Reply of the International Relations Section of KKE to the letter of PCE-IU

To the CP of Spain

And the “United Left”


We read your letter which you had already published and in which you wonder on what the assessment of the article of our newspaper “Rizospastis”, which was published in the edition of 22nd November, is based on. The article reported in relation to the recent elections in Spain: “the United Left trapped voters in illusions for a “better management” of the capitalist system.”

It is a fact that the very participation of the CP of Spain in the presidium of the so-called “European Left Party” which in its founding documents has accepted the safeguarding of the “principles of the EU” and is based on positions which defend the management of capitalism is an answer on its own.

Nevertheless after your letter, it is necessary for us to open certain basic issues quoting only a few of many extracts which anyone could come across in the electoral programme of the “United Left” (ΙU), which substantiate and confirm the specific criticism of the article in our newspaper.

More specifically the programme of the ΙU:

-does not mention anywhere as a precondition for popular prosperity the overthrow of the power of capital and the construction of socialism. On the contrary, it fosters a series of illusions that there can be a pro-people way out of the crisis within the capitalist path of development.

The goal of the “good management” of the system is proclaimed very clearly on page 6 of the programme “… we do not renounce the management of the immediate.” Strategically this is substantiated on page 18 with the “construction of a new productive model”, but always supported on old, outdated exploitative capitalist relations of production. On page 6 there is not the goal of overthrowing capitalism but of “surpassing the current social, political and cultural model which is dominated by neo-liberalism.” In other words, your entire approach focuses the problem on a form ofcapitalist management (neo-liberalism) and is in favour of another, allegedly better management. This is, without beating about the bush, the core of the IU’s programme, which refers to social-democratic management.

– It projects the idea that the capitalist state can be a shield for the rights of the working class and the people. Against reality itself which proves that the capitalist state is a class state, serves the monopolies and even more so in conditions of the liberalization of capital decisively promotes barbarity in labour relations, salaries, it attacks every working class right.

-In the framework of the whitewashing of the capitalist state the programme makes the relevant reference on page 22: “we propose a participatory social state, where, maintaining the central character of the public sector, promotes the public interest, equality, solidarity…”

Along the same lines: “The state must bring back balance to the market, not only correct it.” The utopia is being fostered that the capitalist economy, the rotten capitalist system and its anarchy can allegedly be tamed, “be balanced” and that this could benefit the working people. This appeal undoubtedly causes confusion among the workers, impedes the attempt for militancy and moves in the direction of assimilating popular forces in the objectives of the forces of capital.

On page 7 there is a goal for: “the creation of employment by the public sector because today the enterprises have many difficulties in creating it without assistance.” At the time when the working class is being led to poverty and destitution, the programme of the IU expresses its… anxiety over the “many difficulties” which the capitalists have. In fact it legitimises their demands for fresh state money as a support which operates as a vehicle for cutting or/and abolishing unemployment benefits in the name of the “subsidy of labour” which is a principle of the EU, of which the IU is a firm supporter. Also there must be no doubt about the labour relations which will apply in this employment as the programme declares on page 7 using the terminology of the EU and the associations of industrialists: “the redistribution and rationalization of existing employment”. For the working class these mean that the IU gives the green light to the flexible working hours to the abolition of the collective bargaining agreements, and the generalization of part-time employment.

-The bourgeois and opportunist viewpoint concerning the capitalist crisis as being a debt crisis is reproduced, but the cause of the capitalist crisis is the over-accumulation of capital. The debt is projected as a problem which must concern the working class and the people for which it is not responsible and the plutocracy must pay for it.

Thus misleadingly it supports the position that the peoples have something to gain from the renegotiation of the debt and the issuance of bonds by the EU (page 18). Is this not management “quackery” for the impasses of the capitalist system? However, the Greek people have a bitter experience from the new loans which they are called on to pay as happened with the well-known haircut of 50%, as well as with the proposal of sections of the plutocracy for the issuance of bonds by the EU.

-Your programme is firmly oriented towards the support of the imperialist EU, which is an enemy of the people, and radiates concern about its salvation and “correction” and not its dissolution.

– It talks about the “complete change in the model of the EU construction” (page 17), about “commitment for a change of the current foreign policy(…) of the EU” without calling into question, even for a single moment, this interstate imperialist union and moreover without mentioning the need for a disengagement from the EU.

In addition, it completely legitimizes the criteria of Maastricht and the Stability Pacts, which constitute a lever for the promotion of the anti-workers’ policy through the proposal to “increase the time limit for the reduction of the debt to 3% until 2016” (page 18). It also declares compliance with the criteria of big capital in order to reduce further the price of the labour force.

-It refers that: “the EU must buy public debt of member states and issue bonds to the extent that it is necessary to prevent speculation” (page 18). It fosters the logic that the EU can take on a pro-people character and that there can be a way out from the crisis through the EU which will benefit the working class, the poor popular strata. At the same time it is well known that the EU was constructed by the bourgeois governments in order to defend the European monopolies in their international competition with the American, the Russian, the Japanese and the Chinese ones on the one hand and on the other to exploit in a more intense and coordinated way the working people, safeguarding the bourgeois power by means of new political and repressive mechanisms. This is the EU, a union that serves the monopolies! It cannot be corrected from within, because monopolies are its “cell” and the bourgeois power its “backbone”! The only positive prospect for the working people is the disengagement of the countries from this union, with the establishment of people’s power that will lead to the socialization of the basic means of production, to the central planning and the workers’ control. Only this power can relieve the people from the immense public debt for which it bears no responsibility.

-Your programme calls on the very EU to make an exception in the freedom of movement of capital between the member states and the tax havens (page 12). Consequently, it does not fight against the freedom of movement of capital as a whole (a fundamental principle of the Maastricht Treaty which is supported by the ELP and its presidium where the PCE participates) but asks for exceptions from the general rule which will definitely continue to exist and constitute a tool in the hands of capital for the demolition of the workers’ and people’s achievements and rights. Once again the proposals aim at the management and not at the overthrow of the capitalist barbarity.

– Moreover your programme beautifies capitalism and promotes the view that capital and its power which are based on the capitalist exploitation can allegedly become “moral” and “just”.

What else can the following position (page 51) be if not a description of an alleged “good management” of capitalism? “In case that the process of privatizations begin the IU commits to struggle against them in cooperation with trade unions and social movements, demanding that this decision is adopted at least in a transparent and democratic way through the substantial participation of the affected citizens”. Likewise on page 81 the goal for “compliance of trade agreements with human rights”. In other words, privatizations, capitalist trade agreements with … morality and transparency, a … moral capitalism which is possible according to the programme of the IU and the positions of the “European Left Party”.


The abovementioned are merely a sample of the positions that confirm the criticism of the newspaper of KKE. These positions have no relation to the struggle for the overthrow of the capitalist power. On the contrary, they provide an alibi to capitalism, they foster illusions and serve its perpetuation and actually in a period where more and more workers, toiling people are realizing its impasses and seek a way out from the capitalist barbarity.

This way out cannot be the so-called “socialism of the 21st century” which constitutes a denial of scientific socialism, of the workers’ power, of the socialization of the means of production and the central planning and in fact is a humanized capitalism which is impossible to exist.

Finally, in your letter to our party you also mention that “ it is time for the unity of the consistent left in order to converge”. The social democrat management line of a “humanized” capitalism, the denial of socialism which was constructed in the 20th century by means of antiscientific, anti-historical positions – this is the ideological political basis of the so called “unity of the left”. These choices erect obstacles to the class struggle, to the concentration of social, popular forces against the capitalist path of development. And this takes place in conditions that the coordinated activity of the working class, the self employed, the small and medium sized farmers, the women, the youth, becomes imperative so as to strengthen the people’s alliance and the struggle for the interests of the working people, for the overthrow of the power of the monopolies.

This line is also confirmed by our experience, by the development of the class struggle in Greece where, as it is well known, 22 general strikes, numerous multifaceted class confrontations were organized, with the PAME playing the leading role, based on the slogan “without you no cog can turn, worker, you can do without the bosses” and focusing on the organization of the struggle in the factories, in the workplaces.


In response to your request we will publish your letter and our reply to our newspaper “Rizospastis” so as to inform the workers about the positions of each party and enable them draw their own conclusions.

The International Relations Section of the CC of KKE