Against by nationalism-incluenced dogmatism (1)
In this document concrete arguments and facts for the following statement:
....it is all part of the overall policy of the state of the European monopoly-capitalists: increasing the level of
exploitation.
And this can only be stopped if the European working class decides to break the power of those monopolycapitalists,
expropriationg them and to build a socialist planeconomy that produces in function of real NEEDS.
Fighting (in defense) against deterioration of once achieved reforms AND then just in each member-state of the EU
apart AND NOT building of ONE European workers mass-struggle-organisation with an anti-imperialist program of
“expropriating” all privatised sectors and former (member-)state-enterprises or -services and all monopolies and
monopoly-capital financial institutions to make of them unified public European enterprises under control of a voted,
working and periodical public justifying “parliament” (with abolishing of all installed but non-voted European
institutions is what Lenin called “economism”. Of course this includes the building of ONE European organisation of
the van-guard of the working-class a European Communist Party (and NOT a multitude of “national” -member-state
communist parties).(Link to document)
Opportunism and revisionism in the circles of the International Communist Seminar
I was once member of the Workers Party of Belgium, expelled in 2005 by the group that took over the leadership in 2004 of the Workers Party of Belgium (WPB, website: pvda.be,ptb.be, wpb.be) Now the WPB is in the end of a transformation from a revolutionary Marxist party in to a REFORMIST party, like happened with the SP in the Netherlands. The only difference is that the SP is not trying to hide his REFORMISM under « Marxist sounding phraseology». The WPB organized yearly the International Communist Seminary (ICS, website: icsbrussels.org) in Brussels. The list of participant organisations is a list of parties that declared themselves being communist parties or organisations that are building communist parties. Of course each participant party or organisation is considering, at the same time (while respecting the autonomy of the other parties or organisations) each OTHER party and organisation as communist, basing itself on Marxism Leninism, searching his way to a strategy of revolution and building socialism (within the geographic frontiers of the international recognized nation-state where the organisation happens to exist - and the members of that organisation are living, working ….. and struggling.)
Perhaps this is the reason, beside the BLIND « respect of each other autonomy » that other communist organisations are still recognizing the WPB as a sister-communist organisation, while the WPB is still maintaining a formal « enthusiasm », « respect » and « solidarity » with al those « sister-communist» parties and organisations participating at the ICS.
I want now analyse the political line, the strategically program and the concrete analyses and conclusions of one or some communist organisations. I will try to prove the antagonist CONTRADICTIONS in political and ideological line (apart from secondary non-antagonist contradictions in political analyse to solve with discussion) between organisations that still are considering each other as communist and Marxist. (link to document)
Anti-capitalism not being anti-imperialism is reformism
When the members of a communist party don't participate actively in applying dialectical and historical
materialism in the basic analyses that has to be made for the development of the political and ideological line
of the party, leaving it all to leading cadres, opportunism can develop inside the party without being
countered.
Democratic centralism offers in a communist party the possibility of a conscious control of the members over
their leading cadres.
When serious study and discussion of the political texts of the leading cadres and a study and discussion
about the effective CLASS-point out of which this text is written is neglected, when personal attempts of
fundamental analysis are not been made and political guidelines are just been followed without own study
and without trying to do oneself the analyse again that lies at the base of those guidelines, the development
of opportunism will not been noticed.
Bourgeois elements that once entered the party, or members or cadres who change of class-position (of
proletarean to bourgeois class-position) can use this existing opportunism to cover their bourgeois classposition
while being membre or cadre of that communist party.
When concsiously a bourgeois political and ideological line is developed formulated in “marxist-sounding”
terms it is no longer opportunism but REVIONISM. With that revisionist political and ideological line (when it
will be accepted by “blind” and “deaf” members) it is possible to convert that revolutionary communist party
into a capitalism-protecting REFORMIST party, while many “deaf” and “blind membres are still convinced to
be membre of a revolutionary party.
This is what happened with the WPB.(Workers Party of Belgium – Partij Van De Arbeid van
België/PVDA, pvda.be, wpb.be, ptb.be)(link to document)
Anti imperialist united front.
In a speech in Great Britain, Dyab Abu Jahjah sketched the actual situation of the anti-imperialist resistance in the Arab region. He explained that the organisations that organized most people, and were able to resist to the attacks of the Zionist armed troops of « Israel » and could actual force those troops to a retreat, WITHOUT reaching the imperialist or Zionist objective of their attacks, and with somehow an anti-imperialist ideology, were organisations with a « sectarian line ».
My question to Dyab was: «Do you have a sight on what the so-called vanguard in the region is doing: Popular Front of Palestine? Communist party of Lebanon? How are they trying to get a respected vanguard position at the moment that the most respected vanguard position is at this moment at those “anti-imperialist acting and mass-mobilising organisations but remaining on a sectarian line? »
His answer was short: «These organisations you named are moribund and have nothing to do with being a vanguard. »
Summarized one can say that those organisations (who declared to be « the vanguard ») make NOT a concrete analyse (based on dialectical and historical materialism) of the actual imperialist stage of capitalism today. So they can never come to a real formulation of the tasks of the revolutionary forces in the world (of which they pretend to be a part of).
At the same time there exist forces in the world, that organise struggle against imperialism and who based their effective resistance against imperialism on (as I see it) programs or strategy, that is not the result of real Marxist analyse, but based on historical experiences of colonial production relations of imperialism installed by force over them.
…There that anti-imperialist ideology is often a form of nationalism. The progressive aspect of that nationalism is that that « nation » is NOT a country bordered by artificial frontiers that were drawn by colonial powers dividing larger popular masses that lived under equal colonial production relations and putting them against each other as « competitors ». It is a nationalism that is UNIFYING large popular masses in the same fight against the colonial aspects of imperialism.
The self declared communist, revolutionary or Marxist organisations are often basing their strategically, political and organisational points on a Marxist-sounding analyse that is made in a very GENERALISING way, using QUOTES of Marx or Lenin. But in their anti-imperialist and revolutionary strategy they are often ACCEPTING as a fact, the ARTIFICIAL borders (drawn by imperialism or colonialism) and countries IN those borders. Those borders are a result of imperialist competition dividing the world in zones of influences. In fact those « communist » organisations are developing a nationalism that is MORE NARROW than the nationalism I mentioned above, because they accept a former colony, bordered by artificial colonial drawn frontiers, being a « nation » were IN the revolution has to be organised.
…I want to make my contribution in this development of an anti-imperialist line and worked out a first analysis that can be submitted to discussion.(link to document) (embedded documents: about FDI and export of capital and Articles on aljazeera.net and almanar.com.lb)
"After socialism is been destroyed in the Sovietunion and the explosion of the country of Lenin, all communists has to understand that revisionism is the most dangerous ideological enemy of marxism-leninism. Its beyond any doubt that revisionism represents the bourgeoisie inside the communist movement[1]"
One has to be carefully by concluding that the line of one or another communist party in the world is revisionist or even concluding that the line of one or another communist party is contaminated with a lot of opportunist conceptions. However, it is my opinion that I can prove that there is a development of revisionism in , what is called, “the international communist movement”. That development of revisionism is based on, and is using, certain existing opportunist conceptions ( in different communist parties). In some parties the revisionist line has become the main line IN those parties.
At this moment this is the case of the once revolutionary Workers Party of Belgium.(WPB, Partij Van De Arbeid van België, PVDA/PTB) This was possible because the leading cadres succeeded (through different mechanisms, I will discus in later articles) by putting IN the mind of the majority of the members, a conception of "marxism" or "scientific socialism" wich was in fact metaphysics and idealism (instead of dialectical materialism) formulated in "marxist-sounding fraseology". That kind of leading cadres, perhaps ONCE entered the party on revolutionary conceptions, on a certain moment chosed for a bourgeois classpoint of view. Those cadres could mask their conceptions with Marxist phraseology easily, because they had often an encyclopedic knowledge of publications, articles and books of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao Zedong......and they were often responsible for the marxist formation of the majority of the party-militants.....
While I made allready a lot of analising in dutch on my weblog, I like to begin now in English to make an analysis of the text that is been put on the website of the Workers Party of Belgium, http://www.wpb.be/, on thursday, 17 November 2005, 12h40, "Contribution to the International Symposium held in Wuhan, People’s Republic of China, 13 - 15 October - Friedrich Engels and scientific socialism in contemporary China". The introduction of the “Marxist” analysis of Peter Franssen:
"It is 110 years since Friedrich Engels, the man who along with his companion Karl Marx laid the foundations of scientific socialism, passed away. To commemorate his death, an international symposium was held in the Chinese city of Wuhan. The organisers were the University of Wuhan, the Central Compilation and Translation Bureau of the CC of the Communist Party of China and the Academy of Social Sciences of China. 32 Chinese speakers made contributions, as well as 13 foreigners. At the request of the organisers, Peter Franssen, journalist with the Belgian weekly Solidaire and researcher at the Institute for Marxist Studies, wrote a contribution, which you can read in full below....."
An example of conscious REVISIONISM (because the use of a encyclopedic knowledge of the most works of Marx, Engels and Lenin to find the suited QUOTES to “prove” the ADVANCED IDEA of our revisionist) is where Peter Franssen[2] is quoting Lenin:
Hence the New Economic Policy with among others this directive of Lenin: “ We shall lease the enterprises that are not absolutely essential for us to lessees, including private capitalists and foreign concessionaires.[3] ” Lenin added that this period could last a long time: “But it will take a whole historical epoch to get the entire population into the work of the co-operatives through NEP. At best we can achieve this in one or two decades.[4] ”
Well, you can read here, the full text of Peter Franssen and here my argumentation why his text proves that Peter Franssen (also national cadre of the WPB/PVDA/PTB)is a revisionist and NOT a Marxist.
When you look close to the conceptions, the way of analyzing, the conclusions that are been made, it becomes very clear that revisionism which developed for example in the Communist Party of China (CPC) (...or which could “freely” develop after the death of Mao Zedong in 1976), is identical to the revisionism that developed in the CPUSSR under Chruchof, Bresnjev and Gorbatsjov.
You can for example apply the critic (of course in an adapted way, not in an ANALOGUE way) that the CPC wrote in 1964 on the rising revisionism in the CP-USSR (“The pseudo-communism of Chroustsjov an the historic lessons for the world”) on the revisionism that has seen the light after the death of Mao in the CCP and that is been made concrete in her economic policy after 1978.... And “Perestroika” and “Glasnost” of Gorbatsjov is similar (even in the meaning of the words!) to the “Reform” and “Opening” of Deng Xiaoping.
I am fighting those who defend the “authentically Marxist character” of the economical policy actual in China and who are claiming that “socialism has been strengthened” in China since 1978. Particularly when they are cadre in a, or representing a communist organisation.
They are, I think, from the same calibre as Kautsky opposed by Lenin and named by him as «renegade».
I will prove all this, being in fact the main goal of my analysis of the actual revisionism.
I want to prove now (being the next step in my analysis from the ACTUAL revisionism in the international communist movement) that the line of the CPC since 1978 is the OPPOSITE of the line of that same CPC before the death of Mao Zedong.
All what the CPC was fighting against (with indeed a big contribution of Mao Zedong but ALSO what concerned the conceptions of Deng Xiaoping which he defended AT THAT TIME) is after 1978 becoming a part of the political line of the CPC!
Summarizing (and that is indeed simplifying) I think that you can say that de line of the CPC since 1978 is going back to the revisionist line that Liu Chaochi (in the years ‘50s) defended, in OPPOSITION with the line of Mao Zedong. One can see the official line of the CPC as the result of the struggle between two lines (the revolutionary line and the bourgeois/revisionist line), and therefore reflects a temporary outcome of that struggle.
To prove revisionism with the teacher of the negative example
In fact there is a strong development of revisionism in what is called, the International Communist Movement. I think that it is important to uncover the general and common way of working, way of using Marxist phraseology to mask idealism and metaphysics and the way to use existing and non refuted forms of opportunism in the different communist organizations.
It is of course difficult to judge if a certain communist party is developing revisionism, when you are not a member of that party and when that party is operating in a ante-revolutionary situation whereby intern contradictions are not discussed openly.
I want to make my analysis of the development of revisionism based on the concrete example of the Workers Party of Belgium (PVDA- PTB, pvda.be) in such a way that communists not member of the WPB, but member of communist parties of other regions in the world can make their own opinion about my analysis.(Here the link to this document)
History of revisionism in communist parties
Analysis to prove the following statement: Many “new” Communist Parties, founded once, in a reaction of “revisionism in the old Communist Parties” are now developing ....revisionism themselves. (Read this -downloadable - document here)
[1] "About certain aspects of the struggle against revisionism", Ludo Martens in Marxistische Studies no 29, march 1996, (see www.marx.be), a discussion report on the International Seminar in Janashakti, India organised by the PCI(ML)
[2] Peter Franssen, cadre of the WPB, defends the revisionist line of the CCP since 1978 (read the whole text here), in previous articles (beginning here) I (once member of the WPB, expelled in 2005) analyse his text as an negative example of the actual revisionism in the International Communist Movement.
[3] Lenin, New Times and Old Mistakes in a New Guise, Collected Works, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1965, Volume 33, p.28
[4] Lenin, On Co-operation, Collected Works, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1965, Volume 33, p.470.