On 1 and 2 October this year (2012) the KKE organised a European Communist Meeting in Brussels for to find a unified point of view on the following subject: “Assimilation or rupture? The illusion of the pro-people management of capitalism and the struggle of the communists for the interests of the working class and popular strata, for the overthrow of capitalism, for socialism.”
In her introductory speech the General Secretary of the CC of KKE A. Papariga highlighted to the European Communist Meeting the points about what the other present parties had to react or answer if they agree or disagree (italic-fat is done by me):
“The issue of the character of the crisis is not merely a theoretical issue. It is clearly a practical issue because it determines the specialization of the political line of the communist parties in conditions of the crisis.
Therefore, any peculiarities in the manifestation, the intensity or the duration of the crisis from country to country do not determine the character of the crisis neither should they influence the strategy and the tactics of the communist party.
History has proven that when the capitalist states cannot manage the crisis and above all its consequences they also resort to the use of arms, that is the imperialist war, of course not in order to sell weapons, as several peaceniks and pacifists claim, but because at the specific juncture the use of weapons is more effective for the redistribution of the markets.
Crisis and imperialist war-imperialist peace are inextricably linked and this is how we should treat them.(...)
In addition, the prolonged capitalist crisis is showing something else which is very important for the strategy and the tactics of the communist parties. It shows that the bourgeois management policy has new difficulties, which it didn’t have in the previous periods, in managing the way-out from the crisis, entering into a new cycle of extended capitalist production, putting a brake on mass absolute and relative destitution, even making some maneuvers. (....)
The defense of the one or the other type of management is based on the interests of the bourgeoisie of each member state, the alliances it wants to form in the framework of competition. The workers’ and people’s movement must not take the side of the one or the other rival, it will lose everything.(...)
In conclusion, we assess that the crisis is being prolonged and deepening and that it will affect other countries as well. Even if a country, for instance Greece, enters a phase of recovery, this recovery will be temporary, weak, with unbearable unemployment levels, with starvation salaries and wages, with barbaric labour relations that will bring us back at the end of 19th century. A new cycle of crisis will break out before this recovery consolidates. This is not valid only concerning Greece but also other countries. Realignments will take place in the alliances while we have to take into account a new round of local wars and we should not rule out a generalized imperialist war. (...)
The alliance policy which we propose to the people is related to the formation of the people’s alliance which has a clear anti-monopoly orientation (which of course in essence is anti-capitalist as capitalism has developed into monopoly capitalism). In these conditions the people’s alliance organizes and coordinates the resistance, the struggle for survival, is directed in a line of rupture with the imperialist unions, the imperialist war, for the overthrow of capitalism, for working class people’s power.
We openly pose to the people the need to struggle for the unilateral cancellation of the debt, i.e not to recognise it, because its recognition leads to negotiation which means new memoranda and measures. At the same time, we highlight the need for the people to struggle for the disengagement from the European Union. We explain the reasons why disengagement and cancellation of the debt entail the struggle for people’s power, with the socialization of the monopolies, planned development which will utilize the country’s existing growth potential, withdrawal from imperialist wars and the agreements of the imperialist peace, withdrawal from NATO, the struggle for mutually beneficial international economic relations. (...)
Today the priority is for the people to prevent even more destruction and to have better prospects in the future. These prerequisites:
First: To realize what kind of crisis we are experiencing, namely a crisis of the capitalist path of development and the assimilation in the EU, that is to say the importance of the struggle against the monopolies and their power.
Secondly: The organization of the workers in the workplaces, in the sectors, in the neighbourhoods.
Thirdly: The strengthening and consolidation of the people’s alliance between the working class and the social forces which have an interest in fighting against the monopolies and capital regardless of the differences between them, with the enhanced participation of women and young people from the aforementioned strata. The movement must be directed towards the overthrow of the power of the monopolies. (...)
We had losses in the elections, but we assess that the losses for the people would have been much greater and irreversible for a long period of time if the KKE had decided to support a government of bourgeois management and accept the assimilation of Greece in the EU and the power of the monopolies in the field of the economy. (...)
No government, no matter if it is called left, communist, even revolutionary, will respect its proclamations if the means of production and the wealth are in the hands of monopolies, if the people do not have the ownership and the state power in their hands.(...)
Objectively the conditions for the radical overthrow have matured even further as the monopolies have penetrated very deeply both into the economy and every other aspect of social life.
Of course the subjective factor, that is to say the labour movement, the strength of the CP is far behind, and we must move in the direction of strengthening them.
We must not abandon the struggle against imperialist war and imperialist peace in the name of the economic crisis.(...)...
(T)he course of developments at a national level is determined by the international and regional correlation of forces as well as by the dynamism and revolutionary line of the labour and communist movement. Every success in a country means an impact on other European developments, any sliding to compromise and retreat will place the movements of many countries in a difficult position. (...)
(T)oday there must be an intense ideological struggle against the dominant bourgeois, reformist and opportunist views. Without such a struggle at the ideological level it will be hard for the popular masses to be oriented towards both the struggle for relief measures and also for the cancellation and overthrow of worse measures. The struggles, even if they acquire a mass character, will not have the necessary level of organization and a well-aimed political orientation without the ideological confrontation within the movement.1”
The KKE is a communist party with a elaborated concrete programme about her strategy to revolution and installation of socialism: see on her website “Programme of KKE” and“Assessments and conclusions on socialist construction during the 20th century, focusing on the USSR. KKE’s perception on socialism.”
This gives the possibility of discussion with the KKE on concrete points (on which one does not agree, or have some critic) It give also the material to the militants of the KKE to discuss with the workers about necessity of revolution, how the workers should organise themselves for this and how a new society will be build.....
I have already formulated my point of view about the just formal “unity” on the ICS – see my first mail to 50 (presumed) communist parties and the second mail - and I think that whatever were the objectives of the KKE, the result of the European Communist Meeting is not a unity in revolutionary strategy. A lot of parties did not answer the statements of the KKE, other leaved every development towards a revolutionary strategy. In fact a lot of them developed REFORMISM or a pure electoral strategy.....although formulated in Marxist-SOUNDING phraseology.
In a next article an analyse of some of the “contributions” (they are placed here on the website of the KKE)of participating (presumed communist) parties
1http://inter.kke.gr/News/news2012/2012-10-01-ecm-omilia-kke, “Introductory Speech of the GS of the CC of KKE A. Papariga to the European Communist Meeting, Brussels 1-2 October - Subject: The stance of the Communist Parties towards the capitalist crisis: Assimilation or Rupture”
Een reactie posten