Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line

Defend the International Communist Movement

First Published: FORUM for Marxist-Leninist Inner-Party Struggle, No. 3, May 1964.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Sam Richards 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.

It is clear from Khrushchov’s recent speech in Budapest and from Suslov’s report to the Central Committee of the CPSU, that Khrushchov is concretely planning how best to expel the CPC from the International Communist Movement. He is forced into this position because revisionism has for some time been losing ground all over the world; the resolute anti-imperialist line of the CPC (and other parties) have been integrated with unwavering support for all national liberation struggles actually taking place, and is therefore winning conviction and support on all sides; whereas Khrushchov’s verbal support for anti-imperialist struggle has been contradicted by his capitulationist practice, and so more and more people are beginning to understand t hat Khrushchov sees peaceful co-existence and anti-imperialist struggle as incompatible, that the slogan of peaceful co-existence is in practise being used to cover up capitulation to imperialism. Every day it becomes clearer that Khrushchov is a fraud.

Naturally Khrushchov (like our own revisionists in King St.) is not happy about this trend. He must therefore work to achieve a split in the shortest possible space of time, in a vain attempt to rally and browbeat his dwindling forces. All Marxist-Leninists on the other hand must work hard against a split, must make every effort to preserve the unity of the International Communist Movement, while fearlessly fighting for a correct line. To succeed in this task we need to assess carefully how the CPSU leadership may act. The most likely move is to convene a conference of Parties with known revisionist leaderships, in fact to split the movement by pretending that it is already split. Alternatively the CPSU might call a meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties as suggested by Suslov. At this meeting the aim would be to present a statement to which the CPC and other Marxist-Leninist Parties could not agree.

The question is, what can we in Britain do to prevent Khrushchov and Co. from pushing matters to this point? In the event of an international conference being called, Marxist-Leninists in Britain must demand an Extraordinary Party Conference on the lines proposed by Forum No.2 (April 1964), that is observing the principles of: (1) full discussion at Branch level without any kind of lead or interference from higher committees; (2) full opening of the Party press for discussion; (3) delegates from every Branch and only from Branches; (4) the conference to have before it a resolution affirming the supreme need for a united International Communist Movement; (5) the conference to elect delegates on the spot.

Some comrades will immediately ask, “Why these most unusual demands?” The plain fact is that there has never been in the CPGB full discussion of the differences within the movement. No attempt was made after the November 1960 Moscow Conference to get the membership involved in studying the 81 Parties’ Statement, and in the last 18 months the leadership has used every unscrupulous device (e.g. “We do not wish to continue the public polemic”), to discourage study, to discourage discussion of the differences, to clamp down on any attempt to explain the Chinese viewpoint while propounding in every article and speech their own revisionist theses. The result is that by and large the Party membership are in ignorance of the matters of principle involved , and having been anyway reared on many years of “British Road” type social-democratic policies, are thoroughly confused.

It remains an urgent task to get the Party membership involved in the study of (1) how to fight imperialism and so win peace, (2) how to struggle for socialist revolution in Britain. All Marxist-Leninists in the Party will see the need to raise demands in their Branches aimed at heightening rank-and-file consciousness of the importance of this question. Adapting themselves to recent developments they will demand, for example (1) that the Party press publishes the evidence on which the CPC claims that Khrushchov merely pays lip-service to national liberation, (2) the evidence for the assertion that the CPC is putting forward racist policies, (3) that the whole question of the differences be re-opened throughout the Party. Alongside these demands Marxist-Leninists will take the initiative in organising informal study circles in which recent statements by revisionists can be studied alongside Marxist-Leninist statements.