DECLARATION OF THE
REVOLUTIONARY INTERNATIONALIST MOVEMENT
Adopted by the
delegates and observers at the Second International
Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations
which
formed the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement.
Central Reorganisation
Committee, Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist)
Ceylon Communist Party
Communist Collective of Agit/Prop [Italy]
Communist Committee of Trento [Italy]
Communist Party of Bangladesh (Marxist-Leninist) [BSD (M-L)]
Communist Party of Colombia (Marxist-Leninist), Mao Tsetung
Regional Committee
Communist Party of Peru
Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist
Haitian Revolutionary Internationalist Group
Nepal Communist Party (Marshal)
New Zealand Red Flag Group
Revolutionary Internationalist Contingent [Britain]
Proletarian Communist Organisation, Marxist-Leninist
[Italy]
Proletarian Party of Purba Bangla
(Bangladesh)
Revolutionary Communist Group of Colombia
Leading Committee, Revolutionary Communist Party, India
Revolutionary Communist Party, USA
Revolutionary Communist Union [Dominican Republic]
Union of Iranian Communists (Sarbedaran)
Today the
world is on the threshold of momentous events. The crisis of the imperialist system
is rapidly bringing about the danger of the outbreak of a new, third, world war
as well as the real perspective for revolution in countries throughout the
world." The scientific accuracy of these words from the Joint Communique of our First International Conference in Autumn
1980 have not only been fully borne out by the recent developments in the
world, but the world situation has been further accentuated and aggravated
since that time.
Thus the
Marxist-Leninist movement is confronted with the exceptionally serious
responsibility to further unify and prepare its ranks for the tremendous
challenges and momentous battles shaping up ahead. The historic mission of the
proletariat calls ever more urgently for an all-out preparation for sudden
changes and leaps in developments, particularly at this current conjuncture
where national developments are more profoundly affected by developments on a
world scale, and where unprecedented prospects for revolution are in the
making. We must sharpen our revolutionary vigilance and increase our political,
ideological, organisational and military readiness in
order to wield these opportunities in the best possible manner for the
interests of our class and to conquer the most advanced positions possible for
the world proletarian revolution.
Armed with the
scientific teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin
and Mao Tsetung we are fully conscious of the tasks
expected of us in the present situation and are proud to accept and act in
accordance with this historic responsibility.
The
Marxist-Leninist movement continues to confront a deep and serious crisis which
came to a head following the reactionary coup d'etat
in
The
international communist movement is developing through a process of further
consolidated unity and advance along the scientific principles of
Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought. Since 1980 we
have developed our strength and increased our ability to influence and lead
developments. Our Second International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties
and Organisations which was successfully convened
despite unfavourable and difficult conditions,
represents a qualitative leap in the unity and maturing of our movement. The
tasks that cry out to be done can and shall be accomplished by forging an
invincible barricade against revisionist and all bourgeois ideology, by
providing scientific leadership to and standing in the forefront of the surging
revolutionary waves, by consciously applying the principles of
Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought to guide our
practice and sum up our experience in the crucible of revolutionary class
struggle.
The following
Declaration has been forged through painstaking, comprehensive discussions and
principled struggle by the delegates and observers at the Second International
Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations
which formed the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement.
The World Situation
All the major contradictions of the world
imperialist system are rapidly accentuating: the contradiction between various
imperialist powers, the contradiction between imperialism and the oppressed
peoples and nations, and the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the
proletariat in the imperialist countries. All of these contradictions have a
common origin in the capitalist mode of production and its fundamental
contradiction. The rivalry between the two blocs of imperialist powers led by
the
The post World
War II world is rapidly coming apart at the seams. The international economic
and political relations the "division of the world" - established
through and in the aftermath of World War II no longer correspond to the needs
of the various imperialist powers to "peacefully" extend and expand
their profit empires. While the post World War II world has undergone important
changes as a result of conflicts between the imperialists and, especially, as a
result of revolutionary struggle, today it is this entire network of economic, political and military relations that is being called into
question. The relative stability of the major imperialist powers and the
relative prosperity of a handful of countries based on the blood and misery of
the exploited majority of the world's people and nations is coming unraveled.
The revolutionary struggles of the oppressed nations and
peoples is again on the rise and delivering new blows to the imperialist
world order.
It is in this
context that the statement by Mao Tsetung,
"Either revolution will prevent war, or war will give rise to
revolution" rings out all the more clearly and takes on urgent importance.
The very logic of the imperialist system and the revolutionary struggles is
preparing a new situation. The contradiction between the rival bands of
imperialists, between the imperialists and the oppressed nations, between the
proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the imperialist countries, are all likely in
the coming period to express themselves by the force of arms on an
unprecedented scale. As Stalin said in regard to the First World War:
The significance of the imperialist war which broke out ten years ago lies,
among other things, in the fact that it gathered all these contradictions into
a single knot and threw them on to the scales, thereby accelerating and
facilitating the revolutionary battles of the proletariat.
The heightening of contradictions is now drawing, and will do so even more
dramatically in the future, all countries and regions of the world and sections
of the masses previously lulled to sleep or oblivious to political life into
the vortex of world history. And so the revolutionary communists must get
prepared, and prepare the class conscious workers and revolutionary sections of
the people and step up their revolutionary struggle.
Communists are
resolute opponents of imperialist war and must mobilise
and lead the masses in the fight against preparations for a third world war
which would be the greatest crime committed in the history of mankind. But the
Marxist-Leninists will never hide the truth from the masses: only revolution,
revolutionary war that the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary forces are
leading or preparing to lead, can prevent this crime. Marxist-Leninists must
seize hold of the revolutionary possibilities that are developing rapidly and
lead the masses in stepping up the revolutionary struggle on all fronts -
beginning revolutionary warfare where that is possible, stepping up
preparations where the conditions for such revolutionary warfare are not yet
ripe. In this way the struggle for communism will advance and it is possible
that the victory of the proletariat and the oppressed peoples in the course of
decisive battles will shatter the imperialists' present preparations for world
war, establish the rule of the working class in a number of countries and
create an overall world situation more favourable to
the advance of the revolutionary struggle. If, on the other hand, the
revolutionary struggle is not capable of preventing a third world war, the
communists and the revolutionary proletariat and masses must be prepared to mobilise the outrage that such a war and the inevitable
suffering accompanying it will engender and direct it against the source of war
- imperialism, take advantage-of the weakened position of the enemy and in this
way turn a reactionary imperialist war into a just war against imperialism and
reaction.
Since
imperialism has integrated the world into a single global system land is
increasingly doing so) the world situation increasingly influences the
developments in each country; thus revolutionary forces all over the world must
base themselves on a correct evaluation of the overall world situation. This
does not negate the crucial task they face of evaluating the specific
conditions in each country, formulating specific strategy and tactics and
developing revolutionary practice. Unless this dialectical relationship between
the overall situation at the global level and the concrete conditions in each
country is grasped correctly by Marxist-Leninists they will not be able to utilise the extremely favourable
situation at the global level in favour of revolution
in each country.
Tendencies in
the international movement to view the revolution in one country apart from the
overall struggle for communism must be struggled against: Lenin pointed out,
"There is one, and only one, kind of real internationalism, and that is -
working wholeheartedly for the development of the revolutionary movement and
the revolutionary struggle in one's own country, and supporting {by propaganda,
sympathy and material aid) this struggle, this, and only this, line in every
country without exception." Lenin stressed that proletarian
revolutionaries must approach the question of their revolutionary work not from
the point of view of "my" country but "from the point of view of
my share in the preparation, in the propaganda, and in the acceleration of the
world proletarian revolution."
On the Two Component
Parts of the World Proletarian Revolution
Lenin analysed long ago the division of the world
between a handful of advanced capitalist countries and the great number of
oppressed nations comprising the largest part of the world's territory and
population which the imperialists parasitically pillage and maintain in an
enforced state of dependency and backwardness. From this reality flows the
Leninist view, confirmed by history, that the world proletarian revolution is
composed essentially of two streams - the proletarian-socialist revolution
waged by the proletariat and its allies in the imperialist citadels and the
national liberation, or new democratic revolution waged by the nations and
peoples subjugated to imperialism. The alliance between these two revolutionary
currents remains the cornerstone of revolutionary strategy in the era of
imperialism.
In the period
since the Second World War until now the struggle of the oppressed peoples and
nations has been the storm centre of the world revolutionary struggle.
Prosperity, stability and "democracy" in a number of imperialist
states has been bought and paid for by the intensified exploitation and misery
of the masses in the oppressed countries. Far from eliminating the national and
colonial question, the development of neo-colonialism has further subjugated
whole nations and peoples to the requirements of international capital and led
to a whole series of revolutionary wars against imperialist domination.
The current
intensification of world contradictions while bringing forth further
possibilities for these movements also places new obstacles and new tasks
before them. Despite efforts and even some successes of the imperialist powers
in subverting or perverting the revolutionary struggles of the oppressed
masses, especially in the hopes of turning them into weapons of
inter-imperialist rivalry, these struggles continue to deal powerful blows to
the imperialist system, and accelerate the development of revolutionary
possibilities in the world as a whole.
In the
imperialist countries of the Western bloc the post World War II period has been
essentially marked by a non-revolutionary situation reflecting the relative
stability of imperialist rule in these countries inseparably linked to the
intense exploitation of the oppressed peoples by these imperialist states.
Nevertheless, the revolutionary prospects in these countries are more favourable than in any time in recent memory. History has
shown that revolutionary situations in these types of countries are rare and
are generally connected with the acute intensification of world contradictions,
such as the conjuncture taking form in the world today.
The mass
revolutionary struggles that developed in most of the Western imperialist
countries especially during the 1960s demonstrate forcefully the possibility of
proletarian revolution in these countries, despite the fact that the conditions
were not favourable for a seizure of power at that
time and these movements declined along with the overall ebb in the world
movement. Today the sharpening world situation is increasingly reflected in
these countries as seen, for example, by important rebellions of the lower
strata of the proletariat in some imperialist countries as well as the growth
of a powerful movement against imperialist war preparations in a number of countries,
including within it a more revolutionary section.
In the
capitalist and imperialist countries of the Eastern bloc important cracks and
fissures in the relative stability of the rule by the state-capitalist
bourgeoisie are more and more apparent. In
It is
important that the revolutionary elements in both kinds of countries be
educated to understand the nature of the strategic alliance between the
revolutionary proletarian movement in the advanced countries and the
national-democratic revolutions in the oppressed nations. The social-chauvinist
position that would deny the importance of the revolutionary struggle of the
oppressed peoples or their ability, under the leadership of the proletariat and
a genuine Marxist-Leninist party, to lead to the establishment of socialism is
still a dangerous deviation to be combated. The modern revisionists, led by the
USSR, who claim that a national liberation struggle can only be successful if
bestowed by "aid" from its "natural (imperialist) ally" and
the Trotskyites who negate in principle the possibility of the transformation
of a national-democratic revolution into a socialist revolution are examples of
this pernicious tendency. On the other hand, in the recent period a significant
problem has been another deviation which ignores the possibility of
revolutionary situations arising in the advanced countries or considers that
such revolutionary situations could only arise as a direct result of the
advances in the national liberation struggles. Both these deviations sap the
strength of the revolutionary proletariat in that they fail to take account of
the developing world conjuncture and the possibilities for revolutionary
advances in different kinds of countries and on a world scale that flow from
it.
Some Questions Regarding the
History of the International Communist Movement
In the little over a century since the publication of the Communist
Manifesto and its call "workers of all countries, unite!" an
immense wealth of experience has been accumulated by the international
proletariat. This experience comprehends the revolutionary movement in
different types of countries in the great days of decisive victories and
revolutionary elan and the periods of the darkest
reaction and retreat. In the course of the twists and turns of the movement the
science of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought has
taken shape and developed through a constant struggle against those who cut out
its revolutionary heart and/or render it a stale and lifeless dogma. Important
turning points in the development of world history and the class struggle have
invariably been accompanied by fierce battles on the ideological front between
Marxism and revisionism and dogmatism. This was the case with Lenin's struggle
against the Second International (which corresponded with the outbreak of the
First World War and the development of a revolutionary situation in Russia and
elsewhere} and in the struggle of Mao Tsetung against
modern Soviet revisionism, a great struggle which reflected world historic
developments (the reestablishment of capitalism in the USSR, the
intensification of the class struggle in socialist China, the development of a
worldwide upsurge of revolutionary struggle aimed particularly at US imperialism).
Similarly, the profound crisis that the international communist movement is now
experiencing is a reflection of the reversal of proletarian rule in China and
the all-round attack on the Cultural Revolution following the death of Mao Tsetung and the coup d'etat of Teng Hsiao-ping and Hua Kuo-feng, as well as the overall heightening of world
contradictions accentuating the danger of world war and the prospects for
revolution. Today, as in the other great struggles, the forces fighting for a
revolutionary line are a small minority encircled and attacked by revisionists
and bourgeois apologists of all stripes. Nevertheless, these forces represent
the future, and the further advances of the international communist movement
depend on their ability to forge a political line which charts the path forward
for the revolutionary proletariat in the current complex situation. This is
because if one's line is correct, even if one has not a single soldier at first
there will be soldiers and even if there is no political power, power will be
gained. This is borne out by the historical experience of the international
communist movement since the time of Marx.
An extremely
important element for the elaboration of such a general line for the
international communist movement is the correct evaluation of the historical
experience of our movement. It would be extremely irresponsible, and contrary
to the Marxist theory of knowledge, to fail to attach adequate importance to
experience gained and lessons learned in the course of mass revolutionary
struggles of millions of people and paid for by countless martyrs.
Today, the
Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, together with other Maoist forces, are the inheritors of Marx, Engels,
Lenin, Stalin and Mao, and they must firmly base themselves on this heritage.
But they must also, on the basis of this heritage, dare to criticise
its shortcomings. There are experiences which people should praise and there
are experiences which should make people grieve. Communists and revolutionaries
in all countries should ponder and seriously study these experiences of success
and failure so as to draw correct conclusions and useful lessons from them.
The summation
of our heritage is a collective responsibility which must be carried out by the
entire international communist movement. Such a summation must be done in a
ruthlessly scientific manner, basing itself on Marxist-Leninist principles and
fully taking into account the concrete historical conditions which existed then
and the limits they placed on the proletarian vanguard and above all in the
spirit of making the past serve the present, in order to avoid metaphysical
errors of measuring the past with today's yardstick, disregarding historical
conditions. Such a thorough summation will undoubtedly take a fairly long time
but the pressure of world events, the opening up of revolutionary
possibilities, demands that certain key lessons be drawn today to better enable
the vanguard forces of the proletariat to fulfill their responsibilities.
The summation
of historical experience has, itself, always been a sharp arena of class
struggle. Ever since the defeat of the Paris Commune, opportunists and
revisionists have seized upon the defeats and shortcomings of the proletariat
to reverse right and wrong, confound the secondary with the principal, and thus
conclude that the proletariat "should not have taken to arms." The
emergence of new conditions has often been used as an excuse to negate
fundamental principles of Marxism under the signboard of its "creative
development." At the same time, it is incorrect and just as damaging to
abandon the Marxist critical spirit, to fail to sum up the shortcomings as well
as the successes of the proletariat, and to rest content with upholding or
reclaiming positions considered correct in the past. Such an approach would
make Marxism-Leninism brittle and unable to withstand the attacks of the enemy
and incapable of leading new advances in the class struggle - and suffocate its
revolutionary essence.
In fact,
history has shown that real creative developments of Marxism land not phoney revisionist distortions) have always been
inseparably linked with a fierce struggle to defend and uphold basic principles
of Marxism-Leninism. Lenin's two-fold struggle against the open revisionists
and against those, like Kautsky, who opposed
revolution under the guise of "Marxist orthodoxy" and Mao Tsetung's great battle to oppose the modern revisionists
and their negation of the experience of building socialism in the USSR under
Lenin and Stalin while carrying out a thorough and scientific criticism of the
roots of revisionism are evidence of this.
Today a
similar approach is necessary to the thorny questions and problems of the
history of the international communist movement. A serious danger comes from
those who, in the face of setbacks in the international communist movement
since the death of Mao Tsetung, declare that
Marxism-Leninism has failed or is outmoded and the entire experience acquired
by the proletariat must be put into question. This tendency would negate the
experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat in the
This more or
less open revisionism, whether it comes from the traditional pro-Moscow parties
or its "Euro-communist" current from the revisionist usurpers in
Upholding Mao Tsetung's qualitative development of the science of
Marxism-Leninism represents a particularly important and pressing question in
the international movement and among the class conscious workers and other
revolutionary minded people in the world today. The principle involved is
nothing less than whether or not to uphold and build upon the decisive
contributions to the proletarian revolution and the science of Marxism-Leninism
made by Mao Tsetung. It is therefore nothing less
than a question of whether or not to uphold Marxism-Leninism itself.
Stalin said,
"Leninism is Marxism of the era of imperialism and the proletarian
revolution." This is entirely correct. Since Lenin's death the world situation
has undergone great changes. But the era has not changed. The fundamental
principles of Leninism are not outdated, they remain
the theoretical basis guiding our thinking today. We affirm that Mao Tsetung Thought is a new stage in the development of Marxism-Leninism.
Without upholding and building on Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung
Thought it is not possible to defeat revisionism, imperialism and reaction in
general.
The
The October Revolution in
The
international impact of the Russian Revolution, coming especially as it did in
the course of the world conjuncture marked by the First World War and the
upsurge of revolutionary activity that accompanied it, was immense. From the
beginning the leaders and class conscious workers in the new socialist state
viewed the success of the revolution there not as an end in itself but as the
first major breakthrough in the worldwide struggle to defeat imperialism,
uproot exploitation and establish communism throughout the world. In the wake
of the Russian Revolution a new, Communist, International was formed on the
basis of assimilating the vital lessons of the Bolshevik revolution and in
rupturing with the reformism and social democracy that had poisoned and
eventually characterised the great majority of socialist
parties making up the Second International. The Russian Revolution and the Comintern in connection with the objective developments
brought about by World War I transformed the struggle for socialism and
communism from an essentially European phenomenon into a truly worldwide
struggle for the first time in history.
Lenin and
Stalin developed the proletarian line on the national and colonial question,
stressing the importance of the revolutions in oppressed countries in the
overall process of the world proletarian revolution and arguing against those
such as Trotsky who held that the revolution in these countries was dependent
on the victory of the proletariat in the imperialist countries and denied the
possibility of the proletariat carrying out a socialist revolution on the basis
of having led the first, bourgeois democratic stage of the revolution in these
types of countries.
The period
that followed the Russian Revolution was marked by worldwide revolutionary
ferment and attempts at establishing working class political power in a number
of countries. Despite the unbending assistance the newly established USSR gave
and the political attention by Lenin to the revolutionary movement worldwide,
the temporary resolution of the crisis that World War I concentrated and the
remaining strength of the imperialist powers as well as the weaknesses of the
revolutionary working class movement led to the defeat of the revolution
outside the borders of the USSR.
Lenin and his
successor Stalin were faced with the necessity of safeguarding the gains of the
revolution in the
These
soul-stirring battles and the important victories won in them greatly spread
the influence of Marxism-Leninism and increased the prestige of the
Nevertheless it
can be seen in retrospect that the progress of the socialist revolution in the
This incorrect
understanding of the nature of socialist society also contributed to Stalin's
failure to adequately distinguish the contradictions between the people and the
enemy and the contradictions among the people themselves. This in turn
contributed to a marked tendency to resort to bureaucratic methods of handling
these contradictions and gave more openings to the enemy.
In the period
following the death of Lenin, Stalin led the Communist International which continued
to play an important role in advancing the world revolution and developing and
consolidating the newly formed Communist Parties.
In 1935 an
extremely important Congress of the Communist International was held in the
midst of a severe world economic crisis, the growing threat of a new world war
and imperialist attacks on the Soviet Union, the coming to power of fascism in
Germany and the smashing of the German Communist Party, and the establishment
of fascism or menace of the same in a number of other countries. It was
necessary and correct for the Communist International to try to develop a
tactical line concerning all of these questions.
Because the
Seventh Congress of the Comintern has had such a deep
influence on the history of the international movement it is necessary to make
a sober and scientific evaluation of the Report of the Congress in the light of
the existing historical conditions at the time. In particular the reasons for
the defeat of the German Communist Party must be deeply studied. Nevertheless
certain conclusions can be drawn now, and must be in light of the present tasks
of today's Marxist-Leninists and three clear deviations must be identified.
First the
distinction between fascism and bourgeois democracy in the imperialist countries,
while certainly of real importance for the Communist Parties, was treated in a
way that tended to make an absolute of the difference between these two forms
of bourgeois dictatorship and also to make a strategic stage of the struggle
against fascism. Secondly, a thesis was developed, which held that the growing immiseration of the proletariat would create in the
advanced countries the material basis for healing the split in the working
class and its consequent polarisation that Lenin had
so powerfully analysed in his works on imperialism
and the collapse of the Second International. While it is certainly true that
the depth of the crisis undermined the social base of the labour
aristocracy in the advanced capitalist countries and led to real possibilities
that the Communist Parties needed to make use of to unite with large sections
of the workers previously under the hegemony of the Social Democrats, it was
not correct to believe that in any kind of a strategic sense the split in the
working class could be healed. Thirdly, when fascism was defined as the regime
of the most reactionary section of the monopoly bourgeoisie in the imperialist
countries, this left the door open to the dangerous, reformist and pacifist
tendency to see a section of the monopoly bourgeoisie as progressive.
While it is
necessary to sum up these errors and to learn from them it is just as necessary
to recognise the Communist International, including
in this period, as part of the heritage of the revolutionary struggle for
communism and to beat back liquidationist and
Trotskyite attempts to seize upon real errors to draw reactionary
conclusions. Even during this period the Communist International mobilised millions of workers against class enemies and led
heroic struggles against reaction such as the organising
of the International Brigades to fight against fascism in
The Communist
International also gave, correctly, great emphasis to the defence
of the
In circumstances
of imperialist encirclement of (a) socialist state(s) defending these
revolutionary conquests is a very important task for the international
proletariat. It will also be necessary for socialist states to carry out a
diplomatic struggle and at times to enter into different types of agreements
with one or another imperialist power. But the defence
of socialist states must always be subordinate to the overall progress of the
world revolution and must never been seen as the equivalent (and
certainly not the substitute) for the international struggle of the
proletariat. In certain situations the defence of a
socialist country can be principal, but this is so precisely because its defence is decisive for the advance of the world
revolution.
It is necessary
to sum up the experiences of the international communist movement during the
period around the Second World War in the light of these lessons. World War II
cannot be considered a mere repetition of World War I, for, even if the same
murderous logic of the capitalist system was responsible for it, it was a
complex combination of contradictions. At its beginning in 1939 it was, as Mao
then pointed out "unjust, predatory and imperialist in character."
But a major change with global implications took place when Hitler's
Particularly
with the entry of the
These
differing aspects led on the one hand to the growth of socialist forces, the
defeat of the fascist imperialist powers, the weakening of imperialism and the
quickening tempo of the national liberation struggles. On the other hand they
led to a recasting of the imperialist division of the world with the
There were great
revolutionary achievements in the course of World War II; at the same time it
is impossible not to see serious errors and begin the collective process of
deeply summing them up so as to be better prepared for coming storms. In
particular we can note the error of eclectically combining the above mentioned
contradictions. In practical political terms, the diplomatic struggle and
international agreements of the
While
cherishing and upholding the monumental revolutionary struggles and victories
that took place in this important period and the years immediately following,
today's Marxist-Leninists will have to deepen their understanding of these
errors and their basis.
The socialist
camp that emerged from the Second World War was never solid. Little
revolutionary transformation was carried out in most of the Eastern European
Peoples' Democracies. In the
The coup d'etat of Khrushchev and the revisionists in the
Mao Tsetung,
the Cultural Revolution and the Marxist-Leninist Movement
Beginning immediately after the coup d'etat of
Khrushchev, Mao Tsetung and the Marxist-Leninists in
the Chinese Communist Party began to analyse the
developments in the
In the Proposal
and the polemics Mao and the Chinese Communist Party correctly
- upheld the Leninist
position on the dictatorship of the proletariat and refuted the revisionist
theory of "state of the whole people";
- upheld the necessity
of armed revolution and opposed the strategy of a "peaceful
transition to socialism";
- supported and
encouraged the development of the national wars of liberation of the
oppressed peoples; exposing the sham independence of
"neo-colonialism" and refuting the revisionist position that the
wars of liberation should be avoided because they endanger "world
peace";
- made an overall
positive evaluation of Stalin and the experience of construction of
socialism in the
- opposed the efforts
of Khrushchev to impose a revisionist line on other parties as well as criticising Thorez, Togliatti, Tito and other modern revisionists;
- put forward in an
embryonic form the thesis Mao Tsetung was
developing concerning the class nature of socialism and carrying through the
revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat;
- called for a thorough study
of the historical experience of the international communist movement and
the roots of revisionism.
These points, as well as others contained in the Proposal and the
polemics were and remain vital elements to distinguish Marxism-Leninism from
revisionism. Through these polemics Mao and the Chinese Communist Party
encouraged the Marxist-Leninists to split from the revisionists and form new
proletarian revolutionary parties. The polemics represented a radical rupture
with modern revisionism and a sufficient basis for the Marxist-Leninists to go
forward into battle. Yet, on a number of questions, the criticism of
revisionism was not thorough enough and some erroneous views were incorporated
even while criticising others. Exactly because of the
important role these polemics and Mao and the Chinese Communist Party played in
giving birth to a new Marxist-Leninist movement it is correct and necessary to
consider the secondary, negative aspect in the polemics and in the struggle
waged by the Communist Party of China in the international communist movement.
In relation to
the imperialist countries, the Proposal put forward the view that "In the
capitalist countries which US imperialism controls or is trying to control, the
working class and the people should direct their attacks mainly against US
imperialism, but also against their own monopoly capitalists and other
reactionary forces who are betraying the national interests." This view,
which seriously affected the development of the Marxist-Leninist movement in
these types of countries, obscures the fact that in imperialist countries the
"national interests" are imperialist interests and are not betrayed,
but on the contrary defended, by the ruling monopoly capitalist class despite
whatever alliances it may make with other imperialist powers and despite the
inevitably unequal nature of such an alliance. The proletariat of these
countries is thus encouraged to strive to outbid the imperialist bourgeoisie as
the best defenders of its own interests. This view had a long history in the
international communist movement and should be broken with.
While the CPC
paid great attention to the development of Marxist-Leninist parties in
opposition to the revisionists they did not find the necessary forms and ways
to develop the international unity of the communists. Despite contributions to
the ideological and political unity this was not reflected by efforts to build organisational unity on a world scale. The CPC had an
exaggerated understanding of the negative aspects of the Comintern,
mainly those caused by over-centralisation, which led
to crushing the initiative and independence of constituent communist parties.
While the CPC correctly criticised the concept of
Father party, pointed out its harmful influence within
the international communist movement, and stressed the principles of fraternal
relations between parties, the lack of an organised
forum for debating views and achieving a common viewpoint did not help resolve
this problem but in fact exacerbated it.
If the
theoretical struggle against modern revisionism played a vital role in the
rebuilding of a Marxist-Leninist movement it was especially the Great
Proletarian Cultural Revolution, an unprecedented new form of struggle, itself
in large part a fruit of this combat against modern revisionism,
that gave rise to a whole new generation of Marxist-Leninists. The tens
of millions of workers, peasants and revolutionary youth who went into battle
to overthrow the capitalist roaders entrenched in the
party and state apparatus and to further revolutionise
society struck a vibrant chord among millions of people across the world who
were rising up as part of the revolutionary upsurge that swept the world in the
1960s and early 1970s.
The Cultural
Revolution represents the most advanced experience of the proletarian
dictatorship and the revolutionising of society. For
the first time the workers and other revolutionary elements were armed with a
clear understanding of the nature of the class struggle under socialism; of the
necessity to rise up and overthrow the capitalist roaders
who would inevitably emerge from within the socialist society and which are
especially concentrated in the leadership of the party itself and to struggle
to further advance the socialist transformation and thus dig away at the soil
which engenders these capitalist elements. Great victories were won in the
course of the Cultural Revolution which prevented the revisionist restoration
in
Lenin said,
"Only he is a Marxist who extends the recognition of class struggle to the
recognition of the dictatorship of the proletariat". In the light of the
invaluable lessons and advances achieved through the Great Proletarian Cultural
Revolution led by Mao Tsetung, this criterion put
forward by Lenin has been further sharpened. Now it can be stated that only he
is a Marxist who extends the recognition of class struggle to the recognition
of the dictatorship of the proletariat and to the recognition of the objective
existence of classes, antagonistic class contradictions and of the continuation
of the class struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat throughout the
whole period of socialism until communism. And as Mao so powerfully stated,
"Lack of clarity on this question will lead to revisionism."
The Cultural
Revolution was the living proof of the vitality of Marxism-Leninism. It showed
that the proletarian revolution was unlike all previous revolutions which could
only result in one exploiting system replacing another. It was a source of
great inspiration to the revolutionaries in all countries. For all these
reasons the Cultural Revolution and Mao Tsetung
earned the lasting and vicious abuse of all reactionaries and revisionists and
for these same reasons the Cultural Revolution remains an indispensable part of
the revolutionary legacy of the international communist movement.
Despite the
tremendous victories of the Cultural Revolution the revisionists in the Chinese
party and state continued to maintain important positions and promoted lines
and policies which did considerable harm to the still fragile efforts to
rebuild a genuine international communist movement. The revisionists in
One of the
essential contradictions or features of the epoch of imperialism and the
proletarian revolution is the contradiction between socialist states and
imperialist states. While at the present time this contradiction has been
temporarily eliminated as a result of the revisionist transformation of a number
of formerly socialist states, it is no less true that summing up the experience
of the communist movement in handling this contradiction remains an important
theoretical task, for it is inevitable that the proletariat will again find
itself in a position where one or a number of socialist states will be
confronted with the existence of predatory imperialist enemies.
In 1976
shortly after the death of Mao Tsetung the capitalist
roaders in
This coup d'etat met with resistance from the revolutionaries in the
Chinese Communist Party who have continued to struggle for a restoration of
proletarian rule in that country. Internationally, revolutionary communists in
many countries saw through the revisionist line of Hua
Kuo-feng and Teng
Hsiao-ping and criticised and exposed the capitalist roaders in
Nevertheless
it was inevitable that the restoration of capitalism in a country comprising one
quarter of the world's population and the revisionist capture of the
Marxist-Leninist party that had been in the vanguard of the international
movement would profoundly affect the world revolutionary struggle and the
Marxist-Leninist movement. Many parties previously part of the international
communist movement embraced the revisionists in
While a
certain crisis was to be expected in the international communist movement
following the coup d'etat in
The Tasks of Revolutionary
Communists
The task of revolutionary communists in all countries is to hasten the
development of the world revolution - the overthrow of imperialism and reaction
by the proletariat and the revolutionary masses; the establishment of the
dictatorship of the proletariat in accordance with the necessary stages and
alliances in different countries; and the struggle to eliminate all the
material and ideological vestiges of exploiting society and thus achieve
classless society, communism, throughout the world. First and foremost
communists must remember and act in accordance with their reason for being, otherwise they are of no use to the revolution, and
worse, degenerate into obstacles in its path.
Experience has
shown that proletarian revolution can only be achieved and carried forward by a
genuine proletarian party based on the science of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought, constructed on Leninist lines, capable of
attracting and training the best revolutionary elements among the proletariat
and other sections of the masses. Today there is no such party in most countries
in the world and even where such parties exist they are generally not
ideologically or organizationally strong enough to meet the requirements and
the opportunities of the coming period. For these reasons the establishment and
strengthening of genuine Marxist-Leninist parties is a vital task for the
entire international communist movement.
In countries
where no Marxist-Leninist party exists the immediate
task facing the revolutionary communists there is to form such a party with the
aid of the international communist movement. The key to the establishment of
the party is the development of a correct political line and programme, both as regards the particularities in a given
country and the overall world situation. The Marxist-Leninist party must be
built in close relationship with carrying out revolutionary work among the
masses, implementing a revolutionary mass line, and, in particular, addressing
and resolving the pressing political questions which must be resolved in order
for the revolutionary movement to advance. If this is not done the task of
party building can become sterile, divorced from revolutionary practice and
lead nowhere. On the other hand it is just as wrong to make the formation of
the party dependent upon the rallying of a certain number of members or to
insist that a certain quantitative influence among the masses be achieved
before the party's formation. In most cases when the party is first formed, it
will be composed of a relatively small number of members; in any event, the task
of rallying the revolutionary elements to the party's banner and deepening the
influence of the party among the proletariat and masses is a constant task.
The
Marxist-Leninist party must be built and strengthened in the course of waging
an active ideological struggle against bourgeois and petit-bourgeois influences
in its ranks. In building the vanguard party, Marxist-Leninists should learn
from the experience of the Cultural Revolution through which Mao fought to
insure the party's proletarian character and vanguard role. Mao's understanding
of the two-line struggle in the party, his criticisms of erroneous ideas of
"a monolithic party" and his emphasis on the need for the ideological
remoulding of party members enriched the basic
concept of the vanguard party developed by Lenin. It is important to create a
political situation in which there are both centralism and democracy, both discipline and freedom, both unity of will and personal
ease of mind and liveliness.
Without being
guided by revolutionary theory, practice gropes in the dark. The
Marxist-Leninist parties, and the international communist movement as a whole,
must deepen their grasp of revolutionary theory in the course of making a
concrete analysis of concrete conditions in society and the world.
Marxist-Leninists must not abandon the field of analysis of new phenomena to
others and must actively wage the theoretical struggle concerning all the vital
problems and questions of debate in the revolutionary movement and society as a
whole.
The Marxist-Leninist
party must be built and organised with the
fundamental objective of seizing power firmly in mind and undertake the task of
preparing itself and the proletariat and revolutionary masses organizationally,
politically and ideologically. As the Joint Communique
of Autumn 1980 put it, "In short, communists are advocates of
revolutionary warfare." This revolutionary war and other forms of
revolutionary struggle must be carried out as a key arena for training the
revolutionary masses to be capable of wielding political power and transforming
society. Even when conditions do not yet exist for the armed struggle of the
masses, communists must carry out the necessary work in preparation for the
emergence of such conditions. This principle has a whole series of implications
for the Marxist-Leninist parties, regardless of the differences in tasks and
stages the revolution will go through in different countries, including that
the party, the backbone of which must be organised on
an illegal basis, should be prepared to withstand the repression of the
reactionaries who will never peacefully tolerate for long a genuine
revolutionary party.
While engaging
in, or preparing for, the armed struggle for power the Marxist-Leninist party
should utilise different forms of legal and/or open
work. History has shown that such work while important and sometimes even
critical in a given period, must be coupled with exposure of the class nature
of bourgeois democracy and in no circumstances should the communists drop their
guard and fail to take the necessary measures to insure the continued ability
of the party to carry out revolutionary work when different legal possibilities
disappear. Past experiences of handling the contradiction between utilising legal and open possibilities without falling into
legalism and parliamentary cretinism should be summed up and the appropriate
lessons drawn.
To carry out
its revolutionary tasks, to prepare the masses for the seizure of power, the
Marxist-Leninist party must be armed with a regularly appearing communist
press, even though the press will have a different role in relation to the
tasks posed by the path of revolution in the two types of countries. The
communist press must be neither petty and narrow nor dry and dogmatic. It must
strive to arm the class conscious proletariat and others with an all-round view
of society and the world, principally through analysis and political exposure
following close on the heel of events.
The
Marxist-Leninist party in every country must be built as a contingent of the
international communist movement and must carry out its struggle as part of,
and subordinate to, the worldwide struggle for communism. The party must
educate its own ranks, the class conscious workers and the revolutionary masses
in the spirit of proletarian internationalism, recognising
that internationalism is not simply the support rendered of the proletariat in
one country to another but, more importantly, a reflection of the fact that the
proletariat is a single class worldwide with a single class interest, faces a
world system of imperialism, and has the task of liberating all of humanity.
Such
internationalist education and propaganda is an indispensable part of preparing
the party and proletariat to continue to carry the revolution forward after
political power has been achieved in a given country. The achievement of
political power, and even the establishment of a socialist system not based on
exploitation, must be seen not as the end in itself but as one part of a long
transition period full of twists and turns and inevitable setbacks as well as
advances until the goal of worldwide communism has been achieved.
Tasks in the Colonial, Semi (or
Neo) Colonial Countries
The colonial (or neo-colonial) countries subjugated by imperialism have
constituted the main arena of the worldwide struggle of the proletariat in the
period since World War II and up until the present day. In this period a great
deal of experience has been achieved in waging revolutionary struggle,
including revolutionary warfare. Imperialism has been handed extremely serious
defeats and the proletariat has won imposing victories including the
establishment of socialist countries. At the same time the communist movement
has obtained bitter experience where the revolutionary masses in these
countries have waged heroic struggles, including wars of national liberation,
which have not led to the establishment of political power by the proletariat
and its allies but where the fruits of the victories of the people have been
picked by new exploiters usually in league with one or another imperialist
power(s). All of this shows that the international communist movement has a
very important task to critically sum up the several decades of experience in
waging revolution in these kinds of countries.
The point of
reference for elaborating revolutionary strategy and tactics in the colonial,
semi (or neo) colonial countries remains the theory developed by Mao Tsetung in the long years of revolutionary warfare in
The target of
the revolution in countries of this kind is foreign imperialism and the
comprador-bureaucrat bourgeoisie and feudals, which
are classes closely linked to and dependent on imperialism. In these countries
the revolution will pass through two stages: a first, new democratic revolution
which leads directly to the second, socialist revolution. The character, target
and tasks of the first stage of the revolution enables
and requires the proletariat to form a broad united front of all classes and
strata that can be won to support the new democratic programme.
It must do so, however, on the basis of developing and strengthening the
independent forces of the proletariat, including in the appropriate conditions
its own armed forces and establishing the hegemony of the proletariat among the
other sections of the revolutionary masses, especially the poor peasants. The
cornerstone of this alliance is the worker-peasant alliance and the carrying
out of the agrarian revolution (i.e. the struggle against semi-feudal
exploitation in the countryside and/or the fulfillment of the slogan "land
to the tiller") occupies a central part of the new democratic programme.
In these
countries the exploitation of the proletariat and the masses is severe, the
outrages of imperialist domination constant, and the ruling classes usually
exercise their dictatorship nakedly and brutally and even when they utilise the bourgeois-democratic or parliamentary form
their dictatorship is only very thinly veiled. This situation leads to frequent
revolutionary struggles on the part of the proletariat, the peasants and other
sections of the masses which often take the form of armed struggle. For all
these reasons, including the lopsided and distorted development in these
countries which often makes it difficult for the reactionary classes to
maintain stable rule and to consolidate their power throughout the state, it is
often the case that the revolution takes the form of protracted revolutionary warfare
in which the revolutionary forces are able to establish base areas of one type
or another in the countryside and carry out the basic strategy of surrounding
the city by the countryside.
The key to
carrying out a new democratic revolution is the independent role of the
proletariat and its ability, through its Marxist-Leninist party, to establish
its hegemony in the revolutionary struggle. Experience has shown again and
again that even when a section of the national bourgeoisie joins the
revolutionary movement, it will not and cannot lead a
new democratic revolution, to say nothing of carrying this revolution through
to completion. Similarly, history demonstrates the bankruptcy of an
"anti-imperialist front" (or similar "revolutionary front")
which is not led by a Marxist-Leninist party, even when such a front or forces
within it adopt a "Marxist" (actually pseudo-Marxist) colouration. While such revolutionary formations have led
heroic struggles and even delivered powerful blows to the imperialists they
have been proven to be ideologically and organisationally
incapable of resisting imperialist and bourgeois influences. Even where such
forces have seized power they have been incapable of carrying through a
thoroughgoing revolutionary transformation of society and end up, sooner or
later, being overthrown by the imperialists or themselves becoming a new
reactionary ruling power in league with imperialists.
In conditions
when the ruling classes exercise their brutal or fascist dictatorship, the
communist party can utilise the contradictions this
gives rise to in favour of the new democratic
revolution and engage in temporary agreements or alliances with other class
forces. However, this can only be carried out successfully if the party
maintains its leadership, utilising such alliances
within the overall and principal task of carrying the revolution to completion
without making a strategic stage out of the struggle against dictatorship since
the content of the anti-fascist struggle is nothing other than the content of
the new democratic revolution.
The
Marxist-Leninist party must arm the proletariat and the revolutionary masses
not only with an understanding of the immediate task of carrying through the
new democratic revolution and the role and conflicting interests of different
class forces, friend and foe alike, but also of the need to prepare the
transition to the socialist revolution and of the ultimate goal of worldwide
communism.
For
Marxist-Leninists it is a principle that the party must lead revolutionary
warfare in such a way that it is a genuine war of the masses. The
Marxist-Leninists must strive, even in the difficult circumstances of waging
warfare, to carry out widespread political education and to raise the
theoretical and ideological level of the masses. For this it is necessary to
maintain and develop a regular communist press as well as to carry the
revolution into the cultural sphere.
The main
deviation in the recent period in the colonial, semi (or neo) colonial
countries has been and remains the tendency to deny or negate this basic
orientation for the revolutionary movement in these types of countries: the
negation of the leading role of the proletariat and the Marxist-Leninist party;
the rejection or opportunist perversion of people's war; the abandonment of
building a united front, based upon the worker-peasant alliance and under the
leadership of the proletariat.
This
revisionist deviation has taken on in the past both a "left" and an
openly right-wing form. The modern revisionists preached, especially in the
past, the "peaceful transition to socialism" and promoted the
leadership of the bourgeoisie in the national liberation struggle. However this
openly capitulationist, right-wing revisionism always
corresponded with, and has become increasingly intermingled with, a kind of
"left" armed revisionism, promoted at times by the Cuban leadership
and others, which separated the armed struggle from the masses and preached a
line of combining revolutionary stages into one single "socialist" revolution,
which in fact meant appealing to the workers on the narrowest of bases and
negating the necessity of the working class to lead the peasantry and others in
thoroughly eliminating imperialism and the backward and distorted economic and
social relations that foreign capital thrives on and reinforces. Today this
form of revisionism is one of the major planks of the social-imperialist
attempt to penetrate and control national liberation struggles.
In order for
the revolutionary movement in the colonial, semi (or neo) colonial countries to
develop in a correct direction it is necessary for the Marxist-Leninists to
continue to step up the struggle against the revisionists in all their forms
and to uphold the work of Mao Tsetung as an
indispensable theoretical basis for further analysing
the concrete conditions in different countries of this type and developing the
appropriate political line.
At the same
time it is necessary to take note of other, secondary, deviations that have
appeared amongst the genuine revolutionary forces who have strived to carry out
a revolutionary line in the colonial and dependent countries. First of all it
must be noted that the countries comprising the oppressed nations of Africa,
Asia and Latin America are not a monolithic bloc and have considerable
differences in relation to their class composition, the form of imperialist
domination and their position vis a vis the world situation as a whole. Tendencies to fail to
carry out a thorough and scientific study of these problems, to mechanically
copy the previous experience of the international proletariat or to fail to
take notice of changes in the international situation and in particular
countries can only harm the cause of the revolution and weaken the
Marxist-Leninist forces.
In the 1960s
and early 1970s Marxist-Leninist forces in a great many countries, under the
influence of the Cultural Revolution in
In the
oppressed countries of
When the
revolutionary situation is ebbing, the communist parties should determine
appropriate tactics and not fall into rash and impatient advances. In such
situations, political and organisational preparations
necessary to carry out protracted people's war should by no means be neglected
and forms of struggle and organisation suitable for
the concrete conditions should be determined in order to hasten the development
of the revolution while awaiting favourable
conditions for further advance. It is necessary to combat any erroneous view
which would postpone the commencement of armed struggle or the utilisation of any form of armed struggle until conditions
become favourable for revolutionary warfare
throughout the country. This view negates the uneven development of revolution
and revolutionary situations in these countries, in opposition to Mao's
statement, "A single spark can start a prairie fire." It is also
important to note that the overall international situation has an influence on
the revolution in a particular country; not taking this into account leaves the
Marxist-Leninists unprepared to seize the opportunity when the revolutionary
process is hastened by the developments on the world scale.
Today as the
danger of a new imperialist war is rapidly developing, the Marxist-Leninist
parties and organisations in the neocolonial
countries are also confronted with the urgent task of devoting attention to the
struggle against imperialist war. Communists must take into account the
possibility that many of these countries may be dragged into the imperialist
war according to the position these countries have in relation to the different
imperialist blocs. Communist parties must consider the various concrete
situations that might arise in the midst of such an imperialist war and develop
their thinking in relation to these situations. Given the objective conditions
in these countries the masses are generally less aware of the danger and
consequences of an imperialist war and the Marxist-Leninists must educate them.
In the event of an imperialist war the most important task of the
Marxist-Leninists is to utilise the favourable opportunities thrown up by such a war to
intensify the revolutionary struggle and turn the imperialist war into a
revolutionary war against imperialism and reaction.
The Joint Communique of Autumn 1980 pointed out:
There is an undeniable tendency
for imperialism to introduce significant elements of capitalist relations in
the countries it dominates. In certain dependent countries capitalist
development has gone so far that it is not correct to characterize them as semifeudal. It is better to call them predominantly
capitalist even while important elements or remnants of feudal or semi-feudal
production relations and their reflection in the superstructure may still
exist.
In such countries a concrete analysis must be made of
these conditions and appropriate conclusions concerning the path, tasks,
character and alignment of class forces must be drawn. In all events, foreign
imperialism remains a target of the revolution.
The analysis of the implications of the increased introduction of
capitalist relations in the countries dominated by imperialism, as well as the
specific case of those oppressed countries which can correctly be termed
"predominantly capitalist," remains an important task for the
international movement. Nevertheless some important conclusions can be drawn
today.
The view that
the combination of formal political independence and the introduction of
widespread capitalist relations has eliminated the
need for a new democratic revolution in most or many of the former direct
colonies is wrong and dangerous. This view, promoted by various Trotskyites,
social-democrats and petit-bourgeois critics of revolutionary Marxism, holds
that there is no qualitative distinction between imperialism and those nations
oppressed by it, thus eliminating at a single stroke one of the most important
features of the imperialist epoch.
In fact
imperialism continues to be a fetter on the productive forces in the countries
it exploits. The capitalist "development" which it undeniably
introduces to greater or lesser degrees does not lead to an articulated,
national market and a "classical" capitalist economic system but to
an extremely lopsided development dependent on and in the interests of foreign
capital.
Even in the predominantly capitalist oppressed countries foreign imperialism