First Published: The Call, newspaper of the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) of the U.S., Vol. 2, No. 10, July 1974.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.
The communist movement around the world is experiencing a rebirth, following the betrayal of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 19S6. Under the leadership of the Khruschev revisionists, more than 100 communist and workers’ parties around the world went bad, gave up Marxism-Leninism and took up Khruschev’s line of “peaceful transition to socialism.” This of course, included the Communist Party of the U.S.A.
Following the great victories of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China, which saved that country from following the Soviet Union down the capitalist road, many new communist parties and organizations emerged throughout the world determined to rebuild the communist movement along Marxist-Leninist lines and in direct opposition to revisionism. Today, this new movement is experiencing rapid growth and a new revolutionary up-surge is taking place around the world, largely due to these advances by Marxists-Leninists.
Meanwhile, the revisionist parties are growing more divided, isolated, and wracked with internal difficulties. Violating the principles of Marxism-Leninism, the Soviet revisionists have vainly tried to seek hegemony over all the old revisionist parties around the world, which in many countries still have honest forces among their membership. This big-party chauvinism, which reflects the superpower mentality of the Soviet Union today, has met increased resistance, not only from the genuine communists who have formed new parties along Marxist-Leninist lines, but also from parties and members who reject to one degree or another the revisionism of the Soviet gang and their local counterparts.
An example of this division can be seen within the Communist Party of Australia. The CPA split in 1964 and the Communist Party of Australia (M-L) was born under the leadership of comrade E. F. Hill. During the past ten years, this heroic party has steadily grown, attracting the most revolutionary-minded people from among the working class of Australia. It has waged a determined struggle against imperialism and for the needs of the broad masses of the Australian people as well as a consistent fight against the revisionist CPA.
A full account of this party’s 10-year history of struggle against revisionism can be found in “Struggle for a Marxist-Leninist Communist Party,” a book written by Hill (which is available from Unidos Book Store, 918 S. McBride Ave., LA., Calif. 90022 for $2. plus postage.)
Now we read in the pages of the revisionist CPUSA’s Daily World, an article entitled “Leftist Cancer Menaces Australian Communist Party” by Joseph North, one of the chief apologizers for Soviet social-imperialism in the U.S. In North’s article, we find news that the struggle within the old CPA is sharpening and that many of its members, including forces within the leadership are coming to recognize the sell-out role of the Soviet revisionists around the world. In North’s words, “For several years the bulk of the CPA’s leadership has been steering the party off the road of Marxism-Leninism and onto the dead-end of anti-Sovietism.”
Of course, for revisionist journalistic hacks like North, any party that doesn’t follow slavishly behind Brezhnev and Co.’s superpower aggression and betrayal is “anti-Soviet.” North is in panic over an editorial which appeared in the Tribune, the organ of the revisionist party, which recently came out and attacked the phony “detente” policies of the Soviet Union. The article, entitled, “Not Relevant” referred to the Soviet-controlled World Congress of Peace Forces, which it called “nothing more than a platform for Soviet foreign policy. Then as North reports with false surprise, “an astounding effort was made to separate Soviet foreign policy from peace.”
North then goes on to attack the Tribune article for making ’the notorious Maoist” charge that the Soviet Union has as its goal “U.S.-Soviet accommodation and cooperation at the expense of the revolutionary movements in various parts of the world.”
According to North, the editorial went on to attack the present “detente” meeting between Brezhnev and Nixon as “collusion with U.S. imperialism at the sacrifice of anti-imperialist movements throughout the world.”
North concludes by echoing alarmist cries of the Australian revisionists that “Some comrades in leadership are resolutely opposed to priming anything in our press about resolutely opposed to printing anything in our press about the Soviet Union except condemnation and criticism.”
We would ask the revisionist North, why is he so “astounded?” Did he think that Brezhnev’s bullying the other revisionist parties into acceptance of Soviet-U.S. collaboration, and the policy of dividing the world among the two superpowers at the expense of the world’s peoples would go down smoothly?
The North article shows that the revisionist camp is torn with divisions. The situation in Australia is not exceptional and reflects the deepening rifts among the rank-and-file in all the revisionist parties, including North’s own CPUSA. The voice of the genuine revolutionary and Marxist-Leninist forces is being heard, even over the frantic anti-China, screams of the revisionist press.
The news of the growing struggle within the CPA is welcomed by all Marxist-Leninists and is a victory for the revolutionary line of the Communist Party of Australia (M-L) and genuine Marxist-Leninists around the world.