A CPI (M) Publication
[2] __COPYRIGHT__ June, 1993Price : Rs. 50.00 (Paperback) Rs. 100.00 (Hardbound)
I
__PUBL__ Published by:Cover Design, Typesetting & Layout Progressive Printers
__PRINTED__ Printed at:The seminar on Contemporary World Situation and the Validity of Marxism acquired great importance both nationally and internationally. Its deliberations drew the attention of the communists worldwide. The seminar has in effect fulfilled the yearning of communists for a discussion on the validity of Marxism in the background of the setbacks suffered by socialism with the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the socialist regimes in the east European countries.
It was precisely in the background of the developments during the last few years, and the massive propaganda blitzkrieg launched by imperialism and its spokesmen that the holding of such a seminar was proposed. This imperialist propaganda offensive sought to depict that socialism is dead, communism has no future and that capitalism is the last stage in the evolution of human society. Its paid scribes sought to negate the history of the last 150 years, that had seen the discoveries of Marx shedding a new light on philosophy, political economy and the social sciences. The study and works of Marx that brought a hitherto unknown approach on understanding and comprehending contemporary developments, were sought to be challenged.
Through his analyses and theories, Marx not only uncovered and exposed exploitation and prophesied the historical inevitability of overthrowing of the exploiting class and its replacement by a better social order, he also at the same time, took a keen interest in the struggles and mass movements going on at the time. His works on the Paris Commune, the civil war in France and Germany, and the Mutiny of 1857 in India are outstanding examples of this.
Subsequently, Lenin furthered this theory by his analysis of 6 imperialism, characterising it as the highest stage that capitalism reached. The Bolshevik Party headed by Lenin successfully carried out the Russian revolution, that heralded a new era. It was an example of concrete application of the Marxian theory to the concrete conditions prevailing in Russia at that time.
The emancipatory role that this revolution played and the inspiration that it provided to the struggling peoples the world over, is all part of history. In the erstwhile Soviet Union proper, hitherto unknown rights to work, to education, to health-care, housing, and immense other social security measures, were provided. The provision of these social security facilities in the erstwhile Soviet Union, had its impact on the capitalist countries, forcing the capitalists in these countries to provide their workers some sort of social security network.
The inspiration that the October Revolution provided, played a crucial role in triggering and achieving the independence of a large number of colonies and semi-colonies. Wedded to a cause, the Soviet people throughout the Union, heroically fought, defeated, the fascist hordes, while incurring heavy losses both in terms of human lives and material losses.
Suffice it to say that the map of the world today would have been different had it not been for the theories of Marx, the emancipatory role that they played in liberating humanity. This however is not to imply that Marxism-Leninism has been always correctly applied to the concrete conditions prevailing in both the erstwhile Soviet Union and the countries of east Europe. Had this been the case, the setbacks and reverses would not have taken place.
While some communist and workers parties, faced by the might of the imperialist propaganda, have given in and changed both their signboard and programme, others are in the midst of confusion. The parties that still adhere to the basic tenets of Marxism are evaluating the past and are trying to arrive at conclusions that will help them overcome the distortions and deviations that have led to the creation of the present situation.
It was in the background of the setbacks and reverses suffered by socialism that the GPI(M) in its ongoing process of analysis adopted a resolution On Certain Ideological Issues at its 14th Congress held in January 1991. The resolution, now widely appreciated, encouraged us to take the process further. In order to facilitate 7 an exchange of opinion and experience between communist and workers parties, and defend the basic tenets of Marxism, the July 1992 Central Committee meeting of the CPI(M) decided to organise a seminar. Prior to thisdecision, to explore the possibilities, thiswriter visited many European countries, and Cuba, and had discussions with the parties concerned. The idea having found response from various parts of the globe, the CC decided to go ahead with the seminar.
It is, without doubt, impractical to nave a single guiding centre for the international communist movement. The resolution adopted by the Communist International as far back as 1943, had categorically opined against this. Subsequently, however, efforts were made to impose such a guiding centre.
It was clear that while all parties were engaged in evaluating the latest developments and nobody could claim to have arrived at final conclusions, efforts should not be made to convene a conference. This was made clear during the consultations with these parties and it was also agreed that no party would have to commit itself to any document emerging from the discussions.
Out of the total 30 parties to whom we extended invitations, 21 parties including the CPI(M), were represented at the seminar, while three parties unable to send their representatives, sent their contributions in the form of papers, which formed part of the seminar proceedings. Eight parties sent messages expressing their inability to participate owing to critical political conditions in their respective countries. Among them were the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the Communist Workers Party of Russia, who were unable to participate as they were confronting a difficult situation consequent to the results of the Referendum. The Communist Party of China too greeted the seminar. In its message it expressed its adherence to the science of Marxism and wished the seminar a success.
The response to the seminar therefore was overwhelming, and the initiative thus was a reflection of the urge and desire of the communist and workers parties the world over.
All the papers received were circulated, and arrangements made for translation for those who did not follow English. In the first round, most parties read out their papers while others made observations and comments on them. It was in the second round 8 that concrete questions were raised and discussed. The third round that took place on May 7, took the discussion further and clarifications and replies to questions raised in the earlier round of discussion on some of the important questions facing the communist movement, were given. In its totality, the participants debated on a wide range of questions for sixteen hours.
The participants from different contingents of the communist movement and from different parts of the globe have varied experience of developing the movement in their respective countries . It was therefore natural that their analyses and approach to issues would differ. No doubt there are differences amongst the communist parties in their analysis of the past, depending on the concrete experience of each Party. But as the papers and the discussions establish, based on the science of Marxism-Leninism, they have the capacity to self-critically examine mistakes and overcome them.
The thrust of the papers, as well as the discussions, was the necessity to confront the imperialist challenge to the science of Marxism, and more urgently to unitedly thwart the offensive against Cuba, Korea, Vietnam and China. The discussions also strikingly pointed out that the communist and workers' parties stand united on the adherence to the fundamentals of Marxism.
The CPI(M) had, in its XIV Congress stated: "The short comings and failures in the process of enriching this creative science in accordance with the unfolding historical develop* ments, is not due to its inadequacies or lack of scientific method of its content It is due to the inadequacies and lack of scientific rigour on the part of those who have embraced this philosophy''.
The overriding validity and the abiding relevance of Marxism lies in its liberating vision and emancipatory goals. It remains today the highest form of philosophy that expresses all that humanism constitutes and ought to constitute.
The entire quest of Marx during his lifetime and thatof all subsequent Marxists, was to establish the basic factors necessary for complete human liberation. Capitalism as Marx had shown and subsequent developments justify, is a system based on human exploitation. As long as exploitation of man by man and of nation by nation continues to be the basis of the capitalist system the yearning for human liberation can never be snuffed out. The world 9 that we know today, the rights that humanity has come to accept as a matter of course, had all been contributions of people's struggles. It is this class struggle that continues to shape the present day developments and its associated human consciousness. The imprint of Marxism on contemporary society and the intellectual development of humanity is inerasable.
The contemporary world situation tellingly demonstrate the unjust and inhuman nature of capitalism. It is its rapacious plunder that is responsible for the terrible situation of hunger, misery, sickness, illiteracy that stalk the millions in the developing world. It is directly responsible for the dangers of nuclear holocaust and worsening major ecological imbalances. The increasing moral and ethical degeneration of capitalist societies, drug abuse, violence, gender and racial discrimination are continuously debasing the finer qualities of human beings. Despite the perennial propaganda, intensified following these reverses to socialism, tha 'capitalism is eternal', it today, as in the past, proves itself as a system incapable of solving the major problems confronting humanity.
This is all the more evident from the experience of the former socialist countries. Millions are today deprived of the means of daily existence, unknown to generations under the socialist system. The process of restoring capitalism in these countries, is accompanied by its natural consequences of growing unemployment, insecurity, hunger and the merciless tearing asunder of the social and moral fabric. In the name of `Democracy', the dismantling of Socialism took place. Today democracy has been rendered meaningless for the people. The recent attack on May day demonstrators at Red Square has shown the face of this `democracy'. Imperialism's open support to Yeltsin exposes the real class nature of the new order in these countries. Capitalism has thus proven to be incapable of solving the problems of these countries.
The tasks facing communists are indeed immense. The accentuation of the fundamental contradictions of our epoch, the new insidious and vicious process of economic `re-colonisation' of the third world, and the imperialist attempts to impose its New World Order, call for a greater closing of ranks amongst Communists and anti-imperialist contingents. The unity of all communists, progressive and anti-imperialist forces is the basis for strengthening internationalism in the present situation. It is only on the basis of this 10 that the imperialist offensive can be rebuffed.
The general conclusions arrived at by the seminar are as follows:
__FIX__ Change to ordered list.1. Marxism is a creative science, and remains as valid today as it was when first propounded; and it remainsa guide to action;
2. The setbacks and reverses to socialism arose out of distortions and deviations, and do not constitute either a negation of Marxism, or of the goal of socialism;
3. Socialism remains the objective for all the communists and workers parties;
4. Capitalism, based on exploitation of man by man, cannot provide remedies to the ills of present society;
5. Imperialism remains the main enemy of mankind, and we have to unite all forces in the struggle against it, and defend the socialist countries against its attacks;
6. The communist and workers parties defending Marxism will lead the working class and other toiling millions towards achieving socialism.
When communists say they base themselves on Marxism as a creative science, they do understand that the science cannot be stagnant - that it is ever developing, and the very development of society itself, the development of the productive forces, goes on enriching this science. Lenin's analysis of imperialism, as the highest stage of capitalist development, was not a small achievement. It continues to guide the direction of the movement and lays bare the contradictions inherent in the system till today.
To date, nobody has succeeded in challenging the basis of Marxist philosophy, its political economy, the laws of social development summed up in the phrase, historical materialism. In fact history has vindicated these theories. It is in the applying of these theories that distortions and deviations have occured. That the socialist experience was the first of its kind, and that too in a largely backward country, is a factor to be recognised. Lenin in his last days, was trying to draw lessons from the experience, and formulating policies to meet the situation. It was in mis regard that Lenin reiterated what Marx and Engels repeatedly stated, that the theories of Marxism are not to be treated as a dogma, but used as a guide to action.
11Once we adhere to the science of Marxism, we have to reckon that, one, on the basis of the laws of development of society, capitalism is also transitory phase, and two, that socialism alone is capable of taking forward the productive forces developed under capitalism to their fullest capacity, thereby enabling mankind to free itself of not only all types of exploitation, but to reach new economic, social, cultural and political heights, with full freedom being enjoyed by all working people. This has been amply proved by the successive stages through which the development of the society has taken place. Though the nature of the classes have been different at each stage, it is the struggle between these classes which has transformed society, and the success of the socialist revolution was also the result of this struggle. Even today in the developed capitalist countries, the resistance developing against capitalist exploitation in the forms of strikes and huge demonstrations again vindicate this contention. By contrast the path of class collaboration advanced by the social democrats and the bourgeois politicians has not worked anywhere.
That capitalism based on exploitation cannot provide remedies to the problems of contemporary society has been proved by the present situation in the capitalist world. The collapse of socialist systems in the countries of eastern Europe and the erstwhile Soviet Union does not prove the superiority of the capitalist system. The crisis of capitalism in the form of a long drawn-out recession, that has been going for the past many years, is a glaring example of this. The worsening conditions of the working class, the onslaught on their social security measures, the growing unemployment and closures have vindicated this claim.
That imperialism is the main enemy is nowhere in doubt. It is known that after the developments in the socialist countries,no change has occurred in the nature of imperialism. In fact It has shown its most brutal form- whether in the new world order advocated, through which US imperialism seeks to impose its hegemony over the world, or the Gulf war, the present plight of the east European countries, or encouragement of the rightist forces in Angola, Mozambiqe, intervention in Ethiopia, the Palestinian issue etc. As far as its opposition to socialism is concerned, it has never hidden its designs, nor changed them. Defying the UN resolution it continues to impose its blockade on Cuba, while Cuba is heroically trying to defend its revolution. It is trying to intervene in the 12 DPRK by means of arm-twisting and pressurising it under the guise of concern over nuclear arsenals. It does not hesitate even to pressurise Vietnam and China. On the third world it seeks to forcibly impose its new economic order, make every country dependent on it and mortgage its economic sovereignty.
In the contribution from the parties from the socialist countries, own experiences were outlined and self-critically examined. They explained how in order to overcome the distortions and deviations in their work, they have instituted reforms maintaining the socialist objective. One finding to come out very clearly in the di scussion was that the stage of transition from the old system to the new, has to be a long one. Although they were confident that by their reforms they would continue to strengthen socialism. Their contribution was very educative, because they have the direct experience of building socialism, in nearly all cases in backward countries.
The communist and workers parties will lead the socialist revolutions armed with the scientific ideology of Marxism. This ideology equips them with the vision and capacity to organise the working class, the peasantry and the toiling millions in the struggle for social transformation and to create consciousness in their minds to intervene in the political situation prevailing in each country, by fighting not only economic policies but battles on the political and ideological front against the ruling class. In this process, they are able to rally all the forces fighting for social advance. The leading role of the working class that the communists talk about, cannot be imposed, but has to be won, by serving the interests of the working class, the peasantry and the toiling millions as well as the genuine national interests. Therefore the significance of the communist parties in the struggle for socialism must not be undermined.
The success of the seminar in attaining the objectives it had set before it, gave renewed confidence to the various participants, in their struggle to defend socialism and to continue to fight for the goal of socialism. In this struggle the importance of international solidarity was also emphasised by maintaining the independence of opinion of various communist parties. All the parties decided to continue such efforts in future so that the exchange of experience not only contributes to advancing the cause of socialism in various countries, but enables them to learn from each other's experience 13 and meet the challenged posed by imperialism and the reactionaries in their all-out effort to divert the course of history. Since all the papers and the proceedings are being given herein, I do not wish to elaborate the views of different parties . I would only like to conclude with the assertion that this seminar, held in the background of a critical situation in the history of the communist movement, will go down as a historic event.
Harkishan Singh Surjeet
[14] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Participating DelegationsI. Communist Party of Cuba
1. 1 Mrs. Maria De Los Angeles Gracia,
Member of the Polit Bureau
2. 2 Ramon Hernandez,
Advisor of the Foreign Relations Dept. of the CC (Ambassador)
3. 3 Mrs. Maria Cristina M, Interpreter
4. 4 Victor Ramirez, Charge d'affairs,
Embassy of Cuba in India
II. Workers Party of Korea
5. 1 Hwang Jang Yop, Secretary, CC
6. 2 Ji Jae Ryong, Dy. Director, Int Dept., CC
7. 3 Kim Tae Jong, Dy Section Chief, Int Dept, CC
8. 4 Kim Man Bok, Officer, Int Dept, CC
9. 5 Kim Choi, Interpreter
10. 6 Kim Bok Pil, First Secretary, Embassy of DPRK
III. Communist Party of Vietnam
11. 1 Da wgWuky, Member of CC
Director Institute of Marxism Leninism
12. 2 DaoDuyQuat, Director, Institute of Inf,
Institute of Marxism Leninism
15 13. 3 Ngyun Hoah Sun, Member, International Dept.--
Asian Section, CPV CC
IV. Socialist Party of Australia
14. 1 Peter Symon, General Secretary
V. Workers Party of Bangladesh
15. 1 Amal Sen, President
16. 2 Rashed Khan Menon, General Secy.
17. 3 Haider Akbar Khan Rano. Acting General Secy.
VI. Workers Party of Belgium
18. 1 Baudouin Deckers, Member, PB
VII. Communist Party of Brazil
19. 1 Renato Rabelo, Vice President,
Member, Polit Bureau, Member CC Secretariat
20. 2 Luis Fernandes, Member Central Committee.
VIII. Communist Party of Britain
21. 1 Robert Griffiths, Member, Polit Bureau
IX. New Communist Party of Britain
22. 1 Erich Trevett, General Secretary
X. Communist Party of Canada
23. 1 Elizabeth Rowley,
Member Central Executive Committee.
XI. Communist Party of France
24. 1 Gisele Moreau, Secretary, CC
25. 2 MaxZins, 16 Member, Bureau of External Affairs ~
XII. German Communist Party
26. 1 Fred Merger, Member of Secretariat
Federal State of Saarland.
XIII. Communist Party of Greece
27. 1 Elias Lengeris, Member Ideological
Committee.
XIV. Communist Party of India
28. 1 Indrajit Gupta, General Secretary
29. 2 M. Farooqi, Member, Secretariat
30. 3 A.B. Bardhan, Member, Secretariat ~
XV. Partido Popular Socialist^ Mexico
31. 1 Francisco Hernandez Juarez,
Secretary, International Relations ~
XVI. Communist Party of Nepal (UML)
32. 1 Madan Bhandari, General Secretary.
33. 2 Madhab Nepal, Standing Committee Member,
Chief of Foreign Department.
34. 3 C.P. Mainali, Standing Committee Member ~
XVII. Communist Party of Philippines
35. 1 Emil Villa, Member, Central Committee.
XVIII. Portuguese Communist Party
36. 1 Albano Nunes, Member Secretariat,
Head, International Dept.
XIX. South African Communist Party
37. 1 Essop Pahad, Head of the International Dept
17XX. Workers Party of Turkey
38. 1 MuratMetin ~
XXI. Communist Party of India (Marxist)
39. 1 Harkishan Singh Surjeet, General Secretary
40. 2 Jyoti Basu, Member, Polit Bureau
41. 3 SitaramYechury, Member, Pofit Bureau
42. 4 P. Ramachandran, Member, Polit Bureau ~
Parties From Whom Papers Were Received
1. Tudeh Party of Iran
2. Syrian Communist Party
3. Communist Party of USA
Parties From Whom Messages Were Received
1. Communist Party of China
2. Communist Party of Colombia
3. AKEL of Cyprus
4. Communist Refoundation of Italy
5. Communist Party of Mauritius
6. Communist Party of Russian Federation
7. Russian Communist Workers Party
8. Communist Party of Spain
[Comrade Kim II Sung, General Secretary of the Workers Party of Korea sent a separate message.]
[18] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Opening RemarksOn behalf of the Communist Party of India(Marxist), I extend to you a warm welcome and convey our revolutionary greetings.
On behalf of our entire Party I heartily thank you for accepting our invitation to participate in this seminar.
Calcutta has been an important centre in our country's struggle for freedom from British colonialism. This city has great traditions as a working class centre and in the fields of culture and social advance. In post-independent India, this city has been the advanced outpost of the left and democratic movement in our country. For 16 years, the Left Front, headed by the CPI(M), has been repeatedly elected to the state government by the people of West Bengal. Within the severe limitations imposed by the bourgeois-landlord system, which leaves limited power to a state government, and in the face of discriminatory policies by the central government, it has implemented major land reforms and devolved power upto the village councils. The decentralisation of power has strengthened grass-root level democracy at the city municipalities and village councils. The measures undertaken by the Left Front government have deepened the Party's links with the mass of people in West Bengal and strengthened the ties between the workers and peasants. The city of Calcutta was and remains today an important centre of Communist and progressive activity. The late Com. Muzaffar Ahmed, one of the founders of the Communist movement in India, was based in Calcutta and this city was the centre of his activities.
19Dear Comrades,
The cataclysmic events of the past few years had created a disarray in the international Communist movement and permitted imperialism to launch a new all out offensive against Marxism and Communism. Many parties reneging on the fundamental revolutionary tenets, changed their names and adopted social democracy. Following an intense inner party debate within the CPI(M), in the face of concerted attack by imperialism, their ideologues and internal class enemies our 14th Party Congress in January, 1992, firmly upheld Marxism-Leninism as the creative science which alone can lead humanity to its true and complete liberation. The Resolution On Certain Ideological Issues' that was adopted there, containing our assessment and evaluation is being circulated for information.
Applying Marxism to the concrete conditions of Indian reality, the CPI(M) has been strengthening its links with the Indian people. Recently, in the elections to the Tripura state assembly the CPI(M) led front polled 51.4% of the vote winning 49 of the 60 seats. CPI(M) alone has won 44 seats.
It gave us immense confidence to note that many parties, across the globe, have successfully resisted the liquidationist tendencies, and upheld the cause of socialism and the revolutionary ideology and philosophy of Marxism.
It is in this background that our Central Committee decided to convene such an international seminar, commemorating Karl Marx's 175th birth anniversary, with the express and limited objectiveof sharing our experiences and strengthening our mutual resolve to defend the socialist cause. We, hence, do not propose to have any document from this seminar.
An exchange of opinions, based on our experiences, we are sure, will help all of us and many of those who for a variety of technical reasons could not attend this seminar. Dear Comrades,
India is a developing country with its own share of problems that are very specific to our history, culture and traditions. The CPI(M) is still a small force compared to India's size and population. We have tried our best to make all possible arrangements for your comfortable stay and for a meaningful interaction of ideas. But fully realising our limitations, I would urge upon you to 20 condone any inconvenience that may have been caused. Thank you once again for accepting our invitation and being with us to share your experiences.
If you would permit me, I would like to make some suggestions for the conduct of the seminar.
Given the time at our disposal, we would propose that each delegation be allotted 25 minutes for its initial presentation of the paper.
Subsequently, in the same order of the presentation, each delegation may be given 10 minutes to comment upon the papers that have been presented or to raise any other relevant issue.
After this round, if any delegation seeks to intervene then the floor would be given for an additional five minutes.
As regards the order of presentation, we would propose that following the presentation of the paper by the host, we begin with the socialist countries, in the English alphabetical order, followed by other esteemed guests again in the English alphabetical order.
If you agree to these proposals then we can proceed to begin the work of the seminar.
Thank you.
[21] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ [PART II] __ALPHA_LVL1__ [PAPERS] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of India (Marxist)Dear Comrades,
At the outset, on behalf of the CPI(M), I express my gratitude for jjpur acceptance of our invitation and participation in this seminar.
The need to address ourselves to this issue arises not only because of the renewed offensive, both ideological and political, by the enemies of human liberation - imperialism and its agents. The need arises more out of the necessity to reassert the invincible validity of this creative science, rectifying the mistakes of the past, reassessing the estimations of the correlation of class forces made at various points of time, in order to overcome the weaknesses and lags in understanding, precisely to strengthen and carry forward the struggle for human emancipation.
Of the vast complexity of processes that define the contemporary world situation, two aspects continue to be utilised to mount this renewed offensive which seeks to disintegrate the ranks of communists. First, the dismantling of socialism in the USSR and East European countries. Secondly, the so-called `invincibility' of capitalism as a system signifying the end of the human social evolution.
On both these counts, as on all others, the creative science of Marxism, far from being repudiated emerges as the only basis to properly understand and evaluate these developments.
Before proceeding to substantiate this assertion, it would be necessary to briefly recapitulate the essential qualities of Marxism. We can do no better than to quote Lenin. The history of 22 philosophy and the history of social science show with perfect clarity that there is nothing resembling "sectarianism'' in Marxism, in the sense of its being a hidebound, petrified doctrine, a doctrine which arose away from the high road of the development of world civilisation. On the contrary, the genius of Marx consists precisely in his having furnished answers to questions already raised by the foremost minds of mankind. His doctrine emerged as the direct and immediate continuation of the teachings of the greatest representatives of philosophy; political economy and socialism.'' (On the three sources and components of Marxism)
Further he said, "the genius of Marx lies in his having been the first to deduce™, the lesson world history teaches and to apply that lesson consistently. The deduction he made is the doctrine of class struggle."
The CPI(M)'s 14th Congress Resolution On Certain Ideological Issues had noted: "Marxism-Leninism is inherently materialistic, creative and intrinsically dialectical. It is hence supremely antidogmatic. It is a world-view that embraces the vision of liberation and expresses emancipatory ideals. It is a tool for understanding and analysing the multitude of phenomena mat constitute changing historical situations. It is a guide to action that defines programmatic objectives for {he people's struggle for liberation, subject to the necessary adaptations as required by changing historical situations."
"As a creative science, Marxism-Leninism identifies the tendencies and directions of development In doing so it provides the possibilities for popular mass intervention in these developments in the pursuit of establishing an exploitation-free society. For instance, the historical inevitability of the replacement of the exploitation-based capitalism by socialism is not automatic The key factor mat can effect such a social transformation is the correct ideological, political and organisational leadership of the growing struggles of the working class, the peasantry and all working people. When this class consciousness is defused or blunted, the forces of counter-revolution exploit the situation to perpetuate their class rule".
Subsequent world developments and the present situation vindicate the fundamental Marxist world view; its scientific method and its fundamental conclusion that class struggle is the motive 23 force of history.
Firmly convinced of the fundamental basis of the Marxist understanding, the CPI(M), while probing the factors leading to the dismantling of socialism in the USSR and East European countries basically identified three main areas where certain incorrect assessments led to incorrect political and tactical lines which instead of strengthening the international communist movement only eroded its strongest bastions.
These relate to an understanding of the transition period from capitalism to socialism; a correct estimation of capitalism and its potential; and deviations from the revolutionary content of Marxism-Leninism.
The period of transition from capitalism to socialism was often simplistically and mechanically construed as a straightforward path without any zigzags and more importantly, as irreversible. Socialism, in fact, represents the transition of humanity from capitalism, the highest form of class society, to Communism, a classless society. Integral, therefore, to this stage is not merely the coexistence but the constant and growing struggle between counterrevolutionary forces who wish to preserve the exploitative capitalist order and the revolutionary forces that seek to liberate humanity.
The success or failure in this struggle, at any point of time, is determined both by the successes achieved in socialist construction in the socialist countries and the international and internal correlation of class forces and its correct estimation. The correct estimation assumes importance since from this follows a corresponding poli tical, tactical line which either advances or retards the progress towards liberation. Incorrect assessment and estimation based on ideological deviations, as the history of the international communist movement is witness, lead to distortions. These were exploited by the counter-revolutionary forces time and again to derail the international communist movement from its class moorings.
One such instance, a major one, was the estimation regarding the strength and potential of capitalism made by the international conferences in 1957 and 1960. The document of the 1960 conference, while endorsing the shift in the world balance of forces in favour of socialism, went far beyond to deny capitalism any future and to describe socialism as the decisive factor in shaping world 24 developments. Such a conclusion, apart from re-enforcing the simplistic understanding regarding the irreversible nature of the transition period,grossly underestimated the potential of world capitalism, both of its capacity to further develop productive forces as well as its capacity to adapt to changed circumstances.
This of course, does not mean that capitalism has or can ever have the strength to overcome its inherent crisis that Marx had analysed bare in his work. But crisis by themselves cannot and do not cause the collapse of capitalism automatically. A conclusion of seminal importance drawn by Marx was that capitalism has to be overthrown. It does not automatically collapse.
This underestimation of capitalism was accompanied by an incorrect estimation of the correlation of class forces under changed circumstances by the 20th Congress of the CPSU. The gross distortion of the Leninist concept of peaceful coexistence and the advocacy of peaceful competition and peaceful transition by the CPSU leadership under Khrushchev threw the door open for revisionism and class collaboration of the worst kind. As a consequence, many a communist party was decimated leaving the international communist movement much emasculated.
While capitalism was adapting to changing realities, finding newer formsof exploitation and intensifying the ideological struggle against socialism, the underestimation of capitalism and deviations, both dogmatic and revisionist, combined to dilute the socialist ideological counter offensive and the struggle against capitalism. Instead of correcting the deviations and distortions that crept in, mistakes continued to accumulate in the subsequent decades of socialist construction in 70s and 80s. This permitted imperialism and capitalism to gain for the political advantage.
The task of overthrowing capitalism needs the constant sharpening and strengthening of the revolutionary ideological struggle of the working class and its decisive intervention under the leadership of a party wedded to Marxism-Leninism - a subjective factor without which no revolutionary transformation is possible. This subjective factor was, as we noted, further weakened due to the revisionist deviations.
Such errors, it must be accepted in the spirit of truthful selfcri ticism, were also accompanied by a o verestimation of the strength of socialism. While socialism, being a superior system made 25 gigantic strides in the initial years, capable of facing the severest of onslaughts and rebuff them, was beset with certain limitations. First, the fact that socialist revolutions triumphed not in the advanced but relatively backward capitalistically developed countries. This meant that though the physical size of the Imperialist market reduced, the level of productive forces already achieved by Capitalism and its capacity to develop it further remained. This in itself imposed severe limitations in terms of carrying forward the process of social change from immense relative backwardness to a stage higher than that of capitalism. Lenin was ever conscious of these problems. While emphasising the prolonged and complex character of the transition period, Lenin in his life time, advanced and implemented many initiatives like the NEP keeping in mind the backwardness and concrete conditions of Russia. That the process of socialist construction is both prolonged and complex need to be underlined.
However, it will be wrong to conclude that the socialist revolutions in these countries were premature. The sharpening of the world wide contradictions permitted the rupture of the imperialist chain at its weakest link. Seizing this initiative the socialist revolution triumphed, ushering in a new era in human civilization. The Great October Socialist Revolution radically altered the world situation galvanising both the international working class movement and the struggles in the colonial world. The gigantic economic strides that it made within a short period of time, vindicating the superiority of the socialist system, inspired many a revolutionary movement across the globe.
Apart from such incorrect estimations and deviations, there were specific mistakes and shortcomings in four broad areas in the process of socialist construction. These relate to: form of state under socialism-dictatorship of the proletariat; socialist democracy in practice; socialist economic construction; and ideological consciousness of the Party and people in the socialist countries. The CPI(M) 14th Party Congress resolution has examined these aspects in some detail.
However, instead of correcting the mistakes of the past and overcoming the distortions within the framework of Socialism and Marxism-Leninism, the CPSU under Gorbachev's leadership pursued a liquidationist course that ultimately led to the dismantling 26 of Socialism.
Though a lot more study has to be undertaken into the specifics of these experiences, the CPI(M) is of the firm opinion that the dismantling of socialism in these countries was due to these deviations, mistakes and distortions that have occured during the process of socialist construction.
These developments hence do not and cannot constitute a repudiation of socialism or Marxism-Leninism.
Notwithstanding these incorrect estimations and present-day reverses, the 20th century, particularly the epoch beginning with the October Revolution, was marked by the victories of the working class, the peasantry and people in every continent of the world, in varying degree.
During this century, capitalism plunged humanity into two barbaric world wars claiming millions of lives. It produced and used nuclear weapons to demonstrate its inhuman superiority and plunged the world into a nuclear race with devastating consequences. It launched numerous wars to contain humanity's advance to socialism, intervened in the internal affairs of independent countries, organised coups, foisted reactionary and dictatorial regimes to suit its interests. Its most barbaric form was exposed in the fascist dictatorships.
On the other hand,the socialist revolutions and national liberation struggles imparted a richer content to human civilisation, by making it possible for the majority of the working people in many countries to lead their lives without national oppression and free from exploitation. This impact continues to chart the future course of human development towards national and social liberation. This process, however, will be long, complex and full of twists and turns. But the fundamental direction of the epoch continues to be that of a transition from capitalism to socialism.
The validity of Marxism as a science, a method, a guide to action and its abiding relevance is justified by the nature of the present world developments. It would be unnecessary, in our opinion, to burden this august gathering of revolutionaries with statistical data that is familiar. It, however, needs emphasis that the contemporary world situation continues to be characterised by the four fundamental contradictions. The continuing recessionary 27 spell in the capitalist economy is accentuating the contradictions between Labour and Capital. The effort to shift the burden of this crisis by imperialism on to the third world countries is bound to intensify the contradiction between imperialism and the peoples of the third world countries. Accompanied by the political offensive of USA to establish its "New World Order'', this portends further sharpening of this contradiction. Inter-imperialist contradictions continue to grow and express themselves in various forms, particularly in the economic sphere.The US-led economic blockade against Cuba, the new offensive on the issue of nuclear inspection of North Korea and the continued embargo against Vietnam signify Imperialism's continued offensive against Socialism.
While these contradictions continue to influence world developments, the forms of resolving these would vary according to the concrete situations. For instance, the rnter-imperialist rivalries ending up in an imperialist war like the First and Second World Wars today remains a very remote possibility for a variety of reasons.
Though these developments vindicate the fundamental basis of the Marxist analysis and understanding, a point that we noted earlier needs underlining. The subjective factor - and its weakness today - permits capitalism to create enough space for its manoeuvres to survive out of its inherent contradictions.
However, it is necessary to identify the concrete specificities that permit the continued capitalist advance despite its basic contradictions. The living essence of Marxism as Lenin had said, is the "concrete analysis of concrete conditions''. We venture to pose a few issues that in our opinion distinguish the post-Second World War capitalist economy, particularly since the 70s. We are fully conscious of the limitations of our capacity to undertake a profound analysis. This is a task that is necessary, however.
The two decades until 1973 witnessed rates of growth of output in the imperialist world that were unprecedented in the entire history of capitalism. This was achieved under the new post war political and economic leadership of the USA. The reconstruction boom after the devastation of the second world war, the spread Of automobiles, ihe Keynesian demand management policies p^ rsued in individual capitalist countries, and above all huge Stale |* penditures, especially on armaments in the leading country, the US 28 all contributed to the maintenance of high demand in the imperialist world, which, under the new Bretton Woods financial arrangement facilitating global trade and financial flows, ushered in high growth rates in virtually all of them. To be sure, there was uneven development among them, with Japan being by far the fastest grower among them all, but this was uneven development in the context of a general boom. In these boom conditions, technological innovations were rapidly adopted, bringing about significant growth rates in labour productivity, which, despite rising rates of surplus value, raised the living standards of large segments of the working class in the imperialist countries.
All this is well-known. What is particularly intriguing however is the development after 1973. With high rates of inflation in the mid-70s, with a recession in 1974--75 which was by far the worst since the Great Depression of the 30s, and with the Bretton Woods system having collapsed, world capitalism appeared to be heading for another period of severe crisis in conformity with traditional Marxist understanding. This however did not come about the way it was anticipated, and nothing underscores more clearly the resilience of imperialism and our underestimation of its potential strength than its subsequent performance. No doubt, the growth rates in the advanced capitalist world have come down sharply from their post-war levels; no doubt the growth of world trade has shrunk rapidly; no doubt, at the very present moment the entire imperialist world is experiencing a recession; and no doubt the unemployment rates in all of them have been higher in a secular sense in the 80s and the 90s than during the long boom of the 50s and the 60s. Nevertheless, none of these adds up to portend a repetition of a 1930s-type crisis, at least not as yet. The question is why?
The inflationary upsurge of the late 70s and the early 80s in the imperialist countries was checked in two ways: by enlarging the domestic reserve army of labour (which explains the high unemployment rates), which weakened the trade unions and prevented real wage claims from rising in tandem with productivity increases, and, even more important, by turning the terms of trade against the primary commodity producers of the third world. The collapse of primary commodity prices relative to manufactures, which has brought indebtedness, loss of economic sovereignty to the IMF, decline in per capita incomes, and starvation and famines, to vast stretches of the third world, notably Africa and Latin 29 America, is the direct outcome of the ``success'' of inflation-control in the imperialist countries.
But with declining incomes in the third world, and lower wageshares in the imperialist countries themselves, metropolitan capitalism would have been expected to have moved into a serious slump. How was this avoided? Apart from the scientific and technological advances, we come to the significance of the centralisation of international finance that has taken place. The basic support for the level of economic activity in the metropolitan countries was provided by the huge expansion in the U.S. fiscal deficit which occurred with Reagan. And this deficit, which gave rise to a large current account deficit in the U.S. balance of payments, was financed through incurring an enormous external debt, which was facilitated by the centralisation of international finance.
The hallmark of the current centralisation of international finance, or globalisation as some have called it, lies in the fact that capital is sucked out from all comers of the globe to be invested in a few selected areas deemed fit, or creditworthy, by a handful of multinational banks. It is not that the multinational banks themselves exclusively control the financial flows; but the lead given by them is followed by myriads of individual rentiers, so that without there being any ``conspiracy'' about it the whole world's finances, as it were, are subjected to one centralised controlling authority with regard to their deployment, the authority consisting of a handful of multinational banks. However, the competition between multinational corporations and banks, often leading to conflicts, may well upset the present arrangement.
The recurring U.S. fiscal deficit gives centralised international finance capital an avenue of investment, it thus accentuates third world recession; by sucking in finance from elsewhere it imposes a financial crunch on the third world which forces the latter to surrender its economic sovereignty to imperialist agencies like the IMF and the World Bank; and it also makes the third world hand over control over its assets and resources "for a song" to international creditors for servicing past debt; besides it sustains the level of activity in the imperialist world and prevents the onset of any sharp slump.
All this, namely the ability to stabilise their own economies at the expense of the third world, would not have been possible if, 30 despite their undoubted contradictions, the imperialist economies had not displayed a measure of agreement amongst themselves. Periods of imperialist disunity are periods which are not only characterised by crisis at the core, but which also provide ``space'' to the third world, as well as the socialist countries to assert themselves. On the other hand as long as the imperialist countries act with a degree of common purpose, they can deny this space and more effectively pass on the burdens of their crisis on to the shoulders of the third world, thus stabilising themselves at the tetter's expense. Apart from the objective basis of inter penetration of capital leading to a degree of coherence, the compelling political reason for this was the existance a powerful socialist power that could check imperialist attempts to impose global hegemony. With its absence today, the shifting of the burdens on to the third world is bound to intensiy. Ironically, these periods are marked by disunity within the third world, not only within countries, but even inside countries where secessionist and other fissiparous tendencies raise their heads as the dream of "national reconstruction" gets snuffed out.
To say this is not to retreat to the Kautskyite position of `` ultraimperialism'' from Lenin's emphasis on inter-imperialist rivalry. The point is not to absolutise the degree of coherence that the imperialist powers have displayed hitherto. Severe inter-imperialist contradictions exist and intensify with the U.S. progressively losing its pre-eminent position, her markets progressively being taken over by Japanese capital, her debtor status getting progressively accentuated, and her government under increasing pressure to go protectionist. The ``stability'' that has hitherto characterised the capitalist world despite all its vicissitudes, is bound to disappear with the intensification of inter-imperialist contradictions. The point is to underline the complexity characterising capitalist development in particular conjunctures which can not be reduced to simple formulae.
Imperialism thus, has shown far greater reserves of strength and far greater resilience than had been earlier imagined. To underestimate this strength, its manoeuvres to recover from defeats is not only suicidal from a strategic point of view, but what is more it creates false hopes among the revolutionary ranks and quickly leads to ideological disillusionment. This does not and cannot mean that capitalism and imperialism is invincible. We live in 31 a present situation, when favourable conjunctures for imperialism are bound to be followed by periods when it is driven with incoherence, antagonisms, rivalries and crises. And in this sense there can be no going back upon the Leninist vision. But the transition from capitalism to socialism is likely to be a far more protracted process with setbacks upon the way, with imperialism regrouping its strength with reversals even in countries that had once witnessed socialist revolutions and appeared firmly set on the path of socialism and so on. The point is to change the world by looking unflinchingly at the objective reality, falling prey neither to false euphoria nor to pettybourgeois despair.
The task of enriching Marxism and carrying forward the revolutionary struggle in the present circumstances requires a deeper theoretical study of the contemporary processes that are taking place. In fact, the stupendous task which was undertaken by Lenin in his time needs to be carried forward. The Marxist scientific methodology continues to remain the richest source of tools capable to undertake this task. A lot of work needs to be done not only regarding contemporary capitalism and imperialism but also in the field of political economy of socialism.
The CPKM) had, in its XIV Congress stated: The short comings and failures in the process of enriching this creative science in accordance with the unfolding historical developments, is not due to its inadequacies or lack of scientific method of its content It is due to the inadequacies and lack of scientific rigour on the part of those who have embraced this philosophy".
The overriding validity and the abiding relevance of Marxism lies in its liberating vision and emancipatory goals. It remains today the highest form of philosophy that expresses al 1 that humanism constitutes and ought to constitute.
The entire quest of Marx during his life time and that of all subsequent Marxists, was to establish the basic factors necessary for complete human liberation. Capitalism as Marx had shown and subsequent developments justify, is a system based on human exploitation. As long as exploitation of man by man and nation by nation continues to be the basis of the capitalist system the yearning for human liberation can never be snuffed out. The world that we know today, the rights that humanity has come to accept asa matter of course, had all been contributions of people's struggles. It is this class struggle that continues to shape the present day 32 developments and its associated human consciousness. The imprint of Marxism on contemporary society and the intellectual development of humanity is inerasable.
The contemporary world situation tellingly demonstrate the unjust and inhuman nature of capitalism. It is its rapacious plunder that is responsible for the terrible situation of hunger, misery, sickness, illiteracy that stalk the millions in the developing world. It is directly responsible for the dangers of nuclear holocaust and worsening major ecological imbalances. The increasing moral and ethical degeneration of capitalist societies, drug abuse, violence, gender and racial discrimination are continuously debasing the finer qualities of human beings. Despite the perennial propaganda, intensified following these reverses to socialism, that 'capitalism is eternal', it today, as in the past, proves itself as a system incapable of solving the major problems confronting humanity.
This is all the more evident from the experience of the former socialist countries. Millions are today deprived of the means of daily existence, unknown to generations under the socialist system. The process of restoring capitalism in these countries, is accompanied by its natural consequences of growing unemploy ment, insecurity, hunger and the merciless tearing asunder of the social and moral fabric.In the name of `Democracy', the dismantling of Socialism took place. Today democracy has been rendered meaningless for the people. The recent attack on May day demonstrators at Red Square has shown the face of this `democracy'. Imperialism's open support to Yeltsin exposes the real class nature of the new order in these countries. Capitalism has thus proven to be incapable of solving the problems of these countries.
The tasks facing communists are indeed immense. The accentuation of the fundamental contradictions of our epoch, the new insidious and vicious process of economic `re-colonisation' of the third world, and the imperialist attempts to impose its New World Order, call for a greater dosing of ranks amongst Communists and anti-imperialist contingents. The unity of all communists, progressive and anti-imperialist forces is the basis for strengthening internationalism in the present situation. It is only on the basis of this that the imperialist offensive can be rebuffed.
Long live Marxism-Leninism!
Long live Proletarian Internationalism!
[33] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of CubaIt is extremely encouraging for us to be here, paving tribute to Marx and stressing his cogency at such a difficult time for the revolutionary forces, when---according to many people---the creator of the proletariat's philosophical, social, political and economic doctrine has already been buried forever. The very idea of organizing a meeting like this is an eloquent evidence that the ``Marx'' of the true revolutionaries is not dead and will never die.
Marx is very much alive in the hearts, minds and daily work of the Cuban people. The socialist and communist ideal he proclaimed is one of the firmest bulwarks upon which the Cuban people's determined resistance is based at this most adverse and critical---but also the most important---moment of our revolutionary history. The collapse of socialism in Europe, the disintegration of the USSR and the merciless US blockade have created enormous economic difficulties for our country and have forced it to summon up all its energy, make the maximum use of its intelligence and activate its most revolutionary fibres in order to successfully overcome this stage we have called "special period''. Our main purpose today, expressed in the idea of "saving our homeland, our Revolution and socialism'', must also be seen as the intention of saving Marx and Marxism for the Cuban people and, as far as our strength will allow, for the international revolutionary movement.
It is obvious that our greatest contribution to Marxism today is the safeguarding of the Revolution itself. In our case, to stand firm and progress means the living proof that the ideal of social justice 34 embodied in Marxism has a possible space in this world. The success of our endeavour and of other existing socialist experiences must offer the most convincing argument for reviving the hope and faith of revolutionaries in the socialist and communist future of humankind. We have the privileged opportunity of making this contribution to Marxism and we are aware of the main and urgent practical tasks that this implies; but, at the same time, we know that every contribution is not only practical but also theoretical, and that, at times such as these, every Marxist revolutionary has an unavoidable duty: the critical and self-critical analysis of his theory and his work. This occasion offers us the framework and the necessary encou ragement to allow us to give an idea of how we see Marxism, both in its universal dimension as well as in the framework of its practical and theoretical implementation in our revolutionary process.
To ponder over the present situation of Marxism in the world is an extremely difficult task. It is an attempt to understand a very complex contemporary spiritual phenomenon which is not homogenous at all and is in permanent convulsion. As a result of the collapse of the .socialist experience in the Eastern European countries and the USSR, Marxism---as the theoretical and ideological foundation of that experience---suffered a violent shake-up, thus provoking the most varied reactions and making this line of contemporary world thought even more heterogeneous.
The developments in Eastern Europe posed a clear question: What will happen to Marxism now? A simple logical analysis shows three possible alternative answers to this question: 1) does it disappear?, 2) does it remain as it is?, and 3) does it change? It can be observed that the three alternatives are defended today from different positions and that they are, in fact---ignoring shades of opinion and various positions in-between,---the main attitudes regarding Marxism in the international arena today. Let us make a brief analysis of these attitudes.
For some, people, the collapse of "real socialism" simply means the death of Marxism. This group comprises both the traditional enemies of Marxism and socialism as well as those that someone has described as "temporary fellow travellers'', who turned to Marxism when it enjoyed popularity and influence and are now in a hurry to show their repentance and shamefully hide their `` Marxist'' past.
35It is obvious that this line identifies the end of a model of society with the end of the concept that supposedly served as its foundation. But, can we really identify the model and the concept when it can be easily proved that many of the constituent elements of that model were not---and could not be---present either in Marx's Engels' or even Lenin's theories, while other basic elements of those theories were not included in the model? It is clear that the classics of Marxism did not conceive or even intend to conceive the exact limits of a universal, abstract, ahistorical socialism of the kind that was later presented as the "only model" of socialism. At most, they formulated a series of basic principles---not always taken into account---for building this new society. Why, then should their concept be equalled to the unsuccessful model of European socialism?
But, assuming, however, that we all agree Marxism is dead, what will replace it? The social problems and inequalities that brought Marxism into being and found in it an explanation and guidance to their solution have not disappeared. There is no spiritual alternative today that can match or surpass Marxism in its scientific potential, above all---and this must be underlined---in its revolutionary spirit. Regardless of its past history, to abjure Marxism today is to do a favour to the reactionary forces and imperialism.
The second noticeable attitude is that of those who, under the pretext of being faithful to the legacy of Marxism, adopt a position of ``faith'' in this regard, believing they will be able to find in the writings of the classics or their successors the ultimate answer to all the problems, without taking reality into account or the facts born out by practice.
In our opinion, this attitude favours neither Marxism nor socialism, hinders its revitalization, encourages theoretical passiveness and, to a great extent, reduces practical behaviour to endless regret for what happened.
The third general attitude towards Marxism is that of renewal. The common elements that allow us to define that groups are the following: on the one had, and in contrast with the first position/ there is the view that Marxism is still valid and alive, and, on the other hand, and counter to the second attitude, is the stated need to develop and update Marxism according to the new circumstances.
36We would like to state in advance that, in our opinion, only the third attitude may represent an adequate starting point. But, at the same time, it is not enough for ensuring a really creative and effective development of the theoretical and revolutionary concepts of Marx. In other words, it is necessary to renew Marxism, but not just in any direction.
It is known that, among the ``renewers'', there is a wide range of positions ranging from a proposed return to the classic Marx of the 19th century, ignoring all of Marxism's subsequent development, to an intended ``modernization'' of Marxism by associating it to certain fashionable trends that are completely alien to its essence and incompatible with it, thus adopting a position that is more yielding than renewing.
These extremes have to be avoided. Neither a nihilistic attitude towards the history of Marxism after Marx, nor the distortion and loss of identity of Marxism to favour its association with fashionable slogans, can be appropriate or really dialectical positions towards the necessary and genuine renewal of Marxism. The only right attitude will be that which manages to raise Marxism to the accurate understanding of the present complex and dramatic situation and restore it as an effective guide to the socialist and communist ideal through a transforming and revolutionary praxis. Such a renewal should be based on the critical assimilation of all positive aspects in the history of Marxism and of other progressive trends, but without ever renouncing the basic principles of genuine Marxist theory and practice.
The above mentioned conclusion leads to other questions: why is a renewal of Marxism necessary? What has happened to Marxism that forces it to design a special renovating stage for itself? And, can this be explained by just analyzing the latest development in Eastern Europe?
In recent years, there has been much talk and debate about the existence of a "crisis in Marxism''. This issue is vital in our view. In the case of a revolutionary and open system such as Marxism, its successful emergence from an alleged crisis is closely linked to the understanding of its causes and to the renewal---also in a conscious way---of the whole system in the direction required by the very circumstances which it intends to explain and transform.
In the context of this work, it is impossible to analyze in 37 necessary depth and detail the factors that bring about this situation and the ways to overcome it. We do not intend to do so, especially since a full answer to these questions can only be the collective result obtained with the contribution of many brave and gifted Marxists from around the world, who---to a greater or a lesser extent---have also embraced this task. Thus, our aim here is merely to offer some reflections on this vital issue.
First of all, it is important to point out the need of not ignoring the difficult and unfavourable circumstances in which the historical evolution of Marxism has taken place. The persecution of communists, the conditions of siege and even illegality in which many Marxist parties have had to carry out their work, the anti-- communist and anti-Marxist propaganda as a constant feature in the mass media, the wars, the international tension, the blockades, the permanent danger of aggression that the socialist countries had to endure are, all, factors that have greatly influenced the development of Marxist thinking and become external limitations to the normal development of the revolutionary concept of the proletariat. To deny tt is would mean being unfaithful to the historical facts.
These factors, together with the ups and downs of socialism's post-Leninist history, caused a series of programmatic principles, forming the very core of its raison d'etre, to be neglected and which, once forgotten, brought about the distortion of its evolution. In many cases, these principles were exclusively reserved for its abstract explanation in the lessons and textbooks of philosophy and were never applied or used as methodological instruments in the development of Marxism itself.
Marxism and socialism are inextricably linked and, therefore, all revolutionaries are obliged to find out the causes and consequences of the collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe and the USSR in all fields, because of its significance not only for the revolutionary movement, but also for humankind.
It is not chance, then, that the failure of the socialist model in Eastern Europe and the USSR has meant the flourishing of a wide range of positions in all latitudes and social sectors, acquiring a particular dimension in Cuba due to its direct influence in the dairy life of the population and, above all, due to the unyielding position of our people and of our Party, epitomized and enriched by the leader of the Cuban Revolution, Comrade Fidel Castro Ruz, In the 38 defence of socialism.
We all know that socialism is not a perfect society. As a developing society, it has deficiencies and imperfections in the political, economic and social fields as an unavoidable result of the very dialectics surrounding the emergence of what is new and superior compared to what is old and backward.
These contradictions are surmountable, provided that there is a political will to openly face and rectify---in constant and total unity with the people---the mistakes made. Cuba, may I say this with modesty, has been and is an example of how socialism can overcome any difficulty, whatever it may be.
The comparison implicit in the previous assertion does not mean that we considered that the socialist experience in EasternEurope and in the USSR was bound to be a failure. Regardless of the number and the seriousness of the mistakes made, the balance left by socialism in these countries was a positive one and, therefore, it still maintains its capacity to be defended and corrected. In spite of attempts to do so, it is impossible to deny the significance and greatness of the Socialist October Revolution that took place in Russia in 1917, the heroic deed of the Soviet people led by the Communist Party in building and rebuilding the huge Soviet State, its leading role in preventing the globalist, aggressive action of imperialism, the defeat of German fascism in the hands of the Soviet people, and their role in the elimination of colonialism.
None of this would have been possible without socialism and, above all, no radical transformations would have taken place in the Soviet Union and in the Eastern European countries, where the overwhelming majority of their peoples were backward and had the lowest living standard in Europe before socialism.
Then, this raises a compulsory question: why did socialism collapse in these countries?
In Eastern Europe and the USSR, the objective contradictions inherent to the socialist development intertwined with factors alien to the very nature of socialism. Circumstancial elements, alien to socialism, brought about a specific political and economic model that began distancing itself from the socialism conceived by Marx, Engels and Lenin.
Of course, without intending to make a thorough analysis of 39 the causes, we will point out some of those which support our criterion that in these countries what was buried was not socialism as a social system, but a specific model which was gradually losing it socialist values.
Among these direct causes, the denial of the democratic essence of socialism is highlighted. The political system upon which the construction of socialism is based in each country---i.e., single party or multi-party system---must always be in correspondence with the history and the balance of the political fores existing at the time of the triumph of the revolution.
The formula to be applied is not---by itself---a guarantee of its success or of its democratic character. What is most essential is its answer to the realities to the most genuine interests of the people.
The democratic viability of the socialist project is not defined by single party or multiparty systems, but by its validity and coherence with the reality of the political model adopted. The working class in these countries was stripped of its leading role and, therefore, it was impossible to promote real democratic relations in a situation in which there was a power monopoly without a real participation of the masses.
Another undeniable factor was the access to power of a ruling group that gave up the socialist ideal. The existence of ``objective'' and ``subjective'' conditions for certain changes can not hide the fact that the failure was begotten and began from ``top'' to" bottom" in most of the countries.
Today it is much more evident that the shared and unobjectionable aim was manipulated for other purposes and that these societies demanded deep changes. Under the just banner of transforming the stagnant socialism, the course was changed---- deliberately by some and indulgingly by others---to capitalism.
When enumerating the causes that brought about the collapse of socialism in these societies, the mistakes made in the construction of socialism are evident.
The mechanical transplant of the Soviet economic and political model to other countries was the original mistake that made possible and produced the gradual loss of the Marxist-Leninist nature of the party. This brought abou t the alienation of the masses from the party, the usurpation of the legitimate power of the 40 working class, the omnipotence of the ruling classes and the corruption that prevented the masses from having the leading role in society.
The characteristics of this model also affected the economic development in these countries during the last decade. In this regard, there is a large number of statistical data and criteria. For us, the main aspect is that the economic mechanism which was applied distorted the real and essential character of the socialist relations.
The irregularities that began to appear in the new relations did not stem from the very immaturity of the development, but, above all, from the gradual alienation of their socialist nature. This was reflected in the economic mechanism and the workers continued to distance themselves from the means of production, without becoming their real owners.
As a result of the above mentioned, at a given time there was a stagnation of the productive forces which froze the possibility of a wide use of the technical and scientific advances as the initial relations started to divert its socialist potential.
The periodic and cosmetic economic reforms carried out in these countries were aimed at patching the ``holes'' of the implanted economic mechanism, regardless of the essential causes. That was the cause of their failure, with the subsequent impact on the living standard of the population due to the hindering of the extended self-reproduction based on truly socialist economic factors.
The above mentioned situations were reflected on the social consciousness of the citizens of these countries, bringing about an attitude of rejection that later on resulted in openly anti-socialist and pro-capitalist positions. .
By hiding the existing relations and contradictions, the theoretical reflections made about reality generated in the society a concealed rejection to that reality and to the theory which sanctified the official policy in a compromised way.
This contributed to a silent opposition of the majority, both to reality itself and to the ideology which distorted it.
The most harmful element of all lay in the fact that this false ideology was held to be the one true Marxism-Leninism and was received and, of course, rejected as such by society.
41These distortions, prepared the ground for a parallel and much more dangerous tendency to develop in recent years which began gradually to instill in society the idea that the market economy was best together with the theory of a supposed pure economic efficiency, quite removed from any ideological context.
True socialist objectives were gradually supplanted by other ideals, with the incorporation of the value and customs of Western consumerism. The principles of the genuine socialist ideal were being displaced by the widespread desire to move nearer to Western societies. All that was required and, masquerading under the market economy, off to join the ranks of capitalism unrestrained by scruples.
We can not ignore the destabilizing role played by the centres of capitalist power. Imperialist military pressure forced socialism to develop a powerful arms industry far and above its real economic capabilities, subsequently affecting the rest of the economy and the standard of living of the population. On top of this, imperialism unleashed an ideological attack all along the line.
The idealizing pro-capitalist ideology of the consumer societies was able to flourish because the existing structures in these countries were rotten to the core.
The ideology imperialism exported by all possible meanscould only prosper under these conditions. This situation could not last. In the destructive counter revolutionary avalanche, just and worthy causes were mixed up with others that were reactionary and opportunist, all of which was prompted, accepted and accelerated by the Soviet perestroika.
Under the conditions described, it was impossible for new socialist relations to mature, whose objective is radically opposed to that kind of environment in that they advocate the dealienation of humankind, making us the subject and object of society itself.
For us, the leading role of men and women, of the worker, without whose conscious and enthusiastic contribution there would be no true building of socialism, takes on ever-larger proportions.
What has been said should not lead us to a sceptical position with regard to this stage of development as Marx saw it. Furthermore, the same attitude towards Marxism was not adopted universally. One example of this has been Cuba. We do not intend to 42 present ourselves as an infallible model, or describe our process as free of errors, quite the contrary. In the course of Cuba's revolutionary process we have made mistakes, but they have been recognized publicly and we have approached solutions with the unbreakable alliance of the leadership and the people, with the support of our value for truth and principles.
So long before the word ``perestroika'' had taken on the universal political significance it later acquired, "interpreted as a renewal of socialism'', our country had begun a program of revision at a social level aimed at eliminating certain negative tendencies that has arisen in the economic sector, as well as an in-depth rectification of errors which went beyond the economy to take in all areas of political life in the country, including the Party itself.
There are four fundamental parts to this all-embracing process:
---The restoration of men's and women's position in society and their role in change. This means taking the Revolution forward under a responsible leadership which, at the same time as it modifies reality, transforms humankind itself.
---It is by its very nature a national process, based upon its own foundations, which takes sustenance from its historical roots and channels this towards the creation of a modem society. Its respect for what is national equals the truest values of universal socialist thought.
---The political aim of rectification is strategic, not circumstantial. It needs to continue for a considerable period of time and involves all areas of life in Cuban society.
---The aims of rectification as a Cuban alternative mean in practice that the measures and the main decisions taken are in order to perfect "socialism from within socialism''.
The collapse and dismantling of socialism in Eastern Europe and the former USSR finds us committed to this all-round rectification process, but it continues to have an unfavourable effect on all the work we have done since 1986 and has come to be added to the immoral and unjust economic blockade imposed on our people by the United States' Government since 1959.
In 1990, the negative consequences rapidly felt in our economy as a result of the disappearance of the socialist bloc, forced us to switch over to a state we have called " a special period in peace 43 time".
The collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union only added to the already complex international situation--- in which Cuba had to take part in an unfair exchange on unequal terms---the imbalance caused by falling prices of our export goods and increase in those of imports, rigid international credit, policies and other factors in the world market.
For Cuba, which did 85% of its foreign trade with the socialist bloc and received more than 50% of its imports from there, it was a hard blow that these activities which had supplied our country were practically paralyzed. All this led to drastic reductions in both productive and personal consumption, a situation which was worsened by an unparalleled reduction in energy consumption, which caused and is still causing a lot of strain.
These limitations seriously reduced our production capacity, which in turn had negative effects on the direct employment of workers, on the one hand, and strongly limited the supply of consumer goods for the population on the other.
Inevitably, these conditions meant a complete change in the work we were carrying out in the process of rectification. Now we had to give priority to fundamental activities that would see us through the special period, the most difficult situation our country has had to face since the triumph of the Revolution.
Of course, it has been impossible to continue the whole social works programme, key economic activity has been halted, and today the distribution of goods to the population is strictly rationed, with the aim of sharing equally what little we have.
The priorities for this special period have been set in order to survive in an extremely difficult situation and to prepare the economic and social conditions for future development. This is the reason why highest priority has been given to the food programme, which is fundamental. Important and speedy steps have been taken in the fields of genetic engineering, biotechnology and the production of medicines. Concrete results have been achieved in these fields and we are now competing with the best in the world, despite the fact that we have had to force our way into market dominated by huge capitalist corporations. The great scientific potential created by the Revolution over the past 30-odd years---a genuine; product of the attention always paid to the scientific training of our 44 professionals---is an indispensable human element in order to apply the scientific and technological achievements to the country's economic and social life with increasing speed.
At the same time as the program for developing tourism guarantees our country revenues in freely convertible currency, it also makes it possible to create new sources of employment, in tourism itself and in the field of construction. Simultaneously, it aims to boost other sectors of the economy related to this now so important activity.
Various forms of association with foreign capital are being encouraged, including joint ventures. We need to create favourable conditions in order to obtain capital, technology and markets so as to revive our productive forces, and in this re-insertion there are new avenues to explore.
This process works on the socialist principles of centralized planning, while at the same time satisfying the interests of the foreign partners and benefitting our population. To this is also added a further reorientation of our foreign trade, under totally different circumstances in which experience and new terms of exchange continue to cause strain.
Despite the complex conditions of the special period, the pursuit of greater participation for the population in Cuba's democratic process continues with the improvement of the People's Power institutions.
The changes introduced early this year were carefully studied and made to meet our needs as an expression of our country's reality and not in response to formulas aimed at pleasing others. The most significant changes were made to the procedure for nominating and electing delegates to the provincial assemblies and deputies to the National Assembly, as one more way of developing democracy in our socialist alternative.
The U.S. campaigns to distort the facts about the Cuban elections made their presence felt as part of the constant harassment of a way of life that does not follow its hegemonic and imperialist interests. However, this did not limit or alter in anyway the course set for improving our democratic system.
The final results speak for themselves. An absolute majority of the population cast their votes, both in the municipal elections held in December 1992, and in the elections for provincial delegates and 45 National Assembly deputies two months later. In these last elections, participation surpassed all previous expectations. More than 99 percent of the population turned out to vote, an exceptional figure in today's world which proves that people in the society we are building support the Revolution. Moreover, 95 percent of the valid votes cast were for the whole slate, which confirms the identification between the people and their leaders and ratifies the consolidation of unity in our Revolution, an expression of the strengthened political power of our workers and people in general.
Far from causing divisions due to any particular interest of one culture or another, in our country the mixing of peoples, races and creeds in the course of shaping the Cuban nation and nationality has emphasized that which is essentially Cuban and strengthened national unity. The participation of the most progressive forces in our society, from the first struggles for independence in 1868 to the Revolution in 1959, in the pursuit of solving our nation's problems has contributed to this beyond any measure. This has brought about a unity that has been ratified by the historical process itself, in which there has been no room for interpretations that could weaken Cuban national integration.
The triumph of the Cuban Revolution led by Fidel is the direct continuation of the grouping of revolutionary forces, their antiimperialist and anti-colonial thought which found its greatest exponent in Jose `Marti'. That is the origin of our tradition of rebellion, our national feeling and our struggle against imperialist forces, which have been constant features of our Revolution throughout these years.
This vocation for national unity reflects at the same time in the unity between the Party and the masses in Cuba, which in turn guarantees the achievements made by our people and is proof that the vanguard has been able to set examples, persuade, convince and group all forces in favour of socialism. The style of communication, the open and frank dialogue, the acknowledgement of errors and the capacity to turn them into victories have all contributed to this. The way in which people's basic needs are attended to is very characteristic of the Party's relationship with the masses. In Cuba, to be a Party member has always meant more work, greater sacrifices and more dedication to the revolution and socialism--- never a privilege.
46Having become a ware of the extent of a circumstantial decision that excluded believers from the Party in our country, the 4th Party Congress, held in October, 1991, passed a resolution eliminating this practice.
This decision, which means that in order to become a member of the Party one is not judged by one's religious creed but by one's desire to defend the achievements and welfare of our people with a communist attitude towards this task, makes the Party richer and strengthens its capacity to mobilize the nation.
At the same time, the new approach that has been taken in the rectification process through the work of the Young Communist League is gaining ground. The mass mobilizations in defense of the Revolution that have taken place on various occasions throughout the country are eloquent examples of this. This fresh outlook, free of any stereotyped thinking and full of Cuban spirit, is today characteristic of the youth movement for socialism.
Now beginning its fourth decade, the Revolution is confirming the role its historical leaders have played in the solution of the contradictions stemming from the generation gap. Unlike other experiences, the leaders of this whole revolutionary process and their building of socialism have been able to combine the traditional path of the Revolution with outside influences, at the same time, achieving the active involvement of its best cadres in order to guarantee a continued improvement of Cuban society. Thus, three generations are united in a single power of Party and State leadership. Proof of this, just to mention one example, is the composition of our National Assembly as well as of its executive, the Council of State, after the last elections.
This has allowed young people to identify themselves even more with the revolutionary project. Because of its tasks and objectives, the vast majority of workers and students feel called upon to participate in the work required to further the Revolution and socialism in our country. There are contradictions, it isa natural process that is reborn with every new generation, but they are successfully solved.
Ever since the triumph of the Revolution, the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, another contribution made by socialism to the Cuban nation, have given the ordinary citizen unique opportunities for social participation.
47The collective spirit of this organization has socialized ways of behaviour that mean not only commitment to but also involvement of neighbours in concrete tasks such as education, health, voluntary work, caring for children and young people and defence activities; just some of the necessary tasks in a system that requires more or less constant participation. Due to their efforts since the beginning of the Revolution, the CDRs are taking on activities specifically aimed at promoting cultural life in the neighbourhood and assist in the smooth-running of the election process. That is its multifaceted approach.
Our way of building socialism also breaks traditional patterns by organizing our people into Territorial Troop Militias (MTTs), created as a result of the increased violence on the part of the US Administration against Cuba in the early 80s. In short, the MTTs are the people in arms, a legitimate continuation of the national revolutionary militia which in its times faced theattack at the Bay of Pigs and with great success fought against the counterrevolutionary bandits in the 1960s. And, asComrade Fidel has repeatedly stressed, its existence, is the best proof that there is a genuine democracy in Cuba.
The defence of the Revolution is a permanent task imposed on us since 1959. The imperialist enemy has never ceased to attack us, always creating new pretexts when the traditional ones wear out. This defence has always been based on a principle: it is carried out by the Cubans and for the Cubans.
Economically, the state of underdevelopment in which Cuba has faced the challenge of building socialism has made it necessary to break the traditional patterns that dependent capitalism generally created in such situations. The achievements made in the Cuban economy over more than three decades are a proof of this. The mechanization of the sugar harvest, the levels attained in the production of citrus fruits, the increased nickel and cobalt production, as well as the changes in the productive structure which favoured industry in relation to the production of raw materials, are among other indicators of how the Cuban economy has developed since the triumph of the Revolution.
The economic policy aimed at creating a balance in the development of the different geographical areas is a genuine achievement of the Revolution with immediately visible results. The 48 changes brought about in the country side have to do not only with economic activity but also with new socialized types of communities. The creation and development of agricultural cooperatives--- on a voluntary basis and not forcefully, as in other systems---and the attention paid to spiritual needs in rural communities, such as access to culture and information, as well as the influence from the cities, have created a city-countryside link which, although generating new contradictions, constitutesa new aspect of the Revolution's agrarian policy.
It is true that we still have not reached the desired levels of productivity in all sectors of the economy and that the service industry requires a substantial boost and quality improvement. We still have not been able to achieve a total identification between the producer and his/her means of production, which means we must make further progress in what we now call the sense of collective ownership.
But apart from that we feel that we are masters of everything we are doing, masters of our country, of our Revolution and of our socialism, which are the most universal values for eradicating the differences that still remain.
The social achievements are indisputable. The accomplishment in public health and education can be attained only through a revolutionary process like ours. The reduction of the infant mortality rate to 10.3 per thousand live births and a life expectancy of 75 years are indicators that are on a par with those of the world's most developed countries.
The Cuban educational system is true to our people's best traditions. The combination of study and work, a legacy from Marti and Marx, is the right one and is entirely the work of the Revolution. The real possibility for children and young people to study is a result of what we have been capable of creating. The number of professionals graduated from our universities, with guaranteed employment, is a result of the educational and labour policy in our transition towards socialism; a specific way of progressing towards the transformation of humankind and our conditions of existence.
In short, the Revolution's social policy has been developed on the basis of a new concept of equity in human development, combined with an efficient use of all available resources.
In this brief summary it is impossible to include all the fruits of 49 our work, along unexpected avenues, in our transition towards socialism as an underdeveloped country.
For many years US imperialists labelled us as a Latin American satellite of the socialist bloc. We have always replied that the Cuban socialism is authentic and emerged from its own history and people, that the socialist ideal united us with Eastern Europe and the former USSR, and that our relations with those countries were a model of a new kind of relationship among countries.
The Cuban Revolution is ours. We set its course and our project-based on the thoughts of Marx, Lenin and Jose Marti-has been conceived, built and defended by us with our own sweat and blood.
Today the dramatic developments that led to the collapse and later on to the dismantling of the socialist model in Eastern Europe confirm this assertion. Cuba continues to build socialism as the only legitimate alternative that specifically combines the most sacred values of homeland, revolution and socialism.
May I conclude this lecture with the words of the leader and guide of the Cuban Revolution, Comrade Fidel Castro, on September 28th 1964: "Our Revolution has an obligation, we all have an obligation to the founders of Marxism, and---first and foremost---this is an internationalist obligation. And what is it? To struggle for the prestige of their ideas, to struggle for the triumph of their ideas".
[50] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Workers' Party of KoreaComrades,
I would like, first of all, to express my sincere gratitude, upon the authorization of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party of Korea, to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) for the invitation and warm welcome extended to us at this international seminar of communist and workers' parties on the present situation and the validity of Marxism.
Allow me also to convey the warm comradely greetings and militant solidarity from the membership of the Workers' Party of Korea and the Korean people to the delegates of the communist and workers' parties of different countries participating in this seminar. Today the progressive mankind of the world is marking significantly the 175th birthday of Karl Marx, the outstanding leader of the international working class and the author of the scientific communist doctrine.
Although it is more than half a century since Marx pioneered the revolutionary cause of the working class for freedom and liberation, his name and Marxism for that matter are still enshrined in the hearts of the communists and peoples of all countries.
Marx provided the working class with an ideological and theoretical weapon for its liberation for the first time in history, and threw light on the road to socialism and communism, the ideal of mankind, thereby making an immortal contribution to the development of human history.
The international communist movement under the banner of 51 Marxism has scored one victory after another in its ceaseless struggle against all shades of anti-revolutionary ideas.
When ever there was a big change in the historical development, the bourgeois thinkers and their followers made a noise about the so-called incorrectness of Marxism and declared that Marxism had been buried in the dustbin of history. History, however, proved that it was not Marxism that went to the scrapheap but all sorts of counter-revolutionary and revisionist tendencies which tried in vain to vilify and negate Marxism.
Revisionism was born and developed in Germany, which can be said to be the motherland of Marxism, at a time when industrial capitalism was going over to the stage of imperialism, and it took a heavy toll on the international communist movement.
But Lenin, on the basis of scientific analysis of the reactionary nature of imperialism, further developed Marxism by propounding a new idea on the possibility of a victorious socialist revolution in one country. Relying on the revolutionary principles of Marxism, he powerfully organized and mobilized the masses of working people and led the October Socialist Revolution to victory.
Despite vicious moves of the imperialists to stifle it, socialism grew from strength to strength and, at last, developed into a global system. This dealt a heavy blow to the imperialists.
Faced with a crisis of bankruptcy, the imperialists pursued a social policy aimed at covering up the contradictions between the workersand capitalists with a deceptive slogan of a "welfare state'', and, externally, they colluded with each other politically and militarily, economically and technologically and tried to internationalize the capital.
At the same time, in line with the neo-colonialistic policy, they subjugated newly independent, developing countries politically and economically. Imperialism, thus revived, further stepped up its anti-socialist offensive. This, however, was only the desperate effort of imperialism living its last days, and history, at this point in time, was at a turning-point ushering in the final defeat of imperialism and the world-historic victory of socialism.
It was at this juncture that, within the international communist movement, a new form of revisionism raised its head, finding its expression in giving up the revolutionary principles of Marxism 52 and submitting to the pressure and challenges of the imperialists. This brought about serious consequences, that is, the frustration of socialism in the Soviet Union, the motherland of Leninism, and in eastern Europe.
The imperialists and revisionists are making a big noise about this situation, saying that Marxism-Leninism has gone bankrupt and that the international communist movement was brought to an end.
The collapse of socialism in some countries does not signify the failure of Marxism. On the contrary, it means the failure of the counter-revolutionary line of the revisionists who abandoned the revolutionary principles of Marxism.
Marxism proved that:
Firstly, it is inevitable that capitalism will fade away and socialism triumph,~
Secondly, transition from capitalism to socialism can only be realized through uncompromising revolutionary struggle against the old exploiting class,~
Thirdly, victory in the revolution can be won only when the popular masses are awakened to consciousness and organized under the leadership of a working-class party, and ~
Fourthly, the cause of socialism and communism is an international one and, therefore, it can triumph through the strengthening of the intemationalistic unity and solidarity.
The revolutionary principles of Marxism remain a truth and still serve as a guide for those who are fighting for socialism and communism.
Today the imperialists appear to be flourishing, but the end of the cold war itself means the failure of the policy of strength and this, in turn, foretells doom for the imperialists who have relied on this policy. The internal contradictions of the imperialists are becoming all the more pronounced, the confrontation and discord among imperialist powers getting more aggravated and the everwidening gap between the North and the South is posing serious threat to the lifeline of the imperialists.
The reality today demands that we defend the revolutionary principles of Marxism and develop them in a creative manner in the 53 revolutionary struggle to suit the new historical conditions, thereby speeding up the ultimate defeat of imperialism and the worldhistorical victory of socialism.
Since it assumed the leadership of our people's revolutionary struggle, our Party has invariably maintained the revolutionary principles of Marxism.
In the early years of his revolutionary activities when he was blazing the path for the Korean revolution under the banner of Marxism and Leninism, the great leader of our Party and our people, Comrade Kim II Sung, created the Juche idea in keeping with the requirements of the time and the Korean revolution, thereby initiating the building of a socialist society centred on the popular masses.
The Juche idea means, in a nutshell, that the masters of the revolution and construction are the masses of people and that they are also the motive force of the revolution and construction.
As the people are the motive force of the revolution and construction, the success or failure in the revolution and construction depends on how they adhere to the position of masters and fullfil the role as such.
From this perspective, our Party has regarded it as the basic method of the revolution and construction to strengthen the motive force and enhance its role.
Our Party has consistently upheld the principles of Juche in ideology, independence in politics, self-sufficiency in the economy and self-reliance in defence. We have also maintained the general line of socialist construction, namely, strengthening the people's government, enhancing its function and role and stepping up the three revolutions---ideological, technical and cultural. The above principles and the general line of socialist construction embody the idea on strengthening the motive force and enhancing its role.
The Korean people are united with one purpose and will around the Party and the leader and, under the leadership of the Party, they are adhering to the position of masters and fulfilling their responsibility and role as masters in all fields of the revolution and construction.
Our people emerged victorious from two revolutionary wars against imperialism, from two periods of subsequent 54 reconstruction and two phases of social revolution. They have now built a people-oriented socialist society in which the principles of independence, self-sufficiency and self-defence are thoroughly applied.
At present our people under the wise leadership of the great leader Comrade Kim II Sung and the dear leader Comrade Kim Jong II are vigorously marching forward in an effort to bring about earlier the final victory of the cause of socialism of our own style with the immutable belief in socialism centred on the popular masses.
The imperialists are trying every means at their disposal such as pressure and blackmail to strangle the socialist cause of our people.
Taking issue with us on the non-existing "nuclear problem'', the United States is threatening to use military means and even attempting to apply certain ``sanctions' against us through the UN.
With no moves can the imperialists hinder the progress of our people who are fighting for the cause of socialism firmly rallied behind the Party and the leader.
What is important at present in safeguarding and advancing the cause of socialism is to staunchly abide by the ideal of socialism and its revolutionary principles in the face of all kinds of offensives and abuses by the imperialists and the renegades of socialism.
As the path of socialism and communism is an untrodden path to be paved in the course of decisive struggle against all kinds of reactionary forces, it cannot be achieved without difficulties and trials.
The imperialists, referring to the frustration of socialism in some countries, are abusing socialism, pretending that the socialist ideal itself is faulty.
It was against this background that, in Pyongyang, communist and workers' parties of many countries of the world made public a declaration which mirrored their common aspirations and resolve to safeguard and advance the cause of socialism.
The Pyongyang Declaration has stressed the validity and correctness of the socialist cause and the inevitability of its final victory and demonstrated to the world that there exist powerful forces determined to remain faithful to the socialist ideal. The Declaration 55 dealt a telling blow to the imperialists and the renegades of socialism in their noisy campaign to publicize the `end' of socialism and implanted great hope in the minds of the people who were concerned about the future of socialism.
Only socialism can meet the desire of the people to become the masters of the state and society freed from all forms of exploitation, oppression, domination and subjugation.
The former socialist countries paint a dismal picture in which the law of jungle is in full practice: the gap between the rich and the poor are ever-widening : all kinds of social evils---corruption, killings and gangsterism---are commonplace: the people are suffering from unemployment and starvation: fierce bloody antagonism and conflict between different nationalities are taking everybody by surprise.
The reality reveals that the road to capitalism does not lead to a "welfare society" or "material prosperity" but to destruction and disgrace.
Only socialism, the ideal of humanity and genuine peopleoriented society representing the future, will lead to true freedom and happiness for all. Only socialism will lead to the independent development and prosperity for all countries and nations. Only socialism will lead to the realization of the long-running aspirations of mankind to a durable peace.
The Pyongyang Declaration underlined the idea that the communist and workers' parties must abide by the principle of independence and the revolutionary principles of socialism and that, at the same time, they must cement the internationalistic unity and solidarity among themselves. This idea assumes a weighty significance in safeguarding and advancing socialism at the present time.
The internationally concerted challenges against the socialist cause by the imperialists leave the progressive forces aspiring after socialism with no other choice but to unite themselves to stand opposed to the imperialists.
The imperialist forces and the US, in particular, taking advantage of the tip of the balance of forces in the international arena, do not hide their intention to dominate the world as the only superpower, to isolate and stifle the socialist countries, to put down the revival of socialism in the former socialist countries and to hamper 56 the third world countries moving towards socialism.
With no efforts, however, can the imperialists check the advance of the people towards socialism nor can they save themselves from the fate of ruin.
Our Party will, as in the past, strengthen constantly the bonds of comradely unity and cooperation with all the communist and workers' parties and progressive people of all countries on the basis of independence, equality and the ideal of socialism with the view to safeguarding the cause of socialism against imperialism.
Thank you.
[57] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of VietnamAfter the crisis and the collapse of the Soviet Union and other Socialist countries in Eastern Europe, the evaluation of the legacy of thoughts left by Marx has been raised once again.
Unlike the crises that happened at the beginning of the 20th Century, among forces opposing Marx this time include not a few former Marxists who, due to different reasons, have turned their backs on the communist ideals, and it is they who oppose Marx in the most wicked way.
However, the analysis of the present situation together with the evaluation of the revolutionary and scientific theory of Marx in order to draw necessary lessons for the revolutionary movements of various countries and to create orientation for the evolution of history is a current issue of great significance.
1. It can be said that never has there been a collapse of a political system with such a rapid speed and on such a large scale. "Has history come to an end?" - Has the historic struggle between socialism and capitalism been finally settled with the collapse of the socialist states in Soviet Union and East Europe?
For several years now, if people's*perception of history had not been manipulated and if they were not ``feeling'' the psychological and political ``shock'', it would not have been so easy to deny the vitality of marxism and the theory on scientific socialism founded by Karl Marx.
The theory on scientific socialism, an integral part of Marxism, 58 a theory of the liberation of human kind from all forms of exploitation and enslavement is still the right thought of humanity.
We do not deny that the theory of Marx as well as other scientific theories can not be devoid of certain limitations or imperfections due to the lack of historic experiences or accurate forecasts of the future. However, the foundations of Marx's theory based on the crystallization of the quintessence of human-kind's thoughts, the materialistic dialectics the law of motion of nature, society and thinking, the historical viewpoint which underlines that the mode of production of human-kind's material wealth is the foundation for all changes in social life as well as the theory of surplus value which explains the existence and the development of law of capitalism continue to be confirmed by life itself.
Existing socialism with all of its rights and wrongs has certain relationship with Marx's Theory, especially in the period of time of Leninism. In spite of the fact that it was a model that deviated from Marxist ideology to a certain extent, existing socialism has made many great contributions to the development of human-kind in today's era. The face of our humanity in this 20th Century has changed so much in comparison with that in the 19th Century. Illuminated by the ideology of Marxism, enjoying the encouragement of the October Revolution and the support from socialist countries, hundreds of nations with thousands of millions of people have stood up for national independence and they have gained to different extent the rights to life and democracy.
It's existing socialism that rescued our humanity from fascist catastrophe in World War II, prevented us from a nuclear war and safeguarded world peace. Not a few Western scientists have admitted that one of the reasons for the readjustments of modem capitalism on the relationship between capital and labour, between state and society, and on the regulating role of the government with regard to the economy was partly because of the existence of a counter balance represented by ``Eastern'' bloc as well as the experiences of existing socialism.
Today, when talking about socialism and the proletarian revolution, wedo not talk the same way as we did of Parts Commune, but a great actual force both materially and spiritually. Despite the fact that a large part of existing socialism has already collapsed, still there are millions of people who are consistently pursuing socialist 59 goals and path. Now, in former socialist countries, the development of national and ethnic conflicts, the disintegration of economy and the crisis of the political system with its serious consequences fallen are affecting the working people. This has helped the people recognize the need of chosing their appropriate path for their development. Thus, a new struggle for communist ideals has begun.
How then can we analyse the recent collapse of the former Soviet Union and other socialist countries in Eastern Europe? The answer lies in the fact that this collapse had its deep roots from the erroneous understanding in theory together with its leftist dogmatism in the determining of policies, forms, measures and steps in the process of socialist construction. The direct reason lies in the perestroika strategy of voluntarism and the rightist opportunism which represent an ideological and political betrayal. The opposing acts from hostile forces against socialism had quickened the pace of the collapse.
What happened in the past is characterized by the fact that the prolonged defects and imperfections of existing socialism have resulted in the stagnation and crises in many fields. A number of opportunist elements who betrayed the communist ideals were brought to the fore by the bureaucracy of existing socialism, and a part of the masses living in the existing socialist government model (in Marx's words) were alienated. Meanwhile, the modern scientific and technological revolution as well as the political and social changes since World War II have brought about a profound change in the social life of our human-kind, and this demands new approaches, solutions for the new problems.
Dogmatism was a starting-point for the deformations and deviations of the model leading to bureaucratism and gradual shift from the communist goals. In the new situation, in the face of bitter confrontation by the anti-communist forces, and under the pressure of a small number of people holding power, bureaucratism in its turn rapidly degenerated to opportunism and betrayal leading to catastrophe for socialism.
2. For many times, Karl Marx and Engels had stressed that their theory was not a dogma and that they did not have the intention to provide a detailed design for a future society; instead, their theory only brought forth fundamental guidelines and issues of 60 methodological significance so tha 1 their followers could study and develop that theory further and make it conform to the subsequent historical conditions.
Unfortunately, these important teachings have been put aside or neglected. Not a few theoretical points of Marx, even his unfinished forecasts or personal notes which were not for the purpose of publishing have been turned into creeds and absolute truths. All these have made a lively theory become a sclerotic one; a guiding theory has become a force that held back any creative search.
According to Marx, the birth of socialism was not something outside the general law of our humanity. It was not a capitalist metaphysical negation but a dialectical one. Yet, it did not mean that subjective efforts of human-beings were just interplays of destiny. According to V.I.Lenin, revolutionary dialectical viewpoints constituted the theory of Marx, enabling the working class and toiling mass as well as the oppressed nations to have preconditions for a shorter and less painful path of development than that of capitalism.
The simple understanding of that general law has led to the establishment of a socialist model containing many deviations in theory and many shortcomings in reality right after the success of the October Revolution. Lenin had earlier revealed these deviations and shortcomings and put forth the New Economic Policy (NEP) as a way for solving them. Unfortunately, the successors of Lenin did not know how to maintain and develop these valuable ideas contained in NEP; on the contrary, they pushed up the building of socialism with the model of socialist government. They did not put into practice Marx's instructions on the parallel existence of two economic structures, on the role of bourgeois jurisdiction in the period of transition to communism, and valuable experiences on the use of state capitalism, on the restoration and development of the commodity economy at the time of new economic policy as well. The mistakes made in the perceiving of socialist model have resulted in one system of subjective, voluntary decision and policies on, for example, the abolishment of the commodity economy and the market mechanism, the imposition of only two forms of ownership, i.e. state-owned and collective ones. All these have gradually made socialism fall into stagnation and increasingly grave crisis.
613. For the time being, communists and Marxists have to exert more efforts in defending the achievements of revolution and the results of the working people's struggle in order to apply and develop Marx's Theory in conformity with the new conditions of this era.
The historical era in which classical scholars had created their theories was quite different from today's era in termsof content and nature of the problems facing humanity. The struggle to liberate the working class, toilingmasses and oppressed nations had changed into new forms. More than ever before, the teachings of Marx and Lenin on the diversification of various forms of revolutionary struggle that people can use and on the possibility of choosing different paths to Communist goals for nations have become so valuable for us. In his life time, Marx had already mentioned "the Asian production mode" as a typical one; also, V.I. Lenin had referred to distinctive features due to the fact that the proletarian revolution in the future might be different from the October revolution. These ideas should be studied in a thorough manner.
The modem scientific and technological revolution has deeply changed the face of our planet, from social relationship to natural environment. The emergence of global problems such as the danger of a nuclear war of complete extermination, environmental deterioration, population growth, dangerous diseases... require joint efforts from our humankind in dealing with them. However, Marxists should not forget that the oppression of classes and nations is still a reality in different continents; and with this regard, we must understand clearly that there is no general solution for all specific issues.
4. Comrade Ho Chi Minh, the prominent son of our nation had found in Marxism-Leninism the path to liberate our nation and working people. He founded the Communist Party of Vietnam and laid the foundation for the Platform of our Party. After one third of a century of carrying out the revolution for national liberation, the Vietnamese people have scored many great achievements and then started their socialist construction. Like many other socialist countries and for different reasons, Vietnam was also influenced by the old-style socialist model and found itself in crisis.
Our Party quickly recognized the mistakes and deviations of the old-style socialist model and tried to find ways to overcome 62 these gradually. The Sixth Congress of our Party (12--1988) has mapped out the policy of all-round social renovation. The Seventh Congress (6-1991) has officially adopted Party's Political Platform, determining the targets and the transitional path to socialism. That Political Platform has reflected a new development in the theoretical understanding of the Vietnamese communists.
It is safe to say that philosophical spirit of the renovation process in Vietnam is the restoration and development of the Marxist thoughts, that is liberation, creation and development Renovation, first and foremost, is the liberation of the productive forces. To this end, there must be a need to promote a multi-sectoral commodity economy that works by the market mechanism with the control of the socialist government. Lenin has shown that a commodity economy still has potentialities to develop in a new society. But the question here is that of who regulates whom in that economy? And for the interest of the majority or for only small sections of the society?
Our renovation process places man in the focus of the social policies. It is man who is liberated in every sphere will be the main resource for generating other resources. The power of the community, of the great national unity and the power of each Vietnamese will be the most powerful driving force and the unlimited potentiality for the development of socialism. This idea once again comes back to the declaration of Communist Party which underlines that the free development of each person is the condition for the free development of all persons. The motive for all creative activities is the actual response to the material and spiritual interests of man. That's why, in each stage of the revolution, communists should not only aim at the final targets but also meet the vital interests of the people in order to increasingly improve and raise people's material and cultural life.
After becoming a Party in power, communists' responsibility increasesmanifold. The Party should be responsible for the general development of the whole nation. The unity of interests of the nation and of the classes demands that the party should become a force leading the whole society. The journey to socialism must be the one participated by every class and by every strata of the working people, the core of which is the alliance between workers, fanners and intellectuals; that journey strives for the abolishing of 63 every form of oppression, exploitation and injustice, for the wellbeing of the people and the nation, for a civilized society and the happiness of man.
President Ho Chi Minn was the one who applied creatively and developed the revolutionary and scientific theory put forth by Marx and Lenin for Liberating peoples of various colonies, linking the revolution of national liberation with socialist revolution, and connecting national independence to socialism.
According to Ho Chi Minh, the building of socialism must go through transitional political and economical steps in conformity with certain historical conditions of each nation, each state. It is a must to build a clean and strong party being both a worthy leader and a faithful servant of the people, and a government really of the people, by the people and for the people. The great national unity should be implemented, the new socialist man built. It is the essential need to recapitulate lessons of history which have been proved by life, to crystallize the values of our human civilization and to maintain our national character.
The initial achievements madeby the Vietnamese peopleduring the last 6 years have affirmed the correctness of our party's renovation policy. From our own experiences, our party has determined that there must be principles in the process of renovation and the most important of which is the maintenance of the socialist orientation and the leading role of the Party. The renovation strategy is aimed at overcoming those mistakes committed in the past, bringing into play achievements and taking the country out of the socioeconomic crisis. The accurately established processes of that strategy are as follows: to maintain political stability, to shift to multisectored commodity economy operated by market mechanism with the management of the government, to democratize social life in an allrounded manner, to build a socialist government governed by law, and to implement a foreign strategy of "Vietnam wants to be a friend with all states for peace, independence and development''. We are in strong belief that we will successfully build a prosperous, strong and civilized Vietnam.
The experiences of our own of the whole revolutionary movement of the working class and toiling masses of various countries have proved that any complacency of the achievements made can become a danger to the revolution, because human-kind is 64 witnessing a historic competition between socialism and capitalism.
In the present international context, more than ever before, the pronouncements of Marx and Lenin on the unity of revolutionary forces become so important. The Communist Party of Vietnam and people, faithful to internationalism of the working class, have contributed and will constantly contribute to the common cause of the international proletarian class, striving untiringly for the communist ideals.
Marx once said that his theory was a theory of development, and everything in development is always imperfect Certainly, the platform and policy of renovation in the spirit of Marxism-- Leninism and Ho Chi Minn's Thoughts have and will be perfected with the movement of national and international life in today's era.
[65] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Socialist Party of AustraliaIn commemorating the 175th anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx we re-affirm our belief in dialectical and historical materialism, in the class struggle, in our socialist and communist cause. In a word, we are for Marxism-Leninism.
The discoveries of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in the second half of the last century are among the greatest discoveries of the human mind. Built on the accumulated knowledge up to that time, they represent a giant stride forward in our ability to understand the world around us, to understand the processes of nature.
As the science of nature, dialectical materialism also applies to that part of nature which we call human society. It allows us to recognise that which is necessary to be done to achieve further progress in human society. It allows us to discern the direction of events and to influence those events by the conscious adoption of policies and the selection of priorities. It is this that liberates us and makes us truly free.
But it is not sufficient to liberate our minds. We have to also liberate the society in which we live and it is the class struggle which is the vehicle for the liberation of the oppressed and deprived. It was Marx and Engels who were the first to see clearly, in all its dimensions, the significance of the class struggle as the means by which a new society would be fashioned. They saw that the changes brought about in human society since the formation of social classes had been the consequence of the struggle between the classes, some times violent, sometimes restrained, but none-- 66 the-less, continuous.
They saw that thedemandsof oppressed class and their struggles for social change contained that which was new and progressive even though, before the achievement of consciousness brought by Marxism, the struggle of the oppressed was largely unconscious. The successful outcome of the class struggle invariably meant new steps towards a higher and better society.
But what was this objective of a better society to be? Liberation to -what end? What was to be the direction of change recognising that change can also take place in a backward direction? It is also possible for the contending forces to mutually destruct as is pointed out in the "Communist Manifesto''.
The new society could only be a socialist one. That was the form of society which conformed to the aspirations of the rising working class. It would be a society which, for the first time since the formation of class society, had the objective of eliminating the oppression and exploitation of one class by another. It would be a society in which people of all races found social, political and economic equality, freed from the scourge and inhumanity of racism. It would have no place for national chauvinism - the pretense that one nation is superior to others. A socialist society would have no need of war as a means of settling disputes. Enormous resources at present wasted on armaments would be released for the good of the people. It would be a society in which the labour of those who worked would be returned, firstly, in accordance with the work done and later, in accordance with the needs of all. It would be a society of freedom with that word being used in its highest meaning, recognising the rights, duties and responsibilities of citizens. These principles, when implemented, comprise a socialist society.
This is where we have stood and will stand.
Are these ideas and aspirations, passionately enunciated by Karl Marx, an impossible dream? Is it possible to build such a society or is the socialist objective a great idea that does not work? Is dialectical materialism a flawed way of thinking and unable to encompass the complexities of nature and society? Has the class struggle been rendered out of date by the scientific and technological revolution, by the environmental crisis or by political and economic changes within capitalism?
67These fundamental questions have had to be asked and answered by every communist and, collectively, by every communist party as a result of the events which have overtaken the socialist societies and the communist parties of eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.
The Socialist Party of Australia asked and answered them with a decisive, NO! But many people continue to ask them and remain influenced by the propaganda of our opponents and by what they see as the objective situation - the collapse of former strong socialist societies and communist parties.
Up until October 1917 the work of the great ideologues and practical fighters of our communist movement remained a theory, a possibility. But the Great October Socialist Revolution changed that and its achievements in the Soviet Union and in other countries were the first glimpse of the new world which socialism will create. We have no right to forget or to belittle those achievements.
We extend our solidarity to our comrades in the former socialist states who are resuming the struggle in difficult conditions. Their achievements in the past were a source of great inspiration.
We extend our solidarity to our comrades in the existing socialist countries in their tireless and courageous work to find the optimum way to apply dialectical materialism and socialist principles to the task of building a socialist society in the particular circumstances of their countries.
It is one of the main lessons of these times that there is no one model, no single way to either conduct the revolutionary struggle for working class power or to build a socialist society. Our general principles are held in common but the paths to our goal will be different in each case. That is inevitable.
Any abandonmentorweakeningof theconceptsof class struggle leads inevitably to the abandonment of the struggle against capitalism and imperialism, that rapacious and monstrous expression of modern trans-national exploitation and domination which has inflicted such evil in all its forms on the people of all countries. If class struggle is replaced by class collaboration and class compromises the positions of the whole labour movement are weakened. Not only are the economic and social conditions of the working people sacrificed but the political and ideological domination of the 68 ruling class is consolidated and even accepted as normal and desirable.
Concepts of class peace have become stronger in the labour movements of a number of countries and in the communist parties of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This trend contradicts the reality of raging class struggle in many countries.
Despite its sometimes liberal progressive program and some social achievements when in office, despite its often working class base, social democracy's ideology is mat of the petty-bourgeoisie. Theoretically, its call is limited to reform. It means reforms which strengthen capitalism - not weaken it. It is against revolution. Practical experience shows conclusively that social democracy cannot win and does not aim to win working class power or build a socialist society. Its development in a socialist country leads to the victory of counter-revolution.
A social-democratic party has been in government and in the leadership of the trade union movement in Australia in the last decade. In this period real wages have been reduced and the economy de-regulated as demanded by the big companies and the banks. Social welfare has been slashed and the burden of taxation placed more and more on the backs of the working people. Efficient and economically viable public enterprises have been privatised. In foreign affairs the government's policy, with only marginal differences, is at one with the needs of imperialism in the Pacific and elsewhere.
This critical evaluation of social-democracy does not exclude the necessity to find the way to cooperate with social democrats in the struggle for reforms and more far-reaching changes. Our Party is giving much emphasis to the task of building a left and progressive political alternative based on an advanced programme and comprising the political representatives of all the social forces which in one way or another come into conflict with the rapacious demands of big capital - both national and foreign.
The relationship between the Party and the non-party organisations which abound in all societies is an important question. Does the Party lead by authoritarian command and domination, or does it lead by way of winning conviction and by way of example? In our view a correct dialectical connection between the Party and other organisations is to be found in recognition of the specific roles of the 69 Party and the different role of organisations such as trade unions and community associations. The Party cannot replace these other bodies, nor can these other bodies replace the Party. This same question has to be worked out in regard to the relations between the Party, as the leading party in the political life of a socialist country, and the various state institutions. Once again, the Party cannot replace the state institutions nor the state institutions replace the Party. There must be class power, not party power.
While recognising the role of individuals in the historical process, the basic fact remains that it is the masses who are the motor of historical processes. There is no room in this for the cult of personality which, however, does not mean that the contribution of individuals should not be recognised appropriately. The cult of personality is a departure from Marxism.
There are also no non-persons in history. Whether particular persons play a positive or negative role, none can be exorcised from history.
If the role of individuals replaces the role of the masses in the historical process, the necessity to involve the masses in the tasks of the day and develop initiative and responsibility, the necessity to constantly lift the level of consciousness is likely to be neglected. And so it was.
Marxism demands that we at all times base ourselves on objective reality and not on subjectivity or wishful thinking. The gross over-estimations of the past which related to the speed of development of socialism and its position relative to that of capitalism created illusions and wrong policies. The absence of open or even violent class struggle did not mean that classes had ceased to exist. We had no right to expect that the historical process would be a straight road forward without twists and turns or steps back. We are now witnessing one of those steps back - enforced as it might be.
Marxism has always had to contend with deviations. Marx and Engels argued incessantly against their detractors and those who distorted by one-sidedness the universality of dialectical materialism.
On the other hand Marxism contends with dogmatism and leftsectarianism in politics which Lenin succintly and accurately described as an "infantile disorder''. It wants pure revolution without 70 any compromises in the course of the struggle, it regards every objective analysis of reality and every compromise reached in the course of the political struggle as a betrayal.
On the other hand, there is right opportunism and revisionism. It settles for unprincipled compromises and abandons the concept of class struggle. Revisionism rips the revolutionary soul out of Marxism and the struggles of the working class and its allies.
There must be a constant struggle by Marxists against both these departures from scientific socialism. Revisionism and right opportunism won in the parties of eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union but by that very experience its real meaning has been exposed for all to see. Right revisionism leads to the liquidation of communist parties. We have seen that happen in Australia. Right revisionism facilitates counter-revolution and the destruction of socialism-not its renewal, as is claimed.
The experience of these last years have enabled our Parties to not only reaffirm our beliefs but to understand better the essential characteristics and principles of Marxism-Leninism and to apply them better in our work. There is now a greater maturity and sophistication in the international communist movement. The rising struggle of the masses of the people in one country after another shows that new victories are possible.
The temporary crisis of socialism is more than matched by the deep and insoluble crisis of capitalism. The policies of economic rationalism and "market forces" capitalism are plunging their system into its deepest crisis ever. The masses of the people are acting - we see that everywhere. If at the present time the socialist alternative and the name of the communist parties has been muddied it is only a passing experience.
As we continue our revolutionary struggles as contingents of the worldwide revolutionary process, these are a few of the issues which have to be again substantiated in our thinking and in our work. We are not dealing with any failures of Marxism nor is there any truth in the assertion that socialism does not work. We are dealing with unconnected departures and even total abandonment of scientific socialist principles which created the possibilities for the disorientation of the working people and the defeat and overthrow of socialist societies.
Comrades, Marx and Engels gave to us a true compass. There 71 is a special debt that Australia owes to them. In their work on the struggle of the colonial people Marx made the assertion that labour in a white skin could not be free while labour in a black skin is in chains. Marxism, in this respect too, remains entirely valid in this year of the indigenous people.
The full and proper use of Marxism-Leninism enables us to have great optimism and certainty. This is not some wishful thinking but is bom of an objective understanding of the process at work in this historical period. It is a recognition of necessity.
Part of this process is to be seen in the decision of the Communist Party of India(Marxist) to convene this seminar and bring us together. We thank them for their initiative. It gives us confidence that a process is underway which will once again re-establish what we have called the international communist movement. While each party will make its major contribution in its own country, the world situation demands that the collective voice of communist parties be heard. This would be one of the most important steps which could be taken at the present time.
But in the future, our relations must be truly built on the principles of equality, the independence of each party, non-- interference, and at the same time, mutual help and solidarity which is demanded of us when we espouse the slogan "Workers of all countries, unite''. In our opinion none of these principles can be left out.
Reaction and the social democrats have their internationals, the trans-national corporations now organise production on a world wide scale. The leaders of the imperialist countries meet regularly. There is no justification for further delay in the communists shouldering their historic responsibilities and putting before the people of all countries their policies, their demands and their vision of the world which could be.
Another important aspect of our internationalism and solidarity is that between the other organisations of the working class --- particularly the trade unions.
On behalf of the Socialist Party of Australia I wish to thank the comrades of the CPI(M) for their great hospitality and care and to say how inspired we are by their courageous struggles on behalf of the Indian people and by their successes.
[72] __ALPHA_LVL2__ The Workers Party of BangladeshComrade Chairman, delegates, comrades and friends, We on behalf of the Central Committee of the Workers Party of Bangladesh thank the leadership of the Communist Party of India(Marxist) for inviting us in this international seminar. We highly appreciate the initiative taken by CPI(M) to organise this seminar on the occasion of the birth anniversary of the great philosopher, revolutionary, the leader and teacher of the international proletariat who along with his great comrade Federick Engels laid the scientific foundation of socialism to which there is no alternative for human emancipation, progress and civilization. This seminar, organised by CPI(M) will also give an opportunity to the working class parties of the world to reach to a common understanding and ideological stand, to evaluate the present world situation and possibly find out a common strategy for advancing world socialist movement. Such an international meeting of the Communist and Workers Parties was urgently needed. We once again express our thanks to CPI(M) for organizing such a meet.
The subject matter of today's seminar is "Present World Situation and the Validity of Marxism''. Is there anyone present here who denies the validity of Marxism in the present context of the world situation? However, it is true that setbacks suffered by socialism in former Soviet Union and East Europe have caused some doubts among the ranks of the international communist movement about the validity of Marxism. But our party is firmly convinced that the setback of socialism at a certain period of history 73 on certain parts of the globe does not in any way negate the validity of Marxism. Rather it was the anti-Marxist policy of the leadership of those countries that caused the socialism to fail temporarily. Paris Commune, the first state of the working class, existed for few days only. It happened during the days of Karl Marx, when the working class was not matured enough to fulfill the condition for lasting victory. So it failed. Then again there appeared, in Russia, a state of Proletarian Dictatorship, guided by the ideology of Marxism. Under a very difficult and hostile world situation, socialism was not only victorious, but also proved itself to be much superior to capitalism. The wonderful successes and achievements of socialism, the great advancement of the human civilization was due to the successful application of Marxism and Leninism. When Marxism was replaced by revisionism and bourgeois ideology, there appeared moral and economic degradation and degeneration. This very fact speaks eloquently for Marxism-Leninism.
The bourgeois propaganda against Marxism dates from the very day of the birth of Marxism. The bourgeois was at once prompted by its class feeling to realise that the new revolutionary teaching was imminently dangerous to it. In the beginning they started either to ignore it or to reject it as a social science. But this could not prevent the growing influence of Marxism over the class conscious workers and other honest people. Because the urge for human liberation finds an expression in the revolutionary ideology of Marxism. As Lenin put it, "The irrestible attraction of this theory which draws to itself the socialists of all countries lies precisely in the fact that it combines the quality of being strictly and supremely scientific... with that of being revolutionary" (CW vol. 1. page 327).
Then comes the next phase of the history of the development of Marxism. Guided by the ideology of Marxism, Russian workers under the leadership of Lenin built the state of proletarian dictatorship and a society that fulfilled for the first time in the history the cherished desire of mankind - end of exploitation of man by man. Being guided by Marxism and Leninism, Russian proletariat led by the Bolshevik Party and its leader Stalin, built a fast developing society free from class exploitation and imbued with very high degree of moral and human values. There was no unemployment, which is an impossibility in capitalism. Every citizen was guaranteed basic requirements of modem life which no capitalist country however rich can ever think of. Under the leadership of Stalin who 74 strongly defended Marxism-Leninism and practically applied it, Russia once a backward country turned into powerful nation within a very short time. It was socialist Soviet Union that saved the mankind from the horrors of Fascism, defeating Hitler's Germany, while capitalist France, a colonial power was occupied by Hitler within a couple of days. It was only the socialist Soviet who consistently fought against colonialism, while all the capitalist countries not only killed millions of people in order to maintain their colonial rule and to ruthlessly exploit and plunder the colonies, but also quarreled among themselves and were engaged in the most savage wars for the purpose of redividing the world. So more and more people were attracted toward Marxism. Now Marxism could no longer be ignored. The attractive force of Marxist-Leninist ideas is now so great that even the enemies of Marxism had to reckon with it. In 1950, John Foster Dulles, former secretary of state of U.S.A. had to admit (in his book "War or peace'') that Marxism "catches imagination of millions and millions of people''. He asserted that the programme of social transformation elaborated in the U.S.S.R. has tremendous attraction for those who consider themselves oppressed or deceived and also for idealists who want to improve the world.
However, even during this period the bourgeois slander against Marxism continued unabated. A good number of bourgeois intellectuals were busy in finding fault with Marxism. During this period too, they tried to assert that Marxism has become an obsolete theory and that it can not be used as the basis for a scientific analysis of present day world. For example French theologian Pierre Masset while admitting that Marxism as a theory cannot be ignored even by those who would have liked to do so, asserted that "Marxism perished as a doctrine,'' and that "as a philosophical and economic theory Marxism has had its golden age''. But Marxism remained very much alive and effective. Not only the political struggle of the people, but also various branches of social sciences were extensively influenced by Marxist ideas. Karl Popper, Professor of the University of London, in 1959, while attacking the Marxist concept of materialistic interpretation of history admitted that Marxism stands head and shoulders above all preceding social theories. According to him, " a return to pre-Marxian social science is impossible" (Open societies and its enemies).
Now comes the present phase of history. After the collapse of 75 Soviet Union and setbacks suffered by socialism in Europe, the bourgeoisie have intensified their attack on Marxism. Revisionists have openly gone over to the side of bourgeoisie. And there prevails a lot of confusion among the ranks of Marxist parties too all over the world. It is said that Marxism has failed, that Marxism is no longer valid in the present world situation. Why? Because socialism has failed in Soviet Union. This assertion is absolutely wrong. Firstly, the fact that the socialist system once developed in Soviet Union and East European countries was demolished does not in any way negate the validity of the science known as Marxism. Moreover, the root cause of this failure in USSR and East Europe lies with the leadership who did not want to remain socialist. Then why blame Marxism? Secondly, still there are some socialist countries upholding Marxist ideology including the largest country in the world in terms of population, we mean China. China, Vietnam, Korea and Cuba all these countries arc existing as socialist countries. It is a matter of great pride on the part of international proletariat that inspite of constant threat of US aggression and blockade small countries like Korea and Cuba exist as socialist countries. In fact, US has been waging a war against them, but has failed to crush their morale or deviate them from socialist path. Recent economic development of war ravaged Vietnam is encouraging. The rate of growth of China is 12 per cent, which may seem to be a wonder to the Western capitalist world who are now suffering from the worst form of crisis since 1929. Thirdly, even in some of the capitalist and third world countries, Marxist movement remains as a powerful political force. For example, in the city of Calcutta where we have met for this seminar, Marxism as a political force is much more powerful than the bourgeoisie. The declaration of 71 political parties of the world to defend and advance the socialist cause known as Pyongyong Declaration on April 20, last year (1992) amply demonstrates the strength of the world socialist movement. It is then apparent that Marxism is very much alive the world over. To quote Stalin 'To destroy Marxism the working class must be destroyed. But it is impossible to destroy the working class''.
World has changed a lot since the days of Marx. But does it mean that the basic tenets of Marxism has become outdated? No, because Marxism also had its share in this change. Moreover 76 Marxism is not a dogma, nor should it be taken as a ready made solution for the present and future problems of the society. Marxism is a science which is being continuously developed. It is a methodology to be applied in the concrete situation. It can never become out dated. Marx never tried to predict the future world events like a religious prophet or give solution to the problems of the future socialist society for which he was struggling. "There is no trace of an attempt on Marx's part" Lenin wrote, "to make up an Utopia, to indulge in idle guesswork about what can not be known. Marx treated the question of Communism in the same way as a naturalist would treat the question of development of, say, a new biological variety, once he knew that it had originated in such and such way and was changing in such and such definite direction"(CW. vol 25, page 458).
Let us here very briefly try to examine the major aspects of Marxism and its validity in the context of present world situation. Firstly Marxist philosophy. Marx inherited classical German philosophy and developed it to a higher level which is known as dialectical materialism. It is a powerful weapon in the hands of proletariat and other oppressed people who want to struggle for liberation. Idealist philosophy is not scientific and also it disarms the oppressed humanity ideologically. The great changes that have taken place in the social, economic and political life of the people of the world confirm the validity of materialism, and not idealism. Marx was materialist, but "he enriched it with the achievements of German classical philosophy, especially of Hegel's system which in its turn led to the materialism of Feuerbach. The main achievement was dialectics, i.e. the doctrine of development in its fullest, deepest and most comprehensive form, the doctrine of the relativity of human knowledge that provides us with the reflection of any eternally developing matter" (Lenin, C.W. vol 19, page 24). Is there any reason to question the validity of dialectical materialism, the highest form of materialism where dialectics and materialism form an organic unity, in the present context of the world situation? Our Party firmly believes that the philosophical doctrine of Marxism is a powerful instrument of theoretical knowledge and at the same time an effective means in man's practical work of remaking today's world. The unbreakable tie of theory with revolutionary practice isa major distinctive featureof Marxist philosophy. Marxian philosophy is not a subject of only academic discussion. In the 77 words of Marx himself "Just as philosophy finds its material weapon in proletariat, so does the proletariat find its spiritual weapon in philosophy" (Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Law). The main reason for the collapse of "Soviet socialism' is that the leadership of CPSU did not remain philosophically Marxist.
However, Marx himself did not consider philosophy as an "absolute science" claiming to solve "all riddles''. Extending and applying dialectical materialism to social phenomenon and laws of social developments and also social forces, the working class destined to advance society along the road of progress. This is the doctrine of historical materialism. The materialist concept of history, the theory of inevitability of socialism, of proletarian revolution, class struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat etc. was never accepted by the bourgeois scholars and sociologists, as they cannot think of their own downfall. But the scientific analysis of the society and all the facts gathered till now prove the validity of the theory. The collapse of Soviet socialism, in our opinion, does not reject the Marxist ideas. Our Party considers that the doctrine of historical materialism is also of immense importance to us. Rejecting subjectivism and fatalism, this doctrine arms people with the knowledge of the laws governing the development of society. The practical utilization of laws of social development ensures success of people's transforming activity.
Let us now come to the major economic aspects of Marxism. In the earlier period of bourgeois development, the bourgeois scholars tried to be scientific. During this period Adam Smith and David Ricardo laid the foundation of labour theory of value and then Marx developed it further to discover the theory of surplus value. Recently in our country some of the ex-Communists are trying to assert that the theory of surplus value is no longer valid. Why? Because, according to them, in the present period of high technology and computer, the theory of surplus value has lost its significance. This is simply nonsense. Though Marx did not have any idea about computer, he dealt the theoretical question arising out of higher technology in his immortal book ``Capital'' (Vol 1. Chapter under the heading of "Machinery and Modern Industry). Marx also did not live to see giant industrial complex or transnational corporations. Monopoly capitalism developed after the death of Karl Marx. But analyzing scientifically, Marx could predict the 78 historic tendencies of capitalism- the concentration and centralization of capital. His prediction came true.
Marxism is a creative science. It was developed by Lenin, who made a special study of the concentration and centralization of capital in the epoch of imperialism and showed that the process of capitalist accumulation naturally lead to gigantic monopoly association. Leninism which is the Marxism in the epoch of imperialism states that it is the final stage of capitalism and of proletarian revolution. He developed strategies of revolution and theories of uneven development of capitalism and of breaking the chain of imperialism at i ts weakest link. He also developed theories regarding war and peace, national liberation movement and so on. An intrepid revolutionary and innovator in both politics and theory, Lenin set an example of a thoughtful and sublimely attentive attitude to the treasure-store of Marxist thought and revolutionary experience of all countries. There was always a dialectical link between Lenin's innovatory ideas and solutions and the Marxist tradition. The validity of Marxism-Leninism has been proved again and again during the entire course of history of twentieth century. There is no other theory or methodology to understand properly the present world and to change it for its betterment. However doubts sometimes were entertained by some of the honest thinkers too about the relevance of the Marxist-Leninist approach to the present epoch, because of the complexities of life and rapid change of the a ndition under which the Communists, politics adopted by the opportunists functioning in the name of Communist Parties, the difficulties linked with understanding the process actually taking place and with working out political strategy and tactics in the changing situation are reflected in the minds of some people as crisis of Marxism-Leninism. Particularly after the emergence of Khrushchevite revisionism and the betrayal of the cause of socialism by the opportunists like Gorbachev culminating in the collapse of socialist Soviet doubts about the validity of Marxism have grown faster. So there is pressing need for a further assimilation of inexhaustible resources of Marxism and we must guard ourselves against any attempt to strip the Marxist-Leninist teaching of its revolutionary essence and also against the dogmatic approach towards the science of Marxism.
79Let us now pay attention to the Russian episode. After the setbacks of socialism in former Soviet Union and East Europe, the bourgeoisie have started slandering more vigorously than ever before. They have declared that Marxism and socialism have already vanished. We should firmly refute and fight against their false propaganda. But at the same time, we should also find out the causes of this tragic event.
The achievements of socialism are great. These are as follows:
1. Socialism in former USSR, for the first time in world history eliminated class exploitation --- one of the greatest achievement of human civilization.
2. Socialism in USSR (and also other socialist countries) for the first time in the world history guaranteed the basic material need of modern life (such as free education for all, complete elimination of illiteracy, free and equal medical facility for all, housing facility for all, old age pension, st*te care for disabled persons and orphans, job security etc.) which forced some of the rich capitalist countries to introduce some kind of social security to a certain extent.
3. Soviet Union a relatively backward agrarian country turned into powerful developed nation. To quote an U.S. specialist on Soviet, Ed.Hewett, Soviet Union became the second largest economic power in the world. (`Reforming Soviet Economy' by Ed.Hewett). Soviet Union started the process of socialization in the late 20's and early BO'S and during this period of her first five year plan Soviet Union demonstrated the superiority of socialism with her high rate of growth and rapid development, while at that time the rest of the world, i.e. the capitalist world had been suffering from the worst economic crisis of the history. Then again the astonishingly fast rehabilitation after the second world war also proves the superiority of the socialist system. It may be mentioned here that Soviet Union suffered most during the second world war. She was completely devasted and ruined. Many of the experts of the West were of the opinion that Russia would not be able to rise even in a hundred years. Moreover USA and Western powers, Soviet's ally in the war period did not come forward with slightest help. But within three years after the end of the war, the pre-war industrial level was surpassed. Is it not a wonderful achievement of socialism? Is it not the credit of the party and its leader Stalin and 80 the system of proletarian dictatorship? Is it not the proof of the superiority of a socialist system and its planned economy.
4. In socialist system there was no unemployment and never any economic crisis, which is an impossibility in capitalist system.
5. Socialist system in Soviet Union, once a very backward country, attained a very high level of cultural, scientific and intellectual standard. It was USSR who was the first to send man in the space. It was USSR who had the prestige of being champion in Olympic games.
6. Socialist Soviet created a new people with high degree of morality and human values, whereas corruption, crime, gross violation of human values, racism etc. are the natural characteristics of capitalist countries.
7. It was USSR and other socialist countries who contributed much for the freedom of colonies and consistently helped the national liberation struggle of black Africa, Palestine and other oppressed nations, where as capitalist countries (UK., France, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Italy, USA, Japan) themselves were colonial powers and supporters of racism.
8. Soviet Union saved mankind from the menace of fascism by defeating Hitler's Germany fighting almost single handedly.
9. Socialist USSR always stood for peace, where as capitalism is responsible for world wars and regional wars too.
All these facts prove the superiority of socialism over capitalism. But then why did it collapse in the former Soviet Union? Some people say that it was due to the inherent defect in the system created by Lenin and Stalin. .But the fact that it existed against the attack by 14 capitalist states in the initial period of revolution when she was a very weak power and then by defeating Nazi aggression and the fact that it scored great victories in the field of economy and culture refute these allegations. Some people say that the present crisis is due to the policy adopted by Stalin in the decade of 3(Xs. It is simply nonsense to put blame on Stalin who died 40 years ago. Moreover, the period of Stalin was the most glorious period of Russian history. However, the revisionists and the capitalist readers always try to put blame on Stalin only to undermine and demolish socialism itself. Starting from Khrushchev the successive leaders of USSR denounced Stalin on the charge of so called personality cult and alleged that he distorted inner party life, did great damage to 81 the social development and hindered economic development. Our party thinks that these are simply distortion of history. Some people say that NEP should have been continued for a longer period. The present crisis of Russia and former Soviet Union was due to Stalin who introduced the policy of rapid socialization, ' super' industrialization, collectivization and planned socialist economy. Our party considers that those policies of Stalin were not only correct, but also of great significance. Firstly NEP was nothing but a temporary tactical retreat under the then existing situation. Even Lenin who introduced NEP advised the party to make a halt to the retreat and get prepared for attacking capitalism based on private property in the llth Party congress. Moreover had NEP been continued for a longer period then there would have been every apprehension of capitalist restoration and over all economic setback too. By 1926, Soviet economy returned back to the pre-war (first world warHevel. Then Stalin following Lenin's ideas started the process of eliminating exploiting class and private property which he did very successfully. He advocated the policy of giving preference to heavy industry, to the production of capital goods, machineries, power generation and fuel development etc. This laid the foundation of a strong economy, which helped the agricultural production as well. Because of such policy, the production of consumer goods were not up to the mark. But it is quite natural that one generation has to sacrifice for the next generation, for future. Moreover, the impending danger of war and aggression also compelled the Soviet government to go for so called super industrialization. As to the collectivization its significance lies in the fact that it eliminated exploiting class in the rural area, laid the basis of socialism in the agricultural sector, improved agricultural production, strengthened the alliance of workers and peasants who also strengthened the state of dictatorship of the proletariat and on the top of it, it provided funds for rapid industrialization. Stalin had to fight right wingers like Bukharin on the question of industrial and agrarian policy. He also had to fight left deviationist tendencies of Preobrazhensky and the opportunist line of Trotsky who always vacillated between the right and the left.
The five year plan and the planned economy introduced by Stalin was of great importance. The pen pushers of the bourgeoisie have given a new name to the planned economy as command economy. This is again a slander against socialism. According to 82 Anna Louise Strong, an American journalist who lived in Russia during the period of Stalin, "The plan was never a blue-print to be followed precisely - it wasa challenge to be met and then surpassed. It was not made solely by Moscow, but simultaneously by Moscow and the farthest end of the land" CThe Stalin Era' by Anna Louise Strong). Planned economy is not only the essential element of socialism, but also of a balanced economic and cultural growth of any country. Now how far it would be centralized, what would be the mechanism of planning is altogether a different question. It depends on the concrete situation of a particular country at a particular period of time. But what is the alternative to planned economy? The market economy? Is it not a command economy which is dictated by a handful number of big capitalists? The experience of capitalist economy has demonstrated to the world that it is bound to create chaos, crisis, occasional colossal destruction of human and material resources and damage to the environment.
The greatest contribution of Stalin was that he defended Marxism-Leninism, and creatively applied it to build a socialist society. His contribution to the international communist movement is also of great importance. It is very important to recognize his contribution in order to advance the present socialist movement. However, Stalin made some mistakes which were minor compared to his contribution. In the late 3ffs he thought there was no more need of class struggle, as the exploiting class did not exist. That was his major mistake. In the 18th party congress in 1939 he declared, "In place of suppression, the state has acquired the function of protecting socialist property from thieves and pilferers of the property of the people''. In the later period Stalin probably realised his mistakes. But that was too late.
There were other great mistakes too. The leaders of the revolution, both Lenin and Stalin, paid little attention to the legal provisions safeguarding the freedom of individual members of the working people. Comrade B.T.Ranadive, the leader of CPI(M), immediately before his death said, "The constitution of the USSR since 1918 guarantees rights to common man which no bourgeois constitution could think of. Then he continues, "At the same time when it is a question of provisions assuring individual liberty in relation to state, the freedom from the arbitrary behaviour on the part of the administration and the state we find a big gap. There are 83 no checks and counter checks against abuse of authority for the proper implementation of decisions as there are in consonance with the Party and the Soviets" (Theoretical organ of CPI(M), The Marxist, in the issue of Oct-Dec. 1987).
It is true that there were mistakes. But these mistakes could be corrected in due course, had the party leadership not been captured by the revisionist. The main cause of the collapse of socialism in USSR and East Europe was the revisionist and anti-Marxist policies pursued by the leadership, starting from Khrushchev to Gorbachev.
There were opportunist and revisionist tendencies within the party from the very beginning. It is known to everybody mat Zinoviev and Kamenev betrayed the party even before the October Revolution. Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin and others conspired against the Soviet state. Apart from these facts, there were anti-Marxist and reformist tendencies even among those holding high positions. Evidence can be found in the last major work of Stalin "Economic Problems of Socialism in USSR''. In this book we see that Stalin had to fight the erroneous and opportunist views of the then Soviet scholars like Yaroshenko, Notkin, Sanina and Venzhar. Evidence of revisionist tendencies and of growing bureaucracy can be found in the report of 19th party congress immediately before the death of Stalin. Even in his valuable work "Problems of Leninism'', Stalin mentioned aboutbureaucrats in the following words, "The bureaucrats and red-tapists have long become past masters in the art of demonstrating their loyalty to the party and government decisions in words and pigeon-holding them in deed''. However it is unfortunate that Stalin failed to complete his struggle against the revisionist and opportunist tendencies mainly because of second world war. After the death of Stalin revisionists triumphed.
Since the 20th party congress, the party started to deviate from Marxism-Leninism. Khrushchev undermined the dictatorship of proletariat stating that it is no longer the state of the working class. He undermined and in some cases negated the importance of national liberation movement and of revolution. He put forward the theory of peaceful transition and peaceful competition and misinterpreted the Leninist idea of peaceful co-existence. He 84 wanted "to be friends with the United States and cooperate with them in the struggle for peace and security for the people''. He gave a false hope of bringing communism in USSR within next twenty years.
Similar wrong ideas are also reflected in the 81 party conference of the Communist and Workers Parties of the world held in 1960 where it is stated, "The time is not far off when socialism's share of the world production will be greater than that of capitalism-Capitalism will be defeated in the decisive sphere of human endeavor, the sphere of material production...the world capitalism is going through an intense process of disintegration and decay-capitalism impedes more and more the achievements of science and technology''. Today we know that this prediction did not come true. Rather socialism failed to utilise the scientific and technological development though it had the potential to do so. Anyhow that is a different issue. What we want to point out here is that there were more emphasis on the material production than on people's revolution and struggle against imperialism and capitalism. Impression was given that capitalism would automatically collapse, Thereisnotmuchneedforviolentrevolution. Khrushchev revisionism vulgarized Marxism-Leninism stripping off its revolutionary essence. Thatwas the greatest damage done by Khrushchev. Khrushchev's attack on Stalin with fabrication and lies was also aimed at belittling socialist system and pleasing US imperialism. That is how Soviet Party started to degenerate and turned into a revisionist party. CPSU led by Khrushchev also disrupted international communist movement, which in turn adversely affected Soviet society.
Khrushchev also initiated some economic reforms. Though apparently it did not significantly affect the economy, its consequences were grave and opened up for gradual capitalist transformation.
During 60's another kind of erroneous tendencies could be observed in the international Communist movement. The glorious struggle of Vietnam, emergence of Cuba and the successes of national liberation movements created over optimism among the ranks of Communist movement. Surely there existed a revolutionary situation but it was over-emphasized. Lenin's thesis on imperialism, its moribund and decaying character was not understood 85 properly. It was understood mechanically, not dialectically. It was thought that imperialism would collapse very easily by a little more strong blow to it. The capacity of capitalism to adapt itself to the new situation was underestimated. Unlike previous exploiting classes, capitalists have a special quality which was pointed out long before by Marx and Engels. "The bourgeois cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production and thereby the relation of production and with them whole relations of society" (Communist Manifesto). We overlooked these words of Marx and Engels. However, it is again wrong to conclude that capitalism can remould the entire society and bring about a total revolutionary change to perpetuate its existence. The potential of capitalism was both underestimated and over estimated. However the main danger in the international communist movement was reformism and revisionism, inspired by CPSU led by Khrushchev, Breznev and Gorbachev, which created a tendency of capitulation to imperialism and negation of revolution.
Breznev in the main continued the policy of Khrushchevite revisionism. However there were certain differences, though not in the essence. For example USSR helped directly the Vietnam revolution and the national liberation movements of Arab and African people. We recognize these positive aspects of the then CPSU. But at the same time there were instances of causing harm to the liberation movements and betrayal of the principle of proletarian internationalism. In the main Breznev continued the revisionist ideology. In 1966 he ``excommunicated'' China and Albania. Intoxicated by the idea of Khrushchev and Breznev revisionism some Communist parties or the right sections of the Communist parties pushed towards a reconciliation with the bourgeoisie in their own country. In order to maintain parity with USA, Breznev adopted the policy of maximum expansion of military and nuclear strength of USSR which adversely affected Soviet economy. As long as imperialism exists, it is ofcourse necessary to have sufficient military power to defend socialist state. But, in our opinion, it was not wise and practical to spend such a huge amount of resources only to maintain military and nuclear parity with the Western military industrial complex. Breznev relied solely on military strength and not on mobilization of masses, continuation of class struggle and revolutionary education. Military expenditure, out of proportion is also one of the main causes of economic 86 crisis and collapse of socialist Soviet.
Economic reform initiated by Khrushchev was further carried forward by Breznev which gradually created capitalist elements. Party officials were involved in corruption in a big way giving rise to the creation of black money. Bureaucracy developed and the party devoid of ideological motivation became a huge bureaucratic machinery completely detached from people. Breznev represented the bureaucratic elite which sought easy life and growing privileges.
In 1985 Gorbachev came to power. He was the true representative of the black money holders who wanted to restore capitalism. From the very beginning our Party considered the thesis of perestroika and glasnost as completely anti-Marxist. We also rejected the theory of 'integrated world' and 'modification of contradiction'. Gorbachev presented the world situation in a way which did not correspond to the reality. He distorted the history of Soviet Union only to belittle socialism. He also criticized Stalin only to please Western imperialism and to demolish Marxism-Leninism and socialism. Gorbachev completely surrendered to imperialism and behaved like an imperialist ideologue upto the extent that he even justified the exploitation of the third world countries by the Western imperialist powers. He said "We know how important the Middle East, Asia, Latin America, other third world regions and also South Africa are for Americans and West European economies, in particular as raw material sources" (Perestroika). It was again Gorbachev who helped and encouraged the East European socialist countries to go back to capitalism. He allowed and encouraged the bourgeois culture and ideology to penetrate into society. In the name of glasnost and so called democracy he praised bourgeois democracy. Actually he and his colleagues did not try to improve socialist democracy. Democracy was only a catchword to provoke people against socialist system. He himself being the general secretary of the party banned and dissolved it. Let us not elaborate the crimes committed by Gorbachev which is well known to you.
During the last period of Breznev there appeared relative economic stagnation because of the revisionist policy. During the period from 1976 to 1985 growth rates of national and industrial production declined, for the first time in the history of Soviet Union, 87 since the introduction of first five year plan. But it was the decline of rate of growth, not of absolute growth. Targets decided in the two five year plans during this period could not be achieved. Gorbachev declared that he would activize economy. So he suggested economic reform. We as Marxists are not against reform if and when necessary. With the advancement of socialism and of productive forces necessary reform are required. The law of contradiction between productive forces and relation of production exists in socialist society too. When relation of production does not correspond to the productive forces and the necessity of its further advancement, there is need for new production relation. But in a socialist society new relation of production what may be termed as reform does not mean the change of the ownership of the socialist property. It only means reform regarding management of the production, distribution and administration. But what did Gorbachev do? Gorbachev by one after another decrees started the process of privatization, made agrarian reform in favour of restoring capitalism. He encouraged cooperatives in place of state and collective organizations. In case of industry supreme Soviet adopted Gorbachev's plan prepared by Aganbegan and paved the road toward capitalism. Shatalin, whose plan was adopted by Russian parliament by the end of 1990 under the leadership of Yeltsin, started praising market economy and demanded de jure equality of all types of property including private property and that revenue from property should be recognized as lawful profit. The party no longer remained as party of working class. It started behaving like the masters over working class whom they blamed for economic deterioration. Party leaders and academicians like Nikolai Shmelyov suggested unemployment as the only cure for the problem. In short, instead of taking correct path of socialism, almost entire gang of Party leadership decided in favour of capitalism. According to them socialist system is inefficient and unworkable. But it is an absolute lie. Had it been inefficient how could it achieve great economic victories during the period of Stalin and also afterwards? How can we blame Russian workers for idleness and inefficiency when there is record of unprecedented reconstruction of the war torn economy in record time and also of Subbotnik movement during the period of Lenin, which Lenin considered as "the beginning of a change of momentous importance"? The superiority of socialist planned economy over capitalist market economy is very 88 __FIX__ Many "*" are close double-quotes or dashes. much proved by the historic experience of Soviet Union and other socialist countries and also by the experience of capitalism constantly gripped by crisis.
It is true that there was relative economic stagnation during the end of Tffs. But that could be overcome by applying Marxist method and principle of socialism. Let me cite one example. It was during the period of last days of Brezenv when revisionism has already destroyed much of socialist spirit and economy. Reagan administration and its Western allies imposed embargo on the sale of necessary technology for the Siberian project for the gas pipe line. They were sure that the project would collapse as Soviet lacks necessary technology and other components. But Soviet might was mobilized and it scored the victory. Commenting on this incident US specialist on Soviet energy Ed.Hewett (whom we have mentioned earlier) admitted (in his book 'Reforming the Soviet Economy') that the success of the project was due to "the strength of the system''. Gorbachev's attempt was to diminish the strength of this system. Inspite of revisionist sabotages, the system built by the party under the leadership of Lenin and Stalin was still then so strong that economic problem could be solved and Soviet Union could be salvaged under that very system in a socialist way. But Gorbachev had a different outlook. He wanted to go back to capitalism. So taking the plea of economic crisis which he himself created and further aggravated and in the name of so called democracy he put forward capitalist alternative.
Now question lies why did the Russian people agree to go back to capitalism and abandon socialism? It is because of the fact that the new generation since Khrushchev's time were educated and psychologically prepared in such a way that they may prefer capitalism. They were given a false impression that capitalism would give them abundance and freedom. People were calculatedly misled by "the preaching of * democratic charms' of the present day capitalism and fawning over its achievements real and imaginary" (to use the words of Nine Andreyeva, the leader of present day Communists of Russia). Secondly Soviet party bureaucrats who were enjoying better life at the cost of common man's labour and who abused the power were not only isolated from the masses, but were also hated by the masses. This hatred turned the Soviet people against the system without realising its consequences. Now 89 they can see the ugly face of capitalism which has offered them nothing but poverty and humiliation. Conscious people are now revolting against the new bourgeois regime who had befooled them by giving them false hope. The very recent events of Soviet Union proves the superiority of socialism over capitalism and the validity of Marxism.
We may now summarise the causes of the collapse of Soviet socialism. These are---
1. Emergence of revisionism ~
2. Emergence of bureaucracy, corruption and black money which were due to the revisionist policy of the leadership.
3. Lack of socialist democracy within party and society. (It may be mentioned here that socialist democracy is superior to bourgeois democracy which is the democracy of few rich. However, Soviet Union failed to develop further socialist democracy involving all the working people in administration and decision making process and later on Soviet state turned into a bureaucrat state under the revisionist leadership).
4. Absence of ideological education among the people and the influence of bourgeois ideology and culture, sponsored by the leadership itself.
5. Undermining the dictatorship of the proletariat ~
6. Failure to utilize scientific and technological development in an all round way though socialism had the immense capacity to do so,
7. Betrayal of the principle of proletarian internationalism ~
8. Spending on military build up out of all proportions. Communists all over the world should take lessons from what happened in former USSR and East Europe. These are as follows:~
1. Character of the leadership of the Party is the most decisive factor in the construction of socialism.
2. Purity of the Marxist-Leninist ideology should be maintained both for revolution and socialist reconstruction. There may be political mistakes or mistakes regarding economic planning which may be corrected in due course, but the ideological deviation will cause disaster, even the collapse of a developed socialism.
3. Dictatorship of the proletariat should not be undermined 90 and class struggle should be continued to consolidate it.
4. Bourgeois culture and ideology should be incessantly cornbatted by proletarian culture and ideology and people should be continuously educated in the proletarian outlook in the context of the world development too.
5. Socialist democracy is to be practiced and continuously developed so that working people can freely play active role in the administration and the decision making process. Individual liberty of the members of the working people should be safeguarded from the abuse of power by the authority.
6. Leadership of the party shall have to be ensured, not by constitutional declaration but by actually acquiring the confidence of the people.
7. There should be guard against the emergence of bureaucracy by applying such method by which people can have the right to supervise the activities of the officials and the party and the right to criticise them.
8. Under all circumstances party whether in power or out of power should strictly follow the principle of proletarian internationalism, one of the main foundations of Marxism.
9. In the field of science and technology socialist society should maintain its superiority and proper attention should be given to utilize the scientific and technological development of the world.
Let us now look at the present world situation i.e. the situation since the collapse of USSR and the end of so called cold war period. The main features of the contemporary world situation is as follows:
The socialist camp that once existed does no longer exist. However there are still socialist countries including the biggest country of the world in terms of population. The socialist camp that could inspire the oppressed peoples for liberation and did materially and politically help them, is no longer present in the new world situation. There is relatively general lull in the third world revolutionary activity. The socialist camp that could ensure real world peace and check the aggressive role of imperialism is absent. It is 91 said that the end of the cold war had eliminated tension and the possibility of war. But it is an absolute lie. Facts prove that peace has not been ensured. Rather regional wars has become the order of the day. Do not world today lament for the world in which socialism was so prominent?
In the present world situation U.S. imperialism has become more aggressive than before. The beginning of the new decade with the collapse of Soviet Union provided an opportunity for the USA a `New World Order' of their choice. This "New world order" means the heightening of imperialist aggression against the third world. On the other hand it accentuates the rivalries and frictions among the advanced capitalist countries.
After the second world war USA came out as the most powerful state and most heinous enemy of mankind. Until now it is the only state that dropped atom bomb only to demonstrate its power. In the new situation it has become international policeman. US administration has kidnapped the president of a sovereign country, not to speak of other crimes committed by them. It takes us back to the barbaric age of medieval history. In short US imperialism is working against humanity and democratic principle on an international scale.
The dominance of imperialism takes on varied form due to the continuing changes in global politics and economy. The old slogans are giving way to new ones-development, democracy and drug control, though imperialism itself is the main obstacle for development and democracy and US business circles are themselves involved in drug affairs. Even anti-terrorism and denuclearization are interpreted to suit their design, although USA itself is the worst kind of international terrorist and the only user of atom bomb.
__b_b_b__Imperialism, headed by USA while plundering the resources of entire world, wantonly destroyed the ecological balance of the world. US is still arrogantly continuing this sinister policy of grabbing world's natural resources being utterly indifferent to safeguard the environment for the humanity to survive. In the last Rio conference they refused to accept the democratic opinion of the 92 world and go their own way.
Side by side with using brutal military power imperialists are using political and economic means to dominate the world. International institutions like UNO is used as a tool to serve the imperialist interest of USA. The non-proliferation treaty serves as a tool of major capitalist powers to monopolize nuclear technology for war and blackmail and to subjugate the people of rest of the world. For most of the third world countries, prescriptions by the World Bank and IMF ensures their perennial entrapment to the global capitalist system, causing poverty and permanent under development for the third world countries.
However let us not overestimate the strength of imperialism. It has its inherent and unavoidable weakness, manifested by the present economic crisis of the capitalist world.
The entire capitalist world has been suffering from severe crisis. The imperialists want to shift the burden of crisis on the shoulder of the toiling people of the third world causing further sufferings to them. Let us take a brief view of the present US economy. USA is the biggest debtor country in the world. Its trade deficit is enormous. Its central budget deficit is huge. The unemployment is growing everyday and large number of enterprises are being closed everyday. The situation in other countries, including Japan and Germany is also not good. Situation of UK is worse. In short the present capitalist crisis is the gravest one in the history only next to that of 1929. In Europe, particularly in Germany fascist tendencies has already appeared as a great social menace. In USA particularly, incredible social problems are being accumulated . The recent racial riot in USA is the indication of further future social unrest.
Because of the deep crisis and collapse of powerful Soviet Union confrontation among the capitalist countries have become inevitable. In fact trade war between USA and Japan has already started. There appeared three major centers of the capitalist world, U.S.A. Japan and E.E.C. led by Germany. The issue at the moment is frantic securing of market. As the crisis continues, manifested in 93 the global market slump, they are frantically searching for new solution. But there is no solution in the capitalist economy. The point is that the international market is not growing very quickly. Advanced capitalist countries raid each other's market, though third world market for commodities and capital remain the ultimate frontier for the survival of the international capital.
So the inter imperialist crisis has been intensified. Inner contradiction of the capitalist world is at the highest level since the second world war. Of course we do not see the possibility of any war like the first and second world war in the immediate future for a number of reasons. But confrontation in some other form in near future cannot be ruled out. As far back as in 1952, Stalin said, "What guarantee is there that Germany and Japan will not rise to their feet again, will not attempt to break out of American bondage and live their own independent lives? I think, there is no such guarantee. It follows from this that the inevitability of wars between capitalist countries remain in force''. It is interesting to note here that though USA is the mightiest military power in the world, economically it is loosing its supremacy. Soviet Union was once a super power, one of the two mightiest military powers in the world. She still possesses nuclear weapons much more than any other countries except USA. But she lost her importance in world politics. So only military power does not decide every thing, where other more dynamic economic factors play a great role. Can USA be really called a super power who goes to Japan for begging?
Situation in the former Soviet Union and East European countries are still very unstable, uncertain and highly explosive. It is very difficult to make prediction with accuracy where it would lead to in the near future. But it can be said that instability would continue for the coming years. People have lost their achievements. Overwhelming majority of the people have become poor and their life have become insecure, because of the restoration of capitalism. Everywhere and particularly in the erstwhile Soviet Union people's movement to regain their lost rights are getting momentum day by day. Economic disorder exists. Newly created ruling bourgeoisie fails to control the situation and is bound to fail.
In short aggression and arrogance of imperialist powers against 94 third world countries, conspiracy and undeclared aggression against the socialist countries, extreme form of plundering the third world countries by the imperialist powers, extreme suffering of the people of the third world, ever widening gap between the world's haves and have nots, deep and grave capitalist crisis, unemployment and social upheaval in the major capitalist countries, rise of fascist political forces and racism, instability and social unrest in the former socialist countries, inter imperialist rivalry - these are the basic features of contemporary world situation. Bourgeois approach to the situation cannot explain or understand, not to speak of changing it for betterment. Only Marxism-Leninism can explain the complexity of the situation. Only Marxist-Leninist approach can give solution to the problem. That is people's struggle against imperialism and revolution. There is no other alternative. In the context of post-cf>ld war situation the need for defeating imperialism is not over. Rather in the present world situation it has become more urgent. Surely, and imperialist struggle would develop in the third world countries more strongly than before. Demand for radical changes in the structural relations in these countries to achieve genuine liberation and democracy has become more pressing than before. The temporary setback suffered by socialism in some countries does not mean the end of revolutionary era. The economic basis for waging social revolution becomes a more passing issue than the earlier days. The present contours of the international landscape render more potentiality to social causes and anti-imperialist struggles world wide.
In this meeting of the representatives of the Communist and Workers Parties, we on behalf of the Workers Party of Bangladesh would like to place before you few suggestions for your kind consideration.
1. There should be closer contact and occasional mutual exchange of views between the genuine Communist and Workers Parties of the world.
2. Communist and Workers Parties should unitedly fight the opportunist revisionist and liquidationist trend and bourgeois slander against Marxism.
3. Close alliance of all the anti-imperialist and genuinely democratic forces of the third world countries should be developed who should find out common strategy of anti-imperialist struggle.
954. Common front of all democratic and peace loving forces of the world should be developed against racism, communalism and fascist tendencies and for total disarmament, including dismantling of foreign bases.
5. dose understanding among the following international forces should be developed.
a) anti-imperialist movements of the third world countries.
b) revolutionary working class movements of the advanced capitalist countries.
c) genuine Communist forces of the former socialist countries fighting against capitalist restoration.
d) the working class parties in power in the socialist countries.
Let all of us fight for the common cause.
Let us hold high the banner of Marxism-Leninism.
[96] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Workers Party of BelgiumTwo Years ago, all the parties represented in the Belgian Par liament, from Greens and the Socialists all the way to the Fascists, solemnly hailed the "popular revolution" in Eastern Europe, which was to guarantee "human rights" and bring " freedom, democracy"(l).
Two years ago, the PTB was alone in exposing this sham. The magazine ``Humo'' made fun of us: "A world is collapsing, but here, alone, PTB stands firm"
Today, most supporters of our"democratic capitalism" do not dare make fun of us. This is because things are too clear now.
The promised well-being turned itself into the dismantling of the whole system of production. In Eastern Europe, industrial production has fallen by a third in 2 years. It dropped by 17.5% in 1990. and then by 19.5% in 1991 (2). In the Soviet Union, the Gross National Product dropped by 17% in 1991 and then by 19% during the first three months of 1992 (3).
Freedom turns out to be freedom for criminals, gangsters and corrupt people. In Moscow,the Russian Mafia has taken control of more than half of the privatised hotels and shops (4). Latvia has become a banana republic where the Mafia controls every - thing (5).
The human right that the West defends, are the rights of the 97 reactionaries and the.fascists; now that those rights are well established, millions of workers and retired people fall into deep poverty, do not have the right to work, have no dignity and no future. Poland already has 2,200,000 unemployed. In 1989, Right assassinated Ceaucescu and his wife on the charge that they were starving the population. In 1991, prices jumped by 444% in Romania and real wages dropped by 23% (6). Today, the ex-Soviet Union counts 4 million unemployed but will number 15 millions by the end of the year. Thirty million state employees will soon be fired. A headline in *Le Soir' reads: "Forty-five million people on the way to unemployment without compensation"(7). In Russia one kilo sausages costs 350 rubles. A pension is 200 rubles per month. Out of 150 million Russians, 85% live in the poverty level. (8).
And democracy? In concrete terms, it means the rehabilitation of the fascist leader Antonescu in Romania, of the Nazi Ante Pa velic in Croatia, of the leader of the collaboration state, Tiso, in Slovakia, of the Hitlerian leader Stephan Bandera in Ukraine. And Yeltsin offered apologies to Vladimir Romanov, who claims to be the heir of the Tsars, "for the way you were treated under Communism, while you are the moral and intellectual elite of the country" (9).
In 1989, people celebrated freedom. But the first freedom of a people is to be independent of foreign domination and exploitation. Now, in the name of freedom for multinational corporations, the former socialist countries fall into the dark age of neocolonialism.
The Russian Vice-Prime Minister Igor Gaidar has set up a privatisation plan which foresees that 30% of the Russian enterprises will become foreign-owned. Half of the petroleum industry will be sold to the West. (10).
In USSR, had a foreign debt of $30 billion, today that debt exceeds $70 billion, (11). Recently, the imperialist countries promised $24 billion of aid to Yeltsin. But most of this aid will have to be repaid with interest...(12).
The staggering debt will allow the West to dictate its law. This offer was actually accompanied by extremely hard conditions: freedom of imports, reduction of the budget deficit, wage-cuts...
The colonisation of the ex-Soviet Union takes forms of caricature as well as classical forms: Yeltsin is now surrounded by a team 98 of American advisers, including Jeffrey Sachs of Harvard University and Paul Volcker of the Federal Reserve (13).
The great freedom, the most cherished freedom, seems to be^hex freedom of the market. But the former socialist countries discover that, in the name of the free market, they will have to suffer the domination of the strongest. Western imperialism has forced them to cut their trade barrier with the West by 40%. Our multinational corporations can in this way conquer new markets. But the European Economic Community (EEC) will ``liberalise'' only one percent of its imports from Eastern Europe. All kinds of barriers will continue to protecf`our'' markets from cheap products of agriculture, steel industry and textiles(14). This ``freedom'' of the strongest will imply that the countries from the former Soviet Union will have a trade deficit of $40 billion in 1993, a deficit which will compel further borrowing...(15). The dictatorship of international finance capital will only increase, at the expense of those poor Russians who for a time believed in ``freedom'' and democracy''.
In two years, this new bourgeois, greedy and grasping, whose origins are in criminal underworld, has become hated by the majority of the population. In order to protect its new order of exploitation and injustice, this bourgeoisie puts itself under the military protection of the most aggressive imperialism.
Vaclav Havel, the CIA and Radio Free Europe collaborator who pretends to be an artist, has officially thanked NATO for its attitude during the 40 years of the Cold War, saying NATO has been "an instrument to protect freedom and the values of Western Civilisation"(16). Yeltsin went so far as to declare:"Today, we raise the issue of whether Russia should join NATO"(17). Manfred Worner is already saying thaf'NATO has the duty to protect the countries of Central and Eastern Europe" and that it will react against "any attempt to retreat from the positive steps that have been taken towards freedom and democracy (18). Imperialism has put the former socialist countries under the military tutelage. By military means, NATO is ready to defend the recently restored freefor-all capitalism against future popular uprisings. Officers from Eastern Europe will be trained in NATO schools. The new bourgeois of the East will go regularly and humbly to the NATO headquarters in Brussels to attend their meetings(19).
Could it be that the present catastrophe is only the painful 99 transition from socialist hell to a consumer paradise? Not at all. The new bourgeois is greedy and upstart and behaves like a practiced mafia. Crucial parts of the national economies are in the hands of imperialism. The present catastrophe is thus only a long introduction to the process of reducing these countries to Third World status, supplying cheap labor and raw material and becoming dumping grounds for manufactured goods.
The moral and physical misery into which free-for-all capitalism has plunged the masses of the ex-socialist countries should reinforce our determination to defend the countries that uphold socialist ideals:Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos and China. All are under the fire of imperialism which accepts no limits to its arbitrary rule and openly violates international law. The secretary-general of NATO dared to declare: "We do not have to accept injustices simply because of the old rule of non-interference in the affairs of sovereign states"(19). For NATO, the worst ``injustice'' is the simple existence of socialist countries....
All socialist countries are victims of interference and subversion. Some of them have to submit to economic suffocation by blockade and embargo. Cuba and Korea show what small countries of the Third World can achieve when socialism has liberated the masses of the workers; these examples shire the more brightly that these countries hold on despite the diabolic subversion of imperialism, and that the other Third World countries seem to be disappearing into the darkest night of neo-colonialism.
The future of the international situation, and of socialism, will depend largely, in the coming decades, on the evolution of socialist China. Today, in the light of what is happening in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, it is clear that the victory of the counter-revolution on the Tien An Men Square, in June 1989, would have been a catastrophe for the whole of mankind. Imperialism continues exerting permanent pressure on China and interfering in Chinese affairs in the name of "human rights'', by supporting 'Tibetan independence" and by denouncing Chinese "arms sales" to other Third World countries. At the same time, imperialism continues its policy of economic infiltration, of support for the new bourgeois forces that are developing in China with the intention of ideologically and politically destroying the Communist Party, of helping the revisionist forces take power in the party and 100 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1993/CWSVM387/20071216/199.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2007.12.16) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ top __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_SEQUENCE__ continuous __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ throw socialism along East-European and Soviet path.
The collapse of socialism in the Eastern Part of Europe and in the Soviet Union helps all communists to understand that revisionism represents the bourgeoisie in a very real sense. Those who give in under the pressure of bourgeois ideology, those who slide along the downhill path of opportunism find themselves, in the end, in the company of the big bourgeoisie. Today, the analysis in depth of the political degeneration that has led to the destruction of the Soviet Union can conduct all communists to a new and revolutionary understanding of Marxism-Leninism. A renewed unity of thinking is possible among comrades who were previously and in an arbitrary way divided into ``Pro-chinese'' ``Pro-soviet'' `` ProCuban'' ``Pro-Albanian'' and ``Pro-independent'' tendencies. But to forge this new unity, we all need to prove we have a sense of selfcriticism, deepen our understanding of opportunism and revisionism and exchange our analyses of the degeneration process in the Soviet Union. For that reason, the coming together of about seventy communist, worker and anti-imperialist parties in Pyongyang, on the 15th of April 1992, on the occasion of the eightieth birthday of Comrade Kim II Sung, Veteran of the international communist movement, was an important event. It has allowed us to reaffirm our confidence in the future of socialism and to begin exchanging analyses on the development of revisionism.
When it launched the second World War, German imperialism wanted to destroy Soviet Socialism and establish German hegemony in Europe. The death of Hitler and the defeat of the Third Reich did not persuade the German bourgeoisie to change its goals. They continued their fight, under new conditions and with other means, raising the flag of anti-stalinism and anti-communism. It was in the name of anti-stalinism the German Nazis already in 1945 regained political respectability in the eyes of the dominant power of that time, the United States.
Thousands of fascist officials and collaborators from Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union were recruited by American imperialism to fight the Cold War. West Germany was never de-Nazified, tens of thousands of Nazis continued their fight as leaders of the 101 Federal Republic and the big industries. General Gehlen, the Nazi spy chief in the Soviet Union, passed over to the American side in 1944, with all his staff, and later became the head of the secret services in so-called democratic Federal Germany.
In their constant fight against socialism, German revengemongers found unexpected allies among the revisionists who took power under Khruschev in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In 1956, during the bloody counter-revolution in Hungary, statues of Stalin were destroyed; thirty-five years later, statues of Lenin were crushed. The breaking of the statues of Stalin and of Lenin denote the two points of rupture with marxism. In 1956, Khruschev attacked Stalin in order to change the fundamental line of the leadership of the Communist Party; the slow degeneration of the political economic system that followed has led to the global and final break with socialism, accomplished in 1990 by Gorbachev. The collapse of th Soviet Union denotes the failure of revisionism, introduced by Khruschev 35 years ago. This revisionism has led to the complete destruction of the socialist economy, to a social catastrophe, and to an unconditional surrender to imperialism.
In the Soviet Union, the revisionists had to work 35 years to destroy Stalin. Cmce Stalin was destroyed, Lenin was taken care of quickly. This is worth remembering: the pulling down of the statues of Lenin was not preceded by a political campaign against him. The 35 year long campaign against Stalin was enough. Once all the political ideas of Stalin had been attacked, falsified, denigrated, it could only be observed that the ideas of Lenin and Marx has been got rid of by the same token.
Thepolitical burial of Stalin and Lenin was followed by the resurrection of Hitler. The triumph of a rabid anti-communism and anti-Stalinism was accomplished by the full-blown comeback of fascism on the European scene.
The German bourgeoisie has just won World War II. In order to dominate Europe, they started wars in 1870, in and in 1939. Today, by political and economic means, Germany has reached all the goals it tried to reach earlier by war. At no previous time during the last hundred years has German imperialism reached the dominant position that it now has in Europe.
To strengthen its domination in Europe and to reach world 102 hegemany, Germany has a four pronged strategy.
Firstly Germany increases its own economic power and broadens its political influence.
In 1989, while a lot of noise was made about European unification, Germany decided to mobilise all its resources in order to realise German unification.
The West German multinationals have practically wiped out the industry of the former GDR: in 2 years, its industrial production has dropped by 70%. Almost 4 million jobs, 42% of all jobs, have disappeared. One million workers are unemployed, one and a half million are working part-time or are in training(20). In 1991, the German bourgeoisie invested 70 billion marks in the former GDR: in 1992, and during the next 8 years, it will be 150 billion marks per year. (21).
In order to attract the 1500 billion marks that are needed over ten years, Germany unilaterally has decided to raise its interest rates. All other European countries will face serious problems because this huge capital is being drained towards Germany. In the EEC, the total transfers towards the development of poorer regions is only around 20 billion marks(22), only '3% of what Germany spends to strengthen its Eastern arm.
Within 8 or 10 years, the East of Germany will have an ultramodern industry which will considerably strengthen Germany in the EEC and which will constitute a powerful base for conquering Eastern Europe and the former USSR (23). By weakening the other EEC countries, Germany strengthens its own hegemony.
Secondly: in order to become a world superpower, germany strengthens the political unity of the European Community.
Kohl has declared: "European unification is as important for the Germans as German unification''. The German bourgeoisie must widen its control over the other capitalist countries of the EEC, in order to be able to compete with the United States and Japan on the world stage. German multinationals need the large European market to deploy all their forces. Through alliances and takeovers, they get control over a large part of the bourgeoisie of the other EEC countries. Through Europe, they penetrate the former colonial preserves of France, England and Belgium.
The German bourgeoisie demands the political unity of Europe 103 to disarm and subdue the weaker bourgeoisies. Most capitalists of France, Italy, England need the firm support of their State. Only this State can help them, by pursuing a specific economic policy. In a unified Europe, Germany the dominant economic power, will impose its law. It will have for allies satellite states and multinationals from other countries that need a strong Europe. The political unity of Europe means accepting the dictates of the strongest. On December 10, in Maastricht, the twelve EEC countries spoke of unity. On December 19, Germany decided unilaterally to raise its interest rates, forcing the other countries to modify their economic policy.
Germany needs Europe militarily too. In this area, it is the French bourgeoisie, particularly the socialists of Mitterrand who feed the dragon.
Germany needs to wrap itself in the European Flag in order to realise its military expansion and to send troops to the countries that were martyred by the nazis. Europe is the mystification that puts peoples off-guard in face of German expansionism. Germany must also change herself into a European virgin, to get hold of the nuclear weapons which remain, up to now, a French and British monopoly. Today, the German and French bourgeoisie are setting up an intervention force of 25,000 soldiers which they call a European force. This army will be allowed to operate in regions not convered by the NATO treaty, like the Gulf, or in areas where NATO does not want to intervene, like Yugoslavia.
Mitterrand claims that he wants European political and military unity so as to attach Germany to the West and to democracy. But a weakened sheep has never been seen to enchain a starving wolf.
Thirdly: Germany achieves an unchecked economic and political expansion towards the East.
With the collapse of socialism, Germany has recovered an immense zone in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Republics, where no force can counter its offensive. During the last hundred years, Germany has directed most of its expansion towards the East, since access to colonies elsewhere was forbidden by French and British imperialism. Today, Germany takes this route again.
Economically, Germany is already the dominant power in the 104 East. Germany alone covers 60% of the $53 billion promised or given to the former Soviet Union. (26). More than half of the exchanges between Poland and EEC are Made with Germany (27). Half of the $1 billion of foreign investment in Czechoslovakia in 1991 came from Germany. Germany is buying up the best companies there, making any balanced and planned development impossible. In the next 8 years, Volkswagen will spend $ 6.5 billion in the newly acquired Skoda group. Mercedez-Benz has bought the truck companies A via and Liaz (28).
Germany encouraged the division of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in order to ensure its political domination. Each day we can see that the Balkanisation of Africa and of the Arab World have permitted the continuation of Western domination. Just so, in the East, two political tendencies join their efforts to ensure the triumph of the most reactionary elements. The new bourgeoisies must rely on nationalism and chauvinism to get the masses to follow them and make them forget the cause of their misery. German imperialism waves the flag of self-determination for minority peoples in order to increase divisions among them and to incite those peoples to fight each other so as to weaken them all.
Since the bourgeoisie of the former socialist countries are very weak, most of them seek the support of the strongest and nearest imperialist country: Germany. The American, French and British competitors are in a position of weakness. For example, the German and Austrian bourgeoisie have for many years encouraged right wing separatists in Croatia and Slovenia. Without that support, Croatian and Slovenian reactionaries would never have dared declare war on Yugoslavia by becoming independent. Of course, the Yugoslav civil war has its origin in bourgeois nationalism. But it is German interference that gave a murderous and destructive character to this war. As a sign of its hegemony in the EEC, we see that Germany has imposed its policy of support for the destruction of Yugoslavia on the other members.
It has been said that destruction of socialism would put an end to the Cold War and that we will now know peace and democracy. But armed conflicts in Yugoslavia, Georgia, Moldavia, Armenia, Azerbaijan prove that capitalism always means misery and war. Meanwhile, a more considerable conflict appears possible. In the Ukraine, the fascist movement, which is very powerful, has for a 105 long time collaborated with Germany. On March 27, Germany and the Ukraine created a Council of Cooperation to strengthen their economic relations (29). The Ukraine and Russia are ready to fight for the control of the Black Sea fleet and Crimea. The Ukraine now wants to keep its tactical nuclear weapons. 20% of the population there is Russian. The right-wing French newspaper "Le Figaro" writes: " The Ukraine is playing the Western card. It hopes to benefit from an insertion in the German Europe being formed from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia and the Baltic States''. (30).
Fourthly: Germany increases its power and its influence by allying itself with the United States, Japan, whenever it is profitable.
While building up a European army, Germany continues to use NATO as a military guarantee to protect its expansion in Eastern Europe and in the former Soviet Union.
While working to put the EEC under its economic domination, the German Konzerns sometimes create links with Japanese multinationals to fight the American common enemy. Daimler-- Benzturnover $54 billion, 365,000 salaried workers, 60% of German military industry has formed a technological and industrial alliance with Mitsubishi, number one in Japan, turnover $144 billion (31).
The year 1990 marked the victory of imperialism in the cold war against socialism. And it is a Japanese -American, Fukiyama, who has announced the "end of history''. But in Germany, an ex-SS officer, France Schbhhuber raised the next question: Which capitalism has won the cold war? Who has won?. This is a pertinent question. Indeed, a new cold war has started on the ruins of socialism, this time between the United States, Germany and Japan.
Of course, the capitalist system will always feed on wars. Ten years ago, Reagan told us that with a small supplementary effort, the Soviet Union - that devilish power - could install world domination. Today, the CIA agitates against the yellow threat: Japan has launched itself in a struggle for economic world domination. President Bush himself cannot do without the language of the cold war. As the Reds are no longer hiding, a knife between their teeth, 106 behind the iran curtain, he has found their twin brother. Bush declared: "Japan is hiding behind itsown iron curtain of protectionism, the European Community''. And he continues,'' We have won the Cold War and will win the next economic wars''.
At the end of the Second World War, America had become the international policeman, installing their domination on the five continents. For free, they killed a few hundred thousand Japanese to test their nuclear weapons, and James Burnham, Trotsky's former lieutenant, who had become the ideological advisor of Truman, defended the use of the atomic bomb against Stalin. The United States was leading a secret war against all socialist countries, a war that led to the Korean war of 1950. That was the first big checkmate for U.S. imperialism. After provoking anti-communist insurrection in Berlin in 1953 and Budapest in 1956, the United States began their long war against Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos in 1960. They lost, and American power continued to decline. Then, last year, the United States won a most impressive war against a Third World country of 16 million inhabitants. Some people concluded that America had regained single superpower status and was pursuing a political domination as in 1945.
But can we really award the title of "only superpower in the world" to this poverty-stricken country that had to beg $billion from Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to pay for its last war that cost them altogether $55 billion? In a secret report, the Pentagon showed their determination to "discourage every country or nation from defying American Supremacy''. This is a desperate attempt, which is bound to fail, to maintain American leadership by military means. Indeed, other more dynamic-economic powers have already constituted zones where their economic and political domination is already a reality.
If a superpower could survive only on its military strength, the Soviet Union would still exist. However, the United States, which still disposes of the most powerful military machine, is corroded by economic and social problems.
In 1982, Reagan for the first time in American history lifted the central budget deficit over the hundred billion mark. Ten years later, Bush will multiply this deficit by four. In a period of four years, the total amount of American debts has risen from $1,000 billion to $4,080 billion. If we add that figure to the debts of all 107 American companies and individuals, we come to a total American debt of $ 10,300 billion. The United States have already used up its future.
Furthermore, America has never stopped accumulating incredibly explosive social problems. In the United States, social differences are such that in certain districts or regions one could be in the Third World. Of a population of 250 million, 7% of the active population, or 8.9 million, are unemployed. Hourly wage-rates have decreased by 13% since 1973. Twenty-five million Americans, or one in ten, receive food stamps in order to survive. Forty-five percent of black children and 39% of Hispanic children live in poverty.
With all these highly explosive facts at home, it is simply impossible to be an international policeman for a world of 5 billion people.
Then we see that 40,000 American soldiers have to do a replay of Desert Storm, right in the heart of Los Angeles! The minorities of black and Asian people and Chicano, alongside with white poor, who all have to face daily the terrorist oppression of the capitalist state, started a rebellion with nationwide significance. We pay tribute to the courage of all these oppressed people who, in different cities of the US, fight the greatest enemy of human rights, democracy and independence from within.
The world has become a small village. In the name of competition, the Belgian and American worker is pushed into competition with his brother working in a South Korean or Brazilian factory. In the name of competition, the French or Filipino worker is forced to accept over-exploitation and wage-cuts to get to the end of the runnel.
The international market is not growing very quickly. But the modernized, automated factoriesof Japan, Germanyand the United States go on spitting out more and more cars, computers and plastic materials. The capitalist market has become too small to nourish its three hungry beasts.
Swearing eternal loyalty to the common ideals of liberalism and bourgeois democracy, Japanese, German and American imperialists throw themselves in merciless economic wars.
In 1990 Germany, with a population of a quarter of the United 108 States, exported as much merchandise as its American competiton: $391 billions worth against $ 389 billions for America. Japan realised 70% of American exports, but for the last ten years it has known the biggest economic growth of the world. In a period of five years, Japan accumulated positive commercial balance of $425 billion, compared to $353 billion realised by Germany. The United Stated however, has lost a large amount of money by importing more than it exports:the American deficit amounts to $655 billion over the same period.
The American economic, political and military machine has been able to continue running between 1984 and 1990 thanks to the enormous quantities of money attracted from abroad. The net import of foreign capital during a period of seven years was $912 billion. Actually the United States would never have able to survive without German and Japanese financial imports. During that same period of time, Japan had a net export of capital of $402 billion and Germany $313 billion.
Formerly, the United States drained billions of dollars each year, thanks to its investments abroad and to the pay-offs of other countries,. During the first five years of the eighties, America made about $16.4 billion. But during the last five years, due to foreign debts and investments in the United States, it had a net loss of about $13.2 billion in the form of interest and dividends. During that same period, Japan had a yearly import of $ 18.7 billion and Germany $7 billion, also in interest and dividends.
American imperialism is a military giant built on an ever subsiding base. Japanese imperialism however has become the first financial power and is extending its influence over the most rapidly expanding region of the world, namely South East Asia. German imperialism has become the first export power in the world and disposes of a fresh, and extremely vast, market to exploit: Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.
The economic and political confrontation between these three capitalist centres on the five continents of the world will be inevitable. We can not exclude military confrontations in the future. As early as 1952, Comrade Stalin Said: "What guarantee is there, then, that Germany and Japan will not rise to their feet again, will not attempt to break out of American bondage and live their own independent lives? I think there is no such guarantee. But it follows 109 from this that inevitability of wars between capitalist countries remains in force''.
The United States, Japan and the European Community have become the three principal pillars of criminal, barbaric and inhuman world order. Even if they differ in their strong and weak points, they still follow an identical policy of exploiting the working class, robbing the Third World and dominating the countries in between. Communists all over the world have to fight them with identical energy, and never let themselves be used byonein their rivalry withan other. Of course, thepeople of Latin America are especially confronted by the United States, the people from South East Asia by Japanese imperialism, and the people of Eastern Europeand Soviet Union by Germany.
But here in Belgium, we have to refuse both American supremacy through NATO and German imperialism through the European Community. We cannot feed the young European wolf in order to chase the old American one.
The more the imperialists insist on the eternal values common to mankind, the more they will inflict a filthy struggle on their competitors. The triumph of capitalism meant complete return to the law of the capitalist-jungle. All the alliances which yesterday seemed very stable, have now become the contrary. Germany, once the faithful ally of Washington, is now also aiming for the Soviet Union and Japan. Japan is also getting a firm foot on English territory. If Mitterrand reiterates the solidity of the French German alliance, Madam Cresson is leaning towards firm friendship with the United States against Japan and maybe, Germany.
If the United States show very clear weaknesses, Japan and Germany also have their serious contradictions. Sooner or later, German supremacy will be threatened by the interests of another imperialist member of the European Community. If the situation in the former Soviet Union or Eastern Europe becomes explosive, Germany will not be able to control the situation. At the beginning of April 1992, the shares quoted on the Japanese stock-exchange had declined by 54% since 1989. Their present total value being $1,660 billion, about the same as the amount of money that has gone up in smoke. The Japanese insurance companies alone have seen their assets decline by over $280 billion. An expert of the Brussels Lambert Bank estimates that "in 1992--93 we could suffer a major economic crisis. The risk of an economic crisis and the incredible 110 upsurge of unemployment has never been so high in sixty years''.
The economies of the three most imperialist countries are so weak that couple of serious incidents would suffice to seriously destabilise the system. If the Berlin wall fell in a period as short as three weeks, the pillars of international imperialism could fall as quickly. Furthermore we have to bear in mind the following thoughtrwith their policy of stealing and domination, the industrialised countries, with a population of about 280 million, are making life harder and harder for the remaining 4.2 billion people of this planet.
American aggression against Grenada, Panama and Iraq, aimed at maintaining a barbaric world order, reinforces the hatred of the working classes for their oppressors. The new aggression that the United States is preparing with the support of Japan and the European Community against nationalist forces in Libya and against the guerrilla fighters of the shining path-Communist Party of Peru, will only provoke a new upsurge in the struggle of the Arab and Latin-American people.
Whether it is in the industrialised worU or in the Third World, revolutionaries and progressive forces have to break with imperialism in all its forms and colours. Imperialism brings nothing but misery, oppression, hunger, destruction and war. Over here, there can be no European way to socialism, since the Europe in which we live is the Europe of big business, the Europe that steals from the Third World, theEuropeofdecreasingsocial rights and of oppression, the military Europe that wants to maintain the new liberal world order for the East and the old neo-colonial system for the Middle East Africa.
Since the restoration capitalism in the Soviet Union, we witness an escalation of reactionary violence, of imperialist armed interventions and of local wars. When the big bourgeoisie triumphed from socialism, it launched immediately criminal military adventures against the Third World, in particular against Panama and Iraq. Those crimes were justified by "humanitarian reasons" and "human rights" considerations.
The peace movement in the West has accepted the imperialist 111 demagogy and has shamelessly disappeared from the scene at the time when imperialist war occurred in the Third World, and then in Balkans.
At the same time, we observe that large segments of the population express deep fear; people feel instinctively that crisis of capitalism could well, once more, lead to a generalised war in Europe.
In Stalin's time, the international communist movement made a correct analysis of NATO, which is an aggressive pact whose goal is to destroy the socialist states and to reoccupy their territories, pact which is also dominated by the United States, using it to control and to dominate their European allies.
With the disappearance of the Warsaw pact, the pretext on which this aggressive pact was created has disappeared and all the pacifist forces should demand its dissolution.
However, NATO used the collapse of socialism in the East and in the Soviet Union to launch an even more aggressive and adventurist policy. Far from dissolving itself,NATO enlarged enormously the field of its domination and of its military intervention. The War against Iraq was in fact the first time that NATO was outside its traditional zone, its first war against the Third World. Moreover, NATO extended the field of its interventions to Eastern Europe and to the so-called independent republics of the former Soviet Union. The aggression again Yugoslavia shows that NATO prepares itself for interventions and wars in all the former socialist countries.
In these new conditions, NATO has acquired two new characteristics. First, NATO becomes and essential instrument to allow the United States to maintain its position as sole superpower. Besides, NATO is a framework in which German imperialism maneuvers in order to acquire the status of superpower.
At the time when American imperialism reaches in zenith, the marxist analysis of imperialism as the supreme stage of capitalism, as a system of international terror, and as a source of war, proves its entire validity.
Today, US imperialism declares openly, through NATO, that, in the new world order, no country has a right to independence and 112 sovereignty. American imperialism, the greatest killing machine in the world, claims to be the sole judge of the international affairs of other countries; it may invoke humanitarian reasons to violate the independence of any country an to send its army^^1^^
At the same time, one must remember that it is in virtue of the sacred principle of "national independence" that US imperialism has led to counter revolution in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine and Armenia. In all those countries and republics, reactionaries and fascists fought in the name of ``Independence'',while being only mercenaries of imperialism, enemies of socialism and of a true independence of their people.^^2^^
Independence'', ``democracy'', ``freedom'' and "human rights" are demagogic shibboleths under which imperialism imposes the totalitarianism of the free market to the world and imposes itself as a overarmed cop of a world system of exploitation.
_-_-_^^1^^ The Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff published, in the beginning of 1992, two documents on the strategy of United States. One reads there that the United States are "the only superpower" and that this status must be "perpetuated by a sufficient military force to dissuade any nation or group of nations to defy American supremacy" "The world order is, in last resort, guaranteed by the United States, who must act independently when a collective action cannot be set up or during crises that need immediate action" (Le Monde Diplomatique, April 1992, P.I and 14).
General Colin Powell, the highest military authority, has written:"The United States must bear the responsibility of its power. We must rule the world. And we cannot rule it without our armed forces''. "During the last three years, armed forces have been used several times. (...) in the Philippines (twice), in Panama(three times), in EL Salvador, in Liberia, in Iraq (three times), in Somalia(twice), in Bangladesh, Zaire, Cuba, the former Soviet Union, Angola and Yugoslavia. One could also mention the involvement of our troops in UN operations, in Western Sahara, Cambodia and Bosnia" (Foreign Affairs winter 1992--93, Vol. 71).
^^2^^. Today, we see successors of Nagy and Rajk, people like Vaclav Havel who act efficiently as agents of foreign imperialist domination on their countries. As a true CIA agent, Havel declared that "NATO was founded as an instrument to protect the freedom and the values of Western civilisation" (NATO-courrier, nr6, Dec 1991, P--4).
113To maintain its world hegemony, American imperialism has developed a strategy along five axes.
First: firmly put the countries of Eastern European* the `` independent'' Republics of the former Soviet Union under American control, through the military and police surveillance of NATO.
NATO promises to the new bourgeoisies made of Mafiosi, criminals and exploiters which rule in the East, that it guarantees the "stability* of their regime. Under the pretext mat ``security'' includes political and military aspects, NATO guarantees the new bourgeois order and capitalism against any revolutionary movement.
``Our common goal is to improve European security by promoting stability in Central and Eastern Europe''. (USIS, United States Embassy, Brussels, 12--23-9*).
But the reactionary nationalism that dominates in the East leads, during grave economic crises, to civil wars, NATO, which defines itself now as an "instrument to establish an order in the Euro-Atlantic area" will have to undertake military interventions and wars to maintain the ``peaceful'' domination of our multinationalsOLe Monde Diplomatique, mars 1993, P.4). The intervention of American, Dutch, French and Turkish planes over Serbia is the beginning of this series of interventions and wars" (NRC, April 1993).
The second axis of the United States strategyrprevent the reestablishment of the Soviet Union or of close relations between Russia and some Republics.
The NATO armies will keep an open eye on "the risks for stability in Europe of a rebirth of nationalism in Russia or of an attempt to attach again to Russia newly independent countriestUkraine, Byelorussia, or some others" (Le Monde Diplomatique, April 1992, P1 & 14).
The third and fourth axes of American strategy:prevent Germany and Japan from becoming superpowers, rivals to the United States.
The Pentagon says that one must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging American leadership.
``We must act to prevent the emergence of an exclusively European security system, that would destabilise NATO'' (Le Monde 114 Diplomatique, April 1992, P.I and 14).
The new military structure of NATO, and in particular the creation of a rapid intervention force, depending from integrated commandCthat is, the United States) is also conceived in order to better ensure the control of the United States on its dear European allies. Therefore, the rapid intervention force will be characterised by a high degree of integration, up to the brigade level. One speaks of the "formationof multinational units" (Le Monde, 23 June, 1992).
In Asia also, US imperialism wants to "prevent the emergence of any regional hegemony" and "the destabilisation that would come from an increased role of our allies, in particular Japan, but also, ultimately, Korea" (Le Monde Diplomatique, April 1992, P.I and 14).
The fifth axis of the American strategy is to prevent the emergence of independent political and military powers in the Third World.
The creation of a rapid intervention force and the production of nuclear weapons adapted the use in the Third World serve this purpose.
So, the United States will deploy in 1995 a new air-ground missile,the Tactical Air-Ground Missile,namelyacruise air-ground missile that can carry nuclear warheads. Thousands of these missiles will be produced and they will be deployed throughout the fleet of American strategic bomber.'' (Le Monde Diplomatique, November,m 1991). "General Lee Butler and his planners are in the first phase of the construction and of experimenting new computers that will allow Mr. Clinton to us nuclear weapons against Third World countries that threaten the interests of the United States or of its allies" (International Herald Tribune, 26, Feb, 1993).
ThenewversionofNATOisalsothesiegeofincreasedstruggles between imperialist powers, mostly between Germany, candidate to the superpower status, and the United States but also between France and the United States.
The main axis of German strategy is to strengthen its status of economic superpower thanks to the construction of a German-led Europe. Germany has a vital need to control the other European 115 bourgeoisie, in order to have access to the big European market. This market allows German multinational corporations to become big enough to face international competition with Japan and the United States. Germany has also a vital need of European construction, to give a sufficient basis to its political and military ambitions.
Germany seeks now a strengthening of its economic domination in Eastern Europe and in certain parts of the ex-Soviet Union; the superior economic weight that it could so obtain will also increase its hegemony in the European Community.
Indeed, thanks to "peaceful subversion and the betrayal Khruschev, Brezhnev and Gorbachev, imperialist Germany has obtained all that it tried, in vain, to get during WW1 and WW2. The Great Germany of 1993 claims triumphantly that it pushed its heredetary enemy, "Russia, in its borders of the beginning of the 17th century. It claims to guarantee "all national security its borders of the beginning of the 17th century''. It claims to guarantee "all national security interests" of Eastern Europe and of the former Soviet Republics. Here, a special attention is due to the countries that Germany tried to annex during the two world wars. Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic States(former countries colonised by Germany, that the latter wants to make entrance to the European Community), and the Eastern European countries. Lothar Ruhl writes: "Germany has a new European responsibility" "Western security can spread to eastern Europe only through Germany, as a faithful partner of the Western Alliance. For that reason too, Germany should stay in the future attached to NATCKDie Welt, 18 May 1992).
In order to enlarge its domination in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, Germany wants to use NATO. Germany has managed to launch NATO against its hereditary enemy, Serbia tomorrow, it hopes to do it against its only traditional rival in the East: Russia. Germany wants also to use the shield of NATO to further its``peaceful'' economic expansion in the East. Besides, under present circumstances, only NATO has the military and logistic capacity to launch a war against Russia.
But, as ever since 1945, Germany plays a double game, NATO and the European construction. It alternates and combines cleverly both, so as to extract a maximum benefit for Germany.
In the world markets, European imperialists have their own interest, which often face those of Americans, Therefore, they start 116 a "European defence policy"
On May 22,1992, in La Rochelle, Kohl and Mitterand gave the approval for the creation of Eurocorps, announced since 16 Oct. 1991. In their joint declaration, the German and French imperialists claim. The setting-up of this corps will contribute to give to the European Union its own military capacity" (Le Monde, May 25, 1992). This corps will be operational in 1995 as a rapid intervention force. It will include 35,000 to 40,000 soldiers, essentially German and French units,but the Governments of Belgium, Luxembourg and Spain also want to join it.
Germany and Holland will form also multinational army corps of three divisions, counting up to 25,000 men, but which may grow up to 50,000. Great-Britain and Denmark may also participate.
So ``democratic'' Germany is succeeding where Nazi Germany could not: integrate other European armies in multinational structures, under German command. During WW2, Nazi Germany sent French, Dutch, Flemish, Wallon, military units on the Eastern front. This same policy of using European armies to realise the expansion in the East is brilliantly pursued under current conditions. Volker Ruhe said that he wants to give high priority to the notion of multinational!ty for the defense of Central Europe''. (NRC, March 301993.)
The setting-up of an European army is also the only way allowing Germany to get hold of nuclear weapons, so far reserved for the French and the British. "Le Monde" remarks "the French head of state has himself mentioned the possibility that, under a form still to invent, it will be possible to give a European version of deterrence''.
Germany used NATO as well as the Eurocorps to have its armed forces intervene outside German borders and outside the NATO zone: by sending troops in ex-Yugoslavia, Germany announces its intention to have a military presence in the countries occupied during the last world war. By sending 1,500 soldiers in Somalia, it starts military intervention in the Third Word.
The German who try to take revenge prepare actively the day when it will be again``glorious'' for a son of Germany to fall on the battlefields abroad! General Neumann, Chief of Staff of the Bundeswehr lias reminded us that the commitment of an army supposes also mat every man be ready, for the defence of our country and of 117 our citizens, to take weapon and to risk his life, including outside of Germany" (Le Monde 16,1992 P. 5). Germany relearns from William II and Hitler.
You all know the Goulags, those prison-camps in Siberia during the days of Stalin. All of you have learned that these camps were hell on earth. Today, luck has changed sides; the seniors of the very same prison camps are in power now. In 1992, they have caused an inflation of 1,450%. In a period of two years, they have caused the GNP to decrease 32.5%
Meanwhile, criminal commercial networks are making thousands of million roubles. The mafia controls about 45% of the GNP, over 8,000 million dollars, which is more than the Western aid given to Russia. This ``mob'' capitalism is the very cause of the physical destruction of hundreds of thousands of men. 12 to 15% of the children who leave kindergarten suffer chronic diseases. In Russia, many have sold a kidney or some other vital organ to be implanted into a richer body. You all remember that in Rumania the assassination of president Ceaucescu was called the first minute of liberty. Today, we read the following. "Sixty Belgian francs for a thirty year old Rumanian woman. "Child prostitution is causing tragedies at Bucharest. The causes are misery, drugs and organised crime. "In Lithuania 19 monuments have been erected in commemoration of theSS.
The civil war between Armenians and Azeris already counts 10,000 casualties. The civil war in Tadjikistan, with its 5 million inhabitants, already cost the life to 25,000 people.
Today, the reality of capitalism in Russia, where the power is shared by mafia, nazis and terrorists, shows us that capitalism is an inhuman, criminal and murderous system.
It is Western Imperialists that are the prime responsible for the savagery and violent rage that is destroying Yugoslavia.
In Yugoslavia, socialism ceased to exist in 1948, when Tito cleared the ranks of the Communist Party of 400,000 members, Two years later, Tito voted in favor of the American aggression against Korea. In 1953, private land property was reinstalled while the production of the enterprises, self-ruled went to the free market. 118 Since the beginning of the SOs, Serbian and Slovenian nationalism were stimulated in the name of this ``self-ruling''. In 1974, Yugoslavia changed to a confederation where the Serbian, Slovenian and Croatian bourgeoisie received their proper republics. After 1985, Yugoslavia chose to follow a liberal economy. Hundreds of thousands of employees were fired. In 1991, private capitalism was good for 77 to 84% of the economy in Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia. If we believe the lies spread by fascists, Slovenia and Croatia would have been exploited by Serbia and the poorer republics. Nevertheless, the total of income that was redistributed did not surpass 2 to 3% of the social product of Slovenia and Croatia. But this was returned by the basic products, energy and minerals, mainly produced by the poor republics and the prices of which were kept very low by the central government. Since 1945, it have been Slovenia and Croatia that were beneficiaries of the Yugoslavian system.
It was ``new'' Germany that bought up the Croatian and Slovenian bourgeoisie, and rejuvenated the independist and pronazi tendencies of 1940--45., The French General Pierre Gallois noted that since 1990 Germany has been providing arms for Croatia through Italy, Hungary and Chechoslovakia. This firm decision of making Yugoslavia explode has been taken at Bonn. If wasn't for this strong German desire, there would not be a civil war going on in Yugoslavia at the moment. This criminal decision shows that German dominance over the European continent is no longer a phantom, but has become reality. Germany takes, all on its own,strategic decisions that rigorously modify the entire European situation. All alone, Germany has decided the record-time annexation of East Germany, against the will of Great-Britain and France. All alone, against the policy of the United States, Great Britain and France, Germany began shattering Yugoslavia into little pieces and putting fire to the already explosive Balkans.
The growing imperialism in Europe, Germany, using the "people`s'' right to rule themselves" to mislead the opponents, i.e. the countries against German domination.
To succeed this"right to self-determination'', the Germans first have to lead their people into blindness and ethnic and religious fundamentalism. Thanks to ideas dating from the Middle Ages imperialism has forced the working classes to follow the 119 reactionary bourgeoisie of their ``own'' nation or their``own'' religion, that the fusion of different languages, cultures and nations is something infectious. The capital, that only thinks and acts on international scale, forces the people into nations and ideas of local dialects or traditions.
Afterwards, German imperialism can call on "identities that are ethnic ally and religiously endangered" to start their"help to the weaker " using heavy military material. In their quest for economic and strategic interests, Great Germany endangers the sovereignty of States and international agreements, piles up feelings of hatred and causes secessions. But why did Germany want so much the bloody falling^ apart of Yugoslavia, a country with a liberal policy and completely dominated by the Deutsche Mark (even Serbia)
Both the first as the second world war, Germany has always held massive military operation in the Balkans in attempt to create continuous gangway from Hamburg to Baghdad. Two times in a row, Serbia has prevented them from doing this. During the first world war, Serbia lost 25% of its population. During the second world war, Yugoslavia lost 1,700,000 men. United Yugoslavia will always dispose of an anti-German stronghold, a capitalist-but united Yugoslavia will always have the tendency to seek alliance with United States(as it did between 1950 and 1990)or with France. Here is the reason why it was in German interest to make Yugoslavia explode into small powerless pieces, easy to swallow. To make the Croatian and Slovenian secessionists succeed their plans, the European Community has exercised economic and financial blackmail on the Yugoslavian government. On later, threatening with the recognition of the secessions, the EC prevented the Yugoslavian army to defend the constitution and to guarantee the national unity that about the so-called"rightful state" the bourgeoisie pretended to erect in the East.
The Slovenian and Croatian secession, caused by Germany and European Community, already was an act of extreme danger.
But Germany only continued the aggression, that became openly anti-Yugoslavian and anti-Serbian. Moreover, Germany and the EC kept up their offensive by urging for the secession of both Bosnia-Herzegovina as Macedonia. But the creation of these mini-states, or more precisely fake-states without any historical or popular legitimacy or viability could only lead to never-ending 120 civil wars in the Balkans. It was criminal policy that had to lead to civil wan once the EC had launched nationalism and separatism, neither the Serbs in Bosnia, nor the Croatians in Bosnia wanted to live inside a Bosnian ``state'' with a majority of muslims.
The EC has accepted the nationalist and fascist theory that Croatians cannot live in a united Yugoslavia.
Once this fascist idea was deeply embedded, how could the Serbians be prevented to stick to same ideas? The population in Croatia called upon the "right to self -determination" to realise the secession from Croatia. And thus the next permanent war party was created.
The French General Pierre Gallois says rightfully: "It is the policy of Bonn that is responsible for igniting the Balkans, for the thousands of dead and 25 million refugees who are looking for asylum.
In former Yugoslavia, Croatian, Slovenian, Serbian and ``Muslim'' nationalism are all reactionary, against the unity of the working classes and socialism. Behind Croatia we can see Great Germany ``New'' Croatia is constructed on a policy of discrimination against the 12.2% of Serbs who have been living there for ages. According to the constitution, Croatia is a state for `Croatians'. Everywhere signs are visible of the rehabilitation of the fascist state of Ante Pavelic.
Since the Western press never stops denouncing the Serbian aggressor, Croatia can keep on strengthening themselves with the help of Germany.
In Bosnia the Croatian fascists have the same objective as the Serbs. They want to create "Big Croatia" in despite of Bosnia. The Croatians are also widening their "ethnic territory" by taking from the Muslims, the war between Croatians and Muslims is ranging around several mixed villages proof of the criminal logic of ethnic territories. Croatian forces throw grenades inside the homes of Muslims and wait for the inhabitants to come out, to shoot them. 250 casualties in six days.
Serbs are right denouncing Great Germany, new superpower of Eastern Europe, for following a policy of vengeance. But they had two opposite possibilities: the one of unity and socialism in the Balkans, or the one of Serbian reactionary nationalism. Only 121 socialism can follow a policy of equality and internationalism between different nation, regions and religions. Being hostile to the working class, the Serbian leaders have preferred reactionary nationalism which had already been victorious during the days of alliance wit the Russian war.
Dobrica Cosic, President of the new Federation of Serbia-- Montenegro, stated that the Croatians and Slovenes could create their proper autonomous states, if they stay inside their ethnic territory. If they stick to Serbian ethnic territory, it will mean war. Karedzic said that he does not want a Bosnian nation based on a mixture of Serbian, Croatian and Muslims. The radical party, fascist like, obtained 30% of the seats in the Serbian parliament. Their chief declares: "We have to expel all Croatian and Slovenian population from Serbia.''
It was in Unified Yugoslavia that Islamic minority had found recognition and equality. But the explosion of ethnic and religious hatred caused the expansion of a reactionary conception of Islam. Izetbegovic is moving towards the conception of a religious state. He is supported by the Pro-American compradore bourgeoisies from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Pakistan.
The Muslim forces have set up several murderous provocations to attract the attention of the Islamic world. It was them to who killed 16 people at a butcher in Sarajevo. Television showed cruel images of people ripped open by bombs. The press accused the Serbians of the crime. The provocation on behalf of the Muslims was intended to bring the European Community low level sanctions against Serbia. Which was done.
Croatian, Serbian and Muslim nationalists are supported by proper militia composed of criminals and out-laws. These militia get their money by means of stealing and expropriating and become the ``owners'', the rulers of the new capitalist society.
The lumpen-bourgeoisie at the head of these mini-states have no possibility of independent development. They are at the mercy of imperialist powers, ready for the domination over Balkans. Those who justify the creation of a mini-state, are responsible for the imperialist interventions in this region and the coming wars.
German imperialism already economically dominates former Yugoslavia. Today, for the first time since Hitler's defeat, Germany openly proclaims their moral duty of sending forces to the Balkans!
122In political military terms, the USA remain the first power in the Balkans. They are fighting with Germany for regional dominance. The US use Turkey and other pro-American Islamic states as go between. Saudi-Arabia gives financial help to Bosnia, Kuwait urges for a military intervention and Turkey examines possible bombing sites on Serbian side. The Americans are also trying to divert the hatred of the islamic populations, shocked by the American intervention in Iraq, by using the intervention in Balkans where the US would protect Islam.
Third power that has interest to defend the Balkans is Russia. The reactionary nationalism of Serbia finds its"natural partner in Russian reactionary nationalism. They have a common enemy. Germany, Germany, which made Yugoslavia explode to make it possible to impose themselves, might do the very same thing with Russia. An expansion of the war in the Balkans may pull in Russia. This would the beginning of a European war in which all three parties, the USA, Germany and Russia would aspire reactionary, expansionist and criminal goals.
Three years after the "revolutions for democracy and liberty" a great possibility of a general European war exists. The profound nature of our "democracy and our liberty" is shown in the Balkans where imperialist Europe and their local accomplices are provoking terror, destruction and primitive violence; a reactionary civil war.
We, communists, must be proud to be the only one that keep believing in the flag of unity among the peoples, the flag of creative work, progressive culture, social progress and of popular democracy and peace. A flag around which the oppressed peoples will come together to struggle for the socialist revolution.
Capitalism, system based on exploitation, is characterised by internal contradictions that are impossible to solve and that, today, under our eyes, are dramatically increasing.
In the whole world, the contradiction between workers and capitalist and between the big capitalist powers becomes sharper. We are in the middle of great upheavals, on the eve of new 123 economic crises and new wars. All the bourgeois parties, including the social-democrats and the Greens, promise to solve the problems of our society, while maintaining intact the capitalists system. Its a lie, a cheat.
Europe was witnessing a considerable boom of its industrial investment. The honest workers had to make one very last sacrifice so that their courageous bosses could invest, which would bring work and welfare. But, today, they seriously come and tell us that the investments have created excessive capacities and that it is urgent to rationalise and to fire people in order to save the essential! (J.P. Morgan, World Financial Markets, Sept-Oct. 1992, P.7).^^3^^
Here is why capitalism is a criminal system. The fantastic growth of technology creates a vast social wealth of high quality, but ``produces'' at the same time unemployment, misery and overexploitation for those who create, through their work, this wealth. A handful of rich people live in a revolting luxury, while a growing mass experiences poverty and overwork.
The capitalists of the world are engaged in a war against the _-_-_
^^3^^. The steel industry has enormously Invested in new technologies and are among the most efficient in the world. But towards the end of 1992, overproduction forced Thyssen, German nr 1, to lower its production by 20%. Usinor-Sadlor, European nrl, says: "We are too many in Europe, fusions are needed''. Philips Electronics has already liquidated 70,000 jobs, 23% of the total Siemens plans to eliminate 15,000 jobs, more that half in the sector of computers and semiconductors. (Business Week, Feb, 15,1993, P-24,25). During these last few years, the car industry lowered ib production costs by more than 50%, practically catchingup wifli Japanese competition. Are therefore workers saved? Not at all: in the six coining years the car industry will eliminate 600,000 workers out of a total of 1,80,000 jobs.
In 1992, Europe produced 13,500,000 cars. But there was already an overcapacity of 1,500,000 can. But, Toyota, Honda, VW, Peugeot, Plat, etc...are already constructing new automatised factories that wfll produce 2,000,000 cars inl995. Flexibility, with work during night and week-ends will increase production by 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 cars without new investments. Finally, in Eastern Europe, the factories mat produced Trabants, Skodas, PioUs and Warburg have been taken over by multinational corporations that renewed mem completely, creating thereby another capacity of 1,000,000 units. In 1995, overproduction will reach 4,500,000 to 5,500,000 can.
124 workers; 33~millions unemployed in the industrialised countries, hundreds of millions of unemployed in the Third World: everywhere, capitalists impose low salaries and flexibility, and eliminates social laws and benefits. At the same time, the capitalists push the workers of different countries to fight each other. This war among workers has a name: Struggle for competitiveness. Socialdemocracy and the right-wing union bosses claim that there is nothing to do, that one must accept the wage the international capitalists impose, of course in the Third World, but also increasingly often here, absolutely inhuman working conditions, that destroy the health of the workers. Everywhere in the capitalist world, bosses demand a ``competitiveness'' with respect to people that they can now exploit under conditions approaching slavery. Today, in Japan, 40% of the workers fear ``Karoshi'', namely death through overwork (De Standard, March 23,1993).Three years after that the entire rotten press was shouting that socialism is dead, we see that there is no survival possible under capitalism. On the world level, every new technological progress degrades working conditions and the lifestyle. The Belgian workers are also becoming aware of this truth.
First of all, automatisation and robotisation deprives hundreds of thousands of workers of their jobs, without any hope to find another one, Automatisation that could, under a socialist regime, make the life of the workers easier, more dignified and richer, produces, here, the ghost of permanent unemployment^^4^^
In 1970, the industrialised OECD countries had 5 millions unemployed. Today, after 20 years of fantastic technological progress, they are 33 millions^^5^^. Robotisation and automatisation expel from active life not only manual workers but also increasingly white collar workers and executives.
__FIX__ A webpage showing count of books by publishers and decade covering entire website. _-_-_^^4^^. The successive recoveries cut ead> time less efficiently in unemployment, and, at each way out of the crisis, the (permanent) stock of unemployed workers or of unstable jobs increases. Nowadays, 25% of the job market is covered by unemployment insurance or welfare" (P. Praet, Le Soil, Dec. 11,1993).
^^5^^. In 1970, Belgium had 83,000 unemployed; today they are 506,000 but, really 1,000,000 if you count extended sociality, early retirement, unstable and parttime jobs. For the coining three years, the planning office forecasts an increase of unemployment by 75,000 units (De Standard, March 18,1993).
125The globalisation of market is a second consequence of the technological advance which will make life in the capitalist regime impossible. Nowadays, money can move very quickly around the world. Rapid transportation connects any production place to world markets. This globalisation allows tradition sectors to emigrate towards countries where a worker is ``worth'' 5to 10 $ a day. It increase unemployment in the imperialist world. Globalisation puts the Belgian worker in competition with worker in the Philippines, Korea, Turkey, Morocco, Brazil, Hungary: the norm of competitivity derives unavoidably the worker in a downwards spiral^^6^^~
The conquest of Eastern Europe by imperialism constitutes a great increase in the globalisation of the capitalist markets. Suddenly, capitalism puts the worker from VW in Belgium in competition with the worker of Skoda in the Czech Republic. VW pays 31 $ an hour in Germany; it pays... 3.5$ an hour in Skoda. The Czech minister of economy says: "The workers of my country are as good as in Germany, and probably better than the workers in the VW factory in Spain''. Socialism had produced well-trained workers. Business Week writes. "The cheap and well-trained work force of the East may offer the best chance to solve the chronic competitivity problem of the European Corporations" (Business Week, 15 FEb, 1993).
In the name of the struggle against `Stalinism'' capitalist freedom has been reinstated in the East. The Social-democrats and the Greens have welcomed this evolution, and the right-wing union leaders congratulated themselves. Today, we see that socialism in the East not only protected the workers of these countries from capitalist exploitation but that socialism there helped, simply by its existence, the workers in the imperialist countries to limit their exploitation.
To profit from low wages, the imperialist countries invest now $ 3 billions in the zone Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary. The destruction of their traditional markets in the Soviet Union pushes those countries to export... towards the EC. One made them believe _-_-_
^^6^^. Praet, from the Sodete Generate, says: "The opening of borders and the intensification of competition go together with an harmonise lion of the conditions of competitions. This means tendency to level down" (Le Soir, Dec 11,1992, f£).
126 that now ``freedom'' reigns. The EC did not wait to protect its markets by limiting severely the imports of steel, textiles, agricultural products, cement... In summary, half of their exports are subject to limitation (Business Week, Feb. 15,1993). We have here a nice expression of this truth: the destruction of socialism in the East has sharpened all the contradictions of the imperialist world and will provoke new revolutionary upheavals. Imperialism has made these people expect an increased welfare, but production collapses. Imperialism has made these people expect an increased welfare, but production collapses. Imperialism has promised investments to create``efficient'' economies, but the amounts invested remain marginal. "The EC must dismantle completely it trade barriers towards the East, if Eastern Europe is to become a magnet for private international capital" writes the Morgan Company (Morgan, World Financial Markets, Sept-Oct. 1992, P.8). But these imports will destroy even more jobs in Western Europe! But if there are no investments and if the situation continues to deteriorate itself in the East, hundreds of thousands of those men that have been addicted to fantasies like Dallas and Dynasty will ``invade'' theCommunity. Business Week forecasts "big immigration waves''.In the whole of Western Europe, the nazis wage racist campaigns against Arabs and Turkish migrant workers. Soon, the ``enemies'' will change colour, they will mostly be from Poland, Slovakia, Romania, the enemies will be ``whites'', "brothers from Christian civilisation''. Imperialism has just liberated these people from communism; but if , by hundreds of thousands, they chose the ``freedom'' to go to West, our supporters of free enterprise will shoot them and the dead will far outnumber those of the Berlin Wall.
Each and every market has immediate contact with the international market this way, each worker can feel the impact of international politics. For the first time in history, capitalism tends to be a genuine international system. The crisis can be felt all over world, and the anti-capitalist struggle is obtaining international dimensions.
,,
The basic contradictions of capitalism that Marx has shown us, are today as clear as ever. Social production has taken planetary dimensions, and is being realised by an enormous working force. But this production is still ted by the private interest of the class 127 owners, the benefits of this production remain the property of the capitalists. The mere thirst for maximum benefit of this small class of exploiters makes survival impossible for millions of people, and pushes the rest of the working class into inhuman living and working conditions. That is why this system will explode from the interior, because of the devastating crisis it causes, and under the pressure of the masses who cannot stand the horror anymore.
Four years ago, we were daily brainwashed on the historical failure of Marxism-Leninism. Bourgeois ideology, this stupid, moralising darkening ideology, mixture of lies and demagogy prepared by the social-democrats, liberals, clergymen and fascists was claimed to be the spiritual ``bread'' of humanity until the day of the apocalypse. During the last four years, this very same bourgeois ideology only created more unemployment and social misery, racism and repression fascism and war.
All the events of the last four years clearly confirm the truth of Marxism-Leninism, science of the struggle for socialism. From these last four years, communism, knowing that the world has entered a new era.
Since the collapse of socialism in the East, all contradictions of the imperialist world have been accentuated at high speed. American and European imperialism are calling on interference and terror, but they have an ever decreasing influence on the different economic and political forces that are born on the international scene. We are entering an era where all the contradictions of the capitalist world are going to explode, just like they did in 1905 and 1918, and in 1929--1945. We must cry out loud:against exploitation, against racism, against misery, against fascism against war: fortunately, there still are genuine communists! For the poor, the exploited, the workers, the truth and future lies in Marxism-- Leninism, in socialism.
We must arm ourselves with that indestructible socialist conviction, with the determination to serve the struggle of classes until the very end, with the noble principle of serving the oppressed and exploited masses. The struggle for socialism is an international and historical struggle. It can last one or ten generations. And even after installing socialism, the struggle will continue for generations after to defend it, and to make it more perfect. In Belgium and Europe, our struggle for socialism will be lasting one, but a consequent 128 Communist struggle of today provides a considerable help to those who, like Cuba and Korea, have already installed socialism, from Philippines to India, from the Palestine to South Africa and Peru. While in turn the socialist countries and the revolutions and liberation struggles in the Third World are of utmost help for the revolutionary working classes in the imperialist countries.
Long live Marxism-Leninism!
Long Live Socialist revolution!
Long Live Proletarian internationalism!
[129] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of BrazilBoth in the theoretical field and that of practical politics, Via dimir Hitch Lenin's work represents an immense source of scientific knowledge on the social revolution and the construction of a new society.
In his Principles of Leninism, Stalin synthesized the essential elements of Lenin's legacy to the class struggle of the proletariat in all its different aspects. This book contributed to the formation of generations of communists, through an inspired understanding of the fecund and revolutionary thought of Marx and Engels' follower, who led with great success the first large socialist revolution in history.
Lenin's contribution to the issues related to the period of transition to socialism, however, have received little attention. After the victory in 1917, he lived on for only six years. This was a difficult and unique period. In theory, the problems of the defeat of capitalism and of the taking of power by the working class and its allies were already solved. However, nothing had been developed yet in relation to the construction of the regime that had just been established. There were known generalized indications from the classics of Marxism, which were rightly prudent in advancing only abstract solutions. Furthermore, the revolution had taken place in a backward economy, where different forms of economy predominated, above all the petty-bourgeois form of production.
130Lenin developed a theory of universal value on the first steps of the transition to the construction of the society of the future. This transition obeys objective laws that, if not understood and respected properly, may lead to the failure of revolution itself. Under certain circumstances, the taking of power in itself is not so difficult. What is really difficult - and experience has proved this to be the case - is building the new regime, identifying and seizing, one by one, the links of an infinite chain of complicated social and economic problems in which, many times, the new appears mingled up with the old.
The Leninist theory of transition involves questions related to timing, methods and placing of the revolutionary dynamics. Alongside the question of political positioning and ordering, it stresses the economic aspect - in which the rebuilding of the economy on the basis of heavy industry, in the hands of the proletariat, and the employment of state capitalism, play a leading role.
The particular focus of this article is on the theme of state capitalism. Related to this, some observations will be made on the significance of stages for the construction of socialism.
After recognizing that not everything done in the first years after the revolution could be considered to have been appropriate, Lenin stated firmly: "Vie, the vanguard, the advanced contingent of the proletariat; are passing directly to socialism; but the advanced contingent is only a small part of the whole of the proletariat, while the latter, on its turn, is only a small part of the whole population. If ``we'' are to successfully solve the problem of our immediate transition to socialism, we must understand what intermediary paths, methods, means and instruments are required for the transition from pre-capitalist relations to socialism.''
Such a profound reflection, based on materialist dialectics, led him to elaborate an original conception of state capitalism in the conditions of a backward country where the proletariat has taken power.
From September 1917 to January 4th, 1923 (when his intellectual capacity was starting to diminish due to the disease he was suffering from), he touched on this topic more than thirty times in 131 various articles, interventions, bulletins, theses, speeches and letters. He entered into polemics with Bukharin and Martov, Shlyapnikov and Preobrazhensky, Sokolov and the anarchist Gue, with the "left communists" and the "worker's opposition'', as well as with the Mensheviks and the S.R.'s. Being a convinced materialist, he always insisted on the idea that searching for success demands adapting, in a certain manner, to prevailing conditions so as to advance safely.
The concept of state capitalism was bom out of the overwhelming need to overcome the backwardness of economic relations. In the first years of the revolution, Soviet Russia was ruined - the level of its productive forces was very low. No resources existed for the development of the economy. The disorganization of the state machinery reached almost absurd levels. The new social sectors which assumed power did not have the necessary experience to make the productive machine and the transport system function properly, and even less so in relation to the complicated financial system. It was imperative to introduce the method of register and control of all materials, essential condition for the smooth running of the socialized enterprises.
Socialism is a more advanced system than capitalism. Russia was suffering, however, from a serious lag in the level of its productive forces in relation to the more developed capitalist countries. The revolution had granted political power to the proletariat, but it did not (and could not) supply the resources, the experience and the technique needed for economic growth. It was absolutely essential to create favourable conditions for the strengthening of the socialist industrial base and for the country's progress.
Analyzing this situation, Lenin concluded that "economically speaking, state capitalism is unquestionably superior to the current economic system''. "Reality has taught us'', he also said, "that the state capitalism would represent a step forward for us''.
He then detailed the concept on which he had already been working since 1917 - that of the adequate use of capitalism in the first stage of the construction of socialism in an impoverished country. The essential aspects were the maintenance and consolidation of the political power of the proletariat, without which the expansion of capitalism would have an anti-worker and bourgeois-reformist content.
132In different works, he outlined a program of concessions which allowed for several different types of foreign capital investment, such as the leasing of certain mines, forest areas, petrochemical explorations, etc. as well as allowing the formation of mixed companies and the establishment of large capitalist companies. The payment to the concessionaries was to be obtained with a substantial part of the products obtained. It was, no doubt, a heavy tribute that the proletarian state had to pay to the world bourgeoisie. Lenin did not hide this fact. "We must clearly understand that it suits us to disburse this concession to speed up the rebuilding of our big industry and to improve the situation, principally, of the workers and peasants''. He declared there was no danger in handing concessionaires of a certain number of factories, provided the large bulk stayed in the hands of the socialist state. "Of course, it would be absurd for the Sovietpower to hand out the bulk of its property in the form of concessions. That would not be concessions, but a return to capitalism''. He further declared - "Let the small private industry develop itself to a certain limit, and let state capitalism develop - Soviet power should not fear this''.
But in a country where the revolution has been successful, capitalism should not operate without any type of restraint and, even less, in open and unlimited competition with the socialized part of the economy. Lenin established conditions: "We do not fear state capitalism because it is up to us to determine the measure ( dimension) upto which concessions will be granted''. There is no reason to fear it, "if we have the control of the factories, of transportation and foreign trade''. He adduced further: The proletarian state can, without changing its nature, allow for free trade and the development of the capitalism within pre-detennined dimensions, and under the condition that trade and the private capitalism are kept under state regulation (vigilance, control, determining of forms and methods)''. Indubitably, the primary condition was that state power remained in the hands of the proletariat.
Precisely, the lack of understanding of the new which had emerged - the advent of the socialist state - generated the wrong positions assumed by some revolutionaries. They were caught in bookish ready-made formulas which corresponded to a previous epoch of revolution. "State capitalism is capitalism" they said, to contest Lenin's ideas. They were mistaken. After all, what kind of capitalism was Lenin defending? His indications regarding this 133 subject revealed important aspects of a new economic theory. "State capitalism in a society where the political power belongs to Capital, and state capitalism within a proletarian state are two different concepts'', stated Lenin. In the capitalist state, state capitalism serves the bourgeoisie; in the socialist state, on the contrary, it helps the working class to rise and face the still powerful bourgeoisie, and to fight against it''. Evidently, the existence of proletarian state power gave a new content to social phenomena, including the class struggle. To ignore this radical change in the character of the state could only lead to dogmatism.
These were Lenin's opinions on concessions in the form of state capitalism.
From this Leninist concept of the utilization of Capital by the proletarian state, certain norms stand out and are bound together in a whole:~
It is favorable and necessary, in backward countries where the political power is in the hands of the proletariat, to use the capitalism whenever possible, so as to strengthen the productive forces and to speed up the development of the country;~
the utilization of state capitalism must be regulated ( controlled) by socialist power. It must be allowed to grow, but limits have to be established to its performing areas, so as to prevent it from extrapolating permitted boundaries;~
it is a must to guarantee and strengthen the socialist based economy - irreplaceable base of the new system. The main means of production must belong to the working class. State capitalism is an accessory. If priorities and the constant strengthening of the socialist base are not considered, the uncontrolled expansion of capitalism will result in the formation of a capitalist economy, in detriment to socialism;~
there must be pre-determined (though flexible) deadlines, for the time span of the concessions, depending on the intensity of the transition process. The concessions cease to be necessary when the socialist economy acquires the capacity to stimulate effective economic progress without foreign help;~
class struggle continues under distinct forms. Wherever there is capitalism, of any nature, there will always be class struggle. Capitalism will always try, in one way or another, to defeat socialism.
134Lenin's remarks help to prevent leftist misunderstandings (refutation of the possibility of utilizing capitalism to facilitate the advancement of the productive forces), as well as the rightist misunderstandings (guarantee of free course to the diffusion of capitalism, neglecting the creation and strengthening of the socialist economy).
In Russia, however, it was not possible to completely put into practice the Leninist policy of concessions, due to unfavorable conjunctural factors. This, however, does not deny its importance and validity.
Lenin's theory on the state capitalism is not limited to concessions. It was consolidated and acquired historical significance with its application to the rural areas.
After the revolution, Russia lived a hard period when it literally lacked the essential foodstuff for its people, hindering even the very functioning of industry and trade. Hunger and famine spread throughout the whole country. The "War Communism" policies were adopted as an attempt to face this situation, forcing the Kulaks and peasants in general to deliver the little wheat produced to the government, at a fixed price. Motivated by the civil war, this policy generated great discontent in the countryside, affecting the very worker-peasant alliance.
Based on his concept of state capitalism, Lenin formulated his well-known New Economic Policy, (NEP). Through NEP, he intended to stop using the appropriation system and implement the tax in kind. This meant that the peasants, once they had paid their tax (in wheat), could freely sell their surplus stock or exchange it for other consumer goods.
Thus emerged capitalist trade, even if only within certain limited areas. "Wherever there are small enterprises and freedom of exchange, capitalism will appear''.
But Lenin was not afraid. "Provided transportation and industry are in the hands of the proletariat, socialism will not be in danger. On the contrary, the development of a capitalism controlled and regulated by the proletarian state (that is, of ``state'' capitalism in the real sense of the word) it is advantageous and necessary (within certain limits), in a country of small 135 peasantry incredibly ruined and backward, because it can speed up the immediate re-establishment of the peasant agriculture".
NEP was decisive in the overcoming of the food crisis (which was quite dramatic in 1921) and for permitting the reconstruction of a very weakened economy. The New Economic Policy saved revolution from possible demise.
With NEP, there was a considerable improvement in the country's general situation. But the future of socialism in the countryside was still unresolved, as were the forms and methods of organizing peasants, which remained exceedingly dispersed as individual producers.
Under Lenin's orientation, sovkhozes ---socialist state farms --- started to be settip,making use of thebestagricultural soil. The first agricultural communes were started as well, supported by government through subsidies and loans. However, they did not yet provide sufficient experience to permit definite conclusions.
These conclusion came with the study of cooperativism. There are basic differences between cooperatives in capitalist and in socialist systems. "The cooperatives in the socialist state'', said Lenin, "are collective capitalist institutions''. He noted, however, that "under our current system'', cooperatives were distinct from private companies since they were collective companies. "They were not different, however, from the socialist companies since they operated in land of the state and the means of production belonged to the state, that is to say, to the working class''.
Through this thread of thought, Lenin deduced that, given the particular characteristics of the socialist regime, "the peasant cooperatives had an exceptional meaning - they were in agreement, almost always, with socialism''. He, thus, strongly stated: "Now we have the right to say that for us, the simple development of cooperation ~~ identifies itself with the development of socialism''. In this manner, one of the most delicate and complex problems of socialist construction was solved theoretically, that is, the unification of the dispersed peasant masses which composed the majority of the population and their integration into the new socialist productive system.
Theconcretizationofthisobjectivedemandedtheorganization of a vast educational work among the peasantry, to teach them how to read and work with books so that they could better assimilate the 136 new objectives and tasks of collective activity. In general terms, it was indispensable to proceed with the cultural revolution so as to advance on the risk-laden struggle for the implementation of socialism in a culturally backward country.
It was necessary, as well as, to provide economic support for the development of the cooperatives. Clarifying doubts in relation to state capitalism, Lenin stated: There is another side to the question, of where we need state capitalism, or something equivalent to it - mat is, the cooperatives''. Introducing this change in the socialist economy was not simple. "Every sodal regime, in its start, is strongly supported by a specific class'', Lenin claimed, pointing to the example of capitalism itself. The cooperative regime also needed an extraordinary help to establish itself. This could only come from the working class. "It is necessary'', said Lenin, "to grant the cooperatives a series of economic/ financial and banking privileges. This is the support given by the socialist state to the new principle on which the population should organize itself''.
Lenin demonstrated an acute strategic vision in his propositions. "If we can attract all peasantry to cooperativism'', he stated, "we will stand with two feet on socialist ground''. Prophetically, that is exactly what happened in the course of the following decade.
Indubitably, Lenin's concept of state capitalism in its different forms, aiming at successfully overcoming the transition to socialism, is of priceless value, specially for backward countries. This had never been, previously approached. "Up to now'', Lenin recognized, answering baseless criticisms, "nobody could write a book on this kind of capitalism Because it is the first time in the history of mankind that we see such a thing..... not even Marx thought of writing one single word about this subject He died without leaving any quotation or definite indication about it''. Through this immense contribution, Lenin developed Marxism creatively,asadialectic revolutionary thoughtwhich distinguishes, in different situations, what is old and what new is arising.
Leninist theory on the transition from capitalism to socialism, precious in its teachings, covers a whole set of questions regarding 137 the correct way to perceive this transition. Besides stressing the need for proletarian state power, state capitalism and the strengthening of the socialist base and of new cooperativism, it points to fundamental problems related to the pace, methods, and specially stages to be taken into consideration so as to gradual advance in the process of revolutionary conquests.
Some revolutions have failed or faced enormous difficulties for not understanding this process. It is not easy to consolidate and advance revolution, particularly in backward countries. This demands a dear perception of the problems in question, the control of reality and knowledge of the objective laws that are in course. Revolutions do not take place in the Stone Age, but in a superior stage of society's development. Capitalism reached high parameters in the production of material goods. Socialism cannot lag behind. It has to build something better and superior to the capitalist system. It does not however, initially have the necessary conditions to do so, and neither can it do so in an arbitrary manner, skipping necessary stages.
Lenin identified the handicaps in the prevailing orientation after 1917. "Taken by the wave of enthusiasm that had awakened people, firstly political enthusiasm/ then military enthusiasm/ we believed that we could perform - only on the basis of this enthusiasm economic tasks with the same magnitude of the political and military tasks. We thought, or perhaps we supposed without having studied enough, that it was possible to organize in a direct form, on the basis of the simple existence of the proletarian state, state production and state distribution of goods in a communist manner, hi a country of small peasants. Experience has shown our mistake. It made us see that a series of stages are necessary hi the transition''.
Once identifying the mistake, Lenin recommended a new fundamental approach to these economic problems "considering that the first stage could not be direct transition to socialist construction''. Itwas necessary to make use of roundabout methods,of state capitalisnvetc., without which the revolution would stagnate or perish.
This very important question of stages had already been dealt with by Engels in 1874. Replying to Blanquist communards that thought of reaching their main objective "without stopping at 138 intermediary stages or without promises'', Engels said that stages and compromises are part of historical development, and it is through these that we can strive for and reach our final aim.
Stages correspond to the objective demands of society's advancement. Acknowledging this, and acting accordingly, is fundamental. It is not possible to skip stagesor simply ignore them. What we want to reach is a result of accumulation, and never the result of voluntaristic attitudes. We cannot pre-define the number of stages there will be in each socialist process. In March, 1918, at the VII Extraordinary Congress of the R.CP.(B), Lenin said that "we are still only passing through the first stage of the transition from capitalism to socialism''. Further on he added: "We have only given the first steps to free ourselves from capitalism and start the transition to socialism. We do not know and cannot know how many transitional stages there will be in socialism''. This was due to various factors. Stages in socialism are different from stages in a capitalist system. In the latter, development is spontaneous, empiric, and the period of each stage is more prolonged. In socialism, it is a conscious process. We can speed up the development and obtain, in shorter periods of time, qualitative leaps, on the condition that we do not violate existing objective laws.
It is a pity that this scientific contribution of Lenin on the question of transition had been forgotten. This damaged the revolutionary movement. In its place, the rigid and schematic line adopted by the Soviet Union prevailed for a long time. According to this view, the developmental march of society in every field seemed to depend mainly on men's will, on leaders, without taking into consideration that these developments have objective roots and involve certain stages.
It is absolutely necessary to pay more attention to Lenin's works and the teachings regarding the transition from capitalism to socialism. It is not a question of mechanically repeating Lenin's opinion at that time or the concrete solutions he indicated. The world has developed. New problems arose. Reality has other demands. What is necessary is to assimilate the essence of these teachings, the essence of the Lenin's theory of transition, which indubitably integrates the great and valuable works of Marxism, opening broad perspectives for the construction of the advanced society of the future.
[139] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of BritainFor the Communits Party of Britain, recent events, current circumstances and trends, the obstacles which confront the world's people and the ways in which those obstacles can be overcome, all vindicate Marxism and the Marxist approach.
We would go further: because the modern world is characterised by the existence of imperialism, Marxism/Leninism remains valid as the expression of Marxism in the imperialist era.
We stand by these propositions in respect of each of the three sources and three component parts of Marxism.
Philosophically, Marxism is dialectical materialism, the materialist view is the world is made up of matter and that the highest and most complex organ of matter---the human brain---is capable of discovering and understanding all the phenomena of the universe. Continuing advances in the natural sciences, where materialism has resoundingly triumphed, confirm this view.
In human society, we see fresh evidence in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and South Africa of how non-materialist mysticism, obscurantism---the forces of religious and ethnic fundamentalism---seek to turn back the dock, sometimes by centuries, plunging whole countries into chaos and slaughter. While the ruling circles of the imperialist---powers seek to profit from these disasters, Communists---basing themselves on Marxist materialism, reason and humanism---work to unite people against irrationalism, bigotry and prejudice.
The dialectical method is the only successful way of looking at and making sense of the modern world. Its validity continues to be 140 demonstrated in the natural sciences where, for example, in the field of quantum physics seemingly intractable problems are now being tackled by solutions that embody a dialectical approach. Perhaps, though, this is an area of intellectual activity that we Communists have been slow to look at and learn from in recent years.
That everything is interconnected, is in motion and transition, contradictions that produce movement and---when resolved--- qualitative change, these are dialectical propositions that are incontrovertible in the contemporary world situation.
But did we Communists apply them honestly and resolutely enough, for instance, to developments in the socialist countries of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union? The existence of those societies within a totality which included a still-powerful and ruthless imperialist camp, imposed enormous financial and ideological pressures on socialism.Were those pressures appreciated and counteracted sufficiently and correctly? A contradiction arose in the socialist societies between the centralised command system in the economy and in government, and the need to develop and utilise the productive forces by motivating and involving the mass of the people. It was, in our party's estimation, a contradiction that could only have been solved in the long run by greater democracy and self-government. But again, to what extent was this contradiction recognised and tackled?
The primary contradiction in the modern world, on a global level, is that between the forces of production and the relations of production.
At the most basic level, to take the example of food. Food production has increased considerably over the past 10 years; in the developing countries, new technology has doubled and even trebled the yields on large farms. There is enough food to supply everyone with one kilo of grain a day (which would provide 300 calories and ample protein).
Yet 500 million people suffer hunger, malnutrition or starvation---the same number as 10 years ago. Meanwhile, 600 million tons of grain are fed to animals each year to provide meat for the better-off, using up between 3 and 10 kilos of grain to produce just one kilo of meat. In the European Community and the USA, largescale capitalist farmers are paid to take land out of productive use; 141 mountains of food are produced that cannot be sold in the market for fear of reducing prices and profits---and so they are buried, dyed or injected to make them unfit for human consumption.
In agriculture as in other branches of capitalist industry, capitalist relations of production---private ownership of the means of production---prevent the forces of production being utilised to solve huge problems of hunger, wretched housing and homelessness, ill health and disease, mass unemployment and so on.
The laws and imperatives of capitalist production operate today as surely and as savagely as Marxist political economy has always identified. Periodiccrisisof over-productionoccur as ever--- in Britain we have been going through the longest slump in economic activity since the 1930s, with one worker in 7 out of a job. The abuseof new technology and enforced changes in employment patterns have made mass unemployment a permanent feature of capitalist Europe and North America. The reserve army of labour of which Marx wrote is now larger and more alienated than ever.
The capitalist compulsion to maximise surplus value has led to some new developments in State economic policy and in employment practices. In Britain, for example, we have experienced a barrage of anti-trade union laws, company derecognition of unions, privatisations, the contracting-out of services to private companies who employ workers worse terms, and a huge growth in the number of workers who are part-time, temporary, at-home or contractually `self-employed'; they suffer lower wages worse conditions and fewer rights in law---and many of them are women, black or migrant workers.
The divisions between workers of different race or nationality---identified as a major problem by Marx and Engles in relation to English and immigrant Irish workers---are exacerbated by economic crises, by mass unemployment and deprivation, and by the racist policies carried out by the State in capitalism's interests.
Lenin elaborated the workings of the imperialist stage of capitalism. He identified its characteristics including the export of capital; the domination of internationally organised trusts, syndicates and cartels; and the territorial division of the world amongst the great powers. These propositions of Marxist political economy are confirmed by the contemporary world situation; somtimes they take new form, but the essence is the same.
142Transnational Corporations (TNCs), more than half of them American or British, now account for 30% of all capitalist world output (including l/3rd of manufacturing output in the developing countries), and 60% of world wide trade. Each of the 10 largest TNCs produces more than any one of atleast 150 of the world's countries. Between them, 300 giant banks and corporations control 2/3rd of the world economy.
Through the repatriation of profit and interest on exported capital and bank loans, through the international division of labour, through the creation of Free Trade and Export Processing Zones, through monopolisation and the manipulation of the terms of trade, through transfer pricing, import quotas and tariffs and so on, the TNCs impede and distort development in the Third World; by other more straight-forward means, they undermine self-- government and balanced economic development even in the advanced capitalist countries. In all of this, they are assisted by the States of their `home' countries, by pliant or corrupt governments in the Tiosf countries and by the International Monetary Fund's programmes for austerity, `free' markets and privatisation.
The result is that the Third World pays more to the imperialist countries every year in debt interest, loan repayments and repatriated profits than the imperialist countries provide investment, credit and so-called aid.
The TNCs are also the main beneficiaries from international tension, war and the preparations for war. The military-industrial complex of which US President Eisenhower warned in the 1950s is as influential and corrupting as ever in public life in the advanced capitalist countries. The price of its endless drive for profit is paid mostly in the Third World, in terms of imperialist aggression, proWestern puppet dictators, war of annexation and the diversion of scarce resources away from more constructive ends.
The modem world also has to face growing environmental problems. The drive for profit, the anarchy and irresponsibility of capitalist production---of big business and the TNCs in particular---identify capitalism as part of the problems rather than the solution. This is especially so in the developing countries, ravaged and polluted by TNCs. Thus, the chief economist at the World Bank, Lawrence Summers, could shamelessly argue in December 1991 that dirty industries should be encouraged to locate in the 143 `under-polluted' Third World areas, where controls were less and human lives were not so valuable.
The territorial division of the world is now taking the form of an intensifying struggle between three emerging economic (and political and military) power blocs: North America, the European Community and the Japan-led Far East.
In Europe, this bloc will be consolidated by the Maastricht Treaty, which will take Britain and the other Member States towards Economic, Political and Military Union. It will be a superstate ruled by an unelected bureaucracy (the European Commission) and an intentionally unaccountable European Central Bank, carrying out austerity policies that favour big business. That is why the Communist Party of Britain campaigns for a Referendum in order to defeat Maastricht.
Marxism is not just a theory, still less a dogma: it is also a guide to action.
Our party's view remains that the contradictions of capitalism will only be solved in the arena of politically-conscious class struggle. The revolutionary politics of Marxism, enriched by Lenin's work on the nature of the State and revolution, and or the role and principles of the revolutionary party, remain our guide to action.
In practice this means organising, supporting and leading workers in their struggles against employers; it means combatting the chauvinism, racism and sexism which divide the working class and add to the oppression of women, ethnic minorities and other sections of the population; it means campaigning against poverty, poor housing and pollution and for the national rights of the Irish, Welsh and Scots peoples. The TNCs and other sectors of big business (which also own most of Britain's mass media) are the single greatest obstacle to progress on all these fronts in Britain today.
That is why a democratic anti-monopoly alliance of forces, led by the organised working class, needs to be built to challenge the interests of the capitalist monopolies; that is why the Communist Party of Britain proposes an Alternative Economic and Political Strategy of demands that will benefit the working class and win greater democratic rights, at the expense of State-monopoly capitalism. The struggle for such a strategy inside and outside Parliament would, in our view, create the most favourable conditions for 144 the conquest of State power by the working class and its allies, and for the transition to a socialist society.
In the revolutionary process, the leading role of a party based on Marxism-Leninism, and with an internationalist perspective, is essential. This proposition has been validated by recent developments in Britain, France, Italy and elsewhere, where social-- democratic parties have shown themselves once again unwilling and unable to challenge capitalism.
Nothing is constant; change can be rapid and dramatic. This Marxist proposition has been borne out not only by events in eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, but now by the sudden collapse of European Social Democracy.
Thus, the Communist Parties intensify co-operation at national and international levels, gathering around them all the potentially anti-monopoly and anti-imperialist forces. The contemporary world situation not only uphold the validity of Marxism as a theory---it urgently requires the proof of Marxism as a theory in practice.
[145] __ALPHA_LVL2__ New Communist Party of BritainWe are indebted andappreciatedeeply this initiativeofCPI(M) in convening this seminar. We are sure it will help carry forward the process of rallying the revolutionary forces and help strengthen the struggle to defeat Imperialism and Capitalism.
Last year the Pyongyang Declaration was signed by most parties represented here and to date over 180 organisations have signed that Declaration. That too was a milestone in the struggle to rally the revolutionary forces against Imperialism.
This seminar is an important seminar. It is not an end in itself, but a vital part of a living process.
The counter-revolution orchestrated by the Gorbachev administration in alliance with Imperialism aimed for the comprehensive destruction of all the Socialist countries, the weakening of the non-aligned movement and through so-called 'new thinking' sought to negate the ideological philosophy of Marxism-Leninism withthe consequent marginalisarionofCommunistparties throughout the world.
The `New World Order' that has resulted from the betrayal is one where the class struggle has intensified. The strategy of Imperialism, spearheaded by US Imperialism includes the aim of destroying all the-remaining countries of Socialism or Socialist orientation, and imposing even harsher conditions on the developing countries. In its quest for maximum profits a major offensive has also been launched against the working class in the Capitalist and Imperialist countries themselves.
146With the Soviet Union destroyed a major factor holding the inter-Imperialist rivalries in check has been eliminated. The world is a far more unstable and violent place.
In all the Imperialist countries unemployment, poverty and crime are on the increase as the Capitalist crisis deepens. New technology under Capitalism has led to the consequent elimination of thousands of jobs. The middle strata, as well as the industrial working class, are being affected. A political polarisation is taking place as the ruling class acts more coercively.
The mass of the people are becoming more alienated though they are not yet becoming more revolutionary in Capitalist society. This partly relates to the weakness of the Communists, especially in countries where the revisionist trend in the Communist movement is still strong enough to prevent a regrouping of the Communists into a single party based upon revolutionary Marxist/ Leninist ideological and organisational principles.
The struggle between the Imperialist powers themselves is sharpening. The profound Capitalist crisis has led to intensified competition for contracting markets. At the same time the different Imperialist powers have conflicting interests as they strive to redivide the world among themselves following the counter-- revolution in what was the Soviet Union and East European countries.
In this regard Germany, which virtually annexed the GDR, has benefited from the break-up of Czechoslovakia and encouraged the disintegratory process in Yugoslavia. It has emerged as the dominant power in Europe.
The United States, which no other Imperialist power is strong enough to openly confront, is imposing its will on Europe by insisting on terms of trade which are increasingly favourable to United States interests.
The United States is seeking to strengthen its global role. The United Nations, reflecting the changed balance of global forces, has become more ready to accede to the pressures and interests of US Imperialism. At the same time, and as they themselves seek a global role, Japan and Germany are laying claim to permanent seats on the UN Security Council.
British Imperialism has a weak domestic economic base. It feels constrained to back US Imperialism's lead even though to do so is often to the detriment of its own interests. In the Middle East, 147 United States Imperialism has strengthened its political and economic position partly at the expense of British Imperialism.
British Imperialism's reliance on developing its nuclear weaponry is dearly to counter the growing political and economic strength of German Imperialism. German Imperialism is once again the major rival of the British ruling class in the European arena. In fact, the influence of British Imperialism is weakening as it is being marginalised, especially by US and German Imperialism.
This in turn present deepening problems for the British ruling class which continues to put its major emphasis on the export of capital rather than commodities in an effort to defend its eroding international position as well as getting the biggest possible profit from its investment.
To further sustain the position of British Imperialism the ruling class has launched a comprehensive economic and political attack on the working and living conditions of the people of Britain. The social wage is under attack, the public sector of the economy has been privatised and the trade unions continue to be subjected to an on-going process of crippling legislation.
US Imperialism has strengthened its position in the Middle East, Africa and the Caribbean. It has been more ready to take the military option where it calculates large-scale casualties to US personnel can be avoided. Hence, punitive actions or Imperialist wars have been unleashed on Libya, Panama and Iraq. US Imperialism is intensifying its lobby for military action in Yugoslavia. Somalia has been occupied by United States forces.
In the Asian arena, Japan is beginning to flex its military muscle, but again will not take on the United States directly.
Pressure on Peoples China is being intensified by the continuing military build-up on Taiwan. The US-backed British intransigence over Hong Kong is also part of that pressure.
US hostility towards democratic Korea is particularly marked at present, and the threat of military strikes against that country being called for in authoritative sections of the British bourgeois press is also part of the strategy that seeks to eliminate Socialism.
If all this were to be the whole picture the world would indeed be a miserable place facing total barbarism. Fortunately, there is another side to the story.
148Imperialism has failed to achieve its goal. The remaining countries of Socialism and Socialist orientation have survived the counter-revolution, and throughout the world Communists have emerged from their new baptism of fire bloody but unbowed.
Work is going on to regroup Communist forces nationally and internationally. Progress is being made to rally the working class, peasantry and progressive intellectuals in the anti-imperialist and anti-Capitalist struggle. The narrow nationalism fostered by Imperialism is beginning to countered by Proleterian Internationalism. Even the harsh experience and consequent suffering of the mass of the peoples in the former Soviet Union and Socialist countries of Eastern Europe serve to drive home the lesson.
There is no solution, no road of prosperity, no way of avoiding poverty and war, to be found by turning to or tolerating Capitalism. The Pyongyang Declaration built on the modest levels of the fight-back since the counter-revolution. The bilateral and regional conferences and meetings were taken forward by the signing of the Declaration by delegates from revolutionary parties from all over the world.
This seminar convened by CPI(M) takes the process a step further. The question is how can that process be further consolidated.
In the world we live in, the ideological struggle, the battle of ideas, is of the greatest significance. For the working class to wage it successfully it must have information. It must have news reflecting working class struggle and projecting its point of view.
The bourgeois media has developed great skill in its endeavours to manipulate public opinion. The influence of the bourgeois media is colossal and a major reason why the deepening Capitalist crisis has not led to any substantial anti-Capitalist consciousness among the working class in the Imperialist and other Capitalist countries. Psychological warfare is now waged continuously against the general public on a national and international basis by the Imperialist powers mass media.
Since the counter-revolution and the ending of the service of the TASS news agency, we have all become even more dependent for our news on the bourgeois media. There are obvious great dangers in this but it is a problem we can do something about.
149Our party urges the seminar to issue a call for the convening of an international delegate meeting to discuss and put in motion the setting up of a Communist news agency. Such a meeting could define the terms of reference for such a news agency as well as tackling the technical and financial factors relating to its establishment.
Let boldness and revolutionary optimism continue to be our friend. Let us continue to take initiatives to strengthen the links between us and serve the interests of the working class and allies we are responsible to.
I would like to make a brief reference to the struggle for Communist unity that is going on in the different countries where the Communist movement has over years been subject to a prevailing wave of revisionism. That rightist deviation strengthened the Social Democracy ideologically and organisationally at the expense of Marxist/Leninist forces.
This has led, certainly in Britain, to a position where the original parent party, having effectively abandoned Marxism/Leninism, has now liquidated itself.
In that Parly, and indeed in others in Western Europe which succumbed to revisionism, the fight against Marxism/Leninism was spearheaded not by the rank-and-file membership, but by revisionist elements in the leadership who increasingly gained the ascendancy for policies of betrayal. It has to be said that in the struggle against Euro-Communism, the international Communist movement held itself aloof.
The lack of a consistent fight against Euro-Communism at an international level was excused by the lame plea, elevated into a principle - we cannot interfere in the internal affairs of brother parties. In other words -the international character of revisionism was ignored, and it was left to anti-revisionist elements to fight in isolation and on a national basis.
The failure to tackle revisionism internationally reflected more than a retreat from internationalism. It reflected the acceptance of the penetration of class collaborationist ideas in the international Communist movement and particularly in the top echelons of many Communist party leaderships. That retreat from ideological combat helped pave the way for counter revolution in the Soviet Union and East European countries.
150The link between revisionism, liquidation of the party, and counter revolution, is not coincidental. If not challenged and defeated, it is a logical and conscious progression to the implementation of a counter-revolutionary strategy as occurred in the Soviet Union in the post 1985 period.
It is that link between revisionism and counter-revolution that enables us to understand how so many of today's counter revolutionaries - such as, Gorbachev Yeltsin and Schevernadze were on the CPSU's Politbureau prior to 1985.
Generally speaking, in the current struggle for Communist unity, it has been the Marxist/Leninist parties that have been striving hardest to promote unity.
Communist Unity is not the same as Left Unity, though there is often a willful effort to confuse those two concepts.
Communist Unity must be built upon the firm foundation of Marxist/Leninist ideology and the organisational principles of democratic centralism.
It is necessary to stress the Leninism since at the present time, it is Leninism .that is under the most ferocious attack.
Leninism took forward the Marxist analysis into the Imperialist stage of Capitalism and into the era of global transition from Capitalism to Socialism. Leninism lays down the organisational principles of Communist parties. To drop Leninism is to retreat from ideological and organisational principles and strategies including the political organisational principle of democratic centralism.
The achievement of Communist Unity is of crucial importance in every country but it cannot cannot be rushed or served by abandoning vital ideological and organisational principles.
The process of achieving Communist Unity has to facilitate discussion on a comradely basis so that ideological, strategic and tactical differences can be resolved and thus further the aim of eventually achieving a single party based on Marxism/Leninism.
In our Party's effort to promote Communist Unity in Britain, we have put forward the proposal that a national Communist Committee for consultation and co-operation is set up to help facilitate joint action on agreed objectives and providing a forum for comradely discussion on issues where there are disagreements.
151At the same time, we have reiterated our belief that the ideological basis for Communist Unity could centre on the following agreement:--
__FIX__ Change to ordered list and look for all others in book.(1) That the Marxist critique of Capitalism and the theory of the general crisis of Capitalism is still valid; that the class struggle is a reality and cannot be resolved without the triumph of Socialism and the development to a Communist society; Socialism cannot replace Capitalism without a revolution. The work of building Socialism cannot begin until the Working Class has achieved state power.
(2) The working class has to be equipped with a vanguard party, a Marxist/Leninist Party, in order to play its leading role and that the Marxist/Leninist Party has to be based on the political and organisational principles of democratic centralism.
(3) The question of Communist Unity has an international as well as a national dimension. Provision must be made for regular international conferences to help make and carry forward the collective analysis of regional and global developments. A priority in our work must be to step up solidarity towards the remaining countries of Socialism like Cuba, China, Vietnam and North Korea which will all be under intensified ideological and physical pressure from Imperialism
(4) The struggle for peace has to be given conscious priority in our work and campaigning with the anti-Imperialist nature of that struggle and the growing dangers of war arising from the sharpening inter-Imperialist rivalries being recognised.
The way forward in the national and international struggle for Communist Unity is to uphold the red banner of Marxism/ Leninism.
[152] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of CanadaThe Central Executive Committee of the Communist party of Canada is very pleased to have been invited,and to be able to participate in this important gathering of parties to mark the 175th anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx, the founder and first practitioner of scientific socialism.
Had this anniversary taken place last year instead of this year,the then Executive of the Communist Party would have declined to participate, if they had communicated at all.
Until the late summer of 1992, the top leadership of the Party and of the Party newspaper The Canadian Tribune was in the hands of reformists and revisionists whose aim was to dismantle and liquidate the Communist Party of Canada, while extracting all of the assets built up by its membership and supporters over seventy years.
After a prolonged political ideological, organizational and legal struggle spanning the years 1988--92, with roots going back even earlier than that, the liquidationists were defeated and left the CPC taking with them about 15 percent of the former membership, 50 percent of the assets, and the newspaper The Canadian Tribune.
The terms of their departure, and the restoration of the Party and the remaining half of its assets to the control of the Leninist membership of the Party, were negotiated in the spring of 1992, when it finally became apparent to the liquidationists that in spite of the difficult international situation the Communist membership of the Communist Party was prepared to fight liquidation on every front, including public exposure of their betrayal which was the 153 final straw that forced these ``democrats'' and ``reformers'' to the negotiating table,thus ending the crisis in the CPC.
The splititself, which was dubbed "inevitable'' and ``desirable'' by those who attempted the hijack and whose intent was to split the organization but not the assets, was to be the prelude to the formation of a new political party referred to as "the united party of the socialist left".Initially,the reformists had intend-ed to dispose of the Party by dissolving it into this new broad `` nonsectarian'' formation. It is a party which has yet to be bom, parenthetically; if s more likely to be a still-birth than anything else. That is because there is no room and no interest in Canada's labour and democratic movements in developing a second social democratic party in Canada. It am be said that their hands are full dealing with the existing social democratic Party (NDP), which is presently implementing neo-conservative policy in 3 provinces.
Aside from the inherent dishonesty of the hijackers, as they become known, (for their real agenda was always hidden and always denied), the logic of their position derived from events in Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union in the first place. They concluded that the upheavals in the socialist countries were the result of fundamental flaws in socialist theory and practice which negated scientific socialism as a guide to revolutionary action, and socialism as the next rung on the ladder of human social development. Marxism,they said, was only one of many philosophies.
In abandoning Marxism-Leninism,they strove instead to find a new form in which to express a left social democratic programme and goals; a form which would ensure their own personal careers and which would aim to reform capitalism, not to challenge and destroy it This was "the united parry of the socialist left* which was rebuffed by the Party from the moment it was first floated in the Canadian Tribune in January 1990, as well as by the labour and democratic movements whose interest is in transforming the NDP into a left social democratic party which is accountable and responsive to labour and the democratic movements, instead of being the conduit for the corporate agenda which it is in danger of becoming.
In pursuit of this new political formation however,the reformists strove to abandon the principle of proletarian internationalism, most blatantly revealed in their refusal to condemn US aggression in the Gulf until the very last days of 1990, and by 154 refusing to extend working class solidarity to the people of Iraq during and after the bombing, for fear of appearing ``soft'' on Saddam. It is the position that they take now, outside of the Communist Party of Canada, to the heroic Party and people of Cuba. This alone is massive evidence of their departure from a class approach to the understanding of the world and of their place in it. More4t is reminiscent of the last great split in the working class movement in 1914 on the question of a nationalist or an internationalist approach by the working class movement in each country.
Regrettably, the membership together with the minority in leadership was unable to prevent the reformists from severing almost all fraternal ties between th CP of Canada and the Communist and Workers Parties and the National and Social Liberation Movements around the world; indeed with any organization or publication outside Canada save for the breakaway group from the CP USA. This is a situation that we are working to rectify now. In our view it is crucial to re-establish the links with the international working class movement: to re-establish communications and information exchanges, but much more than that, to find the appropriate ways and means to chart a common strategy to prevent the outbreak of world war and of local wars that might lead to a general nuclear conflagration, to find a common strategy globally to block imperialism and to force it into retreat so that the forces for socialism and social progress may regain the historic initiative which has been temporarily lost to imperialism and to move forward-each country in its own way towards socialism and national and human emancipation. This includes the most urgent task which is the defence of socialist Cuba against US economic and military aggression; as well as socialist DPRK, socialist Vietnam, and other socialist countries in less imminent danger of attack. It also includes the defence and maximum solidarity with the heroic South African Communist Party and the African National Congress of South Africa. And it includes defence and solidarity to the Palestinian people in the year of the Intifada, under the leadership of the PLO. And to all the states and people under attack by US imperialism, and by the growing threat of war, reaction, racism and fascism which increasingly accompanies imperialism whatever its home base.
In our view, such discussions will help to define the new content of proletarian internationalism in the post USSR period and 155 into the next century. That is, working class internationalism that is being shaped by the new conditions in which the anti-imperialist, anti-monopoly struggle is being fought today. We think that meetings such as this one are valuable because they provide an opportunity to examine all aspects of the people's struggles from a theoretical and practical point of view. That is why we also favour the convening of a world meeting of parties as soon as it is practicable to do so.
The reformists in the CP of Canada also attacked democratic centralism, deriding this Leninist organizational principle, and Leninism per se, as "Stalinism in practice''. This too was rejected by Party members, though the then General Secretary put out that the abandonment of Democratic centralism was the crucial pivot on which turned the ``transformation'' and liquidation of the CPC It was this statement more than any thing else that convinced many Canadian Communists that the reformists were not to correct distortions of democratic centralism that had occurred in the CPC, but to gut the party of the very thing that made it possible for the party to act in unison, and to lead in struggle.
The reformists also attacked the theory of socialist revolution, which they wanted to see replaced with an updated theory of gradualism, which they then equated with democracy. Difference between the working class struggle for socialism, and the broader more immediate struggle for democratic reform,became increasingly blurred, as the reformists began to equate governmental power by social democratic governments with state power in the hands of the working class and its allies. They also abandoned the premise that the party should be a part of the working class;rejecting this as "too narrow" a base. Party membership itself began to be regarded as sectarian, as an unnecessary barrier which separated the party from the masses and from the activists in the trade union and democratic movements. Great efforts were made to blur the distinction between the Party and the mass movements as the party's independent policies and campaigns disappeared and merged into the mass movements. Great efforts were made to change and later to ignore the party constitution (rules) so that individuals who were invited by the reformists to join in order to capture certain leading positions in the Party, could be admitted and advanced in spite of the rules.
The idea of a revolutionary leap was also rejected, and the idea 156 of socialism growing up within capitalism was once again advanced and gained currency in some circles. The very idea of class struggle as the motive force of history was rejected, and instead,the democratic forces were suddenly invested with characteristics they do not possess, and tasks they cannot carry through.
The rejection of these reformist ideas by Communists in Canada does not in any way deny the growth and significance of the democratic forces as allies of the working class, and in many instances as initiators of important struggles for democracy and social changes. But they are not, and cannot be the driving force -the engine of fundamental social change, up to and including socialism. That role is reserved for the working class, which continues to be the grave-digger of capitalism, even though the working class in itself is changing in response to the scientific and technological revolution and to global restructuring, which has extended capitalism's life for what will be historically, a relatively brief period of time.
The new conditions are no reason for communists to collapse and declare capitalism the winner, rather the new conditions call for new demands and new methods of struggle. Mass unemployment which is becoming the norm in the advanced capitalist countries, with over 2 million unemployed in Canada, raises the question of shorter work time in sharp perspective. A 35 hour work week with no reduction in take home pay, a ban on mandatory over-time,reducedpensionage and increased vacation time, would go a long way to putting Canada back to work. Together with legislation to prevent capital flight, to make substantial public investment in infrastructure, to bring in democratic tax reform, to bring down interest rates, and to block NAFTA and rescind the Canada-US Trade Deal, to protect social programs and to cut the arms and defence budgets starting with the helicopter purchases, these are the elements of a program to unite the employed and the unemployed for full employment, or in other words for genuine economic recovery.
Combined with a militant defence of the national democratic rights of Quebec, the Aboriginal peoples, and English-speaking Canada to self determination up to and including secession; a policy of new confederal arrangement guaranteeing the equal voluntary partnership of each nation within Canada; the defence of trade union and democratic rights, the rights of women and youth, 157 the rights of Aboriginal people and people of colour; this is a program for a sovereign and independent Canada, a program for peace, jobs and democracy. It is a program that must be implemented in order to reach socialism in Canada; but it is not a program for socialism, nor should it be.
The task before Canadian Communists today is to find the waysand means to mobilize the very broadest sections of Canadian society, including sections of capital, that are prepared to fight for Canada's independence and sovereignty, for a foreign policy of peace, for jobs, and for labour and democratic rights.
These are the forces that must be rallied and organized to defeat the neo-conservati ve agenda in Canada, to defeat the Conservative government led by Kim Campbell nee Brian Mulroney, and to prevent the election of a coalition of right forces including the newconservative and nationalist Bloc Quebecois in Quebec, and the populist Reform Party in the West with its links to extreme rightwing forces such as the white supremacist Heritage Party, the Klu Klux Klan, and the virulently anti-French Confederation of Re gions Party, amongst others. This is the crucial question before the working class and the democratic forces today, since the re-election of the Tories alone or in coalition with other right forces could spell the end of Canada by the end of the century, without exaggeration.
The women's movement in particular together with the senior citizens, the students, the Aboriginal peoples, the anti-racism movements, the peace and social justice movements, and many others have become a powerful force, which allied with the trade union movement, Communists, Social Democrats, (NDP), Greens, and the newly formed National Party (reflecting the sections of Canadian capital in sharp competition with the transnational in Canada), and even some sections of the Liberal Party will be the decisive factor in the days ahead. Such a people's coalition, combining extra-parliamentary with parliamentary struggle, and united in action around a common alternative program such as outlined above.
This is not a program for socialism, but it is crucial we believe in order to turn back the corporate assault in Canada and internationally. A narrow, self-serving approach on our part would be fatal for the attainment of our immediate and our long term goals, and for the future of the Party itself. In other words it is a struggle 158 for democratic reform, but it has nothing in common with reformism.
The struggle against reformism in the Communist Party of Canada as we have tried to briefly outline here, was in fact the struggle to validate Marxism, and the need for Marxist-Leninist party, first in the complicated and quite foggy and confused conditions of 1989--90; and now in the new and complex conditions internationally and in Canada in the post USSR period. It is a struggle which has cost us dearly, but which left us in the words of Lenin "better fewer, but better''.
It is a struggle which William Kashtan, former General Secretary of the Communist Party of Canada, fought hard to win in the last years of his life, and to which he made as always, a signal contribution.
Today, the CPC is a small party, but one which is once again able to be of service to the working class and people of Canada, and to the international working class movement.
In the 72 years of its existence.in Canada, the CPC has sunk deep roots into the working class movement. The history of the Communist party during this period has been indivisible from the history of the working class movement in Canada and internationally, and so we intend it to continue. Learning from the past, and the recent and difficult past in particular now, we will rebuild on the best of those deep roots, severing those which are dead or useless, renewing our party on a continuing basis.
Our recently held 30th Convention, the first since the end of the crisis, opted to reaffirm the Marxist-Leninist character of the party, to undertake a thorough study of the crisis in our Party and internationally which may take some time, to test and re-test all of our theory and practice in light of these cataclysmic events of the past 5 years, and to open up the discussion on our program " The Road to Socialism in Canada" (last published in 1971) that will examine in detail questions such as the national question in Canada, the new World order and capitalist rivalries for a redivision of the world, global restructuring and the scientific and technological revolution, changes in the working class, the new content of internationalism, democracy, democratic movements and democratic demands, socialist political economy and the exercise of working class power, the prevention of nuclear war, stages in the transition 159 to socialism, national liberation and the debt crisis, environment and ecological questions, and other fundamental questions.
We expect that the discussion on the program will culminate in a special convention to be held in 1995 that will adopt a new program for the CPC.
During this period, we anticipate a very critical discussion, a sharp debate, on many of the questions that are before the international movement as well as before our Party. This will help to strengthen our Party, our cadres, our theory and practice; not weaken us, as we replace unanimity as the benchmark of unity, with a more genuine collectivity based on rigorous and critical examination of problems including a rigorous and self-critical examination of our work. Errors and distortions in theory and practice must be regularly corrected in this way, not left to amass and seed the beds of future deviations to right or left This point is of particular significance to us in Canada, since in our view the seeds of the crisis in Canada were already mere, in 1988. The international situation proved to be the trigger that set liquidation in motion, and nearly destroyed the CPC.
The Convention also agreed to launch the new Communist press in Canada, The People's Voice, which was launched on March 1 st as a monthly,but which we expect to be published twice monthly by year end. A great deal of our energies will be spent on publishing this newspaper for the foreseeable future. It is our voice to the working class and people of Canada, and though we are small and our circulation is also small, it is our ideas that tower, and it is this that we must safeguard at all costs.
For as Marx said, it is not enough to study the world, the point is to change it.
[160] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of FranceDear Friends & Comrades,
In the name of the French Communist Party, I would first of all like to thank the CPI(M) for having invited us to this seminar. It is of great interest for it is necessary to carry out our experiences, exchange our ideas and analysis.
On the evidence, the world has entered a new stage of its history. We must therefore analyse it and think over the problems that today are facing all those who do not accept the new world order that imperialist domination wishes to impose.
Peace, the new world order, international solidarity, socialist transformation of societies, a modern Communist identity, such are the important issues of our epoch that Marxism, helps us to face.
The recent changes that have taken place have raised the issues at stake and the level of implication which, we feel, demand a spirit of offensive on the part of progressive and peace-loving forces. One hears saying sometimes that history has started to go faster. If this phrase has any meaning, I would say that history is accelerating in a direction contrary to that foreseen by the dominant forces during the last three years.
Let us recall 1989 : the coming down of the Berlin wall, and 1990--91: the breaking of the ruling regimes in the east and the dislocation of the USSR. What were we told at that time? That the dislocation of these systems meant the disappearance of the very idea of communism, and that Marxism was definitely buried. An American historian, M. Fukuyama, did not hesitate to declare that 161 it was "the end of history''. His articles went around the world. Capitalism, we were told, had triumphed. This would lead, towards a world order exempt of confrontations, more democratic and peaceful.
This interpretation of the changes that have taken place in the world (which has been proved flagrantly wrong less than three years after) has had its own consequences on the perception of these issues at the moment. Many, including some from the left, thought that a new international era would come, based on the emergence of "universal values'', the notion of class struggle being then considered obsolete.
But very quickly, events imposed themselves and these assertions were proved wrong. The first awakening came with the Gulf war in 1991. .The savagery of this conflict exposed what the new order of American President Bush was about. Today, the current world situation has obviously nothing to do with the "new era of peace" announced by Bush. We are living in a harder, more violent, more dangerous world. Indeed, facts are raising doubts among the public opinion over the validity of the theories of the dominant ideology. This slow change in perception is an interesting element in the present situation in the world.
Thanks to the considerable development of science and technology, humanity could advance to a higher degree of civilisation. But instead, it faces considerable drama, threat of veritable military and ecological catastrophe. The gap is widening between the formidable possibilities existing, and the distress of a greater and greater part of humanity victim of a shameful pillage. The conflict is growing between the given situation of the people and the new needs for greater dignity, justice and democracy.
Entire continents, such as Africa, are moving towards destruction. Entire countries, as in Latin America, are in the grip of extreme misery. New diseases are appearing, such as AIDS, or old ones are reappearing. There is frightening development of drugs, mass delinquency, prostitution, notably child prostitution. Independent countries, newly or not so newly independent countries, are now deeply indebted and have to submit to the dictates of the World bank and the IMF.
Half a century ago, Palme Dutt wrote ; "India is not a poor country, but a country inhabited by poor people" We can say too 162 that the world in which we live is not poor, far from it, but more and more, it has people who are poor. At the other end of the chain, a small number of rich getting richer and richer are ruling as masters over millions of people.
It is this which has to change. Global and structural changes are required in every field.
Capitalism does not offer any solution. Indeed the implementation of capitalist reforms in the former socialist countries shows its result. There is a massive impoverishment of the East European countries. Three years ago the C.P. France was in France, among the first to denounce the danger of a "third worldisatton" of the ex-- socialist countries. Today, everyone is saying it. The societies of the ex-USSR and the other East European states are brutally destabilised. A veritable massacre of human and natural resources is happening there.
The main target of the so-called ``aid'' given by the big western powers is to exploit the wealth of these countries. The recent attitude of the G7 towards Russia confirms it. The result is a loss of independence and a veritable negation of national identities. Combined with the impressive deterioration of the level of living, the wounds inflicted on the national sentiments play a big role in the rise of nationalism and obscurantism of all kinds.
What happened in the ex-USSR and other countries of Eastern Europe causes a great blow to the cause of socialism, but it does not signify in any way the triumph of capitalism. The failure of distorted forms of socialism does not condemn the struggle for socialism. It calls us to draw the relevant lessons. That is a point I will discuss later.
Everything shows that capitalism cannot resolve the problems posed at the dawn of the third millennium. Its crisis is aggravating. The peoples of the industrialised countries are also coming under its effects.
As far as France is concerned, in the 1970s, the CPF started to expose the economic, social and moral crisis, which affects all aspects of national life. Its causes lie with the choices made by the ruling elite. They are only interested in maximising financial instability, to the detriment of industries, agriculture and employment. France has been weakened by speculation. Money goes to money instead of being invested in human development. Under 163 these conditions, our country with its considerable potentialities, is experiencing a serious economic and social regression.
We have more than three million of unemployed people, five million of workers with precarious employment. Poverty is spreading. A growing number of people are ``marginalised''. The future of a large part of our youth is spoilt Women are suffering from reinforced inequalities. Important social rights are under severe attacks.
All this is linked to the building of Europe of big capital.
A true cooperation is necessary . It should be based on the mutual interests of the people with full respect for the sovereignty of each nation, combined with the will to contribute to the emergence of more equal international order. But we have to deal with a Europe serving money-power, dominated by Germany and submitting to the US, an egoistic and dominating Europe facing people.
Communists have formulated concrete proposals for a social, democratic, peaceful and fraternal Europe. On this basis, we asked for and obtained a referendum on the treaty of Maastricht, to which we called for a No from the Left. We are proud to have thus helped the people to gather against this infamous project. We nearly reached the majority. Recently, we are taking up action in combination with other progressive forces in Europe.
Under all circumstances, our conception is that the future is never written in advance. It is our people who will decide it. This understanding has guided us in the campaign for the recent election to the National Assembly. Our progress in terms of votes and percentage, compared with the regional elections of March 1992, and the fact that we have been able to form a group in the Parliament is to be appreciated positively in the doubly difficult context in which we find ourselves. It was the first legislative elections since the events in Eastern Europe. The elections unfolded in a climate marked by the deep rejection of the Socialist Party, which in the name of the Left, has followed a policy in favour of the rich, thus exacerbating the difficulties of the vast majority of our people.
That hundreds of thousands of men, women and youth chose to vote communist in order to make themselves heard, to refuse the Right, and to demand new choices, is an encouragement for us. It is also a precious help for struggling against the present Rightist 164 government. The rightist coalition, thanks to the electoral law, obtained 85% of the seats in the legislative assembly while it has only 44% of the polled votes.
To resist the aggravation of the difficulties which our people will face, we are calling for the development of a popular movement in order to modify the relation of forces, to prevent social setbacks, to impose new solutions.
The situation in France evolves in a world frame which faces all of us. The first global issue concerns peace. Everyone can see that the disapearence of the bipolar world, of the cold war era has not made armed conflicts disappear, on the contrary! Experience shows that there is no other alternative favourable to the peoples than those based on negotiated political solutions. The popular intervention is a decisive factor to go towards this direction. Since the Gulf war, vulgarisation of the "logic of war" has taken frightening proportions: intervention in Somalia in October 1992, new bombing of Iraq in January 93, aggravation of the risk of military intervention in ex-Yugoslavia.
In this context, France has sadly illustrated herself with the promotion of the notion of the "right of interference'', we say in French "droit d`ingerence'', which plays with the humanitarian sentiments of the people to justify military interventions. The implementation of this so-called 'right of interference' goes against one of the most important right of our time - the right of national sovereignty.
More generally, the reduction in nuclear arms leading to their elimination from year 2000, is a necessity to safeguard humanity and the planet. Furthermore, disarmament will free considerable resources to resolve the problems of hunger and development.
The second issue, inseparable from the last, is the struggle for an authentic new international order. The need for it has been formulated by the NAM more than 30 years ago. It expresses in essence, the rejection of relations of political, economic and military domination, exercised by the stronger States over the weaker nations. In this, it constitutes one of the dimensions of the antiimperialist struggle.
The very notion of a "new order" is an issue and we refuse to surrender this term to the notion of domination as defined by the leaders of the USA and other powers.
165In a sense, the very brutality of the American order dissipates illusions and illustrates the need of a new international order based on the principle of national sovereignty , the re-equilibrium of relations between states, on the democratisation of international relations, on the establishment of real cooperation between nations. A new international economic order has to be based not on the code of conduct of the different dominant powers, but on the satisfaction of the needs of the people. It is in this spirit that our Party -1 will mention here only one example - denounces the economic blockade against Cuba and organises in France actions of solidarity with this country.
The manner in which Washington and its allies are trying to pervert the role of international organisations, in the first place UNO, to canalise or mask their interventions, leads in our opinion to reinforce the need for a democratised institution at the service of humanity and peace. The international sphere should be considered not as a jungle where the law of the strongest dominates. On the contrary, it should lead to the implementation of a civilised international law.
The third issue 1 would like to raise concerns international solidarity. In the framework of the actual crisis, this has never been as necessary and possible. Imperialism masks its objectives behind a permanent ideological discourse which has become a basic instrument of its domination. This has to be thought of. In a sense, to speculate over popular feelings comes to recognise the strength of these feelings. As the General Secretary of our Party recently put it :"One will dress up within Tiumanitarian considerations' the attempts of the `North' to recolonise the `South'. But the fact that humanity and fraternity are the grounds of these manouevures, speaks much for the aspirations that exist actually.'" It is on the basis of these aspirations, in conformity with our communist ideals, that our Party pressed the government on each occasion to take the initiatives that the situation requires.
In this circumstance, we are convinced that we have everything to win in developing our efforts to inform people and to mobilise public opinion on the great humane causes which are on the agenda. We conceive solidarity in reciprocity. We hope to be, or to become, more and more an active interlocutor of the progressive forces of the whole world( and naturally amongst these the 166 communists) and to hold with them, without taboo, without a prior condition or narrowness, the most open, diversified and frequent relations possible.
Millions of men and women are questioning themselves under diverse forms on the problems of civilisation that the crisis of capitalism engenders. Is not this oneof the strongest demonstration of the validity of Marxism? As far as we are concerned, we have absolutely no difficulty to call ourselves Marxists, even if we do not consider the acceptance of materialism as a condition for membership of our Party. Marxism is for us a living theory of action based on apprehending a reality in essence evolutive. From the moment it freezes or dogmatises it is no longer truly Marxism.
Here we touch precisely one of the drama of the ex-socialist countries.
The CPF, since more than 15 years, in particular since its 22nd Congress in 1976, has debated the problems facing these countries. We have underlined the necessity for them to make profound economic, social and democratic reforms in every field. The essential lever of these reforms, we said, should be liberty and democracy. We had on this point, as it is known, a fundamental divergence with the Soviet leaders.
Faced with the disaster that the USSR and other countries of Eastern Europe have known, our reflection, which in no way pretends to be final, leads us to some elements of analysis. We got the feeling that life seems to verify them.
Socialism, a society of transition, in each case singular, crossing over capitalism and evolving towards communism, has to be a permanent movement towards the New and a struggle against the Old. If this evolution - or better said this revolution - stops, it is socialism which retreats. If this movement is stopped, it does not mean that socialism has been blocked at a specific stage of its development. Indeed, to let the movement being blocked means to reverse the movement back, to the Old which aspires only to take again its advantage.
The socialist revolution can only be the creative work of the people and of the social class most interested in a change in society : the working class. The evolution of productive forces, requiring from the working class always more knowledge, information, competence and responsibility, gives an enhanced role to the 167 revolutionary class i.e. the working class. But this class, in almost all the European socialist countries did not play any real political role. The success in the socialist transformation can only come about through responsibility, democracy and self-government We are convinced of this. That is why our Party extends its support to any reforms leading to a socialism made for and by men, satisfying the material and spiritual needs of humanity, and responding in the same move to the conditions and needs arising out of scientific, technical and cultural progress.
The confusion between the State and the Communist party in power has reduced the Party to a bureaucratic organ, an organ regulating the society in its smallest detail, but then forgetting its political and ideological role. Socialist transformation needs imperatively the role of impulsion (which cannot be self-declared by a decree but has to be merited), of a political avant-garde of the people: a modern communist party, linked to life and to popular aspirations, capable of leading political and ideological activities with the aim of favouring popular intervention.
To conclude, allow me to outline the conditions in which the CPF has changed its policy and practice.
Our evolution has been neither spontaneous nor easy. It has been made under very difficult conditions, on the national and international plane. On the international plane we have paid the cost of the setback of socialism. On the national level, we had to pay the cost of an erroneous form of left unity which brought illusions among our people. That led us to much reflection and self criticism. Not in our fundamental engagements to transform society and to struggle for peace and international solidarity, but in the methods to attain these objectives. From the mid-seventies, we have rejected the notion of a 'model of socialism', we have renounced the dictatorship of the proletariat and undertaken the task of elaborating a strategy corresponding to the needs and conditions of France: a self-governed path for socialism. We conceive the change of our society as the result of the struggle of our people itself, and the change has to be placed under its responsibility from one end to the other.
This implies that a majority popular will expresses itself and that all the forces aspiring for change assemble together. Drawing the lessons from the failure of a left union conceived at the top we 168 are calling for a union anchored in struggles against the orientation of capitalism and for new solutions.
In our last Congress, wechose to stay as the CPF,in implementing a new practice, a modem communist identity. Our role is to be able to listen to the people in order to oppose (our conception of a socialist transformation of society) to the project of the capitalist forces. We conceive our vanguard role not as that of an "advance detachment'', which the people have no option but to follow, but as that of a lever of the popular movement.
In our 28th Congress, we intend to pursuethesechanges, which start to be perceived, as has been shown by the last election results to the National Assembly. We will do this in the fidelity to the communist ideal and in the spirit of dur times.
This dialogue, this exchange of experiences are an encouragement and a help for all. We think we have much to learn from each other in order to hope to be able to modify the relations of international forces in favour of people's interests. This, quite evidently, by banishing formalism and narrowness, and respecting the independence of each party. Incontestably, the international meetings of progressive forces, and amongst them the Communists, constitutes an indispensable factor for the success of our struggles.
The fight for liberty, justice, and peace is more useful than ever. To liberate the people from capitalism and to build socialism, is the future. Rest assured that the French communists will do their best to achieve it.
[169] __ALPHA_LVL2__ German Communist PartyDear Comrades,
In the name of the Presidium of the German Communist Party, I would like to thank the comrades of CPI(M) and wish this meeting a lot of success.
Such a meeting of representatives of Communist Parties of various continents on the subject "Contemporary World Situation and the Validity of Marxism" is a significant occasion. It is now the time to produce answers to new challenges, analyse errors and to be conscious of the revolutionary force of the ideas of Marxism.
The collapse of socialism in Europe and in particular, of the socialism on the German soil was for the GCP a deep shock and it represents the worst defeat of the German working class.
The political, social and the overall condition of class struggle is fundamentally changed in our country. The bourgeoisie had unfolded a climate of extreme anti-communism. Not only are the achievements of socialism put aside but also every trace which in the slightest way reminds one of socialism and the existence of the GDR is being destroyed. In the erstwhile concentration camps, which are the memorials for anti-fascism, it is proposed that in the future, the perpetrators of fascist terror will be presented as victims.
In this situation, the GCP has started a discussion on its programmatic basis at this important juncture of its reorganisation.
In the concluding statement of the opening of this discussion, it is stated that "in view of the present political process following the annexation of the GDR and the collapse of the socialist countries 170 along with the threat of an imperialistic world order, it has become clear as to how urgent the working people of Germany need a Communist Party. We are fighting for a politics which:~
is consistently anti-capitalistic in the fight for the day to day interests of the working, exploited and the oppressed people by exposing the fundamental contradictions of this social order, and which wants to break out of the property relations of monopoly capitalism.
fights for the establishment of a new, exploitation-free social order having faith in the future of socialism.
sees the central motive force of history in class struggle and also finds the working class to be the decisive social force for progress.
is based on dialectical materialism which was founded by Marx & Engels and was further developed by Lenin and other Marxists.
In order to make this politics effective, we would like to examine these basics of communist politics with respect to the realities of today in both theory and practice, to renew it and to reorient ourselves to the new political conditions" (Preamble of the Party Congress resolution for the discussion on the thesis of programmatic renewal).
With this, we have named the main points of the document of our 12th Party Congress, January, 1993.
A question, which is very important as far as scientific socialism is concerned, is that on determining the epoch in which we live. This question was all the more relevant because on this question of the epoch an assessment was made during the concurrently occurring debate of the Parry of Democratic Socialism in Germany, which said that the socialism which collapsed had been the beacon of the world . It has been prematurely dispossessed by capitalism. Its potential to enrich human civilisation will be relevant for a prolonged period. What now is the position of GCP on this question?
Scientific socialism facilitates an analysis of the epoch we live in. It shows us how the productive forces have organized their respective historical developmental state in different production relation which determine the nature of social formation. In the course of its development there arise contradictions which lead to if s destruction. There are always people who are not ready to accept this contradiction. In a revolutionary break with the old 171 society new contradictions are created in which the fundamental principal contradiction of the old must be removed. This can be done if in the old society such productive forces ripen which make transformation possible.
We live in an era in which the dissolution of capitalism by socialism has become necessary in the interest of conservation and progress of human society. The threat to human beings which exist is the result of highly developed productive forces under capitalist production relations. The scientific - technological revolution has generated in this century almost infinite possibilities to intervene in nature and to improve the quality of human life. Never have the people had so many possibilities to unfold their productivity and creativity and simultaneously reduce their physical burden. It would be possible today to overcome hunger and destruction world wide to enable the humanity to live a worthy life without poverty and at the same time conserve the earth as a life worthy ecosystem for future generations.
Surely the reality looks to be different. The tremendous potential of productive forces and the increment of social wealth took place and is taking place under the direction of capitalist production system. At first these had generated scientific-technical and, in the industrialized countries also social progress as a result of organized struggle of the working class. However the development of productive forces serves capitalism only as a medium of capital and profit realization. Thus it becomes a source of danger for the basis of existence of human life. It is possible today to destroy humanity and the higher forms of life in a flash by a nuclear, chemical or biological war and the manipulation of human genes. The destruction of living environment continues forth and if s becoming irreversible. Under the compulsions of accumulation of capital, which is the principle of this societal formation, there does not exist any means to ban this danger effectively. Every scientific and technical progress is accompanied by degeneration and destruction under capitalist conditions.
The world wide crisis is an economic, social, ecological, cultural and political crisis of capitalism. A system, in which the fruits of human work only partially benefits the toilers while another part, the surplus value, is appropriated by the capitalist bosses with the most important means of production and which is used over 172 and over again to generate their capital and to an increased exploitation of the working people. This brings inevitably to the fore the contradiction between the real needs of the people as a whole and the interest of the capital, between working class and bourgeoisie, which remains an unresolved contradiction of the social formation.
Imperialism has produced on the one hand all material precondition for socialism. On the other hand, it has sharpened the basic contradiction of capitalism, the contradiction between the generation of the social production and the continuation of private property in the present state of capitalism to such an extent that it threatens to altogether destroy the civilized society. The defeat of socialism in East Europe increases the danger which capitalism poses. This is because it can now carry out carefree exploitation and increase profit at the cost of the underdeveloped and weakly developed countries and the working class of industrialized nations. The effect of capitalist crisis becomes thereby aggravated. Democratic rights gained through struggles are being more and more restricted and removed. Disenchantment, manipulation and increasing repression of the masses are to ensure the role of capital.
However this also generates the resistance of those who do not let themselvesbedisheartened,manipulatedand suppressed. Only a society in which the overcoming of profit enables an advance of the productive forces, in which the results of production serve to satisfy human needs regulated by the entire society, can put an end to the spiral of simultaneous generation of wealth and poverty, of mastery and destruction of nature. In the place of competing the individual interest, one then has global responsibility, international solidarity, true democracy and rational, planned progress of all productive forces. This societal form is socialism.
The more uninhibited the imperialist forces become, the more the danger of war, hunger, poverty and ecological destruction of the world and the more the dangers of social cutbacks and political repression.
Capitalist exploitation and repression have reached their highest stage today in the functional units of monopolies and state power. In the centres of capitalist operation bank and industrial capital have blended together into finance capital and have created a financial oligarchy which to a large extent determine the economic and political course of the groups of countries controlled by 173 them. These imperialist centres of power which were formed towards the end of the 20th century, are the USA, Japan and West Europe (where Germany is the foremost power). The scientifictechnological revolution, which serves on the basis of economic development of the present decade, is takingplace essentially in the developed capitalist countries in which around 23% of the world population live. AH variants of the 'new world order' propagated by imperialism have the goal to strengthen this leading position.
The developed capitalist world market is robbing three-fourths of humanity of any asppiration for development The countries, in which these people live, are partially included in the capitalist world market only as cheap sources of raw material, as countries of cheap wages, as dustbins, as dumping market for mass productions, as objects of brutal exploitation and as global recreation parks. The States of the imperialist nucleus have the function to ensure the national basis of finance and industrial capitals, to administer these and to bring these into the international network in a profitable form. This is taking place in the generation of transstate political and undemocratic structures like the IMF, the World Bank and the EC administration. Also the UNO is being increasingly misused by the centres of imperialism to attain their goals.
The German imperialism, with Japan which served as the principal supplier during the fascist world war follows the central goal of actively becoming the main winner. With annexation of the GDR already the essential results of the war have been reversed. The German imperialism played a decisive role in the separatist dissolution of the BalticStatesfrom the Soviet Union. With Slovenia and Croatia, historically artificial satellite States have been created and Yugoslavia destroyed. In die shortest time Germany could ensure its influence in Russia, Ukraine and in other republics of the erstwhile Soviet Union.
In this manner German imperialism is attempting to comprehensively strengthen itself economically, politically and militarily, which should enable it to play a leading role in West Europe and also in the larger parts of die world. Its craving for expansion has found a concrete form also in its desire to create a political union out of die European community under its leadership. The EC internal market and die new market of East Europe are meant to be die domain of influence dominated by it.
174A point of crystallization of German foreign and military policy is, therefore, the attempt to, once and for all, overcome the restriction forced onto it by the anti-Hitler coalition after the failed world war adventure of the Nazis. After the foundation of the Federal (German)Anny in 1955 and the membership in NATO, these forces are striving to obtain the option to finally have German soldiers participate in global wars. Germany wants to ensure its place in the "new imperialist world order''. This is the background for the deployment of Federal German army for the AW ACS detachment in Yugoslavia or the maneouvre in Somalia which went under the flag of "human rights and humanism' of imperialism.
As shown by Lenin the dialectic evinced by emerging imperialism of internal and external aggression is now being proved anew. The challenge of socialism had forced imperialism in the last forty years, particularly in Germany, to allow substantial material and social concessions. Thereby it has created for itself a certain force of attraction vis-a-vis not only its own working class but also within the socialist countries. Such political showpieces have served their purpose. The cutbacks of economic, sodal,political and cultural achievements and rights are not anymore confined just to the ex-GDR. In the old federal States the social decline is also rapidly affecting most of the population. Housing crisis and real poverty are becoming the daily experience for large portions of the population. Rights won by the trade unions over the last four decades are being actually threatened. With the recent attacks by the employees on the agreed-upon rise in wages, they would like to arbitrarily go about the wage policy. Against this the working class of East Germany are going on strike. The weakening of the right to asylum and other provisions in the constitution are being incorporated to put an end to the positive results obtained by the anti-fascist achievements of the second world war.
Even though imperialism seems to be so invincible towards the end of this century, its very own economic and political mechanisms bring only the potential for resistance against itself, both in the advanced capitalist countries and in the countries of the "third world''. It is the task of communist forces to contribute towards organising and thereby translating these potentials. It is necessary to take away power from those who misuse it to increase their profits at the cost of the humanity.
175A spedal task of the communists is to make the objective, economic and social laws clear and to fight against any illusion that the essence of imperialism can be changed. This struggle, at the forefront of which the GCP stays, cannot simply merge with a petty reform of the capitalist system. The goal of our struggle is socialism.
A party which does not have any illusions regarding the reformability of this system but wishes to dissolve the system by going beyond reforms and replace it by a socialist order is a historical necessity. Class consciousness cannot be generated merely by moral appeals. It is produced by the struggle for the interests which are experienced by those belonging to a class. The decisive factor for the power of the working class is its organisation. To strengthen the GCP and to spread its organization and the newspaper in the whole of Germany are the preconditions for the future strengthening of the communist movement in Germany. The development of an essentially anti-fascist strategy with an antiimperialistic component will then be objectively possible and can become a reality.
The GCP continues in the tradition of other revolutionary social democracy, the Spartakusbund andtheCPG.lt fights in the letter and spirit of Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Liebenekht, Ernst Thaelmann, Wilhelm Pieck and Max Reimann. It is in solidarity with all those who are today persecuted, jailed and discriminated against because of their past work in building up the GDR. It demands the rehabilitation of all those who have fought in West Germany for peace and socialism and have been persecuted for this reason.
After the Paris Commune the first attempt to build a socialistic social system, socialism began in Russia in 1917 with the October Revolution. This is its continued historical significance which will not be rendered any less relevant even though these attempts have failed. The October Revolution gave humanity the signal to break into a new epoch. Our solidarity, support and sympathy are for those who are working towards the building of socialism in today's world under their own specific conditions viz. Cuba, the People's Republic of China, Vietnam and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
The GCP is a part of the international communist movement and is in solidarity with all communist parties of the worid. The class struggle is since long not a national or a regional strggle. The 176 general crisis of capitalism affects all countries of the world, albeit in different extent. The working class must also organize itself as an international fighting unit against the multi-national powers of capital. Ahighdegreeof responsibility falls thereby on the communist parties who are fighting in the Centres of the capitalist system.
Our party is happy that out of this meeting important impulses are emerging for the collaboration of communist parties the world over and in Europe.
[177] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of GreeceThe CPG rejects the idea that the collapse of the specific regimes in the socialist countries means the decline of Communist theory and ideology. It stresses that its world theory is the socio-political, economic and philosophical theory founded by Marx, Engels and Lenin, scientific socialism, Marxist-Leninist theory moves dialectically, in the basis of reality as it evolves, that is, of scientific progress, social developments, the generalized study of new phenomena, closely linked to the accumulated experience of the international revolutionary movement.
The theory of scientific socialism draws its strength and vitality from the fact mat it expresses the interests of the working class and the true needs of all working people. The transformation of the theory into a system of doctrines and stereotypes which do not correspond to evolving reality is contrary to its founders' creative spirit and to the inherent requirement of the theory itself for constant development.
In today's circumstances, the CPG must preserve and intensify its efforts to develop theoretical and research activity which will allow it to help to provide answers with regard to the form of socialism which the 20th Century has known, the collapse of the specific form of socialist construction, the cause of this collapse, the roll played by the communist parties and the responsibilities borne by mem for it. The party's theoretical and research activity must be scientifically adequate and based on the collective elaboration and thought of the Party's members, friends and followers, as well as of scholars and intellectuals who wish to contribute to the 178 revitalization of the vision, concepts, values and ideals of socialism. Advantage should be taken of multifaceted cooperation and the exchange of theoretical views with other communist or socialist-oriented parties which understand the need for a scholarly, scientific stance vis-a-vis the socialism we have known and which at the same time seek ways of approaching it in our time.
After the events in 1989, new developments occurred on the international level, including new dangers of instability and military confrontations: the negative developments in the Soviet Union, the situation of disintegration in Yugoslavia, the danger of destabilisation in the Balkans and the contesting of borders.
The balance between the forces of imperialist hegemony and infringement of national and democratic rights on the one hand, and those of peace, international security, a just world order and of the socialist perspective on the other, has shifted more dearly now to the detriment of the latter.
The current inter-imperialist contradictions are rapidly becoming more acute and may constitute a great danger for humanity. The USA makes use of the new balance of forces to impose a "new world order''. Being militarily superior, it is attempting to achieve hegemony in the economic, commercial and cultural fields as well, to crush the peoples' resistance and completely defeat socialism.
The EEC, both during the Gulf crisis and during the crisis in Yugoslavia, has proved it does not put up any substantial resistance to the US designs, as some forces had thought, nor can it overcome its internal contradictions, which are becoming more acute now that Germany has been strengthened and is attempting to create its own zone of influence in the Balkans, in Central and Eastern Europe as far up as to the Baltic countries.
The dismantling of the Warsaw Pact and the weakening of the Soviet Union have given the imperialist forces of the USA, Japan and Europe the opportunity to interfere directly in the political and economic problems of the Balkans, Central and Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, thus enhancing secessionist trends.
The climate being created in Europe is reminiscent of the period between the two world wars, when "might is right" governed international relations and borders changed according to the 179 alliances and the interests of the great powers. Two world wars were waged, exactly because the inter-imperialist contradictions had become acute to the extreme, whereas the existence of the USSR and the system of socialist states helped to make it possible for Europe to live in peace and security for 45 years.
The Gulf crisis has proved that the UN is not in a position to play the role required in the current circumstances. The change in the balance of forces permits mighty imperialist circles and the great powers, such as the USA, to impose their domination on a world scale, making use of the privileges offered to them by the structure and the functioning of such institutions. However, particularly in the current circumstances, where the danger of destabilisation, military confrontations and multiform interventions is real, the peoples and states must persist and intensify their efforts so that the existing international organisations and institutions may acquire a democratic way of functioning that secures the substantial participation of all countries in the decision-making process. Real democratisation of these organisations, however, will come as result of change in the balance of forces in favour of peace, progress and socialism.
Our position is that the developments in the EEC are uncertain. We give certain characteristic expressions and proofs:
a) The continuing fall in the rate of EEC development and the extended economic depression. For 1993 --- the first year of Integration of the single European Market almost no - or negative development at all its foreseen whilst in 1994, a possible imperceptible increase. The high level of unemployment; with its constant tendency to rice, constitute a supreme expression of this depression. This year it will surpass 11% on an average. In certain EEC countries/ such as Spain and Ireland, the percentage of unemployment is dose to 20%, whilst in the region of the former East Germany, 50% of the unemployed will find it difficult for many yean to find work. Even if the rate of development were to go beyond 3%, the unemployed would not be absorbed, and the underemployment of the work force would not be abolished.
b) The important inner-imperialist contradictions and disputes in the background of the adverse economic tendencies which 180 dominate in their countries, directly affect of the course of European unification as it was planned by the Treaty of Maastricht. Characteristics are the disputes, in the framework of GATT ( General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade), the strong reaction of France and, more generally, of the fanners throughout the whole of Europe.
There can be no talk today about formation of the Single Monetary System on the basis of Maastricht There are no firm exchange rates, apart from a small group of countries which are linked on German mark, (Dutch Florin, the Belgian and Luxembourg Franc).
The delay in the ratification of the Treaty ot Maastricht leads to complications. The "cohesion found" cannot function in accordance with the decisions.
c) Day by day the elements of a growing political crisis become obvious A panorama of politico-economic corruption, parasitism and rotteness stretches from Europe to Japan. In certain countries such as Italy, it acquires an explosive character. In Germany the development of neo-nazism opens new cracks on the political edifice.
d) The course of European unification begins to be affected by the apparent redefining of American policy. For the first time following of American policy. For the first time following the decade of the '50s, the USA are searching for the "golden cut'', on the one hand, to get free of some of their commitments in Europe, without, of course, putting at risk their active role, and on the other hand, to exercise a more aggressive policy in the world, with priority for South-East Asia.
Of course, the leading forces in the EEC will not abandon the efforts to implement the Maastricht choices. Already the various Community directives and austerity programmes are being promoted, in the name of convergence.
``Perestroika'', as formulated in 1985 to be a policy for the upgrading and restructuring of socialism, has come to a tragic end. The effort made to find ways to overcome the negative phenomena in, the socio-economic development of socialism is evolving into a process that places the very existence of socialism at stake.
181The question is to what extent all the theoretical aspects of this policy to restructure socialism in the USSR were correct; which are the factors that have contributed to a political, social and institutional crisis emerging in the process, a crisis which is evolving into a regression to the capitalist system.
The restructuring process in the Soviet Union brought to the surface long-standing problems that had accumulated over many years, contradictions within various strata, groups and inter-ethnic relations. This process has proven to be far more complex than had been initially estimated. The CPSU leadership pursued a policy which shifted away from its initial declarations. Decisions were not implemented in a uniform way by all cadres and organisations. The restructuring process evolved into a struggle over the settlement of numerous contradictions, the main one being the clash between a socialist and non-socialist orientation for society. It was not a disagreement over one or the other model and type of socialism but over the form and character of ownership and the character of political power.
With the CPSU leadership responsible, a period of indiscriminate confrontation, nihilism and even of slander against the past of the country and the party itself resulted in completely shaking its prestige, particularly in the eyes of the younger generations, who had no experience of the conditions that prevailed during the construction of socialism.
An attempt made to implement a policy accelerating socio-- economic development, without a concrete plan for intermediary objectives, successive stages and phases, resulted in unforeseen difficulties emerging and becoming more complicated. The policy of ``Perestroika'' provided for multiple forms of socialist property ownership, in the process, however, these were abandoned and part of the CPSU leadership adopted views in favour of the uncontrolled development of a market economy. The principles of planning and management were violated. The ground was left free for the development of a shadow economy and profiteering.
The intensity of the social differentiation that followed, the emergence of class contradictions, the formation of poles of wealth and poverty, combined with the over-increasing alienation of the working people from management and administration, led to a search for ways to seize political power and to secessionist 182 tendencies.
Local republics changed their claims for more autonomy, more rights for the management of their wealth, into a movement opposed to the centre and to socialist political power.
With the acquiescence of even the central power, socialist legality, the new laws that had just been passed and even the Constitution itself were violated.
One of the aspects of " Perestroika " was the new political thinking in inter-state relations, in the relationship between class and global problems, the aim being to give priority to the prevention of a thermonuclear war. In the process, the dialectic relationship and interaction of class issues with global ones shifted unilaterally and in absolute terms in favour of the latter. The Soviet Union gradually weakened its internationalist solidarity and showed signs of continuous retreat under the pressure of the West. It entertained illusions that imperialism could distance itself from its inherent agressiveness. The Soviet Union reduced its presence on the level of the ideological struggle, which flared up as the result of the collapse.
One of the fundamental causes for the failure of ``Perestroika'' was, in fact, the abandonment - with the leadership responsible - of the CPSU's leading and vanguard role, while trying to solve problems, such as those of bureaucracy, the side effects stemming from the monopolising of power and its increasing alienation from Soviet society. The initiative passed into the hands of political forces and, in particular, those of public figures who used demagogy and took advantage of the difficulties of ``Perestroika'' in order to exercise their opposition policy.
The leadership of the CPSU tolerated the undermining of its ideological foundations. It was transformed into a party of groups and tendencies as a result, and in the recent period it became a mere observer of events.
The loss of the CPSU's prestige and influence is not due only to its relinquishing its leading role. It had for many years distanced itself from the active social forces, the working class. It had become bureaucratic, monopolised power and identified itself with the state.
Individuals with selfish aims had penetrated its ranks, some of its cadres had lost the respect of public opinion, because of actions 183 incompatible with the values and morals of a communist. During difficult times it was unable to restore its prestige, to inspire trust and be convincing with regard to the need to defend socialism.
The theory of scientific socialism and the experience of the building and evolution of socialist society, as well as recent developments in the Soviet Union and other countries confirm that socialism should use the best elements of bourgeois democratic achievements and struggles and of the democratic traditions of the people. New forms of democracy - qualitatively beyond comparison with bourgeois forms - are created and developed in socialism, based on the predominance of social forms of ownership and on the constant conscious effort to have the people participate in all issues of concern to the new society. The existence of forms of social ownership and the political power of the working class and its allies do not leas automatically to the desired development of all forms of democracy. On the contrary, experience has shown that phenomena of alienation, indifference and apathy, bureaucracy, sabrogation and the violation of socialist democracy and legality do appear. Many of these phenomena resulted from the identification of the party with the state and by the undermining of the working class by its own party.
Socialist democracy, the socialist concept of democracy, is based on a new organisation of labour which ensures a constant improvement in productivity and competitiveness through the use of modern technology, the continuous perfecting and developing of the productive forces and of the working people themselves as individuals.
It is based on the constant extension of the working people's rights,so that they take and feel that they are in charge of things in their own country.
During the period from 1989 to 1991 an extremely sharp ideological and political confrontation broke out within the CC On the one side were the views of those who supported the existence, modernization and renewal of the Party on the basis of its fundamental principles and features as a party of the conscious political vanguard of the working class which struggles for the interests of all working people. On the other side were those who, in the name 184 of renewal, supported the transcending of the Party's character, its social-democratization and its dispersion within the framework of the Coalition.
The confrontation spread throughout the Party, developing into a deep crisis with phenomena of factionalism, open breaches of the Constitution and the slandering of Party cadres. Those cadres in the leading group of the factional movement used support from outside of the Party in order to intervene in inner-Party differences from outside. Nihilism, talk of mistakes and a rejectionist stance with regard to the Party's historic course were concealed, and the whole problem was presented as being a conflict between ``conservatives'' and ``renewalists''. These cadres purposely involved the Party's financial activity in the ideological confrontation, in order to strike at its ethical foundations as well. They instigated a boundless unprincipled confrontation which hurt the image and prestige of the CPG, due to methods which they used.
In the work of the Party, even today, criteria of immediate effectiveness continue to have exaggerated priority. At the same time, theoretical work is underestimated in the Party, the promotion of its strategic pursuits and programmes reduced, and the linking of the immediate struggle to long-term tasks is lax. With the repeated parliamentary elections the tendency to overestimate central political initiatives and moves has developed in our ranks, without this being dealt with concretely. Awareness has dwindled as regards basic factors which help to improve the influence and prestige of the CPG, such as the course taken by the class struggle and social alliances, political and ideological work with the people, persistent informative work.
The new evolving situation which took shape during the eight years when PASOK was in power, under conditions of acute multifaceted crisis, was not examined in depth. The confrontation was limited mainly to certain aspects of PASOK policy concerning income and the standard of living of the working people. There was a weakening of criticism of general aspects of its policy, such as the swelling of the public sector due to partisan favoritism, the expansion of the shadow economy and its social policy, which was carried out with a parallel increase in deficits and the public debt.
The results of this policy affected the shaping of the conditions of the struggle and exacerbated the development problems of the 185 country. Underestimated was the fact that the PASOK governments led to a reinforcement of reformist concepts and illusions and promoted the incorporation of the popular masses in the political management of the system as well as the corruption of values on the Left as well.
In general, the fact that the conditions for the development of social democracy in Greece had taken shape was not perceived in time. A deeper understandingof developments would have helped the CPG to develop a more successful and more responsive ideological and political work and practice in the mass movement. This would have made it easier too highlight the role of the working class and the decisive significance of social alliances. It would have repelled the logic of bi-party system and power monopoly from better positions. The rallying of left-wing forces was not dialectically linked to the general effort to rally the forces of the entire progressive sphere, especially at the grass roots level.
In the last few years the Party's ideological struggle gradually began to weaken. At the same time, organisational laxity and alienation from the problems of the mass movement, trade unions and other organisations appeared. This problem was not dealt with.
The systematic ideological and political work in conjunction with the direct and active participation of all communists in mass organisations could to some degree have prevented our ranks from succumbing to the pressure of reformist ideas.
The revisionist tendency put to good use the problems faced by the mass movement phenomena and practices which violated its independence of partisanship and fractionalization, bureaucracy and centralism, in order to promote Utopian views such as the disengagement of social movements from class and political confrontations and from parties.
The new organisation which emerged is quite unrelated to the Coalition of the Left and Progressives as regards both its composition - given that the CPG and other smaller forces are not taking part in it - and its programmatic positions and practices. Its positions have been subjected to negative changes and have regressed from the programmatic documents and the electoral platforms of the original Coalition. Certain positions of this new organisation concerning the way out of the crisis, development, the market 186 economy and international developments have departed from leftwing radical perception. They constitute a conservative retrogression and retreat. They do no take into account the character of social and political confrontation in our country, or of the class and political causes behind the current problems in the Greek economy and society.
In the place of scientific socialism they propose an assortment of a so-called new left-wing theory, with its main feature being a blend of conflicting ideas borrowed from the theory of the classics, social democracy and bourgeois thought and ideology.
They downgrade the vanguard role of the working class in the struggle to cope with the immediate problems and for socialism. Invoking the internal differentiations of the working class, they have adopted the idea of class collaboration and general consensus.
The replacement of capitalism by socialism - a superior social system and transitional society moving towards Communism -is not a spontaneous development It does not take place by means of orders nor is it a result of heroic action and self-sacrifice by a vanguard. It does not mature solely as a result of confrontation focused on the immediate problems of the working people nor solely through the awareness of blatant injustices in the distribution of income. It entails the upgrading of the criteria for quality of life^ocial and political democracy and the rights and role of the working people in directing and managing society. It demands a deeper awareness of the need to eliminate all possibilities of the working person being used as an object of direct or indirect economic, social or political exploitation for profit or wealth or to reap personal gain from the exercising of power.
This will be a task for conscientious action by millions of working people and their allies headed by the working class.
One of the main prerequisites for the solution to this problem is to increase the force and influence of both the Party and the working class within the trade union movement, the mass movement and other social strata.
In order for the Party to be restructured on a solid base, its allround growth and strengtheningmustaboveall be firmly grounded in today's problems and the needs of the labour and popular 187 movement and in the development of struggles.
The distancing of significant sections of workers, working people, farmers, small businessmen and women from the trade unions and other mass movements, as well as the decline in the youth movement are associated, up to a point, with the crisis in the CFG and with the weakening of socialist ideals in their minds. This is why the upturn in the labour and mass movement will depend, among other things, on the resoluteness of communists in fighting to revitalise the ideas of socialism in our country. This duty places on our Party the responsibility of providing solutions to certain critical problems. These solutions will make it possible for it to regain and consolidate its role.
The following problems have major priority:
Strengthening the Party's ties with the working class and its movement by popularising its positions regarding the way out and the development of our country and by promoting developmental economic and sodal demands within the mass movement through democratic procedures.
The formation and building of the socio-political front of forces that fight for and have interests in the change in the direction of socialism.
Strengthening the ideological foundations of the Party's unity.
Bringing new members into its ranks. The swift reconstitution and growth of KNE (communist Youth of Greece).
Ideological unity on the basis of our world theory does not conflict with the need to study all currents of progressive thought which are developing both in Greece and abroad critically. It is linked organically with the continuing effort to develop our theory and to study new issues which our theoretical positions may have up to now overlooked or to which they have responded inadequately or mistakenly.
Ideological unity does not mean equalizing everything, or demanding completely identical and uniform viewpoints. It does not prohibit different points of view and approaches, or disagreements on theoretical, political and organisational matters, particularly during this present complex period. We are going through a phase in which theory is being subjected to critical examination and development This is why important issues have remained 188 open.
The crisis which developed in the Party was due not to the fact that different viewpoints appeared in the fields of ideology and theory, but to the fact that these views disputed the Party's own world view, the theory of scientific socialism, and the role and character of the Party as well as its principles of functioning.
When ideological differences tend to dispute the fundamental principles of the Party, then unity of action becomes lax and is obliterated.
The slogan "unity in difference* which was used by the group of cadreswho withdrew from theParty did not express theneed for different approaches and subtleties to be respected and studied. It was leading the CPG towards being turned into a party that tolerated different ideologies, trends, groups and parties within itself.
Ideological unity is gained in actionjt is promoted through the theoretical generalisation of the experience accumulated in social and political struggles, assisted by scientific research.
Downgrading it and neglecting the constant effort required to win it may bring about phenomena of crisis, disorganisation and failure to achieve goals, aspirations and objectives.
The character of the unification and the EEC
In EEC documents, but also in its more general literature, in the Communist Parties documents, the terms ``integration'' and `` unification'' are used. The term "unification'' corresponds more to the meaning that expresses a procedure towards the achievement of aims and targets, whilst the term ``integration'' seems to identify with the result of this aim. For us, what is chiefly significant is not whether the one, or the other term is preferable, but the extent to which it clarifies their content.
Internationalisatkm is not a neutral procedure independent of socio-political factors and contradictions. It develops with leaps and bounds in the period of the transition from capitalism to socialism, in conditions of the imperialist stage of capitalism and, especially now, in the conditions of the world hegemony of imperialism following the overthrow of the relationship of forces in 189 Europe. The intemationalisation takes place through the development of specific class contradictions, measuring up and contradictions, reproduction of the problems, bringing new ones to light. Thus, we must confront it through the specific system of international relations, on the basis of the dialectical mutual influence of the economy and policy.
The Community appeared at a specific historic-political moment, following the Second World War which brought about significant changes in the international relationship, with the appearance of a formed socialist system in Europe. In the same period, appears other imperialist organisations -NATO, OECD and the West European Union (WEU). The foundation of the EEC was done with the economic and political encouragement of the USA, which viewed a competitor of theirs, but, on the other hand, the creation of the Community aided the activity and cohesion on NATO in the region. The EEC was founded to serve the gigantic needs of West European capital, in a period when imperialism set, as its immediate target, to organise its reaction to the new-born coalition of the socialist countries of Europe, to put a brake on and strike blow against the labour movement rising in the capitalist countries.
Capitalist unification is not characterised solely by the tendency towards uniting together, co-operation and for concentration. There is also the tendency to being contrary and for concentration together to slacken. The whole progress of the EEC confirms this. In the course of this progress, problems appeared on all the levels of co-operation with a more problematic course taken by political unification.
The contradictions are expressed also on a world level between the EEC, Japan, and the USA.
In the conditions of today, the role is especially significant of a different form of capitalist unity which in front of the EEC and its legislated framework is unofficial and loose. This fact does not prevent it from playing a determining role in the world economy and politics. We are referring to the ``club'' of the seven most powerful imperialist countries.
The EEC is a form of the joining together of the capitalist countries. It is not possible for the communists to confront it with imperative conditions, as, applies more generally to socio-political 190 phenomena. The tendency towards unification is objective, but the forms in which it is expressed cannot be considered as given, non reversible and accomplished facts.
On the contrary, we confront them with the conditions of the class struggle, overthrow, from the point of view of our strategic goal. The class struggle is a given, imperative process. That, for us is the main question.
Nor do we agree with the opinion that the EEC will finally lead, to the one or the other degree, to union together, to the shaping of a harmonious whole of the sectors which comprise it, that is, the member-countries. That it leads to the passing over of the national state in the shaping of an autonomous supra-national centre, that the economies will converge into a united European economy with complete embodiment of the national economies in a single united European economy. Certain people arrive at the point of projecting the view that even the meaning of nation, of the national state, is finally outdated and that Europe is entering a phase of dissolution of the nations.
In such an event, the capitalist system, will have the possibility to survive for long years and to feel secure. The opinions appear not to recognise the basic contradiction of capitalism. They underestimate the whole network of contradictions which develop in the conditions of imperialism both inside a country as well as on a world scale. They ignore, or underestimate, the importance of the law of unequal development, the role of the inter-imperialist contradictions which, especially today, because of the overthrow of the "counter -weight" of the socialist system in Europe, corrosively affect the course of unification.
The following view is also developed: the EEC, irrespective of its character and nature may finally objectively, play a progressive role in the broadening, interdepedence and deepening of international relations, to press for the toning up of the programming of production, distribution and consumption, in the context of the international division of labour, with the transfer of authorities from the national to the supra-national centre. This is projected as an argument in favour of reduction of the authority and intervention of the national state which is considered outdated.
The EEC, from its very nature and character cannot negate the laws of motion of the capitalist system, however much it manages 191 to give it a certain push forward in the development of science and technology lag behind the needs of society and the potentials of science. The backwardness and non-correspondence of the productive relations, the contradiction between the social character of production, constitute decomposing factors in the process of unification. It is indicative that in the recent period, thinking is developing in the Community around return to state-monopoly arrangements and interventions which were restricted or abolished in favour of the market as they underline. Still, even if the dogmatic stand for a "little bit of State and more for the market'', if a better combination of the State and the market were preferred, the situation would not change and the capitalist economy would continue to be anarchic and uncontrolled.
Some comments on the position that the "EEC prevents isolation and demolished walls, objectively constitutes a positive factor in the mternationalisation of relations''. The history of the EEC but also of the present phase in which an attempt is being made following the Treaty of Maastricht, demonstrates the contrary: The EEC imposed, on its members, restrictions on their economic exchanges, in some instances mainly for economic but, in others, for political reasons, as happened in the case of the socialist countries. Irrespective of which was the priority motive, is certain that the EEC in the past, as also today, raises barriers to the broadening of relations.
The international division of labour -in the conditions of imperialist hegemony, cannot evolve into a harmonious whole in which all the countries are incorporated. Nor can a pan-European capitalist division of labour function harmoniously and still less can it do so on a world scale, however much, and even if, the socialisation of production is strengthened given the backwardness and non-- correspondence of the relations of production and the anarchy which characterises the capitalist system. In the last analysis the EEC stands as an obstacle to the development of the production forces, of the utilisation of science and technology to the benefit of the peoples and social progress. It leads to the concentration of capital, the entrenchment of Europe; it feeds and sharpens the crisis, interstate contradictions and nationalistic clashes and local wars.
The EEC constitutes a form of capitalist unification, with a tendency to remove authorities from the national state towards a 192 super-national centre, with inter-state agreement for cooperation. We do not make the term ``super-national'' absolute. It is not a question of a centre via which the role of the State is generally refuted; on the contrary, it is reinforced-albeit on a different levelin the framework of the EEC.
The central organs of the EEC need the aid of the state, also of the member countries. The EEC centre functions as an inter-state agreement in which the leading forces of certain countries -forces of the powerful imperialists. That is to say, we have to do with is not a dear super-national, superstate, autonomous organisation which stands above the member-countries, which act on the basis of the general interest, as it is presented by the defenders of the EEC. If s in this framework that we must view the ascertation made about a crisis in the representative institutions of capitalism. The meaning of nation, of national policy, of the national State has not become outdated, nor is such a tendency appearing that it will evolve thus is the foreseeable future. On the contrary, the difficulties and contradictions of unification demonstrate that there are moves to the contrary, that the EEC inter-State centre is in need also of national state intervention. And this is why in indirect and direct interventions are exercised for political and social acquiescence, for the reshaping and reconstruction of the political system in the various countries so as to prevent the development of the class struggle and the radicalisation of the masses.
The effect, of international factors on the internal developments in each country, is significantly increasing in comparison with the agains the EEC for a Europe of equal economic relations and mutual cooperation, can more speedily bring results, with the fewest possible sacrifices and difficulties, when the struggle becomes a pan-European struggle. When the change in the relation of forces is realised simultaneously and in more countries. This, however, does not mean that today the ability and responsibility is abolished of the Communist Parties, the labour and popular movement in each country, to draw up their strategy, use the opportunities which its country offers, and with its struggle to bring about the prerequisites for a rupture with the system of imperialism on the level of each separate country.
The participation of Greece in the EEC constituted, and still
193
constitutes, a basic factor of the sharpening of the huge problems
facing Greek society in liaison with the policy of the governments
of New Democracy, (ND) and PASOK which follow a policy of
adjustment to the reime of the regime of the Community at the expense of the
working people and development.
Greece has a peculiarity which plays, a special role in the shaping of a social conscience: its long years of dependency on the imperialist system, which is today becoming even deeper in the context of the EEC. For our country, its participation in the EEC means multiple consequences. The cost of adjustment for Greece is much greater than in the countries which rule over it. From the economic, social and political point of view, Greece is isolated within the walls of the EEC. Its participation in the EEC not only does not ensure equal participation in the international division of labour.
What is important indeed, is how quickly or slowly the prerequisites are created for a different place for our country in the international division of labour. The longer the creation is delayed of the social and political prerequisites, necessary for Greece to enter on the road of progressive, anti-imperialist change, the more the obstacles will become even greater since its embodiment will have proceeded ahead. The sooner the prerequisites are created, the relatively more case it will be for a way out of the deep crisis via a progressive development programme.
From the time the Greek state, with the one or the other slogan, efforts have and are made to justify the country's dependence on the big powers and imperialism, with the argument that Greece is a poor, weak country which cannot stand alone on its own feet. The dilemma of "an isolated Greece" or "a Greece inside" the EEC and the other international imperialist organisations, is a false dilemma. The CPG has never supported a policy of isolation of the country. Greece's participation in the EEC with its undertakings and restrictions for example, it raised barriers to the development of its relations and its exports of products. Greece, inside of the EEC and with its compliance with its choices ,instead of opening the horizons of international relations with countries and peoples of the region and more broadly -to the benefit of peace and international co-operation, with be obliged to consider the forces of imperialism as ``friends'' and ``enemies'' of the imperialists as 194 enemies.
The more compliance and subjection to the EEC continues, the more the country's development potentials will be destroyed which, despite the long crisis and the plundering, are still preserved to this day.
We must not underestimate another aspect of the problem, the harmful spread of the mentality and conception of a contemporary rajah mentality cloaked by the European vision and European unification.
The Maastricht Treaty is the product of acquiescence on a European level, of the liberals and the social-democratic forces. The differences between mem do not threaten the EEC.
On the contrary they provide opportunities -for the time being of course- to control the alternation in governing and in the central organs of the EEC so that the procedure may go forward meeting much less stronger obstacles raised by the struggle and the rallying together of the peoples. Social democracy in Europe and on an international level, as a formed political force constitutes a force of support for the capitalist system and for European capitalist unification. In a word, it does not constitute a different road, - another road it proclaims. Its firm course towards the Right is not explained by the nature and character of social democracy. In itself the capitalist system in conditions of a lasting and extended crisis does not have the margins to implement, in the same way as it did in the past, the policy of the "carrot and whip''; that the margins for social manoeuvres and concessions to the workers. Whilst the necessity for deep-going changes and breaks to strike against the foundations of the capitalist system, is immediate and urgent, exploiting the changes in the former socialist countries, social democracy adjusts itself to a conservative policy the limits of which are not easily discerned from the corresponding conservative policy of liberalism. Its choice in the direction of a turn to the Right becomes possible because of the changes which have taken place inside social democratic parties with greater prevalence of representatives of multinational capital in their leaderships.
Social democracy promises materialisation of EEC integration at lower cost for the workers, with the slogans of full employment, 195 a more just distribution of the income and wealth, the granting of social services and quality of life. Its declarations are tested in practice in the countries where it governed or is governing, and they are tested as the opposition, in France, Spain, Italy and Greece. They, their declarations constitute social and political demagogy. Social democracy which believed that after the developments of 1989, it would have the chance for plunder in the communists' political area of influence, it sees that where it is judged as a government it loses a part of its own forces.
Becoming conscious of the problem, a section of it is manoeuvering, raising the question of reconstruction and renewal --- trying to forestall the damage, and revive hopes --- precisely as happened with the proposal of the French man Rocard. The proposals and considerations which are developing do not refer to changesof orientation on the part of social democracy represent but some superficial changes of personnel, methods and style of power, so as to dispel. The discussions and approaches which take place do not go beyond the confines of assent with liberalism. In the nucleus of certain thinking and movements, it is likely that a tendency will be expressed for consensus between the two streams and parties.
It is obvious that the role of the Left in Europe must be formed distinct and in contradiction to the social democracy.
We do not ignore the fact that a significant section of the workers who follow it, believe in it or are influenced by social democracy, adopt left slogans and ideas and regard themselves as left.
As we also know that there exists - apart from the social democratic parties, parties which declare that they have a socialist orientation. From the ideological point of view they are parties related to social democracy but they maintain they a positive stand towards the current problems facing the working people. They also declare changes. It is possible that such Parties will appear, in the course of things, especially in those countries where the political system is in the process of formation, where struggles which affect the order and the relationship of forces. Such people will find their way towards the Left only if they become conscious of the character and the true role played by social democracy. Only if they come close to the ideas and slogans of the Communist Parties, and of the Left.
196The opposition to the Treaty of Maastricht, from the viewpoint of a Europe built on the principles of peace, equal cooperation, and democracy with the prospect of socialism, is, in our opinion a defining line. If the Left moves behind it, sooner or later, it will lose its identify, and will pass into the waiting room to be embodied in the area of social democracy, with or without organisational autonomy.
Only the total opposition to the EEC, the activity against its choices with the prospect of the creation of the prerequisites for a more general break, can in the difficult conditions of today, blunt or restrict the negative consequences. But small changes and improvements cannot be an end in themselves. The straggle of an antiimperialist, and radical Left must be devoted to today and, simultaneously, see today from the viewpoint of the future.
All the historic course course followed by the movement, as also it contemporary course, shows that without the Communist Parties and even still more, in opposition to them, the Left cannot exist. The Left, in with all its shades, is not identical with the Communist Parties. But the Communist movement, to be Left with all the significance of the word it must remain an anti-capitalist force as it always was.
The international developments in 1989 gave the opportunity to tine forces which, in one way or the other, defend or support the capitalist system to launch an attack in many forms, through which it attempted to dissolve the Communist Parties. The developments which varied from one country to another, were determined, by the options themselves, made by the Communist Parties. The road to their recovery began, their activity was revived and their refoundation started.
The anti-imperialist radical Left in Europe will exist with prospect, as long as it has, a concentrated and organised Communist movement with a strong Communist Party in each country. The CPs constitute a vanguard force in the ranks of the Left which fights for the immediate and long-term interests of the working people. We are opposed to every thought and practice which, objectively, leads to the diffusion of the CPs in the framework of a policy of co-operation or alliance. Such a development will damage not 197 only the CPs, but also the Left itself. The course followed by the Coalition of the Left and Progressives which was formed in Greece in 1989, following its split and the CP of Greece's withdrawal from it, and its evolution into a Party, proves that the above evaluation is correct. Their stand against the communists has proved that, irrespective of intentions, it leads the Left on to a road of painful struggle and in other instances, into the arms of the establishment. The presence of the CPs in a anti-imperialist Left constitutes a guarantee that every effort will be made for the ideological and political differences to develop into objective dialogue, and not touch on the independent responsibility of the Parties, nor constitute an obstacle to the firmness, the development and the broadening of the alliances on a national and European level. Without ignoring the mistakes in certain cases, without falling into the trap of beutifulying the situation, we insist that: Experience has shown that the communists have the most complete conception of the necessity of alliances and of the way differences which arise are solved. For the CP of Greece, the policy of alliances does not have a chance character but constitutes a policy of strategic significance.
Today, other forces are appearing in the European area, which represent themselves as the alternative Left solution-with a position of critical support of the Maastricht Treaty. In Greece the ``Coalition'' appears with this ambition. In our opinion, such Parties adopt certain very characteristic positions. One to then is that the circle of the CPs has dosed. They set also the limits against the CPs and the Communist movement Some of these forces - such as the ``Coalition'' - have proceeded to and open or concealed anticommunism, and they feed the more general anti-communist propaganda. Their political position are, on many question identical with those of social-democracy, which is why they consider that through the overcoming of the historical schism, with social democracy, a new Left political force will be formed. It is a matter of a ``Left'' without a Left identity which, from its very nature cannot express social forces, and as a political area, it forces the danger of being finally crushed by social democracy. We do not judge things by their intentions but from the point of view of their objective tendencies.
The vision, of the communists and progressive people, cannot be a vision of a capitalist, united Europe. The CPG's answer to the 198 EEC ---to the unification in whatever forms this may appear on the continent ---is a superior form of internationalisation--- a socialist Europe. In such conditions, the principles of equal co-operation, peace, and security of social justice, democracy and respect of personal and collective rights.
Our Party will devote all its strength to common action, by the Parties which take a stand against the Treaty of Maastricht and from the standpoint of a different Europe, which does not go through the organs of the EEC.
[199] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of IndiaThe National Council of the Communist Party of India wel comes this seminar, for the opportunity that it affords to have exchange of experiences about our work in our respective countries, and our views about developments in contemporary world.
The 175th Anniversary of Karl Marx's birth is a fitting occasion for such a meeting in the midst of a turbulent world. It is an occasion not merely for paying homage to one "whose name will endure through the ages'', but to demonstrate once again that Marxism is immortal, because it is true and valid.
The years that have just gone have witnessed severe set-backs to thecauseof Socialismand Socialist advance in the world. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the regimes in Eastern Europe dealt a heavy blow to all progressive mankind.
This was however hailed by the Western media as signaling the demise of Socialism. A vicious propaganda blitz was let loose that "Marxism-Leninism has failed'', that the "Communist parties have no future''. A type of triumphalistic euphoria gripped the Imperialists, Capitalists and their scribes.
The Indian media faithfully relayed and played up this propaganda offensive of the West. It expected crisis and convulsion within Communist ranks here too.
There is no denying that for quite some time the course of events that ultimately led to the collapse, had given rise to 200 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1993/CWSVM387/20071216/299.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2007.12.17) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ top __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ bewilderment and confusion among Communists and supporters of Socialism mixed with anger at what was happening. Progressive sections of our people who always looked upon the Soviet Union and the Socialist countries as dependable friends of India and the Third World were sad and disoriented.
But we can say with satisfaction that Indian Communists got over the initial confusion within a brief period. Our Party ran an open forum on all aspects of the developments in the party press. The ensuing debate, while self-critically pinpointing several errors in understanding and assessments, resulted in a reaffirmation of our commitment to the ideology of Marxism-Leninism and to Socialism as the strategic objective of our struggle for revolutionary change.
These were unanimously endorsed in the documents adopted at the 15th Congress our party in April 1992. At the same time, we drew several important lessons in the ideological political and practical fields, for the further development of Marxism-Leninism as a living extremely complex social reality, for arriving at our future of Socialism on the basis of our struggle, our historical needs and conditions.
The Left movement as a whole stood solidly throughout this period, and further consolidated its unity of action. The mass bases of the Communists and the left remained unaffected by and large. Their alliance with democratic forces and elements, both in elections and in mass movements, continued undisturbed by the barrage of Imperialist propaganda aimed against Socialism, and by the aggressive anti-Communist postures of Indian rightists and reactionary forces.
This is testified by the results of the general elections. But not merely that.
The Communist and left parties by themselves, and through the joint forum of mass organisations - trade unions, peasant and agricultural workers organisations, youth, student and women's organistions, have been able to take the initiative on several national-political and mass issues during this period, which drew broad sections of the people into state and country-wide move ments.
In the background of the Soviet collapse, the Government of India launched a package of so-called new economic policies under 201 high-sounding names like reforms, liberalisation, `globalisation', 'free marker*, and 'open door'. They drew ideological sustenance from the Soviet collapse and 'return to Capitalism' being put in practice in the former Socialist countries. In effect it was a helpless submission to IMF/World Bank conditionalities on the plea that "there is no alternative''.
Against these policies, which actually constitute an attack on the working peoples living standards and abandonment of a selfreliant path of development, the "Sponsoring Committee of Trade Unions" (which unites 8 central trade unions and nearly 40 industrial federations), organised the November 29, 1992 industrial strike. More than 12 to 15 million workers took part in these nationwide strikes. In certain states, other sections of the people also joined in `bandhs' on those days.
These were followed up by a massive one million strong demonstration in Delhi, which served notice on the Government about the working peoples' resolve to fight these anti-people policies characterised by privatisation, high prices, closures and soaring unemployment, and so on.
Agricultural labourers fought for better wages and social security laws, and through direct action distributed and cultivated more than 20,000 hectares of land which was in illegal possession of landlords.
Students and youth continued their struggle against commercialisation and privatisation of education, against restriction of education for the elitist sections only, and for jobs. Women's organisation have come together to fight against atrocities on women, against gender discrimination and for equality in all spheres.
In this very period, the right reactionary forces, represented by the BJP/RSS and their allied organisations launched their all-out communal drive, brazenly using religion for their political ends, and targeting the Muslim minorities, and their places of worship as hate objects. It gave them certain measure of success in the elections - making them the main opposition in Parliament, and bringing them to power in four states.
The drive was thereafter pursued with greater frenzy. It culminated on December 6,1992 in the demolition of the four and a half centuries old Babri Masjid at Ayodhya. A wave of communal 202 violence and riots, incendiarism and bomb blasts followed, which has takenaheavy toll of human lives and property. The aim of BJP/RSS Hindu fundamentalists is to impose a theocratic state in India, making it a 'Hindu Rashtra'.
This constitutes a threat to India's national unity, to the harmony existing among 85 crores of its people belonging to various faiths and creeds, to the secular-democratic foundations of our Republic. If not curbed and defeated it will grow into a fascist danger for India.
The rightist BJP/RSS supports and advocates the economic policies of liberalisation', `privatisation' and so on with great gusto, while demagogically putting on a show of opposing some fall-out of these policies, such as soaring prices, loss of jobs etc., with a view to fool the affected masses. Their nexus with men of high finance and industry is growing fast. Important sections of the latter have now adopted the BJP leaders as their spokesmen. In a meeting with top industrialists, BJP leaders accused the Congress of hijacking their economic plank, and announced that if voted to power they would set up a 'ministry of privatisation and disinvestment' so as to make a thorough job of it. That would include wholesale privatisation of rail and road transport too. The ' Hindutva' drive for a 'Hindu Rashtra', support for caste discrimination, racist and anti-minority propaganda of hate, opposition to women's liberation and equality, and an economic programme in the class interests of monopolists and Big Capital, these are elements of a fascist outlook, and a fascist order sought to be imposed on India.
The only fly in the ointment is the strong secular and democratic tradition of the Indian people. Hence the virulent attack by BJP leaders against secularism and all those who stand for it. The main target are the Communists.
Unfortunately, the Congress by its opportunist compromises with communal and fundamentalist elements of different brands on various occasions for sticking to power, has helped the BJP to grow to its present strength. Expect for administrative actions the Congress has failed to mobilise its mass following in a campaign against the communal danger.
Basing on the healthy, secular and democratic traditions of our freedom struggle and our age-old traditions of religious tolerance, 203 it is we Communist and other left parties who took the initiative in rallying together the secular parties, groups and individuals in a broad 'Campaign for National Unity'. Several huge rallies, human chains, signature campaign and other forms of action have been organised during these months. We are doing our best to hold high the banner of national unity and the humanitarian and rational teachings of our saints and savants in face of the communal onslaught from different quarters. The Communists' consistent defence of secular -democracy and national unity has won them wide respect and support.
The Communist and left parties in India have thus been able to hold their own in the midst of cataclysmic national and international events, and even to take initiative on the most crucial national political and mass issues. This is to be attributed to the abiding faith of the Communist parties in ideology of Marxism-Leninism, commitment to the cause of Socialism and espousal of national and peoples' interests.
We are in a situation today where a minority Congress government is pursuing anti-people and nationally harmful economic policies, and also failing to curb the communal divisive forces. The right reactionary communal forces led by the BJP are posing as the national alternative. The danger was never so real. Only a combination of left and democratic parties and elements can save the country. For, this, it has to earn credibility as a national alternative. Experience has shown that this calls for a strong Left Front (LF), capable of rallying and uniting the other secular and democratic forces. It requires further consolidation of left unity on a national scale, and for Communist unity at political and organisational levels.
The CPI stands for such unity on a principled basis and for serious efforts at unifying the mass organisations.
We started with ourselves and the Indian situation. At this point, while directing attention to the world situation, we wish first, to express our profound grief at the assassination of Comrade Chris Hani, General Secretary, of the South African Communist Party. We all miss him at this important seminar. But his indomitable spirit is with us.
The assassination shows the depth to which neo-fascists and 204 their international abettors can sink, in order to disrupt and derail the ongoing negotiations in South Africa, and hold up freedom and progress. Yet no single event in recent days has brought about such an upheaval, evoked such strong sentiments, demonstrated so powerfully the feeling of unity among the people of South Africa, and called forth such international solidarity, as the martyrdom of this Communist leader.
As the African National Congress said in its statement, "Com. Hani (was) a man who dedicated his entire life to the struggle for democracy and freedom in South Africa. He served both the ANC and SACP with distinction, great courage and unswerving loyalty."
We feel pride and honour in belonging to his fraternity, and in recalling his firm yet simple words, 1 know exactly what I am fighting for and what ideology I stand for".
We also take this opportunity to hail the triumph of Cuban democracy and the all-powerful moral and political unity of the Cuban people around the Revolution, Socialism, the Communist Party and its courageous leadership under exceptionally difficult conditions as demonstrated by the latest elections in that country.
We express our solidarity with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea' which boldly stood up to the nuclear blackmail symbolised by the South Korean - US joint military exercise with nuclear warheads, thedoubtestandardsof the International Atomic Energy Agency, and pressure put on the problem of "nuclear inspection"
We note with keen interest the spectacular development mat is taking place in China - its high rate of economic growth, its fast expanding trade and favourable balance of payments, its policy of opening to the world without impairing self-reliance, its method of integrating planning with Socialist market, its population control measures, etc. As the Chinese comrades have stressed, the realisation of China's four modernisations is ensured by adherence to MandsMeninist ideology, the leadership of Communist Party, and the Socialist system.
Vietnam has also been able to overcome its economic difficulties, raise production, export surplus rice and control inflation by undertaking reforms within the Socialist system.
We note that each Socialist country is advancing in its own way 205 taking into account its special characteristics and specific situation, guided by Marxist ideology and the leadership of the Communist party.
The century that is coming to an end - the 20th Century, has witnessed events and developments, wars and revolutions, liberation and emancipatory movement, scientific and technological advances which have changed and shaped the world more than everything that has happened during several centuries preceding it. Today, the pace of events is highly accelerated.
Unfortunately our understanding has not always kept pace with these fast-changing events. This has been at the root of several costly and disastrous mistakes.
There has been a good deal of subjectivism, a certain doctrinaire oversimplification in our understanding of the contemporary world. We have overlooked and glossed over the negative feature of the Soviet `model' of Socialism. On the other hand we grossly underestimated the potential of Capitalism to maneouvre, to initiate, adopt and absorb the achievements of science and technology in its search for profits, and prolong its lease of life. There was the wrong belief that the general crisis of Capitalism and its special crisis would lead to Capitalism's imminent collapse and Socialism would overtake it in the foreseeable future.
This prevented a serious, scientific and concrete study of the extremely complex developments in the contemporary world and in each country, particularly after the Second World War.
We failed to note that the need and the prospect of restoring the tremendous destruction of material wealth after the war, the fresh markets that opened up in the newly liberated and developing countries and therefore the expansion of production, trade and commerce; the improved wage structure of the working people and improved social security provisions in Capitalist countries under the impact of the Socialist countries resulting in increased purchasing power; new scope of investments due to revolutionary technological advance and last but not the least the accelerated arms race, helped Capitalism in the post-war world to considerably expand, modernise productive forces and productivity, revolutionise information and communication techniques, and thereby put off for quite some time a classic slump and crisis.
206These factors contributed to a relative stabilisation of Capitalism, though they had in no way done away with the inherent contradictions of the system. However, they sowed illusions in certain circles.
Soviet scientists too had made several pace-setting and pioneering discoveries, which surpassed those in the Capitalist world in a number of spheres of the STR. But due to the over-centralised bureaucratic system which hampered mass conscious involvement and initiative in applying the achievements of the STR, and complete alienation of production from the Socialist market, Socialist economy failed to show greater efficiency and increased productivity, which one expects to be the hallmark of a higher economic system.
The developed Capitalist countries have been able to bring about a relative improvement in the living standards of the middle strata of the population (not to speak of the fabulous affluence of the handful of rich at the top). To meet the 'consumerisf desires and needs of a social nature of these section, they have been able to offer many `goodies' from the Capitalist `confectionaries'. The failure of the Socialist system in this respect lent credibility to the claim that 'Free Market' is the last world in social development.
But only the gullible believe that everything would be rosy in the garden of Capitalism. Even the western media is not in a position today to hide the stark truth about growing recession, closures, job-cuts, soaring unemployment, sex and racial discrimination during hiring and firing, racial riots, neo-nazi violence against migrant workers, rampant corruption and so on in Capitalist countries. The dehumanising effect of a system based on profit for the few is there for all to see.
The Journal of the United Mine Workers of America (No.7/92) has reported that the super-rich have hogged an incredible 200 billion dollars in new income between 1977 and 1989, while wages dropped for families in the bottom half of economy.
In the past decade, Fortune magazine list of top 500 companies have cut nearly 4 million workers from the payroll.
There is an income shift from the middle to the upper class. Based on 1991 dollars, average workers' weekly wage fell nearly $100 below 1973 levels, according to AFL-CLO researchers.
Social security and health care systems have been slashed from 207 the Reagan-Bush years and the tax burden shifted from the shoulders of the rich to the weaker ones. Jobs are being `exported' to the lower-paid neighbouring countries through the North-American Free Trade Agreement What happens to the pre-election promises of President Clinton remains to be seen.
The US protects its markets from competing EC, Japan and even Third World countries while calling for Troee Markef and an 'Open Door' access to the markets of developing and other countries for dumping products of its recession-hit industries. For this it uses political and economic blackmail, and the tremendous power of the financial institutions that it controls.
In the EC countries, economic growth forecast for the year is just 0.8%, expected to rise to only 1.8% in 1994.
The EC average of unemployment this year has risen to 11%. In Japan the overall employment has fallen by 250,000 according to ILO report.
In England, a heroic and prolonged battle is on against pit closures, rail privatisation and such other measures, which have rallied wider sections of the TUC and broad masses cutting across the political spectrum.
In France, farmers resorted to road-blocking (so familiar to us in India), agains the US demand for cut in subsidies.
On April 2, this year, millions of workers struck work and demonstrated in a coordinated move across the EC countries.
We hope to hear more details and facts at this seminar from fraternal parties. We have mentioned only a few which were reported in our press. They are enough to demolish the image of a benign, allegedly crisis-free,and class struggle-free Tree Markef El-Dorado, which some starry-eyed publicists draw for our peoples benefit The misery of the least developed countries grows the more they are shackled by Imperialists and their financial and other institutions, the more they are enmeshed in debts the more poverty, AIDS and other diseases are `exported' to these countries. Disparity is growing adding to despair and deprivation in the countries of the Third World.
Even the so-calledhumanitarianinterventioninSomalia, Ethiopia and certain other parts of the world is nothing but a militarist attempt to bring these countries under imperialist tutelage. The 208 hypocrisy of their 'humanitarian mission' is exposed when we note that the same gentlemen have imposed a double blockade on Cuba, denying it even medicines for maintaining what has been the world's best health service.
The end of the cold war has not brought peace to the world. Rather we see several regional and local wars in which there is direct imperialist intervention under the smokescreen of the U.N.
The forced march to Capitalism in the former Socialist countries is proving a fiasco. Production has sharply declined. Enterprises are closing down by the thousands. Unemployment, which had become a thing of the past has again soared. Women are the worst hit. Inflation has sky-rocketed, and the currency system is in total crisis. Not all the curses heaped on the earlier system, or the frenzied drive towards privatisation has created a class of Capitalist entrepreneurs. Instead, a class of racketeers and middlemen, smugglers and mafia gangs, careerists and opportunists has sprung up.
National chauvinism is tearing up the existing ties between people, and in many places there exists a state of dvil war.
Restoring Capitalism does not appear to be so easy of realisation as some of its enthusiastic protagonists had thought, no matter how many billions of dollars are pumped in as `aid' from the G-7 countries to prop up these regimes, especially that of President Yeltsin, their man in Moscow.
Resistance among people to policies which tear up the gains of Socialism is growing. The basic contradictions and problems of economy and democracy cannot be resolved by referendums.
__FIX__ next paragraph: In this grim situation, a positive feature is that the Communist
party in Russia and in some other Republics of the erstwhile Soviet
Union, are reorganising and regrouping themselves. They are
trying to unite on the ha.«l*Af a r»m«»«»---~^---«-*-«----
______: society. Noteworthy is the fact that they have firmly
based themselves on the principles of Marxism-Leninism, and
democratic centralism with stress on the initiative of the primary
party organisations. In the course of movement on mass issues,
these parties are expanding their influence.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
PAGES 209--224 missing! 16 pages of blank and random pages instead.
Distinguished Comrades,
Since the SAP and liberalization policies have become priority areas of many governments in developing countries due to obvious reasons, I would like to present Nepalese experience with the SAP and other so call liberalization and privatization programmes implemented recently in Nepal. TheSAPinNepal was stated in 1986/ 87 by the previous autocratic regime. The availble indices point out that in 1984/85 the total debt outstanding of Nepal was just 20.7 percent of GDP which went up to 53 percent in 1989/90. The inflationary pressures, rising cost of living and mounting poverty problems accentuated in Nepal when SAP was under implementation. In 1984/85 the poverty level was about 43 percent. This reached as high as 71 percent in 1989--90. Thus, when the democratic movement started in Nepal, Nepal's economy was passing through many problems and major economic activities in the field of trade, industry and tourism were controlled by a small class. There was a great expectation among the common people at a time when the multi-party system was restored in the country in 1990 successfully as a result of democratic movement launched by left parties and Nepali Congress jointly. People were confident that a process of development benefittingdirectly thecommon people will be started soon. But the irony is that after coming to the power Nepali congress government has not only followed the past policies and programmes but also with the blessing of USA and multilateral agencies, the so called privatization, liberalization and market oriented system has been pursued more vigorously. As a result, there is too much rise in prices accompanied by mounting unemployment problems and widening gap between rich and poor people. A deliberate attemptis there to create a monopoly capitalist class and make the Nepalese economy a neo-colony of external capitalist nations. The liberalization process has got momentum especially after India implemented the structural adjustment programme. However, in spite of full support and growing aid from western countries, the Nepali congress government has been a completef ailure in economic front with growing frustration among the common people. The Nepalese experience is sufficient to derive 226 the conclusion regarding the implication of west dictated policies in almost all developing countries.
The Russian and East European experience, inherent crisis in the capitalist system coupled with growing confrontation among capitalist countries, the successes of China and too much adverse effect of structural adjustment and other market oriented liberalization and privatization programmes implemented in developing countries based on the forceful recommendation of western countries clearly indicate that there is no system which is superior to Marxism and Socialism. History tells us that capitalism is essentially devoted to the rich and a few privileged class where as Marxism is devoted to the cause of poor, exploited and oppressed people of society. Without the implementation of Marxian ideas in the nations, no well being of the majority of the people will be possible. Marxism is the only philosophy which can guarantee the abolition of capitalist exploitation, elimination of feudal production relations, eradication of poverty, bringing about drastic changes in the society and stop the exploitation of international monopoly capitalists. But we should be very much careful that the mistakes done in the past should not be repeated in the future. For Marxism, there are problems from both ultra leftist and serisionist forces who are trying to defame Marxism in one form or another. We have to understand that Marxism is a scientific theory and therefore it should not be treated as a dogma. Being a scientific theory, it has to follow a creative approach so that it could fit well in the existing socio-economic situation of a nation and fulfill the basic objectives laid down in the theory.
Dear, Comrades,
Our party has realized based on the past experiences of various socialist countries that a new orientation is needed while implementing Marxism in countries like Nepal and therefore the Fifth Party Congress held in Kathmandu from Jan 27 to Feb 2,1993 has made some important decisions which I believe will have wide ranging long term impact on the left movement of Nepal. Our party Congress has adopted a programme which is based on people's multi-party democracy. This decision is also based on our struggle of last more than 40 years in which the left forces of Nepal had fought without break against autocratic regime for establishing 227 multi-parry democracy in the country. The essence of people's multi-party democracy is that unlike the experiments made with one party system (although some socialist countries in the Eastern Europe claimed that they were following multi-party system, in practice they were not) in socialist countries, it permits the existence and operation of various parties and considers that a communist parry should also compete in the election and it should get mandate from people from time to time to rule the country and run the government. We believe that only a people's multi-party democracy based on rule of law can alert us to check the mistakes and sustain the popularity of the party among the people. I want to stress, however, that it is a people's multi-party system which is at practice in the world today. A distinct feature of this system is that it wants to establish a multi-party system which by rule, is antifeudalist and anti-imperialist. The main features of the party programme adopted by the congress are as follows:
1. Supremacy of law
2. Pluralistic open society
3. Separation of power
4. Protection of human rights
5. Multi-party Competitive System
6. Periodic election
7. Government of majority party and the constitutional opposition
8. Rule of law
9. Strengthening of people's democratic system
10. Permission to foreign capital
11. Compensation to those landlords who support people's democracy
12. Balanced and dignified foreign policy with highest priority on national interest
13. Leadership of the working class and people's democratic dictatorship or people's democratic state
14 Anti-feudal, anti-comprador capitalist and anti-- imperialist People's multi-party democracy.
We have realized that without permitting people to express their views freely, providing an opportunity of constructive 228 criticism and promoting competitive system in the society, it will be difficult to create incentive environment to the people and avoid similar mistakes as were done in USSR and Eastern Europe. It is our firm belief that all types of opposition are not destructive. We are, however, aware of likely adverse effect of the competitive system especially on distributional pattern and therefore we have envisaged such an economic programme which ensures the development of productive forces and no polarisation and exploitation exists in the society. Our economic programmes provides a leading role to the state. At the same time, it allows private sector to play an important role in the economy particularly through expanding its activities in the areas like trade and industry.
In spite of a new thinking taking place in various parts of the world about socialism, a long struggle with capitalism is inevitable. Being a single superpower in the world today but threatened by rivalry from other capitalist countries, American imperialism is not only trying to promote and strengthen capitalist system in Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and developing countries through whatever means, it is also equally trying to destroy the socialist system of Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and even China. As a result of American imperialist imposing economic blockade in Cuba, Cuban people are facing too much economic hardship today. It is also creating various hurdles to the North Korea and is creating problems toward the unification of two Koreas. On the other hand, there is no international communist organization as such which can protect the socialist countries and serve the interest of communist parties of the world. Such an organization is not only a distan possibility but also past experiences suggests that even if it exists it may not be that much relevant and useful in the present world context. Therefore, international seminars, regional gatherings, formal link among parties and frequent contact among the people might be a best way to exchange views, disseminate ideas, assist each other and strengthen communist movement of the Communist Parties in Europe and Latin America have given a new impetus to the communist movement. I hope that this seminar organized by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) will also add new dimension in the history of communist movement.
Dear Comrades, Before I conclude I want to repeat based on my assessment of recent political and economic events that the setback to Marxism is a temporary phenomenon and a socialist philosophy 229 developed by examining the class nature and historical developments definitely will regain popularity in the immediate future. It is an universal theory and therefore it will remain a guiding principle of oppressed and exploited people of the world. Today, the main responsibility of a Marxist is to convey the message to the people that so long as haves and have nots exist in the society the validity of Marxism will remain in this earth.
[230] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of PhilippinesWe are highly honored to be invited to the International Seminar on the Contemporary World Situation and the Vitality of Marxism.
We express our deep gratitude to the Communist Party of India (Marxist) for their fraternal invitation. And we convey our warmest greetings of comradeship and revolutionary solidarity to all participants in this seminar.
The most meaningful celebration of the 175th birth anniversary of Karl Marx is being held now through this seminar, in addition to the ceaseless daily revolutionary work and struggles of the working class parties and peoples against monopoly capitalism and all reaction.
We appreciate the international seminar as a form and method of learning from each other and arriving step by step at a common understanding of the common situation and problems that face the world's proletariat, Marxist working class parties and all the serious adherents to the revolutionary science of Marxism.
We are of the view that the international seminar is the best possible mode for the widest possible convening and participation of working class parties that are committed to Marxism-Leninism and that have a track record of opposing modem revisionism from varying angles and in varying degrees or are reemerging from the countries ruined by modem revisionism and actual capitalist restoration.
These parties can make a diagnosis of both the diseases of monopoly capitalism and modern revisionism and make a prognosis on the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat and people. The 231 ceaseless struggle against monopoly capitalism, modem revisionism and all reaction demonstrates the vitality of Marxism. Under the guidance of Marxism-Leninism, the revolutionary struggle is bound to rise to a new and higher level of consciousness, militancy and achievement
Before we take up the contemporary world situation, let us have a large view of tine history of the revolutionary proletariat.
This history is a spiraling process and follows a zigzag course with its ups and downs. The cause of the revolutionary proletariat has repeatedly gone from one level to a higher level. There are the periods of descent from which a new and higher level of revolutionary struggle arises.
First of all, Marx and Engels gave us the fundamental principles of Marxism in the spheres of philosophy, political economy and social science. Proceeding from the thoroughgoing analysis and critique of the laws of motion of capitalism, Marx and Engels laid the basis of scientific socialism, with its requirements of proletarian class dictatorship against the bourgeois class dictatorship, public ownership of the means of production against the private ownership of these and planned economy against the capitalist anarchy of production.
In the era of free competition capitalism, Marx and Engels extricated the concept of socialism from the Utopian socialists and put it on a scientific basis. He demonstrated that the workers must reclaim the surplus value created by them but taken away by the capitalists to exploit them. The relations of production must be made to correspond to the social character of largescale machine production of commodities.
Occurring 23 years after the writing of the Communist Manifesto which had been issued in the year 1848 of the workers' uprisings coopted by the bourgeoisie, the Paris Commune of 1871 occurred as the prototype and harbinger of proletarian revolution and prdtetiMfian class dictatorship. It was a fleeting victory for the proletariat bat it served to prove that the proletariat is capabteof overthrowing the bourgeoisie and establishing proletarian class dictatorship.
It would take 46 years from the failure of the Paris Commune 232 before the Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917 could occur under the leadership of Lenin and the Bolsheviks. They learned well from the lessons of the Paris Commune and from Marx'scritical study of it.
The decades preceding the October Revolution were characterized by the rapid expansion of capital, the rise of modern imperialism and the degeneration of the major working class parties of the Second International into what we now call classical revisionism and into becoming the adjuncts of the big bourgeoisie in approving colonial projects and increasing war budgets.
It was the great role of Lenin to further develop Marxism in the era of modern imperialism and proletarian revolution. He carried forward the study of materialist dialectics by contending with and debunking bourgeois subjectivism as an extension of idealism and metaphysics.
He made the correct analysis and critique of modem imperialism and led the Great October Socialist Revolution to establish the first socialist state. It would have been impossible to win the revolution without the Bolsheviks being able to contend successfully with the Czarist autocracy, the big bourgeoisie and the classical revisionists.
Socialist revolution and construction were carried out in the Soviet Union under severe difficulties, resulting from interimperialist war, the civil war and interventionist wars; the ceaseless overt violence and covert sabotage by the reactionaries, including the rich peasants and bourgeois nationalists; and the economic blockade and aggressive threats and actions of the imperialists.
Stalin succeeded in undertaking socialist revolution and construction. He built and expanded the industrial foundation of the Soviet Union, collectivized and mechanized Soviet agriculture, educated the largest corps of scientific, technical, cultural and administrative personnel in the world and raised the people's standard of living in so short a time. Stalin demonstrated the superiority of socialism over capitalism, especially when the latter was being beset by the worst depression ever and was afflicted by fascism in several countries.
But there was no straight road in the advance of socialism in one country. Neither was there such a road for all workers of the world. The world capitalist system increasingly unleashed the 233 monster of fascism against the communist and working class parties and ultimately all-out aggression against the Soviet bulwark of socialism, destroying the lives of 20 million people and devastating the Soviet economy.
Prom one more dismal period for the socialist cause, culminating in an inter-imperialist war which involved the fascist objective of destroying socialism, several socialist countries would emerge and the national liberation movements in colonies and semicolonies would surge forward in the period after World War II.
Stalin was greatly honored by the capitalist powers for his successful defense of the Soviet Union and counter attack against the Nazi forces of aggression until the potentates of capitalism declared the cold war. Stalin reconstructed the Soviet economy, raised higher the material and cultural standards, strengthened the internal and peripheral defenses, completed the reversal of the ratio of urban-rural population prior to 1917 and supported the cause of national liberation and socialism abroad.
Bu t after the death of Stalin, exactly in a period when more than one third of the world's population were in several socialist countries, the monster of modern revisionism would arise, especially in the Soviet Union. Khrushchev totally negated Stalin in order to promote modem revisionism and to split the international communist movement.
The petty bourgeoisification of the large mass of bureaucrats and new intelligentsia had already given rise to a monopoly capitalist bourgeoisie. The waning of the proletarian class standpoint started in 1936 when it was proclaimed that there were no more exploiting and exploited classes in the Soviet Union and no more class struggle, except the ever intensifying one between the Soviet people and the external enemy (e.g. the imperialists and their agents).
Our Party has already approved and issued the document, Stand for Socialism Against Modern Revisionism. To cut short this part of our presentation, we refer you to this document. In this, we trace the path of modem revisionism and capitalist restoration from Khrushchev through Brezhnev to Gorbachev.
For 35 years from 1956 to 1991, the modem revisionists masqueraded as Marxist-Leninists and restored capitalism until they shed off their masks and revealed the face of monopoly bureaucrat 234 capitalism. The revisionist parties and regimes disintegrated and even the Soviet Union collapsed.
We are confronted today with a world situation which has ceased to be a bipolar one between two superpowers in the erstwhile protracted cold war.
The Soviet Union has imploded due to internal factors, mainly the all-round restoration of capitalism and misallocation of domestic resources to the new bourgeoisie and the arms race; due to overextension in social imperialist activities; and of course due to ceaseless external pressures and subversive work of the U5.-led alliance of capitalist powers.
The U.S. appears now to have a singular hegemony over the entire world. But this is an imperialist power which has also misallocated and wasted resources in the abuse of finance capitalism, in overconsumption and high speed spending for hightech weaponry.
The U.S. continues to slide in a strategic decline. Strenuous efforts are being exerted to put on a brake on this slide by stepping up the production of tradable goods and reducing budgetary and trade deficits. But such efforts can only have adverse consequences to the other global centers of capitalism, Japan and Western Europe, and to the so-called newly-industrializing economies which have become dependent on the American market.
At the same time, the U.S. attempt to reduce military spending through "burden sharing" and military sales tends to favor the resurgence of nationalism and militarism in Japan and Germany. The trend of multipolarization among the three global centers of capitalism will accelerate as thecrisisof overproduction intensifies.
The United States is still at the head of the world capitalist system through the Group of Seven, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and other mechanisms with respect to political, economic and financial domination; and through the U.N. Security Council and the multilateral regional and bilateral military alliances with respect to political and military domination.
The crisis of overproduction in the world capitalist system is generated and accelerated by high technology, a far cry from the productivity that preceded the crises and interimperialist wars of 235 the past. The centers of world capitalism are increasingly at odds with each other over issues regarding industrial and agricultural production, investment, markets and financial policies.
The current prolonged recession in the industrial capitalist countries or in fact depression (if we take into account the jobkilling character of new investments and reequipment and the continuing bloat in the service sector and military spending) has been preceded by the longer running depression in the general run of rawmaterial exporting countries in the third world and the Soviet bloc countries since the late seventies and by the colossal amounts of deficits of the US.
The internationalization of capital after World War II has been unprecedented in the entire history of capitalism. After the reconstruction of the industries of Western Europe and Japan, large amounts of capital were deployed by the transnational banks and firms to favor infrastructure-building, raw-material production, high consumption of imported manufactures and military spending in the third world since the sixties and through West Germany and other West European countries, also high consumption by the new bourgeoisie and fringe-processing enterprises in the Soviet bloc countries since the seventies.
Thus, for a while the crisis of overproduction in the industrial capitalist countries was temporarily relieved by sales which were generated as a result of profuse lending to the less developed countries. Neocolonialism through economic and financial dominance and manipulation eventually became a more profitable and effective weapon than outright wars of aggression as those in Korea, Vietnam and other countries.
As early as 1969, it became clear to U.S. strategic planners that the U.S. could not win the war in Vietnam and the rest of Indochina and that it was more profitable to sell weapons to other countries than for U.S. personnel to use them (unless of course the U.S. can use mercenaries in low-intensity conflicts or sell the hightech weapons and still control and use them as in the Gulf War of 1991).
There is no doubt that neocolonialism has been successful in dominating third world countries and in getting a handle on countries that continue to call themselves socialist. But there are limits to neocolonialism. When the limits are reached, there are too many countries overloaded with foreign debts, exporting types of 236 products in oversupply in the world market and not earning enough hard currency to service the debt and to keep buying the products of the industrial capitalist countries.
At this point in time, the longrunning depression in most third world countries and in the former Soviet bloc countries is recoiling upon the very centersof world capitalism. The global market for the industrial capitalist countries has shrunk.
Swamped by their own deficits and by bad debts on a wide scale, the centers of world capitalism are trying to consolidate their national and regional positions and are in sharpening competition among themselves. Within the industrial capitalist countries themselves, there is cutthroat competition in which the winning firms adopt high technology, throw personnel out of their jobs in large numbers and undermine their own domestic market.
There is high productivity available. But the growth rate of productivity for entire capitalist economies has fallen down. There are large inventories that cannot be sold from previous production. And the losing firms in the capitalist competition reduce the work force, cut production or go into bankruptcies.
In the present world situation, the proportion of people falling below the poverty line has increased by 10 percent, from 70 percent to 80 percent, during the last ten years. By this measure alone, it is understandable why the world has become more volatile and explosive since the end of the cold war.
There is social turmoil in so many countries and continents at the same time. There is no new world order. There is greater disorder now than before the collapse of the Soviet bloc and the Soviet Union. Eastern Europe, especially the former Yugoslavia, and the former Soviet Union are hotbeds of nationalist, ethnic and religious armed conflicts.
The peace settlements arranged by Gorbachev with Reagan and Bush in several regions have gone into shambles. There are revolutionary armed struggles and mass protest actions led by Marxist-Leninist parties and anti-imperialist movements. There is also spontaneous mass violence in the absence of a capable MarxistLeninist party. Civil wars, cycles of coups d'etat, ethnic or communal conflicts, criminality and senseless street violence abound in the world today.
The social turmoil afflicts not only the general run of 237 underdeveloped third world countries and the former Soviet bloc countries but also the longer running industrial capitalist countries. The complicated civil wars in Yugoslavia and some former Soviet republics are now the most intense and lethal in the world and are in drawing in the foreign interventionists, principally the imperialists.
If we may try to sort out the main contradictions in the world today, they are the following:
First is the contradiction between the monopoly bourgeoisie and all reaction on the one hand and the proletariat and people on the other hand;
Second is the contradiction between the imperialist and the anti-imperialist independent states, some of which strive to hold high the red flag of socialism (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Cuba and the like);
Third is the contradiction among the major capitalist powers which have consolidated themselves as the three most powerful capitalist centers, te United States, Western Europe and Japan; and Fourth is the contradiction between the major industrial capitalist powers and the lesser industrial capitalist countries, including those ruled by bureaucrat capitalist regimes.
The foregoing contradictions are in motion and are running at a pace dictated by the worsening global crisis of overproduction. It must be noted that in the world today countries that consider themselves socialist assert themselves and act in the global arena more as independent and anti-imperialist states rather than as socialist states and proletarian internationalists, with the exception of DPRK and Cuba.
The social turmoil that is already occurring on a widescale makes the ground fertile for the rise of genuine Marxist-Leninist parties and the resurgence of the revolutionary mass movement for independence, democracy and socialism and against imperialism and all reaction.
There is no better way than Marxism to understand the internal laws of motion, the wholeness and crises of capitalism. Free competition capitalism has extended itself into monopoly capitalism or modern imperialism and further on to neocolonialism, 238 characterized by the use of high technology and the most wanton use of finance capitalism. But Marxism has continuously developed both in the critique of capitalism and in the theory and practice of socialist revolution and construction.
If in the time of Marx and Engels largescale machine production had a social character in contradiction with the private character of appropriation, the high technology that is now at hand has a greater social character in sharper contradiction with the private character of appropriation by the supermonopolies.
The big bourgeoisie has warded off the proletariat from seizing political power in industrial countries and from making socialist the relations of production to suit the social character of production by engaging in global capitalist exploitation in a manner as to undermine and dominate economically and financially the newlyindependent states and the revisionist-ruled states and enlarge the labor aristocracy and the white collar work force in the service sector in the industrial capitalist countries.
But now high technology, the excessive use of finance capitalism and the neocolonial deployment of capital have far exceeded the limits of effective world market demand, set in the first place by the capitalist rule of maximizing profits. As the debt-ridden countries languish in depression, the centers of world capitalism are hit by an unprecedented crisis of overproduction.
This crisis is becoming more and more obvious as the supermonopolies are trying to raise their competitiveness and profitability by disemploying large numbers of blue collars and whi te collars in favor of automation, robots and computers and by wiping out a large number of unprofitable enterprises. Like the general run of third world countries, the former Soviet bloc countries are not getting the productive investments and technology that they have expected. They are either retaining the same outdated plants or closing them down and are being reduced to penury and misery.
In the course of the 1989--91 events in the former Soviet bloc countries, the unprecedentedly severe crisis of the world capitalist system was obscured by the powerful triumphalist propaganda of the imperialistsover the supposed victory of capitalism over socialism for all time. Even the crank idea that history has ended with capitalism and liberal democracy was celebrated as true and sophisticated.
239An anticommunist ideological offensive was carried out misrepresenting either as Stalinism or real but flawed socialism the bureaucrat monopoly capitalism that was shedding off its socialist mask.
Now, the imperialist ideological offensive, assisted effectively for a while by the anticommunist ideologues and publicists from the ranks of the petty bourgeoisie, is well overtaken by the public recognition of the crisis of the world capitalist system, which includes the monopoly, bureaucrat capitalism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.
With factual and scientific certitude, we declare that the basic principles of scientific socialism laid down by Marx and Engels remain valid and true and are superior to capitalism and have been proven correct by Lenin, Stalin and Mao and other communist leaders in actual socialist revolution and construction. Among these basic principles are proletarian revolution and class dictatorship, the public ownership of the means of production, economic planning, full employment and rising standards of living and culture on the basis of expanded production.
But there are certain questions that must be answered well by Marxist-Leninists if Marxism is to remain vital and to further develop. What is the point in winning the new democratic revolution and the socialist revolution if at some future time in socialist society revisionism, self-interest and capitalist restoration prevail? In view of the current international situation, is the new democratic revolution through armed struggle in the Philippines one of the dying embers in a receding period of revolutionary struggle in the world or is it one of the flaming torches of a new period of revolutionary struggle?
Again specific to the Filipino communists, how can they make socialist revolution and construction in a medium-sized and archipelagic country like the Philippines upon the completion of the national democratic revolution in an international environment in which there is no socialist country as formidable as China or the Soviet Union that is directly and materially of help? Since Philippines does not have the scale of either Russia or China, will it not be excessively vulnerable to imperialist strangulation when it shall embark on socialist revolution and construction.
With these few questions alone being posed by comrades, 240 honest friends as well as by the mocking enemy, it is no longer enough to say that new democratic revolution and socialist revolution are necessitated by the in tolerable oppression and exploitation inflicted by the imperialists and reactionaries and that Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin provide us all the essential answers.
The first question can be answered only by taking up Mao Zedong's theory of continuing revolution, combating revisionism and preventing the restoration of capitalism for the entire historical epoch of socialism. There is a whole set of principles clarified by thi s theory, which must be thoroughly studied even if its application in the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution failed after a longer period of success than the Paris Commune.
In philosophy, Mao further deepened and extended our understanding of materialist dialectics, particularly the fundamental law of contradiction which is the unity of opposites, which Lenin first pointed to. In philosophy, Mao further deepened and extended our understanding of materialist dialectics particularly the unity and struggle of opposites, which Lenin first pointed to as the most fundamental law of development.
Subsequently, he clarified the correct handling of contradictions among the people in socialist society and distinguishes these from those between the enemy and the people. He had the high distinction of coming to the defense of Stalin and yet analyzing his demerits and launching a counteroffensive against modern revisionism centered in the Soviet Union.
When the proletariat wins political power, the bourgeoisie merely shifts to a secondary position in socialist society. It does not disappear so soon. It can even regenerate itself and reappear in various spheres of social life. The class struggle proceeds. It must proceed with the proletarian class dictatorship upheld and bourgeois rights restricted. Otherwise, modern revisionism can arise and capitalist restoration can occur. It is not true that once socialism is established it is irreversible.
Building socialism is not simply a matter of strengthening the forces of production and increasing the ranks of the proletariat through industrialization. But more important is strengthening the socialist relations of production, putting proletarian revolutionary politics in command and revolutionizing the superstructure.
In our view, the cultural revolution is not something to be 241 waged every ten years or periodically but continuously in a resolute but protracted and persuasive manner so as to avert ultra-Left excesses and keep the Left well in alliance with the Middle. This is the big lesson learned from the failure of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.
At any rate, Mao Zedong extended and further developed our understanding of the problems to pose and solve beyond those previously pointed to by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, such as the vestiges of the exploiting classes, the contradictions between the workers and peasants, between town and country and between manual and mental labor, the problem of petty commodity production generating the bourgeoisie and the force of old habits and customs.
Despite all his great achievements in socialist revolution and construction and the consolidation and defense of the Soviet Union, Stalin had serious demerits. He had a lot of mechanical materialism and metaphysics. He thought of the bourgeoisie in terms of socioeconomic and legal definition alone. He could not see that the old bourgeoisie can be deprived of their properties but not of their ideas and influence and that the bourgeoisie can rearise from the bureaucracy and new intelligentsia if the bourgeoisie is considered only in terms of being the external enemy in the shape of the imperialists and their local agents.
He relied too much on administrative measures and imagined that the relations of production can fully rather than basically correspond to the forces of production, and the superstructure also fully to the mode of production. The full correspondence can never be enforced but upon the recognition of bask correspondence and the differences the contradictions can be handled properly from stage to stage.
Let us answer the second question. The Filippino communists are certain of the viability and growth in strength of the new democratic revolution through armed struggle in the PhUipines because of the ever worsening crisis of the semicolonial and semifeudal system and of he world capitalist system. In this tropical archipelagic and mountainous country, the hightech weaponry used in the Gulf war cannot be effective against the people's war. The main thing is that the proletariat, the peasantry and the rest of the people are engaged in the armed revolution.
242It is not only the armed revolutionary movement that faces tremendous odds in the Philippines. In fact, the puppet regime in the Philippines is now constrained by the dwindling of resources that it can extract domestically and draw from abroad, the crisis of the world capitalist system has a tremendous adverse impact on the Filipino reactionaries and their social system.
We are of the view that the Filipino proletariat and the people are carrying the flaming torch of armed revolution from an old to a new period of revolutionary struggle in the world. We uphold the Marxist-Leninist theory of state and revolution and are confident that in due time revolutionary armed struggle led by MarxistLeninist parties will increase in the world.
Let us answer the third question. We have no timetable for winning the new democratic revolution. After expressing a number of times our desire to win it in ten or twenty years, we now declare that we are willing to wage armed resistance in the spirit of Dagohoy and his descendants who fought Spanish colonialism for eighty five years without letup. Without the cumulative effect of the Filipino people's armed resistance in more than 300 years, Spanism colonialism would not have been overthrown. There would be no end to foreign and feudal domination if the Filipino people ceased to wage armed revolution.
After all, while the enemy is still entrinched in the cities, our Party, our people's army, our united front and our mass organizations build organs of democratic political power in our guerrilla fronts. These guerrilla fronts started as small guerrilla zones. These shall eventually join up in larger and more stable liberated areas.
We shall certainly have serious problems and difficulties in building socialism if so soon we shall have seized political power nationwide and basically completed the national democratic revolution. But fortunately, we are engaged in a protracted people's war and we are still in the stage of strategic defense and tactical offensives to accumulate all-round strength.
When we shall build socialism, we shall, we shall make sure that the proletariat is at the helm of the socialist state, shall have hegemony in all spheres of society, shall rely mainly on the workerpeasant alliance and shall engage in socialist construction in a self reliant way. We shall avoid dependence on the world capitalist market or any foreign country, even if socialist or anti-imperialist. 243 We shall rely on all the patriotic and progressive classes and strata and take advantage of the rich natural resources of the Philippines and the available skills and means of production.
The strategic enterprises, sources of raw materials and main lines of distribution shall come under public ownership. Agricultural cooperation and mechanization shall be carried out stage by stage. We shall pay attention to agriculture as the base of the economy, basic and heavy industries as the leading factor and light industry as the bridge between the two. All these shall be developed in a planned, well-proportioned and well-balanced manner to serve the basic domestic needs and rising standards of living.
We shall leam the positive and negative lessons from the Soviet experience, Mao's critique of Soviet economics and the self-reliant Chinese experience of socialist revolution and construction under Mao and from the disastrous ``reforms'' of modem revisionism and capitalist restoration.
We shall strive to apply the science of Marxism-Leninism on the concrete conditions of the Philippines and to contribute what we can to the great treasury of Marxism-Leninism. In this way, we perform our internationalist duty of contributing what we can to the vitality of Marxism, which must be reinvigorated until mankind is liberated from imperialism and the ultimate goal of communism is reached.
We are hopeful that by the time that the Filipino proletariat and people shall have basically completed the national democratic revolution and commenced the socialist revolution, the international environment shall have been more favorable, with the world capitalist system in more serious crisis and the anti-imperialist and socialist cause stronger on a wider scale than now.
[244] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Portugese Communist PartyDear Comrades,
On behalf of the Portuguese Communist Party, I wish to begin by thanking the CPI(M) for the invitation it has extended to the PCP to attend this Seminar and to greet you for this timely event. The topic of this Seminar is, in our opinion, particularly important and relevant. The fact that this Seminar on "The Contemporary World Situation and the Validity of Marxism" is being held here, in Calcutta, capital city of an important state of the Indian Union which is ruled by the Communists and their allies, acquires a special significance. A direct contact with this reality represents a stimulus for the Portuguese communists to proceed with confidence in the struggle to defend the interests of the working class and the working masses and for an advanced democracy, with a view to building in Portugal a society freed from the exploitation of Man by Man, a socialist society.
Marxcarriedoutaremarkableresearchwork, establishingprofound links with the workers, the struggle and the reality of his time. He made a contribution of historical significance for a revolutionary theory and praxis for the liberation struggle of the workers and the peoples. Marx and Engels must be credited with the extraordinary achievement of having uncovered the basic laws of social development and, in particular, of having shown the necessarily transitional nature of capitalism.
From a dream, a yearning, a Utopia and a project, socialism became a scientific theory. It won over vast masses, it became a tremendous revolutionary force and finally, with the October Revolution and other victorious socialist revolutions, it became a 245 powerful material reality which - despite delays, mistakes and deformations - decisively influenced world's development.
Making the most of the dramatic defeats of socialism in the USSR and in Eastern Europe, our opponents, seek to revise History to suit their class interests. But contrary to their claims, the Twentieth Century by and large marks a brilliant confirmation of the fundamental theses of Marx, which were defended and creatively developed by Lenin, (in particular with his analysis of imperialism) concerning social development, concerning the possibility of advancing - in accordance with the existing social and economic conditions and through the organized and conscious intervention of the exploited and oppressed masses - towards ever higher stages of social and national emancipation, towards a society without exploiters nor exploited, in which 'The freedom of each is a requirement for the freedom of all''.
Undoubtedly, the communists and all progressives face problems of extraordinary importance and complexity in the revolutionary theory and praxis of this final part of the Century.
Reality has shown that, in relation to the assessments prevailing within the Communist movement some decades ago, the process of building a new society is more difficult, complex and lengthy than was predicted. Capitalism has revealed an unexpected capacity to adapt All this raises the need for a thorough re assessment of the path which has been treated and for an appraisal of the lessons which must be drawn.
But, in the PGP's opinion, nothing justifies challenging the notion that the Twentieth Century marked revolutionary advances and transformations of historical significance and that valuable attempts and experiences in building a new society were (and are) taking place. Nothing allows the conclusion that socialism is `` premature'' or even unfeasible. As we stated at our Fourteenth Congress, "the Twentieth Century will go down in History not as the century of the 'death of communism', but as the century when Communism was born as the materialization of an alternative project to capitalism and as a historically necessary solution to its unsurmountable contradictions.
With the process of degeneration of ``perestroika'' in the USSR 246 and the defeat of socialism, a global ideological offensive was undertaken with a view to weakening, dividing, liquidating or ensuring the degeneration of the Communist parties and other revolutionary forces. The core ideas of this offensive are the "failure of socialism'', the "bankruptcy of Marxism-Leninism'', the "end of the communist movement" and the "irreversible decline of the Communist parties''.
The PCFs Fourteenth Congress (December 1992), following up on the Thirteenth Extraordinary Congress (May 1990), gave a clear reply to such a campaign by stating, confirming and renewing the PGP's communist identity and expressing with profound conviction the Portuguese communists' confidence in the socialist future of Portugal and of Mankind.
The PGP's communist identity is not an abstract and timeless concept. Rather, it results from its historical path and from its profound roots in the working class and the people, whose interests and yearnings are the very raison d'etre of our Party.
The PGP's identity is fundamentally reflected in its class nature; in the goal of building a new society without exploiters nor exploited; in the revolutionary theory which inspires it; in a concept and praxis of organization and democratic functioning which ensures its unity and capacity for intervention; in its close and inseparable links with the masses; in its patriotism and internationalism.
The PCP plays its part in the struggle against the reactionary policy of the present PSD government and in all areas of the country's life, asserting with conviction its independence and communist identity.
Contrary to what those prophesized the 'TCP's irreversible decline" would wish, not only is our Party solidly united, not only can it count on its 160 000 members who represent a strong and militant collective, as always geared towards the masses and to giving impetus to their struggle - it is standing on its two feet, carrying out an intense activity, wim an irreplaceable role in the vast working class and popular movement (of the industrial and service sector workers, intellectuals, farmers, women, young people and students and other strata) which is currently on the rise in our country an4 which had in the celebrations of the April the 25th Revolution and of May Day its most recent illustration.
247The Portuguese reality confirms that the PCP is indispensable for the workers and their struggle for a better life. It also confirms that the understanding and cooperation of the democratic forces, which is necessary to defeat the class policy of big business and achieve a democratic about-turn in the country's life, is only possible with a strong Communist Party which in all circumstances asserts its political, ideological and class independence.
The PSD government's policy is a policy which is dismantling key productive sectors and submerging the country in a profound economic crisis; which is severely hurting working people's living and working conditions; which is deteriorating education, health, social security; which is throwing a growing number of workers into unemployment, precarious jobs and social marginalization; which is leading to restrictions of fundamental rights and freedoms and to the setting up of an authoritarian regime; which is jeopardizing the country's very independence and sovereignty, in submission to the European Community's designs of supranational power. A concentration of capital and property; a polarization of wealth; the impoverishment of democracy; national submission; these are the consequences of the present government's policy and they clearly display its class nature at the service of the monopolies and in close connection with European and world-wide big business.
The experience of Portuguese reality (before, during and after the revolution of April 25,1974) is a convincing confirmation of the fundamental theses of Marx and of Marxism-Leninism in what concerns social classes and their struggle, the property of the major means of production, the State, and their key role in the evolution of societies.
The social democratic parties' effort to by-pass and even deny this reality has led them to a growing identification with bourgeois ideology and to the implementation, when in office, of the policies of capital. This necessarily had to lead to a generalized discredit and to the crises which many socialist and social-democratic parties face today. The crisis of a social democracy, which has contradictory consequences, once again shows how illusory and dangerous the paths of reformism and class conciliation are for the working class and national liberation movement. It confirms that the Communists' response to the new phenomena and to the challenges of our time must be sought from Marxist and revolutionary criteria, with the firm rejection of social-democratic theories and 248 practices and of social-democracy's hegemonistic ambitions over the left, the trade union movement and the national liberation movement.
The world situation and the prospects for its short and medium-term developments are still profoundlymarked by socialism's dramatic defeats. But they are also marked- together with the struggle of the workers and peoples which, although in more difficult conditions, continues everywhere-by the crisis which is spreading throughout the capitalist world.
Little more than three years have gone by since the "fall of the Berlin wall" and the overwhelming tide of triumphalism which this event brought about. And it is no longer the defeats of socialism, but the crisis of capitalism and the struggle against the most serious expressions of its exploiting, oppressive and aggressive nature which are on the agenda of the world's life. We think that is particularly important to highlight this fact, given the scale of the political and ideological offensive against the communists and their liberating ideals.
This does not imply that the study of the causes behind socialism's dramatic defeats should not continue. On the contrary, we think that this is indispensable so that, learning from the lessons of experience, we may carry out with renewed conviction and confidence the struggle for a new society, freed from the exploitation of Man by Man. This is what we did in our Thirteenth and Fourteenth Congresses, drawing the fundamental and basic conclusion that the defeats of socialism do not represent the failure of the Communist ideal, but the failure of a ``model'' which departed from the Communist ideal in essential aspects that had to do with political power, participatory democracy, the Party's role and the theory, and which countered fundamental characteristics of socialism which the Communists have always proclaimed.
Countering the wishes of the theorists and propagandists of capitalism and of those who have lost confidence in the masses and capitulated to anti-communist ideological pressure, such events do not challenge Marxism-Leninism. Rather, they show the perils of crystallizing and dogmatizing a theory which is very much alive, anti dogmatic and creative in its essence. It may correctly be infered as we did at our Fourteenth Congress that socialism and democracy 249 (economic, social, political and cultural) are inseparable and that the defeats of socialism prove that the new society can only be built by the revolutionary action and engagement of the workers and popular masses, never without their engagement and much less against their will.
As for capitalism, the serious crisis which it is facing is manifest. For a start, in the economic sphere, with the recession that has spread to practically all developed countries. But also with other expressions of a structural, institutional, political, ideological and moral nature. The bankruptcy, both of the neo-liberal policies of "wild capitalism" and of the "Welfare State" of the much praised "Swedish model of socialism''; the instability and crisis of State institutions and of the liberal bourgeois political regime in various European countries; the generalization of unemployment, of precarious jobs and of phenomena of social exclusion; the upsurge of xenophobia, racism, nationalism and of extreme right wing forces; the serious difficulties which the EC is facing in building the economic-political-military bloc enshrined in the Maastricht Treaty (whose coming into effect is not guaranteed); the dramatic and explosive situation in the so-called "Third World" countries which are subjected to merciless mechanisms of neo-colonial exploitation - all of these are expressions of a crisis whose real magnitude and significance has yet to be ascertained but which has already belied the hasty triumphalisms and the old illusions concerning capitalism.
The weakening of real left-wing and progressive alternatives enshrines serious threats of authoritarian and even dictatorial evolutions for a capitalism in crisis. At the same time, vast areas are opening up for intervention by the communists and the progressive forces in the social, political and ideological spheres and which may lead to a recovery and strengthening of their influence and to a re-launching of the force of attraction of socialism's values and ideals among the masses.
The changes which capitalism has undergone since the days in which Marx and Engels wrote the ``Manifesto'' or in which Lenin wrote "Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism" are, undoubtedly, very thorough ones. But reality is confirming that such changes have not altered capitalism's exploiting and aggressive essence, have not abolished its basic contradictions (starting with that between the social nature of production and private 250 appropriation, between capital and labor), have not freed it from cyclical crises. In its present transnational monopolist stage and with the disappearance of socialism as a world system, the profoundly unjust and inhuman nature of capitalism and its incapability to solve the problems and yearnings of the workers and of all Mankind is becoming even more obvious.
Exploiting the changed balance of forces, imperialism has undertaken a vast offensive seeking to destroy historic achievements by the workers in developed capitalist countries, to liquidate progressive regimes, to set back the liberation struggle of the peoples of the 'Third World" and to impose a "new world order" fully hegemonized by big business.
The strength of political-military alliances and of their aggressive nature: the interference and intervention in the internal affairs of numerous countries; military aggressions; the stirring up of territorial, national, ethnic and religious conflicts; the instrumentalization of the UN and other institutions created for international cooperation - all this is a policy which is responsible for great human tragedies, for widespread conflicts and wars, for the accumulation of extremely serious dangers for world peace itself. Dangers which result in particular from the attempts to solve by the use of force the explosive contradictions (which have become more acute) between the developed capitalist ``center'' and the countries and peoples of the Third World (``North/South conflict''). Dangers which are all the greater since, if on the one hand the major imperialist powers seek to closely concert their policy (``Group of Seven'', IMF,NATO, UN Security Council), on the other hand there are growingrivalriesandcontradictionsamong them in the struggle for spheres of influence and domination. All this confirms the exploiting and aggressive nature of imperialism.
Imperialism's involvement in the Yugoslav conflict and the preparations for a direct military intervention represent an extremely serious threat for peace in the Balkans, in Europe and in the world.
It is a fact that the progressive and national liberating forces have known serious set-backs in recent times.
But it is also a fact that the construction of socialism in various countries continues, that the liberation struggle of the workers and 251 peoples continues. That is what we see in Portugal. That is what we see here in India, as has been testified by our Indian comrades. That is what we see in numerous countries of all continents. As we stated at our Fourteenth Congress, "the objective reasons to continue the struggle, which are rooted in capitalism's intrinsically exploiting, oppressive, unjust and inhuman nature, have not only not disappeared - they have been strengthened. The policies which seek to make the working class and other anti-monopolist classes and strata pay the costs of the crisis which is spreading throughout the capitalist world, and the attempts to impose upon the world, a `new order' against the freedom, independence and progress of peoples have heightened old and new contradictions, have increased injustice and inequalities, have saved growing discontent, have extended the front of the social and political forces which are objectively interested in liquidating capitalism and in particular its most reactionary expressions''.
Despite the difficulties of the current moment, new advances and progressive about turns are possible in the not too distant future. Much will depend upon the subjective factor, upon the capacity which the communists and other progressives will display in organizingand guiding in acorrect direction the popular struggles in their own countries, as well as upon their cooperation and solidarity on an international level. It is for this reason that we greet with vivid satisfaction the presence in this Seminar of such a significant number of Communist parties and of other progressive and revolutionary organizations and movements.
The PCP considers that the solidarity among the workers and peoples of the world is of fundamental importance and that to achieve it, it is necessary to strengthen the relations of friendship, cooperation and mutual solidarity among the forces of democracy, social progress and peace, and first and foremost, among the Communists.
This is a requirement which immediately emerges from the need to build a vast front of resistance to imperialism's attempts to impose its "new order" upon the world. It is a requirement which also results from the on-going processes of internationalization and integration which objectively bring the workers and the peoples of the whole world closer together, creating ever tighter bonds of inter-dependence. Both the famous slogan of the "Manifesto of the Communist Party" - "Proletarians of all countries, unite!" and its 252 Leninist development -"Proletarians of all countries and oppressed peoples of the world, unite!" - have not only not lost, but have actually gained relevance.
In the meantime, whilst the forces of capital and of social democracy are strengthening their cooperation through `` Internationals'' and whilst in Europe there are even supra-national ``parties'' springing up, major difficulties exist in the cooperation and joint or converging action of the Communist parties and other revolutionary forces. In our opinion, this isan abnormal situation which must be overcome with patience and realism, but with persistence and confidence. Through joint or converginginitiativesand,if possible, with appropriate stable forms of cooperation. For its part, the PCP is profoundly engaged in contributing to such an outcome.
Despite the serious problems which it faces, the communist movement is a reality which persists and which, assimilating the lessons from experience and with a renewed composition, remains a necessity for the revolutionary overcoming of capitalism. It is an imperative of the present moment that the communists and all progressive forces strengthen their links of friendship, solidarity and cooperation.
In the present circumstances, the PCP thinks that it is particularly important to organize international initiatives against imperialism's aggressive policies and in solidarity with the peoples and forces which are in the front ranks of the liberation struggle or of imperialism's onslaughts. With Cuba, China, Korea, Vietnam, Laos and other countries and peoples which, with their own solutions, continue to build a new society. With those who in the former Soviet Union and in the countries of Eastern Europe continue resisting and fighting. With the people of South Africa, of Angola and Mozambique, of Palestine, of Cambodia, of El Salvador, as well as of East Timor and many others which are courageously asserting with their struggle the right to determine their own destiny.
In what has undoubtedly been an irregular process, with advances and retreats, with victories and defeats, with inspiring displays of generosity and popular heroism and painful regressions, Mankind has taken gigantic steps on the road to the social and national emancipation of the workers and peoples which was 253 disclosed by Marx and Lenin.
In our view, it is with this broad perspective that the retreats and defeats of this latter part of the Century must be put into context A solid and scientifically based response to such tragic retreats and defeats is not around the corner. It will take time, it will require thorough research and a responsible comparative assessment of experiences and analysis. This seminar is undoubtedly a positive contribution towards the immense task which lies ahead.
We think it is fair to say that, after the great liberating advances on the path which was opened by the October Revolution, we are today living through a period of revolutionary reflex and that the communist movement is undergoing the most serious crisis in its History. We also think that - in an undoubtedly difficult, unstable, unpredictable situation, laden with threats to peace - there is a rapid confirmation of the possibility of recovery for the communists and the progressive forces and of relaunching among the masses the values and ideals of Communism and the project of a socialist society (necessarily renewed in accordance with the lessons from experience and the requirements of life) as a superior system and as a necessary alternative to capitalism.
[254] __ALPHA_LVL2__ South African Communist PartyAllow me to express our profound gratitude to the Commu nist Party of India (Marxist) for making it possible for the South African Communist Party to participate in this important seminar.
Before I make my contribution to this seminar, may I take this opportunity to thank all the parties present here on behalf of the SACP and its allies, the ANC and COSATU for the messages of support and sympathy we received after the assassination of our General Secretary, Com Chris Hani. This killing unleashed a tidal wave of anger and grief never before seen in our country. Millions of people participated in the events surrounding his funeral, including two of the most successful stay-away's seen in South Africa. For the party his assassination is a devastating blow. But as one of our peoples' slogans go (this was after 1976) ``don't mourn -mobilise''.
May I also on behalf of the ANC and its allies thank all of you for the messages of support and sympathy received by the ANC on the occasion of the death of Comrade Oliver Tambo, the National Chairperson of ANC
Over the past two days, we have had various interesting contributions demonstrating the validity of Marxism-Leninism and its continuing importance in the struggle for socialism. I would like to associate the SACP with the fundamental ideas put forward so eloquently yesterday and today that Marxism-Leninism is a science, a guide to action, and a body of methodological principles which should assist us not only to interpret the world but to change it.
The theory and practice of Marxism-Leninism cannot be treated as a closed book i.e. once we have defined a phenomenon in a 255 certain way we stick to it dogmatically. To cite one example, many parties including our own followed a simple definition of socialism basically arising from the experiences following the October Revolution of 1917 that socialism is characterised by the public ownership of the means of production. Without doubt this is an important characteristic But as the Vietnamese comrade pointed out, this simple definition led to policies which were voluntarist which led to wrong conclusions that under socialism you are rid of commodity production, the market mechanism and that basically only two forms of ownership exist- state owned and cooperatives.
In this context, Marxism-Leninism must remain a creative ever developing science of theory and practice. On the other hand we are not pragmatists in the philosophical as well as practical political sense i.e. we merely decide what is good now and what is bad then and selectively choose from the vast body of knowledge that which would support a specific point of view. In our own work, we are guided by two fundamental approaches: (a) does our understanding and actions enhance the positions of the working class and its allies; and (b) does it take us one or more steps further along the zigzag path of achieving our stated objectives. It is ofcourse a truism that as long as there are classes there will be class struggle. We communists did not invent the class struggle, but we do try to give it a direction and a political content.
In his very interesting and thought provoking paper, Comrade Surjeet asked us to examine the correlation of forces nationally and internationally. This is a critical starting point. Now many of us in this room, and our Party was one of them, used to assert with authority that the world balance of forces at the time when the Soviet Union was strong, was in favour of the forces of peace, democracy, socialism and social progress. I believe, it was then a correct characterisation. But if so, the collapse of the Soviet Union and socialist societies in Eastern Europe has fundamentally altered the world balance of forces in favour of imperialism and its myriad agendes. Thus the need for the closest cooperation of the progressive and anti-imperialist forces is of great significance. By working together we can and we must resist the blandishments and intimidations of the major imperialist powers and their agencies.
Looking at this specific area, I would like to stress that whilst it is true mat capitalism has scored some remarkable successes in a number of countries it has failed as a world system. And It would 256 seem to me that if we are to judge whether or not a system is successful one of the characteristics will have to be whether it has succeeded as a world system. As a world system, capitalism has, as the comrade from the Communist Party of Britain pointed out, basically delivered nothing but misery to more than 500 million people around the globe.
Naturally as communists, we are preoccupied by the theory and practice of transition from capitalism to socialism, but I would like to say a few words about another transition process i.e from socialism to capitalism. And it seems to me that within the communist movement, within the broad anti-imperialist movement there is an absolute need for a thoroughgoing analysis of this process. I do not think it is sufficient to merely characterise it as a counterrevolutionary process. There are some fundamental lessons we need to learn. Of course our ideological and class opponents never cease to tell us that our policies for transition from capitalism to socialism would lead to a catastrophic flight of capital, drop in output, drop in GDP and the consequent lowering of the living standards of the people. Yet when it comes to the other transition they seem to be remarkably silent There has been a catastrophic decline in some of the most important economic indicators as well as a growth in others such as unemployment, homelessness and even poverty. In that sense, this process of transition from socialism to capitalism is certainly not irreversible. It is interesting that the bourgeois ideologues may well be making the same mistakes that we communists made earlier - That the transition process of building of socialism was irreversible. But this is of course not to underestimate the very difficult situation facing the fraternal parties in those countries that were formerly socialist.
Nevertheless, even at this stage it is necessary to pose the question: what is the price that the Russian Federation has to pay for this transition. Surely one seems to be, at this moment of time, the loss of political and economic independence. The paper money promised to Yeltsin by the USA and G-7 countries will only be made available if the present regime succumbs to the demands of these countries. The other side of the coin is that it may possibly lead to an authoritarian regime in which the process of democratisationof society will be pushed into the background. The SACP like other fraternal parties is also engaging in a debate and analysis of a number of critical issues facing the communist movement. One of 257 these is the national and ethnic questions. Right-wing forces are using narrow nationalism, chauvinism and racism to divide the working class at the national level and international levels.
Another question is the composition and character of the working class. The question of the changing composition of the working class is not only important for the developed capitalist countries in the wake of the scientific and technological revolution but it seems to me, to all of us. To what extent we require a differentiated approach to the question of the composition of working class, the question of those who are employed and those who are unemployed; to what extent we may need to have a differentiated approach, to categories such as youth and women.
At the end of this month we are holding a strategic conference to examine amongst others issues such as: (a) what kind of parties do we want to build in South Africa; (b) the relationship between a planned economy, the market and democracy; (c) the power of the big monopolies and how to break this, including looking at various ways to bring about the central role of the working class at all levels of decision making d) how to initiate a policy of reconstruction and development which is linked to the struggle to consummate the national democratic revolution, and internationalism in the present world situation. Let me very .brieflyjtQuch. op. these points.
What type of party do we want to build? The core of the debate at least for us is the relationship between a mass party and a party of quality. For example, following the assassination of Chris Hani should we go on the offensive and recruit members in their thousands if possible ? On the other hand, should we seek to consolidate our present membership which stands at 50,000, or do we seek to do both? Now the simple answer for this is always to say, do both. But it is much more complicated when we actually try tp put |K^t in practice. At least speaking for our own Party we face serious problems of servicing our present membership arid otirjSresent structures. We face a serious problem in carrying buf a cbiiSiswht and sustained campaign of political education. TpVus'tfiSWfiSsuBn of raising the level of political consciousness anc| wd^standinr6f our own membership isapriority area. Because v/e feefffiaiW|&?a specific contribution that we can ihake wftfcti wic both on the national liberation and the trade union movement.
__FIX__ above paragraph.We are also of the opinion that being a Communist Party does 258 not automatically give us a monopoly of ideas both in the realm of theory as well as political practice. That we need to find the ways and means in which we can interact with other left forces in order to achieve the aims of bringing about a socialist society in South Africa.
At the same time these discussions would also examine how we can strengthen our alliance with the ANC and the Congress of South African Trade Unions to ensure a fundamental restructuring of the socio-economic life of our country.
On the relationship between the planned economy and the market and democracy: This is an area which concerns all of us as individual parties as well as a collective. Like other parties, we are constantly under attack that these three elements are so contradictory that they are not possible to achieve. We are of the view that not only is it theoretically feasible but without a combination of all three factors socialism cannot have an unshakable condition. And I was particularly interested in the input by our comrade from Portugal and I want to quote what he said, because I think it has a very important approach for us. He said that socialism and democracy (economic, social, political and cultural) are inseparable and "that the new society can only be built by the revolutionary action and engagement of the workers and popular masses, never without their engagement and much less against their will''.
Proceeding from our own experiences, and really speaking only about South Africa, we are convinced that in our own country, multi-party democracy is central to the different stages of our struggle even in the future. And we would insist, at least speaking about South Africa itself that multi-party democracy is good enough for us now and certainly will have to be good enough for us when we reach the phase of the construction of a socialist society.
South Africa has one of the highest concentration and centralisation of capital in any comparable capitalist country. Four large corporations control almost 70 percent of the shares in the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. They also control large tracts of land and the commercial property in every major city. To achieve economic democracy requires therefore the weakening and then breaking up of this huge conglomerates. Again like so many other fraternal parties, we are grappling with the question of how to bring this about. In this context we also proceed from the notion, and I want 259 to emphasise that we are speaking only for ourselves, that the trade union movement must in its organisational, structural and decision making processes be independent of all political parties. Let me give an example. If you take COS ATU, the biggest trade union federation in South Africa, many of its leaders are leaders and members of our Party. But COSATU and ourselves would regard it as intolerable if the Communist Party was to intervene in any of the decision making processes of the trade union movement.
On the issue of reconstruction and development: As you may know the ANC and its allies have proposed a two phased approach to bringing about change in our country. We are proposing that i 5 soon as elections are held for a Constituent Assembly (whose main task is to draft a new constitution), an interim government should be formed. This government would be based on the percentage of votes won by the parties who would be contesting the elections. Now any party winning the minimum of 5 percent of the votes would be entitled to a seat in the Cabinet. Once the new constitution has been adopted we propose that the interim government be transformed into a government of national unity, reconstruction and development. This certainly has elements of power-sharing since the majority party would have voluntarily agreed to include other parties in the cabinet. But it is clear that even this affects only one aspect of the state structures. There are other vital component parts such as the police, defence, intelligence services and the civil service which will have to be radically transformed. Thus these areas of the state structures will form part of our strategy of reconstruction and development. May I just add in passing that in our view those elements that were responsible for the assassination of Chris Hani are to be found within those state structures, certainly within elements of the military intelligence and some of the other security forces. At the level of socio-economic policy it is commonly agreed between the ANC, the Party and COSATU that a policy of reconstruction and development would have to form the core of Jthe ANC's election programme. But in our view we need to embark on this road as soon as we have an interim government We would expect an ANC dominated interim government to immediately initiate a massive house building programme, a public wpjks programme, electrification - it is interesting that the So,uth African government always boasts that atleast 40 percent of all electricity utilised in the entire African continent is used in South Africa, --- yet 260 85% of the African population is deprived of access to electricity, access to health care and services and a drastic overhaul of the education system. In this context a job creation programme, given that at least 50% of the African population is unemployed, is for us critical. At the same time the government would need to pursue policies which would encourage the growth of small and medium size businesses especially for the African population. Here of course, like everywhere else the new government would be under considerable pressure to liberalise trade patterns and to open South Africa to imports. The process of the national democratic revolution has to be pursued to create the basis on which we could seek to build a socialist society.
Lastly, let me say a few words on internationalism. One fully agrees with all other comrades who said that there is a crying need to improve both bilateral and multilateral relations. We think one of the important aspect of this is for example the Sao Paulo forum which had been initiated some years ago and which will have its conference in Cuba in July. Hopefully at this seminar we may usefully explore in our discussion how, if it is possible, to build a powerful anti-imperialist front. Then how do we support those countries, parties and peoples who are under intense pressure from imperialism, in this case specifically as has been mentioned - the existing socialist countries. Ho w do we continue to exchange views and experiences on major theoretical issues confronting us? Of course, obviously with the collapse of the Soviet Union, at least those parties who had closer relations with the Soviet, they had certain advantages in that the socialist countries actually paid for most of these conferences that were held. But there were also disadvantages, I think in the sense that, in my view, we were not openly honest with each other about our differences of opinion and even of our criticisms of what was happening in those countries.
It seems it might be useful here to exchange views and experienceson how we can be constructively critical of each other without seeming to interfere in the internal affairs of other parties. It seems to be important, if it is all possible, to try to share experiences on a number of questions such as the the fact that there are a number of communist parties including the CPI(M) which has accumulated some experience in terms of holding and exercising power on a regional basis - how and in what way does the power exerdsed, limited as it is, has its impact on the national political scene? It 261 would be interesting, I think, for us to examine developments in Guyana, where the PPP has won power through the ballot box It would be interesting to see to what extent a small country is able to carry out progressive socio-economic policies. It would seem to me that it would be useful if over the next few hours left to us we are able to try to share some experiences on this question and on the question of how we take our own collective work together, a step forward.
[262] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Wokers Party of TurkeyThe development of the theory of Scientific Socialism can be examined in two periods. The first period starts in 1840s and goes until 1871 the year following the French Revolution (The Paris Commune) which was predominantly lead by Marx and Engels' ideas and the theory put forward by them within the period could be called 19th century Marxism. The second period however starts with the Russian Revolution in 1917 and goes onto the very near past. The theory within this period extensively supplied by Lenin and Mao Ze Dong's ideas. This classification not only fits neatly into the economic development in these periods. It is shaped by the economic development within the periods.
The 19th century Marxism is a product of the 19th century Europe. The revolutionary theory raised by Marx and Engels within the period should be considered a European Model. The picture seen from today particularly after millions of peoples demonstrated their interest and hope in socialism globally over the past years may well show that looking at the idea of socialist revolution just in Europe is no longer relevant. What was seen as the progressive world in the 19th century was the Continent and some areas neighboring it, but not a lot else beside. In fact people living in the "outside world" were not even perceived to be part of the process of development of the human race at the time. So the centre of revolutionary hope was pinned on Europe and nowhere else. Marx and Engels, as materialists, always sought the truth in facts. The truth of their theory was proven in the revolutions of 1848 and the Paris Commune of 1871. But the facts from which they had to rely upon were bounded to the 19th century view of a European based world though correcting their analysis. The analysis was limited in so far as the facts from which they drew from was limited.
263According to Marx, revolutions would take place in the developed capitalist countries and occur all around Europe concurrently. The working class-proletariat would get the power for defeating capitalism and setting up a dictatorship over the bourgeoisie.
So the revolutions in this century are expected to take place in the most developed countries first and the only cause for a counter revolution may be the undefeated bourgeoisie. Indeed workers and artisans succeeded in taking power in Paris but this success could not survive for long as the revolution did not spread wide enough which in turn enabled the bourgeoisie to stage a successful counter revolution.
The most important development in the 20th century is that massive populations live in Asia, Africa and Latin America to step onto the world's political arena, in other words, started being influential over the history of the world. This development has come about through imperialism. As a result of capitalism spreading out and becoming international, the idea of anti-capitalism was set up in its wake and revolutionary movements developed outside Europe. This struggle was started with the reaction of the people living in the rural areas against metropolis. So that it was an antiimperialist struggle. Capitalism seemed to solve its fatal crisis in Europe by spreading out capitalist relations all around the world. But this was not the solution.
In the 19th century the main divisions within the class system in Europe was bourgeoisie and working class, however in the 19th century this division became that between a result of the exploiting countries and the exploited ones, as polarization based on class conflict again.
Lenin built up the Scientific Socialist Theory which changed all socialist strategies according to this fact. The conflict between the exploiting countries and the exploited countries is the main act in this century. Nevertheless struggle against imperialism has always been led by the working class of that particular exploited country.
One of the topics in this century is that the revolutionary movements have shifted to those underdeveloped countries. As a 264 result of this the core of the revolutionary ideas also shifted to those underdeveloped exploited countries. This fact though which was proven in many occasions over the century, is the cornerstone of our theoretical heritage. There is no other starting point to set up a proper socialist revolutionary strategy than designating the right centre of the revolutionary core. As it can be easily seen from today, the Russian Revolution was not a classical 19th century revolution but one occurred in a comparatively underdeveloped country. The main effect of the revolution was that it spread out more widely among the Asian nations rather than European nations. Lenin and his colleagues in the Bolshevik Party believed that the European revolution was the only way for the Russian revolution to survive and simply waited for it up untill 1920's. After the unsuccessful revolutionary attempts in Germany and Italy, they realised that the eastern countries would be a better target The Russian capitalism when compared with the other major capitalist countries was the weakest but on the other hand when compared with underdeveloped countries it was strong in comparison. So the revolution had succeeded not only in a country least developed among the developed countries but the most developed one of the underdeveloped countries. The Russian Revolution could not lead the revolutionary potential of Asia, Africa and Latin American revolutionary movements. The Russian revolution was followed by the Eastern European, Chinese, Korean, Cuban and far eastern Revolutions.
The shifting process of the revolutionary core from capitalist countries to the surrounding underdeveloped exploited countries has brought up the issue of peasants to an important stage. Simply because in these exploited areas peasants are the biggest proportion of the population. In these the working class population in the cities usually finds itself surrounded by a sea of peasants. This massive community of peasants is also faced with imperialist exploitation. It is not possible to envisage a successful revolutionary strategy without considering the problems faced by the peasantry and drawing up a programme which fuses the problem of the feudalistic elements in the community with a revolutionary socialist goal. The Chinese, Korean, Cuban and Far East Revolutions show that it is possible and works. In the underdeveloped countries the proletarian forces find their main ally in the peasantry. In the 265 imperialist period which we are in, the exploited countries have no chance to develop their own capitalism and the indigenous bourgeoisie has no way to defeat the feudal elements within their own countries. Moreover they can not establish their own democracy. Imperialism has set up a comprador bourgeoisie who acts as a local agent for the international capitalism and run this market and agreed to support the conservative reactionaries within the country who are mainly feudal landlords. Neither the comprador bourgeoisie nor the native capitalists in these countries are able to defeat the feudal medieval elements out of the system and set up a real democracy which will improve the country economically and ethically. So this establishment seems to be of the working class duty as well as setting up the socialist revolution. Inevitably the situation of these extra responsibilities shape the socialist revolutionary strategies.
Therefore the main conflict between bourgeoisie and working class in the 19th century has been transformed into the conflict betweenimperialist, comprador bourgeoisie, feudal elements verses the worker peasant alliance. The struggle against feudalism has to be integrated with the struggle for socialism against imperialism in this century and peasants inevitably will take a very important role in the revolution. Those who insist on not understanding this very crucial fact are looking at the 20th century through the 19th century library windows, no matter how sound their socialist convictions are. Those who are expecting the working class to take over without the help of peasants, as it was envisaged in Europe will be disappointed and they will be waiting for a long time. Although this unfortunate miscalculation may well cause them to take part on the imperialist side. That is the only possible result of not seeing the potential of the peasants in the revolution in the exploited countries in the 20th century.
The unequal and irregular development of the history can be easily observed in this century. While the western bourgeoisie have developed their economies the exploited countries have lagged behind not being able to advance their economies.
In the 20th century capitalism has lost its revolutionary' features because of the organic changes within its internal corimraictory relations. Only socialism now offers a brighter future tor humanity. There is only one way for peasants to break oiit of the medieval feudal condition in which they are trapped, which is to 266 join with the working class in a socialist revolutionary struggle. The Russian and Chinese revolutions illustrate this.
As a result of the revolutionary potential shifting away from the advanced countries towards the exploited underdeveloped countries in which feudalistic elements still exist means establishing a higher cultural level and setting up of a democratic regime which also has to be on the revolutionary agenda of the proletariat. Invariably what follows from this is a form of gradual revolution. It is essential for a revolutionary party to work this into its theory, a theory whose first step includes intensive land reform aimed at distributing the land to those that work it. Other vital issues to be addressed freedom, independence, anti racist internationalism, human rights, education etc. which are essential for democracy. At the end of the day, giving the land to the peasants along with selfdetermination, secularism, independence etc are features which are characteristics of a democratic bourgeois regime. Although they can also serve as a stepping stone towards socialism which includes the nationalisation of the means of production, collective use of the land, proletarian internationalism and socialist democracy which in the exploited world lead humanity towards a classless society.
In past years the two steps of revolution were confused in exploited countries with only the second step being taken into consideration. The difference between stepping into socialism in a developed and underdeveloped country were constantly ignored. The theory of gradual revolution prior to a socialist revolution has to be considered as an addition to Marxism in the 20th century.
The USSR and Chinese cases of trying to establish socialism without first addressing the problems of an uncompleted bourgeois democratic revolution shows the importance of the gradual and continuous revolution theory.
One of the major developments of the 20th century is the capitalism has become a global system spreading out its imperialist tentacles over the world.
267This fact obviously has reshaped the revolutionary strategy of the proletariat compared with the strategies of the 19th century. The class conflict is not the one between capitalists and the working class within a southern country as it was in the 19th century Europe but between imperialistand anti-imperialist forcesacross the world. This war can only be won by breaking the weakest link in the imperialist chain.
It is easy to see mat revolutions in this century has faced enormous pressure from imperialist countries trying to undermine the revolutioruThis should not be understood that the revolution will occur all around the world simultaneously. World revolution would start from the countries which are the weakest link of the imperialist chain.
In such times whilst the world has been shared out among the imperialist countries, watching for the first attempts at establishing socialism from the north either from the US or Europe is a theory that makes the revolution a mere dream. American revolution for instance can only be triggered by the revolutionary upheavals in the exploited southern countries. Eventually the world revolution will come about from the total accumulation of the national revolutions.
Today, demolishing the socialist governing body can not be expected as a criteria of socialism. This naive expectation comes from the 19th century Marxist theory and ignoring imperialism which is the new shape of capitalism in the 20th century.
A diminished governing body would weaken the fight against imperialism as could lead a civil war in many cases. In modern revolutionary conditions proletariat need a stronger governing mechanism. Socialism can be built in an underdeveloped country but mis would invariably mean a longer and sharper class war. The struggle for socialism in one country is the only internationalist theory and it is the only way of building socialism in the world.
Marx stated the importance of the leadership of the proletariat in a socialist revolution. This importance has increased in the 20th 268 century in which socialist revolutions have taken place in some exploited countries having large peasant population. A revolutionary movement which fights against imperialism but ignores the class conflict can not ultimately succeed in defeating imperialism. For instance the Turkish independence war of the I92ffs lead by Kemalism, a native bourgeois anti-imperialist movement, which entirely fought against imperialism without a class consciousness eventually ended up compromising with it.
All the successful revolutions in the 20th century show that the only way the working class to take over is to ha ve a vanguard party. The important point in establishing the vanguard party is to set up proper relations with the masses. There is no example of a successful revolution which was led by the vanguard fighters without the support of the masses. Socialist revolution should be the product of the masses and the following step to establish the socialist regime should be shaped by the demands of the masses.
The historical period in which Stalin took over was an experimental period for trying to construct socialism. As Stalin was the first leader trying to achieve this he made many mistakes. Undoubtably Stalin's determination to abolish the private sector and reorganize the status of the classes would give him a place in the history of socialism. Having said this, it should be understood that Stalinism will be repeated again. The socialist movement which have come after Stalin learnt their lessons and went further from Stalinism. Nevertheless Stalin belongs to the history of socialism.
In the 19th century socialist theories raised by the big masters was limited. They were limited simply because of the lack of practice in the socialist movement. Marx and Engels took lessons from the short experiences of the Paris Commune. In the 20th century another master Mao Zedong also took lessons from what had happened in this century. By observing the USSR and the revisionism taken over after I96ffs in the USSR, Mao raised his counter revolution theory as regards to the degenerations of the previous revolutionary movements. According to Mao, socialism is a long process starting with the proletarian revolution and lasting untill the establishment the classless society. During the period the 269 struggle between the working class and the bourgeoisie, socialism and capitalism, Marxism and revisionism would be carried out by the proletarian party. Within the period nationalising the means of production would not stop the counter revolution.
After this stage biggest danger would not only come out of the defeated bourgeoisie but also from the capitalist minded members of the socialist government. The initiative of the working class should be kept alert all the time.
This theory was actually a new description for a working class democracy. The party members should be there not only for governing the country but physically dealing with the needs of the people as well. The only guarantee of the real socialism is the working class to take over again and again.
If the party can continue to harness the initiative of the masses then socialism can survive.
Socialism should give the governing initiative to the ordinary people so that there would be no need for such a class whose duty is to govern. This can be a classless society.
With the fall of the USSR it can easily be seen how dangerous it is to have capitalist minded members in the governing body. The fall of the USSR indicates Mao's theory is undoutably a very important supplement to the 20th century Marxism. No serious modern Marxist theory can be formulated without taking Mao's insight into account.
Is trying to establish socialism in an underdeveloped country a hopeless attempt to pass to a higher stage of history? This is the dilemma faced by many socialist states since the beginning of this century. Those who criticized includes some ``Marxists'' who were stuck with the 19th century socialist theory. All the efforts made to defeat capitalism this century have come out of underdeveloped countries. Any modem socialist theory must square up with this fact. A theory which does not fit with reali ty that has changed, must be modified.
Socialism is a system that aims to destroy capitalism and set up a civilised community. Recently a theory has been put forward which was based on competing with the capitalism in terms of economic competitiveness, this theory is bankrupt, the USSR 270 practice is a tragic example of this competing and catching up mentality. Since Kruschev's time the USSR, adjusted to competition with capitalism. Actually this idea dates back from Stalin's time, but became an official policy in Kruschev's time.
This competition lead to more and more revisionism sinking the system towards capitalism. By Brezhnev's time the USSR even led in certain sectors of the world economy. But the more they competed the more capitalistic they became.
Today it is plain for everyone to see even to those who clapped this competitive race that the USSR has lost any vestiges of socialism and has lost the competitive race with capitalism. The only thing it leaves behind is a unique lesson. A banning or competing mentality cannot comprehend the dialectic of the history. They insist on sticking on the European positivist philosophy. In actual fact the history of Europe does not verify them. The crude dialectic belief is that every single society must follow the same stage of development from primitive communism through to slave society; feudalism; capitalism and then finally through socialism. This theory does not fit neatly even in Europe. The history of the 20th century shows that socialist revolutionary flash points are not confined to countries that have reached a certain capitalist maturity as the 19th century theoretical model would suggest. Ruling out socialist revolutions in exploited countries and or seeing socialist improvement in terms of catching up with capitalism are ideas which came out of 19th century Euro-centrism which have been blown apart by events of the 20th century.
It is plain for any socialist to see that capitalism is in a bankrupt state unless it views from a northern country.
Lenin stated that imperialism is the form of moribund capitalism. Today there is a media propaganda which says that capitalism still has a potential to move the world community forward. This extensive propaganda which is put forward by the bourgeoisi ideologues like Gorbachev etc find supporters among the `` socialist'' intellectuals. They think that capitalism has some positive motives in it and socialism should not be considered as a separate system but a way should be found out integrating these two systems. However this is an easy question to answer for a 271 sociologist who is not looking from the north whether capitalism is good for an underdeveloped country or not This monster capitalism, a system based on profit not human need, a system which stifles individuals intellectually and spiritually alienating people from each other and themselves. A system which breathes hate in its wake.
The creativity of individuals in the form of technology under capitalism turns into something which is used against the humanity not something for the benefit of mankind,
Capitalism is a barrier to human development and must be defeated. Capitalism has got no progressive potential left. Lenin's phrase "imperialism is a moribund stage of capitalism" has never been more true and socialism has never been more needed.
Scientific socialism was born in the 19th century Europe. Socialism has become a world issue in the 20th century with the exploited countries stepping on the world's political arena.
Socialism is the only hope for exploited countries. Other theories and alternative systems which have been put forward are destined to stay in philosophy books.
Scientific socialism is a revolutionary theory. It is the ideology of the proletariat which is the youngest class in the history of the world. An ideology which improves with the class struggle, matures with revolutions. The human race has been fighting against exploitation and oppression with the hope of socialism for over one hundred years. Scientific Socialism is continuously improving itself by leaving its conservative elements behind.
Second International, Trotskyism, Euro Communism, ideas of Kruschev-Brezhnev-Gorbachev, these are all Eurocentric ideas which appeared in different periods. These are the theories that are based on the superiority of the north which sees no revolutionary potential in ``underdeveloped'' countries and does not regard socialism as suitable for those countries. This is what we mean by revisionism. The mutual points which revisionists and bourgeois theorists agree on is the Eurocentric contemptuous attitude towards exploited countries and ordinary working class people. As Mao said, revisionism is not a type of socialism, but a capitalist and bourgeois ideology.
As a result, these revisionist ideas either collaborated with 272 imperialism (i.e. Second Internationale, Euro-Communism) or became imperialist like ideologies (i.e. Kruschev, Brezhnev, Gorbachev) or broke off all its connections with the real life and lost transformatory features at the end (Trotskyism).
In the 20th century scientific socialism has made great advances with the theories of Lenin and Mao Zedong.
The theories of Mao have brought scientific socialist theory to its present high point and will prove a lot for the future for socialism.
Obviously working class struggle of the world would go beyond the 20th century socialism. The only way to carry on this aim is to take part in an organised class struggle and carry out this until the revolution. The only way of developing scientific socialist theory is by taking part in the day to day class struggle through working class organisations.
[273] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Tudeh Party of IranDear Comrades ~
Allow us first of all to thank our Indian comrades for organising such an important gathering on the occassion of the 175th anniversary of the birth of Karl Marx, the great teacher of the workers and toilers of the world.
We celeberate the birth of an individual who firstly recognised the world and then decided to change it. Karl Marx's views and the immence theoretical work carried out by him, changed our world and it will not be an exaggeration to claim that his doctrine have greatly influenced the present generation and will continue to influence generations to come.
In the turbulent middle of the last century the young Karl Marx was just finishing his doctorate in philosophy (1841). He was greatly influenced by the Bourgeoise revolutions which swept and crushed the feudal system. He was drawn to the, emerging social forces and classes, in particular the industrial workers, the `` Proletariat''.
In such an atmosphere Karl Marx and his life long companion, Fredrick Engels, whom he met during these years, embarked upon developing a collection of ideas and theses, that has been discused, by philosophers, economists, and social scientists the world over, ever since.
<
Capitalism, that was extending its reign throughout Europe and the world,soon realised the dangers of such a doctrine campaigned against it relentlessly.
Marx and Engels, influenced by the social upheavals attA relaying on the scientific achievements in the field of phfloSdplty 274 and economy by other materialist philosophers of their era, particularly Hegel, Ludwig Feuerbach and British economists Adam Smith and David Ricardo, were able to overcome the inconsistencies and the weaknesses in these theories and opened a new chapter in the history of human thinking and action.
In short the overall conditions, objective and historic motivations that existed in Europe in the middle of the last century, demanded a new outlook to life and human history. Marx, by breaking with the "German Philosophy" particularly with Hegel's approach which was mainly concerned: "not real interests or even political interests but with unique and abstract views...'' (1) and developed a new philosophy of history, in which real human beings were the subject matter and was able to make such important conclusions as: "We only recognise one science, the science of history. History could be analaysed from two different aspects; history of nature and human history. But these two aspects have an unbreakable link together and as long as the human race exists the history of the nature and the human history will be dependent on each other..."(2)
Strong disagreements with Marx's view were expressed from the early days from various quarters, from Hegel's students to supporters of Capitalism. Each from its own standpoint declared Marx's views as ``incorrect'', ``simplistic'' and deemed it to be a failure. In recent years, specially following the process of `` Perestroika'' and the eventual downfall of the socialist system in the former Soviet Union and other countries in Eastern Europe, once again the bandwagon against Marx's teachings, have been on the move. The bourgeois mass media, declared that the end of the Soviet Union signalled the death of ``Marxism'' and the historic defeat of "Communism." Some others declared that these developments indicated the defeat of ``Marxism-Leninism'' and the death of "Russian Marxism'', i.e. Leninism. Such views, clearly lack scientific, objective and even logical reasoning and as such are limited to the vast propaganda machinary of the monopoly capital and could not be taken seriously as scientific views.
In our judgment, the views that Karl Marx and Engels expressed and then later on developed by Lenin, are so encompassing and important, that no one could declare them void or un-scientif ic on the basis of a handful of political events or developments.
275People who choose such an approach do not explain, which major principle discovered or expressed by Marx is proven wrong by events.
The main principles of the overall theoretical work carried out by Marx and Engels and later on developed by Lenin, into what we call ``Marxism-leninism'', are still correct and in line with the world'ssdentificprogress/andnoneof the presentsdentific achievement contradicts these theories.
Our approach towards Marx's doctrine, at the same time is/not a dogmatic and idealistic or a ``religious'' type of approach but based on our evaluation of current objective and subjective of the world. We have always tried to adhere to the fact that Marxism without dynamism, evolution and without development will not be able to survive as a true scientific approach and fulfill its historic task of of changing the presents world. Engels in his important work---" Anti-Duhring" clearly stated : "We know fully how comic it will be if we were to claim absolute values for our current views... (3).
Lenin also frequently emphasised the importance of a scientific approach to Marx's teachings. He believed : "our world outlook is not a dogma but a guide to our work...''. In his view : "Marx and Engels clearly rejected the methodology which repeats formulas that best defined very `general' aims (aims that are changed under different political and economic conditions). . ."(4).
A scientific and dynamic approach is of paramount importance to the followers of Marx's teachings if we are to avoid relegating these teachings to some sort of a "holy book" whose words are not to be changed through out the centuries. As Lenin clearly indicated : "If it is true that everything evolves, then should we not apply this law to the most general meanings of human thinking? If we answer no, then we should also believe that human thinking itself is not related to life. . . "(5).
In contradiction to the idealist approach and those who believe in ``absolute'' values, we have always distanced ourselves from it and have tried hard to avoid such an approach. Ai wlfr previously, at the same time we could not accept the __FIX__ here. those who without any in-depth knowledge of the Marxist * trine, dedde to put a cross on it and declare it as null and vdH'.Ti avoid being accused of making hollow claims, it is rrfcessary6/fe 276 briefly discuss some of the most important aspects of Marx's teachings and gauge its validity against todays' scientific findings.
Lenin in one of his most important writtings---"The Three Sources and Three Component parts of Marxism" clearly defined the most important of Marx's doctorine. He wrote: "The Marxist doctrine is omnipoint because it is true. It is comprehensive and harmonious and provides people with an integral world outlook irreconcilable with any from of superstition, reaction, or defence of bourgeois oppression. It is the legitimate successor to the best that man produced in the nineteenth century, as represented by German philosophy, English political economy and French socialism...'^).
In other words Lenin correctly divided Marx's work in three important areas of philosophy, political economy and scientific socialism.
The philosophical part of Marx's work which includes dialectical materialism and historic materialism, is an indication of an immense development on previous type of materialism which was chained by mechanical and metaphysical approaches. Marx expanded on the views of materialists before him, particularly the views of Hegel and Feurbach and then used dialectics as the methodology that explains the development of humanity, the perpetual development of matter and as the science of the cognition of the material world, a science that explains the most general laws ruling the movement of matter. Thus Marx succeeded in developing a new philosophical system. Marxist philosophy, as the culmination of the philosophical thinking preceding Marx, succeeded in answering some of the most fundamental questions regarding the living world, its coming into being and its laws and development. All subsequent discoveries in the natural sciences, physics and chemistry helped prove the correctness of his views or have completed them.
By superimposing dialectical materialism on the human society, Marx discovered and explained the most general laws governing the human society. Recognition and definition of social formations from the coming to existence of the human society, the process of the social formation and development of social life and the laws governing these processes and formations, are the only scientific view explaining the development of various societies and 277 the laws governing these changes. Historical materialism, based on the long experience of human history which goes back to millions of years, studies the formation of social systems, starting from the communes to slavery, feudalism and capitalism. It concludes that this long and uneven road will lead to more advanced formations aiming towards the elimination of injustice, towards socialism and finally communism. None of Marx's critics have so far been able to explain the process of the development of the human society as conclusively as he did. They have also been unable to claim that the development of human society is halted at the stage of capitalism and further development will occur.
It was following the discovery that economy is an infra-- structure upon which the political superstructure is based that Marx directed his attentions to political economy and the Capital was created.
The work of Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels in this field was the continuation of the work that classical economists such as Adam smith and David .Ricardo had started in England. Ricardo and Smith were the first economists to study and develop political economy as a science with objective laws, independent of the human will but comprehensible to the human mind. Lenin writes on these British economists : "Classical political economy before Marx arrived in England, the most developed of the capitalist countries. Adam Smith and David Ricardo by their investigations of the economic system, laid the foundations of the Labour Theory of Value. Marx continued their work; he provided a proof of the theory and developed it consistently. He showed that the value of every commodity is determined by the quantity of socially necessary labour time spent on its production."(7)
This view continues to retain its scientific value and with the progress of political economy, it has developed further in the 20th century. Marxist political economy and the work carried out by Lenin later in explaining the higher stages of capitalism, in the thesis "Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism,'' continue to given an accurate picture of the development of capitalism and its various stages, the developments which naturally neither Marx and Engels, nor Lenin could comment on were the algorithmic advances in technology, the revolution in Information technology throughout the world, the effects of this development in the 278 capitalist system, the intensification or the ``reduction'' of exploitation and finally some changes in the class structure in capitalist societies and the changes in the classical definition of the `` proletariat'' etc. in advanced capitalist systems. It is important to see and understand these changes and take a stance with regard to their effect on the struggle of the working class; this is the task of the communist and international working class movement and unfortunately it must be said that we have in many instances hesitated and fallen short of searching for answers to these pressing political and philosophical questions.
Another part of the viewsof Marx and Engels called for an end to the exploitation of the capitalist system that is to replace capitalism. Socialist thought before Marx and engels was in the `` primitive'' or "Utopian socialism''. It criticised the capitalist society, wished its collapse and hoped for a better system, yet it tried to persuade capitalists that exploitation is immoral. Marx and Engels developed this kind of socialism by learning from the painful defeats of the time. Marx criticlly analyed the events of 1848--1851 in the "18th of Brumer of Louis Bonaparte''; he came to important conclusions regarding social developments, the relationship between the infrastructure and superstructure and the relationship of various social classes and strata with eadh other and in relation to the downfall of the capitalist system. He created a complete picture of the way toward a better social system. Important conclusions such as "the peasants see the proletariat as their natural ally and leader who h^ve the historic task of overthrowing the bourgebp system..."(8) and the conlusion regarding the relationship between subjective conditions and their effect on the society: "Old beliefs and traditions of dead generations are havey burden on our generation.. ."(9) have been implemented to date as a major principle.
The work of Karl Marx and Engels, followed by the works of Lenin on the definition of the state and later in the portrayal of the role of the state in the socialist system, is another crucial contribution of these thinkers, clearly these views have been formulated in very general frameworks, and after more than seventy years since the start of the process of making of the socialist society, these ideas must be developed or even amended. Neither Marx nor Engels was able to provide an accurate picture of the creation and development 279 of the socialist society especially in the form they took in reality. Their original views regarding the adventof socialist revolutions in advanced capitalist countries was not relevant to the experience of the building of socialism started form a backward European country in one of the most critical times in the history of Europe, immediately after World War I and in the throes of the coming into being of a second world war. This experience contains many lessons and the international communist and working class movement must carefully study it free from dogmatism and prejudice, and learn lessons from it in order to take correct steps when a new opportunity arises.
During the short time in which Lenin was in a position to be practically involved in the building of the socialist system, drawing from the lessons of the early years he formulated very important views regarding the economic, social and political composition of the socialist system. Unfortunately, these views were later forgotten, leading to negative results for the this initial attempt at building a better social system. In 1921, in his analysis of four years of Bolshevik government, Lenin wrote: this first victory is not yet the final victory and this victory of our October revolution has been achieved with great hardships, difficulties and a numerous number of mistakes and errors that we have committed.. .We are afraid to admit to our mistakes, we will analyse them carefully to learn the ways of overcoming them. We were calculating and have accurately and properly calculated that we would, with the directives of a proletariat government we could implement a communist mode of production and distribution of the state products in a semipeasantry society. Life showed the incorrectness of our approach... (10).
In understanding and applying Marxism, there are diverse views in the workers and communist movement. But this entire movement and sections of the scientific community (those who approach the issues without political bias) are united in believing that the philosophical, economic and social findings of Marx are of paramount importance inour era. It must be also stated that from a number of aspects these findings are not dearly understood. Some key issues such as the role of 'objective aria subjective" conditions in determining the process of social development and the understanding of this process have often been defined and often analaysed for short term political aims and thitehave thus lost 280 some of their importances as scientific findings. Engels detecting the dangers of such approaches wrote in his imporatant letter to Joseph Bluch in 1890: "Based on historic materialism, the motive force which in the end determines the course of history is production and the reproduction of real life. More than this neither Marx and nor me have stated anything. If somebody misrepresent this fact that the only motive force is economy, this person has changed our view to a menaningless statement It is dear that economy forms the infrastructure, but various aspects of...various forms of political struggle and its effects, the new state machinery which replace an old one after a successful class struggle etc, civil, philosophical and religious forms and their appliance in the forms of dogmas, also leave their marks and in many cases a determine and shape these events...''. Engels correctly emphasised "The fact many people attach more importance to economic factors then its Marx and me are partly to blame. In the need to forcefully state the principles that they were mostly against and in doing so we did not always find the time to emphsise other important factors.. .It is unfortunate but it often happens that people as soonas they learn the general prionciples of a doctrine, and sometimes not even correctly, they believed that they have understood and are able apply it in its entirety...(11).
In short, Marx's teachings and the immense theoretical work carried out by him, Engels and Lenin have changed our world greatly and have formed the basis for the advancement of human society, towards a more humane socio-economic formation, a formation where exploitationof man by man will disappear. These important teachings are part of the development and evolution of human thinking in its long search for ``Utopia'', but present a more accurate path towards this goal and as such become a powerful weapon in the hand of those forces in the first line of the struggle against the unjust and inhumane capitalist society, towards achieving socialism. From this stand point we value the works and teaching of Karl Marx and reiterate its importance today.
Dear Comrades!
Marx's doctrine, rejected the view that humanity is condemned to an unjust society and opened the path to the future. As Engels said:" Marxism is not a set of ready-made dogmas, but the path and the methodology to research and development...''.
281Our era demands immense theoritical efforts to develop, adopt and even correct the work done put to now. The present world disorder and the need to free humanity from the chains of wars, poverty and injustice which are the fruits of a capitalist society demand such reponsiblities more than ever before. The world working class and communist movement, as the force at the helm of such a struggle, carries a historic responsobility, to learn from its 7 decades of experience in humanity's first attempt to build a socialist state, and open the path to future. Left us conclude the discussion with these word from Karl Marx: "Up to now philosophers had the answers in their table drawers...But we will not appear in front of the world, as the founders of a new principle and state that here is the truth! so abide by it! but we apply and develop the new principles for the sake of the world.. ."(12).
References
1. German Philosophy (Collected Work---3rd book P. 39)
2. Ibid (Collected Work---3rd book P. 18)
3. Engels-Anti Duhring (P. 143)
4. Lenin (Collected work---24 P. 33)
5. Lenin (Collected work---book 38 P. 241)
6. Lenin (Selected Writings---P. 21)
7. Lenin (Selected writings---P. 22)
8. The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte P. 23
9. The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte P. 23
10. Prada 18th October 1921
11. Engels letter to Joseph Bluch 21--22 September 1890
12. Marx Collected Works 1st book P. 381
[282] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Syrian Communist PartyWhat we introduce here are theses, because we think it is the T T best way to clarify our ideas about some issues related to the topic of this international seminar. These ideas are introduced for the purpose of having a better comprehension of the problems of our world today and its contradictions.
We shall do that briefly, trying to answer two main questions that have become critical because of the latest international changes. Those are: What is the future of socialism? Does capitalism fulfill the needs of the future development of humanity?
First of all we have to stress that Marxism-Leninism, like any other science, is a science that has no end, rather---as emphasised by its founders---it becomes rich and develops with die enrichment of life by new contents. This emphasis, however, should not mean all that achieved by Marxism earlier are negative i.e. it should not conclude to cutoff from the past.
It should be indicated also that, philosophically speaking, limits are, to some extent, formal between theory and practice. Theory is that ``common'' in the former practice proved necessary by life. Practice on the other hand is a specially tested form of the theory. So, where does the problem lie?
Basically, Marxism-Leninism as a theory was forged by its earlier founders, who could successfully solve great questions theoretically and practically; first, they forged the theory of capitalism as a phenomenon, reaching the inevitability of its collapse; secondly, they forged the theory of the socialist revolution.
283In doing so, they depended on analyzing a raw material of hundreds of old experieness of capitalist development itself, including many past revolutions that were forms of spontaneous protest against this exploitative system.
All of these allowed them to come up with great theoretical generalizations after examining reality itself and its development. But the task of building socialism on the basis of which the advance of the socialist movement which stumbled had to be overcome was a task that had to be undertaken by the Marxists who came after Marx, Engels, Lenin and who should have handled the question of forging theory of building socialism. This task has not been accomplished for many reasons, probably among the most important of them are:
The lack or scarcity of the practical raw material on which the theory of building socialism has to be forged. It seems that if the theory of capitalism required hundreds of years of the development of its own subject, so many years of development of socialism as an experience are necessary also for forging, the laws of building socialism as a complete theory. This question will be answered by life itself; this is the actual state of being; each new experience has to go through the test as to whether they are right or wrong in order to form its theoretical reservoirs at the end for its future development.
Should we blame those who undertook the task of penetrating the skies (the words Marx used when describing the heroes of ParisCommune)? The attitude from the past experience does not only have a practical meaning, their lessons, rather also has a moral one. It is an attitude towards those who paved the way for others, towards those who were first on this road.
When Lenin discussed with some other people about the attitude the European socialists, namely Sismondi, Lenin answered something like: The attitude towards historical personalities should not be forged on the basis of what they did not introduce comparing with the personal requirements, rather it is forged on the basis of what they really presented in comparison with their ancestors.
The past experience of building socialism in history has offered security a lot, but this is out of question here, but most importantly, this experience has offered that raw material on which basis the 284 new socialist regimes will stand. These regimes definitely will be superior than the former ones.
Then where does the problem lie? Does it lie in the theory or in the practice.
Experience proved that the defect is not in the theory rather in the people who could not use it well upon application, or could not develop it to meet necessities of life i.e. they could not ascend to its level. This happened out of objective uncontrolled factors, or out of subjective factors in the people themselves.
Where does the real root of the retreat of international socialism, which we witnessed today, lie?
There is a sharp theoretical conflict over this topic. This is quite understandable, as the accurate specification of the point at which the deviation started would impose the way and the necessary means needed to solve the problem.
Despite the various sorts of opinions about this topic, the presented ones could be classified in two main groups: The first group which includes those opinions that could be called today ``traditional'', which trace the problem back to October Revolution itself or following the 1920s, reaching 1930s of this century. These opinions are propagated by different information media in the East or in the West and are adopted by the majority of researchers and research centres.
While the second group of opinion, that shoulders its way ahead despite the coverage of international media and despite the fierce campaign launched against it, says that the root of the problem began with the actual, slow, and gradual retreat from socialism, especially in the Soviet Union since mid 1950s.
It becomes clear today that the campaign during Perestroika have concentrated their fire at the 1930s for mainly shifting attention from what was prepared for, and from what was really going on during Perestroika itself, and also for hiding the real starting point of the retreat.
The CPSU XX conference widely opened the doors for the growth and prevalence of right-wing opportunism in the general 285 tactical line of International Communist Movement.
Now-a-days, it has become clear that the results of that conference and its following steps rejected class-struggle in the Soviet Union. Naturally, all of this is taking place only on paper, and then this question was generalised over the whole world with different forms and under various names, the issue that hindered the potential development of the World Revolutionary process. Later, this same hindrance laid its burden and difficulties over the Soviet Union and its progress.
Right-wing opportunism after the XX conference hasadvanced on an International level through various axies, which resulted in delaying the development of the World Revolutionary process. The important theses could be summed up as follows:
1. Splitting the lines of World Communist Movement, and escalating the Sino-Soviet difference, often artificially.
2. Theoretically, over-estimating the role played by some Third World fores on the account of minimizing the role of the Marxist and progressive ones. That took many forms: development of Communists Parties. Non-capitalist path of development...
3. Portraying peaceful co-existence as an absolute and a fixed state, and not understanding it as a specific state of balance in the conflict between opposites that would end by the triumph of socialism; i.e. this state was looked at divorsing it from its frame of class outlook.
4. Economically regarding the socialist construction, Marx's thesis on non-commodity production was ignored: the door was widely opened for the commodity monitory relations, theoretically and practically.
5. All that has happened reinforces Stalin's thesis about the intensification of class-struggle during the process of building socialism. After the XX conference, the starting point of the rightwing opportunism was to attack this thesis and reject it; but what is imposed by life and facts can not be eliminated by any one. This theoretical prediction needs analysis of its lapses once again on the grounds of the world realities we live in today.
6. Away from researching the causes behind the collapse that has happened, there is a new reality that has to be studied, and its contradictions have to be understood. This reality hasicreated a 286 new international situation.
What characterizes this new international situation?
A. With the collapse of socialism, the world has not become more safe; quite the opposite is true.
B. A number of contradictions emerged and were intensified; but this does not change the fact that the main contradiction in our age is still that between capitalism and socialism.
i) The first contradiction that has intensified is that among the imperialist centres themselves.
ii) The second one which is being intensified is within the imperialist centres themselves, due to the continuing contradiction between labour and capital,
iii) The third contradiction which is being intensified is that between the imperialist centres and the Third World, or what is called the contradiction between North and South; i.e. between the capitalist North and the poor South.
The Earth Summit was an evidence that the contradiction between imperialism with the American one at the top of it, and the Third World is insolvable and can't be solved but through the disappearance of capitalism itself. This summit proved that Earth as a whole objectively wants socialism and seeks for it in one form of another.
New World Order, recently wanted by US .A. after the collapse in the Socialist Camp, is t'ssentially old, and as a new compound form of both old and new colonialism, and is an important stage in the development of the modern imperialist system.
Socialism as we know is not an independent socio-economical formation. It is mainly a transitional period between two essential formations that are characterised by the nature of their material type of production. So, within this period, a struggle continues between theold thatdid not completely disappear and the new one. This is why we can deduce that it is the main contradiction within Socialism.
The history of humanity knows two main forms of material type of production, the natural and the commodity types of production. Each of them is related to a certain level of the 287 development of the productive forces. Marx's dialectic deductions on this concern were that it it is completely different from the first two ones.
As the complete negation of the capitalism is the negation of its commodity type of production, it becomes clear that the main contradiction within Socialism in the transitional period is between these two types.
It becomes clear also that the ability of Socialism to resolve such a contradiction in a correct way can only decide the future of such a struggle; it is correct that it shall continue forward, if not, it shall fail and we shall return to the beginning.
This contradiction is not resolved by the obligatory negation of either type on the account of the other, rather by knowing the size that should be occupied by each one of them in the given moment, and by knowing how this balance between these two sizes should be changed from time to time.
Such balance is imposed by objective necessities: The degree of the development of the productive forces.
4. Here we face the question of the relation of the basic laws of commodity production with what is called Market Economy. In other terms, how do these laws function in the Market Economy?
Uptill now, humanity knew 4 types of market economy, in which pricing depends on the "law of Value" and the "law of Supply and Demand.''
The first type is within the free-competition period in Capitalism, where these laws were functioning spontaneously and the process of organising proportion in economy is done through the commodity and financial flows, controlled by the laws of propensity of capital towards the Maximum profit.
The second one is that of monopoly capitalism where, for the first time in human history, there is a conscious control of Supply and Demand in order to keep an official imbalance to ensure a price higher than the value, i.e. "monopoly profit" or "ultraprpfit.''
The third type is something which took place during certain period in the Socialist regimes where Supply and Demand are controlled, and thus prices are controlled in accordance'with the Law of Value for the benefit of the whole society.
The fourth type is something like the second one and a deviant 288 of the third where the administration, that moved out of social control, makes an artificial imbalance between Supply and Demand in order to create bottlenecks that leads in turn for a new form of ultraprofit provided by Shadow Economy.
Through this form, profit is gained not by the owners of the means of production, rather by those who administer them in the name of society. This form also carries inside the danger of going backward again to the first or second form after the first process of accumulation made by those influentials are accrued and where the need of reinvesting what has been accumulated rises.
5. According to the above mentioned, it becomes clear why Socialism passes periods of escalated class-struggle. This conflict increases sometimes despite the absence of a clear and overt social bearers of Capitalism. Essentially, the essence of this escalation lies in the necessity of changing the proportion between commodity and non-commodity type of production upon each turning period.
6. Hence, class struggle is a historical category related to the period of transition from capitalism to Communism; and the political victory of Socialism during certain periods does not mean the end of class struggle, nor it means the absolute economical and local victory, unless Socialism moves forward towards the non-- commodity type of production.
7. The roots of the problem of Socialism as a transitional period between two types of material production lie in solving the following three contradictions:
A. The proportion between commodity and the non-- commodity type of production in accordance with the development of the productive forces.
B. The balance between centralism and de-centralism in controlling the economy through the different periods of development*.
C. The permanent change of the level of democracy as an objective factor based on the degree of the development of the productive forces and the degree of culture. This same change is that which will prevent the executives from growing out of society's control.
8. The main contradiction within Capitalism wasand still exists between labour and capital; but it takes different forms according 289 to the periods of Capitalist development.
9. Capitalism under the strong pressure of the Socialist example, was obliged in granting the working class important concessions in order to soften the sharpness of the social tension and to save its countries from deadly shocks. Offering these concessions, however, did not minimize the absolute share of newly produced labour quantities of Capitalism, as it leans upon new reservoirs:
A. The Third World ~
B. Nature ~
10. The non-equivalent different forms of exchange between Capitalism and Third World, provided Capitalism with huge resources for maintaining a specific level of development. This exchange, however, if continued will create the potentiality of stopping social reproduction process in the Third World and the increase of poverty, illness, hunger, etc. are clear indicators.
11. The traditional capitalistic exploitation essentially means superanuting present labour oriented modem Capitalistic exploitation, with its tendency towards exhausting natural resources and polluting them, essentially means adding a new form of appropriation i.e. stealing future quantities of labour.
12. The exploitation of others future quantities of labour is related to an objective factor out of Capitalism's control that is the technical pattern which it depends on.
The pattern, upon which rising Capitalism prevailed depends on exhausting unrenewable natural resources on one hand, and on the other hand as a definite result, it depends on nature pollution.
Capitalism, with its technological pattern, has entered an antagonistic contradiction with nature, which will lead either to the disappearance of nature. Arising from here, is that the struggle against Capitalism is to become an overall human task, as capitalism as a technological socio-economic system is exhausting its final reservoirs.
,
13. The interest of humanity, which necessitates reconsidering the prevailing technological pattern means preventing capitalism from appropriating others future quantities of labour. Thus rrtodern Capitalism loses one of the main resources for ga'ining surplus value; consequently, Capitalism moves on the way of its subjective, internal negation.
29014. The Capitalist sodo-economic pattern, based on certain technological pattern, has led to a sharp contradiction with the prevailing biological pattern on our planet This has led to disharmony, disproportion, and noncorrespondence among the three constituent dimensions of any human civilization---sodo-economic , technological and biological dimensions.
The aspects of this contradiction appear by prevalence of the different forms of man's alienation, that takes shape through man's alienation from nature, society, technology and finally from man himself.
The indicators of this alienation appear in the great increase of psychological and social illness in the modem civilization and in the appearance of new forms of organic diseases. These indicators will not reduce or disappear, unless the conflict among these three dimensions disappear.
The present techno-sdentific revolution puts forth the question of its relation with capitalism. This revolution foretells the move into new period of a huge social division of labour. The period is characterised by increasing quantity of mental labour in the new quantities of labour. If the industrial revolution is characterised by decreasing muscular labour, transferring it to the mechanical machine. The modern scientific revolution is characterised by decreasing a lot of mental labour and turning it to new machines.
The increasing amount of the creative mental labour in the new quantities of labour imposes a new reality.
If the measurement of the value of labour force, formerly characterised by the muscular labour in the first place, was taking on the basis of estimating the value of the necessary materials needed to reproduce this labour force at present with the growth of the amount of mental labour, it is incorrect to estimate it through the quantity of the materials needed to reproduce mental labour.
This is because this kind of labor has other feature and demands differently from the first muscular one. For this, Capitalism has entered a new contradiction with the new kind of labour. If Capitalism is going to estimate its real value, which is providing all the spiritual and material needs required for its reproduction, then its is forced to give up gradually its possession in other quantities of labour, if it did not do that, Capitalism will turn to be a barrier fadng the future development of the productive forces.
291This form of contradiction is the modem one and is likely to develop between private ownership of the means of production and the social character of labour.
The reason behind the collapse of the known Socialist patterns is due to the weakness in providing the theoretical basis of the new experience gone through by humanity. They did not indicate the way by which the contradictions of Socialism are going to be solved, which we mentioned in number (7). Practical experience proves that the possibility to go backward appeared when the fourth pattern of market economy was applied, and when the relation of size between commodity and non-commodity type of production was not solved properly. The issue that strengthened the commodity production deviated the character of social reproduction. This gradually carried inside its political, intellectual and moral infrastructure, which, under certain balance of forces led to resolving this contradiction by going backward.
The historical research entails the spedfication as to where does the turning point lie, and when did it happen?
One of our international struggles is the fight against, as if with its roots, and development of a movement where Capitalism appears in its ugliest elitist form. As Marx indicated, the bearer of Zionism is a capitalist factor even before the existence of capitalism as a social system. For this when this system sees light, that bearer occupies the foremost position.
[292] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party, USAThe concept of class struggle is a matter of great controversy JL in the contemporary world. Never before has this elementary concept of Marxism been the object of such a sustained discussion and debate.
Perhaps this is to be expected given the turn of events in the 1980s, namley, the ascendancy of right wing regimes in the advanced capitalist countries and the nearly concurrent collapse of socialist societies in the Soviet Union ad Eastern Europe.
Nevertheless, this 'retreat from class', that is entirely fashionable among some progressive and socialists caught many unawares.
Why it did is at once interesting and worthy of discussion, but beyond the scope of this article. Suffice it to say that at other turning points in world history a similar pattern has been evident with some notable personalities in the socialist and communist movement bidding farewell and taking up the cudgel of anti-Marxism.
At the centre of this current controversy is not whether the forms of class struggle should be modified in light of changing conditions. Nearly everyone agrees that this is always obligatory. After all, we live in a dynamic and changing world. And in recent decades, we have observed some unforeseen and quite dramatic turns in the historical process.
What is at issue is the very relevance of the concept of class struggle to the modern world.
Of course, this would not be the first attempt to turn the class 293 struggle into a vestigial structure or relic of a bygone era. And just as earlier efforts fell on their face, a similar fate awaits this newest assault. For life' as Lenin was fond of saying, "will assert itself''. And in so doing, will provide fresh evidence of the vitality of the class struggle.
Class and class straggle were foundational concepts of Marx's theorectical and practical work. Now as well as then these concepts help to illuminate the inner, multilayered texture of societies and how they change. They have lost none of their analytic power.
No less important, they also are weapons of struggle. Class concepts impart a militant revolutionary character and outlook to the working class movement. What eventuated in the Soviet Union in recent years, to mention the most prominent example, demonstrates tellingly and tragically the dangers associated with a classless approach to politics.
Notwithstanding the claims of bourgeois ideologies, class concepts are not self-enclosed, unbending, and abstract but rather open ended, pliant and concrete. They are not imposed on society, but reflect the real relationships in society, They are not transitional, but are historically specific.
This may be self evident, but it deserves repeating because many of the present day critics turn Marx's class categories into caricatures of themselves, far removed from his coneptual understanding and application of them.
The class struggle is the overarching feature of capitalist society. It expressed the inevitabe conflict, antagonism, and tension between the two main classes of capitalist society. It is the mainspring of social transformations.
The class struggle is not episodic, intermittent, and occasional, but a permanent feature of capitalist society. It is grafted on the social, economic and political landscape, but rather reflects the intrinsic antagonisms embedded in the class structure.
It operates on the surface as well as in the inner recesses of society. It conditions, without subsuming, other struggles. Indeed, other struggles react back on the class struggle.
This indubitably is not the image of capitalist society conjured 294 up and promoted by capitalism's well paid image makers. They like us to believe that the class struggle is an invention or a remnant of a bygone era. Even the language of class conflict, these unabashed apologists would like to evict from everyday disourse. They say that the use of the words 'class struggle' is not only an unaffordable luxury in view of US capitalism's competitive struggle on a global scale, but also the grounds for antagonizing sectors of the population. Cooperation, not conflict must be labor's compelling imperative.
But this conflicts with reality. The class struggle is not the invention of Communists or anyone else. Communists 'merely express the relations springing from an existing class struggle going on before our eyes' (Marx and Engels, Communist Manifesto).
Nor do allusions to the class realities of capitalism alienate potential supporters. The fact is that millions of white collar workers, technicians, professional people, etc., subjected to exploitation and oppression, increasingly respond to class concepts and rely on working class methods of struggle---strike, marches, demonstrations---to maintain their standard of living as well as their professional standards. In real sense, these new sectors of working people are coming to think and act in class ways which is exactly what Marx and Engels foresaw.
Finally, the clas struggle is hardly on the wane. In fact, the class struggle has intensified on both sides of the class over the past decade. And the new administration in the White House does not alter this in any fundamental sense.
Gus Hall, National Chair of the Communist Party, USA, made this cogent observation recently:
``Despite a new occupant in the White House and many new faces in Congress, it would be naive to think that the class struggle is going or even receding. There have been no such signals coming from either the White House or Wall Street. As long a there is exploitation, the class struggle is here to stay.''
``The monopoly corporations, for example, have no intentions of giving up their drive for maximum corporate profits. They are intensifying their attack on the living standards and working conditions of the working class. Their game plan for the 1990s is much like their game plan of the 1980s---more permanent layoffs, 295 cutting wages and benefits, speedup, and contracting out to low wage suppliers. "Lean and Mean" and downsizing continue to be the day to day policy of big business.''
The coming contract negotiations in mass production industries should dispel any notion that the class strggle is moving to the back burner, that the big corporations have 'changed their spots.' The monopoly coporations, like General Motors, are saying that everything the auto workers have won over the past six decades is up for grabs. Other corportations negotiating contracts this year have a similar approach.''
The class struggle isnot peculiar to capitalism. Slave and feudal societies were marked by sharp class conflicts as well. As Marx and Engels observed in the opening lines of the Communist Manifesto, "The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle.''
The class struggle under capitalism, however, does have some features which distinguish it from slave and feudal societies, its class structure, its forms of class struggle and organization, and its conditions of exploitation and oppression, for example, are different.
So how do we explain this?
Obviously, the material fact of exploitation cannot account for it. After all, the dominant classes in each of these societies appropriated the surplus labor of the primary producers which is essence of exploitation and, in turn, the motive force of the class struggle. Thus, we have to look elsewhere for an answer.
According to Marx, the answer is to be found in the way in which surplus labor is extracted from the primary producers in the labor process. What do we find when we compare capitalist society with slave and feudal societies?
First, the direct producers under capitalism, through an historical process of primitive accumulation, are forcibly separated from the means of labour and production and thus transformed into a propertyless class with nothing but their labor power at their disposal.
Stripped of any claim over the means of production, these 296 propertyiess workers sell their labor power, that is, their ability to work, as a commodity on the labor market. There it is bought by the oweners of the means of production. The workers then set the meansof production into motion and produce commodities, which the owners appropriate by virtue of their ownership rights and then sell on the market for private profit.
In its outward form, the transaction between the worker and the capitalist appears to be an exchange of equivalents---wages for labor power. But what appears on the surface as an exchange of equivalent is nothing of the sort.
In the course of the work day, the worker creates value in excess of the wage which he or she receives from the capitalist owner. Thus only a portion of the work day is paid which is more or les equal to what is necessary for the worker's survival, for the worker's survival, for the worker's social reproduction. The other portion is unpaid and the value created isappropriated by the capitalist in the form of surplus value. The wage form (could be hourly, daily, or weekly), therefore, conceals the exploitative nature of capitalism in so far as it gives the appearance that a worker's wages are more less equal to full value of his or her labor. In orther words, labor power isappropriated by capital "without equal exchange, without equivalent, but with the appearance, of equal exchange.'' (Grundrisse, P. 449)
This contrasts with the form of appropriation of surplus labor in slave and feudal societies. In these societies, the exploitation of the primary producers by the dominant is open and unconcealed.
No wage form, no market mechanism masks the unequal nature of the transaction between producers and non-producers in precapitalist societies. Contrasting wage labor in capitalist society with labor in pre-capitalist societies, Marx made the following observation:
``The wage form thus extinguishes every trace of the division of the working-day into necessary labour. All labour appears as paid labour. In the course, the labor of the worker for himself, and his compulsory labor for his lord, differ in space and time in the clearest possible way. In slave-labor, even that part of the working-day in which the slave is only replacing the value of his own means of existence, appears as labour for his master. All the slave's labour appears as unpaid labor, in wage-labour on the contrary, even 297 surplus-labor appears as unpaid, appears as paid. There the property-relation conceals the labour of the slave for hiself; here the money relation conceals the unrequitted (unpaid) labour of the wage-labourer>'' (Capital Vol.~1, P.~540--541)
Secondly, the wage worker is not bound to a particular capitalist He or she is formally free. The political and juridical contraints which bound serf and slave to their lord or master are not operative with respect to the wage worker. But there is a hitch. Having no access to the means of production, the worker either sells his or her labor power or starves. The worker, therefore, is subjected to economic pressure, if not coercion.
The appropriation of surplus labor in precapitalist societies, on the other hand, rested primarily on extra-econmic coercion, on force, on political domination. The chattel slave and self were not free. They were bound to their master and/or land. Aristotle described the slave in Andent Greek society as an 'inanimate tool'.Finally, the woker under capitalism finds himself or herself locked into a dynamic system of production, its aim is to accumulate capital, to maximize profits. The production circuit is---Money (M)-Commodity-Money(M) with M being more than M. Otherwise there would be no purpose to the production circuit. This gives capitalism an inherently self-expanding character which is further reinforced by the competitive pressures which also are internal to the system. By contrast, modes of production anterior to capitalism are essentially conservative. Commodity production is not yet generalized in precapitalist societies, but rather confined to a limited number of goods. Production is largely for use in precapitalist societies. The production circuit, as Marx pointed out in Volume I of Capital, is the inverse of capitalist society: Commodity - Money - Commodity.
Capitalism, therefore, has an internal tendency to "constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society''. In fact, Marx and Engels said that the capitalist class "cannot exist without more or less constant technical changes iri the production apparatus.'' (Communist Manifesto) Individual productive units are forced by the law of competition to organize production in the most efficient way and adopt the most advanced forms of productive technique. Either that or they fall by Ithe wayside which many businesses do.
298Not only does this bring about the rapid growth of the productive forces, acclerate the centralization and concentration of capital, and result in the extraction of surplus labor or upaid labor at a rate and on a scale never together a class whose interests are incompatible, irreconcilable, and antagonistic to those of the exploiting capitalist class.
``Of all classes that stand face to face with the bourgeosie today'', wrote Marx and Engels, "the proletariat alone is the really revolutionary class. The other classes decay and disappear in the face of modern industry: the proletariat is its special and essential product.'' (Communist Manifesto)
Thus, we can say from the foregoing that mode of extraction of surplus labour in capitalist society determines the development of "new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle.. "(Marx and Engles, Communist Manifesto) Years later, and after exhastinve study, Marx enlarged on this idea. Speaking of the mode of extraction of surplus value and its consequent effects on capitalist society (and all class divided societies for that matter) he wrote:
``The specific economic form in which unpaid surplus labor is pumped out oi the direct producers determine the relationship between those who dominate and those who are in subjection, as it grows directly out of production itself and reacts upon it as a determining element in its turn. Upon this, however, is founded the entire orgnization of the economic community which grows up out of the production-relations themselves, and thereby at the same time its specific political form. It is always the direct relationship of the owners of the conditions of production to the immediate producers---a relation always naturally corresponding to a definite stage in the development of the nature and the method of labour and consequently of its social productivity---which reveals the innermost secret, the hidden foundation of the entire social structure and therefore also of the political form of the relations of the sovereignty and dependence, in short, the corresponding specific form of the state. This does not prevent the same economic basis--- the .same as far as its main conditions are concerned---owing to innumerable different empirical circumstances, natural environment, variations and gradation of aspect which can be grasped only by analysis of the empirically given circumstances.'' (Marx, Capital, Volume III, p. 791)
299The class struggle while having its origins in the production is not exclusively confined to the point of production. It is relfected in .one form or another and to one degree or another in every sphere of life. If we look hard enough, the interest of opposing class will be observed habitating in place that are seemingly above class, that appear to be class neutral.
Furthermore, these spheres are not separated one from the other, instead they interpenetrate. The ideological struggle, for example, is encased in every crevice of social life, it does not trail along behind the economic factor atsome remote distance, (E.P. Thompson, Poverty of Theory) and that is particularly true to bourgeois ideology which has at its disposal a ramified, flexible and sophisticated ideological apparatus, plus the weight of tradition behind it.
What is less evident, at least in its fully developed form, is working class ideology.
Thus a critical task of the more advanced workers in the course of struggle is to bring to the fore capitalism's inner essence, to lay bare the Tudden foundation'. For this reason, Lenin placed special emphasis on the class struggle in the political and ideological spheres with the struggle for political power being the highest form of class confrontation. In "What is to be done'', he vigorously argued that the working class cannot confine itself to the economic struggle whileconcedingleadership to liberals and social demorats in the ideological and political struggle.
Some might interpret mis to mean that the economic arena of struggle should be abandoned for higher tasks. Nothing could be further from the truth. Owing to the systemic nature of the economic crisis and the readiness of millions to think and act in new ways, it is imperative to organize mllions around the economic issues. But for that to happen the working class and its allies must see the class roots of the crisis, come forward in a mass and militant way in the political arena, and bring their own advanced demands to bear on the crisis.
To do less is what Lenin called economism. To be more specific, economism narrows the sights and the flood of activity of'Hie exploited and oppressed. It relies an spontaneity. And in today's 300 Emacs-File-stamp: "/home/ysverdlov/leninist.biz/en/1993/CWSVM387/20071216/387.tx" __EMAIL__ webmaster@leninist.biz __OCR__ ABBYY 6 Professional (2007.12.18) __WHERE_PAGE_NUMBERS__ top __FOOTNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ __ENDNOTE_MARKER_STYLE__ [0-9]+ conditions that would not only ensure that the economic conditions of tens of millions would worsen, but also inhibit the new positive trends which have been developing in the labor movement over the past decade. Nevertheless, there is a section of the labor leadership who are moving in this direction, including a number of union leaders who played a positive role in the struggle against Reagon and Bush in the 1980s. Plainly, a new emphasis on the rank and file in the labor movement is needed.
The class struggle is closely connected to the struggle for democracy, while each has its own dynamic, the two are interwoven in a number of ways. First of all, the drive to maximize corporate profits is the source of class oppression as well as the cause of the restriction of democratic rights. Second, the working class cannot achieve its class aims without allies nor can the democratic movement expand and deepen democracy without the working class. What other social force in society has the social and econmjc power to confront the big corporations directly? Finally democracy is inextricably linked to the abolition of exploitation and socialism requires complete democracy.
Lenin said it, this way:
``A social Democrat must never for a moment forget that the proletariat will inevitably have to wage a class struggle for socialism even against the most democratic and republican borgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie. This is beyond doubt Hence, the absolute necessity of separate, independent; strictly class party of SocialDemocracy,.... However, it would be ridiculous and reactionary to deduce from this that we must forget, ignore, or neglect tasks which, although transient and temporary, are vital at the present time.'' (Lenin, Two Tasks of Social Democracy)
Thus, to bypass the democratic struggle in the name of the class struggle is a prescription for defeat. Conversely, to separate the struggles for democracy from the class struggle is a profound mistake for which a high price will inevitably be paid.
In this connection, special importance attaches to the struggle against racism and for full equality of the racially and nationality oppressed. Because of the historical and present day development developments of the United States, the two are tied one to the other. The fight against racism and for full equality is at the heart of the struggle for class unity; by the same token, the struggle for class 301 unity opens up new vistas in the struggle for full equality and against racism. Accordingly, the struggle for the class, wide concerns of the multi-racial, multi-national working class has to be closely bound up with the specific struggle for the special demands of racially and nationally oppressed people as whole. Herein lies the basis of unity of the victims of class and racial oppression.
Nevertheless, there are those who counterpose the class struggle against racism and for equality and vice versa. This kind of counterposing of problems serves the interests of capitalism and imperialism whose guiding principle is "divide and rule''. It also runs against the grain of Marxism-Leninism.
Writing at around the time of the Civil War, Marx made this profound observation:
``In the United States of America, every independent movement of the workers was paralyzed so long as slavery dish'gurd a part of the Republic, Labor cannot emancipate itself in the white skin where it in the black is branded.'' (Marx, Capital, Vol. I)
This formulation is as relevant today as it was then to the United States, but also to South Africa, in fact to all countries and globally to the struggle against the imperialist countries and globally to the struggle against the imperialist countries.
Marx binds alliance together or, expressed differently, dialectically connects the struggle for the complete eradication of racism and chauvinism irrevocably to the class struggle, the self-interests of workers of all races and nationalities.
While the alliance of working class and the racially and nationally oppressed has proved in life to be strategic to the realization of the class and democratic advance, it should be added that such unity is no better than a foundation of social progress. As the 1992 elections revealed, a broad and diverse front is necessary to curb the power and eventually eliminate the transnational corporations which dominate economic and political life.
In a different context, but with a similar objective of amassirig together a broad front, Lenin observed:
``To imagine that social revolutions is congnisable Without revolts by the small nations in the colonies and in Europe; wimbut revolutionary ou tbrust by a section of the petty bourgeoisie with all of the prejudice, without a movement of the politically non-- 302 conscious proletarian and semi-proletarian masses against oppression by the landowners, the church, and the monarchy, against national oppression, etc. to imagine all this is to repudiate social revolution. So one army lines up in one place and another, somewhere else, says We are for socialism:, and soemwhere else says, "We are for imperialism'', and that will be a social revolution... Whoever expects a `pure' social revolution will never live to see i t. Such a person pays lip service to revolution without understanding what revolution is.'' (Lenin, The Discussion on Self-Determination Summed Up, P. 485)
The class struggle passes through various stages. But these stages are not neatly demarcated one from the other. Nor is there any universal pattern governing the transition from one stage to another stage which all must follow for "History as a whole and the history of revolutions in particular is always far richer in content, more varied, more multiform, more lively and ingenious than is imagined by even the best parties, the most class conscious vanguards of the most advanced classes.'' (Lenin, Left Wing Communism---An Infantile Disorder)
Nor is the class struggle necessarily a smooth, uninterrupted process free of setbacks.
While changes in the relative strength of the contending classes is a constant feature of the class struggle, at certain moments qualitative shifts occur in one direction or another, in favor of one cotending class or another.
A key task of a revolutionary working class party is to discern these shifts and their concrete features before they are full blown and to make necessary adjustments in tactics---demands, slogans* forms of organization and so forth. To do this, a revolutionary working class party must be rooted among the working people and sense their mood.
Another the class struggle urges forward at certain moments, there are also moments when the working class finds itself on the defensive and experiences setbacks, sometimes strategic ones. The destruction of the left in the labor moment during the 1950s which was, in the last analysis, the chief aim of Ma Carthism, falls into this category.
303Thus, knowing how to retreat and at what moment is as essential to a revolutionary working class party as understanding how to advance. Both require a sober estiamate of the balance of class foress at any given moment.
Of equal importance is the ability to differentiate between longer term trends and momentary shits in the class struggle. To mistake one for the other can result in major tactical blunders which, in turn, can set in train strategic setbacks for the working class.
Finally, leaping over stages can also bring unnecessary setback for the working class movement. Mao's Great Leap Forward is an instance in which stages of development were ignored and an economically backward country attempted to construct communism in the absence of the economic and political prerequisites. This was voluntarist and ultimately slowed down the process of socialist construction for decades.
The struggle between the main contending class is international in scope. It is not confined to one or a few countries. Its dimensions are and have been since its infancy-worldwide. Nearly 150 years ago, Marx and Engels remarked:
'The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connection everywhere.'' (Communist Manifesto)
And as it does, it brings ever fresh continents into network of capitalist explotation thus enlarging the ranks of the working class. Presently, the new level of globalization of economic life has accelerated prosesses. The dominance of transnational corporations banks over the giobal economy, frowing inter imperialist rivalry as manifested in the formation of economic blocs, and a new international; division of labor which increasingly leaves entire nations and regions outside the mainstream of economic life impresses on the international working class the imperative need to forge new bonds of solidarity and unity. But for that to happen concrete forms and practial actions are mandatory. General dogans and appeals won't do it.
Anything short of that allows imperialism to continue to set 304 worker against worker and nation agaist nation in capital's predatory struggle for higher and higher profits. Here too the formation a broad and varied anti-imperialist front with the working class in the center is on the agenda.
Thus, restraint and collaboration are ony sensible course of action for the nation's working people. Set aside your bold and imaginative plans. This is no time for 'storming heaven'. Join the team, adopt to the logic and requirments of the global economy. And all will be the best in the best of all classless worlds.
As dubious as these propositions are, they still find their echoes in the progressive and left movement. To be sure, the motivation is usually genuine and the arguments are constructed somewhat differently. Without being exhaustive* a few are worth mentioning.
Some, for example, say that is necessary to find a substitute for strikes which, it is said, are less and less winnable, while long strikes are doomed to defeat the recent struggle of the Greyhound bus drivers after a tgree year strike in which they won all of their demands give lie to this assertion. To be sure, it is more diffficult to win strike struggles, but this should not be a reason to scale down labors sights, but cause to fight for hew and ever wider forms of solidarity, for higher level of class consciousnes, for unflinching resolve and determination. Far from disappearing, the class struggle is moving to a higher stage.
Other say class instersts should be subsumed and subordinate to universal human interest. But life shows that universal human interests can finally prevail only by the elimination of the system of cpitalist exploitation for private profit; in other words, by the victory of the system of capitalist exploitation for private profit; in other words, by the victory of the class struggle of all who labor. There is a conflect between universal human interests and the class struggle only if the former is used to obscure and expunge the latter. There is an alliance between the two when the primacy of the class struggle is recognized as crucial to the realization and eventual triumph of universal human interests.
And still others argue that the socialist movement, historiclly associated with the working class, no longer has a specific class identity. Instead it is constituted by a broad array of social movements and intesests in which the working class and the labour movementarebutone component. If it confers a porivileged status 305 on any grouping it is on intellectuals. Unlike the working class which is easy prey to the twin vices of opportuninsm and reformism, intellectuals and other non-working class strata are less apt to be moved by narrow class and crude material interests. Rather rational appeals and discourses are their bread and butter. In a sense, anyone who has soiled hands, wears a blue collar, performs routinized work, or experience economic hardship does not comprise the natural constituency for socialism. But the end results of this line of thinking is the same as the other tworthe working class is reduced to a minor player, the foundations of the socialist movementare dissociated from class and class conditions, and by implication, very little is determined by the all embracing logic.
Such views gave in to the mystifications and modifications of capitalist ideologues, not to mention reflecting a detachment from the class struggle and working class life in any felt sense. Contemporary capitalist society is not less, but more determined by the imperatives of its accumulation process. It is by no means a harmless apparition. Its logic penetrates and shapes every area of life. Nor is the class struggle receding, but rather exercising a greater weight and influence on world development. And the international working class is not a bit player, but ever more so, the only social force capable of 'storming heaven'.
In any case, these new ideological trends have to be combated, but partisans of the working class can be confident that we are on solid ground. The new developmens in the capitalist countries and, tragic as it is, the disaster that overtook the socialist countries the relevancy of the doctrine of the class struggle. Both experiences show how unrelenting are the imperialists in fighting to preserve their private profit system and the struggles which inevitably issue from that fact.
The class struggle is alive and well. It is being fought in the former Soviet Union, in all the former socialist countries, pn all continents and in all countries.
Now more than ever before, Marxism-Leninism is necessary. It is grounded in life and the struggle of the working class and people.
Now more than ever: "Workers of the World and all Oppressed People Unite''.
[306] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ [PART III] __ALPHA_LVL1__ First Round of Interventions __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of India (Marxist)The first round of discussions have been very useful. The comrades have different experiences working in different conditions. They rightly tried to make their submissions in the light of their experience. As we have made it clear in our paper and in our Party documents, it will not be possible for anybody to claim that all aspects of the situation have been understood and evaluated. In fact, the parties are in the process of evaluating. They have succeeded in coming to some conclusions but as the questions have been posed here, many require to be discussed and debated in such a manner that those that immediately concern us and our movement, are resolved in a way that advances the movement. But one thing that has to be taken into consideration is that the founders of Marxism had visualised, through their writings, that socialism is a stage which comes - socialist revolution they had visualised - after developed capitalism, as a stage which comes after we reach capitalism. And on the basis of this they were visualising the revolutions to take place in the countries of developed capitalism. They had not at that time thought that socialist revolutions will take place in a backward country. It was only after Lenin analysed imperialism and on that basis stated that revolution can break where the chain is the weakest - after that he began working on the revolution in Russia and October Revolution took place. Subsequently also we have seen the socialist revolution has not taken place in the advanced countries-except foroneexception, following the anti-- fascist war in Czechoslovakia. But it has generally taken place in the countries that were backward. Has this fact any implication for building socialism or working for it? So this point has to be taken note of. Moreover there was no earlier experience of socialism. It is 307 stated very frankly that it is a stage, a system where exploitation of man by man will be put an end to. But this exploitation cannot be put an end to at once. Historical materialism fully explains how in the earlier society the only thing that Marx came to conclusion was that the class struggle being the motive force of moving the world forward - for revolutions - but at the same time it is nowhere stated that how it will take place - because conditions vary from state to state, country to country and in that respect Lenin has said, it will take various forms. Even Marx and Engels in the writings when they talk of France, when they talkofGermany,Italy they talkof the peasantry and the bulk of the people, how it was very necessary for the working class to rally the peasantry how that will liberate them liberating the working class itself - all those things they were saying. Because they were participants - they were not only evolving the theoretical concepts before us but they were practical participants in the struggle. So every struggle whether in the class war in France, in Germany, they were writing on everything. So in that respect they were trying to understand.
Similarly, so that is why since there was no model of it, capitalism has the experience of three hundred years - how to develop the productive forces - according to the basic laws of capitalism - but there is no experience for us. That is why it is necessary to understand the complexities of the situation that how in a backward country we had to face with a situation where socialism had to be built and socialist revolution took place. Now when we come to understand this, then we have to see even they who tried - if we study the Lenin's works in 1921--22-23, you win find how on the basis of experience gained - because he had stated that it is not dogma - it is a guide to action. Then how he was trying to make corrections in the policies that were earlier initiated - how his new economic policy came. And not only that he has stated to the 7th Congress of the Russian Communist Party to go into - then he has stated the question is posed whether we are committing a mistake - do we admit it? Then he answers the question - Yes. Unless self-critically we examine how we are implementing it and what corrections we are to make we will not be able to give tt a proper direction. So he was learning from the experience on ttie basis of that, he had also no hesitation in saying, not only new economic policy and subsequently also -even in the4thcongrewof the communist international - addressing them. Earlier concept 308 which was there, in the 4th congress of the communist international, in his address he had elaborated how the different modes of production, even in agriculture were operating in Russia at that time - how to deal with that is a question - that is why with the NEP a big change had come - they were then facing a very bad situation. Even peasant revolts had started, so that they were faced with a serious situation and they had to work out policy to meet the situation.
In this respect I will say, that here some comments have been made and particularly by 2-3 parties, they will understand -1 don't want to name, but they will have to answer, they have to understand and explain on the basis of their experience, everything started with revisionism - no doubt revisionism played a big role. Isn't the question of model came with revisionism. The same model has to be there - why is it that in 1945 itself we were having the postwar period, immediately when the revolutions took place in other countries, they tried to apply the same model, they did not keep in mind the concrete conditions prevailing in their countries and correlation of forces operating then. Why? So they did not give proper thought to the science of Marxism, being a creative science. We learn. We also tried to copy so many things . If here - the correlation of forces, what are they how to operate, how to carry anti-fascist struggle and all that understanding of proper evaluation of our struggle also - we also committed many mistakes. There is nothing wrong to admit the mistakes because only by admitting the mistakes, by self-critically examining you can go forward. So I don't want to take much time, I am only stating - it would be wrong to come to the conclusion - it is only revisionism which has led this path - then you will not be making corrections in your own policy - then how is it that the present socialist countries after this shock are forced to resort to reforms. The basic premises we have stated here - general agreement is there here that there is nothing wrong with the science of Marxism; it is a creative science to be applied concretely in the concrete conditions prevailing in each country - but at the same time when you say this here the experience goes to show - if it is to be applied concretely, then naturally one model which was applicable to one country would not work. It should be treated as science. Now there are different variations - those who are faced with the some situations, now the Sou A African communists who are faced with the situation - they 309 had a good debate in Iheir Party congress - now they have to come into contact with a situation where they have carried on a big struggle. The world situation has changed; in that situation how to carry forward the struggle for socialism. They cannot immediately say, now our struggle against apartheid is over apartheid - you go where you want to go - we will raise our flag. That will not allow the consolidation of the forces which have helped in and winning over the allies for you. So these things are there - and that is why the comrades who came here, they will be drawing proper lessons. For instance Philippines comrades are faced with a very difficult situation they are fighting bitter struggle - Belgium comrades, comrades from Bangladesh - they have stated that everything was all right upto 1956, if anything has happened after 1956, that has led us to this. This is not a proper historical examination. Then you will not be able to justify what is being done today, the reforms being resorted to by socialist countries. They arose out of the one model which we had selected - which came into existence at a particular time. This is not to underestimate the immense harm done by revisionism. All this we have to go into. Keep it in mind we have to go into all these questions and we have to see that our analysis should be scientific. We should not take it as somebody rightly pointed out , when Marx and Engles were working on certain thesis and they were writing their notes in the process of thinking and taking the direction - if you take it as a sacred - like that of some religious book - that since they have written - we have done all these things. I am saying because we have gone through all the experience of the quotations of the period when situation was different in those countries and applying to your conditions where the situation are quite different. Not only in the world situation, in the internal situation too. That is why, I would like to emphasise this point. I do not want to take much time, already I have surpassed my time, so I would like to discuss these issues very frankly so that we learn from each other's experience and try to come to appreciate each other's point of view and start thinking. We will learn from your experience. All of us will have to learn. And the process will be gradual. It concerns the question of ideology. It is not that one seminar can bring all of us together on all issues and that is something that is not related to the science.
[310] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of CubaI want to thank the comrades who have organised this semi nar for this extra time allotted to us even though most of us took more than the 20 minutes given.
I do not have anything else to add to my paper. The organisers of this seminar kindly reproduced our document and the summary that we read yesterday. All we want to say is in those documents.
May I be permitted, above all to publicly express our gratitude to the people of Calcutta and the CPI(M) for the invitation extended to us to participate in this seminar and for the care taken of us.
I have heard different comrades speak which enables us to realise how complex, heterogeneous and topsy turvy the present moment is. Many ideas have been put forth, but I feel that what unites us is greater than what draws us apart, and it is that unity which makes us strong and the one that will make us invincible.
[311] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Workers Party of KoreaComrade Surjeet,
I am very happy to note that the current international seminar is already achieving great successes.
Since the frustration of socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the concern of the world's progressive people has been focused on the future of socialism.
The current seminar in Calcutta is a great historic significance in that the Communist and Workers' parties have come together and discussed important questions related to the future of the socialism for the first time since the publications in April last year of the Pyong Yang Declaration which demonstrated that socialism remains very much alive and that advance of human history towards socialism is an irreversible process.
As an old Korean saying goes, 'beginning is half done'. The fact that the first major international meeting is going to be a success is something that we should be proud of in view of the development of the international communist movement.
Undoubtedly, our coming together this time will occupy a permanent place in the history of the international communist movement as the Calcutta Meeting.
I would like to express my thanks to Comrade Surjit, the General Secretary of CPJ.(M), Com. Basu, Chief Minister of W. Bengal and the organisers for their high organisational abilities and leadership which have been instrumental in making this seminar success.
As many comrades unanimously emphasised in their 312 presentations, the future of the socialism depends on how the communist and workers' parties rally the working class and other toiling masses around the party and how they strengthen international solidarity and unity among themselves.
In many cases, we ha ve tried to explain the essence of socialism with the state system at the centre of our way of thinking. Hence, it was maintained that Capitalism can be born from the womb of the feudal society, but socialism cannot emerge from capitalism. However, if we look at the essence of the socialism from the mancentered point of view, we can see the socialist idea can grow under capitalism, that Communist and workers' party, which are the groups of people to support the idea can be formed. Therefore, we can say that the basis of socialism can be built in the womb of Capitalism. The success or failure in the struggle for socialism depends entirely on how the Communist and Workers' parties organise and awaken the popular masses to the socialist idea.
The man capable of making an aircraft is not trained after the aircraft is produced. Only when there is the man capable of producing an aircraft, the aircraft can be made. Likewise, the socialist person is not made after the socialist system is established. Only when there is the socialist man, can the socialist society be built. TheWorkers' Parry of Korea believes that the basic to socialism is not the social system but the popular masses who have the socialist idea. Therefore, the success and failure of socialism in each country depends, first and foremost, how the Communist & Workers' party of that country arm the popular masses with the socialist idea.
In equipping the people with the socialist idea, the revolutionary principles of Marxism should be preserved and the socialist ideologies and theories be applied creatively to suit the specific conditions of the countries concerned. In this regard, it is important for the Communist and Workers' parties to have frequent contacts and exchange of view, be it bilateral or multilateral. Such an international gathering is a good opportunity to pool our resources and further develop the socialist idea in keeping with the new situation.
Proceeding from the specific conditions of Korea, the Workers' party of Korea is developing Marxism - Leninism on the basis of the position and the role of the popular masses in the evolution of 313 history. We regard the popular masses as the motive force capable of shaping their own destinies independently and creatively. And we define it as the basic strategy of the Revolution and Construction to strengthen the position and role of the masses incessantly.
Herein lies the reason why we call our socialist idea, the Juche idea. The parry and the masses form the subject or the motive force of me revolution. The leader is the centre of unity and leadership. And the party is the core political organisation which can be likened to the backbone of the human-body.
Under the present circumstances where the country is divided into North-South in direct confrontation with the US, our party is fighting for socialist construction and the reunification of the country.
Our enemies are resorting to every scheme to strangle the socialist system in Korea. Our people have formed into a strong motive force of the revolution with the Great Leader Kim II Sung and Dear Leader Kim Jong n at the centre and the principles of the independence in politics, self-sufficiency in economy and selfreliance in defence have been fully implemented. That is why I can say confidently that any economic blockade, military threat, ideological-cultural infiltration by our enemy do not work as far as we are concerned.
I would like to express my deepest thanks to delegates of various countries represented here for their support expressed for the cause of the Korean people.
I can assure you that our party is firmly committed to strengthening the unity and solidarity in the international communist movement!
[314] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Socialist Party of AustraliaI 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.
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.
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.
315But 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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-------'---
__FIX__ OCR mess.
f_____..„., .. .* necessary ror tne comrades to work in
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.
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.
[317] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Workers Party of BangladeshAll of us present here agree that Marxism, as a creative science is valid and will remain valid in future. As regards the main featuresof contemporary world situation there is practically no disagreement. But we have varied understanding as regards transition from capitalism to socialism. It is true that it may take varied form. In the absence of developed socialist society and a strong, powerful working class state the backward countries like ours shall have to allow various forms of ownership of property in the initial period of transition. But Socialism can not mean anything other than social ownership of the means of production.
Next, we shall have to come to an common understanding after a deep and careful study, about the experiences of socialism for the last seven decades. There were great achievements. There were mistakes too. We should be very specific as regards the mistakes, so as to take lessons in order to advance the cause of socialist movement. The economic system as such had the strength and the capacity to utilize latest scientific and technological developments. It is to be reminded that only during the last part of 7ffs there appeared decline of rate of growth in USSR, but not the absolute growth. So there was no major defect with the economic system or the economic model developed since I93ffs. But as regards the dictatorship of the proletariat and the socialist democracy, there were mistakes of great magnitude. CPI(M) has correctly pointed out four areas of theoretical study, (1) form of state under socialism --- dictatorship of the proletariat. (2) socialist democracy in practice, (3) socialist economic construction, (4) Ideological consciousness of the party and the people, in socialist countries.
318These subjects are to be studied in detail. In fact political economy of socialism did not advance much after the last major work of Stalin "Economic Problems of Socialism in USSR''. The task before the present generation of Communists is to develop the political economy of socialism.
I would like to make another point Every party present here stressed on the need for frequent mutual exchange of opinion on ideological issues. The South African Comrade has correctly pointed out that we must evolve methods on how to continue exchange of experiences and on theoretical questions. He also correctly pointed out that it can be constructively critical of others. Though every party has the right to follow its own path, their action on the basic issues has its general impact, from which parties in other countries are not free.
And we also agree with the South African and other comrades who pointed out the necessity of building a strong anti-imperialist front. This is urgently necessary for all of us.
[319] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Workers'Party of BelgiumWe thank again the Communist Party of India (Marxist) for organising this seminar.
The first point I want to point out is certainly that the presentations have confirmed that there is unanimity among us on a lot of topics. And on the other side it is also clear that there are divisions of opinion regarding a lot of questions. I think that this confirms the necessity of the unity of the Communist movement. A lot of divergences may just be the result of misunderstandings, of lack of information about each others' experiences and each others' analyses and certainly it would need a long time before we can explain to each other from where different points of view are coming and on what basis they were developed. So I really will not comment about the opinions of the comrades. I will take them into account seriously and will study all of them.
A second point, I would rather prefer to clarify our own position and submit it to your comments or critique, if you want to. We think that a common point appearing at this seminar is to condemn the policies of Gorbachev because very clearly they led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Workers' Party of Belgium, thinks that we should prolong our analyses and sharings about the links there could be between the lines of Gorbachev and the line developed by Krushchev and Brezhnev. It would be good in order to strengthen our unity to reopen the discussion about the historical experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat under Stalin. We are very conscious that different opinions about that period and those experiences will continue to exist for a very long time and it is not possible right now within the Communist movement to share the same opinion about that. But nevertheless it was an important 320 period in the building of a socialist country, the most powerful that has been. So anyway we cannot avoid to clarify that assessment but let us be very patient regarding each other.
And finally we think that there is also a need for a new evaluation of Mao Tse Tung's contributions. I think that there is unanimity in the international communist movement that Mao has correctly led the National Democratic Revolution in his country, liberating from feudalism and imperialism in 1949. We can also reassess his position in 1956 when he was criticizing Krushchev. We think it is worthwhile to analyse that first historical experience that took place in China when a mass movement was launched against opportunist tendencies known as the Cultural Revolution. Of course, also concerning Mao different opinions exist and will continue to exist for a long time. So it is not necessary to agree and to share the same opinion on that but nevertheless it is very important and it is an experience that cannot be neglected.
Some comrades know, our own Party did not emerge from the former Communist Party that existed in Belgium but from the revolutionary student movement of the late sixties. Comrades were asking us how our Party was able to maintain itself and to develop while most other Marxist-Leninist parties who emerged from the same background collapsed in the 70s and the 80s. There are five reasons why we were able to maintain ourselves and to develop: First, our Party always kept on the principle of linking the universal truth of Marxism-Leninism and in our case also of the Mao-Tse Tung thought with the concrete experience of the revolutionary struggle in Belgium. Practice and mass campaigns were always the main points we stressed, the point of departure to study Marxism and also the point to which study of Marxism has to lead to. Secondly, we always avoided closely following foreign parties and we always have said that the attitude toward another party never should have too much influence in our own party. Thirdly, our party has always oriented its militant concrete mass work among the working class. Many of the revolutionary forces emerging in Europe in the 60s were not capable to root themselves into the working class movement Jourth, our party has always taken the struggle between the two lines as a major ideological principle for its establishment. So we recognize in our own party that there is always both leftist and right tendencies and that without assessing 321 them in time and criticizing them in time we would have collapsed. And fifth, we have always expressed the unity of the party as one of the most important principles for the party based on the principle of democratic centralism.
Let me end with some principles we have forwarded with regard to our international relations. We have adopted a principle to develop and maintain links with all the Communist Parties and revolutionary organizations throughout the world. Even if our judgment is that may be their line is wrong. Why ? First of all we are conscious that we can be wrong ourselves in appreciating that line. So may be the error is on our side. Secondly because experience has shown us that we could learn a lot from the work done by them among the masses, their experiences and their theoretical work. Third, because even fundamental or basic divergences in ideological line may not impede certain forms of cooperations and common struggles in precise fields of work that are common to both parties. Fourth, we have also to take into account possible evolution. Certain parties we might consider as not having a correct Marxist-Leninist line, can develop and change. And finally, some parties with whom we had close links indeed did totally collapse or changed their camp. But through the fact that we maintained contacts with them now we can draw lessons of how it was possible for a party who once was revolutionary party to become a party helping the bourgeoisie more than the working class and the revolutionary movement These were some points I wanted to bring before you.
[322] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of BrazilIn the first place, we would like to say that the various pres entations that have been made here by different delegations were very useful. They gave us a global view of the problems, the doubts and experiences that each party has in its country. We also find that there are many basic questions on which there is a unity amongst us. This is a very important step in the recomposition of the international Communist movement. We would like to stress the importance of maintaining and strengthening our Communist identity in this moment of recomposition. The reaffirmation of our Communist identity is directly linked to the defence of Marxism, the defence of Leninism and development of this science that is creative.
It is also important to stress our unity in the defence of those countries in the world today that continue to follow the socialist path and maintain high the banner of socialism. It is important to intensify our active work of solidarity, for example, with the people of Cuba against the criminal blockade made on them, and also against imperialism's aggressions against DPRK. It is important to stress that the experiences of these socialist countries are important experiences from which the peoples of other countries have to leam. The rich concrete experience of socialist construction which we witness today in Vietnam, in Cuba, in DPR of Korea and in China is a strong point we would like to stress. In the adverse situation that we face in the world, in which the correlation offerees is against us, these countries and their peoples, give us an example in maintaining high the banner of socialism and conducting a struggle of resistance.
323It is important also to stress that the unity amongst us also indicates that there does not exist only one path to socialism, but there are various and diverse paths to be followed in each country. After the tremendous shock that we have had to face in the last few years, may be this is one of the most important lessons that we can extract. Experience shows that there is not only one model of socialism, but various paths of socialism to be followed in each country. Exactly because there is not only one path to socialism, it is natural that different opinions and even divergences exist amongst us in analysing the concrete path to socialism in each one of our countries. Each one of us elaborates his analysis from the standpoint of his concrete reality, the concrete reality in his country and his experience of struggle in his country. Of course, we have to identify who our real enemies are, but the forums of combatting these enemies vary from country to country, according to the concrete historical conditions and traditions of each country. We all here have a clear idea that we have to combat and defeat capitalism, opening the way for a socialist society. But the paths for this, the forms we have to adopt in doing this, evidently have to be different from each reality to each reality, from country to country. So, of course, there may be differing opinions, even divergencies, on questions. But these are the questions we have to debate frankly and let them mature amongst ourselves.
There are many other lessons that we have to learn. The century in which we live was marked by socialist revolutions. We believe we should not precipitate conclusions about the reasons for the collapse of some of these experiences, but let these conclusions mature according to the interchange of opinions and experience.
We have already seen signs that a new phase of revolutionary struggles, struggles against capitalism, is emerging together with the deterioration of capitalism, the intensification of the contradictions of capitalism. Because of this, it is fundamental that the Communist movement recomposes itself internationally. This relates to the very fundamental subjective factor that can intervene in the situation. It is important not only to recompose the Communist and Workers' Parties movement, but also to reconstruct broad anti-imperialist fronts in the world today.
In our opinion the reconstruction of the Communist movement has to take into consideration lessons of the past and the realities of 324 the present. There should not exist, for example, any "father part/' or "guide party" within our movement All parties are equal, irrespective of their size. We believe that in the present phase of the recomposition of the international Communist movement, we should abstain from making public criticism of divergent ideas that exist amongst us, we should try always to take into consideration the opinions of different parties and try to work on a common platform. We should strive for new forms of facilitating and consolidating the cooperation and approximation of our parties' unity. We have to intensify the practice of multilateral and bilateral contacts, including the practice of mutual visits so that all parties can visit other countries and see how these parties develop their struggles in the concrete conditions in which they work.
[325] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of BritainMany parties have given an assessment of developments in the former socialist countries of eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. There is widespread agreement that imperialism's political, ideological, militaristic and - wherever possible economic offensive against them presented substantial obstacles, took a heavy toll, and should not be underestimated.
But were the responses of the ruling parties always correct and justified ones?
Our party believes that the socialist countries were weakened from within, not just by reactionary elements but by the substantial mistakes - and even crimes - committed by the ruling parties and authorities. Serious violations of human and national rights occurred from the 1930s onwards in the Soviet Union and from the late 1940s in Eastern Europe. The clear and necessary distinction between State, party, trade union and other social bodies became blurred, and a privileged - in the end even hereditary - bureaucratic nomenclature usurped power from delegates who should have been genuinely accountable to the working class and its allies.
Dictatorship of the proletariat turned into dictatorship over the proletariat.
The highly centralised bureaucratic command system in the economy, combining large-scale public ownership and planning, succeeded until the 1970s in producing higher rates of growth in the socialist countries than in the imperialist ones, but this success occurred in specific historical conditions which changed.
But our estimation is that these methods of organising the new production relations turned into restrictive fetters, holding back 326 the full development and utilisation of the productive forces. The application of the fruits of the scientific and Technological revolution and the expansion of production and productivity generally, require - under socialism - the initiative, commitment and participation of the masses. In societies based on public ownership and state planning, these necessities have to find their expression in democratic practice in the political as well as the economic sphere.
This became impossible in societies where initiative, criticism, protest, alternative suggestions and ideas, and ``unofficial'' aspirations were not only discouraged --- they were punished.
In our view, there are vital lessons here for the policies of Communist and Workers' Parties --- before as well as during socialist construction.
Comrades, I would like now to turn to the immediate future.
Many parties here have expressed widescale agreement about the nature, strategies, objectives and consequences of imperialism. Quite rightly, mere has been an emphasis on the Third World, including indeed in my own earlier contribution. But we should not lose sight of the fact that imperialism's exploitation of the Third World forms only the minor part of its income. This exploitation is enough to enforce mass misery throughout the Third World - but imperialist enslavement, although of a less brutal kind, of the working class in the advanced capitalist countries remains an essential feature for imperialism. That is why, for example, British TNCs have 84% of their investments in other imperialist countries.
Intensified competition between the TNCs in imperialist markets is a major imperative behind the consolidation of the three imperialist blocs, and the growing economic rivalry between them.
Parties here have already pointed to the dangerous consequences of this development. Our French and Danish comrades have made magnificent efforts to try and derail the Maastricht bandwagon.
In fact, elaborating the principle of the uneven development of capitalism and the imperative of inter-imperialist rivalry, Lenin once wrote that "the United States of Europe is either impossible or reactionary under capitalism''. In the same article, he went on to write: "Of course, temporary agreements between capitalists and the capitalist powers are possible. In this sense the United States of 327 Europe is possible....but what for? Only for the purpose of jointly suppressing socialism in Europe, and of jointly protecting colonial booty against Japan and America.'' These are turning out to be prophetic words indeed.
Should 1he Maastricht treaty go through, we will all have to change it Therefore, the Communist Parties of Member states of the European Community may have to consider meeting within a short period of time in order to exchange views and ideas on the European Community and the dangers presented by the construction of a European super-state.
Linked to the general crisis of capitalism, the current periodic crisis and the intensification of imperialist rivalry and exploitation, is the rise of fascist and racist movements in Europe (to which some parties have already referred). Here is the second major item that could be considered for the agenda of a meeting of European Communist and Workers Parties, should it take place.
[328] __ALPHA_LVL2__ New Communist Party of BritainIt has been a very interesting and constructive seminar which has disclosed many divergent ideas as well as many ideas of common assessments. I would like to comment a bit on the New Economic Policy which was referred to in relation to the early developments in the Soviet Union. Because it was always a temptation to make a virtue out of a necessity. And in the world now, with the changed balance of forces, something that appeared to be so feasible are less likely or less possible. The concept of the noncapitalist road of development foi- instance has obviously been undermined by the change in circumstances over the last few years. This means that most, if not all the remaining socialist countries, incidentally all claim to be developing countries, are looking for ways of attracting capital, ways of incorporating modern productive techniques in their production processes and are seeking to setup joint ventures and sometimes free trade zones with capitalist companies involved. They are seeking to develop new markets and new sources of goods to offset the loss of those from the former socialist countries. For those countries in South-East Asia, China and Vietnam, it is possible. Partly because the crisis of capitalism means that there is masses of capital seeking investment and markets, partly because the crisis is aggravating the inter-- imperialist rivalries. Although the US would like a strong line against China and Vietnam other capitalist or imperialist powers are not willing to go to the extent that the US would want in relation to that. But it is wrong to draw the conclusion from this necessary and possible experience that is going on today that it was wrong to bring the New Economic Policy period in the Soviet Union to a close. Collectivisation was successful. The rapidly expanding towns and the 329 growth of the industrial working class and their families were fed. And yes, there was massive and enthusiastic involvement of the people in that revolutionary process that took place in very difficult circumstances. Comrades have referred to the fact that one of the achievements of socialism was that it played a major part in destroying the Nazi war machine. Would that have been impossible without the industrialisation process that had been carried out before the war? I don't think it would. It needs to be remembered that over 90% of all military equipmemt used by the Soviet armed forces was turned out in Soviet factories. And this was inspite of the tremendous destruction that was wreaked by the Nazi war machine. It also needs to be reminded that Lenin introduced NEP and envisaged it as a temporary measure and the necessary retreat and he stated that as long as Russia remained a small scale producer there would be more economic places for capitalism than for socialism. In any case, the strategy of the different imperialist powers at that time in the 20s and the 30s, did not allow for the same strategy and development for consolidating socialism that exists today. And the changes of circumstances have to be borne in mind. This is the reason why the efforts by the Soviet government in the thirties to take advantage of the inter-imperialist rivalries and establish a pact for collective security met with so little success.
Socialism is itself a transitionary period between capitalism and communism, where the working class exercises state power and develops a strategy for the building of socialism according to the national economic resources, the political situation and the international circumstances. I agree with those who consider that there are no models, which you can lift of the shelf to suit the circumstances which you find yourself in when you are making your way to socialism. And there is no easy path to revolution and no easy transitionary period to consolidate socialism. The goal has to be however, to develop a full socialist planned economy which does mean the collectivisation of wealth, the collective ownership of production, distribution and exchange on an extending basis; And therefore I would say, whilst it is correct under state powertf go in for joint enterprises and free enterprise zones today/ as being done by China and Vietnam. That too in itself is a temporary experience and has to be seen as such. Because you can'JhlMVf socialism without the base being common ownership. Of course it is temporary, and well could be a long time. We can comprehend 330 why the promotion of joint ventures and free enterprise zones is good at this moment of time forsodalism.ltisalso possible because capitalism sees it as a profitable venture. But it would be naive to imagine that the capitalists won't have hidden agenda of theirown to endeavour to undermine the socialist state power that exists in these countries. This is something that has to be borne in mind because it does mean not only the continuation of the dass struggle but in some ways its intensification as weU especially from time to time if there are various reasons and difficulties encountered. Therefore, one of the main problems we face is all the more the necessity that working class and other sections of the population and especially the youth must be warned and made conscious of the responsibilities of participation in the conscious effort to develop the state and socialism. If die working class and the youth are not imbued with revolutionary consciousness then there is a build up of trouble.
In this regard I want to reflect on the positive role of the cooperation of Communists internationally. It is of course extremely good that we come together collectively as well as on a bilateral or multilateral basis to exchange views. The richness of the contributions is of enormous importance to us all.
This seminar is Very good. A wide range of opinions, much on which we agree but many more on which there is divergence of opinion also. The question is how do we carry the unity forward, in the international communist movement, not only on the basis of what we discuss but on thebasisof what we do. It seems to me that one of the ways we should move forward is to tackle the question of projection of ideas in the battle of ideas. I think Marxist ideas are stronger than many ideas in the world. But if we have to say on the basis of the projection of ideas the bourgeois media has been more influential than ours. And we have lost the services of TASS now that the Soviet Union does not exist like in the past So the imperialists have virtually a monopoly of international news through television and Radio. In China, you get the BBC television on the Chinese television, nine stations, most of it is bourgeois oriented. If you come here, go to the room and turn on the TV it is the BBC projecting its position.
I know this is not the forum where it is feasible to forward a concrete proposition. But I think we should consider the idea of 331 establishing, as part of the developing of the cooperation and cohesion of the international communist movement, a international news agency. Because this is one area where mere can be cooperation to strengthen and consolidate the bonds of solidarity between us and to serve the interests of the class we are responsible to and to effectively develop our solidarity to those in struggle.
New technology is an ally to us in this regard. The difficulty seems to me for translating and rewritting news. But this could be done relatively inexpensively, we believe. And we hope mat mis will be consciously considered over a period of time.
We have often said that Marxism is not just a question of theoretical discussion but a mixture of theory and practice. And therefore we think that in the development of the cohesion of the international communist movement there needs to be of course a development of theory, but concrete expression of practical nature as well.
[332] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of CanadaSpeaking about some of the questions that comrades have raised during the course of the last two days, I am reminded of the period of the birth of the socialism at the beginning of the century in the Soviet Union. It was a period of great differences in the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party and you are familiar with the debates that took place. There were many strong voices on Lenin's table and very often there were sharply different opinions. It might also be said that this was a period of some of the most creative theoretical and practical work was done by the communists in the last century.
Today and yesterday when comrades spoke and expressed different opinions about some of the problems that are facing us collectively and individually, I don't regard this as the sign of weakness on our part but as a sign of the vitality of the movement of which we are all a part. The differences here represent different experiences of our parties in our countries and in some cases different conclusions that we have drawn - that is important, it reflects the unity of theory and practice, there is a dialectical relationship and shows that our movement is not only creative but it is also dynamic.
One of the conclusions that communists in Canada are coming to and that has been expressed here by others, is that the period of transition from capitalism to socialism will be a very prolonged period historically short but in years it may be very long. Nevertheless, it raises the question of scientific and technological revolution, which in our view is the main reason for the temporary, but nevertheless extended life which capitalism has at this period. So we are studying the problems of the transition. One of the most 333 immediate problems' we see is the question of building a democratic anti-imperialist front because socialism has lost the initiative, again temporarily. But nevertheless, the Soviet Union which internationally in the past, was able to draw the line on the sand and say this is where imperialism has to stop and can't go any further. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union in particular, the other socialist states in Eastern Europe, this line on the sand was erased. And this has contributed to the situation where imperialism has its world order and ison the offensive against the peoples of the world, against the working class and the communist parties.
So the question of a democratic anti-imperialist front is a very important question which I would like to look it at very briefly. The comrade from South Africa raised the question of Yugoslavia and the danger that is inherent in die present situation. But in our view, one of the reasons why imperialism has not moved into Yugoslavia inspiteoftheopportunities in the last months is becauseof the interimperialist rivalries and it would appear that some conclusion is being arrived at by the imperialist powers when they are now speaking quite openly about the military intervention in Yugoslavia. And the danger another comrade spoke that poses to the Balkans. It could become another flash point that will spread.
This raises the question of the UN, which comrades have spoken about. It seems to me that this is a problem that we need to examine more dearly and extensively as well. I personally think that the United Nations is showing that it is no longer capable of developing into a truly representative body of the world's peoples. Here too there is a void that has been created.
If there is agreement and many comrades have spoken here about the need for a broad front internationally to develop then the question of what forces would be in it is important. In the advanced capitalist countries the question of the role of social democracy has become very sharp, certainly it has in Canada. One of the comrades here mentioned here that the period we are in is reminiscent to the period between the two wars. That reminds me of the 7th Congress and questions that were raised about social democracy, the new situation that we as a world movement are facing, particularly in the advanced capitalist countries, the crisis of social democray. It seems to me that social democracy is important strategically as well as to achieve socialism, at least in Canada it is. But there is no basis 334 for cooperation with social democratic party in Canada as it presently stands, although there is a basis for cooperation with the social democrats in the trade unions movement and the peoples movement And it seems to be a problem for us, how we can move from where we are to where we want to be and how we can move social democracy from the present positions of being conduit for neo-conservanve policy to stand in defence of working class in each country and internationally against the dangers of reaction and war.
I too welcome the questions that have been raised, that perhaps may be regarded as controversial or questions that we haven't spoken about in the past in a collective fashion. We agree, that the Communist Parties must speak frankly and constructively, with regard to our common problems. We also agree that we need internationally relations of equality. That the time when there was the hub and spokes, is a time that has passed. We also agree about the usefullness of a international meeting, however we do not yet see that the conditions are such that all those who should be at the table could be at the table. And we think it is important because of the signifincanceof an international meeting of communists, workers and revolutionary parties and all those who can be at the table should be at the table. Therefore we also think that, if it means waiting a little for that, it is worth the wait.
In conclusion, I would agree with those who pointed out that the new situation has created new contradictions for capitalism as well, not only for us. I think we should look at the victories secured by us in Guyana, in Cuba and South Africa. In Cuba in particular, the Communist Party of Cuba and the people are united and strong and it has to be made sure by all of us that it continues to remain a socialist country.
[335] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of FranceI would like first to underline the interest of our exchange in me seminar for two main reasons. I am intervening here in the prefiminary debate.
Fast, the situation we are under is very complex. The failure of bareauaatk sodafism is not the failure of socialism, it is not also the triumph of capitalism. It will not lead to the failure of capitalism on one condition - unless we draw the lesson from the experience. For it is because of this that it is very useful to make our own analysis and to confirm this analysis with the analysis of others, to exchange views, to confirm our experiences. The second reason is that we have common targets in fields like international solidarity, new world order, peace.
Our perception is mat all this can be done only in respecting scrupulously the independence of each party. The international communist movement suffered a lot and for long because of another conception mat was promoted at that time. To go forward in {^international level it is necessary to go forward in each of our countries. On national objectives and also on international objectives in each of our countries.
The French Communist Party has solid tradition of international solidarity against repression, for independence. We are actually developing a large campaign of solidarity with Cuba, with Sooth Africa, with Palestine, we fought against the Vietnam war, we are actually expressing our active solidarity with our comrades of Turkey, and so towards Greece and Portugal when they were under dictatorship. The engagement on the international front fonnsa large part of our activity in France. And to achieve this, we 336 think that we must have total independence of action and thinking. For two reasons. First, the concrete conditions are everywhere different from each other. The second reason is democracy, the participation of the biggest amount of people possible, vast majority of people. We think that the vast majority of people being behind anything, that is the main concept of our time now, democracy. We need democracy to provoke a setback to imperialism. We need democracy to defeat imperialism. It is in this period that we are very attached to the cooperation between all the communist parties and all the progressive forces. And it is in this spirit that we appreciated a lot, the holding of this seminar.
[337] __ALPHA_LVL2__ German Communist PartyThe discussion has been really enriching for me. Most of the JL points that have been expressed here are also important for the discussion within our Party. I would like to bring out three principal chains of thought, which I have known, having listened to what you all have said today, and that will be important for our Party also. I see a common point of discussion, because the communist parties are in a situation at the moment concerning its role after the death or the collapse of socialism to determine it anew and be conscious of its own possibilities through this process. In most of the discussions the contradiction between the communist movement and revisionism has been brought forth. I would like to agree with what was said but still I would like to add the question --- whether there is not dogmatism in the communist movement which exists now or used to exist before, in the matter of a few particular questions? Concretely speaking, I am talking about the changes in the working class composition in the highly developed industrialised nations. The question that had to be asked in connection with the ecological and social issues and the processes which are taking place among the youth. I think these are questions that should be analysed by us.
The second chain of thought, I was deeply impressed by the discussion that was brought forth by the SACP comrade who told us about concept of the national democratic revolution. I would like to go back and speak retrospectively about something that happened many years ago in the communist parties of East Europe, also it was a discussion in the communist parties of West Europe in middle of the seventies. In these countries, the transition from capitalism to socialism can take place in the background of the 338 experiences that were made in Chile and also in Portugal and France. The German Communist Party in the programme put out in 1975 formulated that in an anti-monopolistic democracy a revolutionary transition to socialism, the possibility exists for more than one party under the hegemony of the working class to carry out this process. One should consider different the objective conditions. A further point, in this connection. One can see that how different the initial conditions are, like the comrades from South Africa,who are fighting in their own conditions and some communist parties in West Europe - how they are conducting their struggle. It is a situation where the bourgeoisie of these countries are trying to marginalise the communist parties in these countries and posing the question of the validity of their existence. I would like to point out the difference in the positions of the various communist parties. In conclusion I would like to support all ideas and thoughts which were brought forth and the situation to build a new anti-imperialist movement which we would like to naturally go beyond the line and range of communists. Wherein however, the communists would play initialising a very crucial role. From the point of view of our Party, we would like to support such an anti-imperialist front, against the attacks of the bourgeoisie and imperialism on the social and democratic rights. We would like to carry out such a fight.
[339] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of GreeceDear Comrades,
It is imperative to organise the struggle against imperialism and to create a new economic order which will guarantee: the mutual and equitable utilisation of achievements in international economic Hfe, the safe-guarding of political self-determination of die people without foreign intervention. In the framework of these goals, the CPG develops its cooperation and more generally its relations with communist parties as well as other left-wing, progressive and ecological parties and organisations which want to fight for a more just world. A world where the people will join forces to face die serious global problems.
__FIX__ OCR mess.
_______------__....,.. .Mnu^vvaca.uiciu at m «ui, ine development of cooperation and coordination of communist and worker's parties both on a bilateral and a multilateral basis, in order to study the new situation which hasbeencreated,in particular after the counter revolution in Soviet-Union and (he other socialist countries.
The CPG participates and also will undertake initiatives to confront anti-communism and to search for solutions to die new problems tiiat have emerged. At die same time die CPG actively contributes to every international forum organised by communist and oflier progressive forces.
This seminar contributes to these efforts. Also die CPG wffl continue to support every form of solidarity with die peoples fighting against neo-fascism and racism. It will strengthen its solidarity with diose forces in central and eastern Europe and die former Soviet Union that are fighting for die defence and revitalisation of Socialist society.
340The peoples of the under-developed and developing countries, exhausted by the hunger and misery to which ti»ey have been condemned by ti^phindering policy of imperialism, are seardung for paths to acquire their social and political emancipation. The peoples' struggle against imperialism and harsh exploitation, in spite of the current balance of forces and difficulties, will go on to bear fruit.
The great success of the South African people, which opened the way for the abolition of apartheid, explain also the aggression and hate of racism and neo-Nazi forces against South African communist party and the African National Congress, the murder of our comrade, general secretary, Chris Hani. But it also has created a new situation on the African continent that win influence future devdopments there. Somalia is an another example. The CPG stands in solidarity with the peoples of under-developed and developing countries striving for democracy and social justice and fighting against Racism and Fascism. It supports their struggle to create conditions that will allow their countries to participate on an equal footing in the international division of labour, conditions that will correspond to the needs of these countries for the transfer to them of resources and technology from the rich countries, for the rescheduling of their debts and for the creation of more favourable conditions for their development.
The Communist Parry of Greece expresses, in particular, its solidarity with the people of Cuba, under conditions of overwhelming isolation, is defending ti« gains of its n^rolution. The right tq choose its own path of development and the right to resist the harsh intervention of American onperiaMsm, in order to live peacefully and cooperate on an equal footing with the peonies of Latin America and even USA. The party also expresses, its solidarity against the new offensive on the issue of nuclear inspection of Norm Korea and ihe continued embargo against Vietnam.
In view of developments in Europe, appropriate measures must be taken as a matter of urgency to promote concerted action involving the Communist Parties. The political forces close to the Communist Parties in the member states of the Community and beyond mat, their counterparts in other European countries. Concerted action by the communists is essential to boost the morale and fire the imagination of the millions of communists throughout Europe and to enable a broad anti-Maastricht, anti-E.E.C front to 341 progress steadily towards its goal.
It must be based on the principle of the non-intervention of one party in the internal affairs of another. This does not absolve each individual party of the responsibility of formulating a national strategy. Common action is possible, despite the different views held by individual parties on a number of theoretical, tactical and strategic issues.
A dialogue and joint action are necessary because no party can hope to successfully tackle the general problems currently facing Europe, and notably internationalization, by itself without the benefit of die experience and views of its sister parties. The CPG will continue its efforts to develop substantive bilateral relations with all Communist and workers parties in order to develop diverse, pan-European cooperation.
The forthcoming European Parliament elections are one of the most pressing problems today. We need to maximize cooperation within the European Parliament's left unity group and step up cooperation between individual members and social representatives.
In the struggle against capitalist unification, we must tackle the problem of Social Democracy.
Present-day European social democracy differs from social democracy before the war or over the last decades. The leaders of the social democratic parties have aligned with conservative forces at all levels, despite individual points of criticism.
They have loudly applauded capitalist unification and given the kiss of life to the Maastricht treaty. They are attempting to emasculate the movement which seeks a different concept of Europe based on security and equitable cooperation. They are supporters of a social consensus and inter-class collaboration.
Joint action by the anti-Maastricht forces spearheaded by die conununistscould serve to rouse large sections of the masses which currently docilely support the social democrats and are struggling with the adverse consequences of E.C. unification. The coiMMMi front against neo-liberal and conservative policies and the exposure of die true role of social democracy may lead to significant realignments and radicalise the progressive forces in Europe:
The communists can, and should play a major role in this process.
[342] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of India(After apologising for not bang able to attend the first day's session on account of a crucial vote in the Indian Parliament on the Finance Bill)
Yesterday, I could not listen to the contributions of the differ ent comrades and since I haven't had time to read all the documents, I just want to make one or two brief points.
Comrades who are coming from the developed capitalist countries, very often when we meet them (not here today, but on other occasions) we find that they are very much interested, naturally, to know much more about the conditions prevailmgin the developing countries, specially comrades from Western Europe and North America J think it is also very necessary both for them and for us, to work out more specific methods of exchanges, cooperation, intercourse and soon. Because,actuallyweare operating in two different worlds, the developed countries and the developing countries. The conditionsofthe peoples who are there among whom you are working and the conditions of the people in Latin America, Africa or Asia are vastiy different Therefore, inavery limited way, that through this seminar, which I think is a very positive step that has been taken, that these comrades fromthesedifferent regions are brought together and they can to some extent; exchange experiences and talk about conditions, very different conditions in which they are working. Many comrades that we met in the last couple of years, who visited India, were much surprised to find demonstrations and public meetings going on with Red Flags, Hammer and Sickleandall and that peopteareseemtobe very enthusiastic about that There were impressions in theirrnindsafter the collapseof the socialist system in the Soviet Union and some other countries and 343 the propaganda that has been done, intense propaganda carried on by the enemies of socialism, that people are thoroughly demoralised, defeatist and have accepted the argument that socialism is dead and nobody wants it and people have rejected it, so on and so forth. They were surprised to find that was not the state of affairs. I am talking about the masses, and not about only people who are members of the communist party. Many members of the communist parties, may have certainly, it is not surprising, that they should have received a very big shock, a setback and all that. But the conditions of the masses - the comrade from Australia who a little while ago was talking about some villages and some rural areas which he had visited here was quite right. He saw for himself what the conditions of people are. And I have no doubt that they are much the same in other developing countries also. It is a problem, whose magnititude is sometimes difficult for comrades from the developed countries to appreciate. Something which runs into millions of people, who are suffering from unemployment, poverty, from malnutrition, disease, homelesshess - not just a few people but millions and millions. And naturally when the question is asked - these problems of course cannot be solved in a day, it is a very long and difficult struggle. But what should be our attitude, what will be our outlook, how do you expect to transform these kind of economic and social conditions for the good of the people, except unless you have some kind of a socialist perspective. Our people laugh if you ask "do you think that these problems can be solved by capitalism''. Some kind of a socialist perspective has to be worked out in each country, according to its own conditions and only on that basis the people will gradually acquire confidence as to how they should go forward. So I think that these kinds of seminar are very useful and helpful from that point of view.
The second point I want to make is that nobody here, as far I could understand, as I was absent yesterday, has said anything which would have been very helpful for us, working in India, about our attitude to religion. What has been traditionally the attitude of the communist parties towards religion? In India you know what is happening now? Misusing the name of religion, and misusing many kinds of religious dogmas and sentiments, in a society where people are under the influence of various religions in this country, rightist forces of a fascist kind are growing, posing a big danger to our country and our people. The question I was wanting to know 344 is --- what is attitude of the communists towards religion, how does one speak about it - what kind of image they create among the people about their attitude to religion. Has it had anything to do with the various setbacks that we may have received from time to time? You know what Karl Marx said about religion. Of course in a different context he said "religion is the cry of the oppressed, the soul of soulless world.'' In a different context he also said that "religion is the opium of the people" What did he mean by it? How did we take it? How did we try to understand it? In countries, where the overwhelming majority of the people are religious minded people, are believers, how did we communicate with them on this very important question. I believe there are countries where it is being said, that because the communists are considered to be non-believers, therefore in such countries it is not possible to talk about Marxism-Leninism or is not possible for a communist parry to prosper in such a country. Well that may be some example in some country. I find, sitting here, comrades from many countries where certainly religion has a powerful hold. So what was the actual role of this factor. How did we react to it? And how are we reacting to it now? I don't think wq will be able to have much of a discussion on it.
But I must certainly congratulate also the comrade from South Africa, who I think was so practical and at the same time so political in his presentation of the struggle of the South African people and what he has said here about the need for the mass organisations in which the party occupies important positions, for those mass organisations to be functioning democratically, as independent mass organisations and not as appendages of the communist party. Some lessons had to be drawn from past history also. There is some resistance among comrades even now to this idea of trade unions being independent of political parties or of course of the government or the employers. But principally the difficulty arises when we talk about the independence of the trade unions from political parties. Of course we were told about the example of COSATU in South Africa and if I understood the comrade rightly, he said that although there are leading members, Central Committee members of the SACP who are occupying leading positions in COSATU but COSATU would not permit the Communist Party to dictate to the trade unions or to intervene in their internal affairs. It is a very important question, and I think that we require to examine our past 345 on this and several other questions, self-critically.
In our country at least, we are feeling very acutely the lack of a national alternative to the present There are big bourgeois parties run by sections of the bourgeoisie or so called centrist forces but people are gradually losing all confidence in such parties. They do not believe that they can really give an effective leadership to the people specially the workingmasses, the working class, the poorer people and the toiling masses as we call them. The situation is ripe for a national alternative to be created, a viable national alternative, which we are not yet able to create. I am talking about an alternative on a national scale. Thereare pockets in our country, there are states here and there like West Bengal where the left forces are dominating, but taking the country as a whole where there are some states whose area and population are bigger than that of many European countries, where the left forces are still very weak and where this reactionary, rightist fundamentalist forces have been able to grow considerably. In such a situation, we feel that it is necessary to make redoubled efforts for the left parties and left forces to come closer together, to consolidate themselves, to counter the reactionary ideology and activities of these parties and to project a national alternative before the people. This is difficult, not an easy job. But it has to be done because the attacks on democracy and democratic rights are increasing all the time. I think you will agree that if there is one single issue throughout the world now where people are being mobilised and are going into struggle and acting it is on the issue of democracy and democratic rights. This is what moves millions today. Therefore, I think that we should consider, whether this also gives us opportunity to forge a very broad kind of front, alliance of all forces which are willing to fight for democracy and democratic rights.
``
Finally, there are some other problems we have to draw lessons from. Of course, we can't do this in one seminar. You have referred, to Yugoslavia, what is happening there. We have seen the multinational Soviet state disintegrate into so many so called independent republics, many of them based on ethnic foundations. At one time we had been firmly convinced that the nationality pwobtem had been solved in the Soviet Union, according to Lenin's teaching and Lenin's principles and that the Soviet Union had beenrconverted into a family of equal nationalities. Certainly tremendous achievements were made at that time. But now after the 346 disintegration of the Soviet state and what is going on there we can see that that was not the whole truth. Some times on the surface it appeard to be like that, but something else was going on below the surface which is now erupting, for the first time into all kinds of unpleasant things. In our country also, we should learn, other countries also, they should speak for themselves, I can't speak for them. But this question of ethnic rights, ethnic self-determination, ethnic striving for asserting their identity, it may be cultural, it may be linguistic, it may be something else. But so many different ethnic groups and nationalities existed in a single country, a single state, as a we have in India. The Communist Party has to have a proper line on this question. Otherwise already we are having so many conflicts and disturbances and many of them are marked by brutal violence, innocent people are losing their lives. This is a question of strengthening the federal character of the state, not centralising all the powers in one place at the top, decentralising the powers to the extent possible, strengthening the federal character of the state where there are so many different national and ethnic groupings so that nobody feels suppressed or stifled. In the Soviet Union also the right to self-determination was inscribed in the Constitution. Right of self-determination to the point of secession, was a right given to the nationalities of the Soviet Union. We were all confident that nobody is going to exercise it But the day came when something very different happened. You can blame anybody,you can blame the wrong policies followed by Gorbachev which accelerated the movement towards disintegration. Whatever it is the fact remains that the day came when we found that the state has been torn apart on the basis of ethnic and nationalistic rivalries, struggles, conflicts. Now we do not know, in some of the central Asian republics there may be a rise of Islamic fundamentalism also.
So what I would like to say in conclusion is that among the many important and valuable contributions, the problems that have been discussed in this seminar, some of these matters, the question of religion, (because certainly in our country we cannot keep quiet, we have to take a stand on this question); then on the question of nationalities, of ethnic identity, of dencentralisation of powers from a single centralised state apparatus to lower levels of self government. If these are not dealt with in time men we may not be able to benefit from the lessons which Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union or other countries are providing for us.
347I hope in our future discussions, we will have more discussions and seminars, I suppose, at any rate we can exchange our views in writings through our various journals, these problems I hope will be taken up and dealt with so that we can profit from it
[348] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Popular Socialist Party of MexicoMarxism-Leninism is not a dogma and hence there is no reason 1 VJL why, to make a revolution one has to go by the letter and not by the spirit. Marxism is a scientific concept that explains the realities of nature, that is, of the universe, of the world, of life, of the society, and of the economic, political and social development.
We have to be better prepared for acting according to the conditions of time and space. In this seminar, we have heard commentaries and reports practically from all the continents of the world about how to face the situation in our countries. On the basis of these, we can arrive at the conclusion that class struggle continues to be the most important aspect of our society - since bourgeois economy continues to divide our countries and nations. And hence people are organised in political parties according to ideologies.
I believe that our pre-occupation is how to defeat our class enemies, how to change the present situation into one in which majority of our people can enjoy the best cultural and material resources that ordinary man has created.
The experience that we have is rich and creative.There are many similarities in our activities but the most relevant point is that where we have ideological unity and organisation, we advance most. That is why we consider that the unity of all the democratic and revolutionary forces is fundamental for our victory.
This type of meetings of revolutionary men and women should be made frequently because this is how we learn other people's experiences and fortify our revolutionary unity.
Just as we had a conference of parties last February - parties of U.S.A, Canada and Mexico,---the same kind of conference we are 349 planning to hold in October this year in Mexico where workers' and communist parties of Latin America will discuss about the conditions of the working class. We would invite you to attend the conference as observers to have a first-hand knowledge of the conditions and struggle of the working class in Latin America.
[350] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of Nepal [UML]Dear Comrades,
Having heard the views and experience of all the delegates, I have found many common points of understanding each of us are reaching. We should probe the past where many mistakes were made. But to point only black about the past will not be doing justice to the past But to keep a blind eye on the past mistakes will not work. Many important achievements were made in the social arena due to the application of Marxism. I would like to point out especially 5 points.
1) Apply Marxism creatively according to one's own concrete conditions. So, to take Marxism as a dogma will not allow us to progress. So, Marxism as a living science is capable enough to face all the ups and downs during its advance.
2) We should have a sense of respect and tolerance for the separate experiences and views. What is correct and what is wrong can not be decided only by comparing what is written in the books.
3) We should have a responsibility for defending the socialist countries, China, Korea, Cuba and Vietnam are the rays of hope of all revolutionary people of the world. So whatever reservation we may have regarding their experiments and experiences, we should have friendly comments only, so mat only after evaluating several practices, we can come to certain conclusions that this is socialism and this is not
4) How the communist and workers party can be the advance force and vanguard of its people's interest? How can the vast majority of people take the communists, Marxists as the defender of their class and national interest. I think, only on the basis of its 351 performance of attracting thousands and thousands of people and having high prestige in its own country, can the Party can be said to be adapting to its own society.
5) We should agree that we have to enrich Marxism only through the practice of thousands of people. Only by regular sharing among the Communist Parties of different countries can we be benefited. We have come from different backgrounds and with different experience. So such type of Seminars are much fruitful.
In the past we looked for models and uniformity either in the period of social political change or in the period of socialist construction. So there were many deviations and mistakes due to this. After learning many lessons, we should now come to a conclusion that there should a tolerance while there are differences and search unity in diversity.
Lastly I would like to thank the leadership of CPI(M) for organising such a type of seminar and providing a forum to exchange the views and experiences. I think we should agree for convening such type of seminar at other times.
[352] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of PhilippinesIn my opening statement I said that this seminar is an oppor tunity for us to exchange views and hopefully to find in the process that we have more things in common than things that we differ in. I am happy to say that, after hearing the papers presented here and the discussions, we do have many things in common. However, we should not fear our differences, so long as we agree to respect each other's views and agree to support one another in our common struggle.
I agree with our Australian comrade that we should now learn to accept a culture of tolerance amongst us. I think we should learn the rules of the debate. We should learn to exchange views without resorting to name-calling. Now, allow me to clarify our Party's position with respect to revisionism.
Despite our situation, our CC was able hold its 1 Oth plenum last year and in this plenum we came out with a document that explains our stand for socialism, against modem revisionism. The first point I want to clarify is, we never questioned the model of socialist construction under Stalin. Neither did we question the model of socialist construction in China. In that document you will see that we say that there are no models to follow. Each party will have to find its own path for constructing socialism.
The second point that I want to clarify is, in that document we also stated that revisionism in the former Soviet Union may be traced to 1936 when it was proclaimed that there was no exploiting and exploited classes in the Soviet Union, not 1956.
And the third point that I would like to clarify is, when we submitted our proposal to take up Mao's theory on the continuing 353 revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat, it was an honest proposal for the parties to consider. It was not meant to criticise any Party, here present or any Party that is absent.
Our party is a small party that is waging armed struggle. We have had only 25 years of experience, of practice, but we stand by our analysis and think that this is scientific.
[354] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Portuguese Communist PartyFirst of all I thank our comrades from the CPI(M) for the invitation to attend this seminar and greet them for this opportune initiative.
I think that this exchange of views, of opinions, of experiences are very useful for us, Portuguese Communists. The situations are very different from continentto continent, from country to country. Each of our parties have their own history. Each of our peoples have their own traditions and experiences. That the path of progress and revolution in each country cannot obey some kind of a ``model''. I think, comrades, that we can conclude that Marxism-Leninism is real, actual and that the links of the Communist Party with the working class and the popular masses in each country, is of specific importance. We must continue with such exchange of experience and of opinions. Naturally, there are some differences, even some divergences, but I consider mat what I heard is very important for our own reflection. Wemustreinforceour solidarity, we miist work for common action and, if not, it is possible for convergent action. We must seek solidarity action namely for Cuba, South Africa, Korea, whose struggle isof specific importance toourown struggle. Naturally comrades, we face new problems, we face great difficulties, we must have a network. But I think that we have reasons to be confident, not only in the future but also in the present because as we are in our respective countries struggling in our own way for the defence of the workers and people's interests.
[355] __ALPHA_LVL2__ South African Communist PartyI would like to begin with what Com. Erich Trevett said. If I understood him correctly, he said something like: 'you cant hare socialism unless you have common ownership.'' Is that correct? Yes. But mat seems to me to give rise to a aeries of other questions - what do we mean by common?. And what do we mean by ownership? It seems to me that, it is not only interesting but a critical question -1 do not know what the answer is.
I also want to comment on the question of revisionism. If I had posed this question five years ago -1 am sure I would have been labeled a revisionist What Com. Surjeet said on this issue is very important - The experience of communist movement has been that when we have internal problems, it becomes very easy to defeat the argument by labelling somebody either a dogmatist, sectarian, a revisionist - sometimes people leave us and then we discover that they were revisionist from the time they were bom. And I do not think that has been useful in helping us as a Communist movement - in developing political tolerance, in terms of debating within our own parties, never mind between ourselves.
The second question that I try to understand is, what happened specifically in the Soviet Union? May I speak as somebody who has written many articles praising the Soviet Union to the skies, and I still read them sometimes. My own party was very dosery kfent£ fied with the Soviet Union as many other parties who had similar positions. And it does worry me, if we seem to approach the problem whether or not revisionism begin in 1936 or began in 1956, of Gorbachev is the Judas of the world communist movement and may be he was a revisionist the day he came out of his mother's 356 womb. And it concerns me, because it seems to me that it still seeks to identify the fundamental weakness at the level of individual idiosyncracies. And a class approach seems to be missing from this approach. The question which we need to ask ourselves- and I ask myself this question, mat even in the space of the last few years of what happened in the Soviet Union, what happened in the other East European countries, where was the organised working class? Where was the organised working class in whose name socialism was being developed, and in whose name the policies of socialism were carried out? It seems to me that unless we try to grapple with this problem we will keep oh falling back into blaming individuals or individual idiosyncrasies in terms of fundamental policy making. And how in the future do we try to develop a system in which the class mat we claim to be speaking for can actually act, if necessary, independent of the political parties' position. Now this for me becomesa critical area for discussion. I do not know what the answers are. But it seems to me that it becomes very important for us to begin to try to understand what actually had been going on in those countries. Having lived in Prague for over ten years it always astonished me as to why the Czechoslovakian Communist Party could not bring out its own people's militia, to oppose the other demonstrations that were taking place in the streets of Prague. I am really posing the question from the point of view of not individuals but from the point of view of social forces and the incapacity at significant momenta in history for the social forces to be brought to the fore in order to achieve certain objectives. So I seriously do not believe that it takes our own analysis a great deal further, even if it is proved that revisionism in the Soviet Union began in 1936.1 seriously do not believe that in 1993 it takes our own understanding that much forward in trying to understand what is for us anyway probably one of the greatest blows, the progressive movement has received in a very long time.
May I just touch upon two other issues because it seems to me that they reflect directly on some of the problems we face in South Africa. The question that Comrade Indrajit Gupta raised, the question of how we relate to believers. In my own party we have a history of being intolerant towards believers and partly as a result of what happened in the socialist countries. And I think this had an impact on the way believers saw us. We have now changed and quite dearly have recognised that atleast in South Africa, and I am 357 sure that it applies to India and other places, that it would be quite impossible to conceive of building any kind of new society if weare not going to take the believers with us. In fact the majority of the people, whether we likeit not are still believers. And that is why we need to find the ways and means in which we would be able to convince the believers, mat our perception, vision, perspective of socialism is one which is not in contradiction to their own humanist beliefs which derives from a religious background.
The second point is to do with decentralisation of power. Com. Indrajit Gupta, posed the issue of decentralisation of powers to regions. In South Africa we face the problem - that we have a white minority, an Afnkaneer white minority that actually demands selfdetermination on the basis of language and culture- but we are opposed to that We have a group called the Inkahata freedom Party which calls for a federal system in South Africa. And we are opposed to that But at the same time we are for decentralisation of power. And in my view, we allowed ourselves to debate this issue only within the framework of the difference between an unitary state and a federal state. And I think our lawyers were largely responsible for that. Indeed we needed to change the framework of the debate. To move away from posing the question of whether to be a federal state or a unitary state, but to pose the question from the stand point of communists, we should be interested in a decentralisation of powers to regions and to local authorities.
In our own conditions in South Africa it would not be possible to begin to deal with the fundamental socio-economic problems facing the masses of our people if we do not have a strong central government for it. It should have the capacity and the political will to allocate resources in a way that would ensure the balanced development of the whole country and in a way which would ensure that the allocated resources go to where they should go. So it might seem in that sense that you come to some kind of contradiction on the one hand asking for a decentralisation of power - which I think is correct, but at the same time asking for the central government to have sufficient powers to be able to act on behalf of the largest group of people. It seems to me, that in an election we go to the country as a whole, with a broad programme which we design to try to deal with national problems. And if we do get elected on the basis of that programme it would seem to me 358 that it would be the responsibility of that political party or organisation to actually fulfill the programme it has put to the masses of the people. In that case you may well come into conflict with those regions where your opposition parties exercise power and they are opposed to your policies. This is a very complicated problem, of trying to define the kind of relationship that needs to exist between a central authority, the regional authorities and the local authorities.
[359] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ [PART IV] __ALPHA_LVL1__ Second Round Of Interventions __ALPHA_LVL2__ Socialist Party of AustraliaI would like to raise two points again referring to the contribu tion made by the comrade from the SACP. He raised in the second round, yesterday, the question relating to the formation of a central government and the demand of the Inkahata Freedom Party for a strong federal system. He pointed out that the position of the SACP call for a strong central government was with the idea of implementing the programme that they have and the needs of the people that they have to fulfill. I think I am raising this in the form of a question because it is not really something which is peculiar to South Africa. It is an issue which has been an issue for a hundred years in Australia, the struggle between the central government and the states in Australia. I think also it is quite an pertinent issue in India. However, probably it is not an administrative question, it is a political question, which relates to the actual level of development of the peoples consciousness at a particular stage. In Australia, it is not possible to do away with the state administrations. Even if the central government attempted to do that, it would run into very serious problems and very serious opposition from sections of the people who are attached to their parochial administrations. I think, in South Africa also, it is a political question. Simply because the Inkahata Freedom Party takes a particular position on federalism, for its own purposes, for the reason that it does not want to see a strong central government, a progressive central government, doesn't necessarily lead us, I think, to circumstances under which because our opponents support something, we will oppose them for that reason. I just wanted to make that point. May be it is in'the form of a question. I would like to known from the South African comrade as to what their answer is to this question.
360The second point is in connection with future seminars which may be organised by any Party, that may provide many opportunities for discussions in this historical period when it is necessary for us to have real exchange of opinions and not formal exchanges of opinions. It seems to me, and I repeat, that there has been a good measure of agreement on many fundamental questions. But there is a desirability somehow or the other to find time and the means by which we can discuss in greater depth some of these questions. For example, we just heard the comrades from France speak about their emphasis, and I would support them, concemingtheir struggle for democracy. But what in fact does that mean? What does it actually mean in particular circumstances? Multi-parry democracy in terms of elections -1 think I understand what the comrades from France have in mind is surely the democracy of the people, people's democracy. But how is it expressed in terms of actual state structures? What does it mean in terms of the functioning of socialist democracy? I think these are very important questions and not sufficiently dealt with. If we limit ourselves to rather general statements, it will not do because democracy today is a very particular question, it is a detailed question when one goes into it And it is very often not on the generalities we find differences of opinion but in the particular application of those generalities. So I know that it is not possible to deal with these matters now, but I hope that in future that we have some facilities to go into details of some of these matters in greater depth. I have the same feeling about other meetings that we have been to, at the World Marxist Review for example, where there were formal statements and appearance of formal agreement on questions but the reality was actually something different. I do not think we should be at all afraid of differences of opinion provided they are expressed in a good Communist spirit, and I think we can handle that. The fact of the matter is that other political trends such as social democracy are able to live and have strong opinions on various questions. We should not any longer fool ourselves by the desirability of showing unanimity if there is not unanimity. I think it is more related to the reality of life that there be some differences of opinion and I think that this will show, and in fact is showing, that we can live with that, handle that, will be a sign of our maturity, not a sign of our weakness.
[361] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Workers Party of BelgiumI will answer a question mat was addressed amongst others, to me. I think that we are all utmost concerned, of how was it possible that the glorious Soviet Union established through the Great October Revolution by Lenin could collapse? Revolution and the socialist revolutions inspired us so much and still continues to do. If we do not believe that Gods or Demons are behind it, we cannot but search for the policies that led to the collapse. And more particularly, that we all confirm that the socialist revolution was a major victory and that socialism in the Soviet Union was during a long time a very successful experiment. Then we have to search for the changes in policies, the changes in orientation that eventually led to the collapse. We cannot but assess this if we really want to draw lessons from the past in order to make our revolutions and our socialism more successful in the future. It is our standpoint It need not to be shared by everybody. The central question concerns the dictatorship of the proletariat and the and the continuing class struggle under socialism. This encompasses the need for the working class and its allies to crush the state machinery of the oppressing class and the building of a new state machine of a totally different kind as Marx and Engels discovered and taught. This means the establishing of the hegemony of the working class under the leadership of its revolutionary vanguard party and maintaining it during the whole period of transition between capitalism and communism.
It is a basic Marxist idea that democracy for the oppressive classes goes hand with hand with their dictatorship over the old and new exploiters and bourgeoisie. As we well know ai a certairt moment in history, these principles were abandoned and as coirirades do not like names, I wont mention them. But it was said at a 362 certain moment that classes no longer exist in the Soviet Union, hence there was no longer need for maintaining die hegemony of the working class and the strange concept of the state of the whole people was introduced. Other changes in policies pertaining to the path towards socialism in the capitalist countries and the path to the liberation of the oppressed nations were also formulated at the same time. These new policies and ideas constitute what we call revisionism. And note, communism was certainly not born without revisionism. On the contrary it grew up and became strong in the struggle against that sort of ideas. So we have all the responsibility to assess these changes in orientation, in the glorious socialist country that we all cherish. Assessment requires from all of us the openness for each other's opinion and a spirit of self-criticism. We also have to conform with our own concrete analysis and arguments for one or other theses and study each others findings with the greatest honesty and seriousness. This unavoidable assessment will not only benefit the unity of the international communist movement but also in the other way the unity of the international movement is required in order to make an assessment that is as balanced and correct as possible. It will certainly take a lot of time. Only through patient exchanges of point of views to which we conclude through our analysis we will get a correct insight into the process that led to the final collapse of the Soviet Union and the other former socialist countries.
Our party wishes to contribute to that assessment with the book written by our Chairman Ludo Martins The Velvet Counterrevolution. A new book is prepared by our parry to come up with an analysis of some important questions in defence of Stalin. Let me restress the need to unite again all parties and organisations who claim to be Marxist-Leninists, who claim that the glorious past of the Soviet Union and the glorious past of international communist movement from 1920 till its formal dissolutions is theirs. We strongly believe that the defeats are temporary. And the future more than ever belongs to socialism and communism. Let us overcome all the allergy inherited from the past 30--40 years.
To conclude, we all agree here that the contradictions in the world are sharpening and several delegates had even pointed that they sharpened quite fast and dramatically. That is another reason to strengthen our unity. Because an analysis means that all of us will 363 come under stronger attacks of the enemy and on the other hand that all of us fully commit ourselves to resist these attacks and wherever possible we defeat our enemies. There is no reason why we should not join our forces and fully support each other in the heavy struggles to come. I agree with those parties who expressed the concrete fields in which we concretely can strengthen our collaboration.
Our party has emerged from the solidarity movement with the Vietnamese Liberation War and from the beginning waged continuously anti-imperialist campaigns and campaigns in solidarity with the third world liberation movements and socialist countries. Our Party has an important task to fulfill today in the struggle against upcoming fascism and racism. I read papers of the parties that expressed their concern about the gains obtained by fascist parties in our country. Indeed racism is growing very fast in our country and its a concrete field in which we should be able to collaborate with all the parties who face the same challenge.
I think that through these kinds of seminars we will reach more openness for each other, more understanding, more unity and we are really willing with each party represented here to look for concrete fields in which we can concretely collaborate.
[364] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of BrazilOne of the basic points of unity that we have discussed here today, is that Marxism is not a dogma but a guide to action. But that is not just a phrase and we can repeat that many times and that will itself become a dogma. We have to take the consequences of that, that is the essential problem that each of our parties has to deal with. Another essential point of unity, which we reached, is regarding the model of socialism, that each country has to chart its own path according to their concrete conditions. But that also is something we have to extract consequences from.
In relation to that I would like to draw attention specifically one topic, that has emerged, relating to democracy. And how each one of our parties deals with democracy. Because on the question of democracy, we think it necessary that each of our parties deal with it in the concrete situation in which it conducts its political activity.
Take the question of multi-party democracy. For us in Brazil, according to our experience, we feel that socialism in our country can be achieved through the consolidation of a form of multi-party democracy. It seems that comrades from South Africa also have that comprehension, so with the comrades from Nepal - that question was a very essential question in the strengthening of the democratic and socialist movement in Nepal. But that cannot be a general or rigid rule for our country. Let me give a example. In Brazil on the part of the LAP they, have decided to put pressure on the comrades from Cuba for introducing a multi-party system in Cuba. On our part, we are absolutely sure that the comrades from Cuba are correct in understanding that the slogan of multi-party democracy today in Cuba is the banner of counter-revolution. And 365 that the path that was taken by the Cuban comrades to strengthen socialist democracy was a correct one and revealed that they were victorious in the last year. So we cannot generalise formulas. And that is the very essential aspect for us.
We have to extract our consequences from our anti-dogmatic positions.
In relation to that, a final observation that I would like to make and tell you and inform you is that we in Brazil attach great importance to the question of democratic struggle and the struggle for democracy. And within that we have just emerged with an important victory, regarding the impeachment of the President As far as we know he is the first President in the world (the others have resigned before they were effectively impeached by their Parliament). What is known is that our Party played a very essential and crucial role in that struggle, at the decisive moments of the impeachment process. When the parliamentary commission that was making the enquiry into the corruption accusations, an agreement had been reached amongst the main parties of not incriminating the President and only incriminating his advisors. Our Party played a very crucial role in leading the mass movement into the streets to pressurise the commission of enquiry and parliament, against this in parliament itself. And this created such an impact, such a form of popular pressure, we created a broad front on that issue that we finally achieved a democratic solution to that process and managed to impeach the President. So this is an example to show that how we in Brazil, deal with the concrete struggle in our country on the question of democracy.
[366] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of CanadaI think that the question of democracy is a very deep one and the communist parties have to look at in the new situation that we find ourselves in now. I think that the way we looked at question of democracy in the past has proved to be limited although a great work was done in the past that has been proved to be very useful to us. But nevertheless, that is one of the reasons why I raised the question of social democracy. Hie Communist Party of Canada thinks the same way as has been described by comrades from France. We speak from a position, not of a mass party but a very small party, with minimum influence in the mass movement of the people in Canada. Something we want to rectify. But the question is how we do that in the concrete. We think that the struggle for democracy is in fact a part of the struggle for socialism in our country, perhaps the pre-condition for achieving socialism in our country.
For example, if we look at the situation in North America - the Canadian communists, American communists and comrades in Mexico are having to face with the North American free trade agreement, following on the heels of the Canada-US trade agreement, if we took a position that this was an issue, concerning only those who want fundamental social changes in Canada, we would never have able to mobilise the vast mass of the Canadian people who were unable to defeat the Canada-US treaty, but who were mobilised in our position. We can just say that in 1988 when we began to campaign with the progressive and democratic forces in Canada, the labour movement began to campaign against the Canada-US trade agreement, we started of with a situation where 367 only 20 percent of Canadians understood that free trade deal was a bad deal for Canada, for Canadian sovereignty, for Canadian workers, Canadian social programmes, and we were able in a very short period of time, in few months, to turn the situation around to where it was about 50:50. It was very important. If we had taken the struggle from the point of view of, only the communists, it would not have had the same results. Now that almost half of the Canadians are aware of what the free trade deal really is, not the bourgeois/translational propaganda about it, we are in a position to raise the issue when the elections take place later this summer or early in the fall. But the trade agreement will be passed in Canada in June. So they are doing the same thing ,the neo-Conservatives did in 1988 when they go to the people with a fait accompli - that it is done.
There are other questions. Defence of the rights of working people on a mass scale around which, in our view a democratic question, anti-racism, anti-fascism in particular. We have a situation in Canada, as I indicated yesterday, where there is a very rapid growth of dearly racist and fascist organisations like Ku Klux Man, most people think that it is a American phenomenon but it is a Canadian phenomenon as well. The anti-French Heritage Front, the racist anti-immigrant and so on down the line. We have to mobilise the mass of the people on these issues as well.
The question of the Social Democratic Parties. To us in Canada, this is a very important strategic question. We are not in a position, nor do I think it will be correct for us to pose the communist party alone as the only force which stands for progress in Canada. It is not the case. But the question of the social democrats, is the crucial question because we have always seen strategically social democracy asa part of those forces which as we used to say open the door to socialism in Canada. I think we need to have a much deeper look into the question than we had in the past. Also the question of democratic demands, the question of socialist democracy, the question of democratising certainly our Party, as a part of the process of the renewal we are undertaking now, I do not mean renewal in the revisionist sense, I mean genuine revolutionary renewal within our party is overdue and we are trying to carry it with a view to making ourselves stronger and to be in a better position to address the questions that are before us.
368I haven't addressed this question to afl comrades but I think it is a very important question for our movement and for our progress. It is very good for us to exchange opinions amongst ourselves and do more theoretical work.
[369] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of FranceI was listening to what our comrade was saying on democ racy. Yes, it is true that general statements may be useful but we have to go more in detail. It is true mat when we take detailed questions, may be we cannot go forward in a discussion. On this I agree that we have to be precise about our concept and notion of democracy. As far as we in France are concerned, we tried to be precise very concretely in our own conditions. In detail, in our country we are going quite deep into it I will take a very small example, like the Maastricht treaty. We were against the treaty. Some others were for the treaty. Okay? The first step we took was that "We want a referendum.*' We want the people to decide on Maastricht. You are for yes, We are for no, first people have to decide. The government was against the referendum. We took the idea, we must have a referendum. Whatever you may want, we must have that. First let us discuss and we obliged the government to retreat on this question. We finally had a referendum which we nearly won. The `NO' lost by a margin of 1%. With a very tiny victory, it is very difficult for them. In our struggle now, it is very interesting to tell our people, look, not only we asked you to tell no, we tell our people, you have to decide whether yes or no - we told our people you have to decide. Today, even if we lost by a narrow margin, the argument we used, more democracy, helped us in going forward. So, as far as we are concerned this is a concrete example of how we go forward with the concept of democracy without, never, masking our target. It is precisely this democratic way of going forward that helps you not to mask your targets but openly to tell your people, I am for this or for that. Butyou have to gather at any stage, at any moment, the majority of the people so that you can isolate your enemies. That is what we are doing and that is the concrete content we will give to democracy.
[370] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of IndiaAt the fag end of a very useful, constructive and friendly dis cussion, I would not like to make some critical remarks. But I have a feeling that on one or two points, I have some opinion mat may be different from the opinion of some of the comrades.
Now I am an old communist, I have been in the communist movement for more than half a century. I have seen the glory of the international communist movement, its profound impact on the 20th century and many ups and downs also. But having gone through the period of the recent developments - what has happened with the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the collapse of socialism in the USSR and Eastern Europe.
I have the feeling that we communists should also be modest. Modest in the sense that -1 have a feeling that somehow we arrogated to ourselves this kind of authority as if that we have the monopoly of wisdom and that has led to some kind of intolerance also to other opinions. For instance when you depict somebody, there has been a tendency to call him either a revisionist or a sectarian. Now I think we have to learn quite a lot from what has happened to our movement and what has gone wrong. Ofcourse we have glorious achievements to the credit of our international movement. Bu t we should also team from our mistakes and should not tihnk as if history began with the international communist movement. I think human history is much longer and we have also to learn from what was there before the glorious ideas of Marx and Engels. In our country there have been progressive thoughts and so on. This is one thing.
For instance there has been a feeling that the 20th Congress of 371 the CPSU gave some kind of a revisionist direction to the international communist movement At least my party does not agree with this. In fact what has happened during the period of Com. Stalin, using the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat in a particular way, which I do not think it was in the Leninist tradition. Because Lenin was a great democrat and he functioned the party in a different way, in a very democratic way. So something happened of course there tremendous achievements to socialism under Stalin that nobody can deny, but there were also were tremendous mistakes, particularly in the realm of democracy and inside the Party.How the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat or democratic centralism was distorted in that period. And therefore we have a feeling (I am talking as a member of the CPI) that the 20th Congress of the CPSU opened the road to new thinking. After all something had gone wrong in the Soviet Union and the CPSU. I am not saying that what followed under Kruschev, Brezhnev --- everything was wonderful. But it opened the road to new thinking.
Talking about my own party, in the 50s, we got our independence in 1947 and for nearly two-three years our party was more or less underground and after independence also. In the 50s we began to discuss in our party, the question of Indian road to socialism. And a great debate in our party among Indian communists, and some comrades said of the Chinese path and some other comrades talked of the Russian path, and finally we came to the conclusion that the Indian revolution will be neither a Chinese path nor Russian path. In the background of that great debate came this 20th Congress of the CPSU. Then soon after the 20th Congress of the CPSU something very important, momentous happened in our political history, after independence i.e. in one state of our country , in Kerala in 1957 elections the communi sts came to power through the ballot, something unique in the history of the communist movement. For the first time communists came to power in a state through the ballot. But the government was overthrown by the central government is another question.
Secondly the great debate that took place in the communist movement after the 20th Congress of the CPSU. And therefore, in our party, we started to work out our own Indian way to socialism. Now please understand that we are working within a parliamentary democratic system and we have to take into account the structure - if the communist movement has to grow, if the people 372 have to respect us, then we have to appear as defenders of parliamentary democracy. Of course we have a socialist objective, a socialist perspective. But socialism is not on the agenda, in the immediate future as far as our country is concerned. In our country having a socialist perspective we have not changed our name (mere is no trend in our party, among Indian communists to change the name of the Communist Party or all that), but socialism is not on the immediate agenda.
On the immediate agenda is how to strengthen the institutions of parliamentary democracy, how to appeal to the people. And therefore we came to this conclusion, that we will have to work out our own path and we in our party congress's in 1958 arrived at this understanding that in India under socialism there will be the right of the opposition to function. Of course, it may appear very strange that the communists come to power and they allow other parties to function. But if we say that we will not allow any party to function under socialism, then people will say all right we will see to it that you don't come to power. And therefore, every party will have to work out its own road. Any party is not going to accept any model. What I would like to emphasise is that almost for more than thirty years we have been discussing this question and we came to certain understanding about the Indian road to socialism.
[373] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Popular Socialist Party of MexicoIn these three days of intense work, in this city of Calcutta, we have confirmed and strengthened our conviction that class struggle has deepened in all the corners of the globe as a consequence of the concentration of riches in the hands of a few and miseries for the majority of our people. Marxist-Leninist theory is in full vigour and constitutes a theoretical and practical weapon at the service of the working class for transforming the society and negate exploitation of man by man in the near future, subject to the condition that it is applied correctly.
The failure of socialism in the USSR and Eastern Europe is only transitory. The reason for this failure will be found in grave errors due to bureaucracy, opportunism, treason and of course permanent attack by imperialism. On the other hand, it also confirms that the capitalist system is in grave crisis, inter-imperialist contradiction are affecting the working class the world over and promoting aggression and breach of peace. We communists have to work with intelligence and also decisively to reverse this process.
[374] __ALPHA_LVL2__ South African Communist PartyI don't think there is any point of dispute between ourselves. I thought I was raising the issue to say that the whole question of decentralisation of power is very complicated. My own view is that we need to throw the label out of the window; throw out federalism out of the window; throw out unitary state out of the window - because that restricts the framework of our debate --- whereas indeed the debate should be about on the necessity for taking power closer to the people, which indeed means decentralisation of power. Yet on the other hand, and it may seem to be contradictory, you would want a central government that has specific and sufficient power to fulfill its obligations to the population as a whole and so in a sense, we are opposed to the idealist position of federalism because it has several specific connotations. But I was interested in what happens in India, because India has enough experience where the central government intervenes because it has a Communist government, whether it was Kerala in the beginning or whetheritis West Bengal now,intermsof attempting to restrict the capacity of these regional power bases to do certain things. I was just raising that as issues for us to discuss further. But frankly speaking in my own view we really must move away from notions which were imposed on us in terms of whether it is a federal state or unitary state, we got to look concretely at the issues of the relationship that would exist between different levels of government, with a view that we have certain objectives that we are to achieve and we need to achieve them. That was the first question.
The second element which I was interested in and hoping that Jyoti Basu would say something, was the question of the relationship between exercising power, in this case what you call state power in 375 India, and in West Bengal where the Left has been for power for 16 yean, how does it impact, to what extent doesit actually impact on thenational sector. What are the problems in taking the experience of West Bengal and making them more broadly acceptable. It is my own understanding of course, that even if the CPI(M) have certainly made powerful bases in certain states but there is still a problematthe national level, intermsof perhaps winning elections to the central government. So I was very interested to have the experience of comrades from West Bengal, we do not have that experienceatall,excepttotalkaboutthis.SoIwould ask Com. Basu to help us in this field.
[376] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Jyoti BosaI did not know that I would be asked such a question as this, although for us it is very very important And, I should be very brief.
During the freedom struggle we had the perception that after we became free,India will be sort of a federal, have federal structure in the Constitution. But in that, because there are so many languages prevailing in India, very developed languages, that on a linguistic basis the states should be formed. This has always been our view even during the freedom struggle. So after freedom that happened, although there were some objections by the Congress party which was the major ruling party and people had to struggle in various areas for the formation of states on the basis of language. Anyway that happened.
Later on, although we see mat our Constitution is federal in structure, but really throughout the long years there has been an attempt at centralisation. Even concerning the powers which were there tinder the Constitution for the states. The states had certain functions to perform, and the Centre had certain other functions to perform, which the state cannot perform. So what we have been saying is that this decentralisation of power is absolutely necessary in order to strengthen India. We say, unlike the Congress party, we need a strong centre, because India is a vast country, we need a very strong centre and that cannot happen, cannot come about unless the states also become strong. By denying the states their powers, you cannot make the Centre strong by the military and the police and all the authority that you have. That is why on the question of what we call Centre-State relations in our federal structure, we, when we came to government 16yearsback, prepared a paper from 377 West Bengal for discussion. We said it is not necessary that everybody should accept it But we want to have a discussion on it. And what is this, we call the majesty of the federal system? Long debate took place. And when Indira Gandhi was alive, just before the elections she was facing, it got so much support (these discussions) that she set up a commission - Sarkaria Commission it was called - to go into the question of federalism - centre-state relations. At long last after a lot of delay that report came. We are not satisfied with many parts of that report. But even the financial part, with which we are more or less satisfied - that financial powers are being taken away from us, even what was accepted in the Constitution --- that is more and more centralisation. So we say, that the states are nearest to the people, the people demand so many things from the states. And in our five year plans also it was quite clear, the directive there that the states have to carry out certain functions, in the interests of the people. But we say where is the wherewithal, where do we have the funds? You are taking away all the funds. We are left with very little resources; As far as we can make out we do not even have the powers, which a state in the US has. We are very much dependent on the Centre. That became further clear to us - where the communist or communist-led Left governments were formed in India, immediately discrimination began apart from the general picture.
So what happened was, to be brief, we asked the central government - we asked them to call a meeting of all the Chief Ministers, to whichever party they belonged - and such meetings, my experience has been that although the Congress Chief Ministers were afraid to speak up, but they agree with us and during the recess when we have tea, they say that you have spoken very well, this is our demand also but you know our position, but how can we speak up when the Prime Minister is our leader etc. So this has gained ground.
What we have done in West Bengal is, whilst fighting for these demands, we say strong centre cannot be there without strong states. So give us those powers, decentralise those powers in the economic, political field etc and accordingly some changes in the Constitution will also be necessary that will strengthen India. When we say that we say but we are honest to ourselves, to our people. In our state what we have done is to decentralise power. When we had the government in Kerala twice, we did the same thing. In Tripura we did the same thing. So what we have done here 378 in the state, is to decentralise powers to the panchayats as we call them, local governments in the villages. Every five years we have elections, vte have a law in that respect, because we respect democracy. Whether we win or lose, elections must be held every five years both for the local government in the cities - the municipalities and the municipal corporations and the village panchayats. This time on the 30th of May about 30 million people will vote in the villages for these panchayats - this is the fourth panchayat elections that we are going to have. In the earlier elections, we now control about 70% of the panchayats, there are about 68,000 seats that will be contested by various parties. This has helped us very much in the countryside particularly. Now 50% of our state budget we spend through the panchayats and the municipalities. They take the initiative. They are involved in the planning process right from down to the state centre. This is the pattern we are placing before the people of India and fortunately in the parliament which is in session a legislation has been adopted where also reservation (which we have already done) for women - 30%, for the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes we have reservation of seats. This is what we mean by decentralisation of power it helps us to involve people in the planning process, in the political field, in the economic field. Their consciousness is raised and roused, that helps us for the future.
[379] __NUMERIC_LVL1__ [PART V] __ALPHA_LVL1__ Messages of Greetings __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Party of ChinaMay 5, 1993
The Central Committee
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
We would like to extend our greetings to you on the occasion of the International Seminar on Contemporary World Situation and the Validity of Marxism.
The theory of scientific socialism founded by Marx has revealed the universal laws governing the development of human society and continues to have great vitality today. Under the guidance of Marxism, the Communist Party of China (CPC) has been leading the Chinese people in achieving great success in the Chinese revolution and development. The CPC always persists in integrating the basic tenets of Marxism with the realities of China. Since the Third Plenary Session of its Eleventh Central Committee, by combining the fundamental principles of Marxism with the current practice of socialist construction in China, the CPC has gradually formulated the theory of building socialism with Chinese characteristics and has worked out the guidelines, principles and policies to carry it out, thus ushering in a new era of socialist development in China.
The theory of building socialism with Chinese characteristics deals with the basic questions concerning the building, consolidation and development of socialism in China. It has carried forward and developed Marxism, and has become a guide to the constant progress of the socialist cause in China.
At the present stage, the CPC is leading the people of all nationalities in China to actively contribute themselves in the great 380 practice of building socialism with Chinese characteristics. We are confident that through the concerted efforts of our Party and people, the socialist cause in China will certainly be further developed, and our ideal is bound to be realised. May the Seminar be a full success.
International Liaison Department
Central Committee
Communist Party of China
Central Committee
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
New Delhi ~
Attn: Comrade Harkishan Singh Surjeet
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Nicosia 22.4.1993
Dear Comrades ~
We would like to thank you for your in vita tion to participate in the international seminar on Contemporary World Situation and the Relevance of Marxism, that you are organising in early May.
'We express our regret that we shall not be able to participate, as the issue under discussion is an interesting one, and the event could give the opportunity for contacts and exchange of experience and views.
We are sending enclosed "Our concept of socialism'', a document elaborated by AKEL and approved by our 17th Party Congress in 1990, which gives our views on issues that the seminar is probably going to discuss.
We wish you every success in the seminar deliberations.
With best regards,
Donis Christofinis
Member of the Political Bureau
Secretary CC AKEL for International Relations
May 5, 1993
I, on behalf of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party of Korea and on my own, offer warm felicitations to the International Seminar of the Communist and Workers' Parties on the Present Situation and the Validity of Marxism which gets underway on the occasion of the 175th birthday of Karl Marx and to the delegates of the Communist and the Workers' Parties of various countries to the Seminar.
Karl Marx, an outstanding leader of the international working class, gave birth to Marxism to provide the working class with a powerful ideological and theoretical weapon for the liberation struggle and blazed a trail to the international communist movement, and his name remains deeply engraved in the minds of the progressive contemporaries for the enormous exploits he performed in the cause of human emancipation.
The unheard of intensity of the abuses and offensive against socialism and communism, the ideals of Marxism, on the part of the imperialists and reactionaries renders the international seminar on the Validity of Marxism all the more timely and important.
The Communist and Workers' Parties and the world progressive people are now faced with a pressing task to champion the Marxist idea, the ideals of socialism, in the face of the counter revolutionary offensive by the imperialists and all other reactionaries, to advance more vigorously the socialist movement and to further consolidate the ties of international unity and solidarity based on independence and equality.
I expect that your Seminar will focus on the effective exchange of experience and views in a bid to defend and advance the cause of Marxism, the socialist and communist cause, so as to greatly spur the progressive people onto further struggle for the socialist cause against imperialism.
Workers Party of Korea
[382] __ALPHA_LVL2__ Communist Refoundation of Italy Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Attn: Harkishan Singh Surjeet, General Secretary ~
Dear Comrades,
We are very sorry but the worsening of the political situation in our country does not unfortunately make it possible for us to attend the seminar organised by you and to which we had the honour to be invited.
Some weeks ago the Italian voting system was changed and we will probably have general elections in the next future. The government collapsed and a new one is being formed at the moment and on June 6th there will be local election with more than 11 millions of voters.
As you can see, our party is deeply engaged on all the matters I mentioned above and therefore we are compelled to concentrate our strength on our problems here at home.
We are however deeply interested in the topics you will discuss in your seminar and if you are going to publish its proceedings, we would like to receive some copies of them. We are moreover interested in maintaining and intensifying the political links to your party which is playing an important political role in an absolutely significant part of the world.
In this regard I hope that our parties will meet, in India or in Italy, to better learn about our respective political positions and to have a more detailed knowledge of the political, economic and social situation in our two countries.
In the meanwhile I think it would be useful to start an exchange of documentation produced by our parties.
I wish a great success to your seminar and to your Party's activity.
A fraternal embrace ~
Luciano Pettinari
Head of the International Department
The Central Committee
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Dear Comrades,
Thank you very much for your fax dated 16th April inviting our Party to attend the international seminar on Contemporary World Situation and the Validity of Marxism to be held from 5th to 7th May, 1993.
Unfortunately, due to the present financial constraints to which our party is exposed and due to our recent efforts both physically and financially directed in celebrating activities on the occasion of the May Day, it is not possible to attend the above seminar.
Nevertheless, the Central Committee wishes to extend all its support and solidarity to the CPI(M) in its struggle to fight against the imperialist machinations and capitalist exploitation and in preserving the light of socialism,
We wish the seminar a complete success and expect to hear from you regularly.
With revolutionary greetings,
Central Committee,
Communist Party
of Mauritius
Comrade Harkishan Singh Surjeet
General Secretary
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
NEW DELHI ~
Dear Comrade ~
We are grateful to you for the letter of congratulations on the occasion of the second extraordinary Congress of the Communist Party of Russian Federation.
The documents adopted by the Congress will form the platform for the streamlining of our members all over Russia in the struggle for socialism.
On March 21 our party was registered in the Ministry of Justice so we have got all the legal rights to continue our activity.
Unfortunately due to the current political situation in the country we are not able to send a delegation to the international seminar on Contemporary World Situation and the Validity of Marxism. We hope that you will find the opportunity to inform us about its results.
Dear comrade, our party expresses its willingness to continue the fraternal relations with the Communist Party of India (Marxist).
With greetings,
Comradely yours ~
First Vice Chairman of the
Central Executive Committee of the
Communist Party of Russian Federation
It is an encouraging development that the initiative of bringing together of Communist and Workers parties comes from the Indian working class and its Party. It is another shining example that the flag of Marxism, Communism and Communist solidarity is unswervingly flying high, reflecting the strong desire of the toiling people of all countries. I hope, the Seminar in Calcutta would attain a great success and it would hold high the ideology of the working class in a period when Socialism in the Soviet Union suffered a tragic and devastating setback.
The Calcutta meet will undoubtedly help the cause of scientific socialism.
Victor Anpilov,
for
Russian Communist
Workers' Party
1. Seminar is coming to a successful conclusion.
2. All parties whom we approached for participation accepted the request.
Most of them are able to participate and some have sent their papers ~
Some have expressed their inability to participate due to some difficulties and political developments. They have sent messages.
But the response shows the proposal to hold this seminar reflected the desire of communist and workers parties.
3. The papers presented and the discussions held go to indicate the basic urge of Communist and Workers parties, to meet the imperialist offensive against the science of Marxism and defending socialism in the background of the setbacks.
4. It also shows that the communist parties are today united on the following fundamental principles;.
i) Marxism is a creative science and it is as valid today as it was when it was propounded and it remains a guide to action.
ii) That setbacks have been due to distortions and deviations and they do not constitute either the negation of the science of Marxism or the goal of socialism.
iii) That socialism remains the objective for all the communist and workers parties ~
iv) That class struggle is the motive force of history ~
v) That capitalism - based on exploitation of man by man can 387 not provide remedies to the ills of present society ~
vi) That imperialism remains the main enemy of mankind and we have to unite all forces in the struggle against it and defend socialist countries against its attack.
vii) That the communist and workers parties defending Marxism lead the working class and other toiling millions towards achieving socialism.
Suggestions
Some parties have given some suggestions about some concrete issues. It is difficult to accept these ~
The scope of the seminar was very limited.
Secondly, there can not be today any guiding world revolutionary centre.
Thirdly, such exchange of opinion is necessary but it will take some more time before all of us are able to draw proper lessons from the recent experiences.
At the present juncture bilateral ties have to be strengthened while opportunities for such multilateral sharing of experiences must be carried forward.
Other points
Some comrades have raised some points regarding other parties not present here.
We suggest, if these parties agree, not to publish in the proceedings, certain references to the experiences and evaluation of parties not present here.
Again, I thank you, for accepting our invitation and making this seminar a success.
__ALPHA_LVL0__ The End. [END]