At Stake at the Time
By printing the Soviet Union’s attacks on China’s political direction in full, today’s edition of the People’s Daily and the following editorial attempts to expose the false banner of unity which party members there, and others at home in China, were calling for. Then Cultural Revolution had overlapping national and international dimensions. Previously this month, Mao critiqued general Luo Ruiqing, in an effort to weaken military pressure for overt war in Vietnam led by a China-Soviet coalition with the logic that such a move would silence internal struggle in China about the direction of the socialist revolution. This editorial’s advocacy for the primacy of people’s struggle in Vietnam, rather than international diplomatic maneuvers on behalf of the Vietnamese people, follows a tenet of the movement that international revolutionary armed struggles are a necessary part of the road towards communism. The path of negotiation under the guidance of the Soviet Union is critiqued here as in effect a form of collaborating with the aims of U.S. imperialism. The CIA’s report from the previous May indicated that a victory of the Vietnamese forces over the U.S. would be a vindication of Chinese political line a repudiation of the Soviet one, and a blow to the global trust is US ability to counter guerrilla insurgency
(see: https://dailycr.wordpress.com/2015/12/24/december-24-1965-storm-clouds-at-home-and-abroad-peng-zhen-presides-over-the-peoples-daily-the-u-s-incites-war-in-cambodia/ ),The editorials in Pravda this month condemning this “break from unity” are symptomatic of these differences coming to a head.
At Stake at the Present
Some today argue that a broad united front is the best the left can hope for given its comparatively weak status. However, the politics of this editorial advocate that principled unity is the only alliance capable of revolutionary aspirations.
The Leaders of the C.P.S.U. are Betrayers of the Declaration and the Statement:
by the Editorial Department of “Renmin Ribao”
On December 30, 1965, the day the following article was published, Renmin Ribao reprinted in full the December 12 anti-Chinese article by the editorial department of Pravda, entitled “Line Confirmed by Life Itself.” It also reprinted extracts from the following six anti-Chinese articles appearing recently in the Soviet press…
ON the fifth anniversary of the issuance of the Statement of 1960, the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. staged a short anti-Chinese farce by publishing a batch of articles.
The revolutionary principles of the Declaration of 1957 and the Statement of 1960 are as diametrically opposed to Khrushchov revisionism as is fire to water. In trying to confuse people by flaunting the banner of the Declaration and the Statement the faithful followers of Khrushchov revisionism only help to reveal their own ugly features still further.
During the drafting of the Declaration and the Statement, the Marxist-Leninists waged intense struggles against the Khrushchov revisionists.
The revisionist line advanced by Khrushchov at the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U. is the opposite of the revolutionary principles of the Declaration of 1957. The 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U. created grave confusion in the international communist movement. Together with other fraternal Parties, the Communist Party of China conducted a principled struggle against Khrushchov’s revisionist line at the Moscow Meeting.
It was again at Khrushchov revisionism that the revolutionary principles of the Statement of 1960 were directed. By that time, Khrushchov had completely transposed enemies and friends, was openly collaborating with U.S. imperialism, had thoroughly undermined the principles guiding relations among fraternal Parties and countries and was creating a split in the international communist movement. Together with other Marxist-Leninist Parties, the Communist Party of China waged a tit-for-tat struggle against the Khrushchov revisionist clique and safeguarded the purity of Marxism-Leninism.
Of course, the formulation of certain questions in the Declaration and the Statement is not altogether clear and there are even weaknesses and errors. As the leaders of the C.P.S.U. repeatedly requested that allowances should be made for their need to connect this formulation with the formulation of the 20th Congress of the C.P.S.U., we made certain concessions at that time in order to reach agreement. On more than one occasion, we have expressed our readiness to accept any criticism of us on this point. Despite all this, the Declaration and the Statement set forth a series of revolutionary principles which all Marxist-Leninist Parties should abide by.
In the eyes of the Khrushchov revisionists, however, both the Declaration and the Statement were mere scraps of paper. They tore up these documents on the very day they signed them. The Khrushchov revisionists had made up their minds to sing a tune opposite to that of Marxism-Leninism and the Declaration and the Statement. By the time of the 22nd Congress of the C.P.S.U. they produced the revisionist Programme of the C.P.S.U., casting to the four winds all the basic theses of Marxism-Leninism and all the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement.
Let us contrast the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement with the line laid down at the 20th and 22nd Congresses and in the Programme of the C.P.S.U., which is being followed tenaciously by its new leaders.
The Declaration and the Statement lay down a revolutionary line. But the Khrushchov revisionists are pressing forward with their anti-revolutionary line of “peaceful coexistence,” “peaceful competition” and “peaceful transition.” They themselves do not want revolution and forbid others to make revolution. They themselves oppose the armed revolutionary struggles of the oppressed nations and forbid others to support armed revolutionary struggles.
The Declaration and the Statement point out that U.S. imperialism is the common enemy of the people of the world and that the people throughout the world must form the broadest united front against the U.S. imperialist policies of aggression and war. But the Khrushchov revisionists are uniting with U.S. imperialism against the people of the world and carrying out the policy of U.S.-Soviet collaboration for world domination.
The Declaration and the Statement point out that socialist countries must maintain the dictatorship of the proletariat and carry out socialist revolution and socialist construction. But the Khrushchov revisionists advance the fallacies of the “state of the whole people” and the “party of the entire people,” abolishing the dictatorship of the proletariat in the Soviet Union and changing the character of the C.P.S.U. as the vanguard of the proletariat. They are enforcing the dictatorship of the privileged bourgeois stratum in the Soviet Union and have embarked on the road of capitalist restoration.
The Declaration and the Statement point out that unity among all the Communist Parties and socialist countries must be based on Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and that in their relations with each other fraternal Parties and countries must follow the principles of independence, complete equality, mutual support and the attainment of unanimity through consultation. But the Khrushchov revisionists practise big-power chauvinism, national egoism and splittism, waving their baton everywhere, wilfully interfering in the affairs of fraternal Parties and countries, trying hard to control them and carrying out disruptive and subversive activities against them, and splitting the international communist movement and the socialist camp.
The Declaration and the Statement point out that all Communist Parties must wage struggles against revisionism and dogmatism, and particularly against revisionism, which is the main danger in the international communist movement at present, and the Statement, moreover, explicitly denounces the Yugoslav Tito clique as renegades. But the Khrushchov revisionists join the Tito clique in a passionate embrace and publicly try to reverse the verdict an this gang of traitors. They gather around themselves revisionists of all descriptions to oppose the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people throughout the world.
The great debate in the international communist movement over the last few years represents a great struggle over whether to uphold or to betray Marxism-Leninism and whether to safeguard or to discard the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement.
The “Proposal Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Movement” which the Communist Party of China put forward on June 14, 1963, sums up the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement, upholds the Marxist-Leninist position and refutes Khrushchov revisionism on a series of fundamental questions relating to the revolution in our times.
Preliminary but important results have already been achieved in the Marxist-Leninists’ fight against the Khrushchov revisionists. The new leaders of the C.P.S.U. love to talk of the “line confirmed by life itself,” don’t they? Please open your eyes and have a look. The results “confirmed by life itself” are quite clear. In the face of resolute struggle by all the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people, the great people of the Soviet Union included, Khrushchov revisionism has been discredited and its founder driven off the stage of history. This is a great victory in the struggle to defend Marxism-Leninism. It is a great victory in the struggle to defend the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement.
In an article in Pravda, the new leadership of the C.P.S.U. said, “The C.P.S.U. has been and will continue to be loyal to the general line of the international communist movement.” Well, let us now examine what the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. have been and will continue to be.
What were they in the past? They were Khrushchov’s close comrades-in-arms. They were loyal to the general line of Khrushchov revisionism. They had to relegate to limbo the illustrious Khrushchov, the founder of their faith and the maestro who “creatively developed Marxism-Leninism,” simply because Khrushchov was too disreputable and too stupid to muddle on any longer, and because Khrushchov himself had become an obstacle to the carrying out of Khrushchov revisionism. The only way the Khrushchov revisionist clique could maintain its rule was to swop horses.
What are they now? They are the old cast of the Khrushchov revisionist leading group. They remain loyal to the general line of Khrushchov revisionism. They never weary of swearing that the general line worked out at the 20th and 22nd Congresses of the C.P.S.U. under Khrushchov’s sponsorship is their “only, immutable, line in the entire home and foreign policy.” At times they give the appearance of opposing the United States, but all their policies boil down to one of U.S.-Soviet collaboration for the domination of the world. They have reaffirmed time and again “the immutability of the policy of the U.S.S.R. aimed at establishing all-round co-operation with the United States.” While proclaiming that they are building “communism” in the Soviet Union, they are speeding up the restoration of capitalism. Amidst the dust and din of their “united action,” they called the divisive March Moscow meeting, stepping up their divisive activities, and they are now hatching a big plot for a general attack on China and a general split in the international communist movement and the socialist camp. They are going farther and farther along the road of Khrushchov revisionism.
And what will they continue to be? Whether or not they can return to the path of Marxism-Leninism and whether or not they can return to the path of the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement, depend mainly on whether or not they themselves can repudiate the revisionist general line laid down at the 20th and 22nd Congresses and in the Programme of the C.P.S.U. Unless they utterly repudiate this line, whatever tricks they play and whatever patching they do can only prove that they are still practising Khrushchov revisionism without Khrushchov. All Marxist-leninists, the great Soviet people and the revolutionary people everywhere have no alternative but to continue to expose them and fight them to the end.
The new leaders of the C.P.S.U. are shouting themselves hoarse for “united action.” Above all, they are clamouring for “united action” on the question of Vietnam. But it is precisely on this question, which is the focus of the present international struggle, that their anti-revolutionary position is revealed in its most concentrated form. Far from believing that the Vietnamese people can win in a people’s war against U.S. imperialist aggression, they are afraid that this will bring “troubles” and hamper their collaboration with U.S. imperialism. Whatever pretences they put up, in the final analysis all their activities are aimed at united action with U.S. imperialism to bring the question of Vietnam into the orbit of Soviet-U.S. collaboration, help U.S. imperialism to realize the plot of “peaceful negotiations” and extinguish the raging flames of the Vietnamese people’s revolution. The slogan of “united action” has now become a poisoned weapon in the hands of the Khrushchov revisionists for sowing dissension. In co-ordination with U.S. imperialism, they are vainly trying to use this slogan to undermine the fighting friendship between the Chinese and Vietnamese peoples and the Vietnamese people’s unity against U.S. aggression. The Vietnamese people are waging a victorious struggle against U.S. imperialism and for national salvation. It is the duty of the Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people to give their staunch support to the just revolutionary struggle of the Vietnamese people and firmly expose the plot of “united action” hatched by the new leaders of the C.P.S.U.
The new leaders of the C.P.S.U. assert that anyone who does not take “united action” with them is “encouraging the imperialists to launch their ventures.” This is turning things upside down. Is it not the very policies of appeasement and capitulationism of the revisionist leading group of the C.P.S.U. and its line of Soviet-U.S. collaboration for world domination that are helping to inflate the aggressive arrogance of U.S. imperialism? It should be pointed out that it is the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. themselves who are actually “encouraging the imperialists to launch their ventures.”
What the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. fear most is that the Marxist-Leninists will draw a line of demarcation between themselves and these leaders. But, as Lenin said,
The great work of uniting and consolidating the fighting army of the revolutionary proletariat cannot be carried out unless a line of demarcation is drawn and a ruthless struggle is waged against those who serve to spread bourgeois influence among the proletariat.1
By clinging to their revisionism and splittism the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. have placed themselves in direct antagonism to Marxism-Leninism. In such circumstances, can the Marxist-Leninists be expected to fall to draw a line of demarcation, both politically and organizationally, between themselves and the new leaders of the C.P.S.U.?
If we failed to draw a clear line of demarcation, both politically and organizationally, between ourselves and the Khrushchov revisionists:
Wouldn’t we be joining them in betraying Marxism-Leninism and the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement and become revisionists ourselves?
Wouldn’t we be joining them in entering into the service of U.S. imperialism and acting as its accomplices?
Wouldn’t we be joining them in undermining the revolution of the fraternal Vietnamese people and rendering service to the U.S. imperialist policy of aggression against Vietnam and of war expansion?
Wouldn’t we be accepting them as the “patriarchal father Party” and serving as an instrument under their baton, recognizing their big-power privileged status and serving as their appendage?
Wouldn’t we be following them in restoring capitalism at home and once again reducing the broad masses of labouring people to a position in which they are oppressed and exploited?
Wouldn’t we be following them in putting ourselves in antagonism to the people of our own country and the whole world and heading for a miserable end without being able to escape the punishment of history?
As a serious Marxist-Leninist Party, the Communist Party of China can only give the categorical answer that we will do none of these things either now or in the future.
The Chinese Communist Party has consistently upheld the unity of the international communist movement and of the socialist camp. The only genuine unity is unity based on Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and on the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement. What the new leaders of the C.P.S.U. call “unity” is sham unity. They have betrayed Marxism-Leninism, proletarian internationalism and the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement, and their betrayal can only lead to a split. We want genuine unity and resolutely oppose sham unity. It is for the sake of achieving genuine international proletarian unity that we are waging struggles against Khrushchov revisionism.
Together with all the other Marxist-Leninists and revolutionary people of the world, the Chinese Communists will continue, as always, to hold aloft the banner of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, abide by the revolutionary principles of the Declaration and the Statement and carry the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism through to the end.
The world is on the march. It is our strong conviction that the struggle of the people of the world against imperialism, reaction and modern revisionism and the cause of world peace, national liberation, people’s democracy and socialism are bound to keep on winning new great victories.
_______________ 1 V.I. Lenin, “Resolution Adopted by the Second Paris Group of the R.S.D.L.P. on the State of Affairs in the Party,” Collected Works, Eng. ed., Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1963, Vol. XVII, p. 223.
Renmin Ribao, on December 29, 1965, devoted nearly three pages to the full text of the following three articles marking the 5th anniversary of the publication of the Moscow Statement:
1, The December 6 editorial of the Korean paper Rodong Shinmoon, “Unite All Revolutionary Forces and Wage a More Powerful Anti-Imperialist Struggle.”
2, The December 10 article of the editorial department of the Albanian paper Zeri i Popullit, “The Khrushchov Revisionists Are Facing Serious Difficulties, Setbacks and Contradictions.”
3, The December 7 editorial of the Japanese Communist Party organ Akahata, “Struggle Against Modern Revisionism, Strengthen the International Fight Against U.S. Imperialism.”
On the same day, Renmin Ribao also reprinted extracts from an article in the December issue (No. 17) of the Australian Communist, the theoretical journal of the Australian Communist Party (Marxist-leninist). The article condemned the Khrushchov revisionists for entering into an alliance with the U.S. imperialists and the Indian reactionaries to oppose China and oppose revolution. —P.R. Editor.
Peking Review’s translation of the editorial from: http://www.massline.org/PekingReview/#1966