|
In April 22, 1969,
the revolutionary masses celebrate the 34th anniversary of the formation of the
CPI(ML), which gave birth to the revolutionary trend in the Indian Communist
Movement — that made a clear break with decades of revisionism. Though the
initial upsurge was brutally crushed, tiny sparks continued to exist, which
later grew into a raging fire in the flaming fields of AP, Bihar and
Dandakarnaya.
Being an April-May
joint issue, we also reiterate the historical significance of May Day —
International Workingmen’s Day, a festive occasion for the working-class
throughout the world. Marxism is particularly the ideology of the working-class.
In its 155 years of its existence Marxism has faced many an attack, both from
within the movement and without. From within the movement, it has primarily
faced attacks from revisionism. From without the attacks take various forms, the
latest being theories of post-modernism, etc.
To commemorate these
two days, we dedicate this issue to Upholding the Science of Marxism by
countering social-democracy/revisionism in some of its manifestations. In this
issue we carry a number of articles on the subject, related both to India and
also the international experience of social-fascism — socialism in words,
fascism in deeds. Social fascism, the end-product of social-democracy, first
manifested by the revisionists of Europe (who encouraged, directly or
indirectly, the growth of Fascism, while in power, or out of it), is to be seen
today in India {as with the CPI(M)}and in many countries of the
world. We also include in this issue an article exposing the newly arisen
World Social Forum, which also acts to divert people’s attention away from
thorough-going anti-imperialism and from revolutionary Marxism. {In later
issues we shall detailedly expose the
main ideological roots of this NGO phenomena — post-modernism—Editor}
The danger of
revisionism to the International Communist Movement cannot be underrated,
particularly today, where it has faced a serious set-back, after the collapse of
socialism in the Soviet Union, China, Albania and elsewhere, and its miscarriage
in countries like Vietnam, North Korea and Cuba. Thousands of troops of the
imperialist armies could not have inflicted as serious damage to the cause of
socialism and communism as this destruction caused by revisionism. Today, it
comprises the main danger to the ICM :
It undermines
class-struggle; like a cancer, it eats into the revolutionary potential of the
masses; it replaces principles and revolutionary integrity with subterfuge and
deception; it creates opportunist and self-seeking bureaucrats, rather than
selfless communists; it creates petty Trade-Union/party officials rather than
communist statesmen; it replaces the science of Marxism with petty politicking;
it negates revolutionary strategy and confines tactics to what is acceptable to
the rulers; it negates proletarian organization and dedication and replaces it
with liberal, secure, self-satisfied life-styles and struggles; it negates
proletarian culture/values and the need for remoulding, and adjusts to the
cultural mores and values of the existing system; and, last but not least, it
stabs the revolution in the back.
Over a century back,
Lenin first defined revisionism, as it arose as a phenomenon within the
communist movement. He said:
"The revived
international organisation of the labour movement — in the shape of periodical
international congresses — from the outset, and almost without a struggle,
adopted the Marxist standpoint in all essentials (i.e by the 1890s….
Editor). But after Marxism had ousted all the more or less integral doctrines
hostile to it, the tendencies expressed in those doctrines began to seek other
channels. The forms and causes of the struggle changed, but the struggle
continued. And the second half-century of the existence of Marxism began (in the
nineties) with the struggle of a trend hostile to Marxism within Marxism itself.
Bernstein, a one-time orthodox Marxist, gave his name to this trend by coming
forward with the most noise and with the most purposeful expression of
amendments to Marx, revision of Marx, revisionism." (Marxism &
revisionism - Lenin)
Lenin further added:
"A natural
complement to the economic and political tendencies of revisionism was its
attitude to the ultimate aim of the socialist movement. "The movement is every
thing, the ultimate aim is nothing" — this catch-phrase of Bernstein’s expresses
the substance of revisionism better than many long disquisitions. To determine
its conduct from case to case, to adapt itself to the events of the day and to
the chopping and changing of petty politics, to forget the primary interests of
the proletariat and the basic features of the whole capitalist system, of all
capitalist evolution, to sacrifice these primary interests for the real or
assumed advantages of the moment — such is the policy of revisionism."
(ibid)
Though the essence of
revisionism is basically the same, its form and methods may change depending on
the time and place. Elaborating on the above Bernsteinian approach, Lenin
further added, "And it patently follows from the very nature of this policy
that it may assume an infinite variety of forms, and that every more or less
"new" question, every more or less unexpected and unforeseen turn of events,
even though it change the basic line of development only to an insignificant
degree and only for the briefest period, will always inevitably give rise to one
variety of revisionism or another".
Later, modern
revisionism by Khrushchev raised this trend to new heights, when Socialism in
the Soviet Union was sabotaged from within, and nearly 70% of the parties of the
ICM led into the morass. Then, in the 1950s and 1960s, China stood out as a
beacon light. The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was a giant experiment
for, not merely taking China along the socialist path, but for the creation of a
new communist man. But then again, in the mid-1970s, Deng revisionism once again
set the clock back. The GPCR was stabbed in the back, and the Deng culture "to
get rich is fine", brought the bourgeoisie once again to power. Revisionism
got a new lease of life as, this time; there was no major force to counter the
Chinese brand of revisionism.
Today, revisionism
has so discredited the communist movement, that we see only a sprinkling of
communists in the gigantic anti-globalisation/anti-war movements of the world.
The bourgeoisie traditionally diffuses the distinction between the genuine
communists and the revisionists, utilizing the general label ‘Left’, thereby
putting the ills of the revisionists on to the communists. Today, it is
basically those upholding Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, that continue in the
revolutionary Marxist tradition. Their numbers are, as yet, few.
In the post-war
world, the reactionaries first sought to tame the communists by diverting them
from the path of revolution, utilizing the services of the revisionists. When
unsuccessful, they unleashed unbelievable fury against them, massacring
thousands, even lakhs. Immediately after World War II this was seen in countries
like Greece, Indonesia and elsewhere. Later this was repeated in Latin America,
Indo-China and Africa. India too witnessed the similar wrath of the rulers after
Naxalbari, and now once again with the revival of the revolution by the PW and
MCCI. A similar ruthlessness is to be witnessed in Nepal after the launching of
the people’s war. Here again the revisionists played their dubious role; the CPM
ganged up with the Congress hoodlums in the massacre of naxalites in the 1970s,
and now act as willing accomplices, when necessary (as in West Bengal). In Nepal
the UML went so far as to align with the present killer king.
History has shown
that, if revolution must proceed, clear lines of demarcation are drawn between
Marxism and revisionism; if not, the revolution will be diverted from its goal.
Not only that, even after victory in any country, if clear lines are not drawn,
the revolution is aborted (as in Vietnam) or defeated (as in Russia and China)
and the bourgeoisie returned to power (notwithstanding their communist/socialist
labels).
Today, it has become
the fashion to negate ideology, the basic principles of Marx, Engels, Lenin,
Stalin and Mao, as something outdated. In the vast sea of the anti-globalisation
movement this has become a trend, and anarchist and post-modernist theories are
in fashion. Even within the Marxists, there are numerous trends, many of which
give only lip-service to ideology, that too in the abstract. The revisionists,
of course, use it only as a label to dupe the masses and cadre.
On this occasion, it
is important to re-emphasise the importance of ideology, not as a dogma, but as
an illumining light through which to view the world and our practice. It has to
be wielded creatively to understand latest developments, in order to help the
process of cognition, of getting to the truth. It has to be internalized as a
world outlook, which, if neglected, necessarily results in the bourgeois outlook
dominating. Finally, it is Marxism and Marxism alone that enable us to draw
those clear lines of demarcation with revisionism. Today, Marxism has developed
into Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; and therefore it is by only utilizing its latest
form that it can be effectively applied as a science. In this issue of the
magazine we attempt to uphold this science, by countering some trends hostile to
it. We hope that it will help this process.
|
