Revolutionary Initiative is reposting this piece from the (new) Communist Party of Italy [(n)PCI] for the significant questions and debates it raises concerning the reconstitution of genuine communist parties in the imperialist countries. The translation is not perfect, but none of its essentials points are lost in translation.
The (n)PCI has made some rather original contributions, if not creative developments, of MLM in the area of: (1) conceptualizing the nature of the state in the imperialist countries, which they refer to as the Preventive Counter-Revolutionary Regime; and (2) their understanding of Protracted People’s War, namely, its universal significance and its particularities as a strategy for revolution in the imperialist countries, which they refer to as Protracted Revolutionary People’s War..
This posting does not express an endorsement of the lines in this document, but rather an intention to more deeply explore the question of revolutionary strategy in the imperialist countries at a time when revolutionary communists are regrouping in the imperialist countries. The Revolutionary Communist Party of Canada / Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire (Canada) also upholds PPW as a strategy (click here and here for their documents on this debate) for the imperialist countries, but we believe that it is a rather distinct conception from the one upheld by the (n)PCI.
In unity and struggle, Revolutionary Initiative
Four main issues to be debated in the International Communist Movement
15 March 2010
(new) Communist Party of Italy
1. The issues we think important for carrying out the struggle for getting a higher unity in the International Communist Movement,
2. Our positions about those issues,
3. The documents in common languages (English, French, Spanish) where our position are explained in a thorough way.
Issues about which to carry out the discussion
The issues about which we think it is necessary to carry out the discussion in the ICM are four:
1. The evaluation of the communist movement (first wave of proletarian revolution and first socialist countries, crisis of the communist movement and modern revisionism, new birth of the communist movement on the basis of Marxism Leninism Maoism);
2. The theory of the (first and second) general crisis of capitalism in imperialist epoch and the connected developing revolutionary situation;
3. The regime of preventive counter-revolution established by the bourgeoisie in the imperialist countries;
4. The strategy of the protracted revolutionary people’s war.
The positions of the (new) Italian Communist Party about the four issues of the discussion.
1. The evaluation of the communist movement (first wave of proletarian revolution and first socialist countries, crisis of the communist movement and modern revisionism, new birth of the communist movement on the basis of Marxism Leninism Maoism, prospects of organization of the International Communist Movement).
1.1. The first wave of proletarian revolution and the first socialist countries.
We indicate as first wave of proletarian revolution the one that developed in the first part of last century, together with the development of the first general crisis of capitalism (see below: “The theory of (first and second) general crisis of capitalism in imperialist era and the connected developing revolutionary situation”). In short, the general crisis produces a developing revolutionary situation. It is a revolutionary situation in which the features described by Lenin protract and become more and more accentuated: so, it becomes easier for the communist party to build the process that brings the working class to seize the power. As a matter of fact, the developing revolutionary situation connected with the first general crisis of capitalism was marked by the seizure of power in Russia, China and elsewhere, that is by the creation of the first socialist countries, by the destruction of the colonial system, by the construction of communist parties practically in all the countries of the world and by great conquests of civilization and welfare wrung by people’s masses in the imperialist countries: in short by the first wave of proletarian revolution.
Evaluating this first wave of proletarian revolution and the history of the first socialist countries we need to put three questions to ourselves:
1. Why, during the first wave of world proletarian revolution, in the first part of latest century, the communist movement has not been able to establish socialism in any imperialist country
2. Why, after a first initial period of shining development and great victories, the first wave of word proletarian revolution lost the momentum and the driving force of human progress it had all over the world?
3. Why the first socialist countries, that had come to cover one third of humanity, after an initial period of great achievements, more and more slowed down, decayed until they collapsed or they changed side and anyway they lost the role of red base of world proletarian revolution they initially carried out?
1.1.1. Why, during the first wave of world proletarian revolution, in the first part of latest century, the communist movement has not been able to establish socialism in any imperialist country?
Communists distinguish themselves from other proletarians because they have a more advanced understanding of conditions, forms and effects of the class struggle and, on this basis, they drive it more and more onwards (Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848). When such understanding is not enough advanced, Communists act blindly. They do not necessarily have a wrong line: instinct and class ties can make up for their lack of understanding. Anyway in those cases they are taken by surprise by the real effects of their activity. Considering their whole activity, their successes in transforming reality and their defeats, we understand also the positive they did being unaware of it, and we learn to do it consciously, and so we can foresee the real effects and to build more advanced tasks on their base. During the first wave of proletarian revolution, the communist movements did blindly many positive tasks. Just because it worked blindly, it has neither been able to reap the fruits nor to make a universal use of some of them. The defeat we suffered obliges us to evaluate again its activity and to get a more advanced understanding of conditions, forms and effects of the struggle between proletariat and bourgeoisie.
The parties of the first Communist International failed to establish socialism in any imperialist country
1. because they had not a right conception of the nature of socialist revolution, so they had no scientific knowledge of the strategy to make the socialist revolution: the protracted revolutionary people’s war,
2. because they did not have a right conception of the general crisis that was going on.
They lacked the knowledge that the socialist revolution, unlike the bourgeois revolution and other revolutions occurred in the course of human history, is not something that breaks out, that Communists have to wait for or which they have to prepare themselves for by making propaganda, by mobilizing people’s masses in every country to make claiming struggles and by taking part in bourgeois political struggle, by organizing the working class and the rest of the masses in trade unions, in mass organizations and in the communist party. On the contrary, the socialist revolution is a process promoted and led by the communist party, campaign after campaign, during which the party strengthens and consolidates, collects and forms the revolutionary forces organizing the advanced elements of the working class and of other classes of people’s masses, as well as in its own ranks, in mass organizations which clump around the party (revolutionary front), and builds, extends and strengthens step by step a new direction on the broad masses, a new power which is opposed to that of the bourgeoisie and hugs him more and more in a vise until supplanting it, as a rule through a civil war unleashed by the bourgeoisie when it is with his back to the wall, grabbing the whole country and establishing socialism.
This process is the construction of the revolution and is the revolutionary people’s war in the imperialist countries. Facing the advancement of people’s war and the encirclement, the bourgeoisie normally reacts rousing civil war. In the imperialist countries the communist parties of the Communist International, not having a scientific conception of the revolutionary people’s war, could not respond adequately to the bourgeoisie when it threatened or roused the civil war: they retreated before it started (the most representative cases are France in the years of the Popular Front and after the Resistance, and Italy after the Resistance), or carried out the war in the wrong way and were defeated (the most representative case is Spain 1936-1939). We draw similar lessons also from the experience of Italy in the early ‘20s, of Germany and other European countries in the ‘20s and ‘30s.
The parties concerned did not have a scientific conception of the protracted revolutionary people’s war and, therefore, neither of their leadership role in this process, of their role of Staff of the working class. The awareness of being leaders of a protracted revolutionary people’s war would lead them to enhance even reformists’ struggles, to exploit the antagonistic contradiction between reformists and fascists, to exploit the contradictions within the ruling class, to build the revolutionary front of people’s masses, to put the foundation for building the revolutionary armed forces in various countries as soon as they had the right conditions. The awareness of being leaders of a protracted revolutionary people’s war would lead them to give top priority to clandestine activity, to constitute themselves as clandestine parties or anyway become clandestine on their own initiative. They maintained instead a simplistic and subordinate conception of the clandestine activity, such as an activity pending or in preparation for the clash that would take place when the revolution had broken out, or else for the attempts of insurrection that the communist parties made without considering the concrete situations and then failing. They did not have the initiative and then gave a free hand to the initiative of the bourgeoisie that stroke them in advance, breaking his own law, decimating the ranks of political parties, arrested and sent to death their main leaders (Gramsci, Thälmann).
Ultimately, the concerned parties had a mechanistic conception of the revolution (as something that happens thanks to factors external to us) and not dialectical materialistic (as something that happens thanks to our subjective action if it corresponds to the laws of reality).
The Russian Communist Party acted essentially blindly, although in general it followed a right line and then managed to seize power and build the first and most powerful socialist country, the USSR. The Chinese Communist Party developed the theory of protracted revolutionary people’s war strategy only in the 30s. The science of protracted revolutionary people’s war is one of the five main contributions of Maoism to communist thinking.
Which was the strategy of the parties of the first Communist International for the conquest of power in the imperialist countries?
In fact, the communist parties of the imperialist countries were lacking a strategy and ranged between attempts of insurrection and waiting for breaking out a revolution which by its nature could not break out. Or they reduced socialist revolution to an insurrection roused by the party or they were convinced that the socialist revolution would start from a revolt of people’s masses determined by worsening of their material conditions.
Now, the insurrections roused by the communist parties failed regularly. The only insurrections roused by the communist parties that were successful were those they roused as particular battles within a war already in progress.
In the second case, the revolt would not have been determined by the communist party: the communist party, which until then had developed mass organizations and made propaganda, would have taken the direction of the revolt. Communist parties supported, promoted, organized and directed the claiming struggles of the working class and of the other classes of people’s masses on one side (trade unions), and on the other they were making propaganda of socialism and were involved in bourgeois politics as the leftmost among the parties involved in this struggle. But these two policies were separated between themselves, that is to say they were not specifically and consciously combined in a strategy for seizing power step by step in a relationship of war with the class enemy. They were not consciously combined firstly to make bourgeoisie’s life impossible and then to tackle successfully the civil war that the bourgeoisie would rouse. So even when and where they were efficiently carried out and produced effects that subverted the existing political order, they did not make the communist party able to get strong positions to withstand the class enemy when it roused the civil war against communist and popular forces.
The separation between the support of the claims of the masses and the propaganda of socialism instead generated in the party two unilateral, opposite and complementary trends: economism and dogmatism. These two deviations then prevented the communist parties from producing an effective strategy for the conquest of power, and persist today in Marxist Leninist parties as the main obstacles to the new birth of the communist movement.
1.1.2. Why, after a first initial period of shining development and great victories, has the first wave of word proletarian revolution lost the momentum and the driving force of human progress it had all over the world?
The first wave of world proletarian revolution lost momentum and driving force of human progress that it had
1. because the communist movement failed to advance in the imperialist countries, that is it failed to transform any of them in a socialist country,
2. because, for this reason and for internal reasons, the socialist countries declined until the majority of them collapsed or changed sides.
In the communist parties and in the international communist movement the left wing (the members most resolutely dedicated to the cause of the revolution) was unable to successfully cope with their responsibilities: this allowed the right wing (the members more susceptible to bourgeoisie’s influence, the modern revisionists) to take the leadership of communist parties and of the International Communist Movement and to bring it to ruin.
Some comrades insist on believing that communist parties are monolithic. This would be the only one known exception to the contradictory nature of reality, acknowledged by the dialectical materialist conception of the world. In reality, experience shows that the bourgeoisie exerts its influence in the communist movement (and that the communist movement exerts its influence within the bourgeoisie and the clergy). In any communist party, its members and its instances are distinguished among them by the different degrees in which are influenced by the bourgeoisie, by varying degree of understanding of reality (contradiction between true and false), by the different sensitivity to the new (contradiction between new and old). The quantity turns into quality and in every party, stage by stage, there is always a left (which pushes forward) and a right (which hampers). Normally the two wings cooperate and complement each other, in every movement or transformation. In some circumstances, the contradiction between the two rival wings becomes antagonistic: then the left must expel the irreducible right, otherwise the party declines and degenerates. The science of struggle between the two lines in the party is one of the five main contributions of Maoism to communist thinking.
1.1.3. Why did the first socialist countries, that had come to cover one third of humanity, after an initial period of great achievements, more and more slow down, decay until they collapsed or change side and anyway lose the role of red base of world proletarian revolution they initially carried out?
The analytic evaluation of the first socialist countries: struggle between two lines in socialism or bureaucratic degeneration?
According to some comrades, the decline of the first socialist countries was due to the fact that they degenerated into bureaucratic societies. Why did they degenerate? What can we do about it? They do not explain it, because their conception is groundless. It is a wrong argument that substantially converges with semi-anarchist and anti-communist positions of Trotskyites. In fact, for a certain period no socialist country (as no communist party) could do without a bureaucracy, that is professional officers, distinct from the rest of the masses for their professional preparation, responsible for carrying out functions of management and other direction functions until and to the extent the mass organizations will not be able to carry out them by themselves. The assumption of these tasks by the masses is a goal of socialism, but its achievement will require some time and will mean the extinction of the state as an institution separate from the rest of society and that has a monopoly of violence, then the extinction of the division of society into classes: so when that goal will be achieved, we shall be in a communist society. The establishment of socialism does not abolish at once the contradiction between who manages and who is directed , between intellectual work and manual labor, between organizational and executive work, between men and women, between adults and young, between city and countryside, between advanced and backward sectors, regions and countries. These are seven major differences and contradictions that can and should be removed in every country and the world, only in stages after the establishment of socialism, during the transition to communism, during the socialist phase. In essence this is what Marx says it in his Critique of Gotha Program (1875). The experience clearly shows that, in the history of the first socialist countries, the socialist state and the mass organizations formed two poles of a contradictory unity and that the class struggle concerned the very line with which the Communist Party dealt with this contradiction.
Some comrades insist on doing a wrong analysis of of the first socialist countries, an analysis contradicted by the experience and sterile. According to these comrades, “in the new society for a long period there are still classes: the working class and peasant workers closely allied to each other, but there are also the remains of ousted and expropriated classes. Throughout this period, these residues together with elements that degenerate and oppose socialist construction, strive to regain power. Because of this, class struggle will continue to exist in socialist society “(Enver Hoxha, Imperialism and Revolution, 1978, pp. 268 of the French edition, T####a 1979). Experience shows a completely different course of events. In all of the first socialist countries, the restoration of capitalism has been promoted by a large and prominent part of the communist party. In the first socialist countries the bourgeoisie consisted of those leaders of the party, of the State and of the mass organizations who wholly or partly opposed to the steps necessary and possible to overcome those contradictions. This is quite obvious, given the nature of socialist society and the contradictions which animate its development, but it has not been easy to understand. The class analysis of socialist society is one of the five main contributions of Maoism to communist thinking.
Then in the socialist society, the struggle was not between whether or not a bureaucracy has to exist, the question on which Trotskyites and anarchists focus their attention, but on the line the party followed, that Maoism and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution of the Chinese people put at the center of attention. Throughout the first phase of the existence of the first socialist countries, the bureaucracy, well-directed by the communist party, has made an excellent and essential work on behalf of socialism.
The withdrawal of the first socialist countries began with the prevalence of the right line in the two lines struggle within the communist parties who directed both the State (consisting of officials, and so the bureaucracy) and the mass organizations. The left line was opposed to the right one implementing steps in the construction of socialism, while the right line gave or supported bourgeois solutions to the problems of development of socialist society. Progresses achieved in the construction of socialism, in the relations of production (ownership of productive forces, relations between workers in the labor process, product distribution), in the rest of social relations (politics, law, culture, etc.), in the conception, in the consciousness of men and women, were the changes that moved socialist countries away from capitalism and pre-capitalist modes of production and brought them to Communism. They are listed in the Manifest Program of the (new) Italian Communist Party, chap. 1.7.4 (http://www.nuovopci.it/eile/en/in080619.html).
The left line prevailed throughout the first phase, for the Soviet Union from the October Revolution until the prevalence of the revisionists in 1956; for the democracies of Eastern and Central Europe from 1945 to 1956; for the People’s Republic of China from 1950 to 1976. The first stage was followed by a second one, marked by the conquest of the directions of parties by the revisionists and by their attempts to restore capitalism gradually and peacefully (for the USSR and the Eastern and Central European democracies from 1956 to the end of the 80s, for the Republic of China since 1976 and is still going on). A third phase, begun in the USSR and in People’s Democracies in Eastern Europe in the late 80s and still going, is marked by the will to restore capitalism at any cost, and then by a violent and destructive confrontation between the classes.
1.2. Crisis of the communist movement and modern revisionism
Why have modern revisionists managed to take the leadership of the communist movement and take it off road?
The modern revisionists have managed to take the leadership of the communist movement because the left wing of the communist parties had insufficient understanding of the conditions, forms and effects of class struggle. The parties acted blindly.
The left wing had not a scientific understanding of the general crises of capitalism typical of the period of its decadence, that is of the imperialist epoch (general crisis for absolute overproduction of capital). It continued to reason on the basis of Marx’s analysis about the cyclical crisis of the first half of the nineteenth century (The Capital Vol. 1), even if Engel, already in the preface to the 1886 English edition of that volume of The Capital, indicated that those decennial cyclical crises had been supplanted by a long depression.
The left wing had no scientific knowledge of the strategy for the conquest of power in the imperialist countries (protracted revolutionary people’s war).
The left wing had not a correct understanding of the political regime of the imperialist countries (regime of preventive counter-revolution).
The left wing had a mistaken analysis of class composition and class struggle in socialist countries.
In the stage before World War II, the communist parties of the imperialist countries acted blindly and constantly ranged between sectarian confrontation and opportunist conciliation, between dogmatic sectarianism and unprincipled collaboration, between struggle without unity and unity without struggle. In general, they gave a rightist interpretation (“all through the front”) of the line drawn by Anti-fascist Popular Front elaborated by the Communist International.
Since the end of World War II, the left wing could not provide adequate solutions to the problems that the situation put on in the agenda.
The right wing of the communist movement (the modern revisionists) had an easy time, facilitated by the force of tradition and by the support of reactionary forces, in imposing a reformist line, where the communist party acted as the left wing of a political alliance directed by the left wing of the imperialist bourgeoisie and the working class renounced to seize the power.
After the modern revisionists had taken the direction, the left wing opposed them, both within and outside the communist parties, in a dogmatic way, without a correct understanding of the reason of its defeat by modern revisionists, of the reason why the revisionists have had the upper hand on the left wing and had taken the leadership of the communist movement. It only raised the banner of the restoration of the principles of Marxism-Leninism that the modern revisionists were repudiating and condemned the betrayal of the cause of socialist revolution by them: it veered into dogmatism. This position of the left wing destroys the confidence in our cause and paralyzes the revolutionary spirit: in fact, nothing and no one can guarantee that sooner or later a leader does not betray, nothing can prevent the bourgeoisie from exerting some influence in our ranks. The left wing came to adopt a conception of the world individualistic or even clerical, anyway not Marxist, not dialectical materialist. They are not the individuals who make history. Depending on the cases, they may betray or be heroically dedicated to the cause. Who today is a hero, tomorrow can become a traitor and vice versa. Individuals change, for better or for worse. Parties change: they either progress or regress. The masses led by the Communist Party make history. The effectiveness of the leadership of the party depends on the conception that guides it and by the line it implements. It is the struggle within the party which prevents the influence of the bourgeoisie from strengthening beyond certain limits, which makes the conception of the world and the party line advance, which develops the revolutionary character of the party and its link with the masses.
The left wing missed some fundamental contribution of Maoism, that is the scientific knowledge of the mass line as a primary method of direction and work of communist parties, the two lines struggle in the communist parties, the nature of classes in socialist countries, as well as the strategy the protracted revolutionary people’s war. These contributions are still missing by organizations that do not take Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the third and higher stage of communist thinking and by the organizations taking it in a dogmatic, abstract and formal way (as in Italy, Proletari Comunisti that even call themselves Maoist Communist Party).
1.3. New birth of the communist movement on the basis of MLM
The evaluation of the first wave of proletarian revolution and the establishment of the strategy that the communist parties must follow to successfully promote and guide the second wave of the proletarian revolution can be summed up in the conception of the world designated by the term Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. The main contributions of Mao to this conception are the five mentioned in the article about the Eighth Discriminating Factor (2002) [The eighth discriminating factor in EILE http://www.nuovopci.it, translated in English, Spanish, French, see below in “Texts” Section]: the protracted revolutionary people’s war as universal strategy of the proletarian revolution, however to be applied under the particular conditions of each country, the revolution of new democracy as a particular strategy of the oppressed semi-feudal countries in the world imperialist system, the class struggle in socialist society based on the seven major contradictions that socialist society has to deal with, the mass line as the primary method of work and direction of the communist party, the two lines struggle in the communist party as a principle for the development of the party and for his defense from bourgeoisie’s influence.
1. The protracted revolutionary people’s war
The protracted revolutionary people’s war is the strategy that we Communists of the imperialist countries have to follow for leading the working class to establish the dictatorship of the proletariat, to begin the phase of socialist transformation of society and to contribute to the second wave of world proletarian revolution.
2. The new democratic revolutions
The new democratic revolutions are the strategy of Communists in neocolonial countries oppressed by imperialism, where the bourgeois revolution (the abolition of the relations of personal dependence and the dominance of commodity production) for the essence has not yet been accomplished.
3. The class struggle in socialist society
In socialist society, the bourgeoisie consists of leaders of the party, of the state and of other social institutions that support the road to capitalism.
4. The mass line
The mass line is the main method of work and direction of every communist party. It combines the autonomy of the party from the masses and its link with them in dialectical unity. It consists of collecting the scattered and confuse elements of knowledge that exist among the masses and their aspirations, of elaborating them so that we obtain goals, guidelines, methods and criteria that we bring to the masses until they make them their own and implement them. In this new situation, the process repeats itself: we select the scattered and confused elements of knowledge and the aspirations of the masses, we elaborate them obtaining from it objectives, guidelines, methods and criteria that we propose to the masses because they make them their own and implement them. By repeating this process over and over again, each time Communists’ conceptions become richer and more concrete and the revolutionary process proceeds to victory. Seen from another angle, in each group the mass line consists of identifying the left wing (i.e. the part whose tensions, if implemented, will lead the group to flow in the channel of socialist revolution), the center and right wings, of mobilizing and organizing the left so that it could be able to unite the center with itself and isolate the right.
5. The two lines struggle in the party
The two lines struggle in the party is the principle for the development of the communist party and for its defense from bourgeoisie’s influence. The principle corresponds to the law of dialectical materialism according to which the contradiction is in all things and governs their development. The development of the communist party is governed by the contradiction between advanced and backward, between new and old, between true and false, and by the contradiction between the interests of the working class and the influence of the bourgeoisie in the communist party itself. The two lines struggle is therefore not only debate in the search for the right path, but also a reflection of the war between the classes within the party. In this aspect it can become antagonistic.
To think that the party is impervious to bourgeoisie’s influence, or that such influence can still be resolved primarily or even only with organizational measures, as instruments of control within it (Control Commission, etc.) and of closing outwards (standards of recruitment, etc.), and so to think that the party is an entity not inherently contradictory, is wrong. In the historical experience this conception did not serve to preserve communist parties from degeneration. On the contrary, it has even facilitated the influence of the bourgeoisie in the parties that believed themselves immune.
Some comrades objected the “theory of three worlds” to Maoism. The theory of three worlds is certainly a non-Marxist theory, which has had a negative role in the history of the communist movement and served to the right wing of the Chinese Communist Party for pushing through its program of introduction of capitalism in China (the “four modernizations”, etc.) in order to make China an imperialist power. As far as we know, it was stated for the first time publicly in April 1974, in UN General Assembly Special Session on Raw Materials and Development by Teng Hisao-ping, declared leader of the right wing of the Chinese Communist Party, rehabilitated in April 1973 and dismissed again by each office in the Party and State in April 1976.
It is doubtful that this theory has been formulated by Mao Tse-tung: even Enver Hoxha did not dare to say it , while reproaching Mao this theory. However, even if it was drafted by Mao, this bourgeois theory does not invalidate the positive and essential contribution that Maoism has given to communist thinking, to which that theory is completely foreign. To say that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is the third higher stage of communist thinking, does not imply to state that Mao, Lenin or Marx did not commit errors, that they never stated mistaken theories, to hold that these great leaders of the communist movement were infallible. It would be a concept completely alien to dialectical materialism. The main contributions of Maoism to the communist thinking are the five clearly illustrated in the above-mentioned article On the Eighth Discriminating Factor (2002). They are essential for the revival of the communist movement.
1.4. Prospects of organization of the International Communist Movement.
Why does the new birth of the communist movement progress so slowly?
The communist movement has not yet embraced the notion that the revolution does not breaks out, but has to be built as Engels already stated in 1895 in the Introduction to Class Struggles in France from 1848 to 1850. Both in the time of Second International and in the time of the Communist International most of the parties waiting for the revolution to break out developed activities supporting claiming struggles or propaganda of socialism. From this there arose the two wrong tendencies that still persist as the major elements that put a check on the new birth of the communist movement, that is economism and dogmatism.
We share the conception expressed by Frederick Engels, who stated that socialist revolution cannot consist of a popular uprising that breaks out because a combination of circumstances, during which the most advanced party seizes the power. As we have already told in various parts of this document, the socialist revolution is a protracted revolutionary people’s war led by the communist Party one campaign after another, during which the communist party strengthens and consolidates, collects and forms the revolutionary forces organizing the advanced elements of the working class and of the other classes of the popular masses, as well as in its own ranks, in mass organizations which clump around the party (revolutionary front), and builds, extends and strengthens step by step a new direction on broad popular masses, a new power which is opposed to that of the bourgeoisie and hugs him in a growing vise until it supplants it, as a rule through a civil war roused by the bourgeoisie when it is with its back on the wall, grabs the whole country and establishes socialism. This strategy of socialist revolution is confirmed by the evaluation of the experience of the first wave of proletarian revolution in the imperialist countries.
The prospects of organization of the International Communist Movement are closely linked to the new birth of the communist movement. This will certainly occur as we shall overcome in our ranks dogmatism and economism that in each country prevent the communist movement from playing the role only it can play in the turmoil of the terminal phase of the second general crisis in which the masses are involved everywhere. The struggle to overcome dogmatism and economism in the International Communist Movement is the struggle for its reorganization. The efforts to reorganize the International Communist Movement or anyway to promote its new birth by means and initiatives mainly or only organizational are unfruitful. The discussion that we want to lead is a component of the struggle to reorganize the International Communist Movement and to found the second Communist International.
2. The theory of the (first and second) general crisis of capitalism in imperialist epoch and the connected developing revolutionary situation.
The most recent and concise exposition of the ongoing general crisis that we have is the following article (The interpretation of the nature of current crisis decides communist parties’ activity) by Nicola P., member of the editorial staff of the magazine La voce del (n) PCI, for the International Newsletter of the International Conference of Marxist Leninist Parties and Organizations. The article echoes many themes discussed in this document tying them to the phenomenon of general crisis.
The globalization of production of commodities and of financial activity is an effect of the general crisis. Every general crisis has produced a general step on in globalization, as well as greater political and cultural unity of the world, the world wars, etc. Absolute overproduction of capital has unleashed capitalists to bustle as beasts of prey, each one trying to make the entire world his hunting grounds and territory of looting and robbery. It is the way by which it affirms the unity of the human species within the capitalist relations of production. It is a presupposition of communist society of which the communist movement has to guide the construction. It implies the international nature of the socialist revolution that anyway is still national in its form. The proletarian revolution is international for its content: Communism can succeed only as a conquest of all humanity. But the socialist revolution is the combination of the conquest of power in single countries by the proletariat organized and guided by its organized vanguard and of starting the social transition in single countries.
The interpretation of the nature of current crisis decides communist parties’ activity (article by Nicola P.)
It is very important, indeed it is essential that we correctly understand the nature of the current crisis. In the 11th of the Theses on Feuerbach (1845), Marx says: “Philosophers have only given different interpretations of the world. But the question is to transform it.” On the other side, in the Communist Party’s Manifesto (1848) Marx says that Communists are distinguished from other proletarians because they have a more advanced understanding of the conditions, forms and results of class struggle and, on this basis, they keep pushing it forward (Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848). The interpretation of the world is not the goal of us Communists. Our goal is the transformation of the world. But people need to represent to themselves, to have an idea of what they do. The socialist revolution is not something instinctive. Lenin strongly taught (What has to be done?) that the theory that guides the communist movement does not at all arise spontaneously from experience. It has to be elaborated by the Communists who, for this purpose, have to use the most sophisticated tools of knowledge that humanity has. The Communists took it to the working class that, for the position it occupies in capitalist society, is especially predisposed to assimilate and to take it as a guide for its actions. The practical communist movement can grow beyond a basic level only if it is guided by a revolutionary theory. Our action to transform the world, other things being equal, it is all the more effective the more just and advanced is our understanding of the world. Only with a fairly good understanding of the nature of the crisis which we are involved in, we can make the socialist revolution, and the second wave of the proletarian revolution will bring humanity to finally overcome capitalism, to build socialism all over the world on the way towards Communism.
The way we interpret the world has a great importance for our political purposes. It influences our political activities, making them more or less effective. It is therefore necessary that we Communists take the time and attention needed to test and improve our understanding of the current crisis.
Even today many Communists interpret the current crisis by transposing in the present the interpretation Marx gave of the crises of the capitalist countries in the first part of the nineteenth century, as if the current crisis would be of the same kind of decennial cyclical crises described by Marx, as if it would be like those with the only difference that now is global. This attitude is one of the manifestations of dogmatism that still rages in the communist movement and makes much of its activity fruitless and its action inconclusive. The cyclical crises described by Marx in the 1st book of The Capital are over. Already in 1886 preface to the English edition of the 1st book of The Capital Engels pointed out that the latest of the cyclical crises of capitalism, the latest crisis of the same nature of those described by Marx, occurred in 1867 and that capitalist countries since 1873 were instead entered into a long and painful depression of which in 1886 they still did not see the end.
The cyclical crises belong to the epoch of pre-imperialist capitalism, when economic relations were characterized by free competition between many capitals. They were economic crises. They were determined by the anarchical proceeding of business and the solution of those crises was coming from the same economic movement of capitalist society. The fall of the business also created the conditions for their resumption. Not by chance the crises were cyclical, and the cycle lasted about a decade. When the imperialist phase began, on one hand the capitalist societies equipped themselves with large-scale systems and organisms that attenuated the amplitude of cyclical fluctuations of business: the Antithetical Forms of Social Unity, which Marx already described in the Grundrisse. On the other hand, the general crises of capitalism began. These are crises that have their basis in absolute overproduction of capital. Marx explains what this is in chapter 15 of the 3rd book of The Capital: the capitalists have accumulated too much capital and in the existing political context they can no longer continue to accumulate and increase in value all it by producing commodities. The political and social context must be disrupted and replaced by another. It is only by this political and cultural upheaval that the general solution of the crisis comes. The solution does not come either by the anarchist movement of business, or by economic measures the governments and other social institutions could take. So the economic crisis becomes political and cultural.
The long depression mentioned by Engels in his preface of 1886 brought the major powers to divide the world among them and introduced the world in the imperialist phase of capitalism: the epoch in which economic the economic relations are no longer characterized by free competition between many capitalists, but by the dominance of monopolies in the production of commodities and by the dominance of financial capital on the capital employed in the production of commodities. It is the epoch in which capitalism has exhausted its civilizing role and became a parasite. In the capitalist countries, the bourgeoisie is politically allied and combined with the residual feudal forces (in Europe especially with the Catholic Church). In the political and cultural field it has become undemocratic, reactionary, militaristic and repressive. In the colonies it combined with the feudal forces and divided the world into imperialist and oppressed countries.
The very first real general crisis of the imperialist epoch took place in the first half of last century. It brought humanity to the two world wars and created the long revolutionary situation which covered the entire first part of last century. All around the world it was a period of instability of political regimes. In its ambit, it developed the first wave of world proletarian revolution that created the first socialist countries and spread communist movement all over the world.
One of the main reasons why the communist movement did not succeed to establish socialism in the imperialist countries and then to put a definitive end to capitalism consists exactly in the inadequate understanding of the nature of the general crisis in progress and its economic foundations by the communist parties of the imperialist countries. Despite Lenin and Stalin’s discoveries and teachings, substantially in the imperialist countries the parties of the Communist International remained anchored in the interpretation that Marx had given of the cyclical economic crises that the capitalist countries crossed in the first part of the nineteenth century. All the analyses of E.S. Varga, the greatest economist of the Communist International, remain in that ambit. They describe the fluctuations in the economic movement, not the long-term general phenomenon, still less the resulting political and cultural crisis and from which the resolution of the general crisis comes. The communist parties of the imperialist countries were not able then to carry out their work despite their large growth, the heroism of millions of their members and their historic commitment to the successful struggle against fascism. The imperialist bourgeoisie managed to maintain the direction of the imperialist countries. Thanks to the turmoil produced by the two world wars and related social, political and cultural movements, it was able to start again the accumulation of capital and develop new large-scale commodity production for several decades (1945-1975). The thrust the first wave of proletarian revolution impressed to the progress of humanity diminished instead almost to extinction. Modern revisionism took the direction of the communist movement, corroded and disrupted it on a large scale, made the first socialist countries regress, brought them to ape the imperialist countries and depend on them, until they collapsed. The struggle the Communists led by Mao at the head of the Chinese Communist Party opposed to modern revisionism and its destructive work did not serve to arrest the decline of the communist movement. Anyway, in particular thanks to the Great Cultural Proletarian Revolution, it gave great teachings to all the Communists who were able to get them. Thanks to them the communist movement is born again all over the world, struggling against dogmatism and economism that still restrain its momentum and its rebirth.
The capitalist world has entered its second general crisis since the 70s of last century. Capitalism could not escape the absolute overproduction of capital: it is the limit to development, the limit inherent to capitalism itself. Capitalism is unavoidably bound to bump into this limit. It took only thirty years after the Second World War for the bourgeoisie to find itself again facing a general crisis, but in the new conditions created by the first wave of proletarian revolution and its decline. It had accumulated too much capital and cannot continue to accumulate and increase it all in value producing goods and services in the political and social context created during the first general crisis, having accumulated too much capital and not being able to continue to accumulate and increase it all in value producing goods, in the political and social context created during the first general crisis, but in the new conditions created by the first wave of proletarian revolution and its decline. The inclusion in the global imperialist system of most of the first socialist countries, particularly China and Russia, has partially changed the situation but has not fundamentally altered the course of events. For the first time, the environmental crisis added to the general crisis of capitalism and the two crises together determine the objective conditions in which the rebirth of the communist movement develops and the second wave of proletarian revolution advances throughout the world. It will continue to advance, because mankind is a species provided with intelligence. During the millennia of its evolution from a state similar to that of other animal species to its current state, it has been able to solve all the problems of its survival. Today has the material, moral and intellectual means to overcome capitalism and establish socialism, and to end the devastation produced by capitalism and definitely improve the natural conditions of the Planet. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is the revolutionary conception of the world that guides the new birth of the communist movement. Only through this conception the communist parties can transform themselves and grow until they will be equal to the tasks they have to carry out.
A just and adequate understanding of the nature and causes of the new general crisis and of the conditions of its solution is essential to form communist parties adequate to the glorious tasks of this phase. So, it is essential a right analysis of the experience of the 160-years history of the communist movement and in particular of the experience of the first wave of proletarian revolution and of the first socialist countries. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is this. That is why the fight for his assertion is the main aspect of proletarian internationalism. The main help that every communist party can give to others, is to contribute to the understanding, assimilation and assertion of the right theory of general crisis and the right analysis of the communist movement, so that each party could draw the right conclusions for constructing the socialist revolution in his country taking into account its particular characteristics, and so contributing to the common task of the world proletarian revolution.
One of the most important conclusions is that socialist revolution by its nature is not a popular uprising that breaks out and where the Communist Party, which was well prepared for the event, avails itself of the opportunity to seize the power and establish socialism. The socialist revolution is not an event that breaks out, as determined by the worsening economic and social conditions, by the suffering which the bourgeoisie imperialist constrains to the mass of the population, by the propaganda of the communist parties and by the organization of the popular masses. Communists waiting for the socialist revolution to break out will be disappointed again and again, today as they were in the past. Some will even draw reactionary conclusions: they will impute to masses’ backwardness and cowardice, to oppressed classes’ nature what is mainly due to communist parties’ backwardness. Already in 1895, in the Introduction to Class Struggles in France from 1848 to 1850 Engels pointed out that, unlike the bourgeois revolution, the socialist revolution by its nature does not breaks out, but it must be built by the communist party. As Lenin and Stalin (Principles of Leninism) taught, by constructing large mass organizations of the working class and other classes of the masses, the Second International (1889-1914) contributed to the construction of the socialist revolution. But most of the parties that composed it were not guided by a correct conception of the world, particularly regarding the general crisis of capitalism, the protracted revolutionary situation it generated and the nature of the socialist revolution. They expected that the socialist revolution broke out rather than building it one phase after another, one campaign after another, as a revolutionary people’s war that leads to the establishment of socialism in every country, and then, in combination with the other countries, to the world proletarian revolution. They instead assume as their sole or at least their main task the mobilization of the masses into claiming struggles, their cultural organization and their participation in the bourgeois political struggle, convinced that doing so they were preparing themselves to “seize the opportunity” of the revolution that would break out. In the imperialist countries the parties of the Communist International (1919-1943, but actually dissolved in 1956) have traced the same way, to a higher level of organization and international links. Many communist parties, especially in the imperialist countries, are still stagnant at this conception of their duties and that the very experience of the first wave of proletarian revolution has proved to be inadequate. Economism and dogmatism are the main restraint to the new birth of the communist movement. In fact, what the leaders do not understand, in their way the masses, especially the advanced workers, feel: in fact they do not join the efforts of dogmatic and economist new parties (even if these parties in all honesty claim themselves revolutionary, Marxist-Leninist and even Maoist) to follow the path that the experience has already shown to be disastrous.
In 2008, with the financial crisis began in the USA, the second general crisis has entered its terminal phase. Even in the richest imperialist countries (in USA. and EU) a growing number of workers, millions and millions of them, are thrown into the street and add to the huge mass of hundreds of millions of workers in the oppressed countries against which for decades the imperialist bourgeoisie has been leading an undeclared war of extermination on a large scale in every corner of the world. The imperialist states cannot afford to endlessly expand unemployment benefits and other social security cushions because their budget deficits, the loans they take out and their debts further disrupt monetary and financial system, whose instability and crashes they instead should remedy, because a stable financial and monetary system is the condition and the support of their whole world. Then the terminal phase may not extend for long.
Given the nature of the current crisis, it does not admit a way out done only of economic measures. It is not enough that the states should create conditions to suggest to the capitalists more profit in the production of goods rather than in financial speculation: this is the solution advocated by the moderate bourgeois right. Nor it is enough that the States distribute monetary income to the classes that will surely spend it for consumption: it is a solution supported by the bourgeois left and by the Communists who think that the current crisis is of the same kind of the cyclical crises of the nineteenth century and then apparently, denying evidence, believe also that the general crisis of the first part of last century has been resolved thanks to the Keynesian policies of the bourgeois state.
We can go out of the current crisis only by a political and cultural upheaval, creating a different social context. Basically in the next future there are two and only two ways out, in every single country and internationally.
Or the revolutionary mobilization of the popular masses led by the communist parties equal to their tasks, namely, by parties who dare to think that the socialist revolution is possible and understand that it is Communists’ task to build it campaign after campaign, as a protracted revolutionary people’s war until the establishment of socialism.
Or the reactionary mobilization of the masses. In fact, also the imperialist bourgeoisie and other reactionary classes are looking for a way out of the current situation. They need it and will have it unless we stop them in time. In short, for bourgeois groups determined to halt the revolutionary mobilization and to prevent the disappearance of their world, the only feasible and realistic way to end the crisis is to mobilize that part of the masses they are able to mobilize under their direction for throwing it against the rest of the masses and drag it all to plunder the rest of the world: the imperialist war. It would be the continuation by other means of the politics that they lead today. The environmental crisis and the general crisis of capitalism combine to provide to the more far-sighted, more resolute, more adventurous and more criminal bourgeois groups adequate excuses to mobilize masses against masses, countries against countries, a coalition against another.
The interpretation we give to the crisis is therefore a decisive factor. The new Italian Communist Party calls the Communists all around the world, but particularly those of the imperialist countries, to join a true conception of the current crisis and of our tasks.
3. The regime of preventive counter-revolution established by the bourgeoisie in the imperialist countries.
The regime of preventive counter-revolution is the system of social relations through which the bourgeoisie still preserves its dominance in our and other imperialist countries. It was created for the first time by the US imperialist bourgeoisie at the beginning of last century in order to deal with the communist movement in the USA and has been successful because of the limits of American and International Communist Movement. After the Second World War, the bourgeoisie has extended it to all the imperialist countries as a means to help the right wing to gain and maintain the leadership in the communist movement and taking advantage of the fact that the communist movement give up to establish socialism. The bourgeoisie keeps alive this regime as long as is effective, that is, until it is able to stop the growth of consciousness and organization of the masses beyond the limits compatible with its own dominance. When it is no longer able to do this, the bourgeoisie resorts to reactionary mobilization of the masses, that is fascism, terror, civil war and war. The worsening of the second general crisis, the beginning of terminal phase of the second general crisis of capitalism and the decline of global hegemony of U.S.A and of the European imperialist powers are destroying the regimes of preventive counterrevolution. Anyway, in the imperialist countries the power of the bourgeoisie ultimately relies mainly on its hegemony rather than on repression and weapons and no one can rule permanently these countries if the workers of capitalist firms are actively resistant to its power. Then the communist parties of the imperialist countries, in building the socialist revolution, that is in promoting and directing the protracted revolutionary people’s war that will establish socialism, today must lever both on the existence of the regime of preventive counter-revolution and on its ongoing dissolution: in short, on the struggle between the revolutionary and the reactionary mobilization of the masses. Which one will prevail is not yet decided. If reactionary mobilization would prevail, the objective conditions of our struggle will completely change and we should reset our work. The argument that the bourgeoisie in the imperialist countries has already introduced a “modern fascism” is a theory developed by the bourgeois left wing (which actually it has already been put aside, has already been defeated) and adopted by some groups and communist organizations (in Italy by Proletari Comunisti). It is a thesis that paralyzes revolutionary activity.
The communist parties of the imperialist countries must therefore understand the nature and origin of the regimes of preventive counter-revolution, both to make a just evaluation of past experience (why did we not even establish socialism in an imperialist country) and to direct their actions today rightly.
Which are the universal features of regimes of preventive counterrevolution?
In the regime of preventive counter-revolution the bourgeoisie combines five lines of action (five pillars that hold together each regime of preventive counter-revolution).
1. To maintain popular masses’ cultural and political backwardness. In order to do it, to spread actively a culture of evasion from reality, to promote theories movements and occupations that distract attention, interest and activities of people’s masses from classes antagonism and concentrate it on futilities (diversion), to make confusion and intoxication with reactionary theories and false news. In short, to prevent the rise of political consciousness with a proper articulate system of cultural operations. In this field, the bourgeoisie reappraised and recovered the role of religions and churches, firstly that of Catholic Church, but couldn’t limit itself to it, because part of the masses unavoidably escaped their seizure.
2. To satisfy the requests of improvement that the popular masses make more strongly, to give everyone the hope to have a dignified life and feed this hope with some practical result, to envelop every worker in a network of financial bonds (loans, instalments, mortgages, bills, taxes, rents, etc.) that every moment make him risk to lose everything or anyway much of its social state and richness if he’s not able to respect fixed deadlines. If in claiming struggles against bourgeoisie the popular masses conquered time and money, the bourgeoisie must address them to use them for satisfying their “animal needs”. So it had to multiply and multiplied means and way to satisfy them so that they work out the time and the money they have.
3. To develop channels for popular masses’ participation in bourgeoisie’s political struggle in a subordinate position, following its parties and exponents. The popular masses’ participation in bourgeoisie’s political struggle is an essential ingredient of preventive counterrevolution. The division of powers, the representative assemblies, the political elections and the struggle among various parties (the multipartitism) are essential aspects of the regimes of preventive counterrevolution. The bourgeoisie has to make the masses perceive as their own the State that in reality is that of imperialist bourgeoisie. All those who want to participate in political life must be allowed to participate. The bourgeoisie, however, lays and must lay down the tacit condition that they had to play along with ruling class’ laws: they had not to go beyond its social order. Despite this tacit condition, however and immediately the bourgeoisie is obliged to divide more definitely its political activity in two fields. A public one, which the popular masses are admitted to (the “petty theatre of bourgeois politics”). A secret one, reserved to the authorized staff. To tacitly respect this division and adapt itself to it is an indispensable requirement of any “responsible” politician”. Obviously, every tacit rule is a weak point of the new mechanism of power.
4. To maintain the popular masses and particularly the workers in a state of powerlessness, to prevent them from organizing themselves (without organization a proletarian has no social force), to supply the masses with organizations led by men the bourgeoisie trusts in (organizations the bourgeoisie makes build to divert the masses by class organizations, mobilizing and supporting priests, policemen and the like: the “Yellow” organizations like the Italian Unionist Confederation of Workers, the Italian Christian Association of Workers, the Italian Union of Workers, etc.), by venal, corruptible, ambitious, individualists men, to prevent the workers from forming an organization autonomous from bourgeoisie in its structure and orientation.
5. To selectively repress Communists. To prevent by all means that communists from getting success: that they could multiply their strength organizing themselves in party, that they could have a right conception of the world, right method of knowledge and work and a right strategy, that they could carry out an effective activity, that they could recruit, that they could establish their hegemony over the working class. To corrupt and co-opt, and break and eliminate those who do not let themselves be corrupted or co-opted.
The general crisis in general and even more its terminal phase is destroying and in a large extent has already destroyed the second of the universal 5 pillars of the regime of preventive counter-revolution. The political crisis leads the bourgeoisie itself to strongly crack the third and fourth pillars of the five (limits to the participation by the masses to bourgeois political struggle as more contradictions grow, anti-trade union politics by owners and their authorities). The “war against terrorism” is the banner under which the bourgeoisie is increasingly cracking the fifth of the five pillars. Under these conditions, the effectiveness of the first of the five pillars is reduced. The conditions for developing the revolutionary people’s war are improving in all imperialist countries. The strong presence of immigrant workers facilitates our work. The heroic resistance of the oppressed countries attacked by the USA, the Zionists and other imperialist powers promotes the development of the second wave of proletarian revolution, although the struggle of the Arab and Muslim countries is still largely directed by reactionary classes and groups. The resistance that an increasing number of countries (from Latin America to China to Iran to Russia) opposed to the claims of US imperialism and of Zionist groups, politically weaken the global imperialist system that still has its center in the USA. The US imperialist bourgeoisie is increasingly tempted to resort to the military supremacy it still has. The race between revolutionary and reactionary mobilization, between revolution and war is fully under way in single countries and internationally. In this situation every communist party, besides devoting its main energies to build the revolution in his country, has to devote energies to the new birth of the International Communist Movement worldwide and in particular to the new birth of the communist movement in the USA: this is probably the only way to prevent US imperialist bourgeoisie from continuing to form a bloc with the Zionist groups and plunging the world into a new world war. Promoting the struggle to eliminate the domination of the imperialist bourgeoisie in the USA is mainly responsibility of the American communist movement, but is also a universal task of the communist movement, similarly as to eliminate the Vatican and the Catholic Church is mainly responsibility of the Italian communist movement, but is also a universal task of the communist movement, considering the role that this residual of European Middle Age plays in world system of imperialist oppression.
4. The strategy of the protracted revolutionary people’s war.
What does the protracted revolutionary people’s war consist of in our country and in the imperialist countries in general?
The protracted people’s war is a universal strategy that has to be applied in each country according to particular laws.
For our country, Italy, the first and most general peculiarity lies in the fact that ours is an imperialist country, and therefore there are not valid the same laws applied in the oppressed, semi-feudal and neo-colonial countries. In these countries war is waged in the countryside and surrounds cities, the accumulation of revolutionary forces is based on the involvement and support of the peasant masses, that here are the vast majority of the population.
In imperialist countries like ours, the accumulation of revolutionary forces proceeds through the establishment and the resistance of the clandestine party and its direction on the masses to join every kind of mass organizations necessary to satisfy their material and spiritual needs, to join the bourgeois political struggle in order to overthrow its course and to carry out the claiming struggles demands, until to put the bourgeoisie in the alternation of rousing a civil war or losing power without fighting. We must work and are working in the prospect of facing and winning the civil war. Only in this way we will be prepared for any eventuality. This is in our country the equivalent of what is “encircling the cities from the countryside” in semi-feudal country.
The revolutionary people’s war in the imperialist countries begins with the founding of the party that governs it. In our country began with the founding of the (new) Italian Communist Party.
Revolutionary people’s war in Italy does not start then with the armed struggle. The transition to armed struggle, namely the civil war, in our country will be the transition from the first phase of the war (the strategic defensive, the phase of accumulation of forces) to the second phase (the strategic balance: two forces collide and contend for the land).
The transition from the phase of the accumulation of forces to that the civil war or to forms of civil war already occurred in our country three times:
1. after the First World War in what was called Red Biennium,
2. at the end of World War II, with the Partisan Resistance,
3. in the ‘70s, with the Fighting Communist Organizations (Red Brigades).
The successes and failures of these experiences are valuable elements of knowledge for the PRPW that (n) PCI directs. These events confirm that the communist movement acted blindly, but also indicate which is the line that it must consciously implement.
We say that the revolution is being built, and that is not something that breaks out. The construction of the revolution is the development of protracted revolutionary people’s war. In it, a campaign follows another based on the results of the former and in its turn creates the conditions for a campaign of higher level (concatenation). Each campaign consists of battles and tactical operations that are combined together (synergy) or follow one another (concatenation).
The phases of the war, both in the oppressed countries, and in the semi-feudal and neo-imperialist countries, are three: the phase of strategic defensive, that of strategic equilibrium, that of strategic offensive. In the imperialist countries like ours, this stage is that the defensive strategy. At this stage the party accumulates the revolutionary forces. At this stage in the imperialist countries, the battlefield is not that of the armed clash, but that where the party attacks the heart of the power of the imperialist bourgeoisie: its hegemony over the masses and his ability to steer their conscience and direct their actions. Here it makes the imperialist bourgeoisie lose ground.
Protracted Revolutionary People’s War overcomes a limit of the Communist International.
Unlike the Second International, the Communist International had a clear conscience and has in his practice taken in account the qualitative difference between the struggles of interest (inherent to bourgeois society and chronic) and the struggle for socialism. However, it has consistently opposed, as elements one of which excludes the other, peaceful struggle and violent struggle, work within the bourgeois society and work against bourgeois society, parliamentary activity and civil war, reform and revolution, alliance and struggle, non-antagonistic and antagonistic contradictions, contradictions between the masses and the imperialist bourgeoisie and contradictions between groups within the ruling class, politics for claims and for revolution, clandestine organization and legal organization. On the contrary, in reality, these elements are unity of opposites. The strategy of the protracted revolutionary people’s war recognizes this unity of opposites, it develops both terms of the unity and composes by them the struggle of the working class to undermine and ultimately eliminate the power of the imperialist bourgeoisie and establish socialism.
Texts for the analysis
1. The evaluation of the communist movement (first wave of proletarian revolution and first socialist countries, crisis of the communist movement and modern revisionism, new birth of the communist movement based on Marxism Leninism Maoism, prospects of organization of International Communist Movement).
Texts in English
Manifesto Program of the (new) Italian Communist Party,
The political order of the first socialist countries
A very important issue: the political order of future socialist countries
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, No. 31, March 2009.
The political order of socialist countries
Message to Symposium on the political order of future socialist countries the Maoist Communist Party of Turkey/North Kurdistan hold in Frankfurt (Germany) on 24 – 25 January
4th February 2009
The second phase of the first socialist countries,
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 22, March 2006.
Ten theses on the Second World War and the communist movement
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano n. 20, July 2005
The eighth discriminating factor
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 9, November 2001, and n. 10, March 2002,
Against the economism
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 29, July 2008
Texts in Spanish
La instauracion del socialismo en los paises imperialistas –
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 21, November 2005,
Marco Martinengo, Los primeros paises socialistas
In Textos para el debate en el movimiento comunista internacional, N°1, May 2003, by PCE (r) – Fracción Octubre,
La crítica dogmática,
La actividad de la primera Internacional Comunista en Europa y el maoísmo,
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano March 2002,
La octava discriminante
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 9, November 2001 – n.10, March 2002,
El papel historico de la Internacional Comunista – Conquistas y límites
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano n. 2, July 1999,
Los comunistas tenemos necesidad de elaborar una teoría justa de la crisis general del capitalismo,
La guerra de España, el PCE y la Internacional Comunista (Presentacion),
Sobre la experiencia histórica de los países socialistas,
Article from Rapporti Sociali nº 11, November 1991,
La restauración del modo de producción capitalista en la Unión Soviética,
Article from Rapporti Sociali nº 8, November 1990,
Contribución al balance de la experiencia de los países socialistas,
Article from Rapporti Sociali, nº 5/6, January 1990
Texts in French
Marco Martinengo, Les premiers pays socialistes,
2. On the theory of the (first and second) general crisis of capitalism in imperialist era and the connected developing revolutionary situation
Texts in English
Manifesto Program of the (new) Italian Communist Party,
The new general crisis of capitalism opens the way to socialism!
19th December 2008 – Statement
3. On the regime of counter preventive devolution established by the bourgeoisie in the imperialist countries
Texts in English
Manifesto Program of the (new) Italian Communist Party,
Texts in French
Saboter le 3e pilier du régime de contre-révolution préventive,
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, November 2009,
4. On the strategy of the Protracted Revolutionary People’s War
Texts in English
Manifesto Program of the (new) Italian Communist Party,
The necessity to revise the experiences of the past and to work out the present experiences by the light of the theory of the long lasting popular revolutionary war
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 18, November 2004
The necessity of distinguishing between the universal and particular laws of the protracted popular revolutionary war
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 17, July 2004,
Texts in Spanish
Es preciso distinguir las leyes universales de las leyes particulares de la guerra popular prolongada,
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano n°17, July 2004,
Texts in French
Il est nécessaire de distinguer les lois universelles et les lois particulières de la guerre révolutionnaire populaire de longue durée
Article from La Voce del (nuovo) Partito comunista italiano, n. 17, July 2004,