p I think there is a large measure of agreement on fundamen J. tals at this seminar, for example, that Marxism-Leninism remains valid and must be upheld and applied; that socialism remains a desirable and attainable objective; that class struggle remains and is the means to a socialist aim; that capitalism and its expression, imperialism, remains an enemy; that revolutionary parties subscribing to Marxism-Leninism is an essential requirement in all countries; that neither dogmatism nor right revisionism are expressions of Marxism-Leninism and must be opposed.

p There are probably a number of other points of agreement on substantial questions. This I think is a very good start to any seminar or conference. And coming at this time in world history it is a very necessary reaffirmation of our communist position. It is also necessary to use the experiences of the collapse of socialism to think about many things to which we had formerly given wrong answers or inadequate answers. And it is not sufficient for us, in my opinion to merely point to the lessons in general.

p I want to thank Com. Pahad from the SACP for raising some really pertinent and immediate issues. For example, the question of multi-party elections in South Africa. And this is not an issue that relates merely to South Africa. Everyone will think it right and proper that the SACP, the ANC and COSATU participate in coming elections as part of a multi-party system. The very fact that this system will replace the hated apartheid, white rule will be regarded correctly as a progressive development. And we will all hope that you succeed in winning a majority in those elections and forming a government.

p But having won the elections do we then do away with the multi-party system? Do we have some other perspective in mind? I am raising these very pertinent questions, which call for answers. Not in general, but specific and particular answers. Can socialism be built in conditionsof amulti-party electoral system? I mink some years ago we would have said no to that question. We would have said, no, that is not the way to socialism. There needs to be, and must be only one party, the communist party, that is the only party that can build socialism.

p How can the role of the working class and its allies be maintained in conditions of a multi-party system which presupposes, at least for some period, the continued existence of bourgeois parties? Can a multi-party system implement a programme of public ownership? And what happens in circumstances in which reactionary bourgeois parties win subsequent elections? Do they then proceed to undo the programme of public ownership that a socialist government would implement? These are not just rhetorical questions or matters which face our comrades working in the conditions of South Africa but in many other countries with bourgeois democratic systems.

p It is a sort of polemic one can see in West Bengal, working in a bourgeois multi-party system with a central government which is hostile to their position. But can we say, as I raised at the beginning, that having won in that system, do we then do away with it? I am not trying to answer these questions, but, obviously, the old way we answered these questions are, in the present historical period, insufficient. I think that it is necessary in gatherings such as this to have time in which to discuss these sorts of questions, honestly and frankly.

p A lot of questions relate to the international communist movement. There was a period, in which we regarded the international communist movement as being monolithic. It is not now monolithic, if it ever was. Certainly communist parties are not monolithic. That was always untrue. If one thinks about it one will see that such a state of affairs could not exist in a party which has hundreds of thousands, let alone millions of members. It could not possibly be monolithic in all respects.

p At this seminar, and I have been to a number of seminars, I have rubbed shoulders with representatives of parties who I am sure had 316 previously not been included in such seminars. I think that is a good thing. It provides us with the opportunity to hear a greater diversity of opinion and not be lulled by a facade of unanimity that did not exist at all. However, this calls for a culture of tolerance, a culture of genuine exchange of opinions recognizing that there is a diversity, there are different ways, there are different views about similar questions and it is necessary for us to unitedly try and work out over a period of time, the communist way forward, recognising that there is never a complete or final answer to any question.

p Time is limited and I want to conclude by saying that one of the most salutary experiences for me in these last few days did not occur in the conference room. It occurred when several of the delegations had the opportunity to visit the countryside, outside thecityof Calcutta. Isawinnra/’« ""i« *-1——-’— conditions of grinding poverty and illiteracy. What sort of issues the comrades have to deal with? The real life issues which one could say are far removed from questions of dialectical materialism or democratic centralism, or things which we spend a lot of time talking about, very necessarily.

p I do not want you to laugh about one of the things we were informed about when we visited one of these villages where the local committee provided housing for wives of the husbands who had been eaten by West Bengal tigers. You might say, what sort of a question is mat? But that is a real life question. Somebody had to do something about it. Something about education; where to build an irrigation canal, so that instead of one crop a year there can be two or three crops per year. How do you educate the illiterates? Where to build a store? How to provide sewing machines for women who have never had the opportunity of sewing clothes except by their hands?

All these were borne in upon me when I saw what had to be done and what was being done by the cadre, by the members of the CPI(M) in their work among the masses. And although we pay a lot of attention to theory and our science and it should never be neglected, we will win the struggle on the basis of what the Communists do to meet the needs of the ordinary people.