WELCOME DEVELOPMENT IN PEKING!S POLEMICS
What may prove to be the opening of a new and important turn in Peking's handling of its dispute with Moscow was signaled October 23 when the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao and Honggqi published "Apologists of Neo=Colonialism," their fourth joint article in the series commenting on the July 14 open letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet -UALONe
Hammering on " Knrushchevite revisionism, of Lenin's theory and practice in relation to the colonial revolution, they take Khrushchev and French Communist party leader Thorez to task for their failure to support Algeria's seven-and-a-half year war for national independence, they sharply criticize the attitude of the Soviet government during the Congo crisis, they quote approvingly from: Fidel Castro's "Second Declaration of Havana, " and they attack the Soviet bureaucracy's doctrine of “socialism in one country" or "a few" countries, ;
The three most important sections of the long article are as follows:
1.
‘Khrushchev!s Attitude Toward Algerian Revolution
"Take the example of the Algerian people's war of national liberation. The leadership of the C.P.S.U. not only withheld support for a long period but actually took the side of French imperialism, Khrushchev used to treat Algeria's national independence as an 'tinternal affair' of France, -Speak~ ing on the Algerian question on October 3, 1955, he said, TI had and have in view, first of all, that the U.S.S.R. does not interfere in the internal affairs of other states.! Receiving a correspondent of Le Figaro on March 27, 1958, he said, 'We do not want France to grow weaker, we want her to become still greater,! :
"To curry favour with the French imperialists, the leaders of the C.P.S.U. did not dare to recognize the Provisional Government of the Republic of Algeria for a long time; not until the victory of the Algerian peoplets war of resistance against French aggression was a foregone con-= clusion and France was compelled to agree to Algerian independence did
they hurriedly recognize the Republic of Algeria, This unseemly attitude brought shame on the socialist countries. Yet the leaders of the C.P.S.U,. glory in their shame and assert that the victory the Algerian people paid for with their blood should also be credited to the policy of 'peaceful coexistence,!"
Le
French Communist Party Attitude Toward Algerian Revolution
"An Example of Social-Chauvinism. [Subhead in original.]
"Similarly, according to proletarian internationalism, the proletariat and the Communists of the oppressor nations must actively support both the right of the oppressed nations to national independence and their struggles for liberation, With the support of the oppressed nations, the proletariat of the oppressor nations will be better able to win its revoe lution,
"Lenin hit the nail on the head when he said: _
"tThe revolutionary movement in the advanced countries would
actually be a sheer fraud if, in their struggle against capital,
the workers of Europe and America. were not closely and completely
united with the hundreds upon hundreds of millions of "colonial"
slaves who are oppressed by capital.' (Lenin, Selected Works,
F,L.P.H., Moscow, 1951, Vol, II, Part 2, pp. 472=73, . ' "However, some self-styled Marxist-Leninists have abandoned Marxism= Leninism on this very question of fundamental principle. The leaders of the French Communist Party are typical in this respect.
"Over a long period of time, the leaders of the C.P.F. have abandoned the struggle against U.S, imperialism, refusing to put up a. firm fight against U.S. imperialist control over and restrictions on France in the political, economic and military fields and surrendering the banner of French national struggle against the United States to people like de Gaulle; on the other hand, they have been using various devices and excuses to defend the colonial interests of the French imperialists, have refused to support, and indeed opposed, the national-liberation movements in the French colonies, and particularly opposed national revolutionary wars; they have sunk ato the quagmire of chauvinism, |
renin said, 'Huropeans often forget that colonial peoples are also nations, but to tolerate such "forgetfulness" is to tolerate chauvinism,! ' (Lenin, ’ Collected Works, Russian ed., State Publishing House for Political Literature, Moscow, Vol. XXIII, p. 52.) Yet the leadership of the French Communist Party, represented by Comrade Thorez, has not only tolerated this 'forgetfulness,' but has openly regarded the peoples of the French colonies as tnaturalized Frenchmen,! refused to acknowledge their right to national independence in Siaccelation from France and publicly suppor» ted the policy of 'national assimilation! pursued by the French imperial« ists,
"For the past ten years and more, the leaders of the French Communist Party have followed the colonial poliey of the French imperialists and served as an appendage of french monopoly capital. In 1946, when the
Ne IE ee a
~Tl-
French monopoly capitalist rulers played a neo-colonialist trick by proposing to form a French Union, they followed suit and proclaimed that twe have always envisaged the French Union as a "free union of free peoples"! and that 'the French Union will permit the regulation, on a new basis, of the relations between the people of France and the overseas peoples who _ fave in the past been attached to France.! In 1958, when.the French Union ‘collapsed and the French Government proposed the establishment. of a French Community to preserve its colonial system, the leaders of the C.P.F. again followed suit and proclaimed 'we believe that the creation of a genuine community will be a positive event.!
"Moreover, in opposing the demand of the people in the French colonies for national independence, the leaders of the C.P.F. have even tried to intimidate them, saying that ‘any attempt to break away from the Union of France will only lead to the strengthening of imperialism; although independence may be won, it will be temporary, nominal and false,! They further openly declared: 'The question is whether this already unavoidable independence will be with France, or without France and against France, ‘The interest of our country requires that this independence should be with France,t
"On the question of Algeria, the chauvinist stand of the leaders of the C.P.F. is all the more evident. They have recently tried to justify © themselves by asserting that they had long 'recognized the correct demand of the people of Algeria for freedom.! -But what are the facts?
"Por a long time the leaders of the C.P.F. refused to recognize Algeria's right to national independence; they followed the French monopoly capitalists, crying that 'Algeria is an inalienable part of Francet and that France 'should be a great African power, now and in the future.' Thorez and others were most concerned about the fact that Algeria could provide France with ta million head of sheep! and large quantities of wheat yearly to solve her problem of 'the shortage of meat? and tmake up our deficit in grain,!
"Just see! What feverish chauvinism on the part of the leaders of the C.P.F.! Do they show an iota of proletarian internationalism? Is there anything of the proletarian revolutionary in them? By taking this chauvinistic stand they have betrayed the fundamental interests of the . international proletariat, the fundamental interests of the French prole-~ tariat and the true interests of the French nation,"
De
On the Theory of Socialism in One Country
"The question of what attitude to take towards the relationship between the socialist countries and the revolution of the oppressed nations, and towards the relationship between the working-class movement in the capitalist countries and the revolution of the. oppressed nations, involves the important principle of whether Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism are to be upheld or abandoned.
"according to Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, every socialist country which has achieved victory in its revolution must active-~ ly support and assist the liberation struggles of the oppressed nations. The socialist countries must become base areas for supporting and develop-
oe bet
ing the revolution of the oppressed nations and peoples throughout the world, form the closest alliance with them and carry the proletarian world revolution through to completion.
“But the leaders of the C.P.S.U. virtually regard the victor of - : socialism in one country or Several countries as the end of the roletarian world revolution, They want to subordinate the aetioneloltberetion revo~ ution to their general line of peaceful coexistence and to the national interests of their own country." [Our emphasis.] [For complete text of "Apologists of Neo=Colonialism" see Peking Review October 25,]
These declarations represent a welcome development in the theoretical position of the Chinese Communist party in its conflict with Khrushchev,. — They offer striking confirmation of the correctness of the Trotskyist estimate at the Reunification Congress of the Fourth International last June that the Chinese side is relatively the more progressive,
_ However, while publicly attacking the theory of "socialism in one country" for the first time, the editors of Renmin Ribso anc Honggi put © themselves in the strange position of quoting -- Stalin, as support for their arguments. And they imply that the ti iquidationists represented by Trotskyites and Zinovievites" back in 1925. defended -- the theory of socialism in one country! , Los
This posture is so grotesque, in such glaring contradiction to the well-known facts of the discussion in the CPSU during the twenties that one is tempted to wonder if this attempt to "rehabilitate" Stalin on the most incredible grounds of all_is not the "sly way" of some "Trotskyite . wrecker" in Peking out to torpedo the campaign for Stalin with a truly monumentat joke,
As a matter of fact, the editorial departments of Renmin Ribao and Honggi are unjust even to Stalin. We find ourselves saddled with the quite unexpected and, we are sure, thankless chore of having to defend Stalin | against his Chinese partisans in order to keep the historical record straight,
They quote from a text of 1925 in which Stalin describes "liquida= tionism," and they imply that he was describing the views of Trotsky and | Zinoviev. This, however, is not true,
The document they quote from happens to be a famous one in the history of Soviet developments. It has often been cited by Trotskyists because it is the one document in which Stalin himself correctly described how the outward signs of bureaucratic degeneration of the Soviet state would become visible in foreign policy. ~
Stalin made his statements on June 9, 1925, during an interview with students of Sverdiov University, The interview was published in France as a | Slepage pamphlet Questions et Réponses by the "Librairie de 1'Humanité.”
The key quotation cited by the Renmin Ribso and Hongai authors is taken. from the answer to the second question, This question was: "What are the dangers of degeneration of the party which would. be determined by the stabilization of capitalism if it were to become prolonged?" ~~ Stalin's answer starts with the following "historical" words: These”
Wowhere in the document does Stalin accuse the 0
ww Low
dangers, do they really exist? Yes, and they exist independently of the. stabilization, which would only render them more palpable," :
The quotation can be found on. pages 18-19 of the above pamphlet,
osition of responsibil~
are inanl es~
There is good reason for this, Everyone at that time in Russia and the international Communist movement Imew that the Opposition stood in the forefront of the defense of the perspective of world revolution and did not show the slightest sign of "petty bourgeois nationalist isolation" in: the field of international affairs,
That the editors of Renmin Ribao and Honggi indicate opposition to the doctrine of "socialism in one country" is, of course, much more important than their curious attempt to attribute this theory to -- Trotsky, and to credit Stalin with starting the fight against this pernicious theory!
However, this strained effort like their general "apology" for Stalin serves to seriously discredit their progressive cause and to cast a repellent shadow on their course, A révolutionary Marxist policy is not served by lies, even in a struggle against the Soviet bureaucracy. Turn towards the full truth, Chinese comrades, and your cause, in alliance with the forces of world revolution, will become invincible!
-ALGERIAtS