The CPC(ML) claims to be the authentic Communist Party of Canada. In this light we must determine how the CPC(ML) stands up to the criteria established through the experience of the world communist movement. In Foundations of Leninism Stalin outlines the six main characteristics of the Party as:
1) “...the advanced detachment of the working class.” (p.103)
2) “...the organized detachment of the working class.” (p. 106)
3) “...the highest form of class Organization of the proletariat.” (p. 109)
4) “ – an instrument of the dictatorship of the proletariat.” (p.111)
5) “ – the embodiment of unity of will, unity incompatible with the existence of factions.” (p. 113)
6) “The Party becomes strong by purging itself of opportunist elements.” (p.115)
In our analysis of the.CPC(ML) we need deal only with the first characteristic. It is here that the Party must first solidify itself or it will be unable to fulfill the other features of a truly Communist Party. It is precisely on this point ’ on being the ’advanced detachment’ of the working class ’ that the CPC(ML) has shown its bankruptcy. It is on this point that most of what is ’negative’ in CPC(ML)’s past and present is found. Why is this the case?
There are two central features to being the advanced detachment of the proletariat. The first is the actual composition of the party, that is
...the Party must absorb all the best elements of the working class, their experience, their revolutionary spirit, their selfless devotion to the cause of the proletariat. J.V. Stalin Foundations of Leninism Foreign Languages Press Peking p. 103.
But on what basis can the Party constantly win the advanced elements? What will attract and draw these elements into active Party work?
The proletarian Party wins the advanced elements of the working class because: a) the communists “...always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.” and b) because “theoretically they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the line of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement.” Marx-Engels The Communist Manifesto Foreign Languages Press Peking p. 47-48.
The second feature is revolutionary theory. Correct, scientific theory is, in fact, the leading aspect, the key, to being the truly advanced detachment. This is incontestable for any Marxist-Leninist. The correctness of this view and the absolute importance of clarity of principles, of firmly grasping and applying the theory of Marxism-Leninism, has been persistently upheld by every consistent, revolutionary Marxist since the Manifesto. Stalin summarizes the importance of theory as follows:
...in order that we may really be the advanced detachment, the Party must be armed with revolutionary theory, with a knowledge of the laws of the movement, with a knowledge of the laws of revolution. Without this it will be incapable of directing the struggle of the proletariat, of leading the proletariat. J.V. Stalin Foundations of Leninism Foreign Languages Press Peking p.103.
What is there in common between these principles and the CPC(ML)? If we open the pages of the May 25, 1975 edition of Mass Line, the first thing that strikes us is the stress on theory, the importance of theory for the revolutionary movement, the necessity of the CPC(ML) cadre firming-up their grasp on Marxism-Leninism, and so on. All of which sounds exceedingly good for a Marxist-Leninist party. The task of developing revolutionary theory is, after all, on-going. For an individual with only a smattering of knowledge of Marxism-Leninism, new to the movement and eager to serve the cause of proletarian revolution, who has heard, perhaps that “without a revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement”, this hulabaloo over theory would be quite impressive. But we would suggest – and surely the CPC(ML) would agree with us – that all comrades in this position should ’seek truth from facts’, and thoroughly investigate these articles before leaping one way or the other. If such investigation is made, we find the Chairman of CPC(ML) point out that
We are passing through the period in the communist movement of this country when the ’guiding line, method, plan or policy’ for the communist movement is being worked out. Mass Line May 25, 1975.
But just seven pages later, in the document “Summing Up The Stage of Discussion Between CPC(ML) and En Lutte”, we find the Party putting forward its more familiar position:
It is a fact that our organization is the only one which has step by step over the years, advanced from low level to a higher level, small organization to a relatively large (i.e. we are still quite small) and from relatively correct political line for Canada and Quebec to relatively more correct line for Canada and Quebec. The secret of our development lies in the fact that we keep our eyes on the ground, deepen and broaden our revolutionary practice in a step-wise manner, oppose our enemies, build the Party in a step-wise manner from a low level to a higher level, and use Marxism-Leninism Mao Tsetung Thought as our theoretical foundation. Furthermore, we rely on our own efforts, believe in the solidity of our own organization and the correctness of our political line, vigourously accept our mistakes, acknowledge these in time and rectify them, and never seek hegemony over others. Ibid. (our emphasis)
With all this ’deepening and broadening’, going from ’low levels to higher levels’, from ’relatively to relatively more’, ’step-wise’ ’step by step’ development, we would expect that the CPC(ML) is surely being guided by some ’guiding line, method,plan or policy’. On the one hand, the CPC(ML) tells us it is being guided by something, embodied in its ’secret’. On the other hand, it states that the guiding line “is being worked out”. On the one hand it tells us it uses Marxism-Leninism Mao Tsetung Thought as its theoretical foundation. On the other hand it tell us that in
Examining the present situation in the communist movement and the past history of the two-line struggle inside the communist movement, it can be scientifically analyzed that during the period 1963-1975, we have basically dealt with various questions relating to practice and our theoretical foundation has been tremendously weak. Even though we provided analysis of imperialist culture and sorted out certain problems of establishing a Marxist-Leninist Party and leading some general struggles in practical work, we have not established yet a solid theoretical foundation for our Party work. Ibid (our emphasis).
And further:
Speaking strictly about the actual situation, the actual condition of the communist movement, we find that there are new forces daily joining the communist movement. This is one aspect of the situation. The other aspect of the situation is that neither we nor any other organization has fulfilled our task of providing a theoritical base to the Canadian revolution ... The way matters stand now is that our political line is still too diffuse and our forces are too scattered. Ibid (our emphasis).
What are we to make of this? The CPC(ML) claims to be guided by Marxism-Leninism Mao Tsetung Thought, claims this theory as their foundation, and yet admits that their “theoretical foundation has been tremendously weak”, admits that Marxism-Leninism is not yet the “solid theoretical foundation for our Party work”, admits that it has “not fulfilled our task of providing a theoretical base to the Canadian revolution”. The only conclusion is that the CPC(ML) has been guided by ’unsolid’ Marxism-Leninism, by otremendously weak Marxism-Leninism; that is, has not been guided by Marxism-Leninism at all, but by some theoretical jelly of its own invention. The net result of this political jello is of course not solid lines of demarcation, not principles, not guiding political lines, but “relatively more correct political line” that in every way fail to fulfill the tasks before the working class movement. “Relatively more correct” in relation to what? The CPC(ML) is at a loss to say.
We have seen that in order to be the advanced detachment of the working class, a truly communist Party “must be armed with revolutionary theory”. This means in fact that the CPC(ML), by its own admission, has not been and is still not the advanced detachment of the working class, has not and is not fulfilling this basic and essential characteristic of the proletarian Party, even though it has had five years of official existence as a party. This means in fact that the CPC(ML) was not and is not guided by Marxism-Leninism, but by ’unsolid’ ’tremendously weak’ petty bourgeois outlook camouflaged as Marxism-Leninism. Lacking Marxism-Leninism, the CPC(ML) has lacked the means to win the advanced workers to communism, has lacked the wherewithall for fusion with the working class, has therefore been unable to represent the highest interests of the proletariat, and instead has represented the interests of the petty bourgeoisie and petty bourgeois new arrivals under the banner of the Party of the proletariat. By maintaining itself as a political party claiming the title of the communist Party, the CPC(ML) has committed the gravest of opportunist errors and has objectively held the movement back from developing consistent Marxist-Leninist leadership.