Category: Fascist terrorism
US & Ukraine are alone in rejecting Russia’s anti-Nazism resolution at UN
| November 20, 2017 | 7:31 pm | Analysis, Fascist terrorism | No comments

US & Ukraine are alone in rejecting Russia’s anti-Nazism resolution at UN

US & Ukraine are alone in rejecting Russia’s anti-Nazism resolution at UN
The UNGA Third Committee overwhelmingly passed a Russian-introduced resolution on combating the glorification of Nazism. The US did not break with its annual tradition of saying ‘no’ during the symbolic vote. Ukraine also voted against.

The Moscow-drafted resolution against whitewashing and attempting to glorify Nazi ideology was approved by a majority in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) human right committee on November 16. The resolution, introduced each year, was supported by 125 delegations, 51 states abstained, and the only countries opposed were the US and Ukraine.

Introducing the resolution, Russian representative Anatoly Viktorov said that neo-Nazis events “clearly resembling similar rallies in Nazi Germany” still occur in some countries. The authors of the draft also condemned the whitewashing of former members of the SS and Waffen SS, and attempts to grant individuals who supported or collaborated with the Nazis the status of national hero, which has been seen in recent years in some former Soviet states.

“Although Nazism was defeated over 70 years ago, and although the verdict of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal once and for all answered the question as to who represented the forces of good and the forces of evil during World War II, some people continue to doubt those great gains,” Viktorov said.

During the vote, the US representative called the draft “a cynical exercise and an annual power play by one country against its sovereign neighbors,” and suggested 20 amendments to the resolution. The move met stiff opposition from the Russian delegation, who said the amendments would change the core principles of the document.

“Representatives of the US delegation were not present at these talks,” the Russian delegation said, adding that the amendments “are openly provocative because they aim to drastically alter the essence and nature of this initiative.” The proposed amendments were subsequently rejected by the committee.

The resolution to ‘Combat glorification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance’ has been submitted by Russia annually since 2005. The US has never supported the document, and this time was no exception, despite this year’s wave of nationalist protests in the US, including the infamous march in Charlottesville, Virginia in which one person was killed after a car rammed into a crowd.

“We regret and are disappointed by [the continuous] unwillingness of the US to support the document given that their persistent attempts to explain their position by concern for the freedom of expression do not appear convincing,” the Russian mission in the US said following the vote.

While the US has always been against the resolution, Ukraine did not hop on the bandwagon until 2014. Previously, Kiev was among the abstainers. This year saw Canada leaving the ranks of those voting against, which it had done for several years.
Following last week’s vote, the resolution now moves on to the 193-member body for a vote, where it is expected to be approved in December.

È la tua rivoluzione: Italian communists honored the October Revolution in Rome
| November 13, 2017 | 7:48 pm | Communist Party Italy, Fascist terrorism | No comments

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

È la tua rivoluzione: Italian communists honored the October Revolution in Rome

The Communist Party of Italy (PC) and Front of Communist Youth (FGC) organized a massive meeting and march on Colosseum Square of Rome. Dedicated to the centenary of the October Revolution, the event promoted communism as the only real alternative against capitalist barbarity. With the participation of thousands of people, city of Rome was decorated with red flags.

Around 5 thousand workers and students got together on Colosseum Square of Rome with their red flags for honouring the centenary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, in respect to the call from the Communist Party and Front of Communist Youth against the anti-popular policies of the EU, NATO and the Italian government. Before the event, thousands of people marhced on the streets of Rome with their chants and slogans.

Last week, the PC and FGC were exposed to political attacks of the main stream media and the physical attack of fascist groups during their propaganda works for this event. However, they stood still against any reactionary tentative and declared, “If they are afraid of communism on the centenary of 1917, it is because communism is still the only alternative against the system of exploitation. High ratios of unemployment, decreasing wages, worsening living conditions for millions… Capitalism is not able to solve these questions. We will get together on Colosseum Square against anti-popular policies of the government and for the disengagement of our country from the EU and NATO.”
Source: international communist press / Senza Tregua.


Αναρτήθηκε από In Defense of Communism

From Warsaw with hate: Fascist and neo-Nazi groups marched in the streets of Poland’s capital

Monday, November 13, 2017

From Warsaw with hate: Fascist and neo-Nazi groups marched in the streets of Poland’s capital
Poland is the country where Communists are being persecuted for their activity and ideology by the bourgeois state’s mechanisms, the Communist Party faces every kind of repression by the government (which demolishes Soviet monuments) and where fascists, racists and neo-Nazis march in the streets, spreading their poison of hate! This is capitalism and EU’s Poland.
According to news agencies, an estimated ten thousand far-right nationalists marched in Poland’s capital city of Warsaw on Saturday, dwarfing the official celebrations and casting a pall on the country’s Independence Day commemoration.
The far-right… ‘We Want God’ march, while just one of several public events marking Poland’s independence in 1918, was by far the largest and loudest, with participants traveling from around the world to march in solidarity with anti-immigrant, racist and, in many cases, fascist causes.
Prior to the nationalist march, Polish President Andrzej Duda and European Union President Donald Tusk — a former Polish prime minister himself — attended a much smaller formal state ceremony.
The presence of the far-right in Warsaw was said to be the largest in recent memory, eclipsing the official state commemorative events, according to The annual march, initiated in 2009, appears to be the most popular global celebration of racism, and has consistently grown in size each year, cited by the New York Times.
Many white supremacist marchers waved xenophobic banners encouraging a growing racial divide in Europe that follows the massive influx of north African refugees fleeing several US-led ‘color revolutions,’ notably those in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, as well as an enormous and ongoing human rights crisis in Syria.
Calling for a ‘White Europe of brotherly nations,’ marchers chanted racist slogans, including anti-Semitic calls to “remove Jewry from power,” cited by the Daily Mail.
Occurring at dusk and continuing into the later hours, marchers carried Christian symbols and red torches that ominously lit up the city, while red flares and firecrackers created a warlike urban scene.
Banners displaying the far-right 1930s falanga symbol were held aloft by many marchers, as well as a diverse array of posters, including those claiming that all Muslim immigrants are terrorists; same-sex marriage denouncements; and in support of the anti-Semitic National Radical Camp, a pre World War II group historically espousing extreme nationalist sentiments.
According to Russia Today, about 6,000 policemen were deployed to keep public order throughout the city. Warsaw seen a number of marches and events, such as a counter-protest organized by the anti-fascist movement. Around 1,500 people attended that rally which comprised members from a dozen or so left-wing organizations.
Holding banners with the wordings: “For your freedom and ours,” “Women against fascism,” “Nationalism is a disease,”and “Class struggle, not national,” activists were on the streets to counter nationalism, racism, sexism and other kinds of hatred.
The Rebirth of the Communist Party of Indonesia

Sunday, November 12, 2017

The Rebirth of the Communist Party of Indonesia
The following essay deals with the resumption of the legal activity of the Communist Party of Indonesia after 50 years of prohibition. 

The article offers interesting information about the heroic and tragic history of the once largest non-ruling Communist Party in the world and expresses the optimism that the new generations of indonesian communists will continue the path of the struggle, joining the marxist-leninist movement for the materialization of the communist ideal. 
By Srećko Vojvodić.
This subject has a big moral importance for us, communists. Here we talk about the Communist Party of Indonesia. Rich is its history of blasts-off, tragedies and bravery of communists, and crimes against them, committed by the bourgeois reaction. Now, after a 50-year long ban, the Communist Party of Indonesia held its Convention and resumed its legal activity in its own country. 
One of the largest communist parties of the world, one of the largest communist parties of Asia, the Communist Party of Indonesia had, at the moment of its ban in 1965, approximately three million members and followers and, among them, two million members. It was the third most numerous communist party of the world, just after the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and the Communist Party of China (CPCn). 
History of that Party began in May 1920. Indonesia is a country, spread over a vast archipelago in South Eastern Asia, which was at that moment a Dutch colony. 
Dutch social democrat Henk Sneevliet started gathering his comrades, left social democrats – both Dutchmen and locals, and organized a foundational Congress of a party, which entered the history thereafter as the Communist Party of Indonesia. It carries this name since 1924. 
Who was Henk Sneevliet? Already not very young man, at the age of close to 40, he had accumulated a lot of experience of trade union work in the Netherlands, and, as such, was appointed Representative of the Eastern Section of the Comintern. After founding the Communist Party of Indonesia, he went to China, where he stood at the foundation of the Communist Party of China. It was he, who organized, in July 1921, the foundational Congress of the Communist Party of China, in Shanghai. It was also none other than he, who invited to this Congress, among others, a young Beijing University student, Mao Tse-tung, seeing in him the traits of a future communist leader. 
After working in the Eastern Section of the Comintern, Henk Sneevliet returned to the Netherlands and then happened his dramatic rupture with the Dutch communist leadership, his switch to the positions of Trotskyism, and then his split with Trotsky. Later on, in the years of the WWII, independent MP of Holland, workers’ representative Sneevliet came to the helm of Dutch underground Resistance and organized the largest strike in the times of the Nazi occupation of the Western Europe against Hitlerism, in November 1941. He was apprehended and executed by the Hitler’s GeStaPo in April 1942. By then he was not yet 60 years old. 
The Party, founded by Sneevliet, developed in the same way as many other Eastern Parties of the Comintern – Asian Communist Parties: it went through the White Terror in 1926, through the fight with colonizers, through the Japanese occupation and the armed resistance to the Japanese allies of Hitler. 
After the debacle of the Japanese militarism in 1945, Indonesian nationalists, headed by the President Sukarno, began their independence struggle against the Dutchmen and their colonial rule. The CPI supported Sukarno – as any patriotic force should – to what he reciprocated with a dark ingratitude. It was none other than Sukarno who, together with Indonesian nationalists and Islamic generals, staged an armed provocation in 1948, involving Army and armed formations of the Party, whose outcome was a bloody massacre of Indonesian communists, killing of the then Secretary General of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Indonesia, Munawar Musso and the member of the Politburo, Amir Sjarifuddin, who was Defense Minister in the coalition Government of Communists and Nationalists – the anti-colonialist Government of Sukarno. 
However, understanding that he still may need communists in the struggle against Islamic generals and Dutch colonizers, Sukarno stopped short of banning the CP, hoping that its new leaders would be more loyal to him than Munawar Musso and Amir Sjarifuddin, whom he executed. 
And, actually, to the helm of the Party came Dipa Nusantara Aidit, Njoto, M. H. Lukman and some others, oriented towards the victorious Communist Party of China and a collaboration of the Communist Party of Indonesia with the CPCn. 
By 1951, full legal activity of the CPI was restored and in this year, Indonesian communists adopted their Party Program, containing – as it turned out later – many erroneous points and confusion, which forced the leading Secretary of the CC of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik), I Stalin, to express his criticism of the CPI draft Program. Unfortunately, under the conditions of semi-legality and terror conducted over the CPI by Islamist generals, in the absence of direct connection between the CPI and the AUCP(B), Stalin’s deliberations reached the new CPI leadership only after the adoption of the new Program. 
Instead of taking these criticisms into account while developing their activities, CPI leaders wrote a reply to Stalin refuting practically all his considerations and showing the aplomb of nephytes: their leader Aidit was not at that time 30 years old! Only one among the Politburo members, Rinto, who was actually Prof. Iskandar Subekti, knowledgeable Marxist who was fluent in Dutch, English and several other foreign languages, educated in Europe, thoroughly acquainted with the works of classics of Marxism, expressed his dissent and wrote a separate letter to Stalin, asking him to sketch some ideas about perspectives of the Indonesian revolution. To the amazement of Aidit and Njoto, Stalin replied to the letter of crde. Subekti, inviting him and other Indonesian communists to be guests at the 19th Congress of the CPSU in October 1952. 
Subekti arrived to Moscow and later on, in December 1952, Dipa Nusantara Aidit with Njoto also came to the capital of the Soviet Union, after attending the Congress of the Communist Party of the Netherlands. So, in the first decade of January 1953 conversations of Stalin with the leadership of the CPI began: about moving forces, perspectives and character of the Indonesian revolution. 

Conversations were fairly interesting and meaningful, comradely. Stalin tried to convince Indonesian communists that his conclusions were correct. All-in-all, he managed to do it.
Based on these talks, Stalin composed a large document on 16 February 1953, addressed to Aidit: “On the Character and Moving Forces of the Indonesian Revolution, on the Perspectives of the Communist Movement in East Asia, about Strategy and Tactics of Communists in the Agrarian Question”. De facto, this was the last theoretical work of Stalin, unfortunately unknown in the USSR for a long time. For the very first time it was published in Russian language in 2009, printed directly from his manuscript. This handwritten original is kept in the Presidential Archive of the Russian Federation, Stalin’s Fund. 
This last theoretical work of Stalin of 16 February 1953, only two weeks before his passing away, is very interesting, in the first place, because in it he formulated the key point of the Indonesian revolution: the agrarian question. He criticized Indonesian communists since they were writing: “We will fight against feudalism,” without clarifying which remnants of feudalism in the Indonesian society they were talking about and clearly insisted that the CPI must put the slogan about delivery of the land to Indonesian peasants into their private property, without compensation – providing a firm theoretical explanation why it had to be done exactly so, how agrarian situation in Indonesia at that time was different from the agrarian situation in pre-revolutionary Russia, from the agrarian situation in Eastern Europe and why, therefore, in Indonesia it was exactly the slogan about delivery of the land to Indonesian peasants into their private property, without compensation that was necessary, while explaining why a slogan about nationalization of the land would not work in the given situation. 
It is exactly in this work where Stalin raised the question of National Front, warning the leadership of the Communist Party of Indonesia about possible absorption of the Party of Communists by the national bourgeoisie, about conversion of the Party into an appendix of the President Sukarno and his clique, so that the communists of Indonesia do not become a bargaining chip in a clan fight between nationalists and Islamists, between direct colonizers and their accomplices, so that they conduct an autonomous line of an alliance of the working class and peasantry and pointed out that the stronger the alliance, the firmer positions of the Party in the National Front would be. 
The work is interesting in itself because of its completely undogmatic approach. For instance, while analysing the agrarian situation in Russia on the eve of the October Revolution, Stalin positively evaluates not only the Bolsheviks’ agrarian program but also of the Socialist Revolutionaries (SR), calling them both “socialist parties”.  He further declares that the October was victorious due to the alliance of the working class with peasantry, which materialized politically in common actions of the two socialist parties, Bolsheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries – which was an absolutely non-traditional view in Soviet social sciences of that time! 
In this situation, Indonesian CP armed itself, naturally, with all these clarifications. Stalin’s formulations found their place, also, in a new version of the CPI Program, adopted in 1954, and in a large theoretical work of Aidit, published a year later.  Of course, given the circumstances of the Khrushchov’s campaign of discrediting the revolutionary struggle for socialism and communism, under the nonsensical guise of “anti-Stalinism”, Stalin’s name was nowhere mentioned in these documents and his formulations became known only after their text was published in Russian language in 2009. 
Practically, the mere fact that Stalin’s suggestions to move the focus of the CPI’s political work to the villages were implemented resulted in such a growth of the CPI in numbers and strength that it became the third most powerful communist party of the world! Mass inflow of peasants, creation of peasants’ associations, led by communists, strengthening of Party’s positions in the workers’ movement, brought about electoral victories, as well as a boost to the reputation of communists in the Indonesian society. Three million members and followers, among which two million were members of the Party and one million: members of youth, trade union, peasants´, women´s and other organizations, led by communists. These numbers speak for themselves. And these numbers are not mythical, they are thoroughly documented. 
Growth of social contradictions in Indonesia, lack of solution to the agrarian question, worsening of the working people´s situation, covered by nationalist slogans and the anti-imperialist rhetoric of President Sukarno and his friendship with Khrushchov; resulted in a gradual transition of the CPI into the opposition to the Sukarno’s regime, albeit two of its members still remained ministers in Sukarno’s Cabinet – one of them being the Politburo member Njoto, and in a renewed move to the positions of Maoism – seeing in Mao’s saying that the rifle bears the power a simple solution to all problems of the Indonesian society. 
Khrushchov’s actions contributed a lot to it. He had been meeting Sukarno all the time, presenting him exclusive gifts from the USSR Treasury – without consulting anybody about it, calling him “a distinguished progressive figure of our times”, while treating Indonesian communists as his servants. Unlike Stalin, who spared no time or effort to convince them comradely in the validity of his arguments, Khrushchov treated them as a haughtily walking landlord treats his serfs: “Chief has spoken, period! Those who disagree: get out!”  All this contributed to the atmosphere and psychological background for the transition of the CPI leadership onto the Maoist vector of the Party development. And this became one of the most important causes of the tragedy that occurred on 30 September 1965 and of the subsequent debacle of the CPI, of the physical liquidation of almost a million of communists and their followers at the hands of bourgeois reaction. 
Looming explosion
On the surface, and in the hearts of a sea of illiterate but devout peasants, Indonesia was run by Sukarno’s pseudo-revolutionary phraseology about “Indonesian socialism” – which declaratively fitted everybody – from landless villagers to the hereditary landlords, with the comprador bourgeoisie and the swelling bureaucracy in between. In truth, there were some significant achievements, mostly in health care and education, but the economy generally declined: in early sixties, its output was below 1940 levels. Industry worked at ¼ of its capacity, mostly because of a chronic lack of raw materials, and the budget received in 1961 only 1/8 of the projected income from the state sector! Even the expensive imported equipment massively idled in the absence of any systematic planning, was often left to decay, or was just stolen away. 
Under such circumstances, regular financing of the Army dried up and the commanders turned to the business, down to the plunder of state property, smuggling and even drug trafficking. Many young officers, born in scarcity, quickly merged with compradors and landlords and all of it inevitably favoured a development of militarist sentiments and worldview, adverse to the politicians in general, but particularly to communists. 
Preparing conditions for the establishment of their dictatorship and suppression of all resistance attempts, Indonesian militarists focused their main efforts to the villages. From the times when the state of emergency was introduced, in 1957, Army commanders ran all village affairs: they appointed and replaced village elders, trained administrators and so on. In fact, Army cupula decided, as an American journalist expressed it, “to enter a competition with the CPI in the field of the work with masses”. Then Defense Minister, Gen. Nasution, assigned to the troops, relieved after Irian Conflict with the Netherlands between 1961 and 1963, a “civic mission”, naming it “Operation Work”. Those soldiers upturned virgin soil together with villagers, built and repaired housing, schools, health centers, roads, canals and dams; they distributed food and seeds to the villagers, whom they taught to become literate and to purify the water. In light of a constant protraction of the agrarian reform, this “civic mission” of the Army attracted many peasants. However, useful work was always accompanied by propagandistic brain-washing of both soldiers and peasants in an anti-communist spirit. 
According to Nasution’s doctrine, “civic” activity of the military was interspersed with the Army preparation for the “defense of the country” together with peasants, as in the times of the war against Dutch. However, this time “the enemy” was not external, but internal. Villages were not been prepared so much for a war, but for mass terror. Armed escorts of the landlords, detachments of religious fanatics and criminal gangs were all merged into a system of pogrom-terrorist formations. As in Latin America, they were going to become known, several year afterwards, as “death squads” – according to the name of one of them. 
Tacking of the regime between antagonistic social and class blocks was gradually exhausting itself, summing close to the transition of all power into the hands of one of them. This general national crisis could have been resolved only in one of the two ways: either through a 
· revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the working people, with the hegemony of the proletariat, which would open a socialist perspective to the country, or through a 
· reactionary dictatorship of the exploitative classes, with the hegemony of corrupted bureaucracy (just 100 ministers!) amalgamated with uniformed entrepreneurs. Communists used to call them together “cabirs” (capitalists-bureaucrats). 
The clash was inexorably approaching. In August 1965 President publicly joined the call of the CC of the CPI to “strengthen the revolutionary offensive”. Prosecutor General declared that the judiciary is ready for liquidation of “cabirs”. In September, left forces went several times to the streets of Jakarta under the slogan “Death to cabirs!” On 8th and 9 September, protesters-communists besieged US Consulate in Surabaya. On 14 September, Aidit called the Party to watchfulness. Finally, on 30 September People’s Youth and Women’s Union organized in Jakarta a mass demonstration against inflation and economic crisis. On the eve of it, at a student rally, President openly called to “smash Generals who became protectors of the counterrevolutionary elements.” 
If this is not a revolutionary situation, what is? 
However, as Lenin warned in ‘The Collapse of the Second International’: “…it is not every revolutionary situation that leads to revolution; revolution arises only out of a situation in which the [elsewhere] mentioned objective changes are accompanied by a subjective change, namely, the ability of the revolutionary class to take revolutionary mass action strong enough to break (or dislocate) the old government, which never, not even in a period of crisis, ‘falls’, if it is not toppled over.” Specifically, he pointed out: “You cannot win with the vanguard only. Victory requires that not only the proletariat but also really broad masses of the working people, oppressed by the capital, arrive through their own experience to the position of either direct support of the vanguard, or, at least, benevolent neutrality towards it and a full inability to support its enemy.” 
Therefore, the objective character of the mass base of Indonesian counterrevolution showed that, in that situation, it was useless, and even worse than that, it was mortally dangerous to wait for a more favourable balance of forces. There was just one way to prevent the catastrophe: using all chances to elevate the revolution to a new, people’s democratic stage, opening not only to the proletariat but also to the petty bourgeois masses a visible perspective of a better life. 
The lost battle
On 30 September 1965 a group of young military officers, mostly belonging to the Presidential Guard and the Air Force, tried to capture and destroy the top brass of the Ground Army, standing on Islamist positions. Five generals and their entourage were killed but the main figure among the top commanders captured by left wing officers, Ground Army Chief of Staff Nasution escaped, hid and then launched, together with the Ground Army Commander Suharto, a counter attack on the Revolutionary Council, constituted by these young left oriented officers. Ground Army had numerical superiority and secured support of Airborne Troops and the Navy. Their joint numerical superiority over the Presidential Guard and the Air Force was so huge that at the end of next day, 1 October, smashed the Revolutionary Council, which practically fell apart under a fierce attack of Suharto and Nasution troops. Leaders of the Revolutionary Council hid in Halim Air Force Base and the Army launched an onslaught on it. 
Exactly at that moment, neither a day before nor a day later, CPI leadership declared its support of the Revolutionary Council and the 30 September Movement! At the moment when it already fell apart it was quite clear that its adversaries were winning. It is understood that it was not easy to convene a congress, conference or the Central Committee plenum. But the Chairman of the Central Committee, Aidit, did not even convene a session of the Politburo. Five of them, Aidit, Njoto, Aidit’s First Deputy Sakirman, his Second Deputy Lukman and the Politburo member Sudisman made the decision to support the Revolutionary Council. Then, in the morning of 2 October, when Halim Air Force Base was practically seized by the enemies of the Revolution – Islamist commanders – the central organ of the CPI published a call to support the Revolutionary Council – which, at that moment, already did not exist – and a declaration of the CPI position. 
It goes without saying that all of it was taken as a pretext for a mass killing of communists by forces of Islamist fanatics. They burnt the Central Committee building, editorial office of the central CPI organ and its print shop. All along the country, enraged fanatics started killing communists, in most bestial ways. On the chests of captured communists and their family members, they used to cut out hammers and sickles, and five-pointed stars; then they did the same on their backs and foreheads; they were cutting off their genitals; cutting open their stomachs; impaled them on stakes, were beheading them in villages to put stockades around such villages, with their heads on top… Mass anti-communist terror in October 1965 took the lives of approximately 500 000 CPI members while its leadership hoped Sukarno would protect them. Alas, nothing of that kind happened! On 6 October, Sukarno delivered his cabinet minister and member of the CPI Politburo Njoto to the military, which executed him the next day; then on 7 October, First Deputy of the CPI CC Chairman, Sakirman, and Second Deputy of the CPI CC Chairman, Lukman were executed. Aidit himself run away into a village, trying to organize a resistance, but was captured on 22 November 1965 by paratroopers and shot. Sudisman, who led the Party after killing of Aidit, Lukman. Sakirman and Njoto, survived until 1967, while organizing underground resistance in the cities, but was captured by counter-intelligence units of Admiral Sudomo and was also killed, after being bestially tortured. 
On 12 March 1966, under the pressure of Suharto and Nasution, President Sukarno, Khrushchov’s buddy and friend, made a decision to ban the Communist Party of Indonesia. Next month, trade unions were banned, as well as other mass organizations led by communists. 
Islamist fanatics were replaced by Admiral Sudomo’s counter-intelligence troops and military Special Forces, who launched mass anti-communist terror. Killings on the streets, detention of communists and their family members in concentration camps and their executions therein, killings at hands of soldiers, Special Forces, counter-intelligence troops, Islamist death squads… 
It seemed like a dark shadow had covered Indonesia. However, a human factor played, as always, its role and Admiral Sudomo’s counter-intelligence officers made a miscalculation. Member of the CPI CC Politburo, Iskandar Subekti, pushed aside by Aidit and Njoto as a pro-Soviet element – theoretician, intellectual and orator but not organizer, the man who never held in his hands anything heavier than a pen or pencil, remained out of the zone of influence of Admiral Sudomo’s counter-intelligence officers, who concluded that he would emigrate to the Soviet Union, to write memoirs at a Moscow suburban datcha, or would be lecturing Marxism in European universities. 
However, Iskandar Subekti did not emigrate but went instead to rural Eastern Java, where communists had the strongest influence in peasants associations, and launched a peasants’ insurrection! Together with his comrades in arms: Indonesian YCL leader Sukatno and the trade union deputy chairman Ruslan Wijayasastra. 
Peasants’ Army started implementing the agrarian reform – the one Stalin wrote about back in 1953! Distribution of landlords’ lands to the peasants without compensation made it a really mass force. Armed detachments of communist not only put fight to the Islamist fanatics but crushed their gangs, expelling them form their territory, and began the onslaught on the military and police forces of Sukarno’s regime. At the same time, preparations were underway for a constitution of a joint front of all insurgents’ detachments on all islands of Indonesian archipelago, for the establishment of a joint command and the Indonesian Red Army. After their first victories, they acquired heavy weaponry. 
The first ones who picked up the fight were the US diplomats, US spies – scared that Indonesia would become another Viet Nam. They put heavy pressure on Sukarno and on Suharto; provided financial and technical support to Indonesian Army, as well as armament and instructors. They silenced the existing contradictions between Malaysian and Indonesian regimes, enabling Suharto to withdraw troops from Malaysian border, and organized, de facto, a reprisal operation against liberated red territories. 
Having had both numerical and technical superiority, as well as better soldiers’ training, Indonesian Army destroyed last hotbeds of resistance in 1968. 
Prof. Iskandar Subekti himself, the one who used to meet Stalin, fell, and his comrades Ruslan and Sukatno fell, as well – together with many thousands of Indonesian communists… 
A shadow of bourgeois reaction finally fell on the country and Sukarno, having sold everybody and everything, was no more necessary to Islamist Generals and was thrown away in the political nothingness. Suharto became country’s President and Nasution – his Vice President. 
For more than thirty years the country was in the grip of anti-communist terror. Communists were killed or sent to concentration camps and jails. The last death sentences for participation in the events of 30 September 1965 were carried out at the very decline of Suharto’s regime, in 1996. For thirty years people were sitting in jails, waiting in death rows. However, the Asian financial crisis erupted. Since Suharto and Nasution’s regime did not solve any of the burning economic problems, not only did not improve the situation of the working people but, actually, worsened it, massive popular demonstrations washed away this regime to mere political garbage. 
Civic President Abdurrahman Wahid, who was the first elected President of Indonesia after the resignation of Suharto in 1998, declared a general amnesty and people who were sitting thirty and more years in jails and concentration camps started coming out. In 2000 he tried to legalize the activity of the Communist Party, invoking the Constitution of Indonesia. Generals, however, objected to it. 
Equally unsuccessful was the second attempt to legalize the CPI, in 2009 – local Islamists objected against it arguing that it is not admissible to have in Indonesia a political party that openly declares its atheism. 
Stubborn buds
Nonetheless, in 2004 and after forty years, all limitations in regards to the civic rights of communists were removed. Marxist circles started to pop up, as well as communist organizations in companies, students residences, etc. In addition to it, the External Committee of the CP of Indonesia was working during all 50 years among the numerous Indonesian emigration, in Europe and China, leading Indonesian left activists – although without direct connection with the homeland. 
Eventually, the growth of social contradictions, development of the class struggle, development of capitalism in Indonesia, as well as the courage and tenacity of Indonesian communists forced the regime to retreat. 
Here we are: in June 2016, the CP of Indonesia resumes its legal activity. 
However, the authorities did not lift the existing ban. Therefore, the coming congress of the CP of Indonesia will be counted as first, and not eight – after the previous, seventh, in 1962, as if the Party is being constituted from scratch. Nevertheless, the Party will keep its name: the Communist Party of Indonesia, and its foundational symbols: the red flag with hammer and sickle and the five-pointed star. It holds to the ideology of Marxism-Leninism and collective leadership. 
The Party will unite all those, who remained loyal to the communist ideas, during long decades underground, in Suharto’s dungeons, or in the emigration, all those who were and remained communists. 
The resumption of the legal activity of Indonesian communists is in itself an important moral event, regardless of how the CPI will develop further, which role it will be playing in the political and social life of its country and how much communists will manage to win the confidence of masses, of the working people. 
It shows that the ideas of communism cannot be quartered, shot down or burned alive. They cannot be killed or banned. Even after a fifty-year long ban, as it happened in Indonesia, they will win their way, under the same red flag with hammer and sickle and the five-pointed star. This is the ideology, founded by our great teachers: Marx, Engels and Lenin! 
We are sure that the new generation of Indonesian communists will continue traditions of their teachers: Munawar Musso, Iskandar Subekti and many, many others, who fell at the hands of Islamists, military and bourgeois reaction. 
We are sure that the Communist Party of Indonesia will join the international communist movement, the army of fighters for socialism-communism. 
Therefore, we wholeheartedly wish to the Indonesian communists, on behalf of so many comrades, victories in the struggle for our common cause, for the materialization of our communist ideal! 
In summarizing: communism cannot be killed, cannot be banned. Red idea, idea of social justice and brotherhood of the workers of all lands, of the social equality will win, regardless of the obstacles! 
So it will be! 
June 2016.
Main sources: 
· The presentation by Vladimir M. Soloveichik on the Leningrad Internet TV, on 27 June 2016 ( 
· The book ТЯЖКИЙ УРОК ИСТОРИИ: К 50-летию антикоммунистического геноцида в Индонезии автора А.В. Харламенко © Рабочий Университет им. И.Б. Хлебникова 2007 – 2016
· The book Pretext for Mass Murder: The September 30th Movement and Suharto’s Coup d’Etat in Indonesia, by John Roosa, Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 2006.
Shameful verdict by Greek court convicts Communist Youth members who were assaulted by neo-Nazis!

Saturday, November 11, 2017

Shameful verdict by Greek court convicts Communist Youth members who were assaulted by neo-Nazis!
A shameful verdict was issued by the single-member Magistrate Court of Thessaloniki in northern Greece regarding a murderous assault of neo-Nazi Golden Dawn thugs against Communist Youth (KNE) members  of November 2012. 
According to the Court’s verdict, the perpetrators of the attack were sentenced to 21 months imprisonment. However, the same verdict convicts the… victims of the attack to 12 months imprisonment! 
The story goes back to November 2012, when two members of the Nazi-fascist party Golden Dawn attacked and injured members of the Communist Youth of Greece in the town of Lagadas, in the outskirts of Thessaloniki. The attackers, who were identified as members of the local Golden Dawn branch, had in their possession knobs and knives. The victims, students-members of KNE, were attacked while they were sticking posters propagandizing a 48-hours strike. 
The Court decided that this wasn’t a clear murderous attack, but a street scuffle between groups thus equitating the offenders and the victims. 
The Central Committee of the KKE, as well as KNE, issued statements expressing strong condemnation of the Court’s decision. “The working people must draw their own conclusions”, writes the KKE’s statement and continues: “With more vehemence and militancy they must organize their struggle against the antiworkers and antipeople policies of the government and the capital. They must decisively expose and alienate the criminal nazi Golden Dawn and its murderous practices”.
‘From Awkward Loner to the Man We All Know’: Why Hitler Joined the Nazis
| November 1, 2017 | 9:08 pm | Analysis, Fascist terrorism | No comments

Adolf Hitler, center, confers with Field Marshal General Walther Von Brauchitsch, left, commander-in-chief of the Germany Army; and Colonel-General Franz Halder, Chief of the German Army staff, in Berlin on Aug. 7, 1941

‘From Awkward Loner to the Man We All Know’: Why Hitler Joined the Nazis

© AP Photo/


Get short URL

Groundbreaking new research has revealed Adolf Hitler was forced to join the National Socialists after a larger far-right group in post-war Germany, the German Socialist party, rejected his advances. Professor Thomas Weber, the historian who made the discovery, has told Sputnik Hitler’s life is not as well documented as it could be.

Adolf Hitler only joined the Nazi Party after being rejected by the German Socialist Party, leading historian Thomas Weber, a professor of history at the University of Aberdeen, has revealed.

He made his discovery by unearthing a document, indicating that in 1919, the then-30-year-old Hitler sought membership of the German Socialist Party, but was shunned, being told they did not want him in the party, or writing for its paper.

The document records testimony of Hans Georg Grassinger, founding chair of the party.

“In the autumn of 1919, around September, Hitler appeared in the office of the publishing house to see Grassinger and offered to write for the paper, and join and work for the party. He didn’t have any money at the time and also asked to borrow money from Grassinger. But they told him they had no use for him in the paper and that they also did not want to have him in the party,” Professor Weber summarized.

Professor Weber explained Hitler approached the party in part, because he was looking for a place to belong and “fit in,” and find a new “surrogate family” of sorts.

“By this point his parents are dead, and he’s lost touch with his surviving siblings. After the war, he desperately tried to stay in the army, but all his peers who had accepted him were demobilized. It was a case of ideological and opportunistic drives coinciding,” Professor Weber told Sputnik.

Hitler’s ‘Radicalization’

The German Socialists, Professor Weber said, were a far-right group much like the National Socialists, but while they were far from massive, compared to the “nascent Nazis,” they were “huge.”The experience of the trenches had radicalized Hitler politically, and in addition to trying to “escape loneliness,” by then the ratification of the controversial Treaty of Versailles had confirmed Germany’s defeat in the First World War.

“People often mention the ‘stab in the back myth’ in connection with Hitler, but he actually only used the term once as far as anyone can tell. It’s not Hiterlian language — he used the language of biological intoxication and viruses, to explain how Germany lost, and how the country should be recast to survive in a rapidly changing world. He concluded the causes of Germany’s internal weakness were the Jews, and its external weaknesses stemmed from insufficient territory, manpower and resources,” Professor Weber told Sputnik.

Why Hitler Joined the Nazi Party

After his jilting by the German Socialists, Hitler turned to the Nazi Party. The German Socialist Party was dissolved the following year.He would not forget the snub, however — in 1920 and 1921 (the latter being the year he became the party’s leader), it was proposed the German Socialists would merge with the National Socialists on three separate occasions.

While most other senior Nazis were in favor, Hitler steadfastly refused, and even briefly resigned from the party over the dispute.

“If the two unified, as the clear junior partner in the union, the Nazis would’ve been absorbed, and Hitler feared he himself would be sidelined and ostracized. Hitler being turned down by the German Socialists is fundamental to his joining the National Socialists, and ensuring the party remained an independent entity. Not long after the failed merger, the picture flips, and by 1922 the Nazis are the bigger party — largely due to Hitler’s oratorical skills — and the German Socialists are dissolved,” Professor Weber said.

German Chancellor Adolf Hitler during his address to 80,000 workers in the Lustgarten, Berlin, May 1, 1936, s part of the May Day Celebrations.
© AP Photo/
German Chancellor Adolf Hitler during his address to 80,000 workers in the Lustgarten, Berlin, May 1, 1936, s part of the May Day Celebrations.

Challenging What We Know About HitlerProfessor Weber is no stranger to challenging conventional wisdom and breaking new information on the Nazi leader.

His 2010 work, Hitler’s First War, examined Hitler’s years spent as a soldier during World War I, and it was the very first work to do so. However, Professor Weber notes “gaping holes” have often plagued historical research on Hitler.

“It was only in the early 90s historians showed the commonly accepted story, of Hitler being radicalized in pre-war Vienna, didn’t make sense. The contradictions in the story were my starting point for my previous book — when that was complete, I realized I’d merely changed the questions, and he’d become even more of an enigma. I was very interested in how he made the leap from awkward loner to the man we all know,” Professor Weber told Sputnik.

Adolf Hitler, left, Nazi chancellor of Germany, and Konstantin von Neurath, German Minister of Foreign Affairs, (right center) as they returned to Munich, Germany, from their meeting with Premier Benito Mussolini of Italy, June 25, 1934.
© AP Photo/
Adolf Hitler, left, Nazi chancellor of Germany, and Konstantin von Neurath, German Minister of Foreign Affairs, (right center) as they returned to Munich, Germany, from their meeting with Premier Benito Mussolini of Italy, June 25, 1934.

Somewhat amazingly, Professor Weber noted the document detailing Hitler’s failed application to join the German Socialist Party had theoretically been available to researchers since 1961, in the archives of the Institute of Contemporary History in Munich, but had merely gathered dust since, despite Hitler’s spirited rejection of the proposed merger long-baffling historians.

“There are a million books on Hitler, but lots just synthesize what others have written. His personal history is not as well-documented as it could be. Some Hitler historians don’t speak German, and others in Germany are reluctant to revisit the darkest chapter in the nation’s history, and raise certain issues in the process. There’s also a worry an undue focus on Hitler could mark a return to the apologetic tendencies of the 1950s, where everything that happened under the Nazis was blamed solely on him,” Professor Weber said.

Professor Weber’s research will feature in his next work, Becoming Hitler: The Making of a Nazi, which will be published in November.

Declassified documents expose US role in the 1965-66 massacre of millions of communists in Indonesia

Monday, October 30, 2017

Declassified documents expose US role in the 1965-66 massacre of millions of communists in Indonesia
Declassified files have exposed just how much the US knew about and supported the massacre of millions of Indonesians in the 1965 anti-communist purges.
The non-governmental National Security Archive research group published 39 documents on Tuesday, out of thousands of pages of newly declassified files from the US embassy in Jakarta. They cover the period from 1963-66, documenting official knowledge and approval of the army’s death-squad operations to wipe out the three million-strong Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) and its supporters.
Up to three million people were rounded up across the country, executed and dumped in mass graves. The files show that the US provided the Indonesian army with lists of senior communist party officials, equipment and money during the massacres. The purges led to the overthrow of communist-backed nationalist president Sukarno and the 31-year dictatorship of General Suharto.
The documents show US officials had credible evidence that contradicting the army’s claim about a supposed September 30 1965 bid by junior officers was ordered by the PKI — used as justification for the massacres.
A December 21 1965 diplomatic cable from the embassy’s first secretary Mary Vance Trent to Washington noted the “fantastic switch which has occurred over 10 short weeks.” Ms Trent estimated 100,000 had been slaughtered by then. A previously released April 1966 embassy cable said: “We frankly do not know whether the real figure is closer to 100,000 or 1,000,000” — and even the Indonesian government had only a “vague idea.”
A report covering November 1965 by embassy political affairs officer Edward Masters addressed the “problem” of holding and feeding suspected PKI prisoners. “Many provinces appear to be successfully meeting this problem by executing their PKI prisoners, or killing them before they are captured, a task in which Moslem [sic] youth groups are providing assistance,” he wrote.
A month later the US consulate in Indonesia’s capital Medan wrote that imams from the Muhammadiyah Muslim organisation were preaching that all communists should be killed, calling them the “lowest order of infidel, the shedding of whose blood is comparable to killing chicken.”
Britain also supported the massacres, documented by the historian Mark Curtis. Anti-communism appears to be on the rise in Indonesia, with rightwingers trying to shut down a meeting on the massacres just last month.
Source: Morning Star.