate agencies draw correct’and rational conclusions. The search for ways of broadening socialist democracy is taking place in our society against the background of differing interests and even contradictions, which reflects itself in a diversity of views. Socialist pluralism, which is inseparable from democracy, manifests itself in identifying, collating and discussing them. This phenomenon has nothing to do with political pluralism that is being imposed upon us: the question of power was resolved in our country forty years ago.

p February 1948 proved that the CPCz had won the trust of the mass of people and convinced them of the correctness of its stand. Our open policy and glasnost had contributed significantly towards that outcome. The party devised various ways of introducing to the working people its proposals, such as those on the agrarian reform, nationalisation, taxation and wages, and mobilised the public for efforts to implement them. Our goal in today’s conditions is to have the principle of openness and glasnost applied as extensively as possible in the activities of all the government, economic and public organisations and agencies both in the centre and in the provinces. That process has been so far making uneven progress. People often are better informed of the work of higher party and government bodies than of 21 the activities of trie local authorities and organisations. The principle of glasnost is often given a narrow interpretation and related only to the mass media. They have made a large and useful effort in the recent period, of course, but no less importance attaches to other forms of mass political work, such as direct communication with the working people, reports by officials to public meetings on the performance of government and other agencies, etc. All these forms of work are by no means outdated.

p Socialist Czechoslovakia today is an economically and socially developed state with a relatively high material and cultural standard of living. However, new problems are arising in the national economy and solutions to them have to be found. Now that the possibilities for extensive development have been exhausted, the party has set the task of intensifying the economy. The 17th CPCz Congress noted that to this end it is necessary to abandon the old economic management system by decree and to restructure the economic mechanism. The new principles of that mechanism, drawn up in a comprehensive document that was approved by the CPCz Central Committee at a plenary meeting last December, rely on such ideas as the application of predominantly cost-benefit methods of management, the use of monetary-commodity relations and plan, an improvement in centralised management, broader autonomy for enterprises and greater democracy in economic organisations.

p The introduction of a new economic mechanism, naturally, will cause some conflicts and run into problems because the change it is to bring about would mean in many ways the abandonment of practical habits and ideas which have shaped and struck deep root over the decades. Take social justice in relations of distribution, for example. As everyone knows, there is much levelling without any regard for the quantity and quality of work. The introduction of full-scale cost-accounting is bound to cause drastic changes in distribution and the differentiation of incomes. The introduction of self-financing will similarly lay bare differences in performance between enterprises and do away with the practice of profitable outfits covering the losses of sluggards. The party, naturally, will have to make considerable effort in its political, organisational, ideological and educational work to overcome some of the simplistic conceptions (for instance, there is a lop-sided interpretation of the social guarantees to citizens as a sort of absolute right which should be immune to social justice). We think it essential to translate the principles of new economic management into practice to the fullest possible extent.

p Both the road we have travelled and the present day show that the behests of February 1948 have an everlasting importance for us Czechoslovak Communists. We rely on that legacy and are developing it in every field of the social life, always remembering the conditions that made possible the victory of the working class and its allies forty years ago. The Communist Party was creatively developing and applying MarxismLeninism and the dialectics of revolution; ensured broad and effective participation of the working people in the administration of social affairs; and concentrated efforts on key political, econortiic and ideological tasks.

22

p That experience is valuable to us and its importance keeps growing now that we are working to accomplish the tasks of perestroika, which actually is a continuation of the socialist revolution.

p  ^^1^^ The parliament had a total of 300 deputies, and 230 of them were present when the votes were cast.—Ed.

p - K. Gottwald, Spisy’, sv. XIII, Praha, 1957, p. 50.

p ’ Ibid, sv. XV, Praha, 1961, p. 160.

p  ^^4^^ See: V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, p. 508.

p International Communist Movement Reawakening Hope

p Louis Van Geyt— President, Communist Party of Belgium  

p SPEAKING on behalf of our party at an informal meeting of the representatives of 178 parties and movements held in Moscow on the occasion of celebrations of the 70th anniversary of the October Revolution, I focussed my speech on the idea of ’reawakening hope’. I meant the positive impact on the new policy of peace pursued for nearly three years now by the Soviet Union and its allies and also of the new image of existing socialism that has been taking shape of late on public opinion and the entire range of social and political forces in the developed European capitalist countries, including Belgium.

p / What is the essence of this positive impact? What possibilities are opening in our sector of Europe and throughout the world for the forces of peace and progress, especially for the communist parties? After all most of them (just as the left workers’ movement in general) are painfully emerging from a very difficult period of their history. In the past few years transnational financial capital and its political placemen, using in their interests the world capitalist crisis and the results of putting into effect latest scientific and technological acheivements, managed to launch an offensive in practically all areas.

p These questions in one way or another are connected with the general problem of the dialectical relationship between socio-political struggle in the world of capital (particularly in the developed West European countries) and changes in the world of socialism. For our analysis to be productive, it is necessary to evoke, if only in most general terms, how this

p We continue the series of articles on modern problems of the international communist movement (see WMR, Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12, 1987.)

Louis Van Geyt (b. 1927) has been active in the workers’ movement since youth. A graduate of Brussels University, he joined the Communist Party of Belgium in 1948, worked at the Drapeau Rouge editorial office from 1952 to 1955, was member of the CPB Central Committee since 1957 and member of its Political Bureau since 1960. He was elected to the Brussels municipal council and was an MP from 1971 to 1985. From 1971 to 1972 he was the CPB national secretary and has been the party president since 1972.

23 relationship took shape in the past. The reader will, of course, find this evocation slightly schematic. Notwithstanding the fact, the Belgian Communists deem it their duty especially today to voice frankly the opinion, including those on most complicated issues.

‘Thaws’ and ’Chills’

p It is commonly admitted today that in the early post-revolutionary years— in Lenin’s time—the October Revolution had an extraordinary strong mobilising effect on the mass of the working people and the oppressed peoples of all continents, whereas the development of the world communist movement in the late 1920s and the early 1930s became, on the contrary, characterised by sectarianism and dogmatism, as illustrated by the resolutions of the Sixth Congress of the Communist International.

p We believe that our movement is still to comprehend fully and in true measure the significance of an unusual shift marked by the Seventh (and the last) Congress of the Communist International, which went down in history as the ’Dimitrov Congress’. In our opinion, the inconsistent implementation of the resolutions passed in no way belittles its importance, though the consequences were indeed grave.

p The resolutions of the Communist International at the time not only demanded the renunciation of narrow concepts and practices of the preceding period but also gave a decisive impulse to the formation of the anti-fascist popular front. They in fact laid the foundations of the antiHitler coalition, which together with the Resistance movement scored a victory over Nazi Germany and its allies. Simultaneously an attempt was made to surmount straightforward ideas, according to which class struggle was reduced exclusively to antagonisms’between ’labour and capital’, ’socialism and capitalism’ and ’the oppressed classes and peoples and imperialism’. Speaking about the developed capitalist countries, it meant a militant alliance with all the anti-fascist forces, including part of the big bourgeoisie, for the sake of preserving or restoring parliamentary democracy called bourgeois heretofore, an alliance that was to strive constantly after raising the weight and positions of the working class and other strata of the working people.

p The Belgian Communists think in the light of their own experience that the manner in which the communist movement reacted in the post-war period of the Cold War to provocation by the reactionary forces showed that many lessons and significant accomplishments of the period of the Seventh Congress of the Communist International had been forgotten. We do not mean here the fact that in response to the Marshall Plan adopted by the West European countries and the shifting of the communist parties and their closest allies into opposition there the partisans of the reestablishment of the hegemony of the big capitalists and landowners were eliminated from the governments of some Central and East European states or that the signing of the Brussels Pact, the NATO Pact and the West German entry into it was followed by the conclusion of the Warsaw Treaty. We are not going to speak about the colossal efforts that the USSR had to make to put an end to US nuclear monopoly. We mean here something different, namely, that the rebuttal of the imperialist strategy of the Cold 24 War was accompanied in the light of the resolutions passed by Cominform and some West European Communist Parties by a certain reversal almost to those same narrow restricted interpretations of class struggle and the class nature of international relations that had already been surmounted in fact by the Seventh Congress of the Communist International and later on in the years of the anti-fascist unions and anti-Nazi coalition.

p The image of existing socialism in the eyes of the democratic West European public was that of a ’besieged fortress’ resigned to the logic of the ’confrontation of two systems’ which was largely identified with the logic of escalating bloc policy. Most of the Communists, including in West European countries, again fell into the old trap in the stubborn belief that ’all those who are not with us are against us’, instead of trying to attract to their side ’all those who are not against us’. In this way many parties lost a considerable portion of their influence gained during the anti-fascist struggle.

p Small wonder therefore that the communist movement on the whole was not ready for the eruption of critical assessment and inventive ideas coming from the 20th CPSU Congress especially on the problems of struggle for peace and of transition to socialism. Meanwhile it is sufficient, for instance, to consider the speech made at the congress by internationalist Otto Kuusinen^^1^^ to see certain continuity with the ideas of the crucial Seventh Congress of\ the Communist International.

p Nevertheless following 1956 during the relatively brief period of ‘thaw’ the spirit of the Cold War was shattered and the image of existing socialism among the democratic West European public significantly improved and the ability of the Communist parties to form broad alliances for peace, social progress and freedom was indisputably reinforced. That openness and the hopes it reawakened proved fragile: the manifestation of improvisation and even subjectivism that followed gave food to all those who from the very beginning desparately opposed changes. Finally, all sorts of setbacks, both in the socialist development of the USSR and on the international scene (namely, the conflict with China), led to the gradual renunciation of the policy of openness itself. A ‘chill’ set in on many occasions accompanied by a ‘symmetrical’ response to imperialist provocation and at times by the demonstrations of force in the name of the defence of socialism. West European democratic public opinion saw it above all as the acceptance of the logic of bloc confrontation rather than the desire to break away from that logic.

p The period of ‘chill’ coincided with the emergence on the political scene of the representatives of the ultra-conservative and even aggressive elements of financial capital in many leading capitalist countries. Given the worsening transnational crisis of capitalism and also scientific-technical and socio-cultUral changes, the reactionaries launched an all-round onslaught on the rights of the working people and the democratic gains of the workers’ movement, escalating the arms race, especially the nuclear arms race. The Communists, first and foremost in West European countries, reacted to those processes disunited for the most part and sometimes even torn apart by differences. The socio-political influence of the traditionally militant and most organised sections of the working class, to which our 25 parties primarily oriented themselves, began to dwindle steadily.

It is quite understandable therefore how under the circumstances the new dynamic policy of peace pursued by the USSR and its allies and the open image of existing socialism can help ’reawaken hopes’. Of course, much depends on the extent to which the forces of peace and progress in the capitalist countries, particularly in Europe, and above all the communist parties will make use of the favourable opportunities that appeared in the past three years.

The Universal Mission of the New System

p Thus at different stages of history the relationship between the development of existing socialism, its image projected in the non-socialist countries and the conditions of the struggle waged by the peace-loving and progressive forces in the industrialised capitalist states was not the same. In the recent period the nature of that relationship has changed, giving birth to new hopes. What then are the long-term factors that determined its evolution?

p The well-thought-out analysis made by the CPSU Central Committee on marking the 70th anniversary of the October Revolution shows that existing socialism came into being and developed, in concrete historical circumstances. Its main advantages and the contribution to the positive solution of problems posed to humanity by the most nefarious tendencies of twentieth-century capitalism manifested themselves in the process of overcoming the grave heritage of the preceding historical formations. Socialism was being built in a single country, which was poorly developed industrially and had gone through the First World War and the Civil War. But it managed to rebuff the attack of the Nazi barbarians, predetermining their eventual defeat. During the Cold War the foundations of the socialist community were laid virtually on .ruins and much had to be sacrificed. The fact that countries, like Yugoslavia, with its relatively modest size and natural resources and China which was at first poorly developed economically, had to lay the foundations of socialism on the whole practically in complete isolation from the community also seriously interfered with showing the advantages of the new system.

p But then an extraordinary event took place in 1957—the first manmade satellite was launched by the Soviet Union, which had hardly emerged from the crippling period of the Cold War and was still shackled by dogmatism responsible for Lyssenkoism and impeding the development of science. Four years later Yuri Gagarin flew into outer space. It is noteworthy that those accomplishments of socialism played a decisive role in changing the attitude of the main world capitalist monopolies to some latest scientific and technological achievements, which they until then considered to be a factor complicating rivalry among them, ‘freezing’ production capital and, consequently, as a factor destabilising and jeopardising profits and the power of dominant financial groups, especially those of the United States. After the first satellite was launched the forces, which had pursued the cartel policy of ’partitioning markets’ and which had a great number of latest discoveries and inventions under lock, had to renounce their conservative stand and to opt for the application of scientific and technological achievements.

26

p Such a ‘defreezing’ of the scientific and technological potential was, naturally, carried out in the conditions of the capitalist world keynoted by the frenetic chase after superprofits and was inevitably accompanied by the destruction of the productive forces, the natural resources and cultural wealth and by an escalation, both quantitative and qualitative, of the arms race. While the major capitalist monopolies were actively introducing the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution in production, existing socialism entered a period of stagnation characterised by a growing gap between scientific progress and the practical utilisation of its results to serve the people. Nevertheless the decisive impulse in ‘defreezing’ inventions and discoveries until then kept under lock and key came from the socialist world, whose natural vocation (though in no way automatic) is to promote the development of science and to put it to the service of the people.

p This is an exceptionally remarkable manifestation of the very nature of the new system in modern conditions when humanity is confronted with vital and global problems, such as to stop the sliding towards a nuclear holocaust, to safeguard the natural and cultural environment, to rid the majority of the people of economic underdevelopment and to make economic growth serve the people. The natural vocation of socialism (and to a certain extent its raison d’etre) is to meet common human interests in the face of these problems, though not alone but in a close interaction with all the forces worried about the future of the globe.

Perhaps the most fundamental and promising feature of regenerating socialism consists in the fact that it deliberately undertakes to fulfil that ‘universal’ mission and that many forces outside it feel today the positive impact of that system. Without them it will be unable to cope with the problems of humanity, which are also its own problems. And the other way round, those problems cannot be resolved without a contribution from socialism. It therefore depends on recognition of and mutual respect for that vital relationship and the ensuing responsibility if that ’reawakening hope’ is to gain ground.

What Stands in Our Way?

p Talking of the past, I discussed the influence exerted by the new system on the struggle waged by the forces of peace and progress in the European capitalist countries. But what we talk of today is the forces outside socialism that are worried about the future. Why so? The fact is that truly universal problems of life itself are being tackled today, and the spectrum of the forces involved has not been so broad and diverse since the universal struggle against fascist barbarity. But while at that time the alliances and coalitions which in fact were products of the strategy of the Seventh Congress of the Communist International were formed under the influence and on the initiative of the left forces, first and foremost the Communists, the situation in capitalist European countries is different today. The ability of the left, including the communist parties, to be a sort of rallying point for forces outside socialism is far from always apparent to public opinion. Let us have a look at just a few causes of this phenomenon which are perfectly self-evident.

27

p —During a long period of revival in a number of the capitalist economies after the Second World War, we were concentrating our efforts on struggle for the social and democratic demands of the working class and the people as a whole. There was the hope, however, that the growth would be sustained and relatively consistent: it was entertained by many Marxists not only in Europe at that time.

p —Regrettably, despite the lesson of the mass popular action in May 1968, the West European left woke up far too late to the far-reaching changes brought about in technology, the social life and international relations by revolutionary scientific discoveries and by the growth of informatics, telecommunications, new materials and biotechnology. The bigwigs of transnational financial capital, meanwhile, latched onto the scientific and technological revolution and used it to maximise their profits and to consolidate their dominance, and launched more or less vigorously (depending on the local conditions) an onslaught on the working class and popular movements to undo what they had- achieved since the Second World War.

p —In the period of the ‘thaw’ most of the West European communist parties, seriously weakened during the Cold War, stabilised their influence and became the ‘spearhead’ of the left forces but since the late 1970s some of them have sustained grave losses because of the aggravating crisis of capitalism, a neoliberal offensive and the growing confrontation of the alliances. Meanwhile, the emergent social movements, which championed peace, environmental protection, the cause of the dispossessed strata of the population and solidarity with the oppressed and exploited Third World peoples, arose outside or next to the working class movement and historical left organisations rather than on their basis.

—Also, very controversial reactions were provoked in the communist movement, especially in Western Europe, by the exposures made and new goals set in the resolutions of the 20th CPSU Congress and by step-by-step ‘freezes’ and some of the political and military^^1^^ actions of the USSR and its allies since the late 1960s.

Make Use of the New Chance

p An analysis of the development of industrialised capitalist countries participating in the European Community prompts the conclusion that the diverse forces worried about the future cannot be effectively rallied around the clearly defined tasks of our age without a substantial contribution of creative Marxism and without better concerted and updated activities of the left organisations and communist parties adhering to Marxism. No realistic way out of the series of economic and financial upheavals (like the recent stock market crashes) caused by the neoliberal policies of the past few years can be conceived even in the short term unless those forces intervene. It is important to reckon, too, with the readiness of the more realistic circles of financial capital (although they are so far in the minority) to accede to measures of the New Deal^^2^^ type, adapted, naturally, to the present situation. Unless this intervention materialises, the leading capitalist powers and their groupings will never be made to renounce in all seriousness the arms race, confrontation between the blocs and the harsh 28 exploitation of the Third World and to embark on the road of mutually beneficial cooperation. It was that opportunity that Mikhail Gorbachov pointed out in his report on the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the Great October Revolution.

p It would not be an exaggeration to say that a great deal is yet to be done to clearly define prospects and to draw up and translate into practice a concerted strategy of the left forces, including a number of European communist parties.

p We are pleased to note, of course, that the Communists along with other organisations and parties were active in the broad public movement which made an unprecedented contribution towards the conclusion of an historic agreement on the mutual elimination of the medium- and shorter-range missiles by the Soviet Union and the United States. Actions by diverse social forces for the continued de-escalation of the policy of blocs and for arms reductions in Europe, especially Central Europe, are noteworthy as well. European Parliament passed a clear-cut resolution by a substantial majority to this effect. The plans for the escalation of the race with nuclear and other weapons in new areas, which are being laid by the Atlantists with their allergy to any rapprochement among the peoples, are thus being countered. The positions of certain segments of the business community and politicians linked with them (e.g., in Western Europe) are worthy of note as well: they are openly calling for daring joint ventures of East and West, North and South, and trying to turn over the page of history that is associated with the policy of confrontation.

p At the same time, the major detachments of the working class movement and the traditional left, including the Communists, are coming against serious difficulties in our countries. It is only by overcoming them that those forces will be able to assume a role of responsibility, cut out for them, in resolving the vital problems facing humanity and to make good use of the new chance offered them by the ’reawakening hope’ today. Summarised below are just three of those difficulties.

p First. Faced with the crisis of the capitalist economy and resultant cuts in employment, large sectors of the labour army still consider it to be the main task to preserve jobs and wages. But more often than not they confine their struggle to protests against the wasteful and destructive actions of ’their own’ proprietors, against arms production and trade, against ecologically harmful and socially useless production and against the chase after state subsidies and contracts in order to beat domestic or foreign competition. Alternative programmes for maintaining employment and the living standards have not always been convincing. Major detachments of the working class, left movement have sometimes found themselves on the sidelines of mass popular actions and the just demands put forward by the peace activists in the early 1980s.

p Second. The belated realisation of the implications of the scientific and technological revolutiorfby the Communists and other progressive forces is still making itself felt. The changes brought about by it at the time of the crisis of transnational capitalism have inevitably detracted from the weight and political influence of the detachments of the working class that once were most combative, while the weaker segments of the labour army are 29 altogether given a back seat in social affairs. At the same time new categories of the working people, better skilled but far worse organised, are making themselves heard to an ever larger extent. From the point of view of ideology, they are more sensitive to general social problems, such as peace, environmental protection, underdevelopment and human and personal rights, than to the need to develop individual enterprises or industries, or the social services as a whole. That gap is a considerable impediment to rapprochement between the inheritors of the best traditions of the working class and the new strata of labour, some of which succumb to the ‘anti-collectivist’ propaganda of the right neoliberal quarters. The mass movements, such as the Greens, do not quite realise that their struggle is anti-monopoly and even anti-capitalist—and as such actually merges with the actions of the vanguard of the left forces.

p Third. At the time of the ‘freezes’ of the late 1960s and especially the early 1980s the West European Communists had the prevalent desire to ’extricate themselves’ from their problems exclusively on their own, on the national level. Meanwhile, the processes of internationalisation continued to gain momentum at the level of the Common Market, the European continent and the world as a whole.

p It is my conviction that the Communists of those countries must join efforts to surmount those three obstacles, which stand in the way of another upsurge of the forces of peace and progress in Western Europe. Their goal can be a strategy of the broadest possible alliance for a national and West European policy of recovery, peaceful renewal and economic growth. Its purpose is to increase production, to expand employment in the socially useful sectors, to meet the material and cultural needs of the population and also to broaden international cooperation with all countries.

p That goal, known in Belgium as the ’peace economy’, reckons with the increasingly obvious relationship between struggle for peace and emergence from the crisis, between disarmament and development. It is called upon to contribute to the unification of the combative detachments of the labour army with the new social movements at the national level and on the scale of the Common Market and capitalist Europe as a whole. Just as in the years of anti-fascist Resistance, we should be both more open to dialogue and cooperation with all those who are willing to take a step, however modest, in that direction, and firmer in the face of those who are persisting in their policy of ’hands off for the transnational and provoking confrontation with the socialist world and the non-aligned movement.

p The meeting in Moscow on November 4-5, 1987 demonstrated that conditions are re-emerging, thanks to the renewal in socialist countries and to their decisive contribution to the process of nuclear disarmament, for exchanges of views between the Communist and other progressive parties of all continents on ways of resolving the key problems of today’s world. There appear opportunities for their joint analysis by the Communists and all the other forces working in the specific conditions of capitalist Europe of the late 1980s. It would be an unpardonable error not to use these opportunities immediately and with good effect.

30

’ Otto Kuusinen (1881-1964), a leading figure in the international communist movement and one of the founders of the Communist Party of Finland, was secretary of the Communist International Executive Committee from 1921 to 1939. He was member of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) since 1941 and was elected member of the Presidium and secretary of the CPSU Central Committee in 1957.—Ed.  ^^2^^ A system of measures taken by the US Administration of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt from 1933 to 1938 to eliminate the consequences of the economic crisis and to alleviate capitalist contradictions. Stronger state regulation of the economy was accompanied by some social reforms.—Ed.