Category: socialism
When Donald Trump Falsifies History
| December 11, 2017 | 7:18 pm | Analysis, Donald Trump, Imperialism, Russia, socialism, UK | No comments

Monday, December 11, 2017

When Donald Trump Falsifies History

A response to U.S. President Trump’s blatant falsification of historical events.
 
By Nikos Mottas.


Donald Trump seems to have his own version of history. A version that falsifies completely the real historical events. The tycoon- turned President of the USA- decided to demonstrate his ignorance (or, perhaps, ability to distort history) during a Republican Party’s rally in Pensacola, Florida on December 8th. 

 
What did Trump say? Among others, the U.S. President said the following“We are the nation that dug out the Panama Canal, won two world wars, put a man on the moon and brought communism to its knees”.
Apparently, Trump thought that he addresses a crowd of illiterate idiots who were cheering at his moronic proclamations. But, unfortunately for Trump, not everyone is ignorant of historical events.
 
1. The U.S. didn’t win two world wars. The First World War (WW1) began in 1914 and ended in 1918. The United States entered the war just a year before the end, in 1917. Britain, France and Russia were the major countries which bore the burden of war, while the U.S. claimed some victories over the heavily damaged German army when the later were unable to provide enough arms or food to their troops. 
 
As for the Second World War (WW2), Trump is falsifying the historical truth too. Because, it was the Soviet Union – the Red Army and the people of the USSR- which actually defeated the Nazis. Someone must inform Trump about the epic battle of Stalingrad. Someone must tell him about the conquer of Berlin by the soldiers of the Red Army. 
 
The United States’ government had declared war against Nazi Germany in 1941, but it didn’t actively involved in warfare until 1944. The focus of the U.S. was on the Pacific Front, against the Japanese. By the time of the so-called “D-Day”, the Red Army had already won major battles against the Nazis, bringing the frontline close to Berlin.

The Soviet Union paid the highest price in casualties- more than 24 million people (troops and civilians) died during WW2. The respective casualties for the U.S. were approximately 420,000 people. Is Mr. Trump or any of his supporters aware of that? 

2. The U.S. President said that his country “put a man on the moon”. Indeed, astronaut Neil Armstrong was the first man to walk on the moon. However, the first person to journey into outer space wasn’t an American, but a Soviet, Yuri Gagarin. Gagarin’s spacecraft “Vostok” completed an orbit on the Earth on April 12, 1961.

Someone must inform President Trump- in case he doesn’t know- that the world’s first artificial satellite was “Sputnik-1” which was launched on October 4, 1957.

3. Donald Trump also said that the U.S. “brought communism to its knees”. This is a major argument frequently used by the various apologists of capitalism, especially after the counter-revolutionary events of 1989-1991. Trump repeats this convenient- for imperialism- narrative about the supposed “triumph” of capitalism over socialism. However, the reality is far from the grandiose nonsense expressed by Mr. Trump and his like-minded.

Socialism didn’t “collapse”; it was the opportunist counter-revolution that prevailed in the USSR and the socialist countries in Eastern Europe in the end of 1980s. The counter-revolution consistued the last act of a process which led to the distortion of the revolutionary character of the Communist Party, the strengthening of social inequalities and ultimately to social regression. The roots of the reasons which led to the victory of the counter-revolution in the USSR goes back to the decisions of the 20th Congress of the CPSU. 

International imperialism played its own role in the long-term strengthening and promotion of the the counter-revolutionary forces, but it wasn’t an imperialist intervention that led to the overthrow of Socialism. The truth exists in the various deviations from the laws of socialist construction and the weaknesses in solving existing issues of Socialism with capitalist tools, which led to the prevalence of counter-revolution. 

 
“Eradicating the Bacillus”

– by Greg Godels is available at:
http://zzs-blg.blogspot.com/

Eradicating the Bacillus”

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Eradicating the Bacillus”
In the US, the last few months have seen a host of celebratory salutes to, tributes to, and commentaries on the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. Serious research and thought were reflected in many, reminding us of both the sacrifices and achievements made by the workers of many nationalities who established the first sustained workers’ state, the USSR. Authors and speakers touched on many aspects of the Revolution and its rich legacy of fighting for socialism and ending imperialism.
Needless to say, little (or none?) of the victories of twentieth century socialism spawned by the Russian Revolution found its way into the monopoly media; the fete for the Bolshevik Revolution was held on alternative websites, by small circulation journals, and in small meeting halls and venues. This would neither surprise nor disappoint Vladimir Lenin; rather, it would conjure memories of the difficult and stubborn work of the small, often disputatious Russian Social Democratic Party in the years leading up to the revolutions of 1905 and 1917.
This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mainstream capitalist media had no commentary on the Russian Revolution. They did.
And it was relentlessly and uniformly negative. No warm words of any kind were spared for Russian workers of 1917 and their cause. In fact, in a year when the media and its wealthy and powerful collaborators decided to resurrect the spectre of Soviet Russia in a new, hysterical anti-Russia campaign, moguls mounted a lurid, anti-Communist campaign unseen since the Cold War.
The New York Times unleashed their rabid neo-McCarthyite commentator (Communism Through Rose-Colored Glasses), Bret Stephens, to spew his venom and unsparingly and gratuitously denounce anyone that he could even remotely connect with the Revolution, from those wearing “Lenin or Mao T-shirts” to Lillian Hellman. Progressives, Jeremy Corbyn, and, predictably, Bernie Sanders are condemned, part of the “bacillus” yet to be “eradicated,” to reference his clumsy, vulgar paraphrase of Winston Churchill. They, like any of us who find any merit at all in the Soviet experience, are “fools, fanatics, or cynics.”
Then there was the nutty Masha Gessen– the favorite of NPR’s resident bootlicker to wealthy patrons, Scott Simon– who analyzes the Soviet experience in a strange brew of mysticism and psycho-babble. Even The Wall Street Journal reviewer of her new book (The Future is History) concedes that she “puts forth a[n]… argument full of psychospeak about ‘energies’ and an entire society succumbing to depression.” He goes on: “She begins with the dubious assertion that one of Soviet society’s decisive troubles derived from the state prohibition against sociology and psychoanalysis, which meant the society ‘had been forbidden to know itself.’”
“Dubious” assertion? Or whacky assertion?
But Gessen will always be remembered for embracing the term “Homo Sovieticus,” a term that will undoubtedly prove attractive to those mindlessly active in the twitter universe.
For reviewing Gessen’s book, reviewer Stephen Kotkin had the favor returned with a glowing review in The Wall Street Journal of his book, Stalin: Waiting for Hitler 1929-1941. Joshua Rubenstein– himself the author of another catalogue of Stalin’s evil, The Last Days of Stalin— engages the usual verbal histrionics: “despotism,” “violent and catastrophic,” “ruthlessness and paranoia,” “draconian,” “remarkable cruelty,” “calamitous,” “crimes,” “ideological fanaticism.” These, and other shrill descriptions, pile up in a mere ten paragraphs. Rubenstein clearly reveals his anti-Soviet bias when he describes Soviet aid and assistance to the elected Spanish anti-fascist government in 1936 as an “intervention.” The interveners were the Italian and German fascists; the Soviets were, unlike the Western “democracies,” the only opponents of intervention.
Kotkin’s service to the WSJ and the anti-Soviet cause were rewarded with a long op-ed piece in the Journal in the weekend Review section (November 4-5, 2017). The Princeton and Stanford professor tackled the topic, The Communist Century, with great vigor. He sets the tone with the dramatic claim that …communism has claimed at least 65 million lives, according to the painstaking research of demographers.”
The victims-of-Communism numbers game was elaborated and popularized by Robert Conquest, a writer whose career overlapped on numerous occasions with the Cold War propaganda efforts of the UK Information Research Department, the US CIA, and the CIA’s publishing fronts. Conquest owned the estimate of 20 million deaths from the Soviet purges of the late 1930s. At the height of the Cold War, this astounding figure met no resistance from “scholars” at elite universities. Indeed, every schoolgirl and schoolboy in the crazed, rabid 1950s “knew” of the tens of millions of victims of Stalin’s purges.
Unfortunately for Conquest (though he never acknowledged it) and the many lemming-like academic experts, the post-Soviet archives revealed that his numbers were vastly inflated. In fact, they had no relationship whatsoever to the actualities of that nonetheless tragic period.
Kotkin’s claimed 65 million victims of Communist misdeeds should, accordingly, be taken with less than a grain of salt, though it is curiously and mysteriously well below the endorsed estimate of his mentor, Martin Malia. Malia, the author of the preface to the infamous Black Book of Communism (1994), endorsed that sensationalized book’s claim that 94 million lives were lost to Communism. Some contributors to the Black Book retracted this claim, noting that it was arrived at by an obsession with approaching the magic number of 100 million victims. They subsequently “negotiated” (or manufactured) a tally between 65 and 93 million. Such is the “rigor” of Soviet scholarship at elite universities.
Kotkin, like most other anti-Communist crusaders, gives away the numbers endgame, the purpose behind blaming uncountable victims upon Communism. For the arch-enemies of Communism like Conquest and the participants in the Black Book, it is imperative that Communism be perceived as equally evil with or more evil than Nazism and fascism. This charge of moral equivalence is targeted at the liberals who might view Communism as a benign ally in the defense of liberal values or social reforms. No one has done more to promote this false equivalency than Yale professor Timothy Snyder with his shoddy, ideologically driven book, Bloodlands.
Of course, the Washington Post also has its resident guardians of anti-Soviet dogma in Marc Thiessen and the incomparable Anne Applebaum. Applebaum has enjoyed a meteoric career from graduate student to journalist covering Eastern European affairs to the widely acknowledged leader of anti-Soviet witch-hunters. Her marriage to an equally anti-Communist Polish journalist-turned-politician further strengthened her role as the hardest charging of the hard-charging professional anti-Communists. Her consistent work denouncing everything Soviet has earned her a place on the ruling class Council of Foreign Relations and the CIA’s “active measure,” the National Endowment for Democracy.
She “celebrated” the Bolshevik Revolution on November 6 with a several-thousand-word Washington Post essay raising the feverish alarm of a return of Bolshevism (100 years later, Bolshevism is back. And we should be worried.) Applebaum repeats a favorite theme of the new generation of virulent anti-Communists: the events of November 1917 were a coup d’etat and not a revolution. Of course, this claim is hard to square with another favorite theme– the Bolsheviks numbered only two to ten thousand followers. How do you reconcile such a tiny group “overthrowing” the government and the security forces of the fourth most populated empire in the world?
The Bolsheviks lied. Lenin was a liar. Trotsky was a liar. “So were his comrades. The Bolsheviks lied about the past… and they lied about the future, too. All through the spring and summer of 1917, Trotsky and Lenin repeatedly made promises that would never be kept.” Further, Lenin’s henchmen used the “tactics of psychological warfare that would later become their trademark” to mesmerize the population. That same easily charmed population was to later fight for socialism against counter-revolutionary domestic reaction and foreign intervention in a bloody five-year war (1917-1922), the same supposedly easily tricked population that laid down their arms and refused to fight for the Czar or his “democratic” successors. This neat picture of perfidy surely exposes a belief in both superhuman, mystical powers possessed by Lenin and an utter contempt for the integrity and intelligence of the Russian masses.
But it is not really the historical Bolsheviks who are Applebaum’s target, but today’s “neo-Bolsheviks.”
And who are the “neo-Bolsheviks”?
For Ms. Applebaum, they are everyone politically outside of her comfortable, insular world of manners and upper-middle class conservatism. First and foremost, she elects to smear the social democrats in Spain and Greece, along with Jeremy Corbyn, who may consider “bringing back nationalization.” Similarly, their US counterparts “on the fringes of the Democratic Party” (Bernie Sanders!) are condemned because they embrace “a dark, negative version of American history” and “spurn basic patriotism and support America’s opponents, whether in Russia or the Middle East.” (Sadly, my social democratic friends will likely not allow these ravings to shake their confidence in Applebaum’s equally inane pronouncements on Communism.)
But the “neo-Bolsheviks” exist on the right as well! She identifies them as those rightists who “scorn Christian Democracy, which had its political base in the church and sought to bring morality back to politics…” “If some of what these extremists [on the right] say is to be taken seriously, their endgame– the destruction of the existing political order, possibly including the U.S. Constitution– is one that the Bolsheviks would have understood.” In Applebaum’s bizarre world, there are Bolsheviks of both the left and right lurking under our beds! Safety is only found in the bosom of Christian democracy, that post-war artifact cobbled together by the Western powers to counter the parliamentary rise of Communism.
The anti-Communist graffiti artists, the professional defacers of the Soviet legacy, are legion. Books and commentaries by others, like Victor Sebestyen, Serhii Plokhy, Douglas Smith, Svetlana Alexievich, Amy Knight, and Catherine Merridale, join the authors reviewed here in churning out new grist for the anti-Communist, anti-Soviet mill.
With many Soviet sources now available, the practice of Cold War defamation has become a riskier business, an enterprise possibly bringing embarrassment to the most outrageous fabricators. Accordingly, the most sophisticated among the new generation of Cold Warriors have turned in a new direction: the 1930s famines in then Soviet Ukraine. With little risk of exposure and eager cooperation from the virulently anti-Communist, extreme nationalists now installed to govern Ukraine, they have started a new victim-numbers race to rally the cause of anti-Communism, a new narrative of Red wickedness.
Applebaum is right about one thing. There is evil in the air.
But it is the vicious slander of everything Red, especially the legacy of the Soviet Union.
Greg Godels (Zoltan Zigedy)
zzsblogml@gmail.com
Dimitris Koutsoumbas: “Socialism in the 20th century proved its superiority in comparison with capitalism”
| November 28, 2017 | 7:46 pm | Communist Party Greece (KKE), socialism | No comments

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

Dimitris Koutsoumbas: “Socialism in the 20th century proved its superiority in comparison with capitalism”

https://communismgr.blogspot.com/2017/11/dimitris-koutsoumbas-socialism-in-20th.html
The Secretary General of the CC of the Communist Party of Greece, Dimitris Koutsoumbas, delivered the central speech during the KKE’s political and cultural event for the 100 years since the Great October Socialist Revolution that took place on Sunday 26th November in Athens / Source: inter.kke.gr
In his speech, the SG of the CC of KKE noted that “The October Revolution is neither an accident of history, nor a Bolshevik coup d’etat, as the capitalists declare and write, nor immature and early, as all kinds of apostates and oportunists-adventurists declare and write”  and added that “The October Revolution has been the climactic world-historic event of the 20th century that sounded the start of the era when the working class would become the protagonist of the developments and would push forward the wheel of history, taking over the power and organizing the new socialist-communist relations of production, reforming the whole society. (…) The October Revolution gave impulse to the international revolutionary movement and filled with optimism the struggle of the peoples around the world, accelerated the process for the founding of a series of communist parties. Our Party, is a product of the revolutionary flame of October. In a few days we will welcome year 2018, year of climax for the celebration of the 100 years of the honored and heroic Communist Party of Greece.”
D. Koutsoumbas underlined that “The Bolsheviks won because they worked with patience, with audacity, primarily because they worked with a plan of political, organizational and military preparation for the revolt in conditions of revolutionary situation” and added: “We hold up high the flag of revolutionary struggle. In our 20th Congress we placed the marker even higher, we put the urgent duty of consolidating the KKE. A strong KKE so that our party becomes able, as a party of social overthrow, to succeed in his historical vanguard role, utilizing and deepening the contradictions and antitheses of the capitalist system with the class struggle. A Party able to lead the struggle of the working class and of the whole people, for the regroupment of the trade-union movement, for the forward push of the social alliance in an antimonopoly – anticapitalist direction, against imperialist war, for the working class power.” 
The SG of the CC of KKE underlined that “The working class has proved that it can, it has the ability and possibility, as the only truly revolutionary class, to bring about its historical mission, to lead the cosmogonia of the building of socialism-communism. Our eyes, our mind and our way of thinking, are not blurred by the counter-revolution and the overthrows that took place. That is why, today, our priority is the regroupment of the working class movement from the situation of recession that is in today, that today more and more workers realize who is the real enemy and where their struggle should be directed to. (…) No struggle gains class orientation, stability and endurance, when the worker adopts the aims of the capital, of the national and international bourgeoisie for “bigger competitiveness” as his own. (…)
 
In order for the working class to assert the power, it must form its own social alliance with the poor peasants, the oppressed strata of the city. With the struggle of the Bolsheviks, it became possible, that the poor peasantry ally with the revolutionary vanguard of the working class. That alliance came up victorious, the alliance of all the oppressed with which the soldiers sided, the sons of the people that where serving in the war.
 
This experience confirms that the hope, the alternative are not to be found in the summit agreements but in the alliance of all the oppressed, in the movement, where all can meet together and walk towards the road of clash in order to really ascend to power.
 
The experience of October has confirmed that the working class due to its place in capitalist production is objectively the only revolutionary class, the builder of the socialist-communist society and consequently the leading force in relation to the rest of the popular forces.
 
Only the working class movement can assume complete revolutionary characteristics, can transform in a revolutionary movement.
 
Our proposal of the social alliance corresponds to the effort that the popular strata, through the struggle, as potential allies of the working class, and their respective movements, to be pulled more or less actively in the revolutionary struggle, or to become neutralized.
 
The Social Alliance that the KKE is proposing, in anticapitalist-antimonopoly direction, has to do with social forces, namely, the working class, the salaried employees of the public sector, the self-employed professionals, small craftsmen, small tradesmen, scientists, self-employed farmers.”
 
D.Koutsoumbas in his speech made reference to the imperialist interventions and wars that are breaking out today and maintained that: “October practically confirmed that the struggle for the exit of the imperialist war is inextricably connected with the struggle for worker’s power, and this strategy of the Bolsheviks was confirmed 100 years ago. That is the experience that we want to discuss, particularly today that the contradictions, the antagonisms, among powerful forces of the international capitalist establishment passes through our region: the Balkans, the Aegean Sea, the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. In the focus of the antagonism there are the routes of transport of energy and commodities between monopoly groups of powerful imperialist states, regarding which will prevail in the share that is already developing in our country. We have already told that the Greek bourgeois class, through the SYRIZA-ANEL government, is claiming share, selling the new dangerous “great idea”, of the so-called “geostrategical upgrading of the country” in the context of NATO. We warn: It is only an upgrade of the geostrategical implication of the Greek ruling class in wars and interventions in the area, in missions of Greek troops out of the national borders, in upgrading the US death-dealing bases, including the ones that host nuclear weapons. And this is what the SYRIZA-ANEL government sold during the recent visit of Tsipras in the USA, apart from praises for Trump.”
 
The SG of the CC called “our people to not take position “under foreign banners”, to not shed its blood for foreign interests.” and added: “In the case of a more direct participation of Greece in an imperialist war, the working class should chart its own struggle along with the popular strata and their movement, in order to defend the territorial integrity of the country and in order for the people to win against the bourgeois power of exploitation and of wars or of the so-called peace with the peoples’ at gun-point.”
 
D. Koutsoumbas highlighted the achievements of socialism and made extensive reference to them undelining that “Socialism in the 20th century proved its superiority in comparison with capitalism, the immense advantages that provides for the work and the life of the workers. The Soviet Union and the international socialist system comprised the only true counter-weight to imperialist aggression.” Talking about the advantages of socialism he noted that “All the economic tools come under the service of the people. The mineral wealth, the infrastructure and machinery of industry, energy, telecommunications, transports, commerce, land, industrialized agricultural and livestock production become social property. The natural wealth producing resources become social property, the commerce becomes state-owned. With these tools the new power can plan centrally its economy, galvanize the development of the sectors of economy, of the peripheries. That is exactly why it can absorb all the unemployed, can guarantee the right to work. To abolish economic activity in health-care and prevention, to develop an exclusively free and public system of health-care-prevention, to develop people’s culture and sports. In can develop agricultural production next to the socialized sector of economy, organizing firstly a transitional form of productive cooperatives, provide the people with enough healthy food products and provide industry with raw materials. It can shape the conditions to expunge the causes of women’s inequality and support the relations between the two genders with complete infrastructures, their willingness to form a family, without any economic motive, protecting motherhood, the children, the elderly. The workers’ power, disentangling our country form the shackles of EU and NATO, will intend to develop interstate relations with mutual benefit, among Greece and other countries, particularly with countries that their level of development, the nature of their problems and of their immediate interests can guarantee such a beneficial cooperation. The working class of Greece is not alone. It has and will have the workers of the whole world at its side. Our slogan is “Proletarians of all countries, Unite!”
 
The SG of the CC of the KKE, expressing the steadfast conviction of the Communists of Greece noted that “The era of socialist revolutions is ahead of us. The dashing entry of the working class and popular forces in the revolutionary struggle will sweep away sooner or later capitalist barbarism, imperialism aggressiveness. October illuminates the struggle of the peoples, socialism is a necessity of our times”.
KKE MEP Papadakis gives decisive response to EU Parliament’s vulgar anticommunism

Thursday, November 16, 2017

KKE MEP Papadakis gives decisive response to EU Parliament’s vulgar anticommunism

https://communismgr.blogspot.com/2017/11/kke-mep-papadakis-gives-decisive.html
KKE MEP Kostas Papadakis (standing).
A decisive answer to the vulgar anticommunism of the capital’s political represnetatives at the EU Parliament was given by the MEP of the Communist Party of Greece Kostas Papadakis. Speaking at the Plenary of the European Parliament on Wednesday in Strasbourg, the KKE MEP said the following:
 
“We defend Socialism, which within a few years solved big problems that remain unsolved in Capitalism. Socialism abolished unemployment and exploitation. Socialism showed to the people what permanent stable labor with rights, free Health – Education for everyone, low cost housing, certainty for the future mean.
 
The exploitative system that you are defending means labour galleon, queues of unemployed people, permanent insecurity, auctions, people searching in the garbage.
 
In Socialism, the people lived peacefully for decades. Your system is dripping blood from the crimes of the imperialist wars, with Hiroshimas, dismembered states, refugees.
 
Socialism defeated the monster of fascism in the Second World War and fascism is capitalism’s child. The democracy that you are promoting is the dictatorship of the monopolies.
 
The mud, the anticommunism, the prohibitions invoked by the supporters and apologists of Capitalism show their fear. The learned people will find again their way. Your rotten system is the past. 
 
The future of the world is Socialism-Communism.”
 
Source: 902.gr / Translation: In Defense of Communism.
Capitalism Doomed: Most young people in the USA prefer Socialism or Communism over Capitalism
| November 13, 2017 | 7:44 pm | Analysis, socialism, Youth | No comments

Monday, November 13, 2017

Capitalism Doomed: Most young people in the USA prefer Socialism or Communism over Capitalism

https://communismgr.blogspot.com/2017/11/capitalism-doomed-most-young-people-in.html

According to a poll, carried out by the international polling firm YouGov between September-October 2017, 51% of the Americans between the ages of 21 and 29, defined in the report as “millennials”, would prefer to live in a socialist or communist country over a capitalist one
 
The majority of young people- 56%– also said that they wouldn’t be offended if someone accused them of being a communist. A similar percentage (53%) of the same age group reported that they feel that the US economic system is working against them.
The above results are included in the second annual report on American’s attitudes towards socialism, released by the anti-communist bourgeois Foundation “Victims of Communism Memorial” which, most probably, has regreted the idea of conducting the research. 
 
100 years since the Great October Socialist Revolution and 27 years since the counterrevolutions in the USSR and Eastern Europe, Socialism is more timely than ever. The rotten capitalist system – a system that perpetuates poverty, unemployment, social injustice and wars – is outdated by History herself. The majority of young people, in the United States and elsewhere, begin to understand that their future is doomed within the exploitative system.
 
The results of the poll are certainly encouraging but they also point out the need to strengthen even more the struggle against capitalism.
 
The Communist Party of Canada’s contribution to the 19th International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties

CPC contribution to 19th International Meeting of Communist & Workers’ Parties

October 4, 2017

The Communist Party of Canada’s contribution to the 19th International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties

We are honoured to bring greetings to this historic gathering on the centenary of the Great October Socialist Revolution.

Great October is the historic marker between all class divided, exploitative and oppressive societies heretofore; and the end of the exploitation of one human being by another achieved with the victory of Soviet power in Russia.  The epoch of the transition from capitalism to socialism was irrevocably opened for the working class to pass through, according to the objective and subjective conditions in each country. 

As Lenin said, the road to socialism is not straight like the Nevsky Prospect.  The loss of the USSR showed that the transition period is intense – a life and death struggle with imperialism, in which socialist states can be overthrown and great setbacks sustained.  But the political struggle of the working class and its allies for socialism cannot be stopped and will prevail, because the working class is the grave-digger of capitalism, as Marx proved.  This is the irreconcilable contradiction of capitalism that foretells its inevitable passing.

Imperialism has seized the moment to drive the world to the brink of world war and environmental devastation, and to unleash the forces of reaction and fascism aimed to destroy socialism, to overthrow socialist and progressive governments, to eliminate the Communist and Workers’ parties.

US imperialism’s threat to “totally destroy” DPRK, to overthrow governments in Venezuela and Syria, and to effect regime change in Cuba, is an invitation to world war and nuclear catastrophe.  US imperialism is sliding towards fascism.  The growth of fascist movements and parties globally, of austerity, xenophobia, racism and misogyny, is imperialism’s response to the changed balance of forces after 1991.

We live in a very dangerous time, facing the stark choice of socialism or barbarism.   We must soberly assess how to roll-back the threat of fascism, reaction and war, and how to advance the struggle for fundamental social transformation which working people increasingly seek, despite growing anti-communist campaigns.

In Canada, nascent fascist movements are also blooming, given new life by developments in the US and Europe.  These include Soldiers of Odin, PEGIDA, and La Meute.  They prey on the insecurity and fear of working people who are victims of the capitalist crises and who are aware that there is no recovery for them, while the biggest corporations rake in super-profits, lay-off workers, drive down wages and pensions, and demand social spending cuts.  Social democratic governments and parties, including in Canada, continue to offer prescriptions to better manage capitalism.

In Canada, the Trudeau government was elected on a platform promising peace, jobs, democracy, equality, and redress for Indigenous Peoples, most of which they have abandoned.  Trudeau has bowed to US demands to increase support for NATO and NORAD, and will increase military spending by 70%.  Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland (grand-daughter of a Ukrainian fascist collaborator) has stick-handled the government’s pro-US positions, including threats to Venezuela, and permanent stationing of Canadian troops in Latvia and Ukraine.   We vigorously oppose these policies, and campaign for peace and disarmament, withdrawal from NATO and NORAD, and cutting current military spending by 75%.  We are working hard to build the peace movement, and in particular the Canadian Peace Congress, affiliate of the World Peace Council.

The climate change crisis, causing major disasters this year, has forced itself onto the global agenda.  The struggle for climate justice must be a priority for our movement.  Socialism will prevail, provided the globe has not been destroyed by war and environmental devastation.

The NAFTA negotiations are collapsing, killed by US protectionism.  A revived Trans Pacific Trade and Investment Partnership is on the horizon.  We have campaigned hard against these deals and capitalist globalization generally, designed to cement corporate control of the world’s resources and markets, eliminating national sovereignty.

We fight for mutually beneficial, multi-lateral trade that includes long-term credits for developing countries.

We have closely followed developments in Catalonia and Kurdistan.  Like other parties, we condemn the use of force by the Spanish government against the Catalan people and their struggle for national self-determination, a right that Lenin invoked as inviolable for Marxist Leninists.

Canada is a multi-national state, created at the point of a gun, after British colonialism defeated France in North America in 1763 and then subdued the French speaking populations in what is now Quebec.  During capitalism’s rise, colonial governments aimed to exterminate or forcibly assimilate Indigenous Peoples.  This unequal and involuntary union of oppressed and oppressor has been maintained by force and violence of the Canadian state ever since.

While the CPC does not support the option of Quebec secession, because it will weaken the struggle of the working class as a whole against capitalism and for socialism, we unequivocally support the right of Quebec and other nations in Canada to self-determination and to secession if they so choose.  This puts the onus on the English speaking nation to offer a new, equal and voluntary partnership as the basis for unity in Canada, one which recognizes the national rights of all, including the right of each to leave, in a new democratic Constitution.  This is the option we favour and campaign for.

In conclusion comrades, we thank the CPRF for hosting this historic meeting in Leningrad, the cradle of the Great October Socialist Revolution.

We express our confidence in the unity and coordinated action of the Communist and Workers’ parties, in our historic struggle for socialism, peace, and a sustainable global environment.

Long live Marxism-Leninism!

Hasta la Victoria Siempre!

Delivered by CPC leader Elizabeth Rowley on behalf of the Central Executive Committee of the Communist Party of Canada to the 19th Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties held in Leningrad, November 2-3rd, 2017.

Revisiting the October Revolution of 1917
| October 26, 2017 | 8:39 pm | Analysis, J. Stalin, Karl Marx, socialism, USSR, V.I. Lenin | No comments

https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201710261058554269

Communist supporter carries the red flag as others carry a banner declaring Long Live the 88th Anniversary of the October Revolution, during the rally to commemorate the Bolshevik Revolution, marking a long-sacred former holiday that was an official working day for the first time in decades in Moscow, Monday, Nov. 7, 2005.

Revisiting the October Revolution of 1917

© AP Photo/ Ivan Sekretarev
Columnists

Get short URL
John Wight
173590

To some the October Revolution of 1917 in Russia still stands, a hundred years on, as the single most important emancipatory event in human history.

For such people it commands greater importance than the Reformation or the American and French revolutions preceding it, in that it went further than religious or political emancipation to engender social emancipation; and with it an end to the exploitation of man by man which describes the human condition fashioned under capitalism.

To its detractors, meanwhile, October ushered in a dark night of communist tyranny under which, per Marx, all that was holy was profaned and all that was solid melted into air. In this rendering, October is considered, along with fascism, to have been part of a counter-Enlightenment impulse, one that arrived as the harbinger of a new dark age.However the attempt to place communism and fascism in the same category is facile in the extreme; it is a depiction that fails the test of history. The real and historically accurate relationship between both of those world-historical ideologies is that whereas fascism was responsible for starting the Holocaust, it was communism — in the shape of the Soviet Red Army — that ended it.

That Russia in 1917 was the least favorable country of any in Europe for socialist and communist transformation is indisputable. The starting point of communism, Marx avers in his works, is the point at which society’s productive forces have developed and matured to the point where the existing form of property relations acts as a brake on their continuing development. By then the social and cultural development of the proletariat has incubated a growing awareness of their position within the existing system of production; thereby effecting its metamorphosis from a class “in itself” to a class “for itself” and, with it, its role as the agent of social revolution and transformation.

Marx writes:

“No social order ever perishes before all the productive forces for which there is room in it have developed; and new, higher relations of production never appear before the material conditions of their existence have matured in the womb of the old society itself.”

The error in Marx’s analysis was that rather than emerge in the advanced capitalist economies of Western Europe, communism emerged on the periphery of the capitalist centers — Russia, China, and Cuba et al. — in conditions not of development or abundance but under-development and scarcity.

German philosopher and economist Karl Marx. Late 1870s. Reproduction
© Sputnik/ A. Sverdlov
German philosopher and economist Karl Marx. Late 1870s. Reproduction

From the vantage of exile in Switzerland, Lenin saw with uncommon clarity how the First World War presented revolutionaries across Europe with a clear choice. They could either succumb to national chauvinism, fall into line behind their respective ruling classes and support their respective countries’ war efforts, or they could use the opportunity to agitate among the workers of said countries for the war to be turned into a civil war in the cause of worldwide revolution.

It was a choice separating the revolutionary wheat from its chaff, leading to the collapse of the Second International as with few exceptions former giants of the international Marxist and revolutionary socialist movement succumbed to patriotism and war fever.

Lenin observed:

“The war came, the crisis was there. Instead of revolutionary tactics, most of the Social-Democratic [Marxist] parties launched reactionary tactics, went over to the side of their respective governments and bourgeoisie. This betrayal of socialism signifies the collapse of the Second (1889-1914) International, and we must realize what caused this collapse, what brought social-chauvinism into being and gave it strength.”

The ensuing chaos, carnage, and destruction wrought by four years of unparalleled conflict brought the so-called civilized world to the brink of collapse. The European continent’s ruling classes had unleashed an orgy of bloodshed in the cause not of democracy or liberty, as the Entente powers fatuously claimed, but over the division of colonies in Africa and elsewhere in the undeveloped world.

Vladimir Lenin
© RIA Novosti. Otsup
Vladimir Lenin

From the left, or at least a significant section of the international left, the analysis of October and its aftermath is coterminous with the deification of its two primary actors — Lenin and Trotsky — and the demonization of Stalin; commonly depicted as a peripheral player who hijacked the revolution upon Lenin’s death, whereupon he embarked on a counter-revolutionary process to destroy its gains and aims.

Writing in the second volume of his magisterial three-part biography of Leon Trotsky, The Prophet Unarmed, Isaac Deutscher describes how the Bolsheviks were aware that “only at the gravest peril to themselves and the revolution could they allow their adversaries to express themselves freely and to appeal to the Soviet electorate. An organized opposition could turn the chaos and discontent to its advantage all the more easily because the Bolsheviks were unable to mobilize the energies of the working class. They refused to expose themselves and the revolution to this peril.”

The harsh reality is that the cultural level of the country’s nascent and small proletariat, whose most advanced cadre was destined perish in the civil war, was too low for it to take the kind commanding role in the organization and governance of the country Lenin had hoped and anticipated. “Our state apparatus is so deplorable,” he was forced to admit, “not to say wretched, that we must first think very carefully how to combat its defects, bearing in mind that these defects are rooted in the past, which, although it has been overthrown, has not yet been overcome, has not yet reached the stage of a culture, that has receded into the distant past.”

Stalin’s victory in the struggle for power within the leadership in the wake of Lenin’s death in 1924 was, if conventional wisdom is to be believed, down to his Machiavellian subversion and usurpation not only of the party’s collective organs of government, but the very ideals and objectives of the revolution itself. However, this describes a reductive interpretation of the seismic events, both within and outwith Russia, that were in train at this point.

Despite Trotsky’s determination to hold onto the belief in the catalyzing properties of October with regard to European and world revolution — which he shared with Lenin — by 1924 it was clear that the prospect of any such revolutionary outbreak in the advanced European economies had ended, and that socialism in Russia would have to be built, per Bukharin, “on that material which exists.”

Trotsky and Lenin’s faith in the European proletariat proved wrong, while Stalin’s skepticism in this regard proved justified. Returning to Isaac Deutscher:

“After four years of Lenin’s and Trotsky’s leadership, the Politbureau could not view the prospects of world revolution without skepticism… Stalin was not content with broad historical perspectives which seemed to provide no answer to burning, historical questions… extreme skepticism about world revolution and confidence in the reality of a long truce between Russia and the capitalist world were the twin premises of his [Stalin’s] socialism in one country.”

The five-year plans introduced by Stalin, beginning in 1928, were undertaken in conditions of absolute necessity in response to the gathering storms of war in the West: “We are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries,” Stalin declared in 1931. “We must make good this lag in ten years. Either we do it or they crush us.”

When it comes to those who cite the human cost of October and its aftermath as evidence of its unadulterated evil, no serious student of the history of Western colonialism and imperialism could possibly argue its equivalence when weighed on the scales of human suffering. Here Alain Badiou reminds us that “the huge colonial genocides and massacres, the millions of deaths in the civil and world wars through which our West forged its might, should be enough to discredit, even in the eyes of ‘philosophers’ who extol their morality, the parliamentary regimes of Europe and America.”

Ultimately, no revolution or revolutionary process ever achieves the ideals and vision embraced by its adherents at the outset. Revolutions advance and retreat under the weight of internal and external realities and contradictions, until arriving at the state of equilibrium that conforms to the limitations imposed by the particular cultural and economic constraints of the space and time in which they are made.

Though Martin Luther advocated the crushing of the Peasants Revolt led by Thomas Munzer, can anyone gainsay Luther’s place as one of history’s great emancipators? Likewise, while the French Revolution ended not with liberty, equality, fraternity, but Napoleon, who can argue that at Waterloo the Corsican general’s Grande Armee was fighting in the cause of human progress against the dead weight of autocracy and aristocracy represented by Wellington? In similar vein, Stalin’s socialism in one country and resulting five-year plans allowed the Soviet Union to overcome the monster of fascism in the 1940s.

This is why, in the last analysis, the fundamental metric of the October Revolution 1917 is the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942. And for that, whether it cares to acknowledge it or not, the world will forever be in its debt.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

Check out John’s Sputnik radio show, Hard Facts.