On the 28th to
the 30th October 2016 there was the 18th
International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties in Hanoi,
Vietnam. Ideological and political contradictions between parties
stilll holdig to a “Communist Identity” (type Third
International) and parties who are more and more flirting wiht a
“Social-democratic Identity” (type Second International) are
appearing more than ever....
Appeal
of the 18th International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties
The
18th International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties held
on the 28-30 of October 2016 in Hanoi, the capital of the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam, under the theme “Capitalist
crisis and imperialist offensive - Strategy and tactics of the
Communist and Workers’ Parties in struggle for peace, workers’
and peoples’ rights, socialism”,
Having
discussed the world situation and the growing challenges faced by
humanity, nations, workers and peoples of many countries,
particularly the worsening socio-economic and environmental crises,
the increasing insecurity and instability in many parts of the world,
caused by capitalism, deepened capitalist crisis, imperialist
interventions. interference and machinations, fostering the emergence
of so-called ‘ISIS' and other extremist criminal forces, as well as
refugee crises;
Stressing
that socialism is the only real
alternative to the on-going economic, social and ecological crises,
to capitalist exploitation and barbarity;
Saluting
the struggles of the people and workers in all parts of the world
against capitalism and imperialist offensive, for labor, social and
democratic rights,gender equality, national independence and
sovereignty, peace and socialism; (...)
Calls
upon Communist and Workers Parties to develop common and convergent
actions along the following axis:
-
Intensifying theoretical and practical works and exchanges on
building socialism in the 21st Century;
-
Working together towards the joint commemoration of 100th
anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution to highlight
its historical significance in paving the way for a new period in
human history, the contribution of socialism to advance the struggle
of workers and peoples for their emancipation, and the need to
strengthen the struggle for peace, social progresses and socialism;
organizing diverse related activities;
-
Commemorating the 150th anniversary of the publication of "Das
Capital" by Karl Marx;
-
Promoting exchange of strategies,
tactics and experiences to strengthen the fight against all forms of
capitalist ideological and political imposition and offensive, to
strengthen communists and workers parties and to enhance mobilisation
of the working people and wider masses, particularly youth, students
and women,in the anti-imperialist struggles, for labor, social, trade
union and democratic rights, and socialism; (...)
-
Broadening the anti-imperialist front to enhance the struggle for
peace,against imperialist occupation, interventions and interference
into internal affairs of other countries, against NATO and its
expansion, against nuclear weapons, militarization and foreign
military bases,for the peaceful and just settlement of all conflicts
based on the principles of International Law;
Read
how the WPB formulated her contribution – as reaction on the appeal
here above - on the points “Defending
workers' rights, opposing capitalism and militarism, building forces
for socialism” ; Defending workers' rights; Opposing
militarism and NATO ; Blocking trade agreements; Building
forces for real change, socialism
Marion
Franssen who represented the WPB, spoke on the 18th IMCWP:
18
IMCWP, Contribution of WP of Belgium
“Defending
workers' rights, opposing capitalism and militarism, building forces
for socialism”
(S)ome
insides about the way the PTB is trying to develop the class struggle
in Belgium via some concrete political struggles. All this in a
context wherein the capitalist crisis is expanding and imperialist
wars and acts of terrorism continue to put at risk the lives of
people around the world.
Defending
workers' rights
(....)
Since 2008 the structural crisis of overproduction is deepening and
spreading further every day. The EU framework of austerity can in no
possible way get us out of the crisis. The working class is getting
poorer and a growing part of the wealth they produce goes directly to
the bank accounts of shareholders. (...)(T)he
PTB is doing all its best to help to build an organized answer to
these challenges, side by side with the trade unions and social
movements. To defend the workers' and peoples rights and to be able
to put offensive demands on the table, the unity of the working class
in our country is essential. This implies a unity between the unions
with different political background, unity between unions in the
private and public sectors, among unions in the different regions in
our country and between the organized working class and the social
movements. This orientation we defend during demonstrations,
picket-line visits and media performances. At the same time we
challenge people to join the actions to build a large movement
against the austerity measures imposed on them.
Opposing
militarism and NATO
Belgium
is hosting the political and military headquarters of NATO. For the
Belgian government NATO is “central in Belgium's efforts for
peace”. Belgium is active in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. It serves
the interests of US imperialism but is also actively participating in
the “Common Security and Defense Policy” of the European Union
and the implementation of the EU battle-groups. The United Nations
comes third in line only. The control of energy supplies,
transportation lines and markets to invest in to keep profits high,
are the main objective of their military spending. And spending is
what Belgium is planning to do. (...) in line with the NATO demand to
allocate 2% of the Gross National Product to military spending. (...)
It will undermine the state budget for many years to come.
This
situation creates big challenges
for the peace movement in Belgium while the era of humanitarian
interventions has an important ideological influence among
progressive forces.
At
the same time the combination of austerity measures and the
investment in military equipment is an opportunity to mend a new
alliance between the peace movement and the working class. Without
this alliance it will not be possible to push back the government
decisions, leave alone to develop a peace policy. The party, as a
member of the peace movement, tries to argue in this direction and to
connect both struggles together.
In
2017 special attention will go the NATO summit that will take place
in Belgium. The peace movement is
working hard to unify all forces against NATO in Belgium and abroad,
in order to debunk the war agenda of NATO and its member states.
Blocking
trade agreements
For
several years a Europe-wide network is active against the signing of
the free trade agreements CETA (Comprehensive Economic and Trade
Agreement between the European Union and Canada) and TTIP
(Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – between the EU
and the US). (...). Both agreements help to reinforce the position of
the EU, the US and Canada on the world market in competition with
Japan and the emerging countries.(...) The proposed agreement is
another tool to secure profit for the capital class. That's why the
PTB is actively participating in the peoples' movements. We defend
the complete rejection of the agreement and don't want to leave the
space to the tendencies that only want to adapt some points in the
agreement to secure the core of it.(...) We
participated actively in the mass demonstrations, published several
articles, we are writing a book, declared our solidarity festival
ManiFiesta CETA free, introduced resolutions in municipalities to
make them CETA free and intervened actively in the different
parliaments. Because of this it is harder for the social-democratic
head of the Walloon government to give in to easy. He is afraid our
party would grow further. (...)
Building
forces for real change, socialism
Our
growing visibility in the media because of the first 8 parliament
members (2 federal, 6 regional) we have ever, creates big
expectations within a growing group among the working class. It is an
important challenge to our representatives not to loose contact with
the reality of the working people while in parliament.
Street-council-street is the principle applied by them. They bring
the struggles of the working people in parliament and go back to the
people after the debate to inform them. Applying strict financial
rules is another means to keep checks and balances right. All cadres
and parliament members live with an average workers wage. This is
much appreciated by the working class.(...) Our presence in
parliament gives us an extra tool to reach out to many people and to
get them involved in the popular movements that struggle for their
rights. It's only through the experience of struggle that the masses
learn about the real character of the system that has nothing to
offer them. In all these struggles it's the parties first task to
build its own strength via a process of sensitizing, organizing and
mobilizing the many workers, women en youth we fight together with.
We
have to take every opportunity to learn from the working class. But
we also have to educate them that our history is build primarily
through social struggle. In all the struggles the working class is
waging, our party is active and tries to bring the struggles together
for a real change of society, for socialism.
Did
Mario Franssen, member of the Central committee, ever followed the
course of candidate-membership?
Well,
in earlier times a contribution like that here above, made by another
party (or as an “analysis” of a member or cadre), would be
“labelled”, and so criticised, as “economist”.... One
of the books which a candidate-member had to study was “HISTORY
OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION ( BOLSHEVIKS )”- Short
Course. EDITED BY A COMMISSION OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE
C.P.S.U. (B.) AUTHORIZED BY THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE C.P.S.U.
(B.)” Every candidate-member once read,studied or got
formation about, at least, the following paragraphs ....where the
characteristics of “Economism” are given, which can be
applied on the “analysis” here above:
The
“Economists” (....) asserted that (..)The primary and
immediate aim of the Social-Democrats should therefore be (...), the
organization of the “economic struggle of the workers against the
employers and the government.” By the economic struggle against the
government they meant a struggle for better factory legislation. The
“Economists” claimed that in this way it would be possible “to
lend the economic struggle itself a political character.”
The
“Economists” no longer dared openly to contest the need for a
political party of the working class. But they considered that it
should not be the guiding force of the working-class movement, that
it should not interfere in the spontaneous movement of the working
class, let alone direct it, but that it should follow in the wake of
this movement, study it and draw lessons from it.
The “Economists”
furthermore asserted that the role of the conscious element in the
working-class movement, the organizing and directing role of
Socialist consciousness and Socialist theory, was insignificant, or
almost insignificant; that the Social-Democrats should not elevate
the minds of the workers to the level of Socialist consciousness,
but, on the contrary, should adjust themselves and descend to the
level of the average, or even of the more backward sections of the
working class, and that the Social-Democrats should not try to impart
a Socialist consciousness to the working class, but should wait until
the spontaneous movement of the working class arrived of itself at a
Socialist consciousness.(....)
1)
Lenin showed that to divert the working class from the general
political struggle against tsardom and to confine its task
to that of the economic struggle against the employers and the
government, while leaving both employers and government intact, meant
to condemn the workers to eternal slavery. The economic struggle of
the workers against the employers and the government was a trade
union struggle for better terms in the sale of their labour power to
the capitalists. The workers, however, wanted to fight not only for
better terms in the sale of their labour power to the capitalists,
but also for the abolition of the capitalist system itself which
condemned them to sell their labour power to the capitalists and to
suffer exploitation.(...)
2) Lenin showed that to extol
the spontaneous process in the working-class movement, to
deny that the Party had a leading role to play, to reduce its role to
that of a recorder of events, meant to preach khvostism (following
in the tail), to preach the conversion of the Party into a tall-piece
of the spontaneous process, into a passive force of the movement,
capable only of contemplating the spontaneous process and allowing
events to take their own course. To advocate this meant working for
the destruction of the Party, that is, leaving the working class
without a party—that is, leaving the working class
unarmed.(....)
3) Lenin showed that to bow in worship of
the spontaneous workingclass movement and to belittle the
importance of consciousness, of Socialist consciousness and Socialist
theory, meant, in the first place, to insult the workers, who were
drawn to consciousness as to light; in the second place, to lower the
value of theory in the eyes of the Party, that is, to depreciate the
instrument which helped the Party to understand the present and
foresee the future; and, in the third place, it meant to sink
completely and irrevocably into the bog of opportunism.
“Without
a revolutionary theory,” Lenin said, “there can be no
revolutionary movement. . . . The role of vanguard can be fulfilled
only by a party that is guided by the most advanced theory.”
(Lenin, Selected Works, Vol. II, pp. 47, 48.)
4) Lenin
showed that the “Economists” were deceiving the
working class when they asserted that a Socialist ideology could
arise from the spontaneous movement of the working class, for in
reality the Socialist ideology arises not from the spontaneous
movement, but from science.
By denying the necessity of imparting
a Socialist consciousness to the working class, the “Economists”
were clearing the way for bourgeois ideology, facilitating its
introduction and dissemination among the working class, and,
consequently, they were burying the idea of union between the
working-class movement and Socialism, thus helping the bourgeoisie.
In
“State and Revolution” (a book normally ALSO to be
studied, during the candidate-membership-period) Lenin quotes Marx
.... (and the WPB still claims to be a Marxist party - although no
longer “communist”...?) But I wonder if Mario Franssen followed
such a candidate-membership-course... He was a cadre-engineer in a
building company and was asked by Bert Belders, being ALSO a national
WPB-cadre for at least 20years, to lead the, new-founded NGO “INTAL”
(read her the vision of INTAL, in French,.... you see NOT ANY
anti-imperialism!)... Mario later was “co-opted” in the national
leadership of the party (in the “international department”)...
and now replacing Boudewijn Deckers and later on Bert De Belder on
the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties
(IMCWP)...:
". . . And now as to
myself, no credit is due to me for discovering the existence of
classes in modern society, nor yet the struggle between them. Long
before me bourgeois historians had described the historical
development of this struggle of the classes and bourgeois economists
the economic anatomy of the classes. What I did that was new was to
prove: 1) that the existence of classes is only bound up with
particular historical phases in the development of production
[historische Entwicklung sphasen der Produktion ]; 2) that
the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the
proletariat; 3) that this dictatorship itself only constitutes the
transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless
society. . . ."
There
is a big (QUALITATIVE) difference in political and ideological point
of view, ...and use of the Marxist analysing method with for example
the contribution of the KKE. In her contribution critic is included
on opportunism (without mentioning the WPB specifically....):
Contribution
of CP of Greece
(...)
The
history of the communist movement is full of heroic pages and is a
valuable source for study and the drawing of conclusions that will
lend strength to the communists so that they can meet the challenge
of the complex conditions of the class struggle, fighting for the
overthrow of capitalist exploitation and the construction of
socialism-communism.(....)
Bourgeois
and opportunist forces are silent about the real causes of the crisis
and present other factors as being the causes e.g. neoliberal
management, the banks and bankers. This causes confusion and fosters
illusions about the potential for a pro-people management of
capitalism.
The
reality is that regardless of whether the form of the crisis'
outbreak is connected to disturbances in the banking-financial
system, to "bubbles" and other similar phenomena, the
crisis is born in the productive process on the terrain of the
exploitation of wage labour by capital. (...)
In
these complex conditions, the analysis of the communists about the
real causes of the crisis as well as the class character of
capitalist growth acquire great importance for the preparation of the
labour-people's movement and the strengthening of the class struggle,
so that the importance of the socialist organization of production is
understood by the working class, which is the only way to eradicate
the causes of the crisis and capitalist exploitation. (....)
It
has been demonstrated by the example of SYRIZA and many other
examples that the so-called "left governments" are an
apparatus for the management and reproduction of capitalist
exploitation, foster illusions about the humanization of capitalism
and a dangerous expectation that the people's problems can be
resolved, the people's needs can be satisfied in the conditions of
capitalist exploitation. Experience demonstrates that these
governments impede the real radicalism of the working class. (...)
Views
(inside the international communist movement) that underestimate the
antimonopoly-anticapitalist line of struggle and the necessity for
comprehensive preparation for the overthrow of capital do not take
into account the potential for the developments to sharpen and for a
revolutionary situation to manifest itself, which as an objective
phenomenon that can be created in the conditions of capitalist crisis
and imperialist war.
We
must learn from the historical experience which demonstrated that CPs
found themselves unprepared for the conditions of the escalation of
the class struggle and could not fulfil their historic tasks. (...)
(T)he
situation in the international communist movement has deteriorated.
In
these conditions, the struggle for the regroupment of the
international communist movement is a decisively important task and
the KKE considers it necessary for a discussion to be initiated about
the serious problems of strategy-tactics, assessing that every delay
worsens the situation and poses serious dangers.
First,
the issue of imperialism must be engaged with by the communists, as
it is a point of more general discussion.
The
Leninist position refers to the fact that imperialism is the highest
stage of capitalism, in the context of which the dominance of the
monopolies and finance capital has been formed and the export of
capital has acquired particular importance. In this framework there
is a struggle between the various monopolies and capitalist states
over the division of the markets.
The
position that limits imperialism to the aggressive foreign policy of
the USA or other powerful capitalist states does not take into
account the economic base of the system in our period, the
monopolies, the large stock companies that have developed and are
developing in all countries.
We
believe that this position cannot see the imperialist (capitalist)
system in all its dimensions. The capitalist states are its links,
which have differences amongst them due to uneven development and
each one has a different position in the system, with relations of
unequal interdependence in line with their economic, military and
political strength. (...)
Fifth,
the KKE in the framework of its long study concerning the analysis of
the causes and factors that led to the overthrow of socialism
assessed that the counterrevolution in the USSR came "from
within and from above" as a result of the opportunist mutation
of the CP and the corresponding political direction of Soviet power,
in an environment of multifaceted interventions by imperialism,
leading to the development of opportunism and its development into a
counterrevolutionary force.
The
overthrow of socialism was connected to the use of capitalist tools
in order to deal with problems of socialist construction.
Socialist
construction begins with the revolutionary conquest of power by the
working class and the communist mode of production is created through
the socialization of the concentrated means of production, central
planning, the formation of institutions of workers' control.
The
class struggle of the working class continues in other conditions and
with other forms both in the period when the foundations of the new
society are being laid and during the development of socialism, in a
constant struggle to eradicate every form of group and private
ownership, to extend social ownership and to strengthen central
planning, communist relations of production.
It
is our unshakable conviction that positions that talk about various
"models of socialism" in the name of national specificities
do not operate within the framework of the principles of scientific
socialism and the laws of socialist construction.
Unfortunately,
this is not just related to the petty bourgeois/social-democratic
framework of the so-called 21st century Socialism, which fosters
illusions about the humanization of capitalism and perpetuates
bourgeois power and capitalist exploitation, as is demonstrated by
the developments,e.g., in Latin America.
The
problem is deeper.
There
is an attempt to replace the necessity of the socialist revolution
with the bourgeois parliamentary road, with the vehicle of the
management of “leftwing governments». A mixed economic system
with capitalist businesses replaces the socialization of the means of
production. The state intervention to regulate the capitalist market
replaces central planning.(....)
The
Great October Socialist Revolution is a historic milestone, a
magnificent creation of the working class, of the class struggle.
The
socialism that was constructed in the 20th century, despite the
weaknesses, mistakes, opportunist influences and deviations, is
characterized by the historical achievement of the abolition of the
exploitation of man by man, thanks to workers' power, the
socialization of the means of production, central planning and
workers' control, the participation of millions of workers in the
construction of the new society. (...)
Workers'
power in the Soviet Union and the sacrifices of the Soviet people
made their mark on the victory against the fascist axis in the 2nd
World War.
The
historical contribution of socialism to social progress, as well as
the study of the real causes that led to its overthrow must motivate
the CPs, the communists all over the world in order to raise the
level of demands and to decisively answer the forces of anticommunist
reaction and opportunism that applauded and supported the
counterrevolution, as did forces that later founded the Party of the
European Left (PEL) and other similar networks.
The
communists believe in the strength of the working class, in the class
struggle which is the motor force of social development and the
international character of the class struggle requires that we make
the greatest possible efforts and to form the bases to acquire
programmatic-ideological unity and a unified revolutionary strategy
in conflict with capital and the system of exploitation.(...)
The
KKE with a sense of internationalist responsibility played a leading
role for the beginning of the International Meetings of Communist and
Workers Parties (IMCWP), contributed and contributes to maintaining
its character as a meeting place for CPs in opposition to positions
that aim at the participation of social-democratic formations which
are labelled as being "anti-imperialist", "left",
"progressive" forces. (...)
The
KKE will devote all its forces in this direction and at the same time
will continue together with dozens of other CPs the efforts to
coordinate their activity with many forms, in Europe, in the Balkans,
in the wider region and will support even further the serious step
that has been taken with the formation of the "European
Communist Initiative", where a significant number of Communist
and Workers parties of Europe participate and the publication of the
journal "International Communist Review" (ICR) which
studies contemporary theoretical issues.
Contradiction are
rising within the IMCWP's:
"The
KKE with a sense of internationalist responsibility played a leading
role for the beginning of the International Meetings of Communist and
Workers Parties (IMCWP), contributed and contributes to maintaining
its character as a meeting place for CPs in opposition to positions
that aim at the participation of social-democratic formations which
are labelled as being "anti-imperialist", "left",
"progressive" forces." ..... Which is clearly
AGAINST parties as the PVDA/PTB/WPB!
"The
KKE (...) will support even further the serious step that has been
taken with the formation of the "European Communist Initiative",
where a significant number of Communist and Workers parties of Europe
participate and the publication of the journal "International
Communist Review" (ICR) which studies contemporary theoretical
issues." ... The PVDA/PTB/WPB REFUSES to participate with
the ECI... but enter the ranks of the REFORMIST "European Left"
and STOPPED cooperation with the ICR.
Within
the ranks of the IMCWP's there are certainly other CP's who are aware
of these contradictions ( For example the contradiction between
developing a revolutionary strategy and organising a van-guard-party
and mass-struggle-organisations LEAD by that van-guard-party, in line
with this strategy ...and developing a “strategy” based on the
propagation of “reforms and organising the people in order to
obtain better result in ...elections)
18
IMCWP, Contribution of Hungarian WP [En] - Gyula Thürmer,
President of the Hungarian Workers’ Party
(...)
The
Hungarian Workers’ Party considers socialism a social system where
the political power is in the hands of the working masses, where the
majority of means of production belongs to the working people and
where planning economy exists instead of market economy.
We
have our negative experiences how far we can go in applying the
methods of capitalism. We always share these negative experience with
other parties. But we think that we should be open to any new ideas
and each party should decide itself how to construct socialism. (...)
We
are convinced: the communist movement should be prepared for the
moment when class conflicts are strengthened and the fight against
capitalism turns into a face-to-face class war.
We
should agree on the main point: our aim is not to manage capitalism.
Our aim is not to save capitalism but to overthrow capitalism. That’s
why we are communists.
We
should see the difference between modernization of our policy,
language, methods and the reformist reorientation of our movement. We
need modernization but we are against reformism.
We
should see that reformist ideas and even clear reformism is present
in our movement. Fortunately, it is not dominant. We should fight
against the wolf in sheep’s clothing to save the
ideological-political and organizational independence of the
communist parties.
We
should save and develop our cooperation. The fact that we have now
our 18th international meeting clearly demonstrates that our movement
exists and we want to rise our influence on world affairs.
We
recommend to organize special forums to discuss such living issues
like party-building, formation of young communists, new methods of
Internet work.
...and
here out of the contribution of the Russian Communist Worker's Party
(RCWP) on the 18th IMCWP:
Theses
of the report at the 18th International Meeting of Communist and
Workers Parties held on the 28-30 of October 2016 in Hanoi, under the
theme “Capitalist crisis and imperialist offensive - Strategy and
tactics of the Communist and Workers’ Parties in struggle for
peace, workers’ and peoples’ rights, socialism”, October 28-29,
2016.
(...)
In
2017 there will be centenary of the Great October Socialist
Revolution .(...) The best way for communists to mark this
anniversary would be to review and reconsider honestly the fate of
their movement in the last century. We should start with the
recognition of the fact that communists didn’t always win in their
struggle for masses, and that they have been defeated by
counterrevolution by this day. We should answer the questions who or
what has won, why we were defeated. Was this defeat the final and
irreversible event or is this a temporary defeat and the struggle
will go on? To put it brief: we should make conclusions from our
mistakes. It’s not for nothing that Lenin said “Nothing can
destroy us apart from our own mistakes.
If
we consider modern communist movement as a whole we’ll have to
confess that the lessons haven't been learnt. We are of the opinion
that nowadays opportunism and revisionism have turned from an
internal product of communist movement, from a set of biases and
errors into a powerful weapon in the hands of Imperialism. The right
bias hasn’t gone away with Gorbachev and the destruction of USSR
and CPSU in 1991
(T)here
has been taking place the adaptation of the parties to the system of
Capitalism while presenting themselves as parliamentary defenders of
people’s rights.
This
right-wing transformation of communist parties leads to removal of
masses from real political participation. Their role is thus limited
to the functions of electorate who give their votes to party leaders
in the course of elections. Strategy of victory by such opportunistic
party reads as follows: they promise working people a success
achieved in the course of coming election, whereas political struggle
of masses is limited to the struggle for “honest” elections. Such
focusing on parliamentary activities only is well remunerated by
governments. One of the most typical examples of this occurrence is
represented by European Left. These parties don’t recognize any
extra-parliamentary forms of struggle, or pay them lip service only
while actually hampering them.
We
cannot say that there is such thing as the unity of modern communist
movement worldwide. One could start with our inability to adopt a
joint statement – so great are the differences. (...)
In
the draft program prepared for the II Congress of RSDRP the aims of
socialist production were described as “planned organization of
social production process aimed at satisfaction of the needs both of
whole society as well as of individual needs”. V.I. Lenin objected
to such wording: “it’s not accurate. Such satisfaction can be
provided by capitalism as well, the difference is that is not granted
to all members of society and is not equal”. In the end of the day
Lenin managed to change the draft program in the following way:
“social revolution of proletariat will destroy the class division
of society and liberate the whole oppressed mankind by way of
replacing private property for means of production and turnover by
the socialized one and introducing planned production process in
order to ensure wellbeing and versatile development of all members of
society.
Nowadays
People’s Republic of China has the second largest number of
billionaires in the world whereas Russia is the third. I think that
both countries are equally far from the classless society – from
communism.
(T)he
experience of Soviets should be studied and used by all parties.
Soviets are the most adequate form of realization of people’s
power, organizational form of proletarian dictatorship. The main
point is the participation of working masses in the struggle.
Initially this should be the issue of taking power, later under
Socialism this is their participation in performing the dictatorship
of proletariat. Lenin saw it as a universal participation in the
control over state… Soviet power is built on the basis of
industries – based on plants and factories.
We,
RCWP are going to celebrate the centennial anniversary of October
Revolution by seeking new ways to develop the struggle. We’ll
invite these parties that hasn’t used up their limits for
revolutions, that extend their recognition of class struggle up to
the recognition of proletarian dictatorship and whose practical
activities are based upon workers movement. We in Russia have been
attempting the tactics of creating Workers Front.
We
see our task in preserving the Marxist-Leninist part of political
theory and practice for the sake of future of communist movement that
nobody will be able to extinguish.
The
same RCWP could appreciate the analyses made by Ludo Martens
(former president of the WPB). I translated (with google) on
her web-site:
The
way of the worldrevolution in the XXIth century -an the 8Oth
anniversary of the Octoberrevolution
Date:
2015/08/03
The
editor: we begin a series of publications in the preparation of the
birthday of the Big Socialist Octoberrevolution. In these series we
will highlight the theoretical work of prominent persons of the
international communist movement.
Today
we publicise the rapport of the president of the Workers Party of
Belgium (WPB), Ludo Martens (who died recently) on the International
Jubilee Conference of the communist and workers-parties about the
lessons for these parties 80 years after the Big Socialist
Octoberrevolution. (The conference was held in Leningrad, 04-6
November 1997). This rapport was published in a special edition of
the international theoretical magazine “Marxism and Modern Times”
in 1997
And
somewhere further was said:
It
should be noted that in the early 1990s speeches in defense of Stalin
and in support of the DPRK demanded considerable courage, both in the
West and in Russia, just as they do now. On the 80th anniversary of
the October revolution Ludo Martens made a presentation at the
international conference of Communist and Workers ‘ Parties in
Leningrad (http://rkrp-rpk.ru/content/view/13209/1/), published
in the special issue of the magazine “Marxism and Modern Times”
(November 1997, p. 41 -45), which concluded that the development of
opportunism and revisionism in the Communist movement, a departure
from the principles of Marx and Lenin, which Stalin was able to
defend so brilliantly and bring to life, became the main cause of the
counterrevolution in the USSR and Eastern Europe and the temporary
retreat of the world revolution.
The
same organisation (RCWP) which was so appreciating the analyses of
Ludo Martens, was discovering a development of revisionism in the WPB
AFTER the death of Ludo Martens. Out of an analysis of the
development of revisionism in the WPB/PTB:
Interesting
and revealing is also the fact that a noticeable bias to the right of
the current leadership of PTB manifested itself also in the
organization of International Communist Seminar (ICS) in Brussels.
Its organizers from the PTB suddenly began to demand from
participants that they do not allow specific and targeted criticism
of the opportunist characteristics of a number of parties who
participated in the work of the ISS. They said that we should
criticize opportunism as a phenomenon in general, without specifying
the parties. And that’s when we all know that the obligatory
criticism of opportunistic phenomena inside the Communist movement
and the ideological struggle against opportunist parties is one of
the cornerstones of Marxism-Leninism.
Lenin
warned in his famous work “Imperialism as the highest stage of
capitalism”: “The most dangerous in this respect, are people who
refuse to understand that the struggle against imperialism, if it is
not connected inseparably with the struggle against opportunism, is
an empty and false phrase”. (V. I. Lenin. Collected Works, vol.
27, p. 424). (...)
The
Soviet Communists who led the struggle against Gorbachev and his
policy of perestroika – as a change of the political system –
within the CPSU are very familiar with such situation and understand
it perfectly well. How to explain this? Probably the party members
lacked Marxist literacy and strength of the convictions to counter
this convenient rolling. And accordingly, these issues were given
insufficient attention under the previous leadership. As a result,
the PTB got seriously ill. The Communists remaining on their
revolutionary Marxist positions, which were consistently upheld by
Ludo Martens, are now subjected to repression and expulsion. To untie
its hands, the party leadership even began to change the Charter,
enabling it to exclude comrades from the party without any democratic
procedures. Now the party leadership can simply “not renew
membership in the party of” of the undesirable Communists. Consider
this degeneration of the party an important and instructive lesson
for all revolutionary Marxist parties.
In
conclusion, we should state that we remember the glorious militant
traditions of the Belgian Communists, their strong reliance on the
working class. So we hope that Belgian comrades will overcome the
revisionist trend and will be able to rejoin the ranks of the
“orthodox,” revolutionary Communist parties.
Analytical
Group of the Ideological Commission of the Central Committee of the
Russian Communist Workers Party (RKRP)
I
have to admit that other parties are (until now) taking a more
“mediated” position in these contradictions, such as the German
CP (DKP)
18
IMCWP, Contribution of German CP [En] Wednesday, 09 November 2016
(...)
Regarding
the EU, our position is that it is correct to go on fighting for
political achievements, but not to believe in a general reformability
of the EU. Generally spoken, reforms have a double character as we
all know: on the one hand they can improve some living conditions of
the people, but on the other hand just those victories could make the
people believe in the „good sides“ of the capitalist system.
So
it is important to sharpen the class consciousness of the exploited.
This means to show them that reforms never can be sufficient, because
of their limited. Regarding the reformability of the European Union
we state that Europe needs a new cooperation including all European
states, without the dominance of some imperialist countries which is
the case of the EU. Europe does not need a European Union as a
capitalist construction guided by imperialist ideas and practice. The
EU never could play an active role for a world with equal
possibilities for the people – this is only achievable with
socialist principles. (...)
The
German Communist Party has recently released a so called „programme
of immediate demands“. It contains demands against curtailing of
social and democratic rights, investment in public property, new
jobs, improvement of social benefits, taxation of the rich. And in
that programme we explain that our „refugee welcome“ isn’t
merely humanitarian, but it means that we will fight together with
them, for equal rights for all working class people. (...)
(W)e
continue with our annual 4-party-conferences with the Workers’
Party of Belgium, the Communist Party of Luxemburg and the New
Communist Party of the Netherlands, since 2006. (..)(A)lthough the
analysis maintains correct that the CPs and WPs in capitalist
countries have to fight first of all against their „own
bourgeoisie“, the globalization sometimes brought very similar
problems in neighbouring countries that require a common answer of
the working classes in those countries.
Bert De Belder FORBID Mario Franssen to sign the solidarity-declaration of
the 18th
IMCWP with North Korea - but APPEALED in 1997 to sign a declaration
.... for solidarity - ...with North Korea
In
1997 on the sixth International Communist Seminar Bert De Belder
declared in the name of the leadership of the WPB - then still lead
by Ludo Martens:
United, communists will
never be defeated!
Common action needed
against the onslaughts of imperialism
From
May 2-4, the sixth International Seminar for the unification of the
International Communist Movement was held in Brussels, on the
initiative of the Workers' Party of Belgium. The theme: the lasting
significance of the road of the October Revolution. 79 parties and
organizations attended the seminar, while some 50 others expressed
their interest and solidarity.
Bert
De Belder
Standing
out at this year's seminar was the video-taped intervention by
Comrade Hysni Milloshi, founder of the now proscribed Communist Party
of Albania, as well as the presence of four Marxist-Leninist parties
from the former Soviet Union: the Russian Communist Workers' Party,
the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, Working Russia/the
United Party of Soviet Communists -represented by Viktor Anpilov -
and the Russian Workers' and Peasants' Party. The Cuban Communist
Party was represented by Manuel Menéndez, Director of the
theoretical journal Cuba Socialista.
Based on their current
experience, the four Russian comrades stressed that the class
struggle will not wait and that we should not only talk but above all
act together. Thus the seminar went
beyond theoretical discussions and proceeded to draft resolutions of
solidarity with Cuba, the Communist Party of Albania and the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which were then submitted to
the participants for signing. In the aftermath of the seminar,
two concrete support campaigns have been launched by Marxist-Leninist
parties from several countries: one for the children who are
threatened by flood-induced famine in the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea, and one for material assistance to the Communist
Party of Albania.
A revolutionary
counter-offensive
Today
the problem of the unification of the communist parties and
organisations poses itself in a particular context. The complete
restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe
has finally and conclusively demonstrated that the road of
revisionism, initiated by Krushchev, is the path promoted by the
internal and international bourgeoisie. Their sole objective was to
liquidate the dictatorship of the proletariat and the socialist
system.
In the countries dominated by the three centres of
imperialism, globalization and internationalization have resulted in
intensified oppression and exploitation. The situation of the working
class and the toiling masses in the formerly socialist countries and
in the countries under domination has been deteriorating rapidly. The
workers in the imperialist world itself have not been spared either.
The capitalist forces of the entire world are waging a concerted
offensive against the international working class.
The crisis of
the world capitalist system pushes the popular masses to the Left.
But the bourgeoisie uses social-democracy, revisionism and Trotskyism
to confuse and mislead the people as well as certain anti-imperialist
and anticapitalist forces. A concerted response by the
Marxist-Leninists has become an urgent necessity.
Progress towards more
unity
For
four years, from 1992 to 1995, the participants in the International
Communist Seminar have been discussing the road to follow in order to
realize the unification of the International Communist Movement.
These discussions have resulted in a set of proposals (see pages 14
and 15) based on the principles of Marxism-Leninism, proletarian
internationalism and the struggle against revisionism. They contain
ideological and political positions that together form a minimum
common framework on the basis of which the process of unification of
the world's communists can be initiated.
At this year's
International Communist Seminar, there was a better understanding
that parties who used to belong to tendencies that supported either
Mao Zedong or Brezhnev, either Che Guevara or Enver Hoxha, can arrive
at a higher level of unity using this approach. For example, the
resolution to support the Communist Party of Albania has already been
signed by 43 parties, several of whom used to be known as pro-Soviet
Union, pro-China or pro-Cuba. As Comrade Milloshi remarked:
"Cooperation in common actions will give birth to the only
international force that can defend the interests of the revolution
and of world socialism."
The language of
proletarian internationalism
For
communists, language should never be a barrier to communication and
common action. That is why we exert efforts to have many of our and
other communists' documents translated into several languages. For
this important job we can currently count on collaborators in Canada,
Spain, Great Britain, France and the Netherlands. But we need many
more translators, editors and proof-readers. Translation work is
mainly French-English, French-Spanish and Russian-French, but other
languages or combinations may also prove useful. We have one very
particular request: translators from Albanian!
Vielen
Dank - Merci beaucoup - Muchas gracias - Muito obrigado - Maraming
salamat!
But
it is striking that 20 years after the 5th
congress of the WPB in 1995,
on which the book of Ludo
Martens,
"Another view
on Stalin"
was presented as one of the documents "on
which existed a broad unity and consensus after large discussions in
the WPB”,
Peter Mertens (PVDA/PTB/WPB) in KNACK, 22 feb. 2015, could declare:
"We
will condemn the crimes of Stalin on our Ninth Congres"
.... and he was
elected as president of the WPB with 94% on that Ninth Congress in
2015!
So
NONE of the party-members out of the period of the Fourth
Congress in 1991
(which resulted in the book"URSS,
the velvet contra-revolution")
AND the 5th Congress
in 1995,
OPPOSED the “new” ideological and political line of the WPB.....
I couldn't ..., being expelled in 2005......
This
is in fact an indirect critic on those “old” WPB-cadres who now
(in 2016) “asked” 'face-book-friendship” with me ...... but
never “dare” to react on (or to criticise, or to oppose...) my analysis of the development of
revisionism in the WPB.... and never were “alarmed” on my
expulsion in 2005.... At least one “old” WPB-cadre/“new”
FB-friend is COMPLICE to my expulsion....
