First Published: The Forge, Vol. 3, No. 18, September 22, 1978
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Malcolm and 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.
In the editorial published in No.123 of their paper, the revisionist group in Struggle tries to pass as a great defender of Mao Tsetung.
At the same time, it reprints and defends the Albanian letter of July 29 that attacked and slandered Chairman Mao and his teachings. [1]
At the same time, it openly supports the “gang of four”, which was strongly criticized by Chairman Mao many times before it was finally exposed and smashed by the Communist Party of China under the leadership of Hua Kuo-feng. IS has just come out and reprinted a text by the “gang of four” (signed by Chang Chun Chiao) in its regular column International Communist Movement Moves Forward, Proletarian Unity (Vol. 2 No 6).
IS’s hypocrisy is beyond words. It has found a way of crying “Long live Chairman Mao” while supporting the “gang of four” more openly than ever and spreading the slanders of the Party of Labour of Albania’s leadership.
To attack Mao Tsetung and his teachings, IS not only reprinted the Albanian letter of July 29, it also defended it by “answering” the criticisms the League levelled at the leadership of the PLA. [2] IS starts off with a blatant lie by saying: “in this article as in all others, the League does not present the slightest explanation of China’s action.” ... IS is referring to China’s cutting off economic aid to Albania.
To date the League has published one editorial and two articles explaining this question in depth. [3] Then IS deals with the crux of the matter, the question of the existence of classes and class struggle under socialism. In a Forge article which IS claims to have answered [4] we explained and showed that the PLA leaders oppose the basic teaching of Mao Tsetung Thought that classes and class struggle continue to exist under socialism.
To defend the position of the Albanian leaders, IS claims that we used an “isolated quote” of a PLA leader “taken out of context” to prove our point. The quote IS is talking about came from Foto Cami, a member of the Central Committee of the PLA. The Cami quote used in our article one by N. Hoxha describing Albanian society as a society “of non-antagonistic classes” and another by the Secretary of the CC of the PLA, Hysni Kapo, that said: “Our society is now made up of fraternal classes – the working class and the cooperative peasantry – and the stratum of the popular intelligentsia.” As we explained, the Albanian leaders are in agreement on denying the existence of the bourgeoisie in Albania. So IS’ first attempts to defend the Albanian leaders are nothing but cheap lies.
But the cat finally comes out of the bag when IS poses the following question: “is there a bourgeoisie in Albania?” Then trying to be ironic, it answers the question supposedly the way we would. “Yes, there is a bourgeoisie in Albania because Mao said, after analyzing Chinese society that the bourgeoisie continues to exist under socialism.” It goes on to say that the League doesn’t make a “concrete analysis of the concrete situation” and takes “refuge behind general principles(!!)”
According to IS, the principle according to which classes and class struggle exist in a socialist country does not “necessarily apply” to Albania. Maybe it was true for China, but maybe it isn’t true for Albania. In other words, it’s not a principle. According to IS, this teaching of Mao Tsetung is merely an analysis of Chinese society during a certain period, and not a basic teaching, not a development of Marxism-Leninism which guides the revolutionary struggles of the peoples of the world.
This is exactly the point where IS attacks Mao Tsetung Thought. Because Mao’ Tsetung’s contribution is precisely that he drew a fundamental and universal conclusion from the experience not only of socialist construction in China, but also in the USSR and elsewhere in the world. Mao Tsetung studied the Russian revolution, the period of socialism under Lenin and Stalin, and the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union. He led the struggle in China against the revisionists who wanted to destroy the power of the working class. And from all this he drew the general conclusion that:
Socialist society covers a considerably long historical period. In the historical period of socialism there are still classes, class contradictions, and class struggle, there is the struggle between the socialist road and the capitalist road, and there is the danger of capitalist restoration. (Speech at the Working Conference of the Central Committee at Politburo in August, 1962).
This principle is extremely valuable in the struggle for socialist construction. The people of socialist countries are armed to stand up to the bourgeoisie and to defend and consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat when they know that the bourgeoisie continues to exist and fights to take back power.
To negate this principle, as do the leaders of the PLA and IS, is to disarm the people, break down their vigilance and open the door to capitalist restoration, as in the USSR. The lessons Mao Tsetung drew from the degeneration of the USSR now serve to advance the world revolutionary struggle. To deny these lessons is to deny Marxism-Leninism.
By attacking Mao Tsetung Thought, by rabidly attacking socialist China as it as been doing for months now, IS is trying to turn the peoples against the bastion and guide of revolution.IS is diverting their attention and their vigilance from Soviet social imperialism which is threatening the world with fascist oppression.
[1] This letter is reprinted in Vol. 2 no 6 of Proletarian Unity. The Party of Labour of Albania sent this slanderous letter to the Communist Party of China following the withdrawal of Chinese aid from Albania. See The Forge Vol. 3, no. 1 , p. 15.
[2] IS no. 124, p. 11
[3] The Forge Vol. 3, no. 14, p. 2; Vol. 3. no. 14. p. 13; Vol. 3, no 15. p. 15
[4] The Forge Vol. 3, no. 16, p. 15