Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist)

Hold high the bright red banner of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism!

Part 11

The following is the eleventh in a series of articles under the title “Hold High the Bright Red Banner of Marxism-Leninism and Proletarian lnternationalisml” The first ten parts appeared in PCDN, Volume 7, Numbers 221-230, dated September 15-26, 1977.

* * *

According to the theoreticians of “three worlds”, “ ... the contradictions between the relations of production and the productive forces and between the superstrucutre and the economic base are the basic contradictions in society and ... that in socialist society there is correspondence as well as contradiction between the relations of production and the productive forces, between the superstructure and the economic base.” The second comment we make on this point made by the theoreticians of “three worlds” is that this formulation, far from bringing forth the nature of class contradictions, masks it. It masks it for various reasons. The main reason is that in socialist society, the main contradiction or the principal contradiction is between the ruling proletariat and the overthrown bourgeoisie. The ruling proletariat has state power and it has used the state power to expropriate the exploiting classes and to crush their resistance to the rule of labour. Thus, the principal aspect of the contradiction, that the proletariat is the ruling class and this rule is based on the worker-peasant alliance and is the class struggle of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, is completely masked.

Comrade Marx pointed out long ago:

This socialism is the declaration of the permanence of the revolution, the class dictatorship of the proletariat as the necessary transit point to the abolition of class distinctions generally, to the abolition of all the relations of production on which they rest, to the abolition of all the social relations that correspond to these relations of production, to the revolutionizing of all the ideas that result from these social relations.

Thus, according to Marx: “The class dictatorship of the proletariat is the necessary transit point”
1. “to the abolition of class dictatorship generally,”
2. “to the abolition of all the relations of production on which they rest,”
3. “to the abolition of all the social relations that correspond to these relations of production,”
4. “to the revolutionizing of all the ideas that result from these social relations.”

Marx nowhere mentions that: “the class dictatorship of the proletariat is the necessary transit point”
1. to “open the way to the development of the productive forces”
2. to bring “about great order across the land” and
3. to build “a great powerful socialist country with modern agriculture, modern industry, modern national defence and modern science and technology.”

The theoreticians of “three worlds” repeatedly assert that the “productive forces are the most revolutionary factor” and they talk about changes “in the superstructure and the relations of production” in order to “open the way to the development of the productive forces.”

Lenin teaches:

The dictatorship of the proletariat is a most determined and most ruthless war waged by the new class against a more powerful enemy, the bourgeoisie, whose resistance Is increased tenfold by its overthrow (even If only in one country), and whose power lies not only in the strength of international capital, in the strength and durability of the international connections of the bourgeoisie, but also In the force of habit, in the strength of small production. For, unfortunately, small production is still very, very widespread in the world, and small production engenders capitalism and the bourgeoisie continuously, daily, hourly, spontaneously, and on a mass scale. For all these reasons the dictatorship of the proletariat is essential, and victory over the bourgeoisie is impossible without a long, stubborn and desperate war of life and death, a war demanding perseverance, discipline, firmness, indomitableness and unity of will.

Lenin pointed out in 1918:

... during every transition from capitalism to socialism, dictatorship is necessary for two main reasons, or along two main channels. Firstly, capitalism cannot be defeated and eradicated without the ruthless suppression of the resistance of the exploiters, who cannot at once be deprived of their wealth, of their advantages of organization and knowledge, and consequently for a fairly long period will inevitably try to overthrow the hated rule of the poor; secondly, every great revolution, and a socialist revolution in particular, even if there were no external war, is inconceivable without internal war, i.e., civil war, which is even more devastating than external war, and involves thousands and millions of cases of wavering and desertion from one side to another, implies a state of extreme indefiniteness, lack of equilibrium and chaos. And of course, all the elements of disintegration from the old society, which are inevitably very numerous and connected mainly with the petty bourgeoisie (because it is the petty bourgeoisie that every war and every crisis ruins and destroys first) cannot but ’reveal themselves’ during such a profound revolution. And these elements of disintegration cannot ’reveal themselves’ otherwise than in the increase of crime, hooliganism, corruption, profiteering and outrages of every kind. To put these down requires time and requires an iron hand.

There has not been a single great revolution in history in which the people did not instinctively realize this and did not reveal salutary firmness by shooting thieves on the spot. The misfortune of previous revolutions was, that the revolutionary enthusiasm of the masses, which sustained them in their state of tension and gave them the strength ruthlessly to suppress the elements of disintegration, did not last long. The social, i.e., the class reason for this instability of the revolutionary enthusiasm of the masses was the weakmess of the proletariat, which alone is able (if it is sufficiently numerous, class-conscious and disciplined) to win over to its side the majority of the working and exploited people (the majority of the poor, to speak more simply and popularly) and retain power sufficiently long to suppress completely all the exploiters as well as all the elements of disintegration.

It was this historical experience of all revolutions, it was this world-historical – economic and political – lesson that Marx summed up in giving his short, sharp, concise and expressive formula; dictatorship.of the proletariat.

Lenin further pointed out:

The class of exploiters, the landlords and capitalists, has not disappeared and cannot disappear all at once under the dictatorship of the proletariat The exploiters have been smashed, but not destroyed. They still have an international base in the form of international capital, a branch of which they represent. They still retain apart of certain means of production, they still have money, they still have vast social connections. Just because they have been defeated, their energy of resistance has increased a hundred- and thousand-fold. The ’art’ of state, military and economic administration gives them a superiority, and a very great superiority, so that their importance is incomparably greater than their numerical proportion among the population would warrant. The class struggle, waged by the overthrown exploiters against the victorious vanguard of the exploited, i.e., the proletariat, has become incomparably more bitter. And it cannot be otherwise if we are speaking of a revolution, if this concept is not replaced (as it is by all the heroes of the Second International) by reformist illusions.

Because the principal aspect of the contradiction under socialism is that the proletariat is the ruling class and the bourgeoisie, both old and new, both remnants of the old and the newly emerging bourgeoisie, is the ruled, the bourgeoisie revolts against this position and aims at smashing the dictatorship of the proletariat and establishing the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. They can accomplish this, not through a direct trial of strength with the proletariat, but through indirect struggle, by infiltrating the proletarian party and by seizing “high official” posts in the Party and state. The political and ideological representatives of this bourgeoisie present themselves as “Marxists”, and “genuine” at that, and push a revisionist line. Once the public opinion is created for the acceptance of the revisionist political and ideological positions, then they openly substitute dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in place of dictatorship of the proletariat and embark on the capitalist road.

The theoreticians of “three worlds” are precisely carrying out such an activity. By creating ideological confusion and using all sorts of “high falutin’” words and phrases, they are deceiving the masses of the people and are carrying out the tasks of the bourgeoisie. The fact that they are always talking about opening “the way to the development of the productive forces” in itself does not amount to much. But what is the issue is that they are presenting this view in order to hit at the dictatorship of the proletariat and the socialist revolution. They are preparing public opinion for capitalist restoration.