REFUTATION OF THE NEW LEADERS OF THE CPSU …...REFUTATION OF THE NEW LEADERS OF THE CPSU ON "UNITED ACTION" by the Editorial Departments of Renmin Ribaa (People's Daily) and Hongqi

R E F U T A T I O N O F T H E N E W L E A D E R S

O F T H E C P S U O N " U N I T E D A C T I O N "

REFUTATION OF THE NEW LEADERS

OF THE CPSU ON "UNITED ACTION"

b y t h e E d i t o r i a l D e p a r t m e n t s o f Renmin Ribaa (People's Daily) a n d Hongqi {Red Flag)

(November 11, 1965)

F O R E I G N L A N G U A G E S P R E S S P E K I N G .1965

Printed in the People's Republic of China

C O N T E N T S

T H E UNITY OF T H E I N T E R N A T I O N A L P R O L E T A R I A T MUST B E BASED ON P R I N C I P L E 1

T H E K H R U S H C H O V R E V I S I O N I S T S H A V E UNDERMINED T H E COMMON B A S I S OF U N I T Y 6

UNITED ACTION IS I M P O S S I B L E W I T H T H O S E WHO TRANS­POSE E N E M I E S AND F R I E N D S 10

T H E NEW L E A D E R S OF T H E C P S U A R E T A K I N G U N I T E D ACTION W I T H T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S ON T H E Q U E S T I O N O F V I E T NAM 15

"UNITED ACTION", SO C A L L E D , IS A MEANS OF PROMOTING S P L I T T I S M 22

"UNITED ACTION", SO C A L L E D , IS A S L O G A N TO D E C E I V E T H E S O V I E T P E O P L E 26

P E R S E V E R E IN T H E S T R U G G L E A G A I N S T K H R U S H C H O V R E V I S I O N I S M 31

T H E U N I T Y O F T H E I N T E R N A T I O N A L P R O L E T A R I A T M U S T B E B A S E D ON P R I N C I P L E

T h e h i s t o r y o f t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i s t m o v e m e n t i s o n e o f s t r u g g l e b y M a r x i s m a g a i n s t o p p o r t u n i s m a n d r e v i ­s i o n i s m , a h i s t o r y o f s t r u g g l e b y M a r x i s t s t o s a f e g u a r d t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l u n i t y o f t h e p r o l e t a r i a t a n d t o o p p o s e a t t e m p t s b y o p p o r t u n i s t s a n d r e v i s i o n i s t s t o d i v i d e i t .

U p h o l d i n g t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y t h e o r y o f M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m , t h e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y o f C h i n a h a s a l w a y s h e l d a l o f t t h e g r e a t b a n n e r o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l p r o l e t a r i a n u n i t y . W e m a i n t a i n t h a t i n t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t c a p i t a l i s m a n d i m p e r i a l i s m a n d i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e w o r l d r e v o l u t i o n , t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l p r o l e t a r i a t c a n d e f e a t t h e e n e m y o n l y t h r o u g h u n i t i n g i t s o w n f o r c e s a n d u n i t i n g w i t h a l l o t h e r f o r c e s t h a t c a n b e u n i t e d .

T h e f o u n d e r s o f c o m m u n i s t t h e o r y , M a r x a n d E n g e l s , a d v a n c e d t h e f i g h t i n g s l o g a n , " W o r k e r s o f a l l c o u n t r i e s , u n i t e ! " T h i s s l o g a n h a s e d u c a t e d a n d i n s p i r e d w o r k e r s a l l o v e r t h e w o r l d a n d s t i m u l a t e d u n i t e d s t r u g g l e b y t h e w o r k i n g c l a s s f o r i t s e m a n c i p a t i o n . T h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l u n i t y o f t h e p r o l e ­t a r i a t a d v o c a t e d b y M a r x a n d E n g e l s i s o n e o f s t r u g g l e t o f u l f i l i t s g r e a t h i s t o r i c a l m i s s i o n o n a w o r l d - w i d e s c a l e .

S u c c e e d i n g t o t h e c a u s e o f M a r x a n d E n g e l s , L e n i n c a r r i e d M a r x i s m f o r w a r d t o a n e w s t a g e . L e n i n i s m i s M a r x i s m o f t h e e p o c h o f i m p e r i a l i s m a n d p r o l e t a r i a n r e v o l u t i o n . L e n i n s t e a d f a s t l y p e r s e v e r e d i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l p r o l e t a r i a n u n i t y o n t h e b a s i s o f M a r x i s m . I n t h e h i s t o r i c a l c o n d i t i o n s o f r i s i n g s t r u g g l e b y t h e o p p r e s s e d n a t i o n s a g a i n s t i m p e r i a l i s m , h e p u t f o r w a r d t h e f i g h t i n g s l o g a n , " W o r k e r s a n d o p p r e s s e d n a t i o n s o f t h e w o r l d , u n i t e ! " T h i s s l o g a n s t i m i i l a t e d u n i t e d s t r u g g l e b y t h e w o r k i n g - c l a s s m o v e m e n t o f t h e c o u n t r i e s i n t h e W e s t a n d t h e n a t i o n a l l i b e r a t i o n m o v e m e n t o f t h e o p p r e s s e d n a t i o n s

1

in the East. It represented a still broader unity of the interna­tional revolutionary forces.

In the light of the new changes in international class rela­tions and the balance of forces after World War II, Comrade Mao Tse-tung advanced the slogan of establishing an interna­tional united front against U.S. imperialism. This united front has the unity of the international proletariat as its core and the unity between the international proletariat and the oppressed nations as its foundation. It means uniting closely with the masses of the people, who constitute over 90 per cent of the world's population, uniting with all the political forces subject to U.S. aggression, control, interference or bully­ing, and making use of every possible contradiction, all for the purpose of isolating U.S. imperialism, the main enemy of the people of the whole world, to the maximum extent and dealing it the hardest possible blows. This is the way to mobilize all the positive factors conducive to world revolution for the achievement of victory in the people's revolutionary struggle in every country. It is a strategic principle of vital importance formulated by Comrade Mao Tse-tung on the question of world revolution in the new historical conditions.

Under Comrade Mao Tse-tung's leadership, the Communist Party of China has always upheld international proletarian unity, the unity of the workers and the oppressed nations of the world, and the unity of all the forces opposing U.S. im­perialism. We have carried out this line unswervingly and with great success.

Marxism-Leninism teaches us that the international unity of the proletariat is revolutionary unity, unity based on principle. Its achievement demands resolute and unequivocal struggle against all brands of opportunists and splitters.

Marx taught us that in the struggle to achieve international proletarian unity, there should be "no haggling about principles". When speaking on the need for principled struggle against the opportunists to achieve genuine unity, Engels said, "Unity is quite a good thing so long as it is possible, but there

2

are things which stand above unity", and "the development of the proletariat proceeds everywhere amidst internal struggles".! He also said that "people of limited intelligence . . . want to stir everything into one nondescript brew, which, the moment it is left to settle, throws up the differences again but in much sharper contrast because they will then be all in one pot".2 Marx and Engels declared explicitly that "it is . . . impossible for us to cooperate with people who wish to expunge this class struggle from the movement".^

Lenin strongly condemned the revisionists of the Second International for betraying Marxism and the common cause of opposition to impei'ialism, for siding with the bourgeoisie of their own countries and degenerating into flunkeys of monop­oly capital, into social-chauvinists and social-imperialists.

He pointed out that, far from undermining the unity of the proletarian party, the struggle against opportunism and revi­sionism was indispensable for its achievement. He said.

Without struggle there cannot be any sorting out, and without sorting out there can be no successful advance, and also no solid unity. And those who are now beginning to struggle are by no means destroying unity. There is already no unity, it has already been destroyed, destroyed all along the line . . . and open and direct struggle is one of the essential conditions for restoring unity.^ It was precisely from the principled stand of Marxism-

Leninism that the Communist Party of China waged a long * "Engels to A. Bebel, October 28, 1882", Selected Correspondence of

Marx and Engels, Eng. ed., Foreign Languages Publishing House, Mos­cow, p. 427.

2 "Engels to A. Bebel, June 20, 1873", Selected Correspondence of Marx and Engels, Eng. ed., FLPH, Moscow, p. 345.

8 "Marx and Eiigels to A. Bebel, W. Liebknecht, W. Bracke and Others ('Circular Letter'), September 17-18, 1879", Selected Correspond­ence of Marx and Engels, Eng. ed., FLPH, Moscow, p. 395.

*V. I. Lenin, "To A. A. Yakubova", Collected Works, Russ. ed., SPPL, Moscow, 1950, Vol. X X X I V , p. 32.

8

struggle against the revisionist leadership of the CPSU headed by Khrushchov in order to uphold the unity of the interna­tional communist movement based on Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and to consolidate and broaden the united front against U.S. imperialism.

Why was it that we published the two articles on the historical experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat in 1956? Why was it that we insisted on a series of revolutionary principles and delivered a memorandum on the question of peaceful transition to the Central Committee of the CPSU when the 1957 Declaration was being drawn up? Why did we publish "Long Live Leninism!" and the two other articles in 1960? Why did we systematically criticize Khrushchov's revisionist, divisive and great-power chauvinist views in our reply of September 1960 to the letter of information from the Central Committee of the CPSU? Why was it that we insisted on reaffirming a number of revolutionary principles and distributed our memorandum on the question of peaceful transition among all the fraternal Parties when the 1960 State­ment was being drawn up? Why did we publish "A Proposal Concerning the General Line of the International Communist Movement", giving a comprehensive explanation of our views on a series of fundamental problems of the contemporary world revolution? Why did we publish the nine comments on the open letter of the Central Committee of the CPSU, publicly repudiating Khrushchov revisionism? Why did we publish a series of documents and articles to criticize the Soviet-U.S.­British treaty, exposing the traitorous action of the Khrushchov clique in allying itself with U.S. imperialism against the people of the world? Why did we warn the Khrushchov clique in the numerous talks and exchanges of letters between the Chinese and the Soviet Parties that it must rein in on the edge of the precipice? The purpose of all this was to defend Marxism-Leninism, the unity of the international communist movement based on Marxism-Leninism and the unity of all the forces opposing U.S. imperialism and its lackeys.

4

I t w a s p r e c i s e l y t h e s e r i e s o f r e s o l u t e s t r u g g l e s w a g e d b y t h e C h i n e s e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y a n d o t h e r M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t P a r t i e s t h a t h a s t e n e d t h e b a n k r u p t c y o f K h r u s h c h o v r e v i ­s i o n i s m a n d d r o v e i t s f o u n d e r i n t o a n i m p a s s e a n d f i n a l l y i n t o t h e g r a v e h e h a d d u g f o r h i m s e l f .

O n e y e a r h a s e l a p s e d s i n c e t h e f a l l o f K h r u s h c h o v a n d t h e r i s e o f t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U . H o w d o t h e n e w l e a d e r s c o m p a r e w i t h K h r u s h c h o v ? H a v e t h e y c h a n g e d K h r u s h c h o v ' s r e v i s i o n i s t a n d d i v i s i v e l i n e ? A l l t h e e v i d e n c e s h o w s t h a t t h e y a r e s t i l l p u r s u i n g h i s l i n e b u t w i t h d o u b l e - f a c e d t a c t i c s m o r e c u n n i n g a n d h y p o c r i t i c a l t h a n t h o s e o f K h r u s h c h o v .

I n n u m e r o u s s p e e c h e s , d o c u m e n t s a n d a r t i c l e s t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U h a v e b e e n v o c i f e r o u s l y a d v o c a t i n g " u n i t e d a c t i o n " o n t h e p a r t o f t h e C o m m u n i s t P a r t i e s a n d t h e s o c i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s . T h e y a r e i n c e s s a n t l y s p o u t i n g s u c h f i n e w o r d s a s " u n i t y " , " c o m m o n s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t t h e e n e m y " , " u n i t y a g a i n s t i m p e r i a l i s m " a n d " j o i n t s u p p o r t f o r t h e s t r u g g l e o f t h e V i e t ­n a m e s e p e o p l e " . B u t t h i s i s a l l f a l s e . T h e i r d e e d s r u n c o u n t e r t o t h e i r w o r d s . A t t h e p l e n a r y s e s s i o n o f t h e C e n t r a l C o m ­m i t t e e o f t h e C P S U i n S e p t e m b e r o f t h i s y e a r , B r e z h n e v , F i r s t S e c r e t a r y o f t h e C e n t r a l C o m m i t t e e o f t h e C P S U , o p e n l y d e n o u n c e d t h e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y o f C h i n a w h i l e p r a t i n g a b o u t " u n i t y a g a i n s t i m p e r i a l i s m " . T h i s h a s l a i d b a r e t h e u g l y f e a t u r e s o f t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U a s p r o t a g o n i s t s o f s h a m u n i t y a n d r e a l h o s t i l i t y t o w a r d s C h i n a .

J u s t a s t h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s , t h e m o s t a g g r e s s i v e o f a l l t h e i m p e r i a l i s t s , t r y t o d i s g u i s e t h e m s e l v e s a s a n g e l s o f p e a c e , s o t h e b i g g e s t r e v i s i o n i s t s a n d s p l i t t e r s s e e k t o p r e s e n t t h e m s e l v e s a s a r d e n t l o v e r s o f u n i t y . T h e c a l l o f t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U f o r " u n i t e d a c t i o n " i s n o t h i n g b u t a f r a u d .

L e t u s n o w t a k e t h e l i e s o f t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U a b o u t " u n i t e d a c t i o n " a n d r e f u t e t h e m o n e b y o n e . L e t u s e x p o s e t h e i r f r a u d u l e n c e b y c i t i n g t h e i r m i s d e e d s b o t h i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y a n d a t h o m e i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e p a s t y e a r .

S

THE KHRUSHCHOV REVISIONISTS HAVE UNDER­MINED THE COMMON BASIS OF UNITY

One of the arguments of the new leaders of the CPSU for "united action" is that all the Communist Parties have "a common ideology" and "a common programme".

Indeed, the Communist Parties should have a common ide­ology in Marxism-Leninism and a common programme in the revolutionary principles jointly drawn up in the Declaration of 1957 and Statement of 1960. But the Khrushchov revi­sionists have completely betrayed this common ideology and common programme and thoroughly undermined the com­mon basis for unity among the Communist Parties.

The new leaders of the CPSU have faithfully taken over the mantle of Khrushchov. They have not changed into Marxist-Leninists or even into semi-Marxist-Leninists; they remain out-and-out Khrushchov revisionists, pursuing Khrush­chov revisionism but without Khrushchov. In November 1964 they told the members of the Chinese Party and govern­ment delegation to their faces that there was not a shade of difference between themselves and Khrushchov on 'the ques­tion of the international communist movement or of relations with China. Time and again they have categorically stated that the general line adopted by the 20th and 22nd Congresses of the CPSU "was, is and will be the only, immutable, line in the entire home and foreign policy of the Communist Party and the Soviet state".^

Like Khrushchov, the new leaders of the CPSU try to negate and oppose all anti-imperialist revolutionary struggles by preaching that "today peaceful coexistence . . . is the most important condition for the social renovation of the world",^ that "peaceful competition" between the two systems is the sole means for the "victory of communism over capitalism

1 L. I. B r e z h n e v , S p e e c h a t t h e R e c e p t i o n of t h e S o v i e t C o s m o n a u t s , Oc lober 19, 1964.

2 N. V. Podgorny , "Great October", Cuba Socialista, N o v e m b e r 1964. 6

on an international scale"^ and that the "chances" of peaceful transition "grow many times over".^

Like Khrushchov, the new leaders of the CPSU insist on abolishing the dictatorship of the proletariat and the Party of the proletariat and on setting up the "state of the whole people" and the "party of the entire people". Moreover, they say that "like the dictatorship of the proletariat, the state of the whole people is a stage conforming to law and common to all countries in the development of the socialist state"^ and that "the transformation of our Party into a Party of the entire people" is "of great significance far beyond the borders of our country".*

The new leaders of the CPSU have further developed Khrushchov revisionism by openly spreading the fallacy that socialism can be achieved without the leadership of the pro­letariat. They say that in the capitalist world "the transition to socialist transformation in one country or another can also take place without the direct leadership of the working class".^ Shamelessly emasculating Lenin's theory on the dictatorship of the proletariat, they allege that "Lenin did not connect the transition to the non-capitalist road with the obligatory establishment of political power under the leadership of the proletarian Party, i.e., in fact with the dictatorship of the proletariat".^ According to this allegation of theirs, the pro-

1 T h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e v o l u t i o n a r y M o v e m e n t of t h e W o r k i n g C l a s s , ed i ted by B. N . P o n o m a r e v (edi tor- in-chie f ) and o thers , Russ . ed . , S P P L , M o s c o w , 1964, p. 214.

2 I b i d . , p. 269. 3 A. A n d r e y e v , "The D e v e l o p m e n t of the M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t D o c t r i n e

Concerning the Soc ia l i s t S t a t e in t h e P r o g r a m m e of t h e CPSU", Kom-m u n i s t S o v e t s k o i L a t v i , N o . 12, X964.

* Y. Frantzev , "The R o l e of the M a s s e s of t h e P e o p l e in t h e His tor ica l Process", K o m m u n i s t , N o . 18, 1964.

6 T h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e v o l u t i o n a r y M o v e m e n t of t h e W o r k i n g C l a s s , edi ted by B. N . P o n o m a r e v (edi tor- in-chie f ) a n d o thers , Russ . ed . , S P P L , Moscow, 1964, p. 325.

6 K. Brutentz , "The C o n t e m p o r a r y S t a g e of t h e N a t i o n a l L ibera t ion Movement" , K o m m u n i s t , N o . 17, 1964.

7

letarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat are totally unnecessary and the Communist Party can very well be dispensed with. In propagating this ultra-reactionary theory, which is a thorough betrayal of Marxism-Leninism, the new leaders of the CPSU are not only giving an ideo­logical weapon to the reactionaries, who are hostile to com­munism and the people, but are trying to confuse those na­tions and peoples who are in the stage of national-democratic revolution with regard to the aim of their present struggle and to induce them to abandon their task of combating im­perialism, colonialism and neo-colonialism.

The essence of the Khrushchev revisionist theory and line, which the new leaders of the CPSU are persisting in and developing further, is to protect imperialist rule in the capital­ist world and restore capitalism in the socialist world.

Between the Marxist-Leninists and the Khrushchev re­visionists there is a difference of fundamental line, a major difference between what is right and what is wrong. In the circumstances, how can there be "a common ideology" and "a common programme" between the Marxist-Leninists and the Khrushchev revisionists? How can there be a common basis for unity? In the circumstances, the relation between the Khrushchov revisionists and ourselves is certainly not one in which "what binds us together is much stronger than what divides us", as alleged by the new leaders of the CPSU; on all the fundamental issues of the present epoch the relation is one of sharp opposition; there are things that divide us and nothing that unites us, things that are antagonistic and nothing that is common.

Since there is such a difference of fundamental line, the achievement of unity requires either that we discard Marxism-Leninism and follow their revisionism, or that they renounce revisionism and return to the path of Marxism-Leninism. These are the only alternatives. It is impermissible and in­deed utterly wrong if we take an equivocal or vague position on such a sharp question.

8

Are we expected to follow the new leaders of the CPSU in order to achieve unity under their revisionist programme? Wouldn't that mean that we must join them in betraying Marxism-Leninism, in putting down the people's revolutions in various countries and in acting as accomplices of the imperialists? It goes without saying that we will never do so.

Are we expected to look on and remain completely silent without criticizing, exposing and opposing the new leaders of the CPSU, while they are betraying all the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism, striving for Soviet-U.S. col­laboration to dominate the world and opposing the people's revolutions in various countries? Wouldn't that mean that we must also abandon Marxism-Leninism, act as their ally in opposing the people's revolutions and become the accomplice of imperialism? It goes without saying that we will never do that either.

If the new leaders of the CPSU really want unity with the Marxist-Leninists, they must change their revisionist line and honestly admit their mistakes. They must publicly and solemnly admit before the Communists and the people of the world that their Khrushchov revisionism, great-power chau­vinism and splittism are wrong, publicly admit that the re­visionist line and programme decided upon at the 20th and the 22nd Congresses of the CPSU are wrong, and publicly guarantee not to repeat the errors of Khrushchov revision­ism. Is it possible that they will do all this?

The antagonism between Marxism-Leninism and Khrush­chov revisionism is a class antagonism between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie; it is the antagonism between the socialist and the capitalist roads and between the line of opposing imperialism and that of surrendering to it. It is an irrecon­cilable antagonism.

As Lenin said, "Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers' cause needs is the unity of Marxists,

9

not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism."^

UNITED ACTION IS IMPOSSIBLE WITH THOSE WHO TRANSPOSE ENEMIES AND FRIENDS

The new leaders of the CPSU argue that even if there are differences of theory and line, these can be put aside and that "united action" should be taken and "unity against the enemy" achieved in practical struggle against imperialism.

The sharpest difference of theory and line between Marxism-Leninism and Khrushchov revisionism concerns precisely the question of handling our relations with enemies and friends, in other words, the question of whether to oppose or unite with imperialism, and above all the question of whether to oppose or unite with U.S. imperialism. This dif­ference is decisive for all the most important practical actions in the international class struggle. How can it possibly be put aside in favour of an unprincipled unity that does not distinguish between enemies and friends?

The reactionary nature of Khrushchov revisionism is ex­pressed in concentrated form in the line of Soviet-U.S. col­laboration for the domination of the world. The Khrushchov clique completely transposed enemies and friends; it regarded U.S. imperialism, the arch enemy of the people of the world, as its closest friend, and the Marxist-Leninists of the world, including those of the Soviet Union, as its principal enemy.

It was precisely on this question that Khrushchov revealed himself as a renegade. It was on this question that the Marxist-Leninists of the whole world waged the sharpest struggle against the Khrushchov revisionists. And it was on this question that the Khrushchov revisionists were spumed by the revolutionary people of the world.

1 V. I. Lenin, "Unity", Collected Works, Eng. ed., Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1964, Vol. X X , p. 232.

1 0

How have the new leaders of the CPSU acted on this ques­tion? Have they changed the line of Soviet-U.S. collaboration for world domination? Have they stopped transposing enemies and friends? Have they changed from being a force allied with U.S. imperialism to one opposing it?

The facts show they have not. Let us consider the facts: ONE. Immediately after taking office, the new leaders of

the CPSU extolled Johnson as "sensible" and "moderate". They have continued to proclaim that the Soviet Union and the United States are two super-powers on which the fate of the world depends, that "there are sufficiently broad areas for cooperation" between them, and that "there are still many unutilized potentialities".^ Even after the rabid expansion by U.S. imperialism of its war of aggression in Viet Nam, they have kept on stressing their desire for the "development and improvement of relations with the United States of America". At times they find it necessary to talk about a tendency to­wards a "freeze" in Soviet-U.S. relations, but behind the scenes they are stepping up their secret diplomacy and their deals with the United States.

TWO. The signing of the partial nuclear test ban treaty by the Soviet Union, the United States and Britain was an im­portant landmark in Khrushchov's alliance with the United States against China. Not only have the new leaders of the CPSU accepted this legacy, but with this treaty as a basis they are actively plotting new deals with the United States for the "prevention of nuclear proliferation" and similar so-called "disarmament" measures in an effort to maintain the monop­oly of the two nuclear overlords, the Soviet Union and the United States, against China and all other independent coun­tries.

1 A. A. Gromyko, Speech at the Plenary Session of the 19th General Assembly of the United Nations, December 7, '1964. 1 1

T H R E E . U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m h a s b e e n u s i n g t h e U n i t e d N a t i o n s a s a t o o l f o r o p p o s i n g t h e r e v o l u t i o n s o f t h e p e o p l e o f t h e w o r l d . C a t e r i n g t o U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m , K h r u s h c h o v u s e d t h e U n i t e d N a t i o n s a s a s t o c k e x c h a n g e f o r t h e d o m i n a t i o n o f t h e w o r l d b y t w o g r e a t p o w e r s , t h e S o v i e t U n i o n a n d t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . T h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U h a v e c o n t i n u e d t h i s r e a c ­t i o n a r y p o l i c y . T h e y h a v e a g a i n b r o u g h t u p K h r u s h c h o v ' s p r o p o s a l f o r a s t a n d i n g U . N . a r m e d f o r c e . T h e y v o t e d i n t h e U n i t e d N a t i o n s f o r a " c e a s e - f i r e " a n d f o r t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f " n a t i o n a l r e c o n c i l i a t i o n " i n t h e C o n g o ( L . ) , a n d t h e y a l s o v o t e d f o r t h e " c e a s e - f i r e " i n t h e D o m i n i c a n R e p u b l i c . W h e r e v e r t h e p e o p l e r i s e u p i n a r m e d s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m o r w i n v i c t o r i e s i n s u c h s t r u g g l e , a n d w h e r e v e r U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m s u f f e r s d e f e a t s a n d f i n d s i t s e l f i n a p r e d i c a m e n t , t h e n e w l e a d ­e r s o f t h e C P S U h u r r i e d l y c o m e f o r w a r d t o h e l p i t o u t . T o g e t h e r w i t h t h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s , t h e y a r e u s i n g t h e U n i t e d N a t i o n s t o a t t a c k , w e a k e n a n d d i v i d e t h e f o r c e s o p p o s i n g i m p e ­r i a l i s m , c o l o n i a l i s m a n d n e o - c o l o n i a l i s m , a n d t o s a v e , s t r e n g t h ­e n a n d e x t e n d U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t p o s i t i o n s . T h e y s e r v e a s a f i r e -b r i g a d e f o r U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m t r y i n g t o s t a m p o u t t h e f l a m e s o f r e v o l u t i o n .

O n A p r i l 7 t h i s y e a r , t o g e t h e r w i t h h i s p r o p o s a l f o r " u n ­c o n d i t i o n a l d i s c u s s i o n s " o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f V i e t N a m , J o h n s o n p u b l i c i z e d t h e s c h e m e f o r " t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f S o u t h e a s t A s i a " i n o r d e r t o u n d e r m i n e t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m w a g e d b y t h e p e o p l e o f V i e t N a m a n d t h e o t h e r S o u t h e a s t A s i a n c o u n t r i e s a n d t o s t e p u p e c o n o m i c i n ­f i l t r a t i o n , a n d h e e x p r e s s e d t h e h o p e t h a t t h e S o v i e t U n i o n w o u l d j o i n i n . T h e U n i t e d S t a t e s r e g a r d s t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f t h e " A s i a n D e v e l o p m e n t B a n k " a s a m e a n s o f p u t t i n g t h i s s c h e m e i n t o p r a c t i c e . I n r e s p o n s e t o J o h n s o n ' s c a l l , t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U w e n t s o f a r a s t o s e n d a d e l e g a t i o n t o B a n g k o k i n O c t o b e r t o s i t t o g e t h e r w i t h d e l e g a t i o n s f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , J a p a n , a n d s u c h p u p p e t c l i q u e s a s t h e C h i a n g K a i - s h e k g a n g , S o u t h K o r e a a n d " M a l a y s i a " a n d t a k e a n a c t i v e p a r t i n p r e p a r i n g f o r t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f t h e " A s i a n

12

Development Bank". Such is the ardour of the new leaders of the CPSU for united action with U.S. imperialism.

FOUR. The new leaders of the CPSU have taken over and expanded the enterprises of the firm of Kennedy, Nehru and Khrushchov which IChrushchov worked hard to establish. They have carried further their alliance against China wi th the Indian reactionaries who are controlled by the U.S. impe­rialists. During Shastri 's visit to the Soviet Union, they gi-anted India aid to the tune of U.S. $900 million in one go, which is more than all the loans Khrushchov extended to India in nine years. They have speeded up their plans for military aid to India and are working hand in glove with the United States to help India's arms expansion,-so that the In­dian reactionaries are able to use Soviet-made weapons against China and other neighbouring countries.

Recently, during India's armed aggression against Pakistan and also in connection with the Sino-Indian boundary ques­tion, the new leaders of the CPSU revealed in all its ugliness their support of the aggressor and their alliance wi th the United States and India against China. The Soviet Union and the United States joined in an anti-China Chorus both inside and outside the United Nations. In September 1965, in state­ments on the armed conflict between India and Pakistan, Tass attacked China by insinuation, and Pravda even openly sided with India against China on the Sino-Indian boundary ques­tion. People will recall that it was precisely with a Tass statement on the Sino-Indian boundary question that Khrush­chov started his public attacks on China in September 1959. But his attacks pale into insignificance in comparison with those of the present leaders of the CPSU. They have dis­carded even the small figleaf Khrushchov used in order to feign neutrality. Small wonder that the U.S. imperialists are gleefully hailing a "new era" in U.S.-Soviet co-operation.

The new leaders of the CPSU are able to deceive people because they sometimes make a few verbal attacks on U.S. imperialism. Why do they have to do this? The answer is

13

t h a t t h i s m e e t s t h e n e e d o f t h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s a s w e l l a s t h e r e v i s i o n i s t s t h e m s e l v e s . T h e K h r u s h c h o v r e v i s i o n i s t s h a v e t o g i v e t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f o p p o s i n g t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n o r d e r t o r e n d e r e f f e c t i v e h e l p t o U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m , h o o d w i n k t h e m a s s e s a n d s a b o t a g e r e v o l u t i o n . O t h e r w i s e , t h e y c o u l d n o t p l a y t h i s d e c e p t i v e r o l e , a n d t h a t w o u l d n o t b e t o t h e a d v a n t a g e o f U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m . M i n o r a t t a c k s i n w o r d s b u t m a j o r h e l p i n d e e d s — s u c h i s t h e w a y t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U s e r v e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m .

S o m e p e o p l e a s k , w h y i s i t t h a t t h e M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t s a n d t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y p e o p l e c a n n o t t a k e u n i t e d a c t i o n w i t h t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U , y e t c a n u n i t e w i t h p e r s o n a g e s f r o m t h e u p p e r s t r a t a i n t h e n a t i o n a l i s t c o u n t r i e s , a n d s t r i v e f o r u n i t e d a c t i o n w i t h t h e m i n t h e a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s t s t r u g g l e , a n d c a n e v e n e x p l o i t t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a m o n g t h e i m p e r i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s i n t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ?

T h e r e a s o n i s t h a t i n t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y w o r l d o p p o s i t i o n t o o r a l l i a n c e w i t h U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m c o n s t i t u t e s t h e h a l l m a r k f o r d e c i d i n g w h e t h e r o r n o t a p o l i t i c a l f o r c e c a n b e i n c l u d e d i n t h e u n i t e d f r o n t a g a i n s t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s .

I n A s i a , A f r i c a a n d L a t i n A m e r i c a , w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e l a c k e y s o f i m p e r i a l i s m , p e r s o n a g e s f r o m t h e u p p e r s t r a t a i n m a n y n a t i o n a l i s t c o u n t r i e s d e s i r e i n v a r y i n g d e g r e e s t o o p p o s e i m p e r i a l i s m , c o l o n i a l i s m a n d n e o - c o l o n i a l i s m h e a d e d b y t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . W e s h o u l d c o - o p e r a t e w i t h t h e m i n t h e a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s t s t r u g g l e .

I n t h e i m p e r i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s w h i c h a r e i n s h a r p c o n t r a d i c t i o n w i t h t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , s o m e m o n o p o l y c a p i t a l i s t s f o l l o w t h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s , b u t t h e r e a r e a l s o o t h e r s w h o d e s i r e i n v a r y ­i n g d e g r e e s t o o p p o s e t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . I n t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , t h e p e o p l e o f t h e w o r l d c a n t a k e u n i t e d a c t i o n w i t h t h e l a t t e r o n s o m e q u e s t i o n s a n d t o a c e r t a i n d e g r e e .

T h e c r u x o f t h e m a t t e r i s t h a t , s o f a r f r o m o p p o s i n g U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m , t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U a r e a l l y i n g t h e m s e l v e s a n d c o l l a b o r a t i n g w i t h i t t o d o m i n a t e t h e w o r l d .

14

T h e y h a v e t h u s s e t t h e m s e l v e s i n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e u n i t e d f r o n t a g a i n s t U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m . I f t h e y r e a l l y o p p o s e d U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m a n d d i d s o b y a c t u a l d e e d s , w e w o u l d r e a d i l y t a k e u n i t e d a c t i o n w i t h t h e m . B u t t h e i r s o - c a l l e d o p p o s i t i o n t o U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m i s o n l y v e r b a l a n d n o t g e n u i n e . W e m u s t t e l l t h e m t h e t r u t h : S o l o n g a s t h e i r l i n e o f S o v i e t - U . S . c o l l a b o r a t i o n a g a i n s t w o r l d r e v o l u t i o n r e m a i n s u n c h a n g e d , a n d s o l o n g a s t h e y d o n o t a b a n d o n t h e i r a l l i a n c e w i t h U . S . i m ­p e r i a l i s m a n d r e a c t i o n , w e a b s o l u t e l y r e f u s e t o t a k e a n y " u n i t e d a c t i o n " w i t h t h e m . W e a b s o l u t e l y r e f u s e t o s e r v e as a p a w n i n t h e i r s e c r e t d i p l o m a c y w i t h U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m o r h e l p t h e m c o v e r u p t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e t o U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m i n s u p p r e s s i n g t h e p e o p l e s ' r e v o l u t i o n i n v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s .

THE NEW LEADERS OF THE CPSU A R E TAKING UNITED ACTION WITH THE UNITED STATES

ON THE QUESTION OF VIET NAM

T h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U n e v e r w e a r y o f s a y i n g t h a t , h o w e v e r s e r i o u s t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e m . C o m m u n i s t s m u s t t a k e " u n i t e d a c t i o n " o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f V i e t N a m a t t h i s u r g e n t j u n c t u r e i n t h e V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e ' s s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s .

S i n c e t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U h a v e d e s t r o y e d t h e b a s i s o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l p r o l e t a r i a n u n i t y , a n d s i n c e t h e y t r a n s p o s e e n e m i e s a n d f r i e n d s a n d p e r s i s t i n t h e l i n e o f S o v i e t - U . S . c o l l a b o r a t i o n f o r w o r l d d o m i n a t i o n , i s ' i t s t i l l p o s s i b l e f o r t h e M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t P a r t i e s t o t a k e u n i t e d a c t i o n w i t h t h e m o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f V i e t N a m ?

A t a t i m e w h e n t h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s a r e c o m m i t t i n g r a b i d a g g r e s s i o n a g a i n s t V i e t N a m , a l l C o m m u n i s t P a r t i e s a n d s o ­c i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s s h o u l d a s a m a t t e r o f c o u r s e t a k e a u n a n i m o u s s t a n d a n d f i r m l y s u p p o r t t h e V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e ' s j u s t s t r u g g l e t o s m a s h t h i s a g g r e s s i o n . T h e p o i n t i s t h a t t h e s t a n d t a k e n b y t h e r e v i s i o n i s t l e a d e r s h i p o f t h e C P S U o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f

15

V i e t N a m i s i n s e p a r a b l e f r o m t h e i r r e v i s i o n i s t p r o g r a m m e a n d l i n e , a n d i s c o n t r a r y t o t h e p r i n c i p l e d s t a n d r e q u i r e d o f a M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t p a r t y .

W h e n K h r u s h c h o v w a s i n p o w e r , t h e r e v i s i o n i s t l e a d e r s h i p o f t h e C P S U o p e n l y s i d e d w i t h U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m a n d o p p o s e d a n d u n d e r m i n e d t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y s t r u g g l e o f t h e V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e a g a i n s t U . S . a g g r e s s i o n . T h e y a l l e g e d t h a t " a n y s m a l l ' l o c a l w a r ' m i g h t s p a r k o f f t h e c o n f l a g r a t i o n o f a w o r l d w a r " . ^ U s i n g t h i s a b s u r d a r g u m e n t t o f r i g h t e n a n d i n t i m i d a t e a l l p e o p l e s e n g a g e d i n r e v o l u t i o n a r y a r m e d s t r u g g l e , t h e y o p e n ­l y r e f u s e d t o s u p p o r t a n d a i d t h e V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e i n t h e i r a n t i - U . S . s t r u g g l e . W h e n t h e s t r u g g l e s o f t h e V i e t n a m e s e a n d t h e L a o t i a n p e o p l e s a g a i n s t U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m g r e w a c u t e , t h e i r p o l i c y o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f I n d o - C h i n a w a s o n e o f " d i s ­e n g a g e m e n t " . I n J u l y 1 9 6 4 , t h e y i n d i c a t e d t h e d e s i r e o f t h e S o v i e t G o v e r n m e n t t o r e s i g n f r o m i t s p o s t a s o n e o f t h e t w o C o - C h a i r m e n o f t h e G e n e v a C o n f e r e n c e . S o o n a f t e r w a r d s , w h e n t h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s e n g i n e e r e d t h e B a c B o G u l f i n ­c i d e n t , K h r u s h c h o v w e n t s o f a r a s t o c o n c o c t t h e s l a n d e r t h a t t h e i n c i d e n t w a s p r o v o k e d b y C h i n a .

T h e s i t u a t i o n i n V i e t N a m d e v e l o p e d d i r e c t l y c o n t r a r y t o t h e w i s h e s o f t h e K h r u s h c h o v r e v i s i o n i s t s . T h e V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e w o n v i c t o r y a f t e r v i c t o r y i n t h e i r r e v o l u t i o n a r y a n t i -U . S . s t r u g g l e , w h i l e t h e U . S . a g g r e s s o r s g r e w h a r d p r e s s e d . T h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U c a m e t o r e a l i z e t h a t i t w a s n o l o n g e r a d v i s a b l e t o c o p y K h r u s h c h o v ' s p o l i c y o f " d i s e n g a ­g e m e n t " i n i t s t o t a l i t y . S o t h e y s w i t c h e d t o t h e p o l i c y o f i n v o l v e m e n t , t h a t i s , o f g e t t i n g t h e i r h a n d i n .

T h e p o l i c y o f i n v o l v e m e n t a n d t h e p o l i c y o f d i s e n g a g e m e n t a r e e s s e n t i a l l y t h e s a m e . B o t h a r e p r o d u c t s o f K h r u s h c h o v r e v i s i o n i s m a n d b o t h a r e d e s i g n e d t o m e e t t h e n e e d s o f U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m .

1 N . S. Khrushchov, Talk at a Press Conference in Vienna, July 8, 1960.

16

The U.S. imperiahsts urgently need to extinguish the roar­ing flames of the Vietnamese people's revolution. And so do the Khrushchov revisionists because they want to carry out their line of Soviet-U.S. collaboration for world domination. When Khrushchov was following the policy of "disengage­ment", he was acting in close co-ordination with John F. Ken­nedy. And now that the new leaders of the CPSU are follow­ing the policy of involvement, they are similarly acting in tacit agreement and close collaboration with Lyndon B. Johnson.

Please consider the following facts: In January 1965 the U.S. imperialists asked the Soviet Gov­

ernment to use its influence to have the Government of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam accept two conditions: (1) stop supporting South Viet Nam, and first of all stop supply­ing it with guns; and (2) stop the attacks on cities in South Viet Nam. Faithfully obeying the orders of the U.S. im­perialists, the new leaders of the CPSU officially transmitted to the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam these preposterous demands, which were aimed at forcing the Vietnamese people into unconditional surrender.

The new leaders of the CPSU have been busy running er­rands for the U.S. aggressors, who are anxious to find a way out of their predicament in Viet Nam. When Kosygin, Chair­man of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, passed through Peking on his visit to Viet Nam in February 1965 and ex­changed views with Chinese leaders, he stressed the need to help the United States "find a way out of Viet Nam". This was firmly rebutted by the Chinese leaders. We expressed the hope that the new leaders of the CPSU would support the struggle of the Vietnamese people and not make a deal with the United States on the question of Viet Nam. Kosygin ex­pressed agreement with our views and stated that they would "not bargain with others on this issue". However, the new leaders of the CPSU soon went back on their promise.

17

Johnson wanted to play his fraudulent game of "uncondi­tional discussions". So the new leaders of the CPSU put for­ward the idea of "unconditional negotiations". On February 16 this year, the day after Kosygin's re turn to Moscow, the Soviet Government officially put before Viet Nam and China a proposal to convene a new international conference on Indo-China without prior conditions, which in fact was advocacy of "unconditional negotiations" on the Viet Nam question. On February 23, disregarding the stand which the Vietnamese Government had taken against this proposal and without wait­ing for a reply from China, the new leaders of the CPSU discussed the question of calling the above-mentioned inter­national conference with the President of France through the Soviet Ambassador to France.

Johnson's fraud of "unconditional discussions" met with a stern rebuff from the Government of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam. The new leaders of the CPSU then began publicly to insinuate that negotiations could be held if only the United States stopped its bombing of North Viet Nam. They engaged in vigorous activities in the international field with a view to putting this project into effect. In communications to certain fraternal Parties, they said explicitly that they favoured nego­tiations with the United States on condition it stopped bomb­ing North Viet Nam. They also said that ways and means should be sought to settle the Viet Nam question through negotiations. And sure enough, not long afterwards Johnson came out with the manoeuvre of "the temporary suspension of bombing".

After these plots of "unconditional negotiations" and of "stopping the bombing and holding negotiations" were foiled, the new leaders of the CPSU began to collaborate with the Indian reactionaries and the Tito clique — both lackeys of U.S. imperialism — as brokers on the question of Viet Nam. In their prescription for this question there was only mention of the cessation of U.S. bombing of North Viet Nam, only abstract talk about the implementation of the Geneva agree-

18

ments but no mention of the fact that the crucial point in the implementation of these agreements is the complete withdrawal of the U.S. aggressor troops from Viet Nam. In addition, the new leaders of the CPSU have been engaged in secret diplomatic activities. In a nutshell, their purpose is to help the United States to bring about "peace talks" by decep­tion, "peace talks" which could go on indefinitely and also allow the United States to hang on in South Viet Nam in­definitely.

To curry favour with U.S. imperialism, the new leaders of the CPSU went to the length of brutally suppressing dem­onstrations in the Soviet Union opposing U.S. imperialism and supporting Viet Nam which were held by students from Viet Nam, China and other Asian, African and Latin-American countries.

Particularly noteworthy is the fact that last April the new leaders of the CPSU let Khrushchov emerge from limbo to talk with Western correspondents. In that interview, he advocated "peaceful coexistence" and attacked the Vietnamese people's struggle against U.S. aggression, alleging that "trouble starts with small things like Viet Nam and ends with disaster".^ This was not accidental. It shows that, like Khrushchov, the new leaders of the CPSU are afraid that the so-called "minor trouble", that is, the question of Viet Nam, may spoil their fond dreams of Soviet-U.S. collaboration.

The new leaders of the CPSU are doing exactly what Khrushchov did before them, namely, pulling the Viet Nam question into the orbit of Soviet-U.S. collaboration. Since they are co-operating so closely with the U.S. imperialists in united action, it is of course impossible for Marxist-Leninists to join in and take "united action" with them.

At bottom, the new leaders of the CPSU are clamouring for "united action" on the Viet Nam question because this slogan is highly deceptive and is apt to create the illusion that it is

' "Mr. K. Speaks", Daily Express, April 6, 1965. 19

s t i l l p o s s i b l e t o h a v e " u n i t y a g a i n s t U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m " w i t h t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U w h o a r e i n t e n t o n S o v i e t - U . S . c o l l a b o r a t i o n f o r w o r l d d o m i n a t i o n . T h e y d o s o i n o r d e r t o w o r m t h e i r w a y i n t o t h e a n t i - U . S . f r o n t a n d c a r r y o u t t h e i r p o l i c y o f i n v o l v e m e n t i n t h e s e r v i c e o f U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m .

L o o k a t t h e t r i c k o f " a i d " t o V i e t N a m t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U a r e p l a y i n g a n d y o u w i l l u n d e r s t a n d t h e r e a l n a t u r e o f t h e i r p o l i c y o f i n v o l v e m e n t m o r e c l e a r l y .

W e h a v e i n v a r i a b l y h e l d t h a t i t i s t h e b o u n d e n p r o l e t a r i a n -i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t d u t y o f a l l c o u n t r i e s i n t h e s o c i a l i s t c a m p t o a i d t h e f r a t e r n a l V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e . T h e V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e w h o a r e s t a n d i n g i n t h e f o r e f r o n t o f t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m h a v e e v e r y r i g h t a n d r e a s o n t o d e m a n d a n d r e c e i v e a i d f r o m e v e r y s o c i a l i s t c o u n t r y . C h i n a i s h e l p i n g t h e V i e t ­n a m e s e p e o p l e t o t h e b e s t o f h e r a b i l i t y . W e h a v e s t a t e d o n m a n y o c c a s i o n s t h a t i f t h e S o v i e t U n i o n g e n u i n e l y w a n t s t o h e l p t h e V i e t n a m e s e p e o p l e i n t h e i r s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t U . S . a g ­g r e s s i o n , t h e g r e a t e r a n d m o r e p r a c t i c a l t h e a i d t h e b e t t e r . B u t w h a t h a v e t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U d o n e ? W h e t h e r i n q u a n t i t y o r q u a l i t y , t h e i r a i d t o V i e t N a m i s f a r f r o m c o m ­m e n s u r a t e w i t h t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e S o v i e t U n i o n . T h e y h a v e u l t e r i o r m o t i v e s i n g i v i n g a c e r t a i n a m o u n t o f a i d — t h e y a r e t r y i n g t o h o o d w i n k t h e p e o p l e a t h o m e a n d a b r o a d , t o k e e p t h e s i t u a t i o n i n V i e t N a m u n d e r t h e i r c o n t r o l , t o g a i n a s a y o n t h e V i e t N a m q u e s t i o n a n d t o s t r i k e a b a r g a i n w i t h U . S . i m ­p e r i a l i s m o n i t .

T h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s a p p r e c i a t e t h e t r i c k b e i n g p l a y e d b y t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U . T h e y k n o w f u l l w e l l t h a t i t i s t o t h e i r a d v a n t a g e f o r t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U t o g e t i n ­v o l v e d i n t h e V i e t N a m q u e s t i o n . F a r f r o m o b j e c t i n g t o " a i d " t o V i e t N a m f r o m t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U , t h e y w e l c o m e i t . T h e U . S . a u t h o r i t i e s h a v e m a d e i t c l e a r t h a t S o v i e t i n ­v o l v e m e n t i n t h e V i e t N a m q u e s t i o n i s p r e f e r a b l e t o S o v i e t n o n - i n v o l v e m e n t . I t h a s b e e n p o i n t e d o u t i n a U . S . m a g a z i n e t h a t " e v e n t u a l l y , a n a r r a n g e m e n t m i g h t b e c o n t r i v e d i n v o l v i n g t h e s t a t i o n i n g o f S o v i e t t r o o p s i n N o r t h V i e t n a m . . . w h i l e

2 0

American troops remain in South Vietnam" and that "one of tie paradoxical advantages of more direct Soviet military in­volvement would be the establishment of a direct American-Sov'.et bargaining relationship in this area".^ In fact, the new leadtrs of the CPSU have disclosed the details of their so-called "aid">o Viet Nam to the Americans through various channels. On this matter, too, they are taking united action with the U.S. imperialists.

Furthermore, the new leaders of the CPSU have been using their "aid" to Viet Nam as a pretext for wantonly vilifying China, and, have been assiduously spreading the lie that "China obstructed the transit of Soviet military equipment for Viet Nam". The truth is that we have always honoured our agree­ments and done our utmost speedily to transport to Viet Nam all military maUriel in transit which was furnished by the Soviet Union with the concurrence of the Vietnamese comrades. By these fabrications and slanders, the new leaders of the CPSU have supplied further proof that they stop at nothing in order to ally themselves with the United States against China.

Marxist-Leninists must penetrate the appearance of things to get at their essence. Having carefully observed ihe actions of the new leaders of the CPSU on the question of Viet Nam over the past year, we can only reach the following conclusion: In calling so vehemently for "united action" on the Viet Nam question and trying by every means to bring about a summit conference of the Soviet Union, Viet Nam and China and an international meeting of the socialist countries and the fraternal Parties, the new leaders of the CPSU have no other purpose in mind than to deceive the world, to tie the fraternal countries to the chariot of Soviet-U.S. collaboration for world domina­tion, to use the question of Viet Nam as an important counter in their bargaining with the United States, and to isolate and

1 Zbigniew Brzezinski, "Peace, Morality and Vietnam", The New Leader, April 12, 1965.

21

attack the Chinese Communist Party and all the other fraternal Parties which uphold Marxism-Leninism.

Things could not be clearer. If we were to take united action on the question of Viet Nam with the new leaders of the CPSU who are pursuing the Khrushchov revisionist line, wouldn't we be helping them to deceive the people of the world? Wouldn't we be helping them to bring the question of Viet Nam within the orbit of Soviet-U.S. collaboration? Wouldn't we be joining them in betraying the revolutionary cause of the Vietnamese people? Wouldn't we be jo:ning them in attacking the Chinese Communist Party and all the other Marxist-Leninist Parties? Wouldn't we be joining them in serving as accomplices of U.S. imperialism? Of course, we shall do nothing of the sort.

"UNITED ACTION", SO CALLED, IS A MEANS OF PROMOTING SPLITTISM

The clamour raised by the new leaders of the CPSU for "united action" is an attempt both to conceal and to carry on their great-power chauvinism and splittism under the cover of hypocritical words. They claim to have "made a number of major moves" to promote unity and improve the relations between fraternal Parties and Soviet-Chinese relations. Let us look at the steps they have actually taken.

The March Moscow meeting which will remain forever in­famous was convened by the new leaders of the CPSU under the slogan of "united action". Khrushchov revisionism and splittism had in effect divided the international communist movement, and the March meeting, which the new leaders of the CPSU called regardless of all consequences, was an ex­tremely grave step to bring about an open split. Since that meeting, they have taken a number of other steps in continua­tion of this divisive line.

22

T h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U h a v e c o n d u c t e d a f e v e r i s h c a m p a i g n a g a i n s t t h e C h i n e s e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y t h r o u g h o u t t h e i r P a r t y a n d a m o n g t h e e n t i r e S o v i e t p e o p l e . T h e y h a v e o r g a n i z e d m e e t i n g s i n o f f i c e s , s c h o o l s , f a c t o r i e s a n d v i l l a g e s t o h e a r a n t i - C h i n e s e s p e e c h e s , w a n t o n l y a t t a c k i n g a n d v i l i f y i n g C h i n a . S o m e o f t h e s e s p e e c h e s w e r e m a d e i n t h e p r e s e n c e o f C h i n e s e c o m r a d e s . T h e y h a v e b e e n b u s y s e n d i n g e m i s s a r i e s t o m a n y c o u n t r i e s f o r t h e s o l e p u r p o s e o f e n g a g i n g i n a n t i -C h i n e s e a c t i v i t y a n d o f s p r e a d i n g a l l s o r t s o f a n t i - C h i n e s e s l a n d e r s . I n i n t e r n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , t h e y s t o p a t n o t h i n g i n p u s h i n g t h e i r a n t i - C h i n e s e s c h e m e s .

T h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U a r e c o n t i n u i n g K h r u s h c h o v ' s a n t i - A l b a n i a n p o l i c y . A l t h o u g h i n J a p a n t h e y h a v e m e t w i t h s e r i o u s s e t b a c k s i n t h e i r c r i m i n a l e f f o r t t o s u p p o r t Y o s h i o S h i g a a n d o t h e r r e n e g a d e s f r o m t h e J a p a n e s e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y i n c o l l u s i o n w i t h t h e U . S . i m p e r i a l i s t s a n d t h e J a p a n e s e r e a c t i o n a r i e s , t h e y r e m a i n u n r e c o n c i l e d a n d a r e c o n t i n u i n g t h e i r c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y s a b o t a g e a n d s u b v e r s i o n a g a i n s t t h e J a p a n e s e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y . T h e y a r e a l s o c o n t i n u i n g t h e i r a t t a c k s o n t h e I n d o n e s i a n C o m m u n i s t P a r t y , t h e C o m ­m u n i s t P a r t y o f N e w Z e a l a n d a n d o t h e r f r a t e r n a l P a r t i e s w h i c h u p h o l d M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m , a n d a r e c a r r y i n g o n v a r i o u s k i n d s o f s a b o t a g e a n d s u b v e r s i o n a g a i n s t t h e m .

W h i l e c o n t i n u i n g t h e p r a c t i c e o f s u b j e c t i n g o t h e r C o m m u n i s t P a r t i e s a n d s o c i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s t o p r e s s u r e , s a b o t a g e a n d s u b ­v e r s i o n , t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U a r e a l s o e m p l o y i n g t h e m o r e i n s i d i o u s s t r a t a g e m s o f t r y i n g t o w o o t h e m , b u y t h e m o v e r , d e c e i v e t h e m a n d s o w d i s s e n s i o n a m o n g t h e m . T h e y t a k e t h e C h i n e s e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y , w h i c h f i r m l y o p p o s e s K h r u s h c h o v r e v i s i o n i s m , a s t h e m a i n t a r g e t o f t h e i r c o n c e n ­t r a t e d a t t a c k s , a n d t h e y a r e t r y i n g t o i s o l a t e i t .

I n t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l m a s s o r g a n i z a t i o n s , t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U , u s i n g t h e s l o g a n o f " u n i t e d a c t i o n " , c o n t i n u e t o p u s h t h e i r c a p i t u l a t i o n i s t l i n e o f n o t o p p o s i n g t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a n d n o t s u p p o r t i n g r e v o l u t i o n a n d t h e i r w o r k o f s p l i t -

23

ting anti-imperialist unity. They repeat Khrushchev's des­picable stock tricks at the meetings of these international organizations, rely on behind-the-scene manipulation as well as open trouble-making and even resort to such ludicrous tactics as banging tables and stamping their feet.

In the name of "united action" the revisionist leadership of the CPSU is vainly trying to recover its position as the "father party", so that it may continue to wield the baton and com­pel the other Communist Parties and socialist countries to do this today and that tomorrow. Actually, however, ,its former power and prestige are gone beyond recall. Today, the new leaders of the CPSU and their followers are drawn together by self-interest, each seeking his own ends. The baton of the new leaders is less and less effective.

Facts have shown that if the Communists of a particular coufttry accept the hodge-podge of revisionism, great-power chauvinism and splittism of the leaders of the CPSU, the country's revolutionary cause is impaired and undermined, its Communist Party becomes corrupted, goes downhill and de­generates, and both the country and Party find themselves beset with difficulties and at the mercy of others. On the other hand, those who firmly resist and oppose this hodge­podge find themselves in a quite different and much better position. This is as true today as it was before.

One of the purposes of the new leaders of the CPSU in advocating "united action" is to stop the open polemics. They want to gag the Marxist-Leninists and prevent the latter from exposing and criticizing them, so as to be free to carry out Khrushchov revisionism.

How can such a thing be possible? The present great de­bate has most vividly and clearly revealed what is decadent and dying and what represents the direction of future development and victory in the international communist movement. Khrushchov revisionism has been refuted down to the last point, and this poisonous weed has been converted into good fertilizer on the fields of world revolution. Truth

24

b e c o m e s c l e a r e r t h r o u g h d e b a t e ; t h e m o r e t h e p o l e m i c s , t h e h i g h e r t h e l e v e l o f r e v o l u t i o n a r y c o n s c i o u s n e s s a n d t h e g r e a t e r t h e d e g r e e o f r e v o l u t i o n a r y v i g o u r . W e s h a l l c e r ­t a i n l y c a r r y t h e d e b a t e t o t h e f i n i s h a n d d r a w a c l e a r l i n e b e t w e e n w h a t i s r i g h t a n d w h a t i s w r o n g o n t h e m a j o r p r o b l e m s . F a i l u r e t o d o s o w o u l d b e e x t r e m e l y h a r m f u l t o t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y c a u s e o f t h e p e o p l e o f t h e w o r l d a n d t o t h e c a u s e o f o p p o s i n g i m p e r i a l i s m a n d d e f e n d i n g w o r l d p e a c e .

A n o t h e r p u r p o s e o f t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U i n a d v o c a t i n g " u n i t e d a c t i o n " i s t o s t o p w h a t t h e y c a l l " f a c t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s " b y t h e M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t P a r t i e s . T h e y w a n t t o s t r a n g l e t h e M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t f o r c e s w h i c h a r e f i g h t i n g t o r e b u i l d r e v o l u t i o n a r y p r o l e t a r i a n p a r t i e s o r e s t a b l i s h n e w o n e s , a n d t o p r e v e n t t h e C h i n e s e C o m m u n i s t P a r t y a n d o t h e r M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t P a r t i e s f r o m s u p p o r t i n g t h e s e n e w - b o r n r e v o l u t i o n a r y f o r c e s .

I n m a n y c o u n t r i e s , t h e M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t s h a v e b r o k e n w i t h t h e r e v i s i o n i s t c l i q u e s a n d e i t h e r r e b u i l t M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t P a r t i e s a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r f o u n d e d n e w o n e s . T h i s i s t h e i n e v i t a b l e o u t c o m e o f t h e p r a c t i c e o f r e v i s i o n i s m , g r e a t -p o w e r c h a u v i n i s m a n d s p l i t t i s m b y t h e l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U ; i t i s t h e i n e v i t a b l e o u t c o m e o f t h e s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n t h e M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t s a n d t h e r e v i s i o n i s t s i n t h o s e c o u n t r i e s a n d o f t h e r e g r o u p i n g o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y f o r c e s u n d e r c o n ­d i t i o n s o f d e e p e n i n g c l a s s s t r u g g l e b o t h i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y a n d d o m e s t i c a l l y .

B o w i n g t o t h e b a t o n o f K h r u s h c h o v r e v i s i o n i s m t h e l e a d ­i n g g r o u p s i n t h e C o n m i u n i s t P a r t i e s o f t h o s e c o u n t r i e s h a v e f o r b i d d e n t h e i r m e m b e r s t o d o w h a t t h e i m p e r i a l i s t s a n d r e ­a c t i o n a r i e s f e a r m o s t , a n d o n l y a l l o w e d t h e m t o d o w h a t i s t o t h e l i k i n g o f t h e i m p e r i a l i s t s a n d r e a c t i o n a r i e s o r i s a t l e a s t t o l e r a b l e t o t h e m . W h o e v e r a c t s d i f f e r e n t l y i s a t t a c k e d , d i s c i p l i n e d o r e x p e l l e d . S u c h b e i n g t h e c a s e , t h e s t a u n c h M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t s i n t h o s e P a r t i e s a r e l e f t w i t h n o a l t e r n a t i v e b u t t o b r e a k w i t h t h e r e v i s i o n i s t l e a d i n g g r o u p s , a n d t h e

25

founding and growth of genuine revolutionary Marxist-Leninist Parties and organizations become inevitable.

Revolution, the fight against imperialism and the fight against revisionism all have right on their side. Beyond all doubt, it is perfectly right to discard these decaying old re­visionist groups and build new revolutionary parties.

We resolutely support all the forces in the world that per­severe in Marxism-Leninism and revolution. It is our lofty proletarian-internationalist duty to strengthen our united action with all the Marxist-Leninist forces in the world.

"UNITED ACTION", SO CALLED, IS A SLOGAN TO DECEIVE THE SOVIET PEOPLE

The new leaders of the CPSU claim that the socialist countries have "a socio-economic system of the same type" and share the "common goal of building socialism and com­munism". This is one more reason they cite in their clamour for "united action".

This is throwing dust in people's eyes, Following in Khrushchev's footsteps, the new leaders of the CPSU are bringing about the further degeneration of the Soviet Union towards capitalism in the name of realizing "communism". Like Khrushchev, they use the slogan of "the state of the whole people" to abolish the dictatorship of the proletariat in the Soviet Union, thus making the Soviet state degenerate into an instrument for the rule of the privileged bourgeois stratum over the Soviet people. Like Khrushchev, they use the slogan of "the party of the entire people" to alter the proletarian character of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and turn it into a party serving the interests of the privileged bourgeois stratum.

In their appraisal of Stalin, the new leaders of the CPSU pretend to be somewhat different from Khrushchov. But this is only an attempt to allay the resentment of the broad

26

m a s s e s o f t h e p e o p l e a n d P a r t y m e m b e r s i n t h e S o v i e t U n i o n . F a r f r o m c r i t i c i z i n g K h r u s h c h o v ' s m i s t a k e i n c o m p l e t e l y n e ­g a t i n g S t a l i n , t h e y h a v e f o l l o w e d h i m i n d e s c r i b i n g t h e p e r i o d o f S t a l i n ' s l e a d e r s h i p a s " t h e p e r i o d o f t h e p e r s o n a l i t y c u l t " . T h e y h a v e s p o n s o r e d t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f n u m e r o u s a r t i c l e s a n d l i t e r a r y a n d o t h e r w o r k s w h i c h k e e p o n b e s m i r c h i n g a l l a s p e c t s o f t h e g r e a t M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t S t a l i n , t h e d i c t a t o r s h i p o f t h e p r o l e t a r i a t a n d t h e s o c i a l i s t s y s t e r h .

T a k i n g a d v a n t a g e o f t h e s t a t e p o w e r t h e y w i e l d , t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U h a v e c e n t r e d t h e i r e f f o r t s o n u n d e r ­m i n i n g t h e e c o n o m i c b a s e o f s o c i a l i s m , s o c i a l i s t o w n e r s h i p b y t h e w h o l e p e o p l e a n d s o c i a l i s t c o l l e c t i v e o w n e r s h i p , a n d o n s e t t i n g u p a n d d e v e l o p i n g a n e w s y s t e m o f e x p l o i t a t i o n a n d f o s t e r i n g a n d s u p p o r t i n g t h e n e w b o u r g e o i s i e , t h u s a c ­c e l e r a t i n g t h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f c a p i t a l i s m .

T h e r e p o r t o n t h e p r o b l e m s o f i n d u s t r y b y K o s y g i n , C h a i r ­m a n o f t h e C o u n c i l o f M i n i s t e r s o f t h e U S S R , a t t h e r e c e n t p l e n a r y s e s s i o n o f t h e C e n t r a l C o m m i t t e e o f t h e C P S U a n d t h e r e s o l u t i o n w h i c h i t a d o p t e d m a r k e d a b i g s t e p a l o n g t h e r o a d o f t h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f c a p i t a l i s m i n t h e S o v i e t e c o n o m y .

T h r o u g h a P a r t y r e s o l u t i o n a n d g o v e r n m e n t d e c r e e s , t h e n e w l e a d e r s o f t h e C P S U h a v e c o n f i r m e d t h e e x p e r i m e n t s i n i t i a t e d i n t h e K h r u s h c h o v p e r i o d a s a r e s u l t o f w h i c h s o ­c i a l i s t e n t e r p r i s e s o w n e d b y t h e w h o l e p e o p l e d e g e n e r a t e i n t o e n t e r p r i s e s o f a c a p i t a l i s t n a t u r e , a n d t h e y h a v e s p r e a d t h e s e e x p e r i m e n t s t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u n t r y . T h e k e y f e a t u r e o f t h e " n e w s y s t e m " o f i n d u s t r i a l m a n a g e m e n t t h e y h a v e i n s t i t u t e d i s t o e n f o r c e t h e c a p i t a l i s t p r i n c i p l e o f p r o f i t a n d t o m a k e p r o f i t - s e e k i n g t h e b a s i c m o t i v e f o r c e o f p r o d u c t i o n i n t h e e n t e r p r i s e s t h r o u g h t h e " e n h a n c e m e n t o f e c o n o m i c i n c e n ­t i v e s " . I n t h e n a m e o f w i d e n i n g t h e e n t e r p r i s e s ' r i g h t t o s e l f - m a n a g e m e n t , t h e y h a v e s c r a p p e d a s e r i e s o f i m p o r t a n t q u o t a s f o r m e r l y s e t b y t h e s t a t e f o r t h e e n t e r p r i s e s i n a c ­c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e p l a n , s u b s t i t u t i n g c a p i t a l i s t f r e e c o m p e t i ­t i o n f o r s o c i a l i s t p l a n n e d e c o n o m y . T h e y h a v e v e s t e d i n t h e m a n a g e r s t h e p o w e r t o h i r e a n d f i r e w o r k e r s , f i x t h e l e v e l

27

of wages and bonuses and freely dispose of large funds, thus turning them into virtual masters of the enterprises, who are able to bully and oppress the workers and usurp the fruits of their labour at will. In reality, this means restoring capitalism, replacing socialist ownership by the whole people with ownership by the privileged bourgeois stratum, and con­verting the socialist enterprises in the Soviet Union step by step into capitalist enterprises of a special type. This is by no means a "new creation"; it has been copied and developed from the old "experience" of the Tito clique in restoring capitalism in Yugoslavia.

It is elementary Marxism-Leninism that the system of management comes within the sphere of the relations of pro­duction and is an expression of the system of ownership. Under the guise of reforming the system of management, the new leaders of the CPSU have undermined the very foundation of the system of ownership by the whole people. This is exactly what the Tito clique of Yugoslavia did. Having a guilty conscience, the new leaders of the CPSU cry out that those who talk about the "bourgeois transformation" of the Soviet economy are "bourgeois ideologists" and "our enemies".^ This is what the Tito clique said too. Such prot­estations are like the sign, "There is no silver buried here", put up by the man in the legend over the place where he hid his money.

In the countryside too, the new leaders of the CPSU are accelerating the growth of capitalism, developing the private economy, enlarging the private plots, increasing the number of privately raised cattle, expanding the free market and en­couraging free trading. They are using a variety of economic and administrative measures to encourage and foster the growth of a new kulak economy, sabotaging and disintegrating all aspects of the socialist collective economy.

1 A. N. Kosygin, "On Improving Industrial Management, Perfecting Planning, and Enhiancing Economic Incentives in Industrial Produc­tion", Moscow News, Supplement, October 2, 1&65.

28

[

Khrushchov wrought alarming havoc in Soviet agriculture. After taking office, the new leaders of the CPSU boasted that they had worked out "a scientifically based programme for an immediate and sharp rise in agricultural production".^ But a year later, Soviet agriculture still remains in a mess, creating untold difficulties in the lives of the Soviet people. The new leaders of the CPSU are now laying the entire blame on the fallen Khrushchov. In fact, these serious troubles are precisely the outcome of their own intensified application of Khrushchov revisionism.

Facts show that the replacement of Khrushchov by these new leaders has been merely a change of personalities in the revisionist dynasty — just as all reactionary ruling classes have to change horses in order to maintain their rule. Al­though Khrushchov himself has fallen, the leading group of the CPSU is still the same old Khrushchov crowd; organiza­tionally, it remains basically unchanged, and whether ideolog­ically, politically, theoretically or in the realm of policy, theirs is still the same old Khrushchov revisionist stuff.

As Lenin pointed out, "opportunism is no chance occur­rence, sin, slip, or treachery on the part of individuals, but a social product of an entire period of history".^ It is in­evitable that Khrushchov revisionism will exist as long as the social basis and the class roots which gave birth to it remain and as long as the privileged bourgeois stratum exists.

Because they are the political representatives of the priv­ileged bourgeois stratum in the Soviet Union, just as Khrushchov was, the new leaders of the CPSU pursue do­mestic and foreign policies which are not proletarian but bourgeois, not socialist but capitalist. Like Khrushchov, they are in a position of antagonism to the Soviet people, who

1 "In Lenin's Way, with Scientific Accuracy", editorial in Sovetskaya Russia, March 28, 1965.

^V. I. Lenin, "The Collapse of the Second International", Collected Works, Eng. ed., Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1964, Vol. XXI , p. 247.

29

constitute more than 90 per cent of the Soviet population, and they are encountering ever stronger dissatisfaction and opposition on the part of the Soviet people.

When the new leaders of the CPSU loudly assert that the socialist countries have a "socio-economic system of the same type", they do so with the aim of covering up their restora­tion of capitalism in the Soviet Union, of preventing us from unmasking them, and of setting the Soviet people against China.

In our view, when a revisionist clique emerges and a capitalist comeback occurs in a socialist country, all the Marxist-Leninists in the world are duty-bound to expose and struggle against these things; this is the only correct and principled stand. The only way to serve the fundamental interests of the great Soviet people and to give them genuine support is resolutely to expose the fact that the revisionist leadership of the CPSU is restoring capitalism in the USSR.

If we should cease exposing and combating the domestic and external revisionist policies of the new leaders of the CPSU, if we should abandon our principled stand and take so-called "united action" with them, that would suit them very well. It would help them to hoodwink the Soviet peo­ple. It would hinder rather than support the Soviet people's struggle to defend the fruits of their socialist revolution; it would hinder rather than support the Soviet people's struggle against Khrushchov revisionism without Khrushchov.

Comrade Mao Tse-tung has often said to comrades from fraternal Parties that if China's leadership is usurped by re­visionists in the future, the Marxist-Leninists of all countries should likewise resolutely expose and fight them, and help the working class and the masses of China to combat such revisionism. Taking the same stand, we consider it our bounden proletarian-internationalist duty firmly to expose the revisionist leadership of the CPSU, to draw a clear line be­tween ourselves and them, and to persist in the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism.

30

P E R S E V E R E IN THE STRUGGLE AGAINST KHRUSHCHOV REVISIONISM

A f i e r c e s t r u g g l e i s g o i n g o n b e t w e e n t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y p e o ­p l e o f t h e w o r l d o n t h e o n e h a n d a n d t h e i m p e r i a l i s t s h e a d e d b y t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a n d t h e i r l a c k e y s o n t h e o t h e r . T h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e p r e s e n t w o r l d s i t u a t i o n i s t h a t w i t h t h e d a i l y d e e p e n i n g o f t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l c l a s s s t r u g g l e , a p r o c e s s o f g r e a t u p h e a v a l , g r e a t d i v i s i o n a n d g r e a t r e o r g a n i z a t i o n i s t a k i n g p l a c e . T h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y m o v e m e n t o f t h e p e o p l e o f t h e w o r l d i s s u r g i n g v i g o r o u s l y f o r w a r d . I m p e r i a l i s m a n d a l l o t h e r d e c a d e n t r e a c t i o n a r y f o r c e s a r e p u t t i n g u p a w i l d d e a t h - b e d f i g h t . D r a s t i c d i v i s i o n s a n d r e a l i g n m e n t s o f p o l i t i c a l f o r c e s a r e t a k i n g p l a c e o n a w o r l d s c a l e .

T h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y f o r c e s o f t h e p e o p l e o f t h e w o r l d h a v e s u r p a s s e d t h e r e a c t i o n a r y f o r c e s o f i m p e r i a l i s m . T h e a d v a n c e o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y m o v e m e n t o f t h e p e o p l e o f t h e w o r l d i s t h e m a i n c u r r e n t i n t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n . T h e p e o p l e ' s r e v o l u t i o n a r y s t r u g g l e s i n a l l c o u n t r i e s w i l l c e r t a i n l y t r i u m p h , w h i l e i m p e r i a l i s m , r e a c t i o n a n d m o d e r n r e v i s i o n i s m w i l l s t e p b y s t e p d e s c e n d t o t h e i r d o o m . T h i s i s t h e i n e v i t a b l e t r e n d o f w o r l d h i s t o r y w h i c h n o d e c a d e n t r e a c t i o n a r y f o r c e c a n c h a n g e . B u t i m p e r i a l i s m a n d r e a c t i o n w i l l n o t f a l l u n l e s s y o u s t r i k e t h e m d o w n , a n d m o d e r n r e v i s i o n i s m , t o o , w i l l n o t c o l ­l a p s e u n l e s s y o u f i g h t i t . B e f o r e b e i n g o v e r t h r o w n a n d e l i m i n a t e d , t h e y w i l l i n v a r i a b l y c o l l a b o r a t e a n d , u s i n g d i f f e r ­i n g t a c t i c s , d o a l l t h e y c a n t o h u r l d e s p e r a t e a t t a c k s o n t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y f o r c e s . T h u s , a l o n g w i t h t h e g r o w t h a n d d e e p e n i n g o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y m o v e m e n t , t h e r e i s a n a d v e r s e c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y c u r r e n t . T h e c o u r s e o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t i s u n a v o i d a b l y f i l l e d w i t h c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a n d c o n f l i c t s ; t h e r e a r e b o u n d t o b e z i g z a g s a n d r e v e r s a l s . I n a l l c o u n t r i e s t h e p e o p l e ' s r e v o l u t i o n a r y s t r u g g l e s n e c e s s a r i l y a d v a n c e i n t h e f o r m o f w a v e s .

A s t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s r e a c h e s a c r u c i a l p h a s e , U . S . i m p e r i a l i s m n e e d s t h e s e r v i c e s o f K h r u s h c h o v

31

revisionism all the more acutely. Hence it is inevitable that the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism must sharpen.

In the course of combating Khrushchov revisionism, there is bound to be a certain unevenness in the degree of people's understanding of the struggle. This kind of phenomenon be­comes particularly conspicuous when the struggle becomes sharp. That is both natural and inevitable. Lenin said that when astonishingly abrupt changes took place, people "who were suddenly confronted with extremely important problems could not long remain on this level. They could not con­tinue without a respite, without a return to elementary ques­tions, without a new training which would help them 'digest' lessons of unparalleled richness and make it possible for in­comparably wider masses again to march forward, but now far more firmly, more consciously, more confidently and more steadfastly".^ Just such a situation exists at present.

As the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism becomes sharper and deeper, a new process of division will inevitably occur in the revolutionary ranks, and some people will inevi­tably drop out. But at the same time hundreds of millions of revolutionary people will stream in.

Faced with a complex situation of this kind, Marxist-Leninists must never abandon or slur over principles, but must take a clear stand, uphold revolutionary principles and per­severe in the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism. Only in this way can the unity of the revolutionary forces be strengthened and expanded.

At present, the task facing all the Marxist-Leninist Parties is to draw a clear line of demarcation both politically and or­ganizationally between themselves and the revisionists, who are serving U.S. imperialism, and to liquidate Khrushchov revi­sionism in order to welcome the high tide of revolutionary struggle against U.S. imperialism and its lackeys.

1 V . I. Le.nin, "Certain Features of the Historical Development of Marxism", Collected Works, Eng. ed., FLPH, Moscow, 1963, Vol. XVII , p. 42.

S2

In the final analysis, in all parts of the world including the Soviet Union, the masses of the people, who constitute the overwhelming majority of the population, and the overwhelm­ing majority of Communists and cadres want revolution and are upholding or will uphold Marxism-Leninism. They are steadily awakening and joining the ranks of the struggle against imperialism and revisionism. It is certain that over 90 per cent of the world's population will become more closely united in the fight against imperialism, reaction and modern revisionism.

All the Communist Parties and all the socialist countries will eventually unite on the basis of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism and take united action in the struggle against imperialism. As Lenin told the old-line revi­sionists, the proletariat will sooner or later unite and even­tually win on a world scale, "only it is moving and will move, is proceeding and will proceed, against you, it will be a victory over you".^

Unless the new leaders of the CPSU stop practising Khru-shchovism without Khrushchov, admit and correct their mis­takes and genuinely return to the revolutionary path of Marxism-Leninism, it is absolutely out of the question to expect the Marxist-Leninists to abandon the struggle against PChrushchov revisionism.

With power and to spare, we must not cease the pursuit Or halt in mid-course for the sake of idle laurels.

This couplet summarizes an extremely important historical lesson. The Marxist-Leninists and all the other revolutionary people of the world must continue their victorious pursuit and carry the struggle against Khrushchov revisionism through to the end!

l y . I. Lenin, "Imperialism and the Split in Socialism", Collected Works, Eng. ed., Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1964, Vol. XXIII , p. 111.

33

( ^ ) 3 0 5 0 - 1 3 4 6 00022

»—E—709P