Revisionism: An Anti-Working Class Tendency

Introduction

Revisionism is a phenomenon which has existed for nearly as long as Marxism has. The ramifications and damages of revisionism which have been inflicted on to revolutionary movements and organization has been incalculable, and the ideological and political struggle against revisionists and other opportunists in the working class movement has, for the longest time, constituted an integral element to the struggle against the capitalist system as a whole.

And so, with the immense importance of this topic, there are many new Marxists who are compelled to raise this question: What is revisionism?

There are three main responses which result. Firstly, the scientific, Marxist–Leninist answer is that revisionism is the seeping of capitalist, bourgeois ideology into proletarian ideology; the distortion (revision) of revolutionary theory to favor the interests of the capitalists and abate socialist revolution.

Secondly, the trivializers' answer, very often produced by revisionists themselves. They will deny the many forms revisionism has assumed and assumes presently, they regard revisionism not as a threat to the socialist movement and form of class struggle on the part of the bourgeoisie, but as very narrow, “historic” phenomena which did not manifest anywhere beyond the most clear of traitors in the revolutionary movement; the followers of Kautsky, Bernstein, etc. and other figures whose apex was over a century ago.

To the trivializers, to say revisionism is prevalent today and that many contemporary revisionists veil themselves as “Leninists” is to be sectarian, dogmatic, and so forth. They will assert with the most potent conviction that major questions such as supporting the inter-imperialist conflict between Russia and the Western countries and upholding China as a model of “socialism” are not the dividing lines between revolutionary communists and opportunists, but mere “tactical” disagreements, and will demand unity between the communists and opportunists for the sake of unity itself!

In short, those who propagate the second answer are at the very least in alignment with the revisionists themselves. They deny the need for anti-revisionist struggle, rejecting its inherent relation to anti-capitalist struggle, and in turn harm our movement.

Lastly, the third answer is one produced most often by many new “Marxists”. They will deny the damages of revisionism and the distortion of principles, arguing that revisionism represents a “positive” element in that any developments of theory to modern conditions (e.g. the development of Marxism into the age of imperialism; Leninism) is “revisionism”. Hence, they proudly proclaim themselves revisionists!

Despite the fallacious nature of the third position, it doubtlessly raises important questions which must be answered. The scientific development of Marxism into Marxism–Leninism must be distinguished from the revisionist deviations of Nikita Khrushchev,and other opportunist figures who veil their distortions to deceive the working class.

We must first enumerate the character of revisionism in the clearest way feasible, then address the tendencies of revisionism in order to concretely demonstrate the need for anti-revisionist struggle.

What is the Basis for Revisionism?

As stated previously, revisionism has stood as an enemy of Marxism for as long as Marxism was developed in the 19th century. In the time of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, their scientific theory was contested by a vast number of unscientific, utopian socialist tendencies which sought idealist, fantastical methods to introduce their envisioned society, largely without concern for class struggle.

Throughout the initial conflicts waged by the proletarian and bourgeoisie throughout the 19th century, the theories of Charles Fourier, Étienne Cabet, Robert Owen, and others were firmly repudiated by most of the working class in favor of communism. These anti-materialist tendencies were exposed as not being in service of the interests of the workers, but the backwards peasantry and petite-bourgeoisie, strata whose modus operandi was under threat by nascent industrial capitalism. An element of the declining utopians persisted in their only anti-Marxist attitudes in the form of anarchism and other “libertarian” tendencies, but many other realized that to fulfill their aims, they would have to distort Marxism from the inside in order to bend it to comply with the desires of the exploiters:

“Pre-Marxist socialism has been defeated. It is continuing the struggle, no longer on its own independent ground, but on the general ground of Marxism, as revisionism.”
--Vladimir Lenin, Marxism and Revisionism

Hence, the basis for revisionism was born — movements which seek to infiltrate the working class movement and provide the presentation of Marxism in rhetoric and symbols, while concurrently being anti-Marxist and bourgeois in essentials.

 
From this, it can be discerned that revisionism serves as a powerful weapon on the part of the bourgeoisie in class struggle against the proletariat.

Revisionism verses Theoretical Development

A confusion exists regarding the matter of what separates revisionism from a progressive development of theory prevalent among new socialists. This confusion results in the inability to disambiguate between a development of theory as seen with Lenin and a deviation from it, particularly as revisionists in the past and present have attempted to distract from this critical distinction; asserting their deviations represent an “evolution” of Marxism in the same vain as Leninism is to classical Marxism.

In short, to revise Marxism (e.g. as done by Kautsky,  Khrushchev, etc.) is to weaken it, falsify it, and remove its revolutionary content in accord with the desires of the exploiters. Revisionism injects idealism, mysticism, and superstition into a science (Marxism). On the contrary, to make a progressive advancement of Marxist theory (e.g. that made by Lenin and Stalin) is to preserve its revolutionary contents if not make them more empowering to the working class movement. 

 
It is commonly stated, particularly amongst followers of revisionism, that aspects of Marxism must in fact be revised or otherwise omitted due to temporal developments; that since the time of Marx and Engels, or even Lenin and Stalin, are so distant from our own, that their words and ideas no longer hold meaning to the proletarian movement. This could not be further from reality:

"Consequently, when we speak of 'subjugating' natural forces or economic forces, of 'dominating' them, etc., this does not mean that man can 'abolish' or 'form' scientific laws. On the contrary, it only means that man can discover laws, get to know them and master them, learn to apply them with full understanding, utilize them in the interests of society, and thus subjugate them, secure mastery over them."

--Joseph Stalin, Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR

In this context, even if it were the case that the words of Marx and Engels are so archaic that they lack pertinence in our modern society, it is not the case that their words were incorrect. It is rather the case that the economic laws which governed the age of Marx and Engels have simply become inapplicable to our modern conditions; those laws have not disappeared from reality, they still exist, yet we have moved beyond them. But if we were to return to the relatively primitive capitalism as seen by Marx, those laws would be noticed again and would be applicable.

However, the understanding of capitalism as held by Marx and Engels has not become inapplicable to even our present condition. The development of our understanding as provided by Lenin and Stalin regarding imperialism and other concepts do not negate or replace the core content of Marxism, they rather augment it; build on to it.

How does Revisionism Take Hold?

The nature of revisionism as a counter-revolutionary tendency within revolutionary movements remains consistent between all contexts. Yet, its practical goals differs mainly in two ways. These are, firstly, revisionism which arises in movements in pre-revolutionary, capitalist countries, and, secondly, revisionism which takes hold of a revolutionary, socialist country.

Revisionism in capitalist countries

In pre-revolutionary countries of capitalism, by encouraging deviations which detach the communist party from the workers, by fostering reformism over revolution, and by propagating class collaboration and truce over struggle, revolutionary organizations are made impotent and harmless to the ruling class. If it fully takes hold of a country's communist movement, revisionism and opportunism have the capacity to bring a crippling halt to a socialist revolution in its infancy.

In the first wave of socialist revolutions at the end of the First World War, their potency and effectiveness was heavily negated by the prevalence of social-chauvinists and opportunists — the Kautskys, Bernsteins, Scheidemanns and others belonging to the Second International. These revisionist figures led the working class of their countries away from revolution and in support of the vicious imperialist war under the justification of “defense of the fatherland” and similar capitulations to bourgeois nationalism.

Less than two decades later, the working class resistance to the rise of fascism in countries such as Germany and Italy was rendered impotent in the face of social democrats and other reformists whose doctrine was inspired by an awfully revised body of Marxist theory, fully tailored to bourgeois interests. The efforts of the Communist Party of Germany to form an anti-fascist united front were willingly countered by the Social Democrats, in harmony with Adolf Hitler. As a result, socialist revolution in Germany sputtered out before it even truly began and the country was plunged into over a decade of Nazi tyranny.

Thus, the aims of the revisionists and opportunists in the countries which have not yet underwent a socialist revolution and establishment of a workers' state are clear — introduce pugnacious separations (national, ethnic, political, etc.) within the working class which detract from class struggle, isolate the party from the people, divert sentiments which would otherwise be revolutionary and class conscious into those which uphold capitalist wage-slavery and imperialism, and ultimately liquidate worker-led socialist organizations which are politically independent from the capitalist state and bring them under the yoke of bourgeois interests and politics, depriving the working class of the ability to operate outside of the confines of bourgeois democracy, in the process abating the prospect of revolution.

Revisionism in socialist countries

In the countries where the working class has already overthrown the capitalist state, established a revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat, and initiated the process of socialist construction, the revisionists' tasks diverge from their counterparts in capitalist countries. Rather then seeking to preserve capitalism in the ways detailed prior, they must restore it, regressing socialism back to capitalism. There are two primary angles through which the forces of revisionism assails the socialist state; internal and external.

Firstly, we address the internal methods of revisionism. The nature of socialism in its early phase — just following the revolution — is one in which the exploiters, being overthrown and on the verge of extinction, intensify their struggle against the working class forces a thousand-fold to preserve their endangered property and status:

“The dictatorship of the proletariat means a most determined and most ruthless war waged by the new class against a more powerful enemy, the bourgeoisie, whose resistance is increased tenfold by their overthrow (even if only in a single country), and whose power lies, not only in the strength of international capital, the strength and durability of their international connections, but also in the force of habit, in the strength of small-scale production.” [Emphasis mine: S.W.]

--Vladimir Lenin, "Left-Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder

This counter-revolutionary struggle may be explicit in its capitalist aims or concealed. The moribund exploiters — in unison with the petite-bourgeoisie and peasantry whose class interests are not yet definitively proletarian — may seek to encourage and propagate deviations within the communist party and state apparatus, support opportunist bureaucrats, and broadly campaign to overturn the Leninist line with a revisionist line of exploiter “socialism”.

Revisionism which springs up within the socialist state ultimately has its basis in small production; the mass of semi-proletarian, agrarian middle peasants and petite-bourgeois proprietors who possess a tendency to vacillate in class struggle and whose interest in socialism is submerged in doubt in even the best of times in the course of the revolution:

“The social basis of the deviations is the fact that small-scale production predominates in our country, the fact that small-scale production gives rise to capitalist elements, the fact that our Party is surrounded by petty-bourgeois elemental forces, and, lastly, the fact that certain of our Party organisations have been infected by these elemental forces.

There, in the main, lies the social basis of the deviations. All these deviations are of a petty-bourgeois character”

--Joseph Stalin, Industrialization of the Country and the Right-Deviation in the CPSU(B)

Secondly, we now move to the external methods of revisionism. It is an indisputable fact that the initial socialist states will have to bear with an encirclement of capitalist-imperialist states whose ruling class seeks pugnaciously to destroy the stronghold of people's power on its borders. The capitalist states may pursue a route of overt military aggression and war against the socialist states. However, they may recognize the potential value of revisionism and opportunism in the socialist state as agents of capitalist restoration; a Trojan horse by which their goal of defeating the revolution will be realized without the need for brutal warfare and aggression (and from it, the potential of their defeat).

Thus, the bourgeoisie of the capitalist countries will sponsor the revisionists of the socialist countries by any and all means available to them, sponsor the petite-bourgeois elements which oppose revolution, etc. For instance, in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin’s leadership, various deviationist and factionalist elements such as the Trotskys, Bukharins, Zinovievs, and others within the Bolshevik party conspired to destroy the proletarian state from within, or at the least weaken so as to ensure future aggression by surrounding imperialist powers would be feasible:

“Trotsky, supposed originally to have inspired the formation of the ‘bloc’, had long since been linked with the … the British intelligence service! On Trotsky’s orders, Krestinsky, former Deputy People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs, had been in the German service since 1921. Rozenholz, former People’s Commissar of Foreign Trade, joined the British service in 1926 and the German service in 1932. Rakovsky, one of the big figures of the Revolution, had served the British intelligence service since 1924, and the Japanese since 1934. And so on. All this Bukharin and Rykov had connived at, since they too were foreign agents.”

--Grigori Tokaty, Trotskyist Conspiracy and the Deaths in the 1937-1938 period

On this topic, it must be stated that the internal and external methods of revisionism are not mutually exclusive. For instance, a revisionist movement which arose from the domestic petite-bourgeoisie and large peasantry may receive a considerable portion of its funding from foreign imperialists. It is more so the case of how these two sources of revisionism amalgamate to devastate a revolution.

Socialist countries under Revisionism

Once a socialist country has fallen under the rule of revisionist elements in the manner detailed previously, its ruling clique has one omnipresent goal to which it, consciously or subconsciously, pursues with the utmost determination — the reversal of all gains made by the revolutionary proletariat and the full restoration of capitalism.

Yet to attain this objective, the aims of the revisionists must be concealed under a mountain of deceit and fabrications so as to throw sand into the eyes of the people who, despite experiencing a reversal from the dictatorship of the proletariat, still maintain the potential to overthrow the distorters and revitalize the revolution.

The process by which the revisionists begin the restoration of capitalism is not inherently spontaneous. In the Soviet Union, the revisionist clique of Nikita Khrushchev refrained for a whole three years after their seizure of power in 1953 to, at the infamous 20th congress of the CPSU in 1956, openly disband the proletarian state and deviate from the socialist construction led by Joseph Stalin.

In place of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the Soviet revisionists installed a so-called “state of the whole people”,2 wherein the proletariat was to share power with the bourgeoisie and large peasants. In truth, this “whole people state” was a dictatorship of the revived bourgeoisie in the Soviet Union, and its creation marked the process by which the newly-capitalist state assaulted the socialist economy.

The nature of revisionist governance is two-fold; its domestic and foreign pursuits.

Domestically, the revisionists pursue a policy of social-fascism. They sow and aggravate national and ethnic divisions within the working class, replace the state of the armed workers with a state of detached functionaries servile to bourgeois interests, and restore old economic relations and from it power and privilege of the capitalist exploiters. The revisionists will still maintain the symbols and to a certain degree rhetoric of the previous revolutionary state as part of their efforts to deceive the masses, comparable to the pseudo-socialist demagogy employed by Hitler and Mussolini.

Internationally, the revisionists pursue the policy of social-imperialism. They will force smaller, previously socialist nations into subjugated peripheries. They will exploit their neighbors, often under the veil of “internationalist” aid and solidarity, all the while devolving them into economic dependencies and military outposts for future aggression.

These two pursuits — social-fascism and social-imperialism — are maintained by the revisionists in power until their goal of capitalist restoration is fully realized and the class consciousness and vigor of the people has been eroded. At this stage, the veil of “socialist” symbols and rhetoric is no longer needed for the revived bourgeoisie in the revisionist countries. Their counter-revolution is concluded with the final destruction of even the fainest remains of the old socialist project, and their rule is now that of an open dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.

Returning to the example of the Soviet Union, the Khrushchevite-Brezhevite group ruled the country for a period of roughly forty years, introducing regression after regression, attack after attack, upon the socialist mode of production. The revisionists destroyed the people’s democracies of Eastern Europe and forced them into the social-imperialist Warsaw Pact and Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, turning countries such as Cuba into little more than sugar colonies operating in the sole interest of Soviet bourgeois profits.

The gradual process of capitalist restoration in the Soviet Union and elsewhere finally reached its sudden end with the dissolution of the Union itself in 1991 against the wishes of the Soviet people. At present, revisionists continue to rule other states which most notably includes the People’s Republic of China, which has grown to represent one of the largest imperialist powers in the world.

Tendencies of Revisionism

To truly understand the features of revisionism requires an understanding of its various tendencies, both present and historical. To detail exhaustively all the many forms of revisionism would be too herculean a task for this work. However, meaning can still be gained from studying first of all the major tendencies of revisionism, the ones whose influence persists directly or indirectly into the socialist movement to the modern day.

Soviet revisionism

The Soviet Union — previously a bulwark of socialism — constituted one of the first revisionist states alongside Mao’s China and Tito’s Yugoslavia. After the defeat of the initial wave of Soviet revisionism as represented in the tendencies of Trotskyism and Bukharinism, the deviationists and opportunists took on a more concealed approach, seeking to slowly detach the Communist Party from the people and provide power to a bureaucratic clique without the knowledge of the administration of Stalin who fought pugnaciously for further democratization.

Under the leadership of Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev, the Soviet revisionists introduced various deviation and distortions, declaring the proletarian dictatorship obsolete in favor of the “state of the whole people”, rejecting class struggle and revolution in favor of a “peaceful transition” to socialism, collaborating with the imperialist powers under the guise of “peaceful coexistence”, and so forth.

These revisionist fabrications were propagated at the same time as capitalism was being restored and the socialist past discarded with campaigns of “de-Stalinization”. The Khrushchevite-Brezhevite line was enforced on the parties of the Soviet social-imperialist bloc in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, most of which would met a similar fate to the Soviet Communist Party in the late 1980s and early 1990s, totally abandoning any remaining vestiges of revolutionary communism in favor of openly capitalist ideology.

American revisionism

In the United States, various movements have fallen into revisionist deviations, the most notable of which includes Browderism and other distortions which emerged from the Communist Party of the United States.

In the 1940s, the American Communist Party fell under the influence of the distortions of Earl Browder, who advocated class collaboration, bourgeois nationalism, and otherwise reduced socialism to a distant prospect while replacing revolutionary ideals with American chauvinism and exceptionalism. Even following the liquidation of the American Communist Party, its reformation, and removal of Browder, the Party never restored its revolutionary outlook and would merely fall under the influence of Soviet revisionism during the leadership of Gus Hall throughout the later 20th century.

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Hall’s death in 2000, the American Communist Party under Sam Webb’s and later Joe Sims’ tenure would regress into various reformist deviations, endorsing bourgeois parties and rejecting Marxist principles.
American revisionism continues on in various forms outside of the American Communist Party, particularly among the “Patriotic Socialists”4 and other social-chauvinists who reiterate the rhetoric of Earl Browder and others.

Anti-Revisionist Struggle is Essential!

That revisionism and opportunism represent major threats to the working class movement cannot be denied. This is a tendency which has seeped and removed the revolutionary desire and practice from socialist organizations, depriving them of the capacity to function independently of bourgeois politics. Revisionism fosters chauvinism, divisions among the exploited and oppressed, and in countless instances halted revolution altogether. In countries where socialism has already been attained, the rise to power of revisionists has culminated in the full restoration of capitalism and regression of class struggle by a matter of decades at the least.

Yet to look at revisionism without understanding its basis and causes would be futile. Only by understanding the basis of revisionism in aspects such as the party’s detachment from the working class, petite-bourgeois inclinations, bureaucracy, and so forth can this tendency be truly combated.

This does not change the situation in the workers’ movement — revisionism has taken hold of countless organizations and its propagandists deceive increasingly larger members of the proletariat who are seeking a truly revolutionary organization in this period of capitalist crisis. Thus, it is among the foremost tasks of communists to engage in anti-revisionist struggle; expose the distorters of revolutionary principles and reveal their nature as agents of the bourgeoisie and enemies of people.

Workers of the world, unite!

Notes1. As this may result in confusion to those unfamiliar with these concepts, it must be noted that the socialist state is that of the sole rule of the proletariat in alliance with certain progressive elements such as the small and middle peasantry. A state cannot be “above-class” or “non-class”, for as Lenin stated in his work “Democracy” and Dictatorship:
“The Scheidemanns and Kautsky's speak about "pure democracy" and "democracy" in general for the purpose of deceiving the people and concealing from them the bourgeois character of present-day democracy. Let the bourgeoisie continue to keep the entire apparatus of state power in their hands, let a handful of exploiters continue to use the former, bourgeois, state machine! Elections held in such circumstances are lauded by the bourgeoisie, for very good reasons, as being "free", "equal", "democratic" and "universal". These words are designed to conceal the truth, to conceal the fact that the means of production and political power remain in the hands of the exploiters, and that therefore real freedom and real equality for the exploited, that is, for the vast majority of the population, are out of the question.”
Thus the Soviet revisionist theory of a “state of the whole people” could only ever be cover for what was truly a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.

2. Commonly known in English as the “Shining Path”. Self-declared as the “Communist Party of Peru”. 

3. A reactionary, social-fascist tendency which emerged in the United States in the 21st century that seeks to combine American chauvinism and nationalism with certain socialist symbols and rhetoric. A restoration of Browderism in many respects.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans — Revolution!

 

Introduction

As decisive developments in the United States political establishment take place and the 2024 presidential elections looms ever closer, we find ourselves in a difficult situation. From one direction, we see a reactionary, fascistic movement led by Donald Trump and the Republican Party make gains among the most backwards sections of the population. From the other direction, we see an impotent Democratic Party attempt to rally the progressive strata with deceptive rhetoric calling for stagnation in the current stage of capitalism, not change towards any new, progressive arrangement.
Further, we see that the Democratic Party of the United States is doing little to defend from the rising fascistic movements in the country, but is in fact taking impotent and permissive stances despite its grave danger.
 
The capitalist “democratic” system in the United States has shown itself to be nearing its end. It can only go into a deep mire of fascist tyranny or be made superfluous by the revolutionary movement of the working class.

To that extent, revolutionary socialists face many issues despite the clearly moribund nature of the United States. The Democratic Party and pseudo-radical forces associated with it have attempted for decades to deceive the United States working class into supporting their rule, and many have fallen to this effort, and have come to perceive working within the decaying, oppressive framework of election cycles as the predominate if not sole means to attain change in society.  To that extent, it is our duty to reverse this, expose the anti-work nature of these appeals, to show the regressive nature of electoralism in the United States class struggle. 

Background to the Crisis of American Capitalism

Capitalism has, for the entire span of its existence, has always constituted a system which trends towards decay, malaise, and volatility. As the United States of America represents one of the foremost capitalist powers in the world, it is no exception. 

The historical crisis of capitalism that was the Great Depression in the 1930s demanded the ruling class of the United States to install a president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, who could save moribund capitalism from the prospect of socialist revolution in the form of social democratic programs such as the New Deal. Further attacks on the working class were made with the Taft–Hartley Act of 1947 and McCarthyism, which decimated organized labor and radical movements. For the next decades in the 20th century, American capitalism was saved.

However, the welfare system spawned from the New Deal was supplanted with the neoliberal reforms and excesses under Ronald Reagan in the 1980s onwards, the condition of American capitalist democracy has been consistently in decline, particularly after the events of September 11, 2001 and the resulting introduction of even more draconian policies under president Bush and his successors. 

The global capitalist crisis of 2008 generated fertile ground for the rise of reactionary, fascistic movements seeking to turn away the liberal democratic framework while still preserving capitalism. The Tea Party movement and other tendencies emerged, but soon were subverted and astroturfed by the most backwards sections of the bourgeoisie. The nascent discontentment within the petite-bourgeoisie in the United States expanded greatly, and the larger, ruling capitalists quickly exploited this. 

Thus, Donald Trump and his fascistic movement were born, premised on a platform of chauvinism, reactionary populism, supremacy, and so on.  This is the formula by which Trump won the 2016 presidential election. After the crisis of the 2020s began with a pandemic and recession, the capitalist system, to a greater extent, showed itself to be against the interests of the workers, and unrest took place following the murder of George Floyd by white supremacist police officers. Trump and his administration’s expansion of the already draconian police forces to quell these protests, negligent response to and denial of the pandemic, and so forth resulted in a widespread decrease in his popularity prior to the 2020 presidential election. After Trump’s potential in maintaining his leadership diminished, he began to vocally oppose the bourgeois democratic system in the country, and covertly plotted to ensure his position via illegal means. After Trump’s defeat in the election, he refused to accept the results, initiating a self-coup attempt in collaboration with multiple neo-fascist terrorist militias along with unorganized insurrectionists on January 6, 2021. However, Trump’s attempts to maintain power failed, and he was forced to resign from office and allow Joe Biden to succeed him as president.  Thus the present political context in the United States emerged.

Democrats — A Party for Democracy?

"[…] The distinction between the two parties has been diminishing. The fight between these two parties has been mainly over the height of customs duties. Their fight has not had any serious importance for the mass of the people. The people have been deceived and diverted from their vital interests by means of spectacular and meaningless duels between the two bourgeois parties. This so-called bipartisan system prevailing in America and Britain has been one of the most powerful means of preventing the rise of an independent working-class, i.e., genuinely socialist, party."  –Vladimir Lenin, The Results and Significance of the U.S. Presidential Elections, 1912  Since the prelude to the 2024 presidential election began, the Democratic Party has attempted to appeal to workers in numerous ways to obscure their true class position as political representatives of the capitalist stratum. One such aspect of their rhetoric has been to pose as defenders of American “democracy” against the despotic Trumpists: “Too much of what is happening in our country today is not normal. Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundation of our republic. […] MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards. Backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you" –Joe Biden, speech delivered in 2022

However, despite this fallacious propaganda, the Democratic Party is as much a part of the falling bourgeois plutocratic system as the Republican Party is, both of which constitute the “two-party” system which suppresses working class and socialist political parties and cements capitalist rule.  We must ask ourselves, when president Biden speaks of the “foundations of our republic,” what constitute these foundations?  According to one of the “founding fathers” of the United States, James Madison: 

“From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.” [Emphasis mine: S.W.] –James Madison, Federalist Papers No. 10

Indeed, these were views nearly universal among the “founding fathers” of the United States. Their opposition to true democracy in favor of oligarchy is an aspect even their reactionary supporters will confess to. The foundations of the United States were premised on the ability of a small ruling class of rich landowners and slavers in a colonialist context to act freely without reference to popular rule. That is to say — exploitation, genocide, discrimination, minority rule, and unfettered property rights for a few.  These are what defined the foundations of the United States, and to that extent, the Republican Party is not opposed to these foundations but extreme defenders of it in a modern form.  A democracy constitutes the rule of the majority, rather than a powerful minority. Is the Democratic Party an organ for the rule of the people?

 
The Democratic Party is heavily funded by powerful institutions with millions of dollars each and every year such as Bloomberg LP, Charles Schwab Corp, and many others, a large amount of which concurrently fund the Republican Party. Nearly all of the powerful Democratic officials in the Senate and Congress are millionaires and otherwise very affluent.  The government of the United States, even under an administration aligned with the Democratic Party, have consistently permitted corruption in the form of “lobbying” and have been overwhelmingly more favorable to the interests of the capitalists (a class which much of its leadership belongs to!) while caring little for the interests of the people. 

This overwhelming evidence proves that the Democratic Party is not a party of democracy at all, but — as with their Republican counterparts — a party led by the rich, operating for the interests of the rich, and counter to the interests of the working class. The United States of the government of the capitalists, and the Democrats merely represent the political will of one faction of them. 

In short, the Democratic Party cannot be the defenders of a “democracy” when none exists for the vast majority of the population.

Are the Democrats a “lesser evil”?

There are many, some of whom self-described “socialists,” who will still provide some degree of support to the Democratic Party even after becoming cognizant of its bourgeois and anti-democratic character. This is the politics of following a “lesser evil.” This position of supporting a “lesser evil” is nearly omnipresent in the working class people who are deceived by the Democratic Party. In the 2020 presidential election, the majority of Democratic voters stated that their primary reason for their decision to vote for Joe Biden was because “he is not Trump.”  Much of the proletariat in the United States is not supportive of the Democratic Party and merely vote for it as they know no other valid forms of political struggle. They are lied to by the bourgeoisie in viewing bourgeois democracy as the only arena for political change; not yet knowing of socialist democracy and its infinitely more liberative nature.  The Democratic Party and its aligned corporate media are very much aware of this tendency among their voting base. During the initial stage of campaigning for the 2024 general election, a widespread trend emerged during the presidential primaries among Democratic voters not to cast their support for Biden, but to vote “uncommitted” largely as a measure of protest. In the State of Michigan, over 100,000 voters voted “uncommitted,” many of Arab, particularly Palestinian descent and felt discontented with the continued support and complicity of the Biden administration for the ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip. While detailing this information, Democrat-aligned academic Michael Traugott stated:

“[Selecting ‘uncommitted’] is not an option for the fall general election, where the only alternative to a Biden vote for Democrats will be to stay home or vote for Donald Trump. Given his past record and proposals to exclude Arabs from immigration to the United States, I don’t believe that will be a realistic alternative for many of Michigan’s uncommitted voters.” 
–Michael Traugott, “More than 100K Michigan voters pick ‘uncommitted’ over Biden − does that matter for November?”, February 27, 2024

This is a view common among the leadership of the Democratic Party as part of their previously mentioned emphasis on fighting to “maintain American democracy.” For the vast majority of the progressive people in the United States, they are faced with a decision: either vote for a right-wing candidate (Biden) who is actively supporting a genocide and is maintaining oppressive policies all while betraying their voting base, or vote for an openly fascistic candidate (Trump) who will not only persist in support for this genocide but expand it domestically against his own people.  Thus, in this case, the “lesser evil” of the Democrats still represents a monstrous, genocidal force. However, this supposedly “lesser” evil has adopted and maintains many aspects of the “greater” evil of Trumpism. Joe Biden has failed to deliver, in part or in full, on the majority of his campaign promises, yet maintained many of Trump’s draconian policies. His administration has continued the construction of a large “border wall” on the border with Mexico which was initiated under Trump and lessened regulations and laws to hasten its progress, continued mass deportations of migrants in large numbers, even surpassing Trump in the number of deportations, and persisted in separating immigrant families and placing children in cages.

Although Joe Biden had campaigned as a “pro-labor” candidate, he has quickly revealed himself as being as anti-working class as any prior president. During a strike by rail road workers suffering from abhorrent working conditions in late 2022, the Biden administration first refused their demand of two weeks worth of sick leave and instead suggested a single day, and then proceeded to enact repressive measures making the strike illegal.  Biden and the Democratic Party have done very little to end the suffering and hardships of the working class. His administration has done nothing to reduce inflation and its resulting consequences for the workers, made critical and negligent errors during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, failed to institute any sort of rent cap and other regulations during massive increases in eviction rates and homelessness, allowed continued police militarization and has done nothing to combat their infiltration by neo-fascists, implemented large-scale neoliberal privatization and austerity measures, and many other extremely anti-working class actions. In the instances where the Democratic leadership does propose certain nominally progressive legislation, such proposals never manifest into anything meaningful as they are quickly diluted, privatization schemes are including into the bill, etc. all the comply with the demands of the American ruling class.  In addition, under the administration of the Democratic Party, supposedly a “left-wing” party, mass repression of working class and progressive movement by police and other state agents have continued. The United States government has responded to nonviolent anti-Zionist protests which started in response to the ongoing Israeli genocide in the Gaza strip with brutal crackdowns and repression, deploying hundreds of militarized police onto college grounds to assault students and other protests and committing other gross violations of human rights in the name of defending a genocidal and colonialist regime at the behest of their corporate masters. Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic nominee for the presidential election since late July 2024, is not at all distinct from Biden in these stances.  On July 24, 2024, when Benjamin Netanyahu, a war criminal and genocidal leader of the State of Israel, came to the United States to deliver a fascistic speech during a joint session of Congress, protests erupted against this blatant show of support for a genocidal fascist regime. In response, police again used brutal methods to quell the protests. A day later, Kamala Harris made a public statement:

“Yesterday, at Union Station in Washington, D.C. we saw despicable acts by unpatriotic protestors and dangerous hate-fueled rhetoric.  I condemn any individuals associating with the brutal terrorist organization Hamas, which has vowed to annihilate the State of Israel and kill Jews. Pro-Hamas graffiti and rhetoric is abhorrent and we must not tolerate it in our nation.  I condemn the burning of the American flag. That flag is a symbol of our highest ideals as a nation and represents the promise of America. It should never be desecrated in that way.  I support the right to peacefully protest, but let’s be clear: Antisemitism, hate and violence of any kind have no place in our nation.” [Emphasis mine: S.W.] –Kamala Harris, Statement on July 25, 2024

No matter if the politician it is Democrat or Republican, the same inhumane and vile beliefs are held; making use of democratic rights such as freedom of speech and expression are “unpatriotic,” opposing a blatant endorsement of an overseas fascist dictator in the chambers of the government is “hateful,” all of the millions of Palestinians are associated with “Hamas,” peace protests are not allowed if it contradicts capitalist-imperialist interests, and condemning one’s government for supporting an ongoing genocide is “antisemitism.” It is clear what sort of “lesser evil” the Democratic Party is. The Democratic Party is an anti-democratic, imperialist association made up of and operating for the interests of the capitalist ruling class. To support this “lesser evil” means to support police repression, mass deportations, genocide, imperialism, wars, austerity, and the continued exploitation of one class over another. There is nothing that the working class can attain from supporting this vile imperialist organization anymore so than the neo-fascist Republicans, a party which the Democrats are all too willing to collaborate with and empower.

​Supporting this “lesser evil” means to excuse any and all of their crimes and atrocities and absolve them from failing to make any meaningful change. Since the Democrats are “not Trump,” all of their actions or inactions become justified, and their responsibility to their voting base becomes irrelevant. This has been shown with the whole of Biden’s presidency, which has seen nothing but unimpeded hardship for the working class yet has acted as a prelude to the rise of American fascism in part due to the Democrats’ own impotence. 

What must be done?

The conditions which warranted working class movements operating within the capitalist electoral framework have long disappeared, and the recent events in the 2020s have shown this to be particularly true.  The “democratic” government of the United States only allows two political parties to exercise political power, the right-wing Democratic Party and the far-right Republican Party, both of which are simply the political arms of the capitalists to maintain their rule without any sort of democracy for the working class. The Democrats have no ambitions for the abolition of capitalism or any other working class interests. Rather, the Democrats are simply present to ensure division of the working class movements and progressive elements while the fascist Republicans dismantle bourgeois democracy itself. As the Republicans fall further into fascism, the Democrats need only to tail them and appear slightly more “moderate” to manipulate young voters eager for change yet fearful of fascism into supporting them. This is always the case even as the Democrats continually move to the right in tandem with the Republicans.  Neither the Democrats nor Republicans are to be supported in any capacity by revolutionary movements. Instead, communists in the United States must ensure the separation of socialist and otherwise working class organizations from the Democrats, expose the anti-working class and reactionary nature of this organization, and form a new revolutionary communist party which will not fight for the maintenance of this repressive capitalist system, but will bring about revolutionary change and a truly democratic socialist republic for the working class. 

Our goal for communists in the United States is, in short, neither Democrats nor Republicans — revolution!

Workers of the world, unite!

[original source]

The Class Struggle in Argentina and its Relevance to the World Proletariat

Preface

Capitalism assumes many political and ideological manifestations throughout its lifespan based on its ebbs and flows; the bourgeois revolutionaries of France and the liberal democrats in the United States and Western Europe during capitalism’s nascent period, all the way to the fascist and neoliberal demagogues seen during its moribund, imperialist conclusion.

What remains is that the state of the bourgeoisie requires an ideology to assist in upholding their power and influence over the exploited masses. This ideology, of course, changes based on the relative degree of consciousness and militancy of the working class and the condition of capitalism. 

In the country of Argentina, we have seen a dramatic shift in the ideology of its bourgeois state in recent months. The decades-long era of neoliberalism nominally ending in the face of a new, rising tide of libertarianism, preaching a new, “radical,” gospel of personal freedom, prosperity, and unfettered property rights, one proselytized by the nation’s new head of state, Javier Milei.

The rise of this extreme-right force is concurrent with the rise to power of other reactionary movements in the Western world, all largely within the span of the 2020s. The crises inherent to capitalism, the global economic slowdown has provided the optimal breeding group for these supposedly “radical” bourgeois movements. Argentina is at the forefront of this revival of extremist reaction, and its historic background which gave rise to these events must be understood as capitalism grows increasingly erratic in other countries.

The events in Argentina prior to Milei’s rise to power

The politics of Argentina have been dominated for decades by a movement known as Perónism. Its namesake, Juan Domingo Perón, was a high-ranking military official who exploited a military coup d’état in 1943 to gain political power and support among the lower strata of Argentine society, eventually seizing a despotic hold over the country by the 1950s. Perón himself was an open admirer of fascist regimes such as that in Italy, yet he never fully embraced that movement. Instead he implemented various, often contradictory, socioeconomic polices during his presidency inspired by center-left social democratic ideas. This was due to the geopolitical circumstances of the time. Perón sought to repress communist and workers’ movements to comply with the demands of the domestic bourgeoisie and his imperialist benefactors in the United States who were in the process of establishing other fascistic military regimes across Latin America to impede the growth of socialism, yet still in an era where the memory of Hitlerite Germany and fascist Italy had not been extinguished. 

​Yet these tendencies towards social democracy did not detract from the fascist character of the Perónist regime, for as Stalin stated:

“Fascism is not only a military-technical category. Fascism is the bourgeoisie’s fighting organisation that relies on the active support of Social-Democracy. Social Democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism. There is no ground for assuming that the fighting organisation of the bourgeoisie can achieve decisive successes in battles, or in governing the country, without the active support of Social Democracy.”
— J.V.Stalin, Concerning the International Situation, 1924

After the overthrow and eventual death of Perón in 1974, the Perónist movement was partitioned into multiple, contradictory factions, some more aligned with social democracy whereas others were more definitely right- wing.

​The Perónist government that had formed following the military dictatorship in 1989 was headed by Carlos Menem, who went on to implement numerous neoliberal policies, including austerity measures, countless concessions to foreign capitalists, assaults on organized labor, etc. These policies were highly regressive in their effects for Argentine society, and the Perónist movement generally began to decline in its popularity among the workers. Thus, as an effective requirement for political survival for the capitalist state, the next era of Perónist governance was that of “Kircherism” — the social democratic policies of Néstor Kircher and his successors.

​Although these actions assisted in preserving Perónism until the 2020s, they made workers dependent on the existence of the bourgeois government’s social programs for continued subsistence. Thus, when the Coronavirus pandemic and resulting global economic crisis began in the early 2020s, the Kircherist government suddenly lost much of its support base as its social programs became unsustainable — allowing various previously subterranean figures and demagogues to arise as the demands of failing Argentine capitalism began to change, most obviously the right-wing libertarians under Javier Milei and his party.

 

Argentina in the first months after becoming the first “libertarian” state in history

“[Reactionary ‘socialism’] consists of adherents of a feudal and patriarchal society which has already been destroyed, and is still daily being destroyed, by big industry and world trade and their creation, bourgeois society. This category concludes, from the evils of existing society, that feudal and patriarchal society must be restored because it was free of such evils. [...]”

"As soon as the proletariat becomes revolutionary and communist, these reactionary socialists show their true colors by immediately making common cause with the bourgeoisie against the proletarians.” [emphasis mine: S.W.]
— Frederick Engles, Principles of Communism, 1847

A notion that spread among the corporate media in the English-speaking world regarded the “radical” Milei’s rise to the post of head of state as an entirely unpredictable outcome, placing the blame on the Argentine workers themselves. However, this view is yet another example of the imperialist bourgeoisie in the United States and Western Europe attacking the proletariat of another country for attempting to find a solution to the issues they largely created. Yet, like Hitler, Pinochet, and Mussolini; the rise of Milei’s extremist movement has a distinct relationship with the collapse of capitalism in Argentina and globally.

The anarcho-capitalist Javier Milei’s electoral “upset” was not solely the result of the demands of the bourgeoisie, but was a further consequence of the increasing desperation of the petite-bourgeoisie, a stratum which is among the most unstable under capitalism — constantly at risk of being “reduced” to the level of the proletarian due to competition from the haute-bourgeoisie yet still maintaining ambitions to advance to the higher sub-strata of the capitalist class, while still consequently having sympathies towards both classes:

“The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant, all these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative.”

“Nay more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history. If by chance, they are revolutionary, they are only so in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat; they thus defend not their present, but their future interests, they desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat.” 

— Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848 

​During such a militant capitalist crisis, the status of the petite-bourgeoisie was increasingly moribund, thus motivating them to support a pseudo-radical movement which promised a “new,” “better” capitalism which catered to the small owners and artisans from the days of yore.

There were also elements of the proletariat who found themselves providing some degree of support for Milei, with some merely voting for him during the country’s 2023 general election despite disagreeing with his rhetoric. They desired an alternative; anything to detach them from the corrupt government and failing economy they had under the Perónists.

Yet the Argentine people soon realized the extent of the demagogy and deceit on the part of the newly-empowered libertarians. 

The far-right government of Milei inherited a country with a dying economy and corrupt government, facing an extreme inflation rate of nearly 200% and a poverty rate exceeding 40% of the population. Yet instead of rectifying the hardships faced by the general population, the Milei government has instead taken every possible step to enlarge the socioeconomic crisis and implement their extremist, anti-proletarian political program.

Among the first actions performed by Javier Milei as head of state was to employ special emergency powers to sign a decree so totalistic in its attacks on the working class and organized labor movement that it has been termed a “mega-decree.” Using this “mega-decree”, the libertarian government has introduced widespread policy changes; severely reducing unemployment benefits, parental leave, assaulting fundamental democratic freedoms such as workers’ right to strike and organize unions.

Meanwhile, the conditions in Argentina continued to deteriorate, as the Milei government did virtually nothing to halt the rapidly-increasing cost of living and hyper-inflation, with them instead introducing absurd and discontented laws such as allowing employers to remunerate their workers in the American dollar, Bitcoin, milk, and beef. The regime has also taken highly discriminatory stances against marginalized groups, particularly the LGBTQ+ community.

 

The workers’ resistance to the reactionary regime 

The working class of Argentina has hastily begun to realize that Milei and his regime are not allies of the people as his demagogic propaganda would suggest, but the most committed enemies of the people and their class interests. Thus, large-scale protests were held in the immediate weeks of Milei’s presidency in response to the extremist, anti-worker policies introduced.

Yet, Milei, despite claiming to be a “libertarian” who would “break the shackles of the oppressive state,” decided to quell these demonstrations by employing brutal police force and terror and introducing draconian laws which made it far less cumbersome for police to arrest demonstrators. This is not to say that the repressive system in Argentina is fundamentally distinct from the bourgeois democracies in other countries:

“In capitalist society, providing it develops under the most favourable conditions, we have a more or less complete democracy in the democratic republic. But this democracy is always hemmed in by the narrow limits set by capitalist exploitation, and consequently always remains, in effect, a democracy for the minority, only for the propertied classes, only for the rich.” 

— Lenin, The State and Revolution, 1917

The Argentine workers, however, were not discouraged by the reactionary regime’s repression and austerity, responding by banging pots and pans on protected balconies, articulating chants such as “Milei! You are garbage! You are dictatorship!” in the nation’s capital city, and similar acts of resistance. Argentina’s largest trade union, the General Confederation of Labor, cognizant of the fact that its very existence was endangered by the far-right government, called for a nation-wide general strike which was to be held in late January.

In the succeeding months of 2024, the Argentines workers have continued to fight for their interests with similar determination and gallantry, even after state repression expanded to the point of raiding soap kitchens, emergency canteens, and other places to assist the increasingly famished working class. General strikes took place, protesters struggling against the state’s increasing repression, and so forth. As a result of this, the reactionary government has been forced to delay its most extreme reforms and make certain concessions such as its plan to institute the U.S. dollar as the national currency, facing the prospect of a full working-class insurrection. However, the libertarian government have indicated they will continue with their anti-worker ambitions so long as they remain in power: 

“There is no strike that stops us, there is no threat that intimidates us, [the strikers and their leaders are] mafia unionists, poverty managers, complicit judges and corrupt politicians […]”

— Argentine Security Minister Patricia Bullrich

​The popular resistance will continue so long as Milei remains in power, and the Argentine people are becoming increasingly mobilized and class conscious.

 

Conclusion

“The working class must be able to take advantage of the antagonisms and conflicts within the bourgeois camp, but it must not cherish the illusion that fascism will exhaust itself of its own accord. Fascism will not collapse automatically. Only the revolutionary activity of the working class can help to take advantage of the conflicts which inevitably arise within the bourgeois camp in order to undermine the fascist dictatorship and to overthrow it.” [emphasis mine: S.W.]

—Georgi Dimitrov, The Fascist Offensive and the Tasks of the Communist International in the Struggle of the Working Class against Fascism, 1935 

Within the span of a few months under the new libertarian regime, the poverty rate has risen from 40% of the population prior to Milei presidency to nearly 60%, with hyper-inflation taking hold even faster than before the libertarians took power, all of which results of the nascent government’s economic “shock- therapy” and other extreme policies. Concerning Milei’s foreign policy, he has done little more than devolve his country into a proxy for American interests, with the government rejecting plans to join the non-American-aligned economic bloc BRICS, expressing fanatical support for the State of Israel and its war against the Palestinian people, making concessions to the Western-led International Monetary Fund, etc.

Javier Milei, unlike what his pseudo-radical positions would suggest, is as much a part of the problems faced by Argentina as the previous social democratic government was. His “free market fundamentalist” policies have brought ruin to the already failing economy, his “anti-government” notions have been refuted by his heading of state terrorism, and he has made himself an enemy of his own people in the clearest manner. 

Argentina prior to the election of Javier Milei is analogous to the Weimar Republic and Kingdom of Italy before those countries’ fall into fascism. Milei — like Hitler and Mussolini, was chosen by the Argentine ruling class as a final means to protect capitalism from working-class revolution. Fascism is the that exists to repress radical movements, and it is clear Argentina is heading along this dark path. However, the Argentine people, understanding that the far-right government has never sided with their interests, are beginning to resist in increasingly large numbers. There is hope, and there is particularly hope that Milei’s government will soon fall due to its own betrayal of the Argentine proletariat. 

The libertarian movements outside of Argentina cannot be separated from the events in this country. Right-wing libertarians have revealed their true countenance as a modern fascist movement who will act as the shock-troops of the capitalist system. They will deceive the masses with their promises of a “better” economic system, yet when they are summoned by the bourgeoisie to power, they will implement merely an extreme form of neoliberalism we see in the present. 

​International Marxist–Leninists express the utmost support for the proletariat of this country against their fascistic regime. The revolutionary communist movement in Argentina will lead the people’s ongoing resistance and establish a country which is not a vassal of U.S., Russian, or Chinese interests, but a free, socialist Argentina.

Death to all forms of fascism and reaction! 

Workers of the world, Unite!

 

Image attribution: 

​Top Image: “ Represión frente al Congreso Nacional - Buenos Aires – Argentina” by Santiago Sito (CC BY-NC-ND)

 

Famous Fraudulent Stalin Quotes Debunked

 Alleged Quotation: 

 

"The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do."

 

Refutation:

 

The only source for Stalin saying anything even approaching "it's not who counts the votes..." is Bazhanov's book (first published in 1980 and translation into English in 1990). But, even here, what Stalin is reputed to have said is quite different:

 

"I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how."

However, this quote seems to evidence Stalin's concerns to prevent electoral fraud. The exact opposite intention of the "who counts the votes..." quote.

Alleged Quotation:

"The Pope? How many divisions has he got?"

 

Refutation:

Wrong again! This lie has been repeated enough to become fact!

The myth holds that Stalin, on being asked to win over Catholic support by French Premier Pierre Laval responded "How many divisions does the Pope have?". The source for this myth is "The Gathering Storm", by Winston Churchill, 1948, Widely quoted and repeated as fact. 

This myth is propagated to target religious individuals; meant to emphasis Stalin's cynicism and "might makes right" attitude. 

 

This quote was actually said by German Chancellor Otto von Bismark in 1872 to Prussian official Adalbert Falk when Falk was charged with enforcing Bismark's anti-Catholic laws. This was part of the Prussian "kulturkampf" against political Catholicism. 

 

No concrete evidence exists for it ever being said, and why would Stalin, in a majority Orthodox nation need to curry Catholic support?

 

Alleged Quotation:

"Death solves all problems — no man, no problem."

 

Refutation:

 

"No man, no problem." comes from a work of fiction, the novel Children of the Arbat (1987) by Anatoly Rybakov where he had a fictional Stalin say it. In his later work, the Novel of Memories, Rybakov admitted that there was no source for the quote and that he had made it up as fictional dialog.

 

Alleged Quotation: 

 

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."

 

Refutation:

 

He never said it!

 

Falsely attributed to Stalin in order to make people believe he was totally uncaring and unconcerned about the fate of millions... The line instead comes from the book Französischer Witz by Kurt Tucholsky (1932): 

 

"The war? I can't find it too terrible! The death of one man: that is a catastrophe. One hundred thousand deaths: that is a statistic!"

 

 [source]

 

January 2024 Announcements and Updates

Revolutionary greetings, and happy new year!

Since our original incarnation in 2022, we have made significant progress in our content and level of ideological development.

With the arrival of 2024, I believe it would be important to articulate certain developments with this project in addition to certain plans which I wish to implement within the time frame of this year.

New developments

New ideological materials from Marxist theorists (Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Hoxha, etc.) have been added and more will be included in the near-future. 

Currently, we are actively working on compiling important quotations from the aforementioned authors and including them in dedicated sections. The page relating to quotations by Enver Hoxha has already been completed, and similar sections dedicated to quotes from Lenin and Stalin will be added shortly. These pages may be accessed from the Theory & Resources tab (formerly known simply as Theory).

Other, more trivial details about this website are being improved as well. 

Intentions for 2024

We intend on expanding the scope of our content so as to document current events and ideological issues in much greater detail than previously. This is only appropriate considering the emerging socioeconomic realities which may be faced this year.    

Additionally, it is our ambition to expand the reach of this website and its content via reestablishing our presence on external platforms. In the middle of 2023, we faced difficulties and setbacks in this regard due to internal conflicts along with the hostility incited against us by online revisionist groupings. Please view our Links tab in the coming weeks.

Suggestions, relevant questions, and productive criticism may be directed towards the address provided on the Contact tab.           

Only under the Leadership of a genuine Marxist–Leninist Party can the objectives be achieved

[source]

From a talk between Enver Hoxha of the PLA and Ernst Aust of the CPG/M–L, November 30, 1979

First Comrade Enver Hoxha welcomed the guest who had come to our country to take part in the celebration of the 35th anniversary of the Liberation of Albania. They held a long conversation in the course of which Comrade Enver Hoxha expressed the opinion of the Party of Labour of Albania about a number of the more important political problems. Among other things he said:

First of all, I want to thank you most sincerely for coming to our country and your participation in this important celebration for our people and our Party, the 35^th anniversary of the Liberation of socialist Albania. You have been here at other times, too, and know our country and our Party, and know the feelings which we nurture for you.

At this meeting I would like to discuss a number of problems which we think are of interest both for you and for us.

The stronger the Marxist-Leninists are, the more they are monolithic, with extensive activity and always with a firm and clear line, the more the day-to-day struggle of the proletariat here in Europe will assume a revolutionary political colour and essence. The strikes, demonstrations and demands of the European proletarians, which are taking place at the moments of the great crisis through which imperialism and world capitalism are passing, will more and more assume a political character.

As you know, the economic strikes and demonstrations which are taking place at present in the countries of the European Common Market frequently end peacefully, in agreements between trade-union bosses or the worker aristocracy and the employers.

We think that work must be done to change this sterile struggle, this modus vivendi. We consider this struggle harmful to the proletariat and favourable, undisturbing, and to some degree surmountable for capitalism, because the results of it are temporary and do not harm capitalism much financially, because the concessions it makes as a result of the demands and the struggle of the proletariat are just crumbs from the enormous surplus value which it extracts from the exploitation of the working class and the mechanization of production.

The contradictions between proletarians and capitalists, between the rank-and-file unionists and the worker aristocracy, the union bosses, are becoming more profound and we must strive to make them more and more so. We think that capital and the worker aristocracy are bound together in a knot which must be severed like the Gordian knot. This knot consists of the laws which are nothing but the chains with which the proletariat has been bound to prevent it deviating from the course advantageous to capital. Therefore, the question which presents itself is to study the enslaving character of these laws which constitute the wall with which the present struggle of the proletariat is colliding, and in this direction you have many possibilities to study the situation to find and attack the weak points, to breach this wall and then to launch a frontal attack on the breach in order, eventually, to bring down the whole wall.

Of course, this is not easy. If systematic actions are not undertaken in this direction, and especially, when a great deal of explanatory work is not done with the army of proletarians, then successes cannot be achieved. Hence, the conditions demand that we should work inside the existing unions, but should also work to establish our own unions, which we must defend and use as a political weapon against capital and the union bosses to defend those economic rights which the working class has won through struggle, but we must also struggle for the true rights of the workers, that is, for their political rights.

However, these can be achieved only when the proletariat and its party, in the first place, clearly understand the theory of Marx and Lenin about the character of capital and the role of the proletariat and the proletarian revolution.

West Germany is the most powerful capitalist state of "United Europe", the wealthiest country of this monopoly capitalist union. West-German imperialism is a ferocious imperialism, an ally of the United States of America, an ally in NATO and a member of the European Common Market. Next to the United States of America it is the "ally" which plays the main role in NATO and it dominates the Common Market from every stand-point. The other members are afraid of it, and therefore, there are contradictions between them.

This domination, which is also exerted over the German people themselves, at the same time enables West-German capital to show itself somewhat more "generous" towards the proletariat. And in fact, the standard of living in West Germany is higher than in the other countries of "United Europe", its currency is stronger, the demagogy about its pseudo-democracy is greater and the level of German technology is among the highest.

Precisely in this difficult situation, in which it is the merit of your Party to be struggling, the Party must provide complete and factually based explanations about the mechanism of the political-economic oppression which German capital exerts, because you have to do with a proletariat with a high level of education and qualification, with farmers who have sufficient land and work with mechanized means, and you have to do with an intelligentsia with traditions, but imbued with the most varied reactionary ideological views which, as we know, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels combated and exposed over a wide front.

Imperialism is continually inventing new fascist and revanchist counter-revolutionary theories, both open and disguised, which respond to the situations which those who create them are experiencing, and it spreads them not only in Germany, but everywhere in the world, concocting and encouraging new outlooks, new ways of life, which are adapted to the technology, the industrial development and capitalism in decay. Imperialism, especially in your country, combines all these theories and outlooks with the Teutonic spirit, with the old Bismarck Junker outlook and Hitlerite national-socialist savagery.

Our doctrine, Marxism-Leninism, explains and clarifies all these situations which have developed and are developing.

 

It has foreseen everything, while also providing a correct solution for the fundamental problems of each epoch, the problems of the materialist and dialectical development of history. Only a rabid enemy of Marxism-Leninism can act as the Chinese revisionists are doing.

Amongst other things, at the Congress of Writers and Artists of China which ended recently, through the vice-president of the League, they declared that in the 19^th century Marx and Engels could not have foreseen the development of productive forces through the wide-scale use of electric power and nuclear energy. Lenin was able to recognize this and that is why he said that communism is Soviet power plus the electrification of the whole country, but, say the Chinese, he was not acquainted with electronics, and consequently, his theory, too, is of no help in today's conditions of development.

On the other hand, this Chinese revisionist made himself the apologist of imperialism by stating, to the astonishment of all, that this system is not in decay or in decline, but is advancing, developing production, science, technique and the productive forces, therefore, he concludes, this new situation of the imperialist countries has brought forward new problems to be studied. "Mao Zedong thought" provides this "aid". In other words, according to this revisionist, we must reject Marxism-Leninism.

In these conditions it is our duty to arm ourselves by studying and thoroughly mastering Marxism-Leninism in order to clearly distinguish the false, so-called Marxist- Leninist theories such as "Mao Zedong thought", the theories of the "Eurocommunists" who would be better called Eurorevisionists, and other such theories.

As we see, we are facing many enemies whom we must fight together in Marxist-Leninist unity of revolutionary thought and action.

Our struggle is serious and complicated. It is a stern political, ideological and economic struggle and, in certain conditions, even an armed struggle. On this occasion, I want to stress that for us Marxist-Leninists the revolution has begun, it is a process in development, therefore we must carry it through to the end, The fundamental issue of this revolution is the seizure of state power by the proletariat by force, by violence, because the capitalist bourgeoisie which holds state power does not relinquish it willingly or through reforms.

Of course, we Marxist-Leninists are realists; we are organizers and know that the revolution is prepared objectively and subjectively. Sacrifices will be required, we and the peoples will shed our blood, we will have to be clear in our thinking, prudent and courageous in actions, fearless on attack and careful in retreat. We must also know when we can make compromises, of course, only when these are advantageous to the revolution. On this question and in everything else, both in strategy and tactics, we are guided by Marxism-Leninism.

We must take full account of the political circumstances, clearly discern the splits in the ranks of the enemies and exploit them in favour of the revolution and erode the material, political and military power of the enemies.

World capitalism, social-democracy and modern revisionism have always fought, distorted and misrepresented proletarian internationalism, the collaboration of communists, and the unity of thought and action of the communist and workers' parties. On us, the Marxist-Leninist parties, devolves the urgent task of putting all these things on the right road.

The so-called joint meetings which social-democracy, modern revisionism hold from time to time are worthless, formal, and are held to feel the pulse of the partners who take part in them. At these meetings each participant aims t o benefit himself at the expense of the others. Of course, we Marxist-Leninists need meetings, but we have no need for meetings just for the sake of meetings, fruitless meetings, meetings which allegedly affirm our existence. First of all, we need meetings to exchange experience, to co-ordinate the cardinal actions for a given situation, we need meetings of a militant character in which unity prevails and not meetings in order to quarrel and split.

The holding of these meetings depends on the seriousness of the parties, on the problems which require joint solutions, as well as on the moments when these solutions should be applied. Therefore, we think that slogans about "general meetings of communist parties (Marxist-Leninist)" should not be issued without first carefully weighing up and deciding the problems which will be discussed in them.

In our opinion, these meetings, whether bilateral, trilateral, multilateral, or general, are determined by the objective needs of the struggle, by the need to exchange experience and for special consultations about related problems which all of us face. Our Party clearly defined this view at its 7th Congress.

Now I come to another question. If we look at the present state of the communist parties (Marxist-Leninist) of Europe, along with the good results achieved in strengthening them, it seems to us that since some of them are new, they are still not properly consolidated politically, ideologically and organizationally.

We, the older parties, with greater experience, must help them. Our opinion is that this assistance cannot be provided properly by a meeting or a communique which might emerge from it, but bilateral and trilateral contacts should take place and these require patience, explanations, and real knowledge of the situations in which each party operates.

Our common problems here, in old Europe, are capital ones, but they are problems not only of Europe, but of the whole world, of all peoples, because no part of the globe, no class, no party, whatever its type and the ideology on which it is based, can isolate itself from the events which are taking place all round the globe or fail to take part in this complicated struggle. Naturally, the intensity of the struggle may not be the same everywhere and this has its own objective and subjective reasons.

We Marxist-Leninists cannot fail to see and study this revolutionary development in all its complexity, with the positive and negative aspects which it presents, and basing ourselves on this, construct our strategy and tactics.

Capitalist and revisionist Europe looks united, but it is and it is not. The interests of Western capitalism seem harmonized and co-ordinated in NATO, in "United Europe" and the European Common Market, but amongst the states which comprise these organisms there are profound contradictions and rivalries, the law of the jungle, crises, inflation and unemployment, fear of the social-imperialist Soviet Union and, above all, fear of the revolution, prevail there.

The situation in the Soviet Union and the other revisionist countries of Eastern Europe, which take part in the Warsaw Treaty and COMECON, is similar.

There are confrontations between the two blocs as well as between states within the blocs, but still without weapons; the rivalries between them are becoming more and more profound. There is fierce economic competition, a frenzied arms race and struggle for the weakening of one bloc by the other.

Hence, in this situation there is unequal economic development, there are capitalist and revisionist states which are wealthy and less wealthy, dependent and less dependent, as well as states which are completely dependent, but which pose as free, independent, sovereign states as Tito's Yugoslavia, Rumania and others describe themselves. The multinational companies dominate their political and economic life. The superstructure of these states responds to this structure. In all the capitalist countries of Europe disguised fascism has its own forms and forces of organization, social-democracy has its numerous parties and modern revisionism also has its parties.

All these parties are political instruments of capital, imperialism and social-imperialism. They represent and defend the interests of various capitalist groups of one or the other bloc, of one or the other capitalist or revisionist state. Decay, rivalry and ideological and political confusion reign throughout them. All of them, with their structures and superstructures, are fighting jointly in the framework of alliances, but also in disalliance and rivalry, in order to safeguard the regime of oppression and exploitation of capitalism as a world system and of capitalism within each state; they are fighting to suppress and exploit the working class and the peoples, to put down the revolution, whether anti-imperialist or proletarian, anywhere in the world.

These are the situations in which we, the Marxist- Leninist parties, the genuine communist parties, the leadership of the proletariat and the proletariat of all countries, are fighting.

The enemies strive to keep the European proletariat split and disorganized and all we Marxist-Leninists can see this. This is the main aim of all the parties of capital, social-democracy and modern revisionism. Only the doctrine of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin assures the proletariat of unity of its ranks and its allies. That is why the bourgeoisie, capitalism, revisionism and socialdemocracy pervert, distort, fight and deny Marxism-Leninism.

In these conditions our primary task is to defend Marxism-Leninism, to apply it correctly in revolutionary ways in the conditions of each country, but not in isolation from the struggle of other peoples, to make correct analyses of particular and general situations and to form alliances while safeguarding the individuality of the Marxist- Leninist party. This is the principle of our struggle from which we must not budge, because only in this way can the struggle which capitalism is waging against us be successfully opposed.

The alliance of the proletariat with the peasantry, the progressive intellectuals, the unemployed of various strata, and the proletarian-worker emigrants who work in each separate capitalist country, is essential. Without this alliance, in this situation our struggle will remain restricted. In Germany there are many such forces, indeed, there are Albanians who have come mainly from Kosova, who, amongst other problems, have the problem of unemployment.

The Kosovars are courageous, they have the tradition that when they give their word they do not go back on it, have many fine characteristics which they preserve and a strong sense of friendship. If they make you their friend they will never forget you and will lay down their lives for you.

In order to achieve such an alliance, first of all, there must be struggle for unity of action of the proletariat, which is not achieved all that easily, because of the obstacles which the parties of the bourgeoisie, such as the social-democrats and the Christian-democrats and the demagogy of renegades from Marxism-Leninism, the modern revisionists, raise and the traditions which they have implanted. Unity is strong when it is established from below, from the base, proceeding from the real problems and needs of the workers, from the needs of the rank-and-file unionists, and in this way, according to the problems and circumstances, forms of organization for unity of action are created and the split with their reactionary union bosses becomes obvious.

The pronounced political content of the demands in strikes and demonstrations in which the new revolutionary leaders will emerge, will strengthen this unity. In the course of this struggle new forms of organization and leadership will emerge too.

Unity, this is the key problem of our Marxist-Leninist parties, the motto of which has always been and still is: "Workers of all countries unite!" This is achieved when attention is paid also to the slogan: "Workers of one country unite!"

This unity implies ceaseless struggle against those who combat it, hence, against the local capitalists and capitalist superstructure, implies struggle against the organization and ideology of political parties of the bourgeoisie and against capitalist exploitation.

Our struggle, then, is a great and extensive one. It is not easy, on the contrary, it is difficult. Naturally, this all-sided struggle does not discourage us or make us pessimistic, but gives us courage. Nevertheless, it cannot be coped with by the forces of the Marxist-Leninist party alone which, while standing firm on principles, must not be sectarian or opportunist either in thought or in action, otherwise it will withdraw into its own shell or become a revisionist party.

Therefore, our Party thinks that the problem of the unity of the working class and the forming of alliances on sound foundations with other strata and forces for specific issues, for minimum programs, in order to go over eventually to alliances of a broader character and more far-reaching programs, are decisive problems.

We think that a mature Marxist-Leninist party with some experience can and must accomplish these tasks.

First of all, of course, it is essential that it should thoroughly understand all these major problems and then solve them correctly from the political, ideological and organizational stand-points, in conformity with the concrete conditions of its own country, so that the objective and subjective factors operate for the mobilization of the masses in revolts, uprisings and revolution.

Such a thing occurred in Iran, but there the Islamic bourgeois party and not the Marxist-Leninist party led the uprising. Of course, Germany, France, or Italy are not like Iran, which is a weak link of capitalism and imperialism.

Nevertheless, the representatives of Islam were able to inspire the masses who overthrew the Shah and not only wiped out his feudal power, maintained by means of modern weapons, but also struck a heavy blow at American and the other imperialisms.

The American imperialists, placed in difficult positions, do not know who to support or how to act, whether or not to intervene in Iran with arms. Armed intervention on their part would be catastrophic, not only for the United States of America, but also for the whole capitalist world.

The Moslem believers in Iran are on the move. Not all the masses believe in Mohammed, but they all want liberation from the yoke of imperialism. Of course, the bourgeoisie, the capitalists, want to use the existing situation for their own interests. What will happen later? That i s another problem the development of which we shall watch. Nevertheless, we Marxist-Leninists draw some conclusions, seeing that the people came out in the streets, overthrew the Shah and succeeded in bringing the army, which was armed to its teeth, over to their side.

It is well known that whoever oppresses others also oppresses his own people. If the oppressed people in Iran rose against their oppressor, then why should the other oppressed peoples not rise against their own oppressors and the oppressors of others? Capitalism propagates the impossibility of this, while at the same time it organizes oppression in a thousand visible and invisible forms.

At the present time an exceptionally difficult political and economic situation has been created for imperialism and for American imperialism, in particular. Apart from other things, the problem of the dollar has become one of its weak points, because the German mark, the Japanese yen and the French franc are paying for the dollar.

Hence, the countries which use these currencies do not want the dollar, but the franc, the mark, the yen, etc.

The struggle of the proletariat, led by the Marxist-Leninists against imperialism, the local capitalism, the bourgeois state and its political parties, cannot fail to lead to blows between these latter and the proletariat and its allies. Provided our actions are revolutionary there can be no other outcome.

The reformists avoid coming to blows, indeed they vote for and support the strengthening of the armed forces, the police, and other forces protecting the capitalist system. The reformists are only for certain reforms, sufficient to deceive the proletariat and the masses; they are for their own participation in the capitalist state, hence, they are for the capitalist order.

They describe anyone who rises against the bourgeoisie and its lackeys as terrorist and anarchist. We Marxist-Leninists are against terrorism and against anarchism, both in theory and practice. However, we are preparing the revolution, hence we are bound to come to blows with the army of the bourgeoisie. For this reason the bourgeoisie is already preparing the terrain and indoctrinating the masses psychologically to create the impression amongst them that we, the communists and proletarians who rise in insurrection against the system of oppression and exploitation, are allegedly terrorists, anarchists, murderers and bank robbers and label us with other epithets which are perfectly appropriate for terrorist and anarchist gangs, but in no way appropriate for communists. It is the capitalist system which creates these gangs, which causes the degeneration of their members and encourages them to operate under pseudo-revolutionary, pseudo-proletarian and pseudo-communist labels. Originally, many members of these gangs were honest people, unemployed and homeless and suffering great hardships, but this miserable life and capitalism itself drive them to commit acts of terror, robbery and murder. In some cases these gangs are an embarrassment to the power of the bourgeoisie, but mostly they serve the bourgeoisie and so it increases them continuously and leaves them free to operate. This is the army of fascism with which the proletariat has clashed and will always clash whenever it rises in revolutionary struggle. Such gangs are the auxiliary aids of the army, the police and all the organs of coercion of the bourgeoisie.

Therefore, it is a primary task of our communist parties (Marxist-Leninist) to educate and train the proletariat and the masses day by day by engaging them in minor actions and then in bigger actions against the bourgeoisie and the various forms of oppression which it employs, especially against the army and the other means of oppression of the capitalist order. This is no easy task. For this reason the Marxist-Leninist party does not separate its revolutionary strategy from its revolutionary tactics. The essence of our struggle is to make the soldier, the son of the people, a political person so that he will not be an automaton, but will consciously sabotage the orders, discipline, and armaments of the army, erode the power of the reactionary officer caste, refuse to open fire on the people and, at the culminating moment, turn his weapons against the system, against his superiors, and join the insurgents, as occurred in Iran.

In the countries of Europe this is a thing that cannot be realized immediately, therefore, the communist parties (M-L) here have to do a great deal of work. It is clear that their subsequent activity will be easier when the genuine parties of the working class have carried out adequate work with the sons of the people before they are recruited to the army.

We must sabotage the imperialist war. This is done by preparing the masses and co-ordinating the struggle against the capitalist structure and superstructure with the struggle to sabotage the army of the bourgeoisie. The Marxist-Leninist party turns imperialist war into civil war.

This is what Marxism-Leninism teaches us, therefore, the ways and means must be found for us to develop and concretize this great lesson in practice.

This will be achieved only when we prepare the soldier for such an action, when he understands this action and is conscious of its importance, when he sabotages the munition plants and depots and the infra-structure of the bourgeois army and when, at the same time, the Marxist-Leninist party through struggle and in the course of fighting has organized the army of the armed people and, at the head of the proletariat, launches direct attacks to overthrow the power of the bourgeoisie and place power in the hands of the people, which is the main objective of the revolution.

All this complex struggle of the Marxist-Leninist parties, the proletariat, and the working masses cannot be waged in the same way and with the same intensity, with the same forms and methods in all the countries of Europe and the world. This is understandable and an objective fact. The situations are not the same and cannot be developed in the same way everywhere, but Marxism -Leninism, the ideology which guides us and must guide us, is the same, the objectives which we must achieve are the same, while the forces in movement and in confrontation have been defined by Marxism-Leninism on the basis of the dialectical and historical development of human society. Hence, it is up to the working class in alliance with the peasantry and other exploited strata, under the leadership of its own Marxist-Leninist communist party, to carry out the revolution and take power into its own hands.

Only a genuine Marxist-Leninist party is able to study and understand these great and important problems correctly, to organize the struggle, the revolution, and achieve the objectives which history has allocated to the proletariat and to the party as the leading and guiding force of the proletariat.[emphasis added]

We think that only a party of the Lenin-Stalin type can lead the proletarian revolution to its successful conclusion and build the new society, socialism and communism.

Assimilation by the militants of the ideology of Marx and Lenin and its rigorous application in practice with iron proletarian discipline have great importance.

The proletarian revolution demands iron proletarian discipline. Therefore, the vanguard party of the working class is characterized by unity of revolutionary Marxist-Leninist thought and action.

There must be only one line and not two in a Marxist-Leninist party. In the party there is genuine democracy within the principles and norms established, there is open and constructive discussion in which the opinions which may exist about various problems are thrashed out, there is sound Marxist-Leninist comradeship and sincere communist love for one another. Bureaucracy, liberalism and sectarianism are combated, always within these norms, and the cult of individuals, favouritism and other evils and all sorts of other hangovers inherited from the old bourgeois-capitalist society are combated.

Militancy demands great sacrifices, even up to the ultimate sacrifice, from us communists. Not all communists understand this. There are some who understand it narrowly, restricting their efforts to superficial propaganda which causes no problems or dangers to "democratic" legality and the adoption of some feeble political stands without militant mobilization and without concrete results.

The revisionist parties are parties of "permanent»"paid officials, commercial parties which act in politics in the way they run their capitalist enterprises. For example, the French revisionist party, the Italian revisionist party and others have their own trusts and receive open subsidies from the state and secret subsidies f r om the capitalist groups. Their "militancy" is a facade which deceives the proletariat and supports the capitalist apparatus and system, hence, does capital no harm.

The period through which we are passing is glorious and revolutionary, but also difficult for our parties. Our struggle must be waged with closed ranks so that we are not infiltrated by the enemy, either through provocateurs or agents, or ideologically, in order to split us. "Mao Zedong thought" is one of these weapons which is being employed at present for this purpose.

The existence and activity of a party in legality and the possibilities which the capitalist bourgeoisie may provide for it to work must not create unhealthy illusions.

We must use these possibilities to develop the revolutionary work, but the party through its sound nucleus can act better in illegality by exploiting the various forms of work which the possibilities of bourgeois "legality" permit, but not for a moment forgetting the tooth and nail struggle with the army of the bourgeoisie which will attack us.

We must not understand the problem of illegal work in a sectarian way and shut ourselves away in isolation, neglecting all the forms of the struggle which "legality" permits, although we must not forget that this legality is ephemeral. The legal work of the party is known to the enemy; whereas its illegal work, which is combined with and guides the legal work, must not be known to the enemy. The legal struggle must, without fail, achieve certain limits, certain results which serve the revolution, create the objective factors for it, prepare the wide-scale mass attacks against the oppressive capitalist system and its state.

The Party of Labour of Albania is in power. Socialist Albania is the only state of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

We are encircled by savage enemies who are also your enemies and the enemies of all mankind, but all of us together also have countless friends in the world with whom we are united in struggle for the one aim, for the revolution.

We fight to expose and disarm the external enemies through our correct, principled and courageous policy which arouses respect among the peoples and fear among the enemies, both because of the good opinion which it creates about Albania and because of the recognized fact that the Albanian people know how to fight and defend themselves if they are attacked. So, for the enemy the question presents itself like this: you may well try to enter the war but how will you come out of it?! The enemy may and does have many sophisticated weapons, but Albania is strong. One of the main aims of our struggle in the international arena is to increase our friends, to assist our co-fighters and to disarm and expose the enemies. We never forget the enemies, we do not overestimate them, but neither do we underrate them, we face them without batting an eyelid, because we are determined to fight to the end, to defend ourselves against them whether in the international arena or within our own country, in ceaseless struggle against the influence which they are doing their utmost to impose on us.

Our Party is constantly working to strengthen the situation within the country in every direction. We have some difficulties, but, of course, we have more successes.

The Chinese revisionists caused us serious difficulties in the economy, but we are struggling to overcome them and we shall do so . . .

We are also encountering some difficulties in trade exchanges with the capitalist states, but we shall surmount these, too, without making even the slightest political concession, without toning down the political struggle even for a moment and without accepting the smallest credit from them. In our payments to them we shall continue to be correct, as we have always been. We shall accomplish everything with our own forces, with prudent and well-considered steps. We will always be opposed to exaggerated optimism.

The continuous strengthening of this sound situation within the country is and will continue to be the main objective of our Party. We are working to ensure that the development of our socialist economy and culture and the strengthening of the defence of the Homeland continue to advance. Above all, we are working to safeguard and strengthen the Marxist-Leninist unity of the Party within its own ranks and the unity of the Party with the people.

We are struggling to promote new cadres, that is, to prepare the leading cadres for the future, because the Party must always be young, continually rejuvenated with fresh blood. This unity has been created and tempered and will be further tempered only on the course of Marxism-Leninism.

Our close, sincere, equal relations on the course of Marxism-Leninism are a vital issue. We must defend Marxism-Leninism, must master and apply it even better than hitherto by fighting harder and more effectively in creative ways for the proletarian revolution and for genuine socialism. We must fight together, shoulder to shoulder, with closed ranks and assist each other as much as we can. We, as Marxist-Leninists in power, will help you in your revolutionary struggle. On the other hand, you help socialist Albania where the Party of Labour is in power, where the dictatorship of the proletariat has been established and the new socialist society is being built successfully, according to the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin.

Our Party thinks that a stern struggle must be waged against the various kinds of modern revisionism and this struggle must be linked closely with the struggle against American imperialism, Soviet social-imperialism, capitalism and its parties in each separate state and on a world scale. We emphasize the struggle against the various kinds of modern revisionism, because this is the most recent and least unmasked variant of social-democracy in the period of imperialism, of capitalism in decay, the period of anti-imperialist revolutions and proletarian revolutions.

In essence, the various kinds of modern revisionism have the same ideological views and the same objectives:

— The rejection of the Marxist-Leninist theory as a theory allegedly unsuitable for our times;

— The rejection of the revolution and the seizure of power through violence;

— The integration of capitalism into "socialism" by means of reforms in pluralism and in collaboration, in harmony and coexistence of classes and their ideologies;

— The preservation of the existing capitalist state structures as well as of religious beliefs, while accepting only some minor formal change.

Although Togliatti's polycentrism has been achieved in general, there will be further splits and fragmentation.

Today we see a number of variants of modern revisionism:

1. Soviet modern revisionism which "dominates" in a series of revisionist parties within its sphere of influence which, in general, are the former communist parties.

This revisionist grouping disguises itself with Leninism, but fights it both as a theory and as a revolutionary practice.

The parties of this revisionist grouping operating in the capitalist countries are in opposition, but they are also making efforts to participate in the capitalist governments of their own countries. Their demagogy is very dangerous.

2. "Eurocommunism", the banner of which is carried by the Spanish, French and Italian revisionist parties as well as others which have openly rejected the Marxist-Leninist theory and the idea of the revolution, defend parliamentarianism, pluralism, reformism i n theory and in structure, reject the class struggle, preach class peace, struggle for participation in the capitalist governments and legal collaboration with capitalism, while integrating themselves into its structure and superstructure.

3. Chinese revisionism with "Mao Zedong thought" as a pseudo-Marxist, eclectic, Bukharinite, revisionist, opportunist theory with tendencies for world hegemony both in ideology and policy. Although not well crystallized, "Mao Zedong thought" is a theory of the developing Chinese bourgeoisie, which has aggressive, war-mongering, social-imperialist tendencies. This pseudo-Marxist theory rejects Marxism-Leninism while disguising itself as a theory of the revolution; likewise, it tries to disguise the struggle which Chinese revisionism is waging for world hegemony and neo-colonialism, rejects the class struggle, has a pronounced Asiatic but also world character and comes out openly against proletarian internationalism.

4. Titoism, a revisionist current which operates with out disguise against Marxism-Leninism, places itself openly in the service of world capitalism, is the builder of an anarcho-syndicalist pseudo-socialist structure with all the anti-socialist and anti-Marxist-Leninist features. Titoism is a friend and supporter of the "Eurocommunists" and is trying to become their leader, but without success.

This current is also making efforts to influence China, to set it more firmly on the capitalist course, and this i n fluence has begun to have effect in several directions, although China aims to create and is creating its capitalist system in its own way.

5. Various eclectic social-religious, social-bourgeois, anti-Marxist currents which pop up continually like toadstools after the rain.

Our parties must bear in mind that these revisionist variants, which are all on the attack against socialism and the revolution, also have their theories with which they want to manipulate the masses within the country and outside it, on the international plane. The theories of "three worlds", "the non aligned", "the developing world", or theories like that which claims that "socialism is being built everywhere" are opium for the peoples, are antipopular theories which are emerging as a reaction to the anti-imperialist situation and serve precisely to protect the capitalist system from the attacks of the masses, to hinder the anti-imperialist movement and struggle of the peoples.

These pseudo-liberation theories create illusions and try to paralyse the revolutionary drive of the masses by creating the opinion among them that they are at work, "in struggle", and that what they are doing, or appear to be doing, is sufficient.

Through the pompous conferences, the broad meetings, through the exchanges of government delegations and parties of these countries amongst themselves and the great publicity which accompanies these numerous manifestations, the bourgeois press is striving to confuse and daze world opinion and sometimes even the new, unformed Marxists.

All these things constitute the complexity of our struggle. In our fundamental fight, in our strategy and tactics, in our daily struggle and activity we must always take all these actions of our enemies into account and unmask them openly and without respite. It is for this reason that we must temper our parties every day, must arm them with our Marxist-Leninist theory and must safeguard and strengthen the Marxist-Leninist ideological unity of the party. In this way alone we can and will find our bearings correctly in our complicated, but glorious struggle, because this is the great struggle for the liberation of peoples from capitalist bondage, the struggle for the triumph of the proletarian revolution on all continents.