Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Bolshevik Union

The Party of Labor of Albania Came to Canada Under a Stolen Flag

The Party of Labor of Albania Came to Canada Under a Stolen Flag

On March 31 Hardial Bains’ clique masquarading under the name of the “Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist)” held a “revolutionary rally” which it proclaims as a “vigorous defense of the purity of Marxism-Leninism and the principles of proletarian internationalism” (PCDN, April 2, 1979, p. 1). “CPC(ML)” claims to be the vanguard of the proletariat in Canada but their “revolutionary rally” went largely unnoticed by the proletariat. The Bainsites claim to have assembled 1,500 people for the occasion. The number was actually closer to 800. People were even forced to bunch up in the center to make the pictures look more impressive. Of this 800 very few were proletarians. Bains paid to bring in people from all over Canada and the US and did everything to try to cajole and coerce people into coming.

The social composition of “CPC(ML)” has always been overwhelmingly petty-bourgeois with the balance lumpens. Bains has never managed to trick more than a handful of workers in to his “party” at any one time and few stay for very long. So as an event for the working class this was one more Bainsite event that was completely irrelevant, except for the consolidation of anti-Marxism-Leninism and complete violation of proletarian internationalism that this event represents.

Bains and his gang have never been taken seriously in the workers’ movement from the days when Bains wanted to go to the countryside to surround Canada’s cities with “people’s war,” through his united front against the “superpowers” in order to “arouse the sleeping defense minister.” to his campaign to save the “middle bourgeoisie” by “making the rich pay” more to the labour aristocracy.

It is not because of the organizer or the audiance that we have to consider this event so important. It is because it was attended by 11 organizations, from different countries, which call themselves Marxist-Leninist, and it received messages from others. This event has been portrayed by its participants as an important contribution to the unity of the international proletariat. If these participants actually are parties of the proletariat in their countries and they actually do defend the purity of Marxism-Leninism and the principles of proletarian internationalism, it becomes incomprehensible to communists and proletarians in Canada how they could in anyway lend credibility to this gang of counter-revolutionaries and paid agent-provocateurs. But they not only gave Bains and his gang credibility, they came here and embraced him, praised him and endorsed his revisionist political line. They came here and proclaimed that CPC(ML)“was the vanguard of the proletariat and that the proletariat should follow this ’party’” and that the proletariat can place its trust in this “party” to lead the struggle for the emancipation of the proletariat from the tyranny of capitalist enslavement. A more grotesque violation of the principles of proletarian internationalism cannot be imagined. “There is one, and only one, kind of internationalism, and that is – working whole-heartedly for the development of the revolutionary movement, and the revolutionary struggle in one’s own country, and supporting (by propaganda, sympathy and material aid) this struggle, this, and only this, line, in every country without exception. (“The Tasks of the Proletariat in Our Revolution.” LCW 24:75)

Anyone who considers it his duty to support the cause of proletarian revolution in Canada could not possibly embrace and proclaim Bains and his so-called “CPC(ML).” To support Bains is to support the submersion of the proletarian revolution to the bourgeois and petty bourgeois struggle for “independence” and “democracy” and to condemn the Canadian proletariat to a longer toil under the barbarous rule of Canadian and American finance capital.

To support Bains is to not only violate one’s proletarian internationalist duty to the Canadian working class, but it is also to violate this duty to all the workers and oppressed peoples that are exploited and oppressed by Canadian imperialism, an important imperialist power in the western bloc and a gendarme of international reaction. In an editorial of April, 1978 the Bolshevik Union said:

For those of us in Canada who are familiar with the counter-revolutinary work of the Bainsites over the last 15 years, it might be easy to forget that Marxist-Leninists throughout the world who are not familiar with the concrete conditions of Canada nor with the history of communism in this country might be misled by Bains’ very well financed and executed campaign for recognition. It is, after all, the duty of Marxist-Leninists in Canada to expose “CPC(ML)” for the fraud that it is. We are confident that after this is done the international communist movement will have nothing to do with these counter-revolutionaries.(Lines of Demarcation nos. 7-8, p. 3)

We have carried out a systematic campaign to expose Bains and his clique in Canada and internationally. This was our duty to the proletariat in Canada and it was our proletarian internationalist duty. We have not just published our polemic against Bains, but we have also met with many of the parties that attended or sent messages to Bains’ rally. We know that they and others are fully informed of our views. It has been our position to Marxist-Leninists and the proletariat in Canada that an error of misinformation had been committed and that once this had been rectified the appropriate action would be taken. It is obvious to those who have followed events that as our exposure of Bains intensified, so did the international campaign to recognize him and cover him up. The response to letters, meetings and Lines of Demarcation nos. 7-8 was Bains “international rally” of last year. The response to more letters, meetings and Lines of Demarcation nos. 9-10 was Bains’ invitation to the “scientific session” in Tirana. The response to more letters, meetings, intensified polemics in Proletarian Revolution and to the split we, in part, caused in “CPC(ML)” was for these many parties and organizations to come to Canada and celebrate the ninth anniversary of “CPC(ML)” and to endorse Bains for the very things we have exposed him for.

Indeed, it became clear that the mistake of misinformation was on our part in not understanding that these parties and organizations were not operating out of ignorance, but, in fact, were well informed about the struggle in Canada. These forces carried on a deliberate plan of lying to us, misleading us, and trying to sabotage our struggle against revisionism. Already in Lines of Demarcation 9-10 we understood that Bains was not an exception, but that he was part of an international trend. In our struggle to expose Bains and uncover this trend, to rout it out internationally, we found out that we were misinformed about the parties and organizations that support Bains, rather than they who were misinformed about Bains. It, therefore, did not take us by surprise that Bains organized his rally with such an “impressive” list of participants. We, however, had maintained a false hope that, particularly, the Party of Labour of Albania would rectify this situation. This false hope was nurtured by the PLA’s deliberate and calculated lies to us to try and mislead us about what was really happening, in order to sabotage our efforts to expose Bains and. particularly, the international trend of which he is a part. We, however, were not deceived for long. We intensified our campaign against this trend more and more, which can be seen in the appendix of this issue, as we deepened out investigation of the international nature and extent of this trend. Bains scurried off to Tirana to get reinforcements. When it was announced that a delegation of the Central Committee of the PLA was coming to Canada in a desperate attempt to prop up Bains’ “party” from totally collapsing, we knew beyond any doubt how far the cancer spread, and we knew that we had been deliberately misled. Bains was in serious trouble, and he and they knew it. Even with the PLA visiting Canada, Bains could only organize a meeting of around 800 which he inflated to 1,500. This was down substantially from the 3,500 he announced had attended his “internationalist rally” 11 months previous.

Out of all the parties that attended, it was particularly disheartening to Communists and advanced workers in Canada to see the PLA take part in this spectacle of mutual admiration for disguised revisionism. Workers and Communists in Canada had a great deal of hope in the PLA because the PLA appeared to be opposing the perfidious activities of the Russian and Chinese revisionists to sabotage proletarian revolution in Canada and throughout the world. The PLA’s struggle against the theory of “three worlds” was welcomed because it appeared to oppose the Chinese revisionist line of having the Canadian proletariat abandon the struggle for proletarian revolution for socialism to substitute the defense of the “national independence” of Canadian imperialism. As Lenin so often pointed out, you don’t judge proletarian internationalism by words, but by deeds. The PLA said it was opposed to imperialism but all the revisionists say this, in general, but in practice they abandon the struggle against imperialism under one pretext or another. Revisionists in Canada have always had their mouths full of words like “socialism,” “revolution,” “Marxism-Leninism,” “proletarian internationalism,” but in deed they follow a path of concilliation and collaboration with the Canadian bourgeoisie under the banners of “independence,” “democracy,” “social progress.” etc. They have tried to deceive the proletariat into thinking that by struggling for “national independence,” “genuine democracy,” and “social progress,” this will somehow lead to socialism, and that the “patriotic” “middle” “non-reactionary” bourgeoisie was an ally in this struggle.

Much hope had been placed in the PLA because it appeared to be breaking with both the Chinese and Russian variants of modern revisionism, and it apparently was supporting the cause of proletarian revolution in Canada. At the Seventh Congress of the PLA, Enver Hoxha said:

The crisis is further sharpened by the unrestrained competition of the industrialized bourgeois and revisionist countries among themselves, as well as between them and the developing countries, the main producers of raw materials. The operation of the law of uneven political development of capitalist countries drew the Common Market, Japan, CANADA, and others into the arena of the struggle for markets and privileges and of challenging US domination in the sphere of capital exports. (Report Submitted to the Seventh Congress of the PLA, p. 163)

And in the famous Zeri i Popullit editorial of July 7, 1977 it states:

This is an anti-revolutionary “theory” because it preaches social peace, collaboration with the bourgeoisie, hence giving up the proletariat of Europe, Japan, CANADA, etc.. who have to fight the monopoly bourgeoisie and the system of exploitation in the countries of the “second world,” because the interests of national independence, and particularly the struggle against Soviet social-imperialism, allegedly require this. (“The Theory and Practice of the Revolution,” Albania Today, no. 4(35). 1977. p. 26)

In another article in the same newspaper it talks about’ “the Common Market, Japan, CANADA, etc., which contest these privileges, which try to penetrate the spheres of influence of US imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism. These are contradictions and rivalries among IMPERIALIST wolves, to draw each for themselves the greatest possible profits from the blood and sweat of the peoples.” (ATA, Feb. 15, 1977) Bains, on the other hand, has always denied that Canada is an imperialist country. Bains, however, managed to get the PLA to change its line on this question. At the “scientific session” in Tirana Ramiz Alia talked about “the contradictions, squables and conflicts among US imperialism, Soviet social-imperialism, the Common Market as a whole and each of the individual member countries, Japan, etc. are becoming more accute” (The Revolution – a Question Taken Up For Solution, Tirana, p. 14). No mention of Canada, now excluded from the imperialist countries. Elsewhere, Alia talks about “The implementation of neo-colonialism by the two superpowers and, together with Germany, Britan, France, Japan, and soon by China, too.” (Ibid., p. 13) Canada, whose capital export has tripled in the last two years is no longer imperialist? China is now a“ superpower” but Canada is not even imperialist even though it has exported more capital to China than China has to the world. And where do we find Canada in the PLA’s scheme of things?

In present-day society the proletariat has increased as a class and constitutes a great social force. This is true in regard to the developed capitalist countries of Europe, the United States of America, Japan, Canada, etc. But now this is a reality, also, in the countries of Latin America as well as in many countries of Asia and Africa. (Ibid., p. 36)

In Canada we are quite familiar with the theory that Canada has more in common with Brazil than it does with imperialist countries. The Chinese say Canada is in a “second world” in between. The PLA claims to oppose this theory but in deed does it? The Communist International discharged its proletarian internationalist duty to the proletariat in Canada by exposing the revisionists who denied that Canada was an imperialist country and who tried to substitute the struggle for “national independence” for the struggle for socialism. The PLA claims to uphold the legacy of the Comintern but its actions are quite different than its claims. Instead it upholds a revisionist like Bains. Let us be clear, however, that upholding Canada as an imperialist country is no absolute proof of purity; but the PLA’s abandonment of this position is a sure sign of revisionism, particularly when they have been presented with all the facts. In all our meetings with the PLA, it was many times implied and several times stated that they agreed with our analysis of Canada. They never stated opposition to our condemnations of the slogan of “independence and socialism” in Canada. A slogan, which as we pointed out to them, the Comintern condemned. The PLA tried to deceive us and play us along on a string in order to spy on our organization and on our international contacts in hopes of derouting our struggle. But when they had to come to Canada to help prop up Bains and save him from total collapse, they proclaimed their support for Bains’ struggle for “independence and socialism” as did all the organizations that attended or sent messages to Bains’ rally. This rally was, in part, an attempt to try to save Bains from the destructive effects of our polemic against his bourgeois nationalism and revisionism. It is not difficult for us to decide between the Communist International and the PLA, on which has manifested proletarian internatinalism towards the proletariat in Canada.

A very important aspect of the Bains rally was to promote Bains in the upcoming federal election. In 1972 Bains ran under the banner of “Chairman Mao is our Chairman, China’s path is our path.” This time the PLA was preparing it to run under the slogan of – “First Secretary Hoxha is our First secretary and Albania’s path is our path.” The voters must prefer Mao to Hoxha because the average vote per candidate fell from 185 in 1972 to 106 in 1979.

The essence of Bains’ election program was the same, collaboration with the bourgeoisie. In 1972 Bains called for “revolutionary committees” that included “the non-monopoly, pro-communist capitalists” (Communist Manifesto for Canada and Quebec). Bains promised that “the Communist Government will curb all Canadian monopoly capitalist class enterprises, take over those which supported the foreign imperialists... and let others maintain their enterprises with the conditions of a strict control on prices and profits in order to ensure the maximum well-being of the people.” This is pure social democracy or “Eurocommunism.” The NDP and the revisionist CPC both run in Canada on a platform of“curbing” monopolies, not expropriating them and encouraging the growth of the middle bourgeoisie. As Bains put it in 1972 “The Communist government will encourage all non-monopoly enterprises to carry on, but will oppose the exploitation of the working people through these enterprises as well as oppose these enterprises becoming monopolies.” And how does Bains propose to “oppose the exploitation of the working people.” As he said “All production must serve the needs of the working people! and for this reason it (The Communist Government – BU) will control prices and profits.” The working class is too exploited, so Bains will lessen the exploitation by “controlling” prices and profits! But abolish exploitation by abolishing the private ownership of the means of production, to abolish profit? This would be “ultra-leftism,” “dogmatism” and not “applying Marxism-Leninism to the concrete conditions of your country”! Bains certainly did well in learning from his “Chairman,” MaoTse rung. Mao pulled the same trick in China. Mao brought in a “Communist government” that only expropriated some foreign capital but preserved the capitalist system and Bains hoped to do the same in Canada. Although the difference is that Bains only had a handful of people to follow him.

In 1979 Bains had Hoxha to follow instead of Mao but not much changed. Bains is still trying to preserve capitalism. At the “Sixth Consultative Conference of CPC(ML)” held in the days previous to his “revolutionary rally,” Bains put forward the call for an alliance with the “middle bourgeoisie” against the “rich” to solve the crisis by implementing the slogan “make the rich pay!” The representative of the Central Committee of the PLA praised this as a “scientific class analysis” of Canada and firmly based on “Marxism-Leninism.” It has nothing to do with science or Marxism-Leninism but it certainly is based on Enver Hoxha. Hoxha, in his new epic, tells us:

The middle peasantry and that section of the bourgeoisie which is not linked with foreign capital and which aspires to an independent development of the country, can also be allies of the proletariat.

The uniting of this section of the bourgeoisie with the democratic and anti-imperialist revolution depends on the correct strategy and tactics of the proletariat, the skilful and intelligent manoeuvering (i.e. opportunism – BU) of the revolutionary party of the working class. In this way, the proletariat with its party can convince not only the petty-bourgeoisie, but also this bourgeoisie, to place itself under the leadership of the proletariat and rise to abolish the foreign domination and liquidate the savage capitalist big bourgeoisie a tool of imperialism. (Imperialism and the Revolution, Tirana, pp. 222-3)

Bains at the “scientific session” in Tirana denounced the “big bourgeoisie” and tells us that: “Democracy in all of the capitalist and revisionist countries is sham and in name only. It is, in fact, a barbaric rule of the tiny rich minority over the vast exploited and subjugated majority.” (“Speech delivered by Hardial Bains to the Scientific Session,” NBI, 1978, p. 12) With this Bains puts forward his class-less analysis of society. Classes no longer exist. Instead there is only a “tiny minority of rich” who are faced by the “subjugated majority” that included the bourgeoisie, petty bourgeoisie, peasantry and proletariat. For Bains this “subjugated majority” struggle to make the tiny rich minority pay! And we will see just how “tiny” Bains considers this minority. So for Bains and Hoxha there are “pro-communist capitalists” in all countries. Despite all of Bains’ demagogical talk about “proletarian revolution,” in this speech he proposes collaboration with the bourgeoisie for “national independence”

With the revolt of the broad masses of the people taking on wide proportions against the plunder of the land and labour of our country by US imperialism and the Canadian monopoly capitalist class, reflecting the sharpening of the contradictions between US imperialism and the Canadian monopoly capitalist class on the one hand, and the Canadian people on the other. (Ibid., p. 25)

Bains pompously entitled his speech “The Proletariat is at the Centre of Our Epoch,’” but for Bains it is not at the centre of the revolution in Canada. Instead it is the “Canadian people” which he claims are in revolt, “the broad masses of the people.” This is of course a complete fraud. The “broad masses of the people” are not in revolt, but Bains must use this to justify his tailing after the nationalist aspirations of the “pro-communist capitalists” and the petty bourgeoisie.

Bains claims to oppose the “Canadian monopoly capitalist class,” but for Bains they are a compador bourgeoisie “which is constituted by the US imperialist bourgeoisie operating within Canada” (ibid., p. 25). For Bains monopoly capitalism is not indigenous to Canada, it did not develop as the result of the laws of capitalism, but is an alien creature that has been “constituted” by US imperialists. The rest of the bourgeoisie is made up of “pro-communist capitalists” or at least vacillating in that direction. Bains’ partner in crime puts it this way:

The Marxist-Leninist party maintains a cautious and flexible attitude, especially towards its wavering, possible, or temporary allies, including the various strata, for the middle bourgeoisie, which are linked by numerous threads, various interests, traditions and prejudices with the world of capital and imperialism. The proletariat, and its vanguard, the Marxist-Leninist party, without ever budging from their principled positions, are interested in attracting such forces, too, in spite of their waverings and instability, to the side of the revolution or the liberation struggle, or at least in neutralizing them, so that they do not become a reserve of the enemy. (Imperialism and the Revolution, p. 224)

Hoxha does not wish to rally the “middle bourgeoisie” for national liberation struggles alone, but wants to win them “to the side of the revolution OR the liberation struggle.” For Hoxha allying with the “middle bourgeoisie” is part of “proletarian strategy” in every country. How far Hoxha and Bains are willing to go to attract to their side those who “are linked by numerous threads, various interests, traditions and prejudices with the world of capital and imperialism” is demonstrated by Bains’ election programme. The delegation of the CC of the PLA came to Canada to reorganize (“bolshevize”) Bains’ party and get him ready for the election. In the election we can see just how Bains used what the PLA praised as a “scientific class analysis” to win over the “middle bourgeoisie” to “the side of the revolution.”

Bains put forward his programme under the slogan “The Only Solution to the Crisis – Make the Rich Pay!” This programme had nothing to do with expropriating the bourgeoisie as a class, nor does Bains mean by the rich the bourgeoisie in general. What Bains calls the other bourgeois parties are “representetives of the rich, of the tiny minority of some 45 families, the multinationals and the financial oligarchs.” So it is this “tiny minority” that Bains wants to make “pay.” Pay to who? The “broad masses of the people,” which of course included the “middle bourgeoisie.” Bains proposes to take the property of this “tiny minority” and cancel their foreign investments etc. But as to the bourgeoisie outside of the “45 families,” they don’t lose anything and they gain the property of the “45 families” which becomes “social property” of the “workers’ and poor farmers government,“ i.e. the property of the ”middle bourgeoisie,” because this government is nothing but a bourgeois democracy calling itself “genuine democracy.”

But let us consider just exactly who constitute this poor impoverished “middle bourgeoisie” which is so oppressed by US capital and the “45 families” that they are becoming “pro-communist capitalists.” Bains did not draw the number 45 out of a hat. It comes from information provided in a “ no. 1 Best Seller” book called The Canadian Establishment which was written by the editor of Canada’s weekly news-magazine (Canada’s Time) as an attempt to glorify the bourgeoisie. This author, Peter C. Newman lists 45 families that have personal wealth of $50 million or more Newman also lists those that are worth between $20 million and S50 million. This for Bains and the PLA must be the “middle bourgeoisie,” who, despite their “waverings and instability,” can and must be won “to the side of the revolution.” This list reads like a who’s who of the Canadian monopoly bourgeoisie. Monopoly capitalism goes a lot further than “the tiny minority of some 45 families.” This list includes (the whole list is reproduced elsewhere) the likes of the Black family and the Carmichael family who have holdings in Argus Corporation, one of Canada’s largest monopolies. Conrad Black now heads up Argus. Argus is a holding company that included Massey Ferguson, one of the world’s major farm implement manufactures, has operations in more than 30 countries in the world. Argus also controls Hollinger Mines and through it a substantial slice of Noranda Mines, which has mining operations all over the world and is presently investing nearly $2 billion in Chile, financed by the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. CIBC is Canada’s second largest bank with over $30 billion in assets and Conrad Black, as well as other “middle bourgeois.” are on the board of directors of this bank. The list also included the likes of the Maclaren family who are the largest stockholders in the Bank of Nova Scotia, Canada’s fourth largest bank with close to $20 billion in assets and has 50 branch banks in foreign countries including such countries as Guyana, Dominican Republic, Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica. The list goes on and on to include “middle bourgeois” that are involved in every aspect of Canada’s economy, and they have nothing to fear from Bains and his “CPC (ML)”. Bains will only expropriate the property of the “45 families” and only cancel their foreign investments. And for those workers who toil for Canada’s “middle” monopoly capitalists, nothing will change, and for those nations that are oppressed by Canadian “middle” finance capital, for those exploited by Canadian “middle” imperialism, the future only holds more of the same under Bains’ “workers and poor farmers and middle bourgeois” government.

Not only is Bains trying to get the Canadian proletariat to collaborate with the “middle” imperialist bourgeoisie, he is building support in the oppressed nations. Bains wants to ally with the likes of the Maclaren family whose bank has 10 branches in Trinidad-Tobago. The Bank of Nova Scotia along with the Royal Bank of Canada (12 branches) control the economy of Trinidad-Tobago. Bains does not propose to abolish their presence in Trinidad-Tobago but to support it. Bains has gone so far as to set up a “National Liberation Movement of Trinidad-Tobago” which participated in Bains’ “revolutionary rally.” As they themselves put it “from almost the inception of our organization we have had relations with your Party. (CPC(ML)).... Our organization cherishes the close relationship which exists between your Party and our group.” (PCDN, April 9, 1979, p. 1) And, of course, this group, which is presumably for ’national liberation“ has nothing to say about Canadian imperialism or the Canadian banks in their country. Instead they just talk about the struggle against “U.S. imperialism.” Their objective is to drive out US influence which would give Canadian imperialism a complete stranglehold over the country. Indeed, it is easy for the MacLarens to be pro-Bains capitalists.

Hoxha said that “the Marxist-Leninist party, without ever budging from their principled positions, are interested in attracting such forces” and certainly Bains’ programme to solve the crisis not by revolution but by making the “tiny rich minority of 45 families” pay is certainly a programme that can draw support from the “middle bourgeoisie.” This will not put Bains in power, but will pay him for his efforts to sabotage the revolution, indeed a way to “make the rich pay.” As to “principled positions,” Bains has never had any to “budge” from. His programme says nothing about socialism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, working class, class struggle, the bourgeoisie, the smashing of the state, revolution, etc.. etc.

It is, indeed, not surprising that the Canadian government, which is notorious for not even allowing university “marxologists” into Canada to lecture, did not put up any objection to the PLA coming to Canada. The bourgeois press in Canada is notorious for denouncing anyone who comes to Canada who is even mildly tinged with “socialism.” There was even objection to the “Socialist International” holding a convention in Vancouver; but as to the visit of the PLA. they were silent as a tomb.

The PLA’s support for the incredible opportunism of Bains could be seen no more clearly than when Xhelil Gjoni, member of the CC of the PLA, led Bains’ lobotomized followers in chanting “Make the Rich Pay.”

The delegation of the PLA made a sickening attack on the purity of Marxism-Leninism and the principles of proletarian internationalism, which they love to claim they defend, from the beginning to the end of their visit to Canada. At the end of his first speech, after getting off the plane, Gjoni “concluded his remarks by hailing the friendship between our two fraternal parties and shouting Long Live the Canadian People!” (PCDN. March 26. 1979, p. 1) Indeed we have seen just exactly who the PLA considers the Canadian people to be and just exactly who they wish a long life to! Gjoni said that “the PLA highly estimates this visit, which affords the PLA the opportunity to further strengthen its fraternal relations with our Party and to learn first hand of the struggles being waged by the Canadian proletariat and people” (Ibid., p.4), i.e. the “middle bourgeoisie.” Gjoni further explains that “the delegation of the CC of the PLA had come to Canada to learn from the Canadian proletariat and people and from the struggles thev are waging, under the leadership of CPC(ML), against the Canadian monopoly capitalist class and the US imperialist domination.” (Ibid.) What they learned from the “middle bourgeoisie” on their visit can only be a matter of speculation, but they certainly learned that Bains does not, in reality, lead much of anything. His talk against “the Canadian monopoly capitalist class and the US imperialist domination” sounds impressive but is typical “centrist” demagogy that attempts to sound close to the truth but in reality covers up collaboration with the bourgeoisie. The facts are that the PLA and their Bainsite cronies want to ally with most of the “middle” monopoly capitalists of Canada against the “rich” monopoly capitalists who they claim were “constituted” by US imperialism and who are responsible for the crisis.

They must be made to “pay.” At least the Chinese revisionists “honestly” admit their support of Canadian imperialism: their difference with the PLA lies in the fact that they support the alliance between Canadian imperialism and US imperialism.

Canada shows concern about world peace and security and attaches importance to strengthening its unity with other second world countries and developing with third world countries, and it has played a positive role in international affairs. (Peking Review, July 4. 1978. p. 4)

The PLA, however, practices cowardly craven opportunism, “centrism,” that tries to conceal its alliance with the bourgeoisie and imperialism through demagogical rhetoric; but when we look at their deeds and the subtlety of their words carefully, their betrayal of the proletariat in Canada and the world is clear. This kind of centrism is summed up well in Bains’ slogans “independence and socialism,” “independence, democracy and socialism.” and often it is reduced to “independence, democracy and social progress.” The PLA proclaimed all three slogans during their visit. The last one demonstrates that “socialism” is mentioned as a centrist mask to justify taking up with the bourgeoisie. The Comintern 40 years ago denounced the line of “national independence” as abandoning the proletarian revolution and socialism. The revisionists tried to cover themselves by putting forward the “centrist” “independence and socialism” which was also denounced as a scheme to mislead the proletariat into thinking that by struggling for “independence” it would lead to socialism. This “centrism” is not a spatial concept. This position of “independence and socialism” is a cowardly attempt to deroute the proletariat onto the path of bourgeois nationalism. This is just as revisionist as the Chinese revisionists open betrayal of socialism under the pretext of calling for national independence. The difference is that centrism disguises itself better and manages to be more effective at corroding the internationalism of the proletariat, it travels under a stolen flag. This centrism boldly declares its “vigorous defense of the purity of Marxism-Leninism and the principles of proletarian internationalism,” but in reality it substitutes bourgeois nationalism for proletarian internationalism and revisionism for Marxism-Leninism.

The PLA came to Canada under this stolen flag, they are like Potresov, who Lenin exposed many years ago this way:

The author drives his cargo under a stolen flag. He has applied – whether consciously or unconsciously does not matter in this case – a military ruse; he has hoisted the flag of “internationalism” in order more securely to transport under this flag the contraband cargo of national-liberalism.... A. Potresov’s use of a stolen flag is the more dangerous since he covers himself not only with the principle of “internationalism” but also with the title of an adherent of “Marxist methodology.” (V. I. Lenin. “Under a Stolen Flag”, Collected Works, Vol. 18, Pg 119, 1930, edition International Publishers.)

The scene at Bains’ “revolutionary rally” is described this way:

Speaking on behalf of the CC of the PLA. Comrade Xhelid Gjoni pointed out that in socialist Albania, the Canadian proletariat and people have a sincere friend. Comrade Gjoni concluded his message of greetings with the slogans: Long Live Marxism-Leninism!. Long Live Proletarian Internationalism!. Long Live the Friendship between Our Two Parties Based on Marxism-Leninism!. Long Live the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist)!. Long Live the Canadian People! The messages of greetings were responded to with profound joy and tulmultuous applause. Comrade Bains and Comrade Gjoni embraced each other and held each other’s hand high in the air while comrades and friends vigorously shouted “Enver Hoxha! Enver Hoxha! Marxism-Leninism! Marxism-Leninism!” over and over again. (PCDN. April 2. 1979, p. 4)

But the facts are that while the “middle bourgeoisie” of Canada may have “a sincere friend” in the PLA. the Canadian proletariat has only one more false friend that proclaims its support for the proletariat in Canada, but in reality betrays it at every turn. The PLA calling for a long life to the “Canadian people” without calling for a short life for the Canadian bourgeoisie, without noting the difference between oppressor and oppressed nations in Canada, is in reality calling for long life for capitalism and national oppression, and this is a complete betrayal of the principles of proletarian internationalism. Any party that calls for a long life, for friendship, with Bains’ social-fascist counter-revolutionary clique is no friend of the Canadian proletariat, and obviously knows nothing of Marxism-Leninism.

The Bainsites yelled out their joy at equating Enver Hoxha with Marxism-Leninism just as they once equated Mao Tsetung thought with Marxism-Leninism. The politics of Mao Tsetung and Enver Hoxha both support the counter-revolutionary, anti-Marxist-Leninist line of “CPC(ML).” but Mao’s politics led China to open support of imperialism. Today the Bainsites “vigorously” denounce Mao and celebrate the fact that Hoxha gives them a “centrist” cover to carry on their counter-revolutionary activities.

Forty years ago in April the Executive Committee of Communist International sent a letter to the Communist Party of Canada that directed a rectification in the Party’s line, that denounced the bourgeois nationalism of those who proclaimed “national independence” or “independence and socialism,” that instructed the party to take up the line of proletarian revolution for socialism in one stage to smash the bourgeois dictatorship and its state and replace it with the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The PLA came to Canada in April. 40 years later, bearing the flag of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, but in reality carrying a contraband cargo of bourgeois nationalism and revisionism. The PLA came here under a stolen flag hoping to deceive the proletariat in Canada and the international proletariat as a whole. On behalf of the proletariat we have uncovered this latest in revisionist military manoeuvers to sabotage the proletarian revolution in Canada and throughout the world.

On behalf of the international proletariat, the Communist International sent a flag of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism. The PLA tried to smuggle in its contraband cargo by pretending to represent the historical continuity with the Soviet Union of Lenin and Stalin, with the Communist International of Lenin and Stalin, with the whole history of the international communist movement, but we have uncovered this fraud and with this document we are exposing the “centrists” of the PLA for the revisionists they are, we are demonstrating that the PLA fly s a false flag, a stolen flag, that its true colors are the colors of bourgeois nationalism and revisionism. We are confident in drawing this line of demarcation we are in deed, as well as in word, defending Marxism-Leninism and discharging our revolutionary duty to the proletariat in Canada and to the international proletariat.