Originally
– so people could read some time ago on the website icseminar.org
– there would be in 2013 a Ninth Congress of the WPB (PVDA/PTB), on
which would be discussed, amended and finally voted (“democratically
by majority”), what would by the concrete and elaborated vision of
the WPB on “SOCIALISM”, how capitalism would be
“replaced” by socialism and what would be the concrete
revolutionary strategy of the WPB to get there.....:
A
Congress on socialism in 2013
All
experience of this past year reinforces the importance of the 9th
Party Congress that will take place at the end of 2013 and that will
tackle the question of socialism. To reaffirm our goal of society, to
update our vision based on the experience of the 20th century, and to
ideologically strengthen the party1.
So
this was said on the 21th
International Communist Seminar (in 2012)....Well, in May
2013, on the 22th
International Communist Seminar was written in a text
......but which now has disappeared with the whole website:
Towards
the end of 2014, we will hold a Congress on our societal project,
socialism. The theme of socialist democracy will be a major axis. 2
The
website icseminar.org has disappeared, and also each
reference or allusion to the Ninth Congress about “socialism”.
Finally
NOT the party-members would, by any manner (General member-meetings
or “democratic centralism”, or through discussion and voting by
congress-delegates) decide about a principal substantive theme which
“socialism” should be for a party as the WPB, which
is still declaring to be a “communist and revolutionary
party”,....but it is ONLY Peter Mertens, who is defining the
point of view of the party. This is a rather undemocratic way of
proceeding, certainly for a “communist” who is declaring in the
press everywhere: “Iam/we are no longer Stalinists, I am/we are
no longer Maoists” 3....
a populist appeal to the public opinion which is persuaded that
Stalinism and Maoism is opposed to (either proletarian, either
bourgeois...) democracy.
While
a congress on which a clear party-point of view (voted by a majority
of delegates) is postponed (from “end
2113”
to “end
2014),
it
was the third time that Peter Mertens organised with reformists of
all kinds the “Day
of Socialism”
(in
the last part of this article
you can read more about Peter Mertens' initiative “Day
of Socialism”)
Whenever
you are now searching with the term “socialism” on the
website of thte WPB (pvda.be or ptb.be, as the website wpb.be has
disappeared already for ages...) you get on a interview of Solidair
with Peter Mertens about “some outlines of socialism of the
future” 4
This
“interview” is put (in English) on the site solidnet.org (a
website made by the KKE on which all parties that once participated
at a International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties
or a International Communists Seminar can put (as long
as they are able to login)
“Socialism
2.0 will be born not out of romanticism, not out of nostalgia, but
out of today’s needs, with the technology and the wealth
distribution we have nowadays. And for that socialism there are some
outlines, some basic fundamentals of a socialist society we want to
realize in the future. These outlines are contrary to the evolution
of the present society, we are fully aware of this.” Workers' Party
of Belgium (PTB) chairman Peter Mertens presents five principal
outlines for the socialism of the future.
1.
(...)We want a society based on solidarity. Precisely by developing
solidarity you are capable of shaping quite a lot of creative
elements which are currently being spoiled by capitalism. (...)
Social status still determines much of your future. This means that
many talents are being thrown away. (....)
When
society regains control over production – a highly developed
production with enormous possibilities – then man will no longer be
dependent on his social status, on his inherited wealth or on
external factors, as is the case today. In socialism you are
dependent on the only issue a man should be dependent on, namely his
own creativity, his own activity, his own self-deployment.(...)
2.
(....)The ecological sources and accumulated knowledge of mankind
should be recognized as common heritage which nobody can or may
monopolize for self-interest, for profit or for short-term interests.
The most important form of wealth belongs to all of us, common goods
to be actively protected and managed for the use of everyone. The air
we breathe, fresh water, the oceans, the raw materials, the climate
have to be managed in common, and in a rationally planned manner.
Climate degeneration is a social problem, and cannot be solved within
the straitjacket of private interests and the pursuit of maximal
profit.
Secondly,
all aspects of technological progress in the history of modern man,
since 10,000 years, have been passed on by mankind from generation to
generation. With the first technological revolution, the neolithic
revolution, nobody thought of privatizing or taking a patent on the
invention of the wheel. Technological progress was shared and passed
on from generation to generation. The entire development of the
productive forces, of science, of research and so on, has been built
up in the course of the centuries. This knowledge belongs to mankind
as a whole.
The
same can be applied to the most recent technological revolution. All
developments of the past are essentially the fruit of historical
knowledge, but also of collective research at universities, research
financed with public means. (...)
We
cannot allow this to get privatized. These days every scientific
research gets immediately patented, in other words it gets enclosed
in a cage by a number of big shareholders from transnational
companies.(...)
In
the 21st century, socialism will emerge from the recognition that the
common heritage is collective and that public research will be
liberated from the profit straitjacket.
3.(...)In
the 21st century we will have to hold debates about the most
important economic sectors which give form to our society. This
debate is already ongoing, only it is not called as such. The energy
sector and banking sectors, for instance, are sectors that are too
big to fail. This means : if such sector fails by the mechanism of
competition, then social damage is so extensive that we cannot allow
this to happen. What is the current solution? These sectors are
temporarily being saved with our tax money in order to return them as
soon as possible to the private sector. But of course this is no
fundamental solution.
The
only fundamental solution for these key sectors supporting the
economy – and which are indeed too big to fail – is to
“socialize” them, to make them belong to society. In our vision
they have to be turned again into a kind of modern “commons”.
Commons in the past were those ecological sources that did not belong
to the state neither to private people. They belonged to society as a
whole.
This
does not only mean that you have to bring these sectors under public
control where it concerns the structure of its shares and property,
but also where it concerns the appointment of a management that
functions with total transparency, and that can be dismissed at any
time. Public functions, not to be cumulated with functions in
management councils of other companies. Neither can politicians be
part of that management.
But
more importantly, we also have to change the purpose of that kind of
sectors. The purpose will be no longer to satisfy shareholders with
returns of 12 or 13 percent. The purpose will become to deliver a
public service, with these sectors thus becoming society-driven and
no longer profit-driven. In the case of the energy sector : to
provide society with energy in a sustainable way. In the case of the
banking sector : to grant credit where needed, and not to speculate
on the stock market. Sectors serving social interests have to be
under the control of society.
4.
(....)Mankind has reached a point at which we dispose of the
technology and organizing power that allows us to set objectives we
previously deemed impossible. It is perfectly possible to eradicate
hunger worldwide. It is well-known what has to be done, and what it
would cost. We have the technology to decrease the work pace, but
instead of letting this technology work to our favour, it is used
only for the profit engine, and man has become more than ever a slave
of an infernal work pace. A very important factor to reverse all this
is democracy.(...) People like Ford's CEO Stephen Odell or Lakshmi
Mittal (Mittal's CEO) can decide from anywhere, far away, which
worker loses his job and which other worker can keep his. (...) Never
before in history has there been such a small group – transnational
corporations, industrialists, the financial lobby – that exercises
the real control over the objectives of society, over the direction
society is taking. And – we have to say it as it is – they have a
large group of professional politicians at their service, (...)
Socialism
will be about real freedom, the freedom to make choices about the
essential elements of your life, and the freedom to be free of
worries about your basic needs. Will your needy mother still find a
place in an affordable service flat? Will you still have your child
registered at a school? Will you still be able to pay your hospital
bill? These days people are again so occupied with these basic rights
that almost all energy, creativity and leisure time are spent on
them. But that is no real freedom. Real freedom means to be free of
those kinds of worries, so that people are able to be really creative
and can co-govern society.
5.
(...)To cope with the major challenges concerning ecology, democracy…
, we will have to plan. Or in fact I have to say : we will have to
draw away a number of planning processes from the closed rooms of
transnational management councils. For already now an enormous
quantity of plans are being elaborated worldwide. TNCs as Bayer or
Unilever plan from a to z, at an unprecedented scale: the
exploitation, transport and processing of raw materials, the
finishing and distribution of products… All that pertains to a very
strict planning process. But this occurs behind closed doors, not
serving socially rational objectives to meet basic needs, only
serving profit purposes.
Big
TNCs also plan their own research and development. Again, not to
satisfy social needs, but only to realize the largest profit margins
possible. (....) under capitalism, it is the market that determines
the planning. A planning that is not rational, neither ecological nor
social. What we have to achieve is a modern, democratically planned
economy under control of the population.”5
In
the “analysis” of Peter Mertens, ALL references to “classes”
in, and “class-character” of the capitalist society, and ALL
references to the historical revolutionary role of the working class
or proletariat have totally disappeared. The role of the
working-class is reduced by Peter Mertens (by the use of an
elaborated Marxist-SOUNDING so revisionist
analyse) to a mass of potential VOTERS.... for the WPB participating
in elections.( see
here my argumentation
further elaborated in this
document).
Also in what a COMMUNIST society (of which “socialism” is just
the first stage) essential and qualitatively DIFFERS with a
capitalist society, Peter Mertens will not tell us.
In
fact is HIS “socialism” just ..... “state-capitalism”
and while he is not clearly speaking of the class-character of “the
state”, it will not be “a state-power of the working
class”.....but “a state-power of the BOURGEOISIE” (because
“democracy”, “solidarity”, “freedom”,
“control of the population” are NOT neutral, but have all
a class-character about which Peter Mertens does not say a word)
The
other search-results with “socialism” on the website of
the WPB ( pvda.be or ptb.be) are one limited and very general text of
the 8th congress and for the rest only texts and quotes in
books of Peter Mertens himself:
http://www.pvda.be/wie-zijn-we/socialisme.html
“What
is the vision on society of the WPB? What is for her, socialism.
Which kind of ideas the party has about economy, democracy, morality,
the environment? You will find the answer on these questions and on
many other questions in the following texts:
1.
In the chapter “Party of principles” of her 8th
congress, the party gives her Marxist vision, her strategy en her
perspective on a society without exploitation, her
party-concept.(...)
2.
In the 4th part (“the future begins now”) of
the book “On human scale”, Peter Mertens, president of the
WPB gives his vision on socialism, the social development of the
economy, about planning, democratic participation,about socialism on
human scale.(...)
3;
In the 5th part (“Socialism 2.0 on the rhythm of man
and nature”) in the book 'How dare they” Peter
Mertens is deepening his vision on socialism, more exactly on
democracy, education and emancipation, equality between man and
woman, security, health, freedom and sustainable development. He is
calling to “become futuremaker yourself”.
About
the three search-results on “socialism” by the WPB (PVDA/PTB)
1.In
the chapter “Party of principles”, a document of
the 8th congress (2008)
you can find about socialism only:
“
We want the social
ownership of the big means of production. This means that the big
enterprises, farming fields, agro-business, means of communication
and transport will come under public ownership. We want a planned
economy in service of the community and of man and in balance with
nature. Social ownership of the big means of production is unifying
the different enterprises for a common goal. It is elimination the
anarchy in the production. A planned distribution of the means of
production and the labour-forces becomes possible. The planning comes
about by active participation of the whole working people. She
concerns the essential issues and allows as much decentralisation,
autonomy, personal initiative and creativity, as possible.(...)
There
exist a totally different, much richer vision on the concept
democracy.
A
vision which is supposing another state. Democracy still means,
participation of the whole population, power to the people? It means
that the working people will participate in essential matters in the
organisation of the society. On all levels: the quarter, the
enterprise, the province and the country.
It
means also participation in the planning of the economy, the
organisation of the education and the technology.
It
means also a new judicial apparatus and another public authority
which are democratic.
That
the elected ones work at a regular salary, take responsibility for
their work and are dischargeable. And it means also that the
socialist state has the right to defend herself against aggression
and undermining. So it means that political power is wielded by the
working people. We are speaking of a socialist, participative
democracy and of a socialist state.(....)
The
world of tomorrow, with a planned economy, a participative democracy
and a socialist state, shows that also other “standards and values”
are possible. Capitalism creates individualism, but socialism
creates solidarity.
Capitalism
leaves people alone on themselves, is promoting “each for himself”
and is opposing people against each other. But socialism is directed
towards the integration of man. It wants collectivism, humanism,
internationalism and anti-racism. It wants modesty, justice and
responsibility.6
Very
general (and so dogmatic) declarations of intentions. No concrete
analysis and no concrete strategy. General concepts which are clearly
“above all classes” (Which are neutral on themselves?): “state”,
“democracy”, ”freedom”..... In an idealist way(so not
materialist way) “mixing” aspects of socialism as realised
just after revolution with aspects which will exist in later
communist stage, without saying that under socialism (as first
stage of communism) the production-system will become out of
commodity-production (of which capitalism is the highest form)
into production in function of needs. This, Marx criticised
already in “Critic on the Gotha-program”...to which
critic Lenin referred in “State and Revolution” in
HIS critic on revisionism of Kautsky, which is similar of that
of.....Peter Mertens!
So
finally this “socialism” is nothing more than state-capitalism
where the power comes from “the active participation of the
whole working people”. That “active participation of the
whole working people” ...in parliamentary elections will
be, as Peter Mertens see it, the historical role of the
working-class, which she can practice today already by......voting
for the WPB and her program of reforms.
2.
In th 4th part “the future begins now” of the
book “On human scale” (EPO, 2009) “....Peter
Mertens, president of the WPB”, as the website says herself,”
gives his vision about socialism, about the social development of the
economy, about planning, about democratic participation, about
socialism on human scale.”
“When
the community would get the control on the production, but today on
a highly developed production, than enormous possibilities will
become possible. Than man will no longer depend of his social status
in which he is born, neither of inherited wealth or of another
external factor. The own labour, the own activity and creativity, own
initiative and the development of the individual will become the
indicator of his development. Than “taking responsibility for life”
will no longer be an idle call. Than man will really have the
opportunity to do so. Than man will become his own maker. (....)
Of
course, the economic system in which we live is not determined by
physical laws. It is made by men. So it can also be changed by men.
The Pharaoh's in Egypt, the aristocrats in Athens, the Chinese
emperors, the nobility in the Middle Ages were all convinced that
their realm was eternal, and that no other form of community was
possible.
Until
their model came under pressure: by new developments in science and
technology, by new possibilities of production and by new
perceptions.
Until
social tensions increased to a level that the community-form has to
change. A new social order is not breaking through in one stroke.
Also capitalism has needed a long period of time to install herself.
The first attempts were in Genoa and Venice in the second half of the
fourteenth century.
There
was the development of capitalist relations in Holland and England of
the sixteenth century. It was just after the whole process of
conflict and compromises with the worn out feudalism that capitalism
in the nineteenth century as system could really persist. Capitalism
has not succeeded from her first attempts.”7
Nothing
about the come into existence and development of classes, nothing
about the concept class-society, or about the ruling class exploiting
and oppressing other class(-es). So , “a community-form has to
change” by a revolution of the oppressed class against the
ruling class in the “old” society, where by the oppressed class
is in fact the “grave-digger” of the “old” society, and the
pacemaker of a new society, a new production-system and new class.
Further
Peter Mertens about “socialism”:
“It
would be really narrow-minded to dispose of socialism because it
succeeded not by the first attempt.(...)
Serious
leakages have generated. (...) the crisis, the ecological challenge,
the collapse of the financial system, the massive closures...(...)
the
debate about socialism is an open debate, a search to tracks for a
society on human scale. Where man is put in the centre, not the
profit. We want a real society in which labour, education social
care, housing, pensions and a clean environment form a factor of
certainty. This means that they are guaranteed, whatever the
thickness of the wallet. We demand a correct justice, which protect
people against exploitation, corruption and arbitrariness. We strive
for a society in which labour is not serving for the realising of the
dividends and the profits of the few, but to be a source for the
development of the whole society.
Therefore
we demand that the key-sectors will be brought under public
ownership. Therefore we want to stimulate collective scientific
research. Therefore we want that there comes a modern, elaborated
planning. And therefore we strive for a democratic model, in which
the people can participate about the essential issues of life.(…)
Let the society not turn around the level of profit. She better turn
around on human scale.8
For
Peter Mertens: “socialism is desirable”. So not necessary and
inevitable as the working-class does not want to go further with the
“old” production-relations?
And
for Peter Mertens socialism is not a RUPTURE with capitalism,
capitalism has to be TRANSFORMED to something what then will be
called “socialism”.
Peter
Mertens about “socialism”: means of production become “social”
or “public” property. The class-character of the state
“disappears”, so a proletarian dictatorship is not needed in
exchange of the bourgeois dictatorship..….
And so is consequently, as Peter Mertens is making clear in another
article (where Peter Mertens is affirming the world that “The
WPB is no longer an extremist party”),
no longer considered to be needed, the “extremist”
violence of a revolution and the “extremist”
violent expropriation of the capitalists.9
3.
The third result on the search on “socialism” on the website of
the WPB (pvda:be): “In the 5th part
“Socialism 2.0 on the scale of man and nature” in the book “How
dare they”10
(ed. EPO, 2011), Peter Mertens is deepening his vision on socialism,
more exactly on democracy, emancipation and education, equality
between man and woman, security, health, freedom and sustainable
development. He calls to become oneself to become again future-maker.
http://www.pvdashop.be/hoe-durven-ze.html “
But
the only thing which you read in surplus in this text (compared with
the former texts) of what peter Mertens is telling about his
“socialism” is a certain “what we have to do”
“History
has reached a point on which we reach the knowledge, the technology
and the capacity to organise, to make possible for us to make those
objectives which were earlier still unreachable. We can help to ban
poverty, war and illness out of the world. There is enough for the
needs of everybody. But there is insufficiencies for the greed of a
handful return-hunters who run away with phenomenal fortunes.
Reconquer
democracy on this elite will be one of the most important tasks of
socialism 2.0. This is only possible when the economic base of her
power is attacked. Capitalism has created the illusion that economy
is concerning only money. It is of course an important aspect but
economy is in the first place concerning the satisfaction of needs of
people now and later. Because the means are limited, choices have to
be made. That is what economy matters. To have participation in those
fundamental choices, that is democracy. And so democracy and economy
are linked tightly.
Today
the “supper-class” of the few make disastrous choices. She
expropriate man of his labour-force and participation. She
expropriate nature of her recovery-power. She expropriate and
expropriate until the damned end.
What
do we have to do? We can do no other thing than filch from the
industrial and financial giants the “natural and inalienable
rights”.which they are claiming today. We have to stop the
expropriation by making of the veins of life of our economy, public
sectors, by giving the people real participation, to make the
community turn round public and ecological objectives. The democracy
of tomorrow starts with the expropriation of the expropriators.“11
The
classes have disappeared again. Nowhere is said anything about the
historical and revolutionary role of the working class, whose
objective interests are OPPOSED to those of the capitalist class –
the reason why the working class IS the revolutionary class because
they have OBJECTIVELY as CLASS all interests that capitalism will
disappear and be “replaced” by communism (of which socialism is
the first stage). Peter Mertens talks about “democracy” as a
neutral phenomena (above the classes?).
Of
course, when you speak about the objective interests of the working
class and about her revolutionary role, you have to speak about the
tasks of the VANGUARD of the working class (and THAT is finally the
communist party!). But Peter Mertens wants and dares not to follow
that consequent logic, result of a real historical materialist (so
MARXIST) analysis.
Peter Mertens' analysis of “socialism”, not to develop a strategy, but for an “anti-capitalist” IMAGE of WPB in elections
The
revisionist analysis to which Peter Mertens is submitting the
members/cadres of the WPB has the only goal to create a “socialism”
which propagation can strengthen the “anticapitalist” IMAGE of
the WPB, in order to win votes in elections by workers and
petty-bourgeois. (Peter Mertens' final “role of the
working class!”)
The
WPB has no other strategy (in the daily work of her members, cadres
and sympathizers) for the mobilisation and organisation of the
workers.
The
propaganda, the agitation, the discussions related to the development
of the class-struggle is focused on making the objective or slogan of
the class-struggle, the reforms as formulated in the ELECTION-program
of the WPB. Therefore the formulation of what is “socialism” and
what will be “the socialist state” is very GENERAL (in fact
ABSTRACT) Will it be Belgium, will it be larger than Belgium, will it
it be Europe,....Peter Mertens will not tell us. It is not needed
either, because the propagation of “socialism” is just intended
to emphasis the “anticapitalist” IMAGE of the WPB.
Read
the message of the First of May of 2012.12
“Join
the concrete radical being and Socialism 2.0. A European spring is
sprouting at the protesting popular masses in Spain, Portugal, Greece
and France. Join that concrete radical resistance. Reject “there is
nothing possible”. Join those points of struggle which are
reasonable, but also concrete and ciphered. They will give
breathing-space to the working class:
- the millionaire-tax is just a pay-back tax. A tax which will touch only the 2 percent very rich, but will obtain 8,7 billion euro. To invest a part of the wealth which disappeared in their bags back into the society
- to make the banking-sector public is just to secure the saving- and pension-money. Private banks are unsafe. It is not the task of the public authorities to collect the money in the society in order to save failing banks.
Join
the new socialist radicality which dare to dream again of a society
that respect and protect man and nature. Capitalism is exploiting the
father (labour) and the mother (nature) of wealth and is stepping on
them. That model is bankrupt. Social life, democracy and ecology
should be the starting point of an economy. A socialism 2.0 where
the invisible become visible, where man is the regulator and the
standard.13”
121st
International Communist Seminar Brussels, 18-20 May
2012www.icsbrussels.org – ics@icsbrussels.org
The relation
between the immediate tasks of communists and their struggle for
socialism Workers’ Party of Belgium (PTB) The experience of the
Workers’ Party of Belgium (PTB) David Pestieau, Member of the PTB
Bureau, head of the PTB’s Studies Department andeditor-in-chief of
the PTB’s weekly, Solidaire (this reference does not work
anymore, but you can get the full text by putting this in google and
then choose IN CACHE)
222nd
International Communist Seminar , Brussels, May 31 – June 2, 2013,
www.icseminar.org – info@icseminar.org,
“ The attacks on the democratic rights and freedoms in the world
capitalist crisis. - Strategies and actions in response. Workers
Party of Belgium (PTB) (the WPB wiped it from the web, but I
put it online again)
3http://antwerpen.pvda.be/nieuws/article/de-morgen-pvda-beschouwt-zich-niet-langer-als-extreem-linkse-partij-1.html,
25 februari 2008
08:54
|, [De Morgen] 'PVDA beschouwt zich niet langer als extreem linkse
partij', Interview of Walter Pauli with Peter Mertens: “ We
will stay Marxists .... The WPB is no longer Stalinist neither
Maosist .... we
continue defending 'the little man', but .... not anymore with big
theories. Certainly with concrete actions, in comprehensive
language....It will be simpler to become member. You subscribe the
political program of the WPB and pay twenty euro.....In the nineties
Ludo Martens wrote a persistent and elaborated defence of Stalin. We
want to be now more modern communists and choose for another
approach..... We are no Stalinists.....I just have nothing to do
anymore with the Soviet Union or China .....So has the WPB nothing
to do anymore with Stalinism or Maoism.....Also Cuba of Fidel Castro
is for us not a role-model..... (“Was/is the WPB still a
revolutionary party?”)....I can understand that Nelson Mandela saw
in the sixties no other way out than the armed struggle . But the
WPB is not extreme left. We are opposing extremist violence as that
from the CCC or the DHKP-C .... We focus first of all on the
revolution with ideas.”
4http://www.pvda.be/nieuws/artikel/enkele-hoofdlijnen-van-het-socialisme-van-de-toekomst.html,
6 maart 2013, “Enkele hoofdlijnen van het socialisme van de
toekomst”, Nick Dobbelaere
5http://www.solidnet.org/belgium-workers-party-of-belgium/wp-of-belgium-some-outlines-for-the-socialism-of-the-future-en,
WP of Belgium: Some outlines for the socialism of the future [En.],
Monday, 08 April 2013 01:00 Workers' Party of Belgium E-mail Print
PDF, http://www.wpb.be , mailto: wpb@wpb.be,
, “Some outlines for the socialism of the future”, by Peter
Mertens, chairman of the Workers' Party of Belgium (PTB)
6http://www.pvda.be/fileadmin/users/nationaal/download/Documents_parti/8cong_hoofdstuk2.pdf
7http://www.pvda.be/fileadmin/users/nationaal/download/Documents_parti/opmensenmaat_deel4.pdf
8http://www.pvda.be/fileadmin/users/nationaal/download/Documents_parti/opmensenmaat_deel4.pdf
9
http://antwerpen.pvda.be/nieuws/article/de-morgen-pvda-beschouwt-zich-niet-langer-als-extreem-linkse-partij-1.html,
25 februari 2008
08:54
|, [De Morgen] 'PVDA beschouwt zich niet langer als extreem linkse
partij', Interview of Walter Pauli with Peter Mertens: “ We
will stay Marxists .... The WPB is no longer Stalinist neither
Maosist .... we continue defending 'the little man', but
.... not anymore with big theories. Certainly with concrete actions,
in comprehensive language....It will be simpler to become member.
You subscribe the political program of the WPB and pay twenty
euro.....In the nineties Ludo Martens wrote a persistent and
elaborated defence of Stalin. We want to be now more modern
communists and choose for another approach..... We are no
Stalinists.....I just have nothing to do anymore with the Soviet
Union or China .....So has the WPB nothing to do anymore with
Stalinism or Maoism.....Also Cuba of Fidel Castro is for us not a
role-model..... (“Was/is the WPB still a revolutionary
party?”)....I can understand that Nelson Mandela saw in the
sixties no other way out than the armed struggle . But the WPB is
not extreme left. We are opposing extremist violence as that from
the CCC or the DHKP-C .... We focus first of all on the revolution
with ideas.”
10http://www.pvda.be/fileadmin/users/nationaal/download/Documents_parti/Hoedurvenze_deel5.pdf
11http://www.pvda.be/fileadmin/users/nationaal/download/Documents_parti/Hoedurvenze_deel5.pdf
12http://www.pvda.be/nieuws/artikel/meer-dan-ooit-de-mens-centraal-zegt-pvda-voorzitter-peter-mertens-in-1-meiboodschap.html
13http://www.pvda.be/nieuws/artikel/meer-dan-ooit-de-mens-centraal-zegt-pvda-voorzitter-peter-mertens-in-1-meiboodschap.html
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten