Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Revolutionary Communist League (M-L-M)

First Published: Unity and Struggle, Vol. V, No. 6, June 1976.
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 changing of the Congress of Afrikan People’s name to Revolutionary Communist League (Marxist-Leninist-Mao Tse Tung Thought), is being done in the context of the world situation. According to Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought, there are four fundamental contradictions that exist in the world today, which give shape and force to the present international situation, whose road is marked by many twists and turns but ultimately favorable for the broad masses who are the makers of history, as our Chinese comrades state.

These contradictions are, labor vs. capital, this means the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie in the “advanced” capitalist countries; second is the contradiction between imperialism and the third world, this represents the struggle of the peoples of Asia, Afrika, and Latin America against imperialism, neocolonialism, hegemonism and the superpowers, these struggles have borne great victories for the people of these countries fighting for national liberation. These struggles are the motive force of revolution in the world today. Next is the contradiction between imperialism vs. imperialism the most intense being, the struggle of the two superpowers for world domination with U.S. imperialism on the one hand and Soviet Social-imperialism on the other, these superpowers represent the danger of new world war, and the threat of this war comes mainly from the Soviet Union. The fourth of these contradictions is imperialism vs. the socialist countries. Of these four basic contradictions, two are the sharpest in the world today, they are imperialism vs. the third world and the contradiction between the superpowers.

It is also necessary to adhere to the theory of two points in analysing the world situation. In his solemn statement People of the World, Unite and Defeat the U.S. Aggressors and All Their Running Dogs! issued on May 20, 1970, Chairman Mao pointed out: ’The danger of new world war still exists, and the people of all countries must get prepared. But revolution is the main trend in the world today.’ ’The danger of world war’ and ’revolution’ are the two aspects of an ’entity’ – the world situation. What are the conditions regarding these two aspects? Chairman Mao pointed out: The former ’still exists’ and the latter is ’the main trend.’.. .’The danger of a new world war still exists. This is another trend in the development of today’s world. It is dangerous if we see only the raging flames of the revolution without noticing the enemies sharpening their swords and think we can lower our vigilance because of the excellent situation.’” (quoted from Study Philosophy, “The Theory of Two Points”, p. 8).

In this contention the main danger of war comes from the “wildly ambitious” Soviet Union, which is a country of socialism in words and imperialism in deeds! Li Chiang, Minister of Foreign Trade of the People’s Republic of China, at the Seventh Special Session of the U.N. General Assembly put it this way “Above all, it should be pointed out that this superpower is energetically pushing neo-colonialism in the third world under the cloak of a ’natural ally’ of the developing countries. In the name of ’aid’, it practices usury, outrageously dumps outmoded equipment and loots the raw materials and other industrial and agricultural products of the developing countries. It even uses ’aid’ as an opportunity for securing various special privileges and obtaining strategic bases.”

As the liberation struggles of the third world continue to smash U.S. imperialism and the contradiction between labor and capital in the Western industrial countries sharpens, and as the superprofits once used by the imperialists to bribe and divide a sector of the working class in these countries is ripped away by the liberation struggles of the third world the bourgeoisie will resort to massive layoffs, budget cuts, closing of or running away of shops to the Black Belt South where the U.S. imperialist can exploit the Black Nation or they will run all the way to a third world country, in its ever continuing search for superprofits, thus priming the working class in the Western industrial countries for revolution (though as the 3rd World defeats U.S. imperialism, the U.S. markets and spheres of influence contracts and it cannot run away to many places in the 3rd World anymore, e.g., Cambodia, Vietnam. Guinea-Bissau).

This makes it the task of Marxist-Leninist and advanced forces to take up and deepen ourselves in the study of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought and integrate these studies with our day to day practice to make socialist revolution.

As Comrade Lenin pointed out “Without a revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement.”


As Marxist-Leninists we recognize the central task in this period is the building of an Anti-Revisionist Vanguard Communist Party because without this revolutionary party, socialist revolution is not possible. The danger of modern revisionism lies in the fact that it cuts the core out of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought. Modern Revisionism is the ideology of the bourgeoisie dressed in “Marxist-Leninist” terminology, which does not include the essence of M-L-M which is class struggle, proletarian revolution, and the dictatorship of the proletariat! Many may think the Soviet Union is a socialist country, it is not, it once was a land of the dictatorship of the proletariat under the leadership of Lenin and Stalin, and as such represented a guiding light for the countries, nations and people of the world struggling for independence, liberation and revolution. But, it has restored capitalism, this was done by opportunists within the party who consolidated a bureaucrat-monopoly capitalist class under the leadership of the traitor and revisionist Khrushchev, and in doing so, “The entire superstructure of Soviet society degenerated. The former dictatorship of the proletariat was transformed into a fascist dictatorship of the new revisionist bourgeoisie, the socialist Soviet State was transformed into a social-imperialist state.” (“The Soviet Economy, A Completely and Definitely Capitalist Economy,” Aristotel Pano, Albania Today, July-August, p. 43, 1975)

The question of Modern Revisionism is an international phenomenon, not one that is isolated to the Soviet Union. Parties have degenerated to Revisionism from the USSR, USA, to most Western and East European countries and even Latin America. This is why we agree that Right opportunism is the main danger in the international Communist movement.

We must study and deepen our understanding on the question of the dictatorship of the proletariat which represents the dividing line between genuine Marxist-Leninists and modern day revisionists. Understanding the dictatorship of the proletariat is of fundamental importance as Chairman Mao Tse Tung says “lack of clarity on this question will lead to revisionism.”

As well, we must, in order to make a genuine contribution to the building of the party of a new type, it becomes important to understand Lenin’s statement that “unless a determined, ruthless struggle all along the line is conducted against opportunism it is useless to talk about the struggle against imperialism because the fight against imperialism is a sham and humbug unless it is inseparably bound up with the fight against opportunism” (V.I. Lenin, Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism).

We must take up a tit for tat struggle against modern revisionism which in this period has assumed the form of state power in the Soviet Union and has turned the once proud beacon of socialism into a country of social-imperialism and social-fascism. Revisionism is attempting to hold back the revolutionary struggle of the people of the world! The relationship of modern revisionism to changing our name is that we as Marxist-Leninists want to take a clear class stand on the side of the working class and oppressed nationalities in the struggle for socialist revolution and leave no room for the clouding of issues. To us the name change should be a consideration of these facts so that we as Marx said, not only understand reality but change it.


With the international situation characterized by “great disorder”, the sharpening of the fundamental contradictions of imperialism, have led to the decline of U.S. imperialism because of the successful wars of national liberation waged by heroic peoples of the Third World. And at the same time the other superpower, the U.S.S.R.. is more and more aggressive since it is the latecomer seeking world hegemony and its “place in the sun”. These two contradictions, the contradiction between the third world vs. imperialism and superpower contention, i.e., revolution and war, are the sharpest contradictions in the world today. And both these contradictions are intensifying the crisis in U.S. imperialism, where more and more these revolutions in the third world are cutting into the superprofits of imperialism, and the ruling class in the U.S. must lean more and more to rule by force, and less and less money is put into deceitful reforms. As the Chinese point out, “In their last-ditch struggle the imperialists always make fostering an opportunist faction in the workers’ movement one of their basic policies. The super-monopoly profits they have grabbed enable them to buy over the upper stratum of workers and encourage opportunism. The old and new revisionists are all scabs bribed by the monopoly capitalists with their superprofits, the completely bourgeoisified labour aristocracy and the agents of imperialism. Worming their way into the international communist movement, they have made every effort to cover up the contradictions and nature of imperialism, prettify imperialism, spread the ideas of imperialism and benumb the fighting will of the world’s revolutionary people.” (On Studying Some History about Imperialism, by Shih Chun, Peking Review, No. 25, 1972). But in order to make maximum profits the monopoly capitalists are taking away these crumbs, the bribes for the few and concessions for some others, and in the rightward movement the bourgeoisie is ruling more and more by open repression.

This is laying the basis for spontaneous unrest throughout the land, massive reaction to the economic crisis that U.S. imperialism cannot find a way out of. And for this reason, the imperialist economic crisis, and because of the coming world war between the superpowers, the U.S. must move toward fascism in order to centralize its control of the economy to prepare to fight a nuclear world war.

This relationship between imperialism and opportunism and revisionism has made the struggle to accomplish the central task of building an anti-revisionist vanguard Communist Party ten times more difficult. But at the same time with the sharpening of the contradictions of imperialism, the need for the Party to lead the revolution in the U.S.A. intensifies.

To deny the connection between imperialism and opportunism serves to conceal opportunism and not oppose and destroy, it. In order to have a genuine anti-revisionist vanguard Communist Party capable of destroying imperialism, we must wage a ruthless struggle against opportunism and revisionism.

We must remember, comrades, that our central task is to build the Party of a new type because as Stalin put it “The Party constitutes the officer corps and general staff of the proletariat, who direct the struggle of the latter in all its forms and all spheres without exception, and combine the diverse forms of the struggle into one whole. To say that a Communist Party is not needed is equivalent to saying that the proletariat must fight without a general staff, without a leading core, who make a special study of the conditions of the struggle and work out the methods of fighting; it is equivalent to saying that it is better to fight without a general staff than with one, which is stupid.” (Stalin: On Strategy and Tactics, p. 15.) Now our task is “To win the vanguard of the proletariat to the side of Communism (i.e., build up cadres, create a Communist Party, work out the programme, the principles of tactics). Propaganda as the chief form of activity.” (Ibid., p. 24-25).

Now our work must be aimed at winning the best elements of the working class to the side of Communism, those who are the most devoted and most active to the cause of the proletariat, hammer out our line and program, form our ranks in order to put our party firmly on its feet, to paraphrase Comrade Stalin.

Since the decline of the CPUSA in the 40’s, and its subsequent degeneration in the 50’s into the tool of modern revisionism and Soviet Social imperialism after the death of Comrade Stalin, the process of building a revolutionary anti-revisionist vanguard Communist Party has been the central task of Marxist-Leninists. It must be clear that in this country there exists no Communist Party, only a revisionist party that talks of “peaceful transition” to socialism, which is a question Comrade Stalin dealt with in defending the banner of Leninism, when he stated “To think that such a revolution can be carried out peacefully, within the framework of bourgeois democracy, which is adapted to the rule of the bourgeoisie means that one has either gone out of one’s mind and lost normal human understanding, or has grossly, and openly repudiated the proletarian revolution.” (Stalin, On the Opposition, “Concerning Questions of Leninism”, p. 279).

But even more today as the contradictions sharpen and the intensification of the revolutionary crisis in imperialist countries heightens, a new party, “a militant party, a revolutionary party, one bold enough to lead the proletarians in the struggle for power.. .”, clearly this is what is needed, and not the various “parties” of opportunism, menshevism, social-democracy, and trotskyism!


Since we have declared ourselves to be seeking to gain clarity about the science of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought, the science of revolution, we are consciously moving to break with all forms of bourgeois ideology, particularly bourgeois nationalism, which negates class struggle and unites with the bourgeoisie against the working class. We internally are at the crossroads of developing genuine Marxist-Leninist cadre, vanguard fighters of the whole multinational working class and oppressed nationalities. Stalin raised the importance of making this break with bourgeois nationalism and explained that many times comrades in the border regions (the area of the oppressed nationalities in Russia) who out and out worship menshevism use their “nationalism”, revolutionary in no respect to cover their menshevism, pretending to “honestly” support the struggles of the oppressed nationalities!

It has become important that we grasp the essence of Comrade Lenin’s Critical Remarks on the National Question, where he says “The principle of nationality is historically inevitable in bourgeois society and, taking this society into due account, the Marxist fully recognizes the historical legitimacy of national movements. But to prevent this recognition from becoming an apologia of nationalism, it must be strictly limited to what is progressive in such movements, in order that this recognition may not lead to bourgeois ideology obscuring proletarian consciousness.

The awakening of the masses from feudal lethargy, and their struggle against all national oppression, for sovereignty of the people, of the nation, are progressive. Hence, it is the Marxist’s bounden duty to stand for the most resolute and consistent democratism on all aspects of the national question. This task is largely a negative one. But this is the limit the proletariat can go to in supporting nationalism, for beyond that begins the ’positive’ activity of the bourgeoisie striving to fortify nationalism.

To throw off the feudal yoke, all national oppression, and all privileges enjoyed by any particular nation or language, is the imperative duty of the proletariat as a democratic force, and is certainly in the interests of the proletarian class struggle, which is obscured and retarded by bickering on the national question. But to go beyond these strictly limited and definite historical limits in helping bourgeois nationalism means betraying the proletariat and siding with the bourgeoisie. There is a border-line here, which is often very slight and which the bundists and Ukrainian nationalist-socialists completely lose sight of.” (Lenin, CW,, Vol. 20 pp. 34-35).

The objective division of the working class by means of racism and white chauvinism are two evils, whose economic base is imperialism, that Marxist-Leninists must see as the principal reasons for the response of narrow or reactionary nationalism from among oppressed nationalities. “And that National Chauvinism from so-called Marxist-Leninists only adds to that division.” (Unity & Struggle, March edition, 1976 “Imperialism & Revolution,” p. 11)

The name Congress of Afrikan People is scientifically incorrect because we are not Afrikans, but Afro-Americans which correctly describes our nationality, also the name emphasizes the national form of our organization over its proletarian outlook. To say “Congress” and “People” to us implies a mass character rather than an organization based on democratic centralism.

Lenin in his essay “What Should be the Name of our Party? – One that Will Be Correct Scientifically And Help to Clarify the Minds of the Proletariat Politically” said “objectively, however, the world situation is such that the old name of our party makes it easier to fool the people and impedes the onward march.” We agree!!

Because we are changing the name of our organization does not mean that we are declaring ourselves a party, as some opportunist, philistines, trotskyites and fellow-travelers have and to these so-called “parties” that do “exist” we advance the position of Lenin, “. . .the highest form of proletarian class organization began to arise, viz., the revolutionary party of the proletariat (which will not deserve the name until it learns to bind the leaders with the class and the masses into one single indissoluble whole. . .” (Lenin, Left-Wing Communism, An Infantile Disorder, p. 41)

The name Congress of Afrikan People has become an obstacle to the building of the multi-national Communist Party, and it does not help unite Marxist-Leninists and win the advanced to Communism, i.e., Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought. And this name C.A.P. does not serve to educate the minds of the proletariat nor clearly and openly put forth our aims as Marx said, ’The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.” (Communist Manifesto, Marx-Engels, p. 76). Some people will take the position that we are liquidating the national question (as did the New York Times, chief propagandist of the “enlightened” bourgeoisie, in our transition to Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought). But nothing could be further from the truth since the Afro-American national question is inseparably linked to the question of proletarian revolution.

The organization’s name has been changed from C.A.P. to the Revolutionary Communist League (M-L-M), because we, are Revolutionaries and anti-revisionists as opposed to reformists. As Lenin said ’The approach of a great storm is felt everywhere. All classes are in a state of ferment and preparation.” “Revolutionary” is to denote our fighting spirit and fighting organization! And that we hold to Marx’s tenet that only proletarian revolution can bring socialism.

“Communist League”, because this was the name of the organization of the founders of scientific socialism, Marx and Engels. “Communist” because Lenin said in 1917, “We must call ourselves the Communist Party–just as Marx and Engels called themselves. The name ’Social-Democracy’ is scientifically incorrect, as Marx frequently pointed out. . .From capitalism mankind can pass directly only to socialism, i.e., to the social ownership of the means of production and the distribution of products according to the amount of work performed by each individual. Our Party looks farther ahead: socialism must inevitably evolve gradually into communism, upon the banner of which is inscribed the motto, ’From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.’ (Lenin, CW, Vol. 24, pp. 55-91).

“League”, because this best characterizes our development historically which was the joining together of different organizations. As a pre-party formation we must continue to struggle to build a revolutionary organization based on democratic centralism, and see as our most important task in this period to deepen our study in order to firmly grasp Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought, the science of revolution!!


The main organization of the German workers’ movement of the 1830’s was the League of the Just. This secret organization was formed by German emigrants in Paris in 1836. Engels had already been in contact with the League circle in London and both he and Marx respected the League for its militancy and recognized its importance as a worker’s organization. At this time, however, the League was under the influence of the line of the Utopian communists and anarchists, particularly Wilhelm Weitling, whose line was that the lumpen-proletariat was the leading revolutionary force in society (and the revolution would come spontaneously) and there was no need for preparatory work, especially no need for political education of the working class. Marx and Engels were unwilling to unite with this harmful line, and therefore did not join with these workers until that line was abandoned by the League. They therefore made an intermediate step, setting up the Communist Correspondence Committee, a network of communists, to conduct propaganda among the ranks of the German communists and to win the advanced over to the principles of scientific socialism. The Communist Correspondence Committee held meetings and exchanged vital analysis of the movement with working class militants in England, France, and Germany, and in particular they corresponded with the sections of the League of the Just. And with this line struggle, eventually succeeded in winning the League closer to a scientific line.

Early in 1847, based on the intense ideological struggle between Weitlings’ brand of Utopian communism and anarchism and the scientific socialism founded by Marx and Engels, a congress was held in London, which Engels and Wilhelm Wolff attended representing the Communist Correspondence Committee, and this congress transformed the League of the Just into the Communist League, and reorganized its structure along the lines of democratic centralism (though it was necessary for the League to remain secret). Their first articles of rules reflected Marx and Engels views in that, “The aim of the League is the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, the rule of the proletariat, the abolition of the bid, bourgeois society based on class antagonisms, and the foundation of a new society without private property.” (Quoted by Engels ’On the History of the Communist League’, MESW, p. 440)

The second congress of the Communist League discussed the principles of scientific socialism for several days in a presentation by Marx and Engels, and at the end of this congress Marx and Engels were mandated to draft a statement of principles for the League, Marx sent the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” to London at the end of January, 1846.

The Manifesto was published as the platform of the Communist League, a worker’s organization. This manifesto outlined the historical mission of the proletariat in ushering in a new epoch in the history of mankind, the overthrow of capitalism and the building of socialism and communism, under the leadership of the Communist Party. But the Communist League was hunted by the police until finally the central committee itself was arrested in Cologne. After 18 months imprisonment, they were tried in October, 1852, ending in the imprisonment of seven comrades. Immediately after the sentencing, the League was formally dissolved by the remaining members.

We also want to make reference to Engels on the importance of the name “Communist” in distinguishing Communists from Utopian schemes of socialism. Engels says, “Yet, when it was written, we could not have called it ’Socialist’ Manifesto. By ’socialist’, in 1847, were understood, on the one hand, the adherents of the various Utopian systems: Owenites in England, Fourierists in France, both of them already reduced to the position of mere sects, and gradually dying out; on the other hand, the most multifarious social quacks. who, by all manners of tinkering, professed to redress, without any danger to capital and profit, all sorts of social grievances; in both cases men outside the working-class movement, and looking rather to the ’educated’ classes for support. Whatever portion of the working class had become convinced of the insufficiency of mere political revolutions, and had proclaimed the necessity of a total rough-hewn, purely instinctive sort of communism; still, it touched the cardinal point and was powerful enough among the working class to produce the Utopian communism. . .Thus, socialism was, in 1847, a middle-class movement, communism, a working-class movement. There could be no doubt as to which of the two names we must take, moreover, we have, ever since, been far from repudiating it.” (Preface to 1888 English Ed. of Communist Manifesto).


Joseph Stalin said, ’Leninism is Marxism of the era of imperialism and the proletarian revolution.’ This is entirely correct. Since Lenin’s death, the world situation had undergone great changes. But the era has not changed. The fundamental principles of Leninism are not out dated; they remain the theoretical basis guiding our thinking today. (Chou-En-Lai, 10th National Congress of the C.P.C.).

In the historical conditions of the epoch of imperialism and proletarian revolution, Lenin carried Marxism forward to a new stage and showed all the oppressed classes and people the path along which they could really shake off capitalist imperialist enslavement and poverty.

There have been different ways of describing the distinctions between different ’epochs.’ Generally speaking, there is one way which is merely drivel, concocting and playing around with vague, ambiguous phrases to cover up the essence of the epoch. This is the old trick of the imperialists, the bourgeoisie and the revisionists in the workers’ movement. Then there is another way, which is to make a concrete analysis of the concrete situation with regard to the over-all class contradictions and class struggle, putting forward strictly scientific definitions, and thus bringing the essence of the epoch thoroughly to light. This is the work of every serious Marxist. (Ibid.)

On the features that distinguish an epoch, Lenin said: “We are speaking here of big historical epochs; in every epoch there are, and there will be, separate, partial movements sometimes forward, at other times backwards; there are, and there will be, various deviations from the average type and average tempo of the movements. We cannot know how fast and how successfully certain historical movements of the given epoch will develop. But we can and do know which class occupies a central position in this or that epoch and determines its main content, the main direction of its development, the main characteristics of the historical situation in the given epoch, etc.” (“Under a False Flag”, CW, Vol. 21, p. 125).

Only on this, i.e., by taking into consideration first and foremost the fundamental distinctive features of different “epochs” (and not of individual episodes in the history of different countries) can we correctly work out our tactics. . .(Ibid.)

Lenin always demanded that we examine the concrete process of historical development on the basis of class analysis, instead of talking vaguely about “society in general” or “progress in general.” We Marxists must not base proletarian policy merely on certain passing events or minute political changes, but on the over-all contradictions and class struggle of whole historical epoch. This is a basic theoretical position of Marxists. It was by taking a firm stand on this position that Lenin, in the new period of class changes, in the new historical period, came to the conclusion that the hope of humanity lay entirely with the victory of the proletariat and that the proletariat must prepare itself to win victory in this great revolutionary battle and establish a proletarian dictatorship. After the October Revolution, at the 7th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) in 1918, Lenin stated: “We must begin with the general basis of the development of commodity production, the transition to capitalism and the transformation of capitalism into imperialism. Thereby we shall be theoretically taking up and consolidating a position from which nobody can dislodge us. From this follows an equally inevitable conclusion: the era of social revolution is beginning. (“Report on Revising the Program and Name of the Party,” SW, 1943, p. 317.)

This is Lenin’s conclusion, a conclusion which up to the present still requires deep consideration by all Marxists.

The formulation of revolutionary Marxists that ours is the epoch of imperialism and proletarian revolution, the epoch of the victory of Socialism and Communism is irrefutable, because it grasps with complete correctness the basic features of our present great epoch. The formulation that Leninism is the continuation and development of revolutionary Marxism in this great epoch and that it is the theory and policy of proletarian revolution and proletarian dictatorship is also irrefutable, because it is precisely Leninism that exposed the contradictions in our great epoch – the contradictions between the working class and monopoly capital, the contradictions among the imperialist countries, the contradictions between the colonial and semi-colonial peoples and imperialism, and the contradictions between the socialist countries, where the proletariat has triumphed, and the imperialist countries. Leninism has, therefore, become our banner of victory. (Essential Works of Marxism, “Long Live Leninism”, p. 523-528.)


We are proposing our name to be changed to Revolutionary Communist League with the words Marxist-Leninist-Mao Tse Tung Thought, in brackets. When Lenin proposed that “Bolshevik” in brackets be the suffix of the name of the Russian Communist Party, he pointed out that the name Bolshevik had “acquired rights of citizenship in the political life of Russia” and throughout the world, as distinguished from the opportunism of the Mensheviks.

The purpose was that the RCP (B) “must make the most decisive, sharp, clear and unambiguous statement that is possible to the effect that it has broken off connections with that old official socialism, for which purpose a change in the name of the Party will be the most effective means.” (“Report on the review of the programme and on Changing the Name of the Party,” 1918, Lenin, SW in 3 volumes Vol. 2 pp. 603-604.)

On the other hand, the most important argument in favor of changing the name of the Party was that ”up to now the old official socialist parties in all the leading European countries have still not got rid of their intoxication with social-chauvinism and social-patriotism that led to the complete collapse of European official socialism during the present war, so that up to now almost all official socialist parties have been a real hindrance to the working class revolutionary socialist movement, a real encumbrance to it.” (Ibid, p. 605)

The suffix “M-L” has been used to distinguish between genuine Communists organizations and parties and modern revisionism. But recently we have seen too many parties and organizations with the suffix “M-L”, using that suffix as a cover for attacking Comrade Mao Tse Tung, and not recognizing the important contributions Comrade Mao Tse Tung has made to Marxism-Leninism, many do not understand that in the present period it is Mao Tse Tung Thought that represents the line of demarcation between Modern Revisionists and genuine Marxist-Leninists. Recent events in China, in terms of the whole struggle against the capitalist-roaders and bad elements who with their reactionary slogans in a vain attempt to undermine the mighty dictatorship of the proletariat, advanced: “We believe in Marxism-Leninism”. . .“Those scholars who emasculate Marxism-Leninism, what we want is genuine Marxism-Leninism”. . .“for the sake of genuine Marxism-Leninism” (Hsinhua News release). These are the slogans of the revisionists who seek to deny the fundamental importance of Mao Tse Tung Thought and the revolutionary proletarian line of Comrade Mao Tse Tung, and we must constantly be on guard to smash its ugly head when it raises up.

We are convinced that one of the clearest ways for us to draw the line today is to use this suffix (M-L-M) and in our practice continuously uphold and defend the banner of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought while uniting with other Marxist-Leninists and advanced forces to build the Anti-Revisionist Vanguard Communist Party, rooted in the principles of Bolshevism, that will lead the working class and oppressed nationalities to make socialist revolution in the U.S.A.

To explain the meaning and importance of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought and why we propose its usage as a suffix for our name R.C.L. (M-L-M) rather than Marxist-Leninist, it is necessary to understand what Mao Tse Tung Thought is and how it must be applied as ”the acme of Marxism-Leninism in the present era” to the struggles in all countries against imperialism, Soviet Social-Imperialism, Modern Revisionism and all reaction. (“A Compass for the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution”, Mao Tse Tung, Talks at the Yenan Forum on Literature and Art, appendix, p. 80, Hongqi, Red Flag, #9, 1966)

In explaining the connection, the inextricable link of Leninism to Marxism, Comrade Stalin, answering questions from the Young Communist League, stated “.. .a brief remark about Marxism and Leninism. Such a formulation of the question might lead one to think that Marxism is one thing and Leninism another, that one can be a Leninist without being a Marxist. Such an idea cannot be regarded as correct. Leninism is not Lenin’s teaching minus Marxism. Leninism is Marxism of the epoch of imperialism and proletarian revolution. In other words, Leninism includes all that was taught by Marx plus Lenin’s new contribution to the treasury of Marxism, and what necessarily follows from all that was taught by Marx (teaching on the dictatorship of the proletariat, the peasant question, the national question, the Party, the question of the social roots of reformism, the question of the principal deviations in communism, and so forth). It would be better, therefore, to formulate the question in such a way as to speak of Marxism or of Leninism (which fundamentally are the same) and not of Marxism and Leninism.” (“The Tasks of the Young Communist League,” Stalin, CW.)

In the present period Mao Tse Tung Thought, has developed Marxism-Leninism to a new stage. Under the new conditions of struggles of the proletariat, oppressed people and nations against imperialism, Soviet Social imperialism, Modern Revisionism and all reaction. As a result capitalism in the Soviet Union, the concept of the three worlds has emerged in accordance, with reality and the scientific analysis of classes, since the rise of modern revisionism to state power, there no longer exists a Socialist camp and an imperialist camp. Today three worlds exist, and both interconnected and in contradiction to one another. The United States and the Soviet Union make up the First World. The developing countries in Asia, Afrika, Latin America and other regions make up the Third World. The developed countries between the two make up the Second World.

It has been the Thought of Mao Tse Tung and his proletarian revolutionary line, which has led a tit for tat battle against the revisionists at home and abroad who have tried to cut the core out of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought, that core being class struggle, proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat. Chairman Mao Tse Tung, the greatest Marxist-Leninist of our time has repeatedly stated, “never forget classes, class struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat. . .“and has deepened the teachings of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, adding the rich lessons learned in applying Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution. Contributing the concept of Mass line, New Democracy, the use and development of the concept Cultural Revolution – the consolidation of power necessary to defeat revisionism, and the theory of People’s War which is the application of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought to protracted revolutionary warfare plus new contributions to the understanding of dialectics. In reference to the great victory of the dictatorship of the proletariat in defeating the revisionist line of the capitalist roaders inside the Chinese Communist Party we must give special study to Chairman Mao’s theory on classes, class contradictions and class struggle in the period of socialism which sums up the following: “To have a correct understanding of classes and class struggle in the socialist period and firmly grasp the principal contradiction in socialist society is a fundamental question that concerns our getting a deep understanding of the character, target, tasks and prospects of the socialist revolution and correctly implementing the Party’s line and policies. To change the Party’s basic line, subvert the dictatorship of the proletariat and restore capitalism, the revisionists invariably obliterate class struggle and distort the principal contradiction in socialist society. In the course of his struggle against revisionism over the past more than 20 years, Chairman Mao has systematically, comprehensively and profoundly expounded class contradictions in socialist society. His teachings are a powerful ideological weapon for combating and preventing revisionism and consolidating the dictatorship of the proletariat. In the current struggle to counterattack the Right deviationist wind to reverse correct verdicts, we must redouble our efforts to study and have a good grasp of the series of directives given by Chairman Mao on class struggle in the socialist period so as to criticize the revisionist programme of taking the three directives as the key link’.” (Peking Review #17, p. 14, 1976.)

Comrade Mao Tse Tung has creatively and comprehensively inherited, defended and developed Marxism-Leninism and his Thought is the acme of Marxism-Leninism in the present era, the era when the colonies, semi-colonies, and neo-colonies are all rising up against imperialism, soviet social-imperialism and its lackies. “Similarly Mao Tse Tung Thought can only emerge in the present era in which imperialism is heading for total collapse and socialism is advancing to worldwide victory.” (Study Philosophy, Reprints from Peking Review, “How Engels Criticized Duhring’s Apriorism”, p. 6)

However, we must be aware of the class enemies who try to oppose Mao Tse Tung Thought by raising it in absolute terms “. . .Liu Shao-chi and swindlers like him kept changing their tactics in opposing Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought. At first they described Marxism-Leninism in absolute terms and negated the fact that Mao Tse Tung Thought is a development of Marxism-Leninism. After this tactic had failed, they in turn tried to make Mao Tse Tung Thought absolute and denied the fact that Mao Tse Tung Thought can develop continuously. The greatness of Chairman Mao lies precisely in the fact that he always stands in the van of history and continuously make his thought and practice advance together. Making Mao Tse Tung Thought absolute and solidified in itself is counter to Mao Tse Tung Thought. Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse Tung Thought has in no way exhausted truth but ceaselessly opens up roads to the knowledge of truth in the course of practice. Liu Shao-chi and the other swindlers superficially praised Mao Tse Tung Thought, but actually disparaged and slandered it; superficially they wanted to establish the absolute authority of Chairman Mao, but actually they were trying to establish their own absolute authority. We must thoroughly expose their vicious and treacherous tactics!” (Study Philosophy, Reprints from Peking Review, p. 6) “Cast away illusions, prepare for struggle.”