1917 - 2017

100 years

Struggle against betrayal of the October Revolution

20th of June, 2017

written by Wolfgang Eggers

published by the Comintern (SH)

 

contents

Preface

I. The falsification of the history of the October Revolution - a dual strategy of the bourgeoisie

II. How the anarchists betrayed the October Revolution

III. How the Trotskyites betrayed the October Revolution

IV. How DIMITROV betrayed the October Revolution

V. How the modern revisionists betrayed the October Revolution

VI. HOW THE MAOISTS BETRAYED THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION

VII. HOW THE NEO-REVISIONISTS OF TODAY BETRAY THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION

VIII. CONCLUSION

 

 

 

Preface

 

The October Revolution was the first revolution which burst through the world imperialist chain of slavery.
With the Albanian revolution the imperialist-/social imperialist encirclement was broken through.
The socialist world revolution finalizes the process of breaking through the world imperialist chain namely by its complete destruction. The socialist world revolution paves the way to the complete construction of the world-socialist chain.
From our Stalinist-Hoxhaist point of view, we must unmask those who deny that exactly this revolutionary world process began with the October revolution 100 years ago.

The Great October was victorious because the Bolshevik party, on a national and international scale, had led a resolute and determined, tenacious and pitiless struggle against opportunism, reformism, social-chauvinism, and similar bourgeois influences, because they timely smashed the Menschiwiki, the Trotskyists, and all the rest of the renegades.

All the opportunists attacked Lenin and the Bolsheviks before the victory of the October Revolution and accused them of deviating from Marxism.

After the victory of the October revolution, all the opportunists attacked Stalin and accused him of deviating from Leninism. After the October revolution was victorious in the second country, in Albania, the opportunists accused Enver Hoxha of deviating from Stalinism. And today, on occasion of the Centenary of the October revolution, the opportunists accuse us Stalinist-Hoxhaists of deviating from Stalinism-Hoxhaism. This is the time-line of 100 years opportunist betrayal of the October revolution.

Before the October revolution the opportunists preached that the socialist revolution could not be successful in a backward country like Russia, and that only Western Europe could pave the way to the socialist revolution, could begin with it, and give an example for all the other countries. The enemies of Marxism did everything they could to persuade the international working class that the experience of Russia was "not suited" to the countries of Europe, that Europe had to work out a special path of transition to socialism, namely a theory and practice of socialism without violence and without the dictatorship of the proletariat, thus without Leninism. The opponents of Marxism-Leninism and of the Socialist Revolution, the opportunists of the Second International, the Mensheviks, Trotskyists, etc., were opposed to history. And therefore history condemned them to a position of defeat.

As Comrade Enver Hoxha stressed, the socialist October revolution was the greatest victory of Marxism-Leninism over bourgeois ideology, the ideology of opportunism and reformism. It gave a crushing blow to the revisionists of Marxism-Leninism, the Social Chauvinists, and the reactionary nationalists.

The October revolution teared down the mask of the social democrats of the Second International, which had turned into lackeys of their own bourgeoisie and of the world imperialism, and into savage enemies of the proletariat and the international workers' movement.

On occasion of the Centenary of the October revolution, the Comintern (SH) basis her struggle against the traitors of the world socialist revolution on the teachings of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism. Especially Lenin, Stalin and Enver Hoxha led the struggle victoriously against the opportunistic betrayal of the October revolution. Lenin, Stalin and Enver Hoxha have always kept high the banner of the October revolution, its revolutionary spirit and ideas. And we comrades of the Comintern (SH) swear to defend the banner of the October revolution against any opportunist betrayal.

 

The tactics of the traitors of the October revolution

The tactics of the opportunist traitors of the October revolution is a complementary tactic, that consists of two components:

It is firstly a tactic with which they present themselves as alleged "defenders" of the October revolution.

And from this position, they secondly accuse the true defenders of the October revolution as "traitors", namely the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism.

For short, the opportunist traitors turn upside down the betrayal of the October Revolution.

Today, the October Revolution cannot be defended and crowned with the victory of the world socialist revolution without having defeated the neo-revisionists and their bourgeois ideology !

On occasion of the Centenary of the October Revolution, all the neo-revisionist ideology exit its rat holes. We must chop off the ideology of the neo-revisionist rat heads all over the world - namely before, during and after the victory of the world socialist revolution!

 

DEFINITION

 

What means

revisionist betrayal of the October Revolution?

The revisionist betrayal of the October Revolution began with the bourgeois revision of the teachings of the October Revolution.

The revisionist goal is the adaption of the principles of the October Revolution to the bourgeois ideology, for the purpose of keeping off the world proletariat from the world socialist revolution.

 

Definition in short:

“For” the Red October in words

– against the Red October in deeds.

This is the shortest formula of the revisionist betrayal of the October Revolution.

 

The revisionists betray the October Revolution by "defending" the October Revolution only in words (historically limited ), however in deeds they struggle against its necessary international continuation, against its global completion.

In essence there is no difference between the revisionist and neo-revisionist betrayal of the October Revolution. However, this betrayal differs historically significantly in this:
The modern revisionists betrayed the October Revolution for the purpose of the restoration of capitalism.
The neo-revisionists of today betray the October Revolution for the purpose of thwarting the restoration of socialism on a global scale.

Even more dangerous are the centrists. In words they "defend" the October Revolution against the betrayal of the neo-revisionists, while they propagate the re-conciliation between the Stalinist-Hoxhaists and the neo-revisionists. The centrists are the prolonged arm, or the 5th Column of the bourgeoisie within the Stalinist-Hoxhaist World Movement which is led by the Comintern (SH).

Whereas, the Stalinist-Hoxhaist defence of the history of the October Revolution can be defined in no other way than this:

The Stalinist-Hoxhaists strive for the world revolutionary globalized continuation of the October Revolution in words and deeds, guided by the lessons of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism.

The invincibility of the October Revolution supposes our ability for preparing and implementing its global rebirth.

 

 

Opportunism

- and the celebrations of the Centenary of the Great October Socialist Revolution -

 

The betrayal of the revolution is as old as the revolution itself.
The betrayal of the October Revolution is divided into four historical phases:
1. Thwarting the necessary theoretical and practical preparations for the approaching revolutionary situation;
2. Theoretical and practical sabotage during the whole period of the revolution;
3. Preventing the theoretical and practical defence of the achievements of the revolution;
4. Thwarting the theoretical and practical preparations for the renewal (continuation) of the October revolution.

On the occasion of the 100th anniversary, the opportunistic organizations all over the world outdo each other in the self-display of their alleged "sympathy" with the October Revolution. But they cannot cover up their betrayal by turning up the volume of their propaganda.

"Swimming with the tide", is typical for all kinds of opportunism. And this is true on occasion of "100 Years of Red October", too.

During 100 years a lot of anti-Bolshevist "theories" were created for the purpose to falsify the historical meaning of the October Revolution". Particularly Trotskyism claimed to be the "guiding" ideology of the October Revolution and accused Stalinism as the ideology of the alleged "betrayal of the Revolution". Trotskyism became thus the forerunner of bourgeois Anti-Stalinism.

History proves that the bourgeoisie, for herself, was unable to hide her reactionary ideology against the October Revolution behind a "revolutionary" cloak. This was necessary for deceiving the working class. For this purpose, the bourgeoisie had to base her counter-revolutionary influence on treacherous leaders and renegades who emanated directly from the October Revolution.

The October Revolution has produced not only heroes, but also traitors, who changed sides and who became servants of the counter-revolution. Among the traitors there were also such who desribed themselves as "defenders" of the revolution. These dangerous types of traitors like to present themselves as "revolutionaries". From this occupied position they turn the tables and produce "theories" in which they condemn the revolutionaries as "traitors". This tactics - "Stop thiefs!" - "Expose traitors! " have proved to be successful in the history of the counter-revolution - particularly before, during and after the October Revolution.

Lenin wrote:

"... also teach the lessons of preceding revolutions, in which the counter-revolution made a point of supporting the opposition to the extreme revolutionary party which stood closest to the latter, in order to undermine and overthrow the revolutionary dictatorship and thus pave the way for the subsequent complete victory of the counter-revolution, of the capitalists and landowners." [Lenin, Volume 32, Tenth Congress of the R.C.P.(B.); [8] Preliminary Draft Resolution Of The Tenth Congress Of The R.C.P. On Party Unity - March 1921]

All these hidden enemies of the revolution wanted and still want to give a favourable impression that they are allegedly "defending" the October Revolution against the open anti-communist lies of the bourgeoisie. These appearances are deceitful.
The truth is, that there is no essential difference between the open anti-communist propaganda and the anti-communist propaganda which is hidden behind revolutionary phrases. Both form a unity and complement each other in the struggle against us Stalinist-Hoxhaists, the only true defenders of the October Revolution.
History teaches that the opportunists had been always enemies of the revolution. This is also true for the opportunists of the centenary of the October Revolution. Everything that they write about the October Revolution are lies.

Especially the imperialist bourgeoisie in Russia is afraid today of a rebirth of the October revolution. The modern revisionists occupied the festivities of the Red October to conceal with this the restoration of capitalism while, today, the Russian imperialists occupy the 100th anniversary of the Red October to restrain the proletarian masses from the repitition of the October revolution. But whoever compels the 100-year celebration of the October revolution under the interests of Russian imperialism will one day get one's just punishment for this crime. Today it is especially important for the Russian proletariat to overthrow imperialist Russia with a new October revolution and restore the dictatorship of the proletariat. This will only succeed if the Russian neo-revisionists are defeated.

* * *

Most of the historical texts about the October Revolution are anti-communist (so called "Blanquist coup of the Bolsheviks"). And many so called "communist" texts are falsifications from the former revisionist countries and revisionist parties. Today, these falsifications are continued by all kind of neo-revisionist organizations all over the world, only in a modified manner (repainted with fresh red colour). There is no other way to defend the history of the October Revolution than purifying it from the 100 years old revisionist betrayal.

The history of revisionist betrayal at the October Revolution is the history of all the futile attempts of the bourgeoisie, to deny and disprove the victory of the October Revolution and its unavoidable completion through the world socialist revolution. Therefore it is the task of the revisionists to combat our struggle against the revisionist betrayal at the October Revolution. It is the task of the revisionists to prevent us from crowning the October Revolution through the victory of the world socialist revolution. The internationalist meaning of the October Revolution is its role as the initiation of the world socialist revolution and not the termination of the world socialist revolution.

Neo-revisionism was created by the bourgeoisie for the purpose to prevent the rebirth of the October Revolution to thwart its completion by the victory of the world socialist revolution.

Our struggle against neo-revisionism teaches that the danger of restoration of the revisionist betrayal at the October Revolution exists until today and also tomorrow, namely as long as the class society exists.

No revisionists can prevent the rebirth of the October Revolution on a global scale because this rebirth is an inevitable historical process, namely the consequence of the objective decline of world capitalism. The era of world imperialism is the era of the world socialist revolution.

Stalinism-Hoxhaism is the theory and tactics of the world-proletarian revolution in general, and the theory and tactics of the world dictatorship of the proletariat in particular.

The process of the rebirth of the October Revolution takes place dialectically. Out of the destruction of the achievements of the October Revolution, which was caused by the modern revisionists, emerges nothing else than the world socialist revolution and the restoration of all socialist achievements on a global scale. This is a Marxist principle of the negation of negation. The socialist world revolution is nothing more than the further development of the October revolution on a higher step ladder, namely on a global scale. This further development is based on avoiding the weaknesses and failures of all the previous revolutions which led to the defeat earlier or later. And the only key for overcoming of all previous failures, that is the correct application of the lessons of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Enver Hoxha.

The victory of the October Revolution is much easier than the victory of the world socialist revolution. This correlates with the difference between the betrayal of the October Revolution and that of the world socialist revolution. The revisionist betrayal of the October Revolution is much easier than the neo-revisionist betrayal of the world socialist revolution. The proletarian revolution in "one" country can much easier betrayed and defeated than the proletarian revolution on a global scale.

The neo-revisionists of today follow in the revisionist footsteps of Dimitrov's "people's front", which is nothing but a betrayal at the lessons of the October Revolution. Dimitrov's betrayal must be defined as the rejection of the October Revolution, is the rejection of the armed overthrow of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and its replacement through a pact with the bourgeoisie, called "People's Front". The turning away from the October Revolution began with the infamous VII World Congress of the Comintern which was always praised by the modern revisionists and rediscovered by the neo-revisionists in recent time.

The revisionists want that the proletariat takes only a look back to the October revolution through the vitrine of a historical museum. The Stalinist-Hoxhaists teach the world proletariat to look ahead, namely to struggle for the victory of the world socialist revolution under the banner of the October Revolution.

 

 

I

The falsification of the history of the October Revolution

- a dual strategy of the bourgeoisie

 

The opportunist betrayal of the October Revolution

- complementary "counterpart" of the

openly reactionary, anti-communist ideology

 

Before we unmask the different opportunist branches of the betrayal of the October Revolution we must point to the functionality of the dual strategy of the bourgeoisie which consists essentially in the systematical interaction of open and hidden attacks on the October Revolution, in particular the denial of its international significance. The international counter-revolution was directed against the October revolution not only in Russia, but throughout the world - on the one hand by its brutal reactionary violence, on the other by the help of its agents within the communist and workers' movement.

The essence of the open reactionary ideology is to disdain the historical significance of the October Revolution in every respect and to deny its pathbreaking significance for the current world socialist revolution.
This has not changed in 100 years. The only thing that has changed is the size of the torrents, with which the bourgeois media pour abuse over the Bolsheviks.

Today's bourgeois historiography culminates in the bold assertion that "there has never been an October revolution." It would have been only the "putsch of a small group of conspirators" and thus "anything else but a popular uprising".

For the bourgeois historians, the October Revolution is just a propaganda lie of legitimation with which the Bolsheviks would have justified the "establishment of their terrorist regime." (war communism/ "red terror")

The "anti-democratical" character of the October Revolution could allegedly be proved by the fact that the Bolsheviks had prevented the establishment of the "democratic" (bourgeois) system of the Constituent Assembly. The Bolsheviks would have allegedly misused the Soviet system for creating their communist dictatorship. (dictatorship of the proletariat = "dictatorship of the Bolshevik Party")

Today the Bolsheviks would have been banned as a "terrorist organization" on the basis of the bourgeois "anti-terrorism law". Today, every call to the global completion of the October revolution is regarded by the world bourgeoisie as a "criminal offense", because it is a call to overthrow the "democratically legitimated" (capitalist) world order.

Allegedly, the German imperialists would have supported the Bolshevik October Revolution for the purpose of weakening the Tsarist war opponents. Some bourgeois historians claim that the "October Revolution would have been impossible without the support of the German imperialists" ("The Purchased Revolution"). In order to restrain the masses from the October Revolution, the Russian bourgeoisie had accused the Bolsheviks having been "agents of the German Emperor" and denounced them as so called "Fatherland traitors".

All these anti-communist lies on the October Revolution are as old as the October Revolution itself, and a hundred times unmasked and disproved htrough us communists.

As long as Stalin lived, most bourgeois historians did not dare to question the October revolution. Only with the help of the modern revisionists, with the murder of Stalin, with the overthrow of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the restoration of capitalism, did the bourgeoisie succeed in pushing forward appreciably its anti-Communist falsification of history through the October revolution. It was only after 100 years that bourgeois historiography came nearer to its goal, namely almost completely removing the truth about the October revolution from the consciousness of mankind.

The bourgeoisie presents the October Revolution as a "cautionary tale", as a "failed experiment of communism". The restoration of capitalism allegedly "proves" that "communism is doomed to failure", that "capitalism has survived its overthrow".

"The October Revolution could not prevent the restoration of the dictatorship of the Russian bourgeoisie. And the world socialist revolution would share the same fate of the October Revolution, namely not to prevent the restoration of the dictatorship of the world bourgeoisie." This is the anti-communist credo of today's world bourgeoisie. And the neo-revisionists repaint this lie with "red" colour. The working class receives the "well-intentioned advice," to renounce following the banner of the October Revolution, and to distance oneself from the "dangerous" revolutionary ideology of communism.

On occasion of the Centenary of the October Revolution, the bourgeoisie does everything possible to tarnish the workers' commemoration about their already-won victory over capitalism. This proves that the world bourgeoisie fears the world socialist revolution more than ever. Why else does the class enemy neither give up, nor reduce anti-communist propaganda against the October Revolution after 100 years ?

It is the agents of the bourgeoisie within the communist world movement who betray the October revolution. And these traitors provide the bourgeoisie with the newest ideological ammunition - especially on occasion of the 100th anniversary of the October Revolution.

The gloomier the reactionary present, the gloomier the consciousness of the revolutionary past, the more intensive the joint efforts of the Communists across the world, to clean the October revolution which is coated with more and more dust of betrayal. But defence of the October revolution does not exhaust itself in political purge.

We do not learn from history if we only confine ourselves to draw pretty pictures of historical events. The October revolution shines in new splendor not before it is crowned by the world socialist revolution. And this is the only genuine Stalinist-Hoxhaist meaning of the centenary of the October revolution.

 

 

 

REJECT ALL OPPORTUNISTIC "THEORIES"

about the history of the

Great October Socialist Revolution !

 

II

How the anarchists betrayed the October Revolution

(Councils-"Communists")

As a text for introduction we recommend in first line the study of Lenin's famous book:

1920 

"Left-Wing"-Communism - an infantile disorder

especially Chapter IV - The struggle against which enemies within the working class movement helped Bolshevism develop, gain strength, and became steeled

 

The anarchists think ONLY of destroying the old state machine. However, they do not care about, WHAT and HOW to put in the place of the destroyed state machinery. The October Revolution was victorious because it was based on the experiences of the Paris Commune, namely to establish the STATE power of the proletariat. The complete abolition of the state can only be achieved after classes have been abolished. This was the aim of the October Revolution, namely to establish the socialist state which leads to the withering away of the state. Rejecting the establisment of the armed proletarian state that means betrayal of the October Revolution.

The anarchists differ two "types of October": The Bolshevik October and the alleged "anarchist" October with their slogan: “Soviets without the Bolsheviks!” In truth, the anarchists used this slogan (by the way, in co-operation with the White Guardists !!) to re-establish capitalist rule in Russia.

The model of the anarchists was that of the "Self-administration" of the Soviets in contrast to the Marxist-Leninist model of the Soviets as democratic organs of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The Anarchists were generally enemies of the October Revolution. In particular, they were anti-Marxist-Leninist enemies of the state of the armed dictatorship of the proletariat.

The anarchists argue like this:

"The Bolshevik October is the conquest of power by the party of the revolutionary intelligentsia, the installation of its 'State Socialism' and of its 'socialist' methods of governing the masses. The Bolshevik practice of the last ten years shows clearly the counter-revolutionary role of their dictatorship of the Party." (1927 - "The Two Octobers" - by Piotr Archinov)

The anarchists equated the dictatorship of the proletariat with the "dictatoship of the Bolshevik party". Moreover, the anarchists struggled against the Bolshevik party as an alleged "instrument of the exploitation and oppression of the masses".

In particular, the anarchists accused the Bolsheviks of turning the Soviets into such organs which served the establishment of a new bourgeois state ( with a "socialist" cloak).

Lenin gave the right answer to the anarchists:

"The nearer we appraoch the complete military suppression of the bourgeoisie, the more dangerous does the element of petty-bourgeois anarchy become. And the fight against this element cannot be waged solely with the aid of propaganda and agitation, solely by organising competition and by selecting organisers. The struggle must also be waged by means of coercion." (Lenin, Volume 27, page 266)

The defeat of the Kronstadt mutiny proved that these were not empty words.

The counter-revolutionary mutiny in Kronstadt which began on February 28, 1921, was organised by the Social Revolutionaries, Mensheviks and whiteguards.

 

Lenin on the

Kronstadt - Munity

"I have not yet received the latest news from Kronstadt, but I have no doubt that this mutiny, which very quickly revealed to us the familiar figures of whiteguard generals, will be put down within the next few days, if not hours. There can be no doubt about this. But it is essential that we make a thorough appraisal of the political and economic lessons of this event.

We saw the petty-bourgeois, anarchist elements in the Russian revolution, and we have been fighting them for decades. We have seen them in action since February 1917, during the great revolution, and their parties’ attempts to prove that their programme differed little from that of the Bolsheviks, but that only their methods in carrying it through were different. We know this not only from the experience of the October Revolution. We must bear in mind that the bourgeoisie is trying to pit the peasants against the workers; that behind a façade of workers’ slogans it is trying to incite the petty-bourgeois anarchist elements against the workers. This, if successful, will lead directly to the overthrow of the dictatorship of the proletariat and, consequently, to the restoration of capitalism and of the old landowner and capitalist regime." [Lenin, Volume 32, Tenth Congress of the R.C.P.(B.); Report On The Political Work Of The Central Committee Of The R.C.P.(B.) - March 8, 1921]

"And the Kronstadt events revealed their connection with the international bourgeoisie." (Lenin: Speech In Closing The Congress - March 16, 1921

"International capital (...) admitted that if the slogan becomes “Soviet power without the Bolsheviks” they will all accept it.

If the slogan of the Kronstadt events is a slight deviation to the left—Soviet power with the anarchists, begotten by distress, war, the demobilisation of the army—why is Milyukov in favour of it? Because he knows that a deviation leads either to the proletarian dictatorship or to the capitalists.

Weariness and exhaustion produce a certain mood, and sometimes lead to desperation. As usual, this tends to breed anarchism among the revolutionary elements. That was the case in all capitalist countries, and that is what is taking place in our own country. The petty-bourgeois element is in the grip of a crisis because it has had it hard over the past few years.That is the meaning of the Kronstadt events in the light of the alignment of class, forces in the whole of Russia and on the international scale. That is the meaning of one of our last and crucial battles, for we have not beaten this petty-bourgeois—anarchist element, and the immediate fate of the revolution now depends on whether or not we succeed in doing so. If we do not, we shall slide down as the French Revolution did. This is inevitable, and we must not let ourselves be misled by phrases and excuses. We must do all we can to alleviate the position of these masses and safeguard the proletarian leadership. If we do this, the growing movement of the communist revolution in Europe will be further reinforced. What has not. yet taken place there today, may well take place tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow, but in world history such periods, as between today and tomorrow, mean no less than a few years.All of you, learning the lessons of our revolution and of all preceding revolutions, must understand the full gravity of the present situation. If you do not allow yourselves to be blinded by all sorts of slogans such as “Freedom”, “Constituent Assembly”, “Free Soviets”—it is so easy to switch labels that even Milyukov has turned up as a supporter of the Soviets of a Kronstadt republic—if you do not close your eyes to the alignment of class forces, you will acquire a sound and firm basis for all your political conclusions. You will then see that we are passing through a period of crisis in which it depends on us whether the proletarian revolution continues to march to victory as surely as before, or whether the vacillations and waverings lead to the victory of the whiteguards, which will not alleviate the situation, but will set Russia hack from the revolution for many decades." (V. I. Lenin: Speech Delivered At The All-Russia Congress Of Transport Workers - March 27, 1921)

* * *

"I have already said that the fundamental features of our economy in 1921 are the same as those in 1918. The spring of 1921, mainly as a result of the crop failure and the loss of cattle, brought a sharp deterioration in the condition of the peasantry, which was bad enough because of the war and blockade. This resulted in political vacillations which, generally speaking, express the very “nature” of the small producer. Their most striking expression was the Kronstadt mutiny.

The vacillation of the petty-bourgeois element was the most characteristic feature of the Kronstadt events. There was very little that was clear, definite and fully shaped. We heard nebulous slogans about “freedom”, “freedom of trade”, “emancipation”, “Soviets without the Bolsheviks”, or new elections to the Soviets, or relief from “Party dictatorship”, and so on and so forth. Both the Mensheviks and the Socialist-Revolutionaries declared the Kronstadt movement to be “their own”. Victor Chernov sent a messenger to Kronstadt. On the latter’s proposal, the Menshevik Valk, one of the Kronstadt leaders, voted for the Constituent Assembly. In a flash, with lightning speed, you might say, the whiteguards mobilised all their forces “for Kronstadt “. Their military experts in Kronstadt, a number of experts, and not Kozlovsky alone, drew up a plan for a landing at Oranienbaum, which scared the vacillating mass of Mensheviks, Socialist-Revolutionaries and non-party elements. More than fifty Russian whiteguard newspapers published abroad conducted a rabid campaign “for Kronstadt ”. The big banks, all the forces of finance capital, collected funds to assist Kronstadt. That shrewd leader of the bourgeoisie and the landowners, the Cadet Milyukov, patiently explained to the simpleton Victor Chernov directly (and to the Mensheviks Dan and Rozhkov, who are in jail in Petrograd for their connection with the Kronstadt events, indirectly) that that there is no need to hurry with the Constituent Assembly, and that Soviet power can and must be supported—only without the Bolsheviks.

Of course, it is easy to be cleverer than conceited simpletons like Chernov, the petty-bourgeois phrase-monger, or like Martov, the knight of philistine reformism doctored to pass for Marxism. Properly speaking, the point is not that Milyukov, as an individual, has more brains, but that, because of his class position, the party leader of the big bourgeoisie sees and understands the class essence and political interaction of things more clearly than the leaders of the petty bourgeoisie, tbe Chernovs and Martovs. For the bourgeoisie is really a class force which, under capitalism, inevitably rules both under a monarchy and in the most democratic republic, and which also inevitably enjoys the support of the world bourgeoisie. But the petty bourgeoisie, i.e., all the heroes of the Second International and of the “Two-and-a-Half” International, cannot, by the very economic nature of things, be anything else than the expression of class impotence; hence the vacillation, phrase-mongering and helplessness. In 1789, the petty bourgeois could still be great revolutionaries. In 1848, they were ridiculous and pathetic. Their actual role in 1917-21 is that of abominable agents and out-and-out servitors of reaction, be their names Chernov, Martov, Kautsky, MacDonald, or what have you.

Martov showed himself to be nothing but a philistine Narcissus when he declared in his Berlin journal that Kronstadt not only adopted Menshevik slogans but also proved that there could be an anti-Bolshevik movement which did not entirely serve the interests of the whiteguards, the capitalists and the landowners. He says in effect: “Let us shut our eves to the fact that all the genuine whiteguards hailed the Kronstadt mutineers and collected funds in aid of Kronstadt through the banks!” Compared with the Chernovs and Martovs, Milyukov is right, for he is revealing the true tactics of the real whiteguard force, the force of the capitalists and landowners. He declares: “It does not matter whom we support, be they anarchists or any sort of Soviet government, as long as the Bolsheviks are overthrown, as long as there is a shift in power; it does not matter whether to the right or to the left, to the Mensheviks or to the anarchists, as long as it is away from the Bolsheviks. As for the rest—‘we’, the Milyukovs, ‘we’, the capitalists and landowners, will do the rest ‘ourselves’; we shall slap down the anarchist pygmies, the Chernovs and the Martovs, as we did Chernov and Maisky in Siberia, the Hungarian Chernovs and Martovs in Hungary, Kautsky in Germany and the Friedrich Adlers and Co. in Vienna.” The real, hard-headed bourgeoisie have made fools of hundreds of these philistine Narcissuses—whether Menshevik, Socialist-Revolutionary or non-party—and have driven them out scores of times in all revolutions in all countries. History proves it. The facts bear it out. The Narcissuses will talk; the Milyukovs and whiteguards will act.

Milyukov is absolutely right when he says, “If only there is a power shift away from the Bolsheviks, no matter whether it is a little to the right or to the left, the rest will take care of itself.” This is class truth, confirmed by the history of revolutions in all countries, and by the centuries of modern history since the Middle Ages. The scattered small producers, the peasants, are economically and politically united either by the bourgeoisie (this has always been—and will always be—the case under capitalism in all countries, in all modern revolutions), or by the proletariat (that was the case in a rudimentary form for a very short period at the peak of some of the greatest revolutions in modern history; that has been the case in Russia in a more developed form in 1917-21). Only the Narcissuses will talk and dream about a “third” path, and a “third force”.

With enormous difficulty, and in the course of desperate struggles, the Bolsheviks have trained a proletarian vanguard that is capable of governing; they have created and successfully defended the dictatorship of the proletariat. After the test of four years of practical experience, the relation of class forces in Russia has become as clear as day: the steeled and tempered vanguard of the only revolutionary class; the vacillating petty-bourgeois element; and the Milyukovs, the capitalists and landowners, lying in wait abroad and supported by the world bourgeoisie. It is crystal-clear: only the latter are able to take advantage of any “shift of power “, and will certainly do so.

In the 1918 pamphlet I quoted above, this point was put very clearly: “the principal enemy” is the “petty-bourgeois element”. “Either we subordinate it to our control and accounting, or it will overthrow the workers’ power as surely and as inevitably as the revolution was over thrown by the Napoleons and the Cavaignacs who sprang from this very soil of petty proprietorship. This is how the question stands. That is the only view we can take of the matter.” (Excerpt from the pamphlet of May 5, 1918, cf. above.)

Our strength lies in complete clarity and the sober consideration of all the existing class magnitudes, both Russian and international; and in the inexhaustible energy, iron resolve and devotion in struggle that arise from this. We have many enemies, but they are disunited, or do not know their own minds (like all the petty bourgeoisie, all the Martovs and Chernovs, all the non-party elements and anarchists). But we are united—directly among ourselves and indirectly with tbe proletarians of all countries; we know just what we want. That is why we are invincible on a world scale, although this does not in the least preclude the possibility of defeat for individual proletarian revolutions for longer or shorter periods.

There is good reason for calling the petty-bourgeois element an element, for it is indeed something that is most amorphous, indefinite and unconscious. The petty-bourgeois Narcissuses imagine that “universal suffrage” abolishes the nature of the small producer under capitalism. As a matter of fact, it helps the bourgeoisie, through the church, the press, the teachers, the police, the militarists and a thousand and one forms of economic oppression, to subordinate the scattered small producers. Ruin, want and the hard conditions of life give rise to vacillation: one day for the bourgeoisie, the next, for the proletariat. Only the steeled proletarian vanguard is capable of withstanding and overcoming this vacillation.

The events of the spring of 1921 once again revealed the role of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks: they help the vacillating petty-bourgeois element to recoil from the Bolsheviks, to cause a “shift of power” in favour of the capitalists and landowners. The Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries have now learned to don the “non-party” disguise. This has been fully proved. Only fools now fail to see this and understand that we must not allow ourselves to be fooled. Non-Party conferences are not a fetish. They are valuable if they help us to come closer to the impassive masses—the millions of working people still outside politics. They are harmful if they provide a platform for the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries masquerading as “non-party” men. They are helping the mutinies, and the whiteguards. The place for Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, avowed or in non-party guise, is not at a non-Party conference but in prison (or on foreign journals, side by side with the white guards; we were glad to let Martov go abroad). We can and must find other methods of testing the mood of the masses and coming closer to them. We suggest that those who want to play the parliamentary, constituent assembly and non-Party conference game, should go abroad; over there, by Martov’s side, they can try the charms of “democracy” and ask Wrangel’s soldiers about them. We have no time for this “opposition” at “conferences” game. We are surrounded by the world bourgeoisie, who are watching for every sign of vacillation in order to bring back “their own men”, and restore the landowners and the bourgeoisie. We will keep in prison the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries, whether avowed or in “non-party” guise.

We shall employ every means to establish closer contacts with the masses of working people untouched by politics— except such means as give scope to the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, and the vacillations that benefit Milyukov. In particular, we shall zealously draw into Soviet work, primarily economic work, hundreds upon hundreds of non-Party people, real non-Party people from the masses, the rank and file of workers and peasants, and not those who have adopted non-party colours in order to crib Menshevik and Socialist-Revolutionary instructions which are so much to Milyukov’s advantage. Hundreds and thousands of non-Party people are working for us, and scores occupy very important and responsible posts. We must pay more attention to the way they work. We must do more to promote and test thousands and thousands of rank-and-file workers, to try them out systematically and persistently, and appoint hundreds of them to higher posts, if experience shows that they can fill them.

Our Communists still do not have a sufficient understanding of their real duties of administration: they should not strive to do “everything themselves”, running themselves down and failing to cope with everything, undertaking twenty jobs and finishing none. They should check up on the work of scores and hundreds of assistants, arrange to have their work checked up from below, i.e., by the real masses. They should direct the work and learn from those who have the knowledge (the specialists) and the experience in organising large-scale production (the capitalists). The intelligent Communist will not be afraid to learn from the military expert, although nine-tenths of the military experts are capable of treachery at every opportunity. The wise Communist will not be afraid to learn from a capitalist (whether a big capitalist concessionaire, a commission agent, or a petty capitalist co-operator, etc.), although the capitalist is no better than the military expert. Did we not learn to catch treacherous military experts in the Red Army, to bring out the honest and conscientious, and, on the whole, to utilise thousands and tens of thousands of military experts? We are learning to do the same thing (in an unconventional way) with engineers and teachers, although we are not doing it as well as we did it in the Red Army (there Denikin and Kolchak spurred us on, compelled us to learn more quickly, diligently and intelligently). We shall also learn to do it (again in an unconventional way) with the commission agents, with the buyers working for the state, the petty capitalist co-operators, the entrepreneur concessionaires, etc.

The condition of the masses of workers and peasants needs to be improved right away. And we shall achieve this by putting new forces, including non-Party forces, to useful work. The tax in kind, and a number of measures connected with it, will facilitate this; we shall thereby cut at the economic root of the small producer’s inevitable vacillations. And we shall ruthlessly fight the political vacillations, which benefit no one but Milyukov. The waverers are many, we are few. The waverers are disunited, we are united. The waverers are not economically independent, the proletariat is. The waverers don’t know their own minds: they want to do something very badly, but Milyukov won’t let them. We know what we want.

And that is why we shall win." (Lenin: "The Tax in Kind" - 21 April, 1921)

* * *

Lenin unmasked the "Workers' Opposition" as the prolonged arm of the anarchist counter-revolution in Kronstadt within the party.

"Comrade Kollontai, for example, said bluntly: 'Lenin’s report evaded Kronstadt.' When I heard that I didn’t know what to say. My report tied in everything—from beginning to end—with the lessons of Kronstadt. If anything, I deserve to be reproached for devoting the greater part of my report to the lessons that flow from the Kronstadt events, and the smaller part to past mistakes, political facts and crucial points in our work, which, in my opinion, determine our political tasks and help us to avoid such mistakes in the future.

I now come to the Workers’ Opposition. You have admitted that you are in opposition. You have come to the Party Congress with Comrade Kollontai’s pamphlet which is entitled 'The Workers’ Opposition'. When you sent in the final proofs, you knew about the Kronstadt events and the rising petty-bourgeois counter-revolution. And it is at a time like this that you come here, calling yourselves a Workers’ Opposition. You don ’t seem to realise the responsibility you are undertaking, and the way you are disrupting our unity!

This is the petty-bourgeois, anarchist element not only among the masses of the workers, but also in our own Party; and that is something we cannot tolerate in any circumstances. (Lenin: (3) Summing-Up Speech On The Report Of The C.C. Of The R.C.P.(B.) ; March 9, 1921

 

History of the CPSU (B) - [Short Course]:

"The way the enemies of the proletariat take advantage of every deviation from the thoroughly consistent Communist line was most strikingly shown in the case of the Kronstadt mutiny, when the bourgeois counter-revolutionaries and Whiteguards in all countries of the world immediately expressed their readiness to accept even the slogans of the Soviet system, if only they might thereby secure the overthrow of the dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia, and when the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the bourgeois counter-revolutionaries in general resorted in Kronstadt to slogans calling for an insurrection against the Soviet Government of Russia ostensibly in the interest of Soviet power. These facts fully prove that the Whiteguards strive, and are able to disguise themselves as Communists, and even as people "more Left" than the Communists, solely for the purpose of weakening and overthrowing the bulwark of the proletarian revolution in Russia. Menshevik leaflets distributed in Petrograd on the eve of the Kronstadt mutiny likewise show how the Mensheviks took advantage of the disagreements in the R.C.P. actually in order to egg on and support the Kronstadt mutineers, the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Whiteguards, while claiming to be opponents of mutiny and supporters of the Soviet power, only with supposedly slight modifications."

 

 

 

 

III

How the Trotskyites betrayed the October Revolution

 

 

 As the most important text we recommend to study Stalin's famous books against Trotskyism. Here is a small selection of texts:

 

STALIN

AGAINST TROTSKYISM

 

Trotzkyism or Leninism?

(November 1924)

 

  

The October Revolution and the Tactics of the Russian Communists

December 1924

 

CONCERNING QUESTIONS OF LENINISM

(January 1926)

 

 

 

On the final victory of socialism

18 January 1938

 

Comrade Stalin exposed the Trozskyite betrayal of the October Revolution so excellently that all questions are exhaustively answered by himself.

We have nothing further to add to it.

 

It was Trotsky

who accused Stalin to be the alleged "traitor" of the October Revolution

and thus a traitor of the world socialist revolution

 

We want to prove this by selecting some quotations of TROTSKY (Trotskyist quotations related to Stalin and the October Revolution):

"The party was in abyssal confusion."

"In 1917, Stalin left only the impression of a gray spot that occasionally appears and then disappears again."

"Stalin has practically disappeared from the scene and has hardly ever been seen in Smolny."

"Stalin is by nature lazy."

"He prefers to smoke the pipe and waited while not knowing what to do next";

"Stalin had no contact with the masses and did not trust them";

"Stalin generally tended to underestimate the workers' and soldiers' preparedness to fight";

"Although Stalin was chief editor of the "Pravda " and signed his articles with his name, these articles were not noticeable to anyone, and no one was interested in their author."

"There is almost nothing to say about Stalin's journalistic work during this period;

"The higher the momentum of the movement, the smaller the place that Stalin occupies in it."

"In October, the decisive month of a decisive year, he is less than ever to be remembered."

"With the exception of a few plenary sessions, (Lenin, Zinoviev, and Trotsky), the Central Committee did not play a political role. "

" Stalin's time came after the end of the civil war,"

" Stalin was for the uprising, but he did not believe that the workers and soldiers were ready to act "

" Stalin had supported Kamenev and Zinoviev four days before the insurrection" " Stalin is overshadowed by historical decisions ";

"In the last week before the insurrection, Stalin maneuvered between Lenin, Trotsky, and Sverdlov, on the one hand, and Kamenev and Zinoviev on the other".

" "I can not say much about Stalin's participation in the October Revolution";

"During the October revolution Stalin's name is never mentioned ;

"All important decisions regarding the conduct of the insurrection were made in Stalin's absence, and he took no part in it";

"No, Stalin did not lead the insurrection";

"Stalin needed about twenty years to impose a historical panorama on the country, occupying the place of the real organizers of the October revolt, while the latter is attributed to the role of traitors to the revolution";

"Stalin did not feel directly responsible for the fate of the revolution";

" Stalin never fully understood the inner logic of the October revolution. "
(all quotations fromTrotsky's "Stalin Biography", 1940);

"Every great social epoch," says Marx, appealing to Helvetius, "demands her great men, but if such are not found, history invents them." ("The Class War in France.") Such a "fictitious" man of the anti-October reaction is Stalin. "

"Disregard in matters of principles and inability of political thinking were always Stalin's companions";

" Without any knowledge of the history and the Internal life of the foreign states, without a personal knowledge of their working-class movement, and even without the possibility of pursuing the foreign press, Stalin is now called upon to resolve the questions of the international revolution"
(Trotsky, 1930, "Who guided the Komintern?")

"Stalin is a second-rank figure of the proletarian revolution";

"Through the mediation of the Comintern, Stalinism became the worst obstacle to world revolution";

"The Stalinists are actually on the extreme right wing of the workers' movement, and insofar as they continue to cover the authority of the October revolution, they are far more dangerous than the old traditional opportunists". (Trotsky: Stalin's betrayal and the world revolution) 10 June 1935;

"Without Stalin, Hitler would not exist."

"The struggle against the Comintern at world level is currently the most important part of the struggle against the Stalinist dictatorship." (Trotsky) - 1938;

"The world revolution will march under the banner of the Fourth International."
(Trotsky, Why Stalin defeated the Opposition, Interview, 1936)

"One cannot derive Stalinism from Bolshevism or from Marxism. This would mean nothing else but deriving the counterrevolution from the revolution." (Trotsky, 1937, "Bolshevism and Stalinism")

"Stalinism, antithesis of Bolshevism, is the mortal enemy of the proletarian revolution." (Trotsky)

We could continue these Trotskyist accusations endlessly ...

 

Trotsky did not believe in the possibility of the establishment of socialism under conditions of world capitalist encirclement. Trotsky believed in the "export of the revolution" which is an anti-Leninist theory of the world socialist revolution. Struggle against Trotskyist "export of revolution" does not simultaneously mean to renounce the world socialist revolution. In the contrary.

The Trotskyists wanted to overthrow Stalin in order to "save" the proletarian world revolution. The Comintern (SH) will defeat Trotskyism in order to continue victoriously the road of the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world revolution.

Trotsky understood how to juggle with the method of dialectics up to such a perfection that Leninism, in the end, would have the "opposite effect" (adaption of Leninism onto Trotskyism). This concerns especially the dialectics between the October revolution and socialism in one country. The October revolution paved the way to socialism in one country. And socialism in one country became the lever and basis of the world socialist revolution. In this way, the October revolution became the material starting point of the world socialist revolution. This is the Leninist dialectics of the theory of the October revolution. The theory of socialism in one country - is the Leninist foundation of the Stalinist construction of socialism, the road of which was paved by the October revolution as the basis for the world socialist revolution. Trotsky, however, created an unpermissible antagonistic contradiction between socialism in one country and the world socialist revolution.

Regarded historically, Lenin hoped for some years that the October revolution would inflame the entire proletarian world revolution within shortest time. However the world revolution did not come as quick as wished. For this, one may not put the blame on the Bolsheviks. What should the Bolsheviks have done ? To sit back and do nothing or put the power of the Russian proletariat into the service of the world socialist revolution. The Bolsheviks decided to choose the latter one. And what did Trotsky do ? He condemned socialism in one country as a "betrayal" at the principles of proletarian internationalism. According to the moral of Trotsky, the Russian workers cannot live like in paradise while the world proletariat suffers in capitalist hell. We answer: In truth it was the Soviet proletariat which made the greatest sacrifices for the world socialist revolution - beginning with the victory of the October revolution until the victory of the Stalinist world camp. In contrast, the Trotskyist "permanent revolution", until today, has never been victoriously implemented into practice.

Trotsky assumed that socialism can only be created after the victory of the world socialist revolution. The history of the victory of socialism in one country proved Trotsky's theory of the "permanent Revolution" wrong.

Trotsky had hidden his theory of the "permanent Revolution" behind the mask of Marx and Lenin, while Lenin was the true creator of the theory of socialism in one country. Stalin defended and further developed this Leninist theory and put it excellently into practice. This is the historical truth which cannot denied by the Trotskyists.

Trotsky attacked the Leninist theory of socialism in one country as a selfish "Stalinist" theory of "nationalist reformism". With this accusation, Trotsky tried to prevent the Soviet Union from its decisive role as the lever and basis of the world socialist revolution. Trotsky failed and Leninism-Stalinism defeated Trotskyism.

The imperialists have always tried to accuse Stalin of using the world revolution as a mere pretext to make of the Soviet Union an imperialist super power. There was even an interview with him, where he supposedly "declared his renunciation of the world revolution":

"This is not the first time the New York American has tried to make capital out of forged non-existent Stalin "interviews" and "articles." I know, for example, that in June 1927 the New York American published a counterfeit "interview with Stalin," alleged to have been given to a certain Cecil Winchester, about a "rupture with Britain," abandonment of "world revolution," the Arcos raid, and so forth. In connection with this, the Argus Clipping Bureau wrote to me at the time asking me to confirm the genuineness of that "interview" and inviting me to become its client. Having no doubt that this was a piece of trickery, I at once sent the following refutation to the New York Daily Worker:

"Dear comrades, the Argus Clipping Bureau has sent me a cutting from the New York American (of June 12, 1927), containing an interview which I am supposed to have given to a certain Cecil Winchester. I hereby declare that I have never seen any Cecil Winchester and never gave him or anyone else any interview, and I have had absolutely nothing to do with the New York American. If the Argus Clipping Bureau is not a bureau of swindlers it must be surmised that it was misled by swindlers and blackmailers connected with the New York American. J. Stalin. July 11, 1927."

Stalin, Works, Vol. 10, August - December, 1927

What does this example show? It shows firstly that the imperialists wanted to prove that Stalin would have "turned away from the world revolution" and secondly this example proves that Stalin's world-revolutionary position was morally clean, otherwise such a trickery would not have been necessary at all.

9 years later it was Trotsky who became the speech-pipe of the anti-Stalinist press of the imperialists , namely concerning Stalin's alleged "abandonment" of the world revolution. It was about the following interview:

"Howard:

Does your statement mean that the Soviet Union has to any degree abandoned its plans and intentions for bringing about a world revolution?

Stalin: We never had such plans and intentions. You see, we Marxists believe that a revolution will also take place in other countries. But it will take place only when the revolutionaries in those countries think it possible, or necessary. The export of revolution is nonsense.

Every country will make its own revolution if it wants to, and if it does not want to there will be no revolution. For example, our country wanted to make a revolution and made it, and now we are building a new, classless society. But to assert that we want to make a revolution in other countries, to interfere in their lives, means saying what is untrue, and what we have never advocated." (March 1, 1936)

This statement of Stalin is completely in accordance with Lenin, namely that the sole Russian proletariat can never make the entire world socialist revolution in place of the proletariat of all the other countries. The world revolution is a matter of the proletarians of all countries and not that of one country all alone.

Trotsky quotated this Stalin interview, however, with the intention of driving a wedge between Lenin and Stalin. In his comment of this Stalin quotation, Trotsky wrote: "Stalin is not the continuator of the world socialist revolution, but its grave-digger."

It was also Trotsky who influenced the "leftist Opposition" to declare in its platform: "Since Lenin's death, a whole series of new theories have been created whose only purpose is to justify the withdrawl of the Stalin -group from the path of the international proletarian revolution."

Trotsky: "The bourgeois reaction continues to accuse Stalin of being the inspirer of the world revolution, but only from inertia or because of any ulterior motives." (January 13, 1938)

* * *

There are many other reasons for Trotsky's betrayal of the October revolution. We want select only a further one.

Trotsky: "If the revolution would have triumphed at least in Germany, the need to forbid the other Soviet parties would have been dispensable immediately. The fact that the rule of a single party served juridically as the starting point for the Stalinist totalitarian system is quite indisputable."

The October Revolution had to destroy all parties which were opposed to the Bolshevik party - otherwise the victory would be impossible. In accordance with the experiences of the October revolution, the indispensability of the single-party-system is one of the most important principles of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism. The victory of the socialist revolution is, in general, and the world socialist revolution, in particular, impossible without the sole leadership of the communist party which is, on her part, guided by the lessons of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism.

In contrast, Trotsky turned this principled question of the October revolution into a pure Russian tactical question which helped him to pave the way to the propaganda of a Soviet multiparty system on a world scale. In our view this Trotskyist concept of multiparty system does not differ from the concept of Dimitrov's "people's front" which was, by the way, vehemently "criticized" by the Trotskyites. This shows that the "left"-wing and right-wing betrayal of the October revolution differ only apparently, but they are in essence identically and complement each other (Block of the "left" and right party-enemies). This has not changed in 100 years. Therefore, we Stalinist-Hoxhaists have to continue the fight against betrayal of the October revolution in an ideological two-fronts war.

* * *

Trotskyites "support" the revolution in words, while actually undermining and hindering its realization in service of the counter-revolution.

Trotskyites argue falsly that the October, Russian revolution of 1917 was the realisation of Trotsky’s "theory of Permanent Revolution".

Stalin is said to have removed the "old guard" of the Bolsheviks and thus "betrayed" the October revolution. We Stalinist-Hoxhaists reject these accusations and argue that the victory of the October Revolution was based on Marxism-Leninism and led by the two Classics of Marxism-Leninism - Lenin and Stalin. Lenin and Stalin defeated successfully the Trotskyite "theory of Permanent Revolution."

After the February Revolution of 1917, just as in 1905, the Trotskyists confused the bourgeois democratic stage of the revolution in Russia with the socialist stage; failing to recognize the bourgeois democratic stage, they demanded the immediate creation of a “true workers’ government, ” the leading role in which they assigned to conciliatory parties. They continued to advocate the alliance of the Bolsheviks with the opportunists under the aegis of Trotskyism, and they attempted to make the Mezhraiontsy, or “interfaction” Social Democrats, into a nucleus around which a united, centrist Social Democratic Party could be formed.

After the February Revolution of 1917, the Mezhraiontsy announced their agreement with the Bolsheviks, into whose ranks they were accepted at the Sixth Congress of the RSDLP(B). The Trotskyists who entered the party as Mezhraiontsy, however, continued to adhere to their former ideological positions and to struggle against Leninism.

During the first decade of Soviet power, Trotskyism presented the greatest threat from within the ACP(B) since it sowed doubt among the ranks of the working class and the working-class party in the strength of the socialist revolution and in the cause of the socialist transformation of the country. The Trotskyists opposed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (1918) and foiled the timely conclusion of the negotiations, thus exposing the still weak Soviet republic to the threat of German imperialist aggression. As a result, the Soviet government was compelled to sign a peace treaty at a later date and under worse conditions.

The Trotskyists viewed the raison d’être of Soviet power to be the fostering, or pushing, of world proletarian revolution by any means, including military measures. This interpretation was “completely at variance with Marxism, for Marxism has always been opposed to ‘pushing’ revolutions, which develop with the growing acuteness of the class antagonisms that engender revolutions” (MEW, vol. 35, p. 403). The thesis of pushing world revolution by means of war is also a tenet of present-day Trotskyism.

During the difficult period of reconstruction after the Civil War of 1918–20, Trotskyism took shape as a petit bourgeois deviation within the RCP(B). The Trotskyists initiated an intraparty struggle during the trade union controversy of 1920 and 1921. They created a faction with its own political platform demanding the transformation of the unions into an adjunct of the state machinery and the reduction of the party’s guiding role in building socialism. They also attempted to impose upon the party wartime methods of leading the masses.

In 1923 and 1924 the ideological formation of Trotskyism was completed as an antiparty trend reflecting the attitudes of part of the urban petite bourgeoisie and the bourgeois intelligentsia and serving the interests of the remnants of the capitalist classes in the country. Trotskyism’s principal thesis was the rejection of the possibility of building socialism in the USSR. Echoing the leaders of the social democratic movement in the West, the Trotskyists declared that because of the capitalist encirclement of the USSR and the country’s technical and economic backwardness, the Soviet working class could not succeed in consolidating its power and in building a socialist society. The Trotskyists opposed the Leninist doctrine that the dictatorship of the proletariat was a special class form of alliance between the working class and the peasantry; instead they propounded the thesis that the peasantry was hostile to the cause of building socialism. The Trotskyists declared the Soviet socioeconomic system to be state capitalism, and they treated the New Economic Policy (NEP) as but a retreat toward capitalism. Considering the building of socialism in one country to be a sign of insularism and a departure from the principles of proletarian internationalism, they continued to advocate the adventuristic policy of pushing world revolution.

In 1922 the Trotskyists asserted that although the Soviet republic had defended itself as a state in the political and military sense, it was not approaching the creation of a socialist society; in their view a true socialist economy could not arise in Soviet Russia until after the victory of the proletariat in the major countries of Europe. In order to hold out until that time and to prepare the country for “revolutionary warfare, ” the Trotskyists during the reconstruction period proposed a “dictatorship of industry” intended to increase the USSR’s military potential; for the transition to a reconstructed national economy they advocated a policy of rapid industrialization at the expense of the peasantry, whom they called a colony of industry. The Trotskyists wanted to finance the industrialization by, for example, raising prices of industrial goods, lowering prices of agricultural products, increasing taxes on peasant farms, and extracting funds from the villages; such measures, however, threatened to break up the alliance between the working class and the peasantry and to bring about the downfall of Soviet power.

In “The Lessons of October, ” an article published in the autumn of 1924, Trotsky distorted the history of Bolshevism and attempted to replace Leninism with Trotskyism. The Trotskyist leaders strove by any available means to remove their opponents in the Central Committee of the party and to take control of the Central Committee. Predicting the inevitable defeat of the USSR in the next war, they planned to use this defeat to overthrow the existing regime. Objectively speaking, the Trotskyist political and economic line would have led to the restoration of capitalism in the USSR.

 

In the end, we recommend the book:

"Trotskyism - Counter-Revolution in Disguise"

especially Chapter: "Trotsky - the historian"

( written by Olgin in 1935)

 

LENIN ON TROTSKY

“I know that there are, of course, sages who think they are very clever and even call themselves Socialists, who assert that power should not have been seized until the revolution had broken out in all countries. They do not suspect that by speaking in this way they are deserting the revolution and going over to the side of the bourgeoisie. To wait until the toiling classes bring about a revolution on an international scale means that everybody should stand stock-still in expectation. That is nonsense.”

 – Lenin, Speech delivered at a joint meeting of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Moscow Soviet, 14th May 1918, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 9.

 

Nadezhna Krupskaya

The Lessons of October

(The Errors of Trotskyism, May 1925)

CONCLUSION:

"Down with Trotsky, long live Stalin!"

Down with the Fourth (Fifth ... etc.) International !

Long live the Third International of Lenin and Stalin!

 

How must we defend the October revolution against the Trotskyist betrayal ?

If we are to defend the October revolution, we must defend the Leninist theory of world revolution against the Trotskyist so-called "permanent revolution" because Trotskyism is an ideology for adapting Leninism to the bourgeois ideology.
We must defend the theory of all 5 classics of Marxism-Leninism about the world revolution, especially against those who deny it in deeds. Some are using an "anti-Trotskyist" mask because they are too cowardly to attack the 5 classics openly. This includes the ICMLPO.

Not anyone who is an "anti-Trotskyist", is simultaneously a Stalinist-Hoxhaist. The bourgeoisie fights against us Stalinist-Hoxhaists with the help of Trotskyism and to the same time with the help of a fake (bourgeois) "anti-Trotskyism."

The Comintern (SH) teaches that there is an "anti-Trotskyism" in words, behind which the anti-Stalinism-Hoxhaism conceals itself. Thus, at the time of Stalin, there were not a few who used anti-Trotskyism not only as a stepping-stone for their own career, but as an effective mask in their struggle against Stalinism. We can therefore only completely defeat Trotskyism if we also tear down all the masks of "anti-Trotskyism" . In the struggle against so-called "anti-Trotskyism" (behind which a whole series of anti-Stalinist-Hoxhaist theories are concealed), we are defending not Trotskyism, but Stalinism-Hoxhaism. We must struggle against both the open and the hidden Trotskyism in the question of the world revolution.
In all questions of Stalinism-Hoxhaism, we must always clearly distinguish between those who honestly support the Comintern (SH), and the others who applause only because they want to misuse our trust.

Under the banner of Trotskyism there will never be a world socialist revolution.

Long live the world socialist revolution under the banner of Stalinism-Hoxhaism! "

 

 

 

IV

How DIMITROV betrayed the October Revolution

 

STALIN: "The October Revolution marks the victory of the Third International over the Second International." (November 6-7, 1927)

Comintern (SH): The dissolution of the Third International marks the betrayal of the October revolution.

 

The history of the Communist International teaches us:

Letting the world proletariat without the Bolshevist world party means leaving the world proletariat in the lurch. The dissolution of the Comintern is nothing else than liquidation of the leadership of the world proletariat, without which the proletarian world revolution is doomed to fail.

The neo-revisionists from ICMLPO accuse us of branding Dimitrov's defense as a betrayal of Marxism-Leninism.
We answer: Yes, it was our historical duty to draw a principled Stalinist-Hoxhaist demarcation-line against Dimitrov !

We Stalinist-Hoxhaists founded anew the Comintern which Dimotrov had dissolved !

Whoever defends Dimitrov, defends the criminal liquidators of the Comintern. And whoever defends the liquidation of the Comintern is an enemy of the October revolution, for the October revolution can never be implemented victoriously on a world scale without the Communist International. Those who defend Dimitrov, are enemies of the Communist International of Lenin and Stalin, are enemies of the world socialist revolution, are enemies of Stalinism-Hoxhaism!

If you give up the struggle for the world socialist revolution, you become a traitor, and you are then an enemy of the October Revolution.

If you dissolve the indispensable world organization of proletarian internationalism, if you liquidate the only world revolutionary organization with which the world proletariat can get rid of the capitalist world, then you are not any more a communist, then you became a servant of the world bourgeoisie.

Without leadership of the Communist International, the Communist parties became useless for the world socialist revolution.

The truth of this betrayal cannot be denied, even not after hundred years of the October Revolution.

And it was the Comintern under the leadership of Dimitrov that gave up the struggle for the world socialist revolution.

The criminal dissolution of the Comintern in 1943 is an ineradicable historical eyesore because:

A world organization of the proletariat, which dissolves itself, can never lead the world socialist revolution to victory.

If you defend Dimitrov, you defend the dissolution of the Comintern, and this means: unavoidably defeat of the world socialist revolution. If you want to struggle against Dimitrov, you must struggle for the re-founding of the Comintern which organizes the victorious completion of the October revolution on the basis of the teachings of the five Classics of Marxism-Leninism.

Dimitrov's betrayal of the October Revolution became a historical fact latest when he dissolved the Comintern. This betrayal was successfully defeated by the founding of the Comintern (SH) on 31st of December 2000.

* * *

The October Revolution was a victory of the Bolsheviks over the betrayal of the Second International.

And the World Socialist Revolution will be a victory of the Comintern (SH) over those who betrayed and finally liquidated the Comintern of Lenin and Stalin.

* * *

Only the world revolution - or at least the victory of the socialist revolution in several countries - can guarantee the survival of socialism in "one" country, and thus the achievements of the October Revolution. Those who betray the world revolution, also betray the socialist revolution in every individual country.

The October Revolution was the prerequisite of the founding of the Soviet Union and thus for the basis and lever of the world socialist revolution. Consequently, betrayal of the world socialist revolution is equal to the betrayal of the October Revolution - and vice versa.

* * *

Neither before, nor after the October Revolution, there was a smallest reason for the dissolution of the CPSU (B).

Neither before, nor after the World Socialist Revolution, there will be the smallest reason for the dissolution of the Communist International.

* * *

The October Revolution could only be victorious under the leadership of the Bolsheviks.
The world socialist revolution can only be victorious under the Bolshevik leadership of the Communist International. Without revolutionary leadership of a Bolshevik world organisation, the matter of the world-proletarian revolution is doomed to failure.
Whoever dissolves the Communist International thus renounces the world organization, without which the socialist world revolution can not be victorious.
The historical significance of the dissolution of the Communist International consists in the betrayal of the inalienable principles of the October Revolution.

"Essentially the Communist International did not fall - lives on till this day and will also live on in future!”  (Lenin ). The Communist International is indestructible, because the world proletarian revolution is indestructible.

The dissolution of the Comintern contradicts Leninism, the victorious ideology of the October Revolution in particular, and the victorious ideology of the world socialist revolution, created by the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism, in general.

The course and goal of the world socialist revolution was, from the outset, the essential content of all the Comintern documents, in particular anchored in the program of 1928 (VI World Congress). However, with the VII. World Congress in 1935, the departure from the socialist world revolution began and thus from the October Revolution.
The October revolution marked the turn of world history from the old capitalist world to the new socialist world.
The October Revolution thereby exposed the lie of the leaders who dissolved the Comintern, namely that a "peaceful transition to socialism" is possible through the so called "people's front". The October Revolution established the dictatorship of the proletariat. The October Revolution began to build the new, socialist order upon the ruins of the destroyed old bourgeois order.
The leaders of the dissolution of the Comintern, however, abandoned these ideas and principles of the October revolution, the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie, the destruction of the capitalist state, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The dissolution of the Comintern was a historically lasting defeat for the world proletariat and the world revolution, was a victory of the international forces of the Anti-Comintern, was a decisive factor in the historical growth of modern revisionism.

In essence, there is no difference between Dimitrov who dissolved the Comintern, and Trotsky who founded a counter-revolutionary Fourth International. Both are traitors of the October revolution, and liquidators of the Comintern of Lenin and Stalin. We Stalinist-Hoxhaists had been the only force which founded anew the Comintern in the year 2000 with the aim to crown the October Revolution with the victory of the world socialist revolution. Those who blame us that we have revived the Comintern, defend Dimitrov's liquidation of the Comintern and therewith his betrayal of the October Revolution.

The Neo revisionists can scold us "Trotskyites" as much as they want, but they are unable to prevent the historical break of the Comintern (SH) with all those renegades who dared to dissolve the Communist International of Lenin and Stalin. The neo-revisionists are enemies of the re-foundation of the Comintern (SH) because they defend Dimitrov's dissolution of the Comintern. On 31st of December 2000, It was not the Neo-revisionists, but the Stalinist Hoxhaists who pulled the banner of the Comintern out of the opportunistic marsh, and who now march under the purified banner of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism towards the world socialist revolution.

The dissolution of the Comintern was nothing but a disservice to the world bourgeoisie, was a historical act of capitulation, was an agreement of abandonment of the world socialist revolution and thus the end of the struggle for the global completion of the October Revolution. These capitulating Comintern leaders prepared the merging of the remainders of the Comintern Sections with bourgeois parties. The communist parties were transformed into parties of the modern revisionists, into parties of the bourgeosie. The dissolution of the communist parties began with the dissolution of the Comintern. The formation of the revisionist parties was an act of liquidation of the communist parties and thus an act against the October Revolution which was once the cradle of the communist parties. The October Revolution paved the way for the foundation of the Comintern, for the foundation of communist parties. Dimitrov, on the other hand, has pursued the opposing road of the October revolution, namely the destruction of the interconnected communist parties. Without the Communist International it is impossible for communist parties to guarantee their victory of the socialist revolution. Only the Comintern can guarantee the victories of the communist parties.

The rightist leaders of the Comintern argued that the objective of the October Revolution was allegedly "already reached" - through the false pretense of the "conclusive and irrevocable victory of socialism in the Soviet Union." This was like a licence to keep the world proletariat away from the socialist world revolution. If the victory of socialism would be "conclusive and irrevocable", then the socialist revolution would not be necessary any more - then the overthrow of the bourgeoisie would be superfluous and capitalism would peacefully give way to socialism. The dissolution of the Comintern was the organizational consequence of the liquidatory theory of the "conclusive and irrevocable victory of socialism in the Soviet Union" - which was proclaimed in a resolution of the VII World Congress of the Comintern.

Dimitrov claimed that all communist parties would supposedly be "mature" enough to exert so much influence on the "vast masses", that socialism would be possible "without" the armed destruction of the capitalist system. This peaceful way would be allegedly "possible", for example by obtaining majority relations in the parliaments, the trade unions, public institutions, thus by the "People's Front".

The bourgeois "scientists" try to disprove the Marxist-Leninist theory of the proletarian revolution, with the argument that capitalism makes any proletarian revolution superfluous through the functioning of the bourgeoisie's own 'self-regulating forces'. And because the proletarian revolution prevents capitalism from regulating itself by means of reforms, the proletarian revolution must be hindered before its outbreak. And for preventing the revolution timely, the revisionist ideology of "peaceful way to socialism" must be spread within the working class.

Providing evidence of the "superfluity" of the proletarian revolution, this is the task of every anti-communist historian. But this open anti-communism can not be so easily smuggled into the communist and workers' movement. For the accomplishement of this special mission the bourgeoisie needs her agents, who dye these "theories" in red. This includes Dimitrov and the other liquidators of the Comintern. This "theory" was smuggled into the VII World Congress by the Resolution on the Soviet Union as the bulwark which "guarantees" socialism. They argued that socialism is "irreversible" through the pure existence of the Soviet Union. With this anti-communist lie they tried to provide evidence that the proletarian revolution is not anymore necessary.

History of the restoration of capitalism proved Dimitrov wrong.

Stalinism-Hoxhaism teaches: No one can guarantee socialism to the world proletariat. Only the world proletariat itself can guarantee socialism, but not without the world socialist revolution. The October Revolution paved the way for the world power of the Soviet Union, but without the victory of the world socialist revolution there is guarantee for no socialist country. History showed that even a powerful socialist country cannot abrogate the laws of the socialist world revolution in the period of world imperialism:

«The Leninism is Marxism of an epoch of imperialism and proletarian revolution" (Stalin)

Dimitrov defied this basic Leninist doctrine and combated the global completion of the October Revolution as an alleged "sectarian deviation". The denial of the proletarian revolution, the denial of the destruction of the bourgeois state, and instead, subordination under the bourgeois government of the "popular front" - that was the worst betrayal of the October Revolution. Dimitrov regarded the October Revolution not as the beginning of the world socialist revolution, and thus not as something which has to be continued, but as something which makes the world socialist revolution "superfluous" and "dispensable". He regarded the international significance of the October Revolution as something "absolut". From this false assumption, he derived all the revisionist lies like the nations' "own way" to socialism, "peaceful way to socialism", "peaceful coexistence". All these lies were later on further modified by the modern revisionists. It was only the socialist Albania with Comrade Enver Hoxha at the head, that unmasked all these lies, and which continued successfully and undeviatingly the October Revolution - despite all pressure and machinations of the traitors of the October Revolution. The crucial key to the continuation of the path of the October Revolution was Enver Hoxha's historic speech at the Moscow Conference (1960). This was the beginning of the break through of the revisionist chain of betrayal of the October Revolution. That was the signal for the rebirth of the October Revolution outside that country where it once had been victorious.

* * *

Only the guns in the hands of the workers can guarantee the proletarian character of the Popular Front.

Dimitrov propagated the avoidance of the armed uprising, the dispence of the violent socialist revolution. Dimitrov did not fight for the destruction of the capitalist state, thus for the support of its maintenance by means of the "People's Front" government in alliance with bourgeois and petty-bourgeois parties. We Stalinist-Hoxhaists, in contrast, only fight for a government of the armed world proletariat. Abandonment of the violent overthrow of world imperialism, substituting the dictatorship of the world proletariat, substituting the socialist world revolution by a government of the "Popular Front" under the yoke of the old world-bourgeoisie, under the yoke of globalized wage-slavery - this is the height of stupidity and hypocrisy related to the present crisis of world capitalism. Dimitrov sold out the October Revolution for the thin pottage of the class-reconciliation of his "Popular Front".

The united front of the working class and the poor peasants was a lever for the victory of the October revolution. In contrast, Dimitrov's "united front" with the bourgeoisie was a lever for the destruction of the achievements of the October revolution.

Certainly, we need a world-front against war and fascism, just today is this world-front urgently needed, but this can only be a world-front which is under the leadership of the communists, a world-front in the spirit of the October Revolution. Without this world-communist front, without the world revolution, ANY OTHER world-front will never be able to abolish the inevitability of war and fascism and thus doomed to be degenerated into a bourgeois world front. This problem can only be solved by the world-revolutionary overthrow of capitalism - because capitalism is the source of war and fascism. History of the October Revolution teaches us that capitalism cannot be removed by a "Popular Front" without overthrow of the bourgeois state.

We ask: The entire VII World Congress of the Comintern had expressively commited itself to the necessity of the united front against fascism an war. Why then did the Comintern dissolve itself in 1943 (!!) while fascism and war still raged and raged. We have no other term for this "contradiction" - than capitulation to fascism and betrayal of the revolutionary anti-fascist united front of the world proletariat, betrayal of the October Revolution.

The anti-fascist united front policy of Dimitrov confines itself to the goal of forming a bourgeois popular front (with the Social Democrats, for example) to fight for the elimination of fascism. This bourgeois popular front had specifically NOT the goal to revolutionarily destroy the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the capitalist system of exploitation. The bourgeois popular front refuses categorically to establish the dictatorship of the proletariat on the ruins of the fascist state. The classic target of the violent armed socialist revolution of the proletariat had been expressively abandoned and replaced by the "peaceful" united front tactics of Dimitrov. In essence, Dimitrov limited himself to the bourgeois democracy as the goal of his anti-fascist struggle. This is proved by historical facts, though hidden behind revolutionary phrases.

The anti-fascist concept of Dimitrov thus differed fundamentally from the revolutionary concept of the Bolsheviks against the brutal reactionary counter-revolution of Tsarism and the Provisional bourgeois government which replaced Tsarism. The revolution against Tsarism did not end halfway with the bourgeois-democratic February Revolution. It was continued until the victory of the Socialist Great October Revolution under the leadership of the Bolsheviks. The October Revolution swept away the bourgeois "democracy" and realized the proletarian democracy through the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, through Soviet power.

So you can not equate the objectives of the October Revolution and the objectives of the "Popular Front" of Dimitrov without pulling the wool over the eyes of the anti-fascist masses. The one matter was the violent revolutionary road to socialism - that was the aim of the Comintern of Lenin and Stalin! The other was the so called "peaceful" way to socialism - that was the "Comintern" under the leadership of Dimitrov.

A united front of the world proletariat and the poor peasants all over the world is indispensable for the victory of the world socialist revolution, however this is absolutely impossible without the leadership of the Comintern. Can a "united front" lead to world socialism without leadership of the Comintern ? No, it can't.

Can Dimitrov be a leader of a genuine world revolutionary united front if he has simultaneously dissolved the Comintern ? No, he can't.

Dimitrov has rejected the most important cornerstone of the teachings of Marxism-Leninism - the armed proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of ther proletariat. And this in spite of the founding documents of the Comintern, in spite of all decisions of all previous world congresses which base on the unshiftable and indispensable necessity of the armed socialist, proletarian revolution on the dictatorship of the proletariat. In contrast, the Seventh World Congress discarded the necessity of the victory of the October revolution on a world scale, and on top of it, condemned the dictatorship of the proletariat as "sectarian". This is nothing else but revisionist betrayal at the socialist world revolution - betrayal at the world proletariat - betrayal at Marxism-Leninism !

No Popular Front government can be peacefully transformed into the dictatorship of the proletariat. Dimitrov violated the Marxist-Leninist principle, namely that there is no dictatorship of the proletariat, no hegemony of the world proletariat - without the reolutionary destruction of the bourgeois state machinery. The October Revolution removed the shifting of the balance of forces within the bourgeois state power. The October Revolution destroyed the bourgeois state power and established the armed state power of the proletariat. The October Revolution did not tolerate sharing proletarian state power with the bourgeoisie as it was propagated by Dimitrov and his so called "People's Front" government. Either bourgeois state power - or proletarian state power. In no way does the socialist revolution mean "anything between." "Something in between" is betrayal of the socialist revolution, is betrayal of the teachings of the October Revolution. The October Revolution teaches that the proletariat cannot participate a bourgeois government which supports imperialism and war and which fights against the Communist party. The October Revolution teaches, in contrast, that the bourgeois government must be smashed and replaced by a proletarian government.

Anyone who fights for the dictatorship of the proletariat can do so only under the sole leadership of the Communist Party and not under a bourgeois popular front government, in which the Communists form a bloc. The history of the Bolsheviks and the PAA teaches that they have rejected any unification with bourgeois parties, while Dimitrov implemented the merging of Communist parties into unitary parties. The proletarian revolution is thereby betrayed and the road to the dictatorship of the proletariat is made impossible. History proved that these countries of people's democracy degenerated into bourgeois, social-fascist countries. The October revolution teaches that the Communist Party can not share its power with bourgeois parties. Thus, there will be no world socialism together with bourgeois parties, but only without bourgeois parties. There will be no more so called "people's democracy" led by "bourgeois-proletarian" unitary parties according to the model of the former Eastern bloc countries. There will be only the Sections of the Comintern who lead the socialist revolution in their country to victory. Thus, the Comintern (SH) will be the only party to lead the world proletariat to victory of the socialist world revolution.

The October Revolution destroyed the bourgeois parties - without exception. And according to the October Revolution, the dictatorship of the world proletariat will destroy globally all bourgeois parties. The world socialist revolution excludes any "peaceful coexistence" with the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The nature of the dictatorship of the proletariat is abhorrent to the revisionist "people's front-policy" ("united" front of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie). "Together with the bourgeoisie" instead of "without the bourgeoisie" - that is the revisionist "peaceful way to socialism" and completely contrary to the teachings of the October Revolution.
If the October Revolution was impossible without the Bolshevik party, then as well, the socialist revolution in any other country would be impossible without communist party. The transformation of communist parties into revisionist parties (such as merging with social-democrat parties) was thus nothing but betrayal at the October Revolution.

The October Revolution defeated Menshevism which was a hostile ideology against the October Revolution. In contrast, - Dimitrov restored the acceptability of Menshevism and paved the way for the unification of Bolshevism with Menshevism.

A government of the "People's front", which is collaborating and merging with the bourgeoisie, is the death of every socialist revolution, is betrayal of the October Revolution, is betrayal of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Dimitrov's government of the "people's front" paved the way to the "unity" with the national bourgeoisie of the "own" country - namely after having eliminated the Comintern.

Dimitrov's government of the "people's front" is against the unity of the international revolutionary proletariat which was burried by the dissolution of the Comintern.

Dimitrov's government of the "People's front" is the unity with the national bourgeoisie against the world proletariat.

Dimitrov's government of the "People's front" is nationalist and against the Comintern's spirit of proletarian internationalism.

The task of the October Revolution is converting the dictatorship of the proletariat from a national dictatorship into an international one. The interests of the proletarian revolution in any one country must be subordinated to the interests of the proletarian revolution on a world-wide scale. Dimitrov chose the opposite path and dissolved the Comintern as the only world organisation which was able to pave the way towards the World Socialist Republic.

Especially after the dissolution of the Comintern, Dimitrov withdrew more and more openly - both in words and deeds - from the aim of the struggle for the global victory of the October Revolution and the indispensable establishment of the armed dictatorship of the world proletariat. He did not anymore struggle for the world socialist revolution and became a renegade.

STALIN:

"The characteristic feature of that danger is lack of confidence in the international proletarian revolution; lack of confidence in its victory; a sceptical attitude towards the national-liberation movement in the colonies and dependent countries; failure to understand that without the support of the revolutionary movement in other countries our country would not be able to hold out against world imperialism; failure to understand that the victory of socialism in one country alone cannot be final because it has no guarantee against intervention until the revolution is victorious in at least a number of countries; failure to understand the elementary demand of internationalism, by virtue of which the victory of socialism in one country is not an end in itself, but a means of developing and supporting the revolution in other countries.

That is the path of nationalism and degeneration, the path of the complete liquidation of the proletariat's international policy, for people afflicted with this disease regard our country not as a part of the whole that is called the world revolutionary movement, but as the beginning and the end of that movement, believing that the interests of all other countries should be sacrificed to the interests of our country." (Stalin; Works, Volume 7, "Questions and Answers"-Speech Delivered at the Sverdlov University - June 9, 1925)

The October revolution teaches to overcome opportunistic mistakes. Those who defend Dimitrov's deviation of the October revolution, and do not realize that Dimitrov has betrayed the world revolution, will cause further mistakes which can be compared with the enlargement of a downhill snowball. And this growing snowball will unavoidably crush the ICMLPO !

The Neo revisionists call us Stalinist-Hoxhaists "enemies of Marxism-Leninism", because we fight against the renegade Dimitrov. In contrast, we call the neo-revisionists supporters of renegades. Only those who defend the renegade Dimitrov, betray Marxism-Leninism. Today, one can only defend Marxism-Leninism by combating the comeback of renegades. The Neo revisionists are, in words, "defenders" of Marxism-Leninism and in deeds defenders of renegades whose myth was created by the modern revisionists. The modern revisionists condemned Stalin, the great leader of the October Revolution and simultaneously they praised Dimitrov the traitor of the October Revolution. Dimitrov capitulated, and Stalin triumphed.

 

 

 

V

How the modern revisionists betrayed the October Revolution

 

"When the Khrushchevite revisionists emerged at the head of the Soviet Communist Party and the Soviet state, the PLA declared principled, uncompromising war on them, while coming out in defence of the glorious road of the Bolshevik Party and the Soviet peoples, in defence of J.V. Stalin and the lessons of October, which were trampled underfoot by the revisionists, and this it regarded as its internationalist duty."

(ENVER HOXHA)

 

The betrayal of modern revisionists can't darken the light of the Great October Revolution.

We recommend to study some texts

 

Hyni Kapo

THE IDEAS OF THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION ARE DEFENDED AND CARRIED FORWARD IN THE STRUGGLE AGAINST MODERN REVISIONISM

Speech at the solemn meeting on the 60th Anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution, November 1977

also available in PDF format - Download

 

"Today, the Soviet Union has become a center of counterrevolution after the center of world revolution was destroyed, which it had been in the time of Lenin and Stalin." (Enver Hoxha - 7th PLA Party Congress)

 

The Comintern (SH) resolutely and consistently defends the doctrines of Marxism-Leninism, confirmed by the experience of the October revolution, about the necessity of the completion of the October Revolution by the overthrow of the world bourgeoisie and the necessity of the dictatorship of the world proletariat for the construction of world socialism and world communism.

The modern revisionists turned the Soviet Union from the lever and the basis of the world revolution into an international bulwark of counterrevolution. They transformed the anti-imperialist character of the October revolution into a socially imperialist exploitation and oppression system. The proletarian democratic character of the October revolution was transformed by the modern revisionists into a social-fascist regime of the new Soviet bourgeoisie. The socio-economic character of the October revolution was destroyed by the modern revisionists by restoring capitalism. The Khrushchev revisionists transformed the dictatorship of the proletariat into a neo-colonialist chauvinist, social-imperialist and social-fascist state.

The modern revisionists preached the theory of the "party of the whole people" (beyond the classes), and thus liquidated the proletarian class-character of the party. This is another betrayal of the October revolution which was successfully led by the Bolshevik party of the working class.

The modern revisionists turned the Leninist principle of peaceful co-existence - which was excellently further developed and implemented by Stalin - into a revisionist "peaceful integration" of socialism to capitalism. The modern revisionists misused the peaceful co-existence as a justification of their withdrawl from the armed world revolution. Peaceful co-existence which replaces class struggle through class reconciliation and class cooperation between exploited and exploitors, is nothing but betrayal of the teachings of the October revolution. The achievements of the October revolution must be guaranteed by the victory of the world socialist revolution. The banner of the October revolution , is the banner of the victory over world capitalism, is the banner of the destruction of the whole state-system of world imperialism, is the banner of the socialist world without co-existence with the capitalist world. The October revolution did not tolerate the peaceful coexistence of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in Russia, and the world socialist revolution does not tolerate the co-existence between world proletariat and world bourgeoisie. The world socialist revolution is only victorious with the establishment of the state of the dictatorship of the world proletariat which is based on the destruction of the state system of the bourgeois world, and not based on the" peaceful co-existence with the world bourgeoisie".

The modern revisionists preached the theory of the "decline of the class struggle in socialism," while Stalin further strengthened the dictatorship of the proletariat, which had emerged from the October revolution. Without defence of the dictatorship of the proletariat - no defence of the October revolution. The historical experience of the October revolution shows that every weakening of the state of the dictatorship of the proletariat had serious dangerous consequences for the socialist achievements of the October revolution.

Modern revisionism was the bourgeois ideology with which the restoration of capitalism was labeled as the alleged "further development" of the achievements of the October Revolution. The modern revisionist praised their restoration of capitalism as a "victory of socialism". In truth, modern revisionism was the bourgeois ideology which tried to prove that there is no need any more for the renewal of the October revolution and its crowning through the victory of the world socialist revolution.

The revisionist betrayal of the October revolution is inevitable as long it is not victorious on a world scale.

Abolishment of the INEVITABILITY of revisionist betrayal of the October revolution is only possible by means of the world socialist revolution. To overcome the betrayal of the October revolution, we must struggle for the establishment of the world dictatorship of the proletariat, we must struggle for world socialism, for the destruction and removal of the whole world capitalism.

* * *

The revisionists tried to reduce the Comintern to a peaceful democratic tool in the fight against fascism. This myth diverts attention from the real mission of the Comintern, namely to organize the world-proletarian armed revolution for the establishment of the dictatorship of the world proletariat. The Comintern is a tool which the world proletariat is using for the violent overthrow of the world bourgeoisie.

The revisionists uphold the class-reconciliatory spirit of Dimitrov, whereas we Stalinist-Hoxhaist resurrect the spirit of the world revolutionaries, Lenin and Stalin, - "class against class".

The Comintern had done its historical part and should not be needed any further. For the modern revisionists, the Comintern was doomed to remain superfluous forever.

Not once was the Comintern mentioned by Stalin later on - neither on the XVIII nor on the XIX Congress of the CPSU [B]). One thing is certain: Stalin had never praised the VII World Congress as an alleged "milestone or victory of Marxism-Leninism" - as the modern revisionists have done it extensively !

Secret diplomacy was wiped out by the October revolution but was restored by the Soviet revisionists. Having rejected the doctrines of Lenin and the October Revolution, they have once again turned to the Tsar's diplomacy. This is also another proof that capitalism is being restored in the Soviet Union, a proof of its transformation into social imperialism, another testimony of the transformation of the Soviet revisionists into a fire-brigade against the world revolution and against the liberation struggles of the peoples.

“Soviet social-imperialism even conceals its expansionist aims under the slogan of «aid for the proletarian revolution».” (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, volume II, Tirana, edition in English)

It is well known that the Soviet revisionists misused the prestige of the October revolution to justify their "grandeur", under which all the others had to bow down.

At first revisionism was directed against the October Revolution. That was a fight between revisionists and Marxists-Leninist. At first the revisionists developed in different forms according to the different conditions in different countries - to paralyze socialism in a "single" country, to restore capitalism in a "single" country. Since there is no socialist country left, since the contradictions between socialist and capitalist world are "solved" for a while, revisionists concentrate on the prevention of the socialist restoration which is not alone a matter of this or that former socialist country, but a global matter of all countries over the world. Nowadays revisionism directs it`s chief attention to the globalization of the socialist ideas and activities, to the globalization of the socialist revolution, to the globalization of the worker`s movement. This means, that revisionism had to change it`s old specific forms characterized by the particular conditions on a national scale. With revisionist branches in this or that country problems of globalization cannot be solved, they are not up to date. Under present conditions of globalized class-struggle world-capitalism as well as world-revisionism cannot escape or pull out anywhere on the world, because they are always and anywhere confronted with the worker`s movement and the socialist movement, with Marxism-Leninism on an international scale. The workers of the world and their ideology, the Marxism-Leninism, unfold their full power on an international scale because their nature is internationalist. Under conditions of globalization proletarian internationalism develops on a higher level, on such level which makes it invincible because this internationalist ideology can be best materialized under conditions of the global class-struggle of a global working class. Concerning the revisionist tactics under these circumstances every flirt with the world proletariat, with the Marxism-Leninism, leads consequently and inevitably to the self-exposure of revisionism on an international scale. This is very dangerous for the maintenance of the whole world capitalist system, far more dangerous as in times of the existing "single" socialist countries, when restoration of capitalism could be supported by the whole world capitalist system. Under global conditions of class-struggle the old tactics of the world capitalist encirclement makes no sense for the world bourgeoisie. You can encircle a part of the proletariat, but not the whole world proletariat - that`s the reason for the inevitable chrushing defeat of the world capitalist system. In consequence revisionism is finally and completely forced to withdraw, refuse and reject the banner of Marxism-Leninism. On an international scale revisionists have to break with their tactics of hiding behind the banner of Marxism-Leninism, because the world proletariat forces them to be desmasked as open defenders of world capitalism.

Today, one cannot be called Marxist-Leninist without supporting the proletarian world revolution openly and completely. Today, one cannot be called Marxist-Leninist without leading the international class struggle not only against the bourgeoisie of one's own but against the complete world bourgeoisie.

Today, the revisionists become more and more directly agents of the world bourgeoisie in the global camp of the world proletariat. Revisionists of today gossip about socialism, but only about such kind of "socialism" which can be restored as capitalism (!)

Does that mean that world revisionism shall calm down, becomes peaceful ? In the contrary. If the capitalist system, if the revisionists are attacked by the whole world proletariat on an international scale, then their struggle to survive, their struggle of resistances will get sharpened, will be multiplied. The revisionists shall strengthen their forces under the conditions of the Great Proletarian World Revolution. To ignore this fact means unavoidably the defeat of the global working class. The teachings of the October Revolution are teachings of sharpening our anti-revisionist weapons, preparing them for our global battles. The October revolution started not only the era of the dying capitalism but also the dying revisionism.

 

 

 

VI

HOW THE MAOISTS BETRAYED THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION

 

To continue the cause of the Great October, the fight against opportunism must be strengthened in all its forms, especially against the Maoists.

The unmasking and condemnation of the Chinese revisionists' betrayal of the October Revolution, the struggle against their anti-Marxist, counter-revolutionary, and chauvinistic course, the defence of the international solidarity with the PLA against Maoism, and finally our "Declaration of War against Maoism" , shows that the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world movement is increasingly reinforced by its struggle against the Maoist betrayal of the October revolution - even after 100 years !

 

Mao Tsetung:

“ Since the beginning of the war, Stalin was very skeptical towards us. When we
won the war, Stalin perceived our victory as being of the same kind of that of Tito, and in 1949 he exercised a very strong pression upon us.” (Mao Zedong, Oeuvres choisies, Tome V, translated from French language).

Enver Hoxha:

“When China was liberated, Stalin expressed his doubt that the Chinese leadership might follow the Titoite course. Glancing over all the main principles of Mao Tsetung's revisionist line, in regard to all those things which he raises against Stalin, we can say without reservation that Stalin was truly a great Marxist-Leninist who foresaw correctly where China was going, who long ago realized what the views of Mao Tsetung were, and saw that, in many directions, they were Titoite revisionist views, both on international policy and on internal policy, on the class struggle, on the dictatorship of the proletariat, on peaceful coexistence between countries with different social systems, etc.” (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II,December 28, 1976, Tirana, 1979, edition in English).

The Maoists have never implemented the Leninist principles of the October Revolution, neither in China, nor in any other country, and much less on a world's scale. Maoists are and had always been traitors of the October Revolution. This Maoist betrayal of the October revolution was brilliantly unmasked by the ideology of Hoxhaism. The Comintern (SH) is guided by Hoxhaism and we defend Hoxhaism against the Neo revisionists, especially in the question of the October Revolution.

The October revolution could only be victorious under guidance by the Bolshevik party. This most essential precondition of the victory of the proletarian revolution was missing in China. According to Enver Hoxha the CP China has never been a genuine Communist party - neither at the time of its founding, nor until today:

"In essence it was not a genuine party of the proletariat, a party of the revolution, which could secure the leadership in the democratic revolution and ensure its transformation into a proletarian revolution."

"Prior to the October Revolution and after it, the spread of Marxism in China took the character of a movement for national liberation rather than for social liberation. The first Marxist groups were characterized by ideological confusion and vacillation in political line. All these various ideological and political views should have been brought under control, in the sense that the ranks should have been purged and the influence of those elements who were democrats, but were not Marxists and who did not follow the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism, should have been reduced. With this I want to say that the terrain should have been purged in order to form a genuine communist party, which would follow the theory of Marxism-Leninism, and apply it in a creative manner in the conditions of China, but apply it with a more profound and clearer understanding according to the ideas which guided the Great October Socialist Revolution, the Marxist ideas of Lenin.” (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, 26th December of 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

With the October revolution the transition from the bourgeois-democratic revolution to the socialist revolution was completed and the dictatorship of the proletariat was established. This did never happen in China.

"China does not agree with the definition which the classics of Marxism-Leninism have made of our epoch, who said that after the victory of the Soviet Union, after the triumph of the Great October Socialist Revolution, the world has entered the epoch of proletarian revolutions. For China, mankind «is not living in this epoch», it pretends that we are still in the period of bourgeois-democratic revolutions." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, 29th April of 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

"Since the views of the CP of China were not completely Marxist-Leninist views, the revolution in China could not be carried through to the end, and the transformation of the bourgeois-democratic revolution into socialist revolution could not be assured. The transition from the bourgeois-democratic revolution to the socialist revolution can be achieved only when the proletariat resolutely removes the bourgeoisie from power, even in those cases when the bourgeoisie has been its ally for a time. So long as the working class in China shared power with the bourgeoisie, this power, in essence, was never transformed into a dictatorship of the proletariat, and consequently the Chinese revolution could not be a socialist revolution." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, 26th December of 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

The October Revolution was a socialist revolution because it secured the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The October revolution was realized under the leadership of the proletariat and its closest ally, the poor peasants. In contrast, Mao Tsetung turned the October revolution upside down:

"In his theoretical writings Mao Tsetung says that China could not have been liberated without the leadership of the peasantry, that the revolution in China was a peasant revolution. According to him, the peasantry was the most revolutionary class, that it had to lead the revolution «and did lead the revolution». This is a major theoretical error on the part of Mao Tsetung and shows that he was not a Marxist-Leninist but an eclectic and a bourgeois-democrat. Mao Tsetung, as a progressive democrat, was for a bourgeois-democratic revolution, and when China was liberated, he clung to the same views. According to his views, the peasantry was the leading force and the working class had to be its ally." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, 26th December of 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

The October revolution was a Marxist-Leninist revolution. The Chinese revolution was not a Marxist-Leninist revolution because it was not guided by Marxist-Leninists. Mao raised the slogan that “the Chinese Revolution is a continuation of the October Revolution,” and similar phrases can be found in his works. But here again is Mao’s hypocrisy, because he did not agree with this idea at all. In fact, Mao Tsetung created an entire, worked out theoretical position, or more precisely schematic dogma, that the road of the October Revolution is only good for the advanced, imperialist-capitalist states while the oppressed nations and peasant countries had to have a different road, their own road to liberation, which was the road of China and Mao Tsetung.

"Mao Tsetung and the comrades around him were not genuine Marxist-Leninists". "Mao Tsetung was not a Marxist-Leninist." "His views were not Marxist-Leninist, he did not follow the theory of Marx and Lenin". "Likewise, the masses must be prepared so that they understand that one cannot live with illusions. The masses must become politically aware that those leading them are not Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries, but elements of the bourgeoisie, of capitalism, who have entered a course which has nothing in common with socialism and communism. But if they are to understand this, the masses must understand the basic question that «Mao Tsetung thought» is not Marxism-Leninism and that Mao Tsetung was not a Marxist-Leninist. He did not betray himself, as you might say. We say that Mao is a renegade, is an anti-Marxist, and this is a fact. We say this because he tried to disguise himself with Marxism-Leninism, but in fact he was never a Marxist." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, 26th December of 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

The "Mao Tsetung-thought" is an anti-Marxist theory which is in contrast with the teachings of the October revolution. It is an anti-proletarian ideology for the purpose of maintaining the decaying imperialist world.

"The ideas of Mao Tsetung developed in the present period of the decay of imperialism, the final stage of capitalism, hence, at a time when proletarian revolutions are on the order of the day and when the example and the great lessons of the Great October Socialist Revolution, the teachings of Marx and Lenin are an unerring guide for us. The theory of Mao Tsetung, «Mao Tsetung thought», which emerged in these new conditions, was bound to cloak itself with the most revolutionary and most scientific theory of the time — Marxism-Leninism, but in essence it remained an anti-Marxist theory, because it is opposed to proletarian revolutions and goes to the aid of imperialism in decay." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, 26th December of 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

In his pamphlet "The New Democracy" Mao Tsetung distorted the Marxist-Leninis principles of the transition from the bourgeois-democratic revolution to the socialist revolution and thus the teachings of the October Revolution. We refer to our theoretical organ "The Path of the World party" where we published the "Declaration of War on Maoists" (Part 2).

In this anti-Maoist polemics we criticized this anti-Leninist theory of Mao Tsetung as follows [comprehensive paragraph of quotation in Italic]:

"This wrong theory is based on the false presumption that it is essential to develop capitalism before advancing towards the socialist revolution. This anti-socialist presumption has its roots in the anti-Bolshevist and anti-Leninist opposition in the context of the 1917 October Revolution and was one of the main “arguments” used by the bourgeois opposition to destroy the October Revolution and to restore capitalism in Russia under the excuse that “economical conditions in Russia are still not ready to the socialist edification”.

"In fact, there is a close relationship between Maoism and another major revisionist tendency: Trotskyism. Just like Maoism, Trotskyism tried to glorify and perpetuate bourgeois dictatorship by arguing that socialist revolution is impossible without the development of capitalism. Both revisionisms also tried to convince the oppressed masses that it is possible to rely on non-proletarian classes to successfully achieve socialism.
In truth, the October revolution was the historical precedent which permitted that Lenin affirmed:
'[...] with the help of the proletariat of the developed countries, the backward countries can establish the Soviet regime and, after passing through certain stages, they can achievecommunism avoiding the capitalist stage.' (Lenin, “IIIe Congrès de l'Internationale communiste”, Oeuvres, Paris-Moscou, 1965, translated from french language)."

"And as the Party of Labour of Albania correctly understood:

'The level of development of capitalism in a certain country cannot be considered as the decisive factor or the determinant factor in what concerns the victory of the socialist revolution.' (Parti du Travail d’Albanie, Histoire de la construction socialiste en Albanie, Tirana, 1988, translated from French language)."

* * *

"Mao frontally denies the necessity of the leading role of the proletariat in this “New Democracy”, Mao wrote:
'No matter what classes, parties or individuals in an oppressed nation join the
revolution , and no matter whether they themselves are conscious of the point or understand it, so long as they oppose imperialism, their revolution becomes part of the proletarian-socialist world revolution and they become its allies.” (Mao Zedong, New Democracy, January of 1940, edition in English).
So, for Mao, the proletariat and the national bourgeoisie, the exploited and the exploiterswere all at the same level, they had no conflicting and irreconcilable class interests, but on the contrary, they should be united in the “anti imperialist” revolution, because in doing this, even the bourgeoisie can turn into an ally of the “proletarian-socialist world revolution”!

As can be observed, Mao is defending some kind of “third way”, nor the “bourgeois dictatorship” nor the “proletarian dictatorship”. This is very similar to the old anti-communist theory which says “nor capitalism, nor socialism” and which is still very used nowadays among the petty-bourgeois and “libertarian” currents. This slogan of the “third alternative” is in fact an ultra-reactionary ideology which serves to perpetuate capitalism because (...) the economical and political power belongs to the class which owns the means of production, the class who controls the productive relations which constitute the material base of society. While this control of the economical and material means of production is not conquered by the proletariat through revolutionary armed violence, it will always belong to the bourgeois exploitative class.(...) If we deny the necessity of the dictatorship of the proletariat, we are maintaining and serving the bourgeois dictatorship. Mao considers that the bourgeoisie and the proletariat can “share” the state power. This is something impossible. It cannot exist a state in which both classes have state power and “share” that power. (...)

 

* * *

The so called "Chinese Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" was another betrayal of the October Revolution. There was never established the dictatorship of the proletariat in China. Consequently, this non-existing dictatorship of the proletariat can not be defended by a so called "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" either. Mao Tsetung rated the "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" higher than the October revolution. More than that, he classified it as a "further development" of the October revolution. To make such a comparison is more than overbearing. This shows how the Maoists despise the significance of the October revolution.

"The Chinese comrades think that aid for the international communist movement and the world revolution consists of recommending that they carry out the great proletarian cultural revolution as China did. According to them, from now on, it is not necessary to be inspired by the Great October Socialist Revolution (perhaps by the Paris Commune, yes), but by the Cultural Revolution, because, just as Marxism-Leninism has been replaced with «Mao Tsetung thought», so the Cultural Revolution contains the October Socialist Revolution!" (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume I, 14th July of 1967, page 373, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

"The Bolshevik Party and the Party of Labour of Albania, which have waged people's war, have done nothing. For these to be people's wars, they must bear the brand of Mao and his ideas! Thus, the great classics are written off and the theory about the revolution and people's war is written off. This behaviour is not only unacceptable, but also intolerable." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume I, 14th July of 1967, page 374, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

The so-called “Great Cultural Proletarian Revolution”, as Comrade Enver Hoxha correctly affirms,
“(…) was neither a revolution, nor great, nor cultural, and in particular, not in the least proletarian.” (Enver Hoxha, Imperialism and the Revolution, Tirana, 1979, edition in English).

The October revolution was led by the Bolshevik Party. But the so called Chinese "Cultural Revolution" was not conducted by either the working class or the CP of China.

"In fact there was no party, but only the bourgeoisie, there were clans and fractions which were fighting for power. This was the Trotskyist "permanent revolution", led by Mao Zedong-Trotsky.” (Enver Hoxha, Letter to Comrade Hysni Kapo, 30th July of 1978).

The October revolution eliminated the counter-revolutionaries. Otherwise it could not be victorious. In contrast, Mao Tsetung openly took counter-revolutionaries under his protection: "We should kill none and arrest very few..."Mao Tsetung contented himself with "educational measures" against the counter-revolution, and thus betrayed the October revolution.

* * *

Another Maoist betrayal of the October Revolution is the Chinese "Polemics" (1963)

The "Polemics" propagates the "revolution of the peoples" in place of the socialist proletarian revolution.

The "Polemics" refuses the struggle for the world socialist revolution and denies the international significance of the October Revolution.

The "Polemics" ignores the struggle for the dictatorship of the world proletariat.

The "Polemics" conceals the Leninist-Stalinist struggle for the implementation of the Soviet Union as a model on the world scale and its further development of the establichment of the World Socialist Republic.

* * *

ENVER HOXHA

"The theses that «the third world is the greatest and most powerful force which drives the revolution forward», etc., are anti-Marxist, counterrevolutionary theses presented by Mao Tsetung and his Chinese disciples (all so-called Marxists). These theses drawn from «a Marxist-Leninist study of the world situation and its evolution», are a serious restraint on the world revolution and the national revolutions." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, January 25, 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English).

“The theory of «three worlds» is against the proletarian revolution, and replaces it with the bourgeois-democratic revolution. This anti-Marxist theory eliminates the decisive leading role of the proletariat in the revolution, lumps all the forces together under one umbrella or in one bag, calling them the «third world» and giving them that role and those attributes which these forces do not possess, and with this «world» denies the socialist world." (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, March 22, 1977, Tirana, 1979, edition in English).

The Maoist "Therory of the Three Worlds" is vioalating the theory of the October Revolution. Enver Hoxha stressed that the world socialist revolution can not win if the "Three Worlds Theory" will not be liquidated:

“After the triumph of the October Revolution, Lenin and Stalin said that in our time there are two worlds: the socialist world and the capitalist world" (Enver Hoxha, Imperialism and the Revolution, Tirana, 1979, edition in English).

"In its division of the world into three, the Communist Party of China is advocating class conciliation. The genuine Marxist-Leninists never forget the teachings of Lenin, who stresses that the opportunists and revisionists strive by hook or by crook to tone down the class struggle, to deceive the working class and the oppressed with "revolutionary" cliches, while divesting the Marxist -Leninist doctrine of its revolutionary content. This is what the Chinese revisionist leadership is doing when it preaches conciliation and peaceful coexistence between the working class and the bourgeoisie." (Enver Hoxha, Imperialism and the Revolution, Tirana, 1979, edition in English).

“The theory of "three worlds" advocates social peace, class conciliation, and tries to create alliances between implacable enemies, between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the oppressed and the oppressors, the peoples and imperialism."

The Maoists cooperated with every enemy of the world proletariat, with all the exploited and oppressed peoples. This is another one of the numerous Maoist betrayals of the October Revolution.

* * *

Stalin pointed to the global significance of the October Revolution that has erected a bridge between the socialist West and the enslaved East. Thereby a new front of revolutions against world imperialism had been created, extending from the proletarians of the West, through the Russian Revolution, to the oppressed peoples of the East. Mao had never been walking over this bridge of the October Revolution. In the contrary, he destroyed this bridge.

„The East-Wind shall dominate the West-Wind!“ This slogan was historically in the interests of the socialist world revolution, namely exclusively in the sense of the revolutionary war of the oppressed and exploited peoples of the East against Western imperialism. Fight against world imperialism from two sides, both from the hinterland side and from the inner front of the imperialist metropolis.

„The East-Wind shall dominate the West-Wind!“ This is, today, the original social-imperialist slogan of Mao Tsetung, and it is totally directed against the internationalist character of the October Revolution. With his slogan, Mao violated the anti-imperialist unity between the world proletariat and the national liberation movements. The October Revolution was not only directed against Russian imperialism in particular, and Western imperialism, in general. Above all, the October Revolution was directed against the whole world-imperialist system at all. The October Revolution was the beginning of the overthrow of world imperialism for paving the way to of world socialism. The teachings of the October Revolution - hundred years after - thus can mean nothing else than the overthrow of the Chinese super power which is in nature a social- imperialist country which exploits and oppresses the peoples all over the world. The west wind has dominated always in China, but one day it will be swept away by the storm of the world socialist revolution.

"Being resolutely opposed to the world revolution, proletarian revolutions, and the Leninist theses, China has set itself with all its might against the Marxist-Leninist communist parties, which it is splitting and liquidating.The policy of China must be combated mercilessly, must be exposed, because it is causing great damage to the world revolution, the peoples and socialism and is an opportunist policy which brings grist to the mill of imperialism and revisionism. This is criminal and the criminals, be they political ones, must be unmasked and knocked on the head". (Enver Hoxha, Reflections on China, Volume II, 24th December of 1977, page 756, Tirana, 1979, edition in English)

* * *

Finally, we like to mention that the Maoist traitors of the October Revolution, for their part, insult us Stalinist-Hoxhaists as "Trotskyites". Here a quotation, once again, od our "Declaration of War on the Maoists" (Part 2) - in Italic:

The Maoists try by all means to discredit Stalinism-Hoxhaism, because Maoists perfectly know that Stalinism-Hoxhaism is the only ideology which can lead the world proletariat towards world socialist revolution. Maoists fear Comrade Enver Hoxha very much, because they are aware that Comrade Enver Hoxha is the Fifth Classic of Marxism Leninism and not Mao Zedong; and they fear Hoxhaist ideology also because this is the only ideology which gave concrete historical proofs of being capable of unmask the reactionary and pro-capitalist character of the Mao Zedong Thought. In April of 2011, the official newspaper of the UOC arrogantly remarks that:

“(…) there is an objective tendency within the international communist movement towards the reorganization of the Marxist-Leninists-Maoists (…) Therefore, we understand the desperation of the Hoxhaist International (Comintern SH) which on 6th of February published a “Declaration of war against the Maoists”, an attack which, as happened with the trotskyists, shows the wicked face of the bourgeois detachments inside the communist movement (…) which in all history have never been able to accomplish a single victorious revolution (…).” (UOC, Semanário Revolución Obrera, 18th April of 2011, translated from Spanish language).

It's outrageous the way in which those social-fascists and defenders of chinese imperialism dare to compare us Stalinist-Hoxhaists with the trotskyists and to qualify us as "bourgeois detachments inside the communist movement"!!!

Maoism is nothing more than chinese fascism. And it's really shameful to see Maoists’ logo...to see how they consider the fascist Mao, the lover of Franco and Pinochet, the great friend of American imperialism, the main architect of chinese imperialism which exploits and oppresses the peoples of the entire world as the 5th head of "Marxism-Leninism-Maoism"!!!!

It's deplorable to see how they put Mao side by side with such great communists as Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. They accuse us of being desperate, but they are the ones which say that “in all history of the proletarian revolution, they (Stalinists-Hoxhaists) could not make a single successful revolution". No comments. We, Stalinists-Hoxhaists, are the followers and continuers of the Communist Party of the SU (B) and of the Labour Party of Albania, which were the two only Communist parties which accomplished socialist revolution by leading their respective peoples under the dictatorship of the proletariat towards socialist and communist society, no matter if their revolutionary course was ultimately thwarted by revisionist traitors after the deaths of comrade Stalin and of Comrade Enver Hoxha.

To what "successful revolution" are those social-fascists referring to? To the bourgeois Chinese "revolution" inspired by confucianism and buddhist religion, which was conducted by a party which was communist only in name and whose objective was to pave the way to China's ascension as a new superpower?

When analyzing Maoist “arguments” against Hoxhaism, we notice that they insult us, but they don't specify their insults, they call us opportunists but they don't explain why. This is quite normal. Maoists can never point a single ideological error in what concerns Stalinist-Hoxhaist ideology simply because Stalinist-Hoxhaist ideology contains no errors nor in theory, nor in practice. The ideological purity of the Stalinist-Hoxhaist ideology is in total contrast with Maoism reactionary eclecticism.

In the excerpt, we can also note that the Maoists of the UOC try to compare us Hoxhaists with the Trotskyites. This abject “argument” has been widely used by the Maoist revisionists.

The Maoists stated that:

“Hoxhaism joins Trotskyism in its denial of the necessity of organizing the peasantry.”

This comparison is totally false. If we properly and honestly analyze the ideological nature and the historical role played by each of them, we will easily conclude that Trotskyism and Hoxhaism are intrinsically opposite ideologies. Trotskyism tried to deny the thesis of the socialism in a single country at a time when acceptance of this thesis was essential to the survival of the October Revolution and of the socialist edification in Soviet Union. On the contrary, Hoxhaism proved that even a backward and semi-colonial country can apply this thesis in a successful manner if it is guided by an authentic proletarian and Marxist-Leninist party.

Trotskyites always negated the glorious legacy of Stalin, calumniating him in order to prevent the world proletariat from overthrowing capitalism. On the contrary, the PLA of Comrade Enver Hoxha was the only party which consistently and coherently defended Stalin’s splendid inheritance against all kinds of revisionists and deviators, including Maoists.

Trotskyism completely denied the role of the peasantry in the revolution. On the contrary, Hoxhaism recognizes that role. Indeed, the first partisan detachments of the Communist Party of Albania which fought against the Axis during the Second World War were mainly composed by peasants. However, Hoxhaism refuses to see peasants as “the main force of the revolution” as does Maoism, because Comrade Enver Hoxha knew that only the proletariat guided by its vanguard party can lead the workers towards socialist revolution and establish a communist society. Therefore, the claims that Trotskyism = Hoxhaism are nothing more than a proof of the anti-communist nature of Maoism.

It is Maoism which has everything in common with Trotskyism. Just like Mao, Trotsky also defended the existence of various parties under socialism. In his “Program of Transition”, Trotsky affirmed that:

“The democratization of the Soviets is unconceivable without the legalization of the Soviet Parties.” (Trotsky, Programme de transition, Paris, 1973, translated from French language).

Also the neo-revisionist traitors of the ICMLPO insult us as "Trotskyites". And this identicalness of insults against us Stalinist-Hoxhaists is by no means a coincidence! (See: next chapter VII)

 

 

VII

HOW THE NEO-REVISIONISTS OF TODAY BETRAY THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION

We recommend to study our theoretical article:

Declaration of War Against the neo-revisionist

ICMLPO

June 16, 2015:

(Excerpt)

The Comintern (SH) defined the term “socialist world revolution” as follows:
“The world proletarian socialist revolution is the violent, armed overthrow of the bourgeois capitalist world and the complete destruction of its oppressive and exploitive system. It is led by the world proletariat and its Communist International. The basic purpose is to break the chains of the world's productive forces from their imperialist relations of world production – by means of global expropriation of private property at the global means of production. To realize this purpose - and to resist the danger of restoration of world capitalism -, the world proletariat establishes its own armed dictatorship, and creates a global superstructure of the own world socialist system - by support of the alliance with the poor peasants.
The proletarian socialist world revolution is the most directly and shortest way to overcome world capitalism and to pave the way towards world socialism. The era of the world proletarian dictatorship is unavoidable for the whole transition-period between world capitalism and world communism - the future era of the classless world community. The proletarian, socialist world revolution makes possible the guarantee of the preventability of capitalist restoration - but its complete inevitability can still not be removed. This is guaranteed in the future communist world society - only then.” [General-Line of the Comintern (SH), The proletarian socialist world revolution, Chapter II, 2001, edition in English]
Such or similar definitions cannot be found in the documents of the ICMLPO.
This is not astonishing. The world socialist revolution is simply not part of the concept of the ICMLPO. On the contrary. The political line of the ICMLPO is in
opposition to the line of the Comintern (SH) concerning the socialist world revolution.

The victory of the world proletarian revolution is impossible without defeating neo-revisionism and without defeating all organisations which are guided by neorevisionism.
Without understanding the theory of the role of the Bolshevist world party, the final victory of the October Revolution on a global scale cannot be guaranteed.

“Everything that has occurred since the October Revolution of 1917 (…) the Chinese, Vietnamese and other revolutions (…) - all these confirm the
Leninist thesis about the epoch in which we live. The fundamental contradictions remain as before.” (Documents of the ICMLPO, Quito Declaration, 1994, edition in English)
It is interesting to observe that, from all historical examples they could have chosen, the ICMLPO’ neo-revisionists managed to select precisely those who not only did not lead to socialism, but foremost constituted revisionist and even social-fascist deviations from it. The Chinese and Vietnamese “revolutions” have absolutely nothing to do with proletarian dictatorship, neither with socialism or communism. They were bourgeois revolutions who did not follow in the least Lenin’s path.

(Declaration of War Against the neo-revisionist ICMLPO )

 

* * *

 

Rejecting once more the "Trotskyism" - accusation of the ICMLPO

against the Comintern (SH).

 

Die ICMLPO accuses us to be "Trotskyists".
This is a lie, because the Comintern (SH) is the refounded Third International of Lenin and Stalin, while the Trotskyists are the founders of the "Fourth" International which doubtlessly fights against our Comintern of Lenin and Stalin.

If the ICMLPO accuses us of "Trotskyism", this accusation would also have to apply to our "betrayal" of the October revolution. We do not betray the October revolution. If one studies our websites on the October revolution carefully, one will find just the opposite:

We propagate and defend the Leninist theory of the world revolution against the Trotskyist ideology of the "permanent revolution". We are the worldwide leading publisher of the works of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism. We have never published Trotzskyist works. In the contrary, we have created the worldwide biggest anti-Trotskyite websites.

The Comintern (SH) is the worldwide standard bearer and leader of today's struggle against Trotskyism.

And the ICMLPO ? The websites of the ICMLPO is not be able to match our comprehensive and principled struggle against Trotskyism. "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones !"

If someone in the world is fighting a determined struggle against Trotskyism, then it is the Comintern (SH) and not the ICMLPO. A look at our anti-Trotsky archive is enough to prove that our Anti-Troskyism is beyond any doubt. On the other hand, if you look at the ICMLPO publications, you can hardly speak of a struggle "against" Trotskyism. The "anti-Trotskyist" struggle of the ICMLPO consists primarily of struggle against the Comintern (SH) !

We ask the traitors of the ICMLPO: Are you for or against the Comintern program (1928) ?

The ICMLPO has so far evaded this important question, and this speaks volumes about the ICMLPO's depraved indifference to the Comintern of Lenin and Stalin!

The neo-revisionists have good reasons for ignoring the answer to this important question until today. And the Comintern (SH) had also good reasons to publish and propagate the Comintern program in many languages. The neo-revisionists of the ICMLPO discredit themselves because they brand us as alleged "Trotskyists". The ICMLPO knows very well that the Trotskyists fight against the anti-Trotskyist Comintern program while we Stalinist-Hoxhaists propagate and defend the Comintern program since 50 (!) years. More than that: The Comintern program had been modified in our anti-Trotskyist General-Line that we are implementing into practice since nearly 17 (!) years. In our General-line there is no single chapter in which we did not unmask Trotskyism. Our struggle against Trotskyism is confirmed in most of all the articles of our "Theoretical Organ".

In contrast, the ICMLPO on her part, puts itself under suspicion of Trotskyism by keeping silent on the Comintern program. Ignoring the Comintern program is grist to the mill of the Trotskyists.

Can one seriously defend the Comintern without defending its program? Hardly likely ! Did Dimitrov defend the Comintern program by means of the dissolution of the Comintern? Of course, not ! The liquidator of the Comintern is simultaneously the liquidator of the Comintern program. Who likes to doubt this ?

So you can not seriously defend the Comintern program and simultaneously defending Dimitrov, the gravedigger of the Comintern program. We criticize Dimitrov because he buried the Comintern program, which is based on the October revolution. The Comintern program is the program of the Leninist-Stalinist world revolution !
We do not at all criticize Dimitrov from the point of view of the Trotskyists (and not from the point of view of Blandism, which is a further inappropriate accusation of the ICMLPO against us), but solely from the point of view of the Leninist-Stalinist Comintern program - which was abandoned by Dimitrov, and openly condemned by the Trotskyists.

The ICMLPO's betrayal of the October revolution is that the ICMLPO tries to justify Dimitrov's departure from the Comintern program. Officially, the Comintern program was never abrogated. It existed until the dissolution of the Comintern. However the point was, that its implementation was thwarted by the revisionist course of Dimitrov, namely a course which was hidden behind his mask of "Stalinism". Not openly but hiddenly Dimitrov combated the Comintern program as a "left" deviation. Especially after the dissolution of the Comintern, Dimitrov trampled on the Comintern program both in words and deeds!

And what did Trotsky say to the Comintern program?

"The Comintern existed for nine years without a particular program, and the only way out is the following: to convene the 7th Congress for the next year, so as to to rescind the Stalinist program." (TROTSKY: "The International Revolution And the Communist International ")

Trotsky fought against the Comintern program as a "rightist" deviation and demanded the 7th World Congress to eliminate it. The Trotskyists have combated the Stalinist program of the Comintern thus as well as Dimitrov. But, of course, not under the mask of "Stalinism", but under the mask of "Leninism" (just as the modern revisionists have done later on!). As a result, both Dimitrov and Trotsky had worked against the Comintern program - although from different positions.

This explains why the ICMLPO's defence of Dimitrov gets tied up with Trotskyism.

"Anti-Trotskyism" in words and Trotskyism in deeds, that is the neo-Trotskyism of the ICMLPO.

This is what makes the ICMLPO so dangerous, because it hides its Trotskyism behind the mask of the "anti-Trotskyist" struggle against the Comintern (SH)!

The Trotskyist physiognomy of ICMLPO consists in its denigration of the Comintern (SH), in attempts of splitting the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world movement, and finally in its liquidatory goals. And that is precisely why the world proletariat condemns the ICMLPO as the 5th column of the world bourgeoisie, as traitors of the October revolution!

* * *

We may not underestimated the danger of neo-revisionism in the question of 100 years of the October Revolution.

The Neo-revisionists pass themselves off as "anti revisionists", misuse the October revolution to hide their neo-revisionism behind "the struggle against the betrayal of the modern revisionists."

They do so by swearing on Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and even on Enver Hoxha. They passes themselves off as the "true" defenders of the October revolution again by defaming the true Marxists-Leninist as "sectarian" and "dogmatist". Due to the fact that the neo-revisionists attack the Marxists-Leninist as so called "sectrerians" or "dogmatists" they attack the internationalist ideas of the October Revolution.

The neo-revisionists are clever enough to make use of the teachings of the October Revolution and to put our new Marxist-Leninist teachings of the Great Proletarian World Revolution in a dummy contrast to the October Revolution. This is the present hypocritical way how neo-revisionists cook their lies on the Red October.

In the end the world capitalists are contented with the undermining work of the neo-revisionists if everybody believes that the world proletariat would be unable to finish what the Russian proletarians started up with their October Revolution. At the 100th anniversary of the October revolution we have to teach the world proletariat to believe in its own revolutionary forces. What the Russian proletarians were able to do in their own country, the world proletariat will be able to do so in its own world !

* * *

The modern revisionists' betrayal of the October revolution is:

Anti-Stalinism under disguise of Marxism-Leninism.

The neo-revisionists' betrayal of the October revolution is:

Anti-Stalinism-Hoxhaism under disguise of Stalinism and reconciliation with Hoxhaism.

Related to the October revolution, neo-revisionism cannot be defeated without a profound Stalinist-Hoxhaist critique at Dimitrov.

We fight against fascism in the spirit of the October revolution. We can not fight against fascism, if we would unite in a "people's front" with the anti-communist Social Democrats, the neo-revisionists and all the other traitors of the October revolution. The October revolution teaches that the bourgeois anti-fascism of social-democracy, of modern revisionism and neo-revisionism was, is, and will always remain a means of defending the existence of the shaken capitalist system against the proletarian world revolution. Pacts with the bourgeoisie can only be thwarted in the way as the October revolution thwarted them !

And those who unite with the social fascists - (and it is the neo-revisionists who do this !) - they make up their way up to enemies of the world proletariat, traitors of the October revolution, and strengthen the 5th Column of anti-communism.

* * *

On conditions of globalization, the world proletariat needs the Communist International with its Sections in every country and not independent national parties.

There is no other alternative to destroy world imperialism on a global scale than to form Sections of the Communist International.

The time of national communist parties has passed away. In times of globalization they prove to be ineffective in the requirements of centralized leadership of global class-struggle.

The betrayal of the October revolution in every country is linked to the global betrayal. Therefore the victory over the national betrayal is only guaranteed by simultaneous victory over the global betrayal. This victory, however, cannot be guaranteed by a single national party. This victory over the betrayal of the October revolution can only be guaranteed by the leadership of a Communist International.

* * *

The key of the success of the proletarian revolution and anti-imperialist struggle depends on its readiness and ability to affiliate with the great, invincible army of the world proletariat, its iron will to support the unified actions of the proletarians of all countries - namely under the world revolutionary banner of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism and the Comintern (SH).

The world proletariat is both the main driving force and leader of the world socialist revolution to fulfill its mission. Lenin taught that the proletariat must never leave its leading position in the world revolution.

The Leninist party of the world proletariat in Soviet Russia argued concretely with people from their own ranks who did not understand or wanted not understand, that the main driving force and leadership of the world socialist revolution may not be relinquished. Lenin wrote this:

„But here is what is strange and monstrous. An „explanatory note“ is appended to the resolution: ( … ) 'in the interests of the world revolution it is expedient to accept the possibility of losing Soviet power … '“ ( Lenin, Collected Works, Volume 27, page 68 and 69, English edition).

The attempt to surrender and to give up Soviet power, to sacrify the world center of world socialist revolution "in the interest of the international revolution" - that is pure liquidationism! To sacrify even its world center - is there anything worse ?

That was in Lenin's time. And today?

Today, the neo-revisionists maintain silence about the need of the Communist International "in favour" of the revolution. Is there anything worse ? Is that not liquidationism? Today, neo-revisionists are really the most dangerous liquidators of the world revolution and the Communist International !

The neo-revisionists can not or will not understand that, today, we have to fight for world-socialist countries for the development of world socialism and that we need the Communist International, created as a world center of world socialist revolution.

They can not or will not understand that it is now the right moment to overthrow entirely world-imperialism, to directly begin with the construction of world socialism - not crabwise under conditions of socialism in 'one' country (as before), but moreover under the joint efforts and leadership of the world-revolutionary forces of all countries.

Back then, the opponents of the socialist world revolution sacrified socialism in "one" country "in the interest" of the international revolution. Today, the opponents want to sacrify world socialism "in the interest" of the socialist world revolution, because they are vainly waiting for the comeback of the old socialism in "one" country, as the "only possible" world center of the world revolution.

If the victory of the socialist world revolution in the first period of socialism was only possible by detour of socialism in "one" country, then it is possible in the second period only by the unification of the proletarians of all countries in a common world organization.

Lenin led the world proletariat to the path of world socialist revolution. This is a world-historical fact, that only those try to conceal, who pay lip service to Lenin.

Distinguished neo-revisionists ! Make sure to remember Leninism:

Lenin taught that the socialist revolution in a country ... ... is only part of the world socialist revolution.

Lenin taught that the dictatorship of the proletariat in one country ... .. is only part of the world dictatorship of the proletariat.

Lenin taught that a single proletarian state ... ... is only part of the world- proletarian State ( respectively, part of the Soviet World Union initially).

Lenin taught that the building of socialism in one country ... .. is only part of the world socialism.

Lenin taught that the Communist Parties in every country .... are only parties of the international proletariat (troops and vanguards of the world proletarian army).

Lenin taught that the Communist parties are fusioned, in the world party of the world proletariat, that they are part of the Communist International.

Lenin fought not for „any kind“ of socialist revolution, not for „any kind“ of dictatorship of the proletariat, not for „any kind“ of proletarian state, not for „any kind“ of socialism. Lenin fought as a genuine internationalist first and foremost:

for the world socialist revolution,

for the dictatorship of the world-proletariat,

for the world-proletarian state (or initially for the Soviet World Union),

for world socialism,

for world communism

for the world-party of the international proletariat, the Communist International.

This is the Leninist line of demarcation that separates us from all our opponents.

This is the Leninist world-barricade with the Stalinist-Hoxhaists on the one side and their opponents on the other side of the struggle for the world socialist revolution.

 

 

After 100 years of October revolution, we must look forward to the world socialist revolution, not backward.

VIII

CONCLUSION

 

In spite of all betrayal, the October Revolution was invincible because it was guided by Marxism-Leninism.

In spite of all betrayal, the socialist world revolution is invincible because it is guided by the teachings of the 5 Classsics of Marxism-Leninismus, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Enver Hoxha !

"On the eve of the proletarian revolution, the liberation, the freedom, of the parties of the revolutionary proletariat from opportunists and “Centrists”, from their influence, their prejudices, their weaknesses and vacillations, is the main and essential condition of success. (Lenin, 11. 12. 1920)

The majority of the European socialist leaders, of both the social-chauvinist and Kautskyite trends, have become so much a prey to purely philistine prejudices, fostered by decades of relatively “peaceful” capitalism and the bourgeois parliamentary system, that they are unable to understand that Soviet power and the dictatorship of the proletariat mean. The proletariat cannot perform its epoch-making liberating mission unless it removes these leaders from its path, unless it sweeps them out of its way. These people believed, or half-believed, the bourgeois lies about Soviet power in Russia and were unable to distinguish the nature of the new, proletarian democracy—democracy for the working people, socialist democracy, as embodied in Soviet government—from bourgeois democracy, which they slavishly worship and call “pure democracy” or “democracy” in general.

These blind people, fettered by bourgeois prejudices, failed to understand the epoch-making change from bourgeois to proletarian democracy, from bourgeois to proletarian dictatorship. They confused certain specific features of Russian Soviet government, of the history of its development in Russia, with Soviet government as an international phenomenon. (Lenin, Volume 29, pages 387-391)

These "blind people" still exist after 100 years.

Dialectics does not regard the October revolution as an accidental uprising in Russia, unconnected with world imperialism, isolated from the world proletariat, and independent of the peoples of the world. The October Revolution cannot be regarded merely as a revolution "within national bounds." It is, primarily, a revolution of an international, world order. (Stalin)

Dialectics holds that the October revolution, after 100 years, had never been in a state of rest and immobility, stagnation and immutability, but a state of continuous movement and change, of continuous renewal and development, where revolutions were always arising and developing, and reactionary phenomena always disintegrating and dying away. The history of the October revolution is not a chapter of events that was closed 100 years ago. The October revolution goes on and on. The October revolution developed further within 100 years, and this development is finished not before the victory of the world socialist revolution.

The mission of the October revolution is not completely fulfilled through its victory in Russia because the Leninist theory of the revolution is not only the theory of its victory in a single country, but simultaneously a theory of the victory of the world revolution. Only anti-Leninists can deny this dialectical character of the Leninist theory of the revolution which is based on Marxism, on the principles of proletarian internationalism.

To learn from the October revolution is not confined to the proper application of this doctrine under the special conditions in one's own country. The doctrine of the Russian October Revolution is international, because it is a doctrine for all countries, because it is the basis of the theory of the world socialist revolution. The essence of the world theory of the revolution is its globalized applicability which requires the revolutionary action of the world proletariat as a global class and its guidance by the Communist International as the global vanguard. The world revolutionary theory states that single interests of the proletariat of one country, or group interests in specific countries, are subordinated to the general interests of the world proletariat, and not vice versa. The October revolution served the world socialist revolution. The revolutions in single countries serve the world revolution, etc...

It is the Comintern (SH) who developed further the theory of the socialist world revolution of the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism - under conditions of today's globalization. In her general-line, the Comintern (SH) created the strategy and tactics of the world socialist revolution in demarcation to all opportunist "theories".

There are three types of betrayal to the theory of socialist world revolution:

1. Denial of the theory of the world socialist revolution. The application of Lenin's doctrine of the October revolution is limited to one's own country.

2. In words = recognition of the theory of world social revolution on a world scale, but in deeds = non-recognition of their application in a country.

3. Centrist attitude of the reciprocation between the two opportunistic conceptions of the theory of the socialist world revolution.

The Marxist-Leninist theory of the world socialist revolution will further stay maintained if it verifies the harmonization of the objectively global factor and the global subjective factor of the world revolution on scientific ground. With other words: The Marxist-Leninist theory of the October revolution survives as a guidance of the world revolution if it is further developed through Stalinism-Hoxhaism.

The Marxist-Leninist theory of the world socialist revolution will not stay maintained,

firstly: if it ignores or neglects the experience of the new world proletarian movement under conditions of globalization,

and secondly: if it refuses to revise the outdated, old familiar doctrines of the past period of socialism 'in one' country, if it itself denies the general revision which is needed for the further development of Stalinism-Hoxhaism.

What is the strength of the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world theory?

The international character of the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world theory is, that it provides the opportunity for the Communist International (of new type), to orient itself in the globalized world situation, that it understands the interdependences of world events, that it foresees the course of international occurrences, and to recognize not only how and where the occurrences develop in present, but how and where they must develop in future (Stalin).

Only a new Type of Communist International, which has mastered the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world theory, can march forward with confidence and to pave the way of the world proletariat. And vice versa - a Communist International that has not mastered the Stalinist-Hoxhaist world theory, will blindly wander about, will lose confidence in its actions, and will not be able to lead the world proletariat (Stalin).

„World communism of today must be marked through the revolutionary, militant spirit of the heroic times of Lenin and Stalin, of the Comintern“

(Enver Hoxha, report to the 5th party congress of the PLA, November 1966).

 

* * *

The world proletariat has no other weapon in the struggle for world power than its world organization, that combines and centralizes the fighting units of all countries.

The overall interests of world revolution determine the revolutionary interests of each country, therefore: the overall world-revolutionary process determines the world revolutionary process in each country.

"The world proletariat today has everything that is necessary to fully build world socialism. The world proletariat can and must overthrow the global power of the world bourgeoisie and, supported by its allies, build the socialist world society."

The world proletariat is now the only leading force which is capable to overthrow world capitalism. The world proletariat is the most decisive subjective factor of the world socialist revolution.
The world proletariat is therefore destined to begin with the world socialist revolution and to lead the oppressed and exploited classes on the global battlefields of class struggle.
The Comintern (SH) must mobilize all its Sections and concentrate and centralize their global force. In doing so, it is the task of each Section to supply its greatest possible support for the world socialist revolution, so that the world proletariat can bundle and unite all its national forces to the highest degree of globalized power for the purpose to smash world imperialism. Even if the one or the other Section would not be able to immediately complete its revolution in its own country, half its victory already consists in the fact that it has contributed to the global victory of the world proletariat. The other half of the victory comes from the world proletariat, which has triumphed globally, and which will now contribute to the liberation of all remaining Sections with the global power granted to it, thus facilitating the victory of the proletariat in these remained countries. This Bolshevik formula expresses the plan of today's Stalinism-Hoxhaism, the world-Bolshevik plan of the Comintern (SH).
("On the foundations and concerning questions of Stalinism") in German language.

You cannot appreciate the hegemony of the world proletariat, if you refuse to appreciate its vanguard, the Communist International.

In a globalized world the rebirth of the October revolution will take place under the globally centralized leadership of the Comintern (SH). Each Section of the Comintern (SH) takes actively part in the overall world-revolutionary process through carrying forward the banner of the October Revolution in its own country , namely in solidarity and cooperation with the Sections of all other countries which also hold high this victorious banner. On this global way of democratic centralism, the banner of the October Revolution becomes the common banner of the whole world proletariat.

No betrayal of the October revolution can stop or hinder the completed victory of the October revolution all over the world if we are guided by the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism !

Long live the Centenary of the October Revolution !

Long live the Soviet Union of Lenin and Stalin !

Long live the world socialist revolution !

Long live the dictatorship of the world proletariat !

Long live world socialism and world communism !

Long live the 5 Classics of Marxism-Leninism:

Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Enver Hoxha !

 

The 5 Classics of Marxism - Leninism

On the October-Revolution

(collection of texts and quotations)

 

 

 

special website of the Comintern (SH):

The Great October Socialist Revolution

RUSSIA 1917