ARTICLE 5:
HOW TO DEFEND BOLSHEVISM - HOW TO DEFEND LENIN - HOW TO DEFEND STALIN
AND
HOW THE TURNCOATS TURNED?-EXAMPLE OF COMMUNIST PARTY OF GREAT BRITAIN!
(FROM “BRITISH ROAD TO SOCIALISM”- http://directdemocracy4u.uk/british-r2s)
CONTENTS
4.1. A FEW POINTS OF ONE’S HISTORY TO REMEMBER:
4.1.1: ONE CAN NOT TURN BOLSHEVISM, AND THE LEADERS WHO FORMULATED BOLSHEVISM INTO A MATTER OF DISCUSSION:
4.1.2: AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR THE TITOISTS WERE THE ENEMIES OF COMMUNISM AND ASSASSINS AND SPIES AT THE SERVICE OF AMERICAN AND BRITISH IMPERIALISM:
4.1.3: THE ROTTEN LIBERALISM TOWARDS THE TROTSKYITES, AND THE TIOTISTS WHO WERE THE NEW TROTSKYITES WOULD LEAD TO DEFEAT:
5.1: CPGB POLICY ON TITOISTS AFTER STALIN:
5.2: CPGB POLICY ON STALIN AFTER STALIN:
5.3. CPGB ON THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE TWENTIETH CONGRESS:
CONCLUSION
INTERNATIONALISM AND ONE’S HISTORY (OR INTERNATIONALISM AS THE BASIS OF ALL COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES):
“Slutsky assumes that in their appraisal of the Lefts in the West, Lenin and the Bolsheviks were guided by their own factional considerations and that, consequently, the Russian Bolsheviks sacrificed the great cause of the international revolution to the interests of their faction. It scarcely needs proof that there can be nothing more base and disgusting than such an assumption. There can be nothing more base, for even the basest of Mensheviks are beginning to understand that the Russian revolution is not a private cause of the Russians; that, on the contrary, it is the cause of the working class of the whole world, the cause of the world proletarian revolution. There can be nothing more disgusting, for even the professional slanderers in the Second International are beginning to understand that the consistent and thoroughly revolutionary internationalism of the Bolsheviks is a model of proletarian internationalism for the workers of all countries.
Is it not obvious that people who regard these questions as "factional" questions fully expose themselves as base and degenerate elements?”
(Stalin; Some Questions Concerning the History of Bolshevism; Letter to the Editorial Board of the Magazine "Proletarskaya Revolutsia" 1931;The magazine Proletarskaya Revolutsia, No. 6 (113), 1931)
“The Information Bureau’s resolution was a powerful call for revolutionary vigilance. It was a reminder that those who sink into the mire of anti-Sovietism run the danger of falling into bourgeois nationalism; a danger against which Comrade Stalin warned already twenty-two years ago-(in 1927.mn):
“He is an internationalist,” Comrade Stalin says, “who unreservedly, unhesitatingly and unconditionally is prepared to defend the U.S.S.R., because the U.S.S.R. is the base of the world revolutionary movement, and it is impossible to defend, to advance this revolutionary movement without defending the U.S.S.R. For he who thinks of defending the world revolutionary movement without, and against, the U.S.S.R., goes against revolution, and is bound to slide into the camp of the enemies of revolution. (J. V. Stalin, Works, Vol. X, p. 51.)” (Meeting of the Information Bureau of Communist Parties in Hungary in the latter half of November 1949; Published by the journal “for a lasting peace, for a people’s democracy!” 1950. Gh. Gheorghiu-dej—Communist Party of Yugoslavia in the Power of Assassins and Spies)
The whole matter of comprehension of BR2S, is based on the comprehension of internationalism, on the comprehension of the strategy and tactics of the world revolution, of comprehension of our history.
One does not become a communist revolutionary, an internationalist, a liberator of one's own nation and the liberator and defender of oppressed nations through the path of revolutionary phrase mongering. One becomes a true communist revolutionary, a true internationalist only by developing and applying a strategy for world revolution that will provide for the fastest and least painful way of achieving the world revolution, fastest and least painful way of defeating the world bourgeois, of defeating imperialism.
It is thus that after October (November) Revolution one cardinal rule of being a communist revolutionary, an internationalist was to take up the defence of the Soviet Union, the defence of building socialism-communism in the Soviet Union as the most important duty of all communists and proletarians of all countries - even if at the expense of your own country’s revolution (unless of course your country was in a position to provide more for the world revolution, was able to provide more for the peoples of the world, and this concretely, practically, not as a possibility, especially not as a policy to damage the world revolution)! For the very existence of the Soviet Union and its building of socialism-communism was the best way of speeding the world revolution, speeding the defeat of the world bourgeoisie. It is thus that having a correct plan of building socialism-communism and applying this correct policy is also a cardinal issue of the victory of the world revolution, of internationalism. After the Second World War, the most important duty of the communists and proletarians was still the defence of Soviet Union that is building communism, and thus was a base of the world revolution. To this was added the defence of the People’s Democracies that are building socialism and the defence of the People’s Democracies that are building the conditions to build socialism.
With the Soviet Union that is building communism we are free, we can build socialism, we can build the conditions to build socialism, and we can make revolutions, we can win the fight for democracy and for peace, we can be victorious; with the Soviet Union that is not building communism, with the Soviet Union that is not fighting for the world revolution, we are not free, we are defeated, without it we are, the whole world is, oppressed by the imperial powers. Barbarity becomes the order of the day!
In 1952, with the Soviet Union that is building communism, and with the British proletariat in power and colonial peoples of British Empire becoming members of the “British” Commonwealth of Nations led by the British proletariat in power, those colonies and Britain becomes free together; and the world imperialism is sent to its death bed; separated from a Soviet Union that is building communism, separated from this unity of free nations of the British Commonwealth, Britain remains a subject of USA and Britain’s colonial peoples become subjects of Britain and USA. BR2S, its approach to achieve power in Britain and its approach to liberate the colonies is the fastest and least painful way of achieving revolutionary power in Britain and in the colonies, of the liberation of the peoples of British Empire, including British people, and thus it is the best way of contributing and the way of contributing the most to the least painful and fastest way of achieving the world revolution.
Such was the approach of the program. It was in complete agreement with the Stalin plan of the world revolution. Critics do not agree with the BR2S of 1952, for they are not true communist revolutionaries, that is, they are not true internationalists!
Critics do not agree with not only the BR2S but all other R2S programs that were formulated by our parties in cooperation with Stalin and the CPSU, for they are not true communist revolutionaries, that is, they are not true internationalists!
4.1. A FEW POINTS OF ONE’S HISTORY TO REMEMBER:
J. Stalin dies on the 5th of March 1953. In August of 1953, at the meeting of the Supreme Soviets, Comrade Malenkov who has just in 1952, at the 19th Congress of the CPSU presented a summary of the teachings of J. Stalin on the economic laws of socialism gives a speech regarding the economic laws of socialism and thus the building of socialism-communism in the USSR (and in all the people’s democracies) that is clearly Trotskyite. A line that will make the building of communism impossible and thus will destroy the world communism is proposed.
It seems that all, including Comrade Molotov has forgotten J. Stalin and his teachings!
J. Stalin dies on the 5th of March 1953. In August 1953 steps to slow down the industrialization of all the people’s democracies, starting with the East German People’s democratic Republic is formulated and applied. This is followed by the same being done in all the people’s democracies.
It seems that all, including Comrade Molotov has forgotten J. Stalin and his teachings!
J. Stalin dies on the 5th of March 1953. In 1953 August steps to talk about the cult of the individual, clearly trying to blame J. Stalin is being talked and written about.
It seems that all, including Comrade Molotov has forgotten J. Stalin and his teachings!
J. Stalin dies on the 5th of March 1953. Beginning of 1954 Tito, the spy of USA and Britain, The murderer of our comrades, the destroyer of people’s democracy in Yugoslavia, the mass murderer of the Greek people, organizer of spying activities in the USSR and all the people’s democracies, formulator of Trotskyite form of building socialism, that is the destruction of socialism, is rehabilitated with all others in the USSR and in the People’s Democracies.
It seems that all, including Comrade Molotov has forgotten J. Stalin and his teachings!
J. Stalin dies on the 5th of March 1953. By the end of 1956 all the practice of building socialism is changed by the CPSU, outright Trotskyite adventurist methods are applied with all the plans of building communism of J. Stalin with all the abiding of economic laws of building socialism being abandoned. New and many and varied ways of building socialism including that of Tito are declared valid and begun to be applied in all the people’s democracies - China and Albania contributing profusely. (Particularly see Congress of Communist Party of Chine, of 1956)
It seems that all, including Comrade Molotov has forgotten J. Stalin and his teachings!
4.1.1: ONE CAN NOT TURN BOLSHEVISM, AND THE LEADERS WHO FORMULATED BOLSHEVISM INTO A MATTER OF DISCUSSION:
“I cannot refrain from protesting against the publication of Slutsky's article in your magazine as an article for discussion, ….. the question whether Lenin was or was not a real Bolshevik, cannot be made into a subject of discussion.
That means that you intend once again to draw people into a discussion on questions which are axioms of Bolshevism. It means that you are again thinking of converting the subject of Lenin's Bolshevism from an axiom into a problem requiring "further analysis." Why? On what grounds?
Fraudulent manoeuvres must be branded as such and not made a subject of discussion.”
(Stalin; Some Questions Concerning the History of Bolshevism; Letter to the Editorial Board of the Magazine "Proletarskaya Revolutsia" 1931;The magazine Proletarskaya Revolutsia, No. 6 (113), 1931)
The attack on Stalin was a clearly Trotskyite activity for the basis of Trotskyism is enmity of Stalin. This is visible in its Titoite version too. And behind this enmity lies the open enmity towards building of communism in the USSR-and people’s democracies.
Any compromise in this issue is a compromise in our line and thus is a first step in the destruction of our cause.
Who would not know this?
Trotskyite traitors. That is who!
4.1.2: AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR THE TITOISTS WERE THE ENEMIES OF COMMUNISM AND ASSASSINS AND SPIES AT THE SERVICE OF AMERICAN AND BRITISH IMPERIALISM:
“On the basis of irrefutable facts testifying that the Tito clique have definitely swung over to fascism and deserted to the camp of world imperialism, the Information Bureau of Communist and Workers’ Parties considers that:
Tito, Rankovic, Kardelj, Djilas, Pijade, Gosnjak, Maslaric, Bebler, Mrazavic, Vukmanavic, Koca Popovic, Kidric, Neskovic, Zlatic, Velebit, Kolishevski and the other members of this espionage group are enemies of the working class and the peasantry, enemies of the peoples of Yugoslavia.
This espionage group represent not the will of the peoples of Yugoslavia, but the will of the American and British imperialists, and have therefore betrayed the interests of the country and destroyed the political sovereignty and economic independence of Yugoslavia.
The “Communist Party of Yugoslavia,” as at present constituted, having fallen into the hands of enemies of the people, assassins and spies, has forfeited the right to be called a Communist party and is merely an apparatus for carrying out the espionage assignments of the Tito- Kardelj-Rankovic-Djilas clique.”(Meeting of the Information Bureau of Communist Parties in Hungary in the latter half of November 1949; Published by the journal “for a lasting peace, for a people’s democracy!” 1950. Communist Party Of Yugoslavia in the Power Of Assassins and Spies — Resolution of the Information Bureau.)
4.1.3: THE ROTTEN LIBERALISM TOWARDS THE TROTSKYITES, AND THE TIOTISTS WHO WERE THE NEW TROTSKYITES WOULD LEAD TO DEFEAT:
“Trotskyism has long since ceased to be a faction of communism. As a matter of fact, Trotskyism is the advanced detachment of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, which is fighting against communism, against the Soviet regime, against the building of socialism in the U.S.S.R.
That is why liberalism in the attitude towards Trotskyism, even though the latter is shattered and camouflaged, is blockheadedness bordering on crime, on treason to the working class.
That is why the attempts of certain "writers" and "historians" to smuggle disguised Trotskyist rubbish into our literature must meet with a determined rebuff from Bolsheviks.
That is why we cannot permit a literary discussion with the Trotskyist smugglers.
But what do the Voloseviches care about the facts of Lenin's life and work? The Voloseviches write in order, by decking themselves out in Bolshevik colours, to smuggle in their anti-Leninist contraband, to utter lies about the Bolsheviks and to falsify the history of the Bolshevik Party.” (Stalin, Some Questions Concerning the History of Bolshevism, Letter to the Editorial Board of the Magazine "Proletarskaya Revolutsia" 1931)
“As you see, the editorial board made a mistake in permitting a discussion with a falsifier of the history of our Party.
What could have impelled the editorial board to take this wrong road?
I think that they were impelled to take that road by rotten liberalism, which has spread to some extent among a section of the Bolsheviks. Some Bolsheviks think that Trotskyism is a faction of communism — one which makes mistakes, it is true, which does many foolish things, is sometimes even anti-Soviet, but which, nevertheless, is a faction of communism. Hence a certain liberalism in the attitude towards the Trotskyists and Trotskyist-minded people. It scarcely needs proof that such a view of Trotskyism is deeply mistaken and harmful. As a matter of fact, Trotskyism has long since ceased to be a faction of communism. As a matter of fact, Trotskyism is the advanced detachment of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, which is fighting against communism, against the Soviet regime, against the building of socialism in the U.S.S.R.”
(Stalin; Some Questions Concerning the History of Bolshevism; Letter to the Editorial Board of the Magazine "Proletarskaya Revolutsia" 1931;The magazine Proletarskaya Revolutsia, No. 6 (113), 1931)
“There can be no doubt that the chief role in this dastardly work will be assigned to the old spies and agents-provocateur of the Tito clique. They will endeavour to utilize people like Rajk, as well as every weakness and fissure in the ranks of the party and the government service, and malcontents, nationalist elements and people with dubious pasts.
We must constantly bear in mind, as Bolshevism teaches, that it is necessary to put an end to the opportunist complacency which arises from the false assumption that as our strength grows the enemy becomes more tame and inoffensive. This assumption is fundamentally fallacious. We must remember that the more hopeless the position of our enemies becomes, the more readily will they resort to “extreme methods”.
Let us raise still higher the victorious banner of proletarian internationalism, by fostering devotion to the Soviet Union—the first socialist country, the foundation of the world revolutionary movement and the main bulwark of the struggle for the peace and liberty of peoples—to the great Bolshevik Party, the leading force in the world revolutionary movement, and to the genius who is the teacher of labouring humanity and the leader of the struggle of the peoples for peace and Socialism, Comrade Stalin.”(Meeting of the Information Bureau of Communist Parties in Hungary in the latter half of November 1949; Published by the journal “for a lasting peace, for a people’s democracy!” 1950. Gh. Gheorghiu-dej—Communist Party of Yugoslavia in the Power of Assassins and Spies)
5.1: CPGB POLICY ON TITOISTS AFTER STALIN:
A) “We were shocked to learn that a number of those arrested in the Soviet Union as traitors to the people were in fact devoted patriots and Communists; and that a number of those tried and convicted as traitors in the people’s democracies were the victims of deliberate provocations and fabricated evidence.
It is clear now that on the basis of false information we, in all good faith, made a number of mistakes, as in our support for the accusations against the Yugoslav Communist leaders as traitors, and our condemnation of a number of those falsely convicted.”
(Lessons of the Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U.; Resolution of the Executive Committee of the Communist Party; 13 May 1956)
B) “The restoration of state and Party relations between the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, with the Soviet withdrawal of unfounded charges against the Yugoslav leaders, was an important step.
But while boldness and initiative were shown by the Soviet Union in the case of Yugoslavia, there was not the same speed in overcoming errors in the relations between the Soviet Union and other East European socialist states.” (Communist Party of Great Britain; Political Resolution; 25th Congress Report, 19-22 April 1957)
5.2: CPGB POLICY ON STALIN AFTER STALIN:
A) “It was shown how the fact that Stalin had progressively in this period put himself above the Party and above the state, had led to the belittling of the Party and the people, to serious lapses in the democratic functioning of the Party, to violations of socialist law and grave injustices to loyal comrades, to a certain stultification in intellectual life, and to some serious mistakes in home and foreign policy.
The Soviet leaders at the Congress courageously laid bare these mistakes, and have taken resolute steps to correct the mistakes, to repair injustices done, and to ensure that they cannot recur.
Following the report and discussions at the closed session of our Twenty-Fourth Congress, a whole series of discussions on the Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U. have taken place throughout our Party organisations.
It is quite wrong to refuse to face up to the errors and injustices revealed, to refuse to acknowledge them, to try in any way to cover them up. If that is done we cannot appreciate the important steps already taken in the U.S.S.R. to correct them and to repair them. If we refuse to accept and acknowledge weaknesses, we can never learn from them, nor appreciate the positive influence of their exposure and correction.”
(Lessons of the Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U.; Resolution of the Executive Committee of the Communist Party; 13 May 1956)
B) “It was on this tremendous positive background that the Congress carried forward the correction of the errors and distortions of the later years of Stalin’s life, and the crimes to which they gave rise.
Our Draft Resolution makes a brief examination and estimation of Stalin.
In the later period of his life, Stalin increasingly put himself above the Party and the state, leading to the belittling of the Party and the people, to serious lapses in the democratic functioning of the Party, particularly regarding collective leadership, to violations of Socialist law and grave injustices to loyal comrades, to a stultification in intellectual life, and to some serious mistakes in home and foreign policy.
(Political Report by John Gollan; Twenty-Fifth Congress of the Communist Party of Great Britain; April 19-22 1957)
5.3. CPGB ON THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE TWENTIETH CONGRESS:
“It took steps to overcome the consequences of the cult of the individual. These consequences included mistakes and failures in the operation of State and Party democracy, unjust treatment of a number of national minorities and a number of Jewish people, breaking of Socialist legality, and errors in the relations between Socialist states. Most vigorous efforts are being made to put right all these errors and injustices.
The errors and abuses which were revealed came as a profound shock to our Party which rightly condemned them as alien to Socialism.” (Communist Party of Great Britain; Political Resolution; 25th Congress Report, 19-22 April 1957)
During and after the Second World War, open Trotskyists were more or less finished. With the victory of USSR with the building of socialism in the USSR and USSR moving openly towards building communism, with all the people's democracies joining in this endeavour, Trotskyism had to assume different forms. One of these was Titoism!
The actions and the policies of Titoists are in complete agreement with Trotskyism. Enmity of USSR and Stalin; spying and working for imperialist powers to defeat and divide and destroy USSR; declaration that USSR acts as an imperialist power, that USSR is an oppressor of other nations, that USSR does not recognise the equality of nations; in the same fashion CPSU, does not recognise the equality of communist parties and the oppresses other communist Parties, CPSU imposes its views on them, and those views are wrong; that Yugoslav Party liberated Yugoslavia on their own, that USSR did not liberate Yugoslavia and Yugoslav people; that USSR's way of building socialism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism is wrong, and that exploitation of workers in the USSR carries on for there is a bureaucratic cast in power; that they have a new and correct way of building socialism, and they can build socialism independent of USSR and they would not need USA either; that they do not need to belong to either of the camps; that there is a Yugoslav way of building socialism that is totally independent of the USSR and USA and it is the Yugoslav way of building socialism; and that they, unlike USSR, will finish off all exploitation and all inequality in Yugoslavia in a year or two.
This declaration of Yugoslav way of building socialism that is independent of USSR and distinct from the Lenin-Stalin way of building socialism-communism led to nothing but the loss of independence of Yugoslavia to USA economically, finantially, militarily, diplomatically; it led Yugoslavia to siding with the camp of war, the camp of imperialism dominated by the USA; it meant keeping the urban and rural bourgeoisie alive and declaring that one is building socialism while the bourgeois classes and their property, their commodity and their market are kept alive instead of being destroyed. It is a declaration in practice that socialism cannot be built, that bourgeoisie cannot be gotten rid of, by “proving” that socialism cannot do anything better than the bourgeoisie. This is Trotsky's theory in a new form that is hidden with the declarations of building socialism-in order to destroy it better.
The fact that Titoist leaders and parties are nothing more than spies and assassins at the service of the American and British imperialism has been exposed, the fact that the theories, strategies and tactics formulated and all the lies created by Titosits can only lead to defeat has already been exposed-that is by 1948.
Yet, CPGB leaders go along with the leaders of the CPSU who declare these spies and assassins as their comrades, and declare the Tito and gang their comrades.
To transform the theory, the strategy, the tactics of the world communist movement which have been proved in practice, to transform the very life of leaders of world communist movement who led the formulation and application of these theories, strategies and tactics into a subject of attack, a subject of belittlement let alone a subject of discussion, has only one real aim and has only one real result: to smuggle in confusion into our ranks, to create confusion in our ranks and thus to destroy Bolshevism and the parties and states of the proletarians. To destroy the line of building socialism-communism of Lenin and Stalin, and thus to finish off the building of socialism-communism.
Yet, CPGB leaders go along with the leaders of the CPSU who declare all the things they declare about Stalin and thus about our theory, strategy and tactics, about our practice.
It is thus that CPGB turns Trotskyite and Titoist, helps the diversion of USSR form building communism, and thus instead of defending the USSR, helps dig the grave of the USSR.
It is thus that CPGB turns Trotskyite and Titoist, helps the diversion of European Peoples' Democracies from building socialism, and thus instead of defending the European Peoples' Democracies helps dig the grave of the European Peoples' Democracies.
It is thus that CPGB turns Trotskyite and Titoist, helps the diversion of Albania and Asian Peoples' Democracies from building the grounds to build socialism, and thus instead of defending Albania and the Asian Peoples' Democracies helps dig the grave of Albania and the Asian Peoples' Democracies.
It is thus that CPGB turns Trotskyite and Titoist, helps the diversion of French, Italian, American and all other parties from being consistent fighters for Peoples' Democracy, thus instead of defending the world communist parties that are not in power helps dig the grave of these world communist parties and their struggle for people's democracy.
It is thus that CPGB turns Trotskyite and Titoist, and digs its own grave as a party of communists; it is thus that CPGB turns Trotskyite and Titoist and digs the grave of BR2S, the grave of the rule of the British workers in Britain and the British Commonwealth!
It is thus that CPGB turns Trotskyite and Titoist, and BR2S, its program of revolution, its program of victory, its program of people's democracy is destroyed.
That a defence of Titoism is an attack on Bolshevism, an attack on building socialism-communism in the USSR, an attack on world revolution and internationalism should have been clear to all the Bolsheviks.
That if such an attack by Titoists and in defence of the Titoists is not repulsed and Bolshevism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of world revolution, that is internationalism is not defended when these attacks materialised, this would lead to the defeat of Bolshevism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of world revolution, that is internationalism, to the defeat of the USSR and people's democracies and all other revolutions. To the defeat of the world communism!
That an attack on Stalin and Stalinism is an attack on Bolshevism, an attack on building socialism-communism in the USSR, an attack on world revolution and internationalism should have been clear to all the Bolsheviks.
That if such an attack by Titoists and in defence of the Titoists on Stalin is not repulsed and Bolshevism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of world revolution, that is internationalism is not defended, this would lead to the defeat of Bolshevism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism, the Lenin-Stalin plan of world revolution, that is internationalism, to the defeat of the USSR and people's democracies and all other revolutions. To the defeat of the world communism!
These two changes first the surrender to Titoists and the second, taking part on the attacks and discussions on Stalin (and one leads to the other) have paved the way for the total defeat of world communism and the total victory of world Trotskyism, “the advanced detachment of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie” (Stalin). It is also known that by 1952 almost all national sections of the world big bourgeoisie have turned counter revolutionary!
These two changes have changed the interpretation of everything regarding our theory, our strategy, our tactics, and our history. What is socialism and how does one build socialism and communism; what is the plan of building socialism-communism; what is the world revolution and how does one work to achieve the speediest victory of the world revolution; what is internationalism; what is the revolutionary power of the proletarians. Who is a Bolshevik and who is a Trotskyite enemy of the people: Tito the unjustly treated comrade, and Stalin the criminal who unjustly treated Tito?
Interpretation of BR2S, including the changes to BR2S is based on these decisive changes, and yet none of the critics who are taken in by Trotskyism even notice this simple fact of life, and are driven into discussion on the meaning of being revolutionary without any reference to these changes.
How to be revolutionary without comprehending and defending Lenin-Stalin plan of building socialism-communism; how to be revolutionary without comprehending and defending Lenin-Stalin plan of achieving the world revolution?
Without any consideration given to these issues discus until you drop and the world communism is defeated comprehensively-and carry on discussing even now so that the defeat is never stopped and never reversed!
How can one remain a revolutionary if one is a participant of the destruction of the plan of building communism in the USSR? And whoever takes part in this takes part in the destruction of the world revolution, and each and every possible revolution. How can one remain a revolutionary if one is a participant of the destruction of the plan of achieving world revolution, of the destruction of internationalism?
Impossible!
Yet critics by defending violent revolution and the phrase mongering about the Soviet forms of proletarian dictatorship as the only revolutionary form of proletarian dictatorship and what's not, hope that they shall become revolutionaries. The fact is that by instigating a discussion on these issues which have been resolved and instead of the essential issues, the critics by their views and the issues they discuss within the bounds of their Trotskyite -Titoist views have just participated and continue to participate in the destruction of communism!
One becomes revolutionary by talking about making revolution using violent methods?
How many revolutions have you made since Stalin has died and the Soviet Union have been transformed into a hot bed of Trotskyism?
Nil. Zero.
One becomes revolutionary by establishing soviet form of proletarian dictatorships using revolutionary, violent means rather than winning elections and transforming the parliament into a people's democracy?
How many revolutions have you made and how many soviet forms of proletarian dictatorships have you established since Stalin has died and the Soviet Union have been transformed into a hot bed of Trotskyism?
Nil. Zero!
But have you not been told that if the USSR is defeated so is the world revolution?
Yes you have.
Have you not been told that Tito and anyone who behaves in a liberal fashion to Tito is a traitor!
Yes you have!
And yet here you are defending all those who have taken part in Tito's defence after Stalin's death, and in the attacks on Stalin and still carry on defending these traitors!
Compromisers are themselves traitors!
What is one clear and well known characteristic of Trotskyism?
It is enmity of Stalin. There was not and there is not a communist who does not know this. It is well known that behind the enmity of Stalin by the Trotskyites, lurks the enmity of USSR, the enmity of building socialism (after Second World War, the enmity of building communism) in the USSR, and thus the enmity of the victory of the world communist movement over the world imperialism!
And yet no sooner than Stalin dies the talk of the cult of the individual starts. And no sooner than 1956 February, the 20th Congress of the USSR an outright and most disgusting attack on Stalin is launched by the Trotskyites within the movement.
And all join in this attack. Can any of the critics show us one section of the movement, be it Khruschevites, be it Enverist, Maoist, Cheist, etc., that has objected to this and declared this attack as nothing more and nothing less than Trotskyism?
No!
Was there a communist than, and is there a communist now who does not know the simple fact that Trotkysim is the defeat of building socialism in the USSR, and thus the defeat of building of communism in the USSR, and thus it is the total and utter defeat of the world communist movement?
No!
Is this the most important issue as regards the British movement! Of course it is. And yet there is not one word uttered by any of the critics on this determining factor: it is here that British movement takes part in the defeat of the world movement and thus in its own destruction. All other issues raised by the critics relating to BR2S are secondary-as well as being wrong.
“Our speakers should never be on the defensive about the Soviet Union, People’s China or the New People’s Democracies.” (H. Pollitt. Twenty-Second Congress of the Communist Party -1952)
The moment this principle was broken, thus Trotskyism-Titoisms was allowed to win, is the moment CPGB was defeated together with the whole world movement.
Let us take this opportunity to remind the reader that 1949 to 52 and immediately after is not a period when only BR2S is written in agreement with Stalin and CPGB; but in almost all the countries of the world almost all the communist parties of the world write their own “road to socialism” programs. When critics oppose BR2S, they are opposing not just BR2S but all these programs and all the programs, strategy and tactics formulated by all these parties of the world communist movement in cooperation with Stalin and CPSU.
NOTE: HOW TO DEFEND LENIN-BOLSHEVISM!-HOW TO DEFEND STALIN-BOLSHEVISM!
FROM STALIN HIMSELF
STALIN WORKS V.13 JULY 1930 – JANUARY 1934
P86:
SOME QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE HISTORY OF BOLSHEVISM
Letter to the Editorial Board of the Magazine “Proletarskaya Revolutsia”
I cannot refrain from protesting against the publication of Slutsky’s article in your magazine as an article for discussion, for the question of Lenin’s Bolshevism, the question whether Lenin did or did not wage an irreconcilable struggle, based on principle, against Centrism as a certain form of opportunism, the question whether Lenin was or was not a real Bolshevik, cannot be made into a subject of discussion.
That means that you intend once again to draw people into a discussion on questions which are axioms of Bolshevism. It means that you are again thinking of converting the subject of Lenin’s Bolshevism from an axiom into a problem requiring “further analysis.” Why? On what grounds?
This cannot be denied even by the downright enemies of Bolshevism, It is an axiom. But you are dragging us back by trying to turn an axiom into a problem requiring “further analysis.” Why? On what grounds?
You want to open a discussion on this Trotskyist thesis of Slutsky’s. But what is there to discuss? Is it not obvious that Slutsky is simply slandering Lenin, slandering the Bolsheviks? Slander must be branded as such and not made the subject of discussion.
Fraudulent manoeuvres must be branded as such and not made a subject of discussion.
Now judge for yourselves whether Lenin and the Bolsheviks could have supported the Left Social-Democrats in the West without serious reservations, without severely criticising their mistakes, and whether it would not have been a betrayal of the interests of the working class, a betrayal of the interests of the revolution, a betrayal of communism, to act otherwise?
Is it not obvious that in reproaching Lenin and the Bolsheviks for something for which he should have applauded them if he were a Bolshevik, Slutsky fully exposes himself as a semi-Menshevik, as a camouflaged Trotskyist?
There can be nothing more base, for even the basest of Mensheviks are beginning to understand that the Russian revolution is not a private cause of the Russians; that, on the contrary, it is the cause of the working class of the whole world, the cause of the world proletarian revolution. There can be nothing more disgusting, for even the professional slanderers in the Second International are beginning to understand that the consistent and thoroughly revolutionary internationalism of the Bolsheviks is a model of proletarian internationalism for the workers of all countries.
But does it not follow from this that the Russian revolution was (and remains) the nodal point of the world revolution, that the fundamental questions of the Russian revolution were at the same time (and are now) the fundamental questions of the world revolution?
Is it not obvious that people who regard these questions as “factional” questions fully expose themselves as base and degenerate elements?
And you are ready to discuss this nonsense, this rascally chicanery. But what is there indeed to discuss? Is it not obvious anyway that by his talk about documents Slutsky is trying to cover up the wretchedness and falsity of his so-called conception?
Slutsky considers the Party documents now available to be inadequate. Why? On what grounds? Are not the universally known documents relating to the Second International, as well as those relating to the inner-Party struggle in Russian Social-Democracy, sufficient to demonstrate with full clarity the revolutionary relentlessness of Lenin and the Bolsheviks in their struggle against the opportunists and Centrists? Is Slutsky at all familiar with these documents? What more documents does he need?
Who, except hopeless bureaucrats, can rely on written documents alone? Who, except archive rats, does not understand that a party and its leaders must be tested primarily by their deeds and not merely by their declarations? History knows not a few Socialists who readily signed all sorts of revolutionary resolutions, just for the sake of satisfying importunate critics. But that does not mean that they carried out these resolutions. Furthermore, history knows not a few Socialists who, foaming at the mouth, called upon the workers’ parties of other countries to perform the most revolutionary actions imaginable. But that does not mean that they did not in their own party, or in their own country, shrink from fighting their own opportunists, their own bourgeoisie. Is not this why Lenin taught us to test revolutionary parties, trends and leaders, not by their declarations and resolutions, but by their deeds?
he should have taken as the basis of his article, not individual documents and two or three personal letters, but a test of the Bolsheviks by their deeds, their history, their actions?
Why did he not resort to the most reliable method of testing Lenin and the Bolsheviks: by their deeds, by their actions? Why did he prefer the less reliable method of rummaging among casually selected papers?
Because recourse to the real deeds and the real history of the Bolsheviks would have shown that Slutsky’s teachers, the Trotskyists, were the principal and basic group which fostered Centrism in Russia, and for this purpose created a special organisation, the August bloc, as a hotbed of Centrism.
As you see, the editorial board made a mistake in permitting a discussion with a falsifier of the history of our Party
I think that they were impelled to take that road by rotten liberalism, which has spread to some extent among a section of the Bolsheviks. Some Bolsheviks think that Trotskyism is a faction of communism—one which makes mistakes, it is true, which does many foolish things, is sometimes even anti-Soviet, but which, nevertheless, is a faction of communism. Hence a certain liberalism in the attitude towards the Trotskyists and Trotskyist-minded people. It scarcely needs proof that such a view of Trotskyism is deeply mistaken and harmful. As a matter of fact, Trotskyism has long since ceased to be a faction of communism. As a matter of fact, Trotskyism is the advanced detachment of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, which is fighting against communism, against the Soviet regime, against the building of socialism in the U.S.S.R
Trotskyism is the advanced detachment of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie.
That is why liberalism in the attitude towards Trotskyism, even though the latter is shattered and camouflaged, is blockheadedness bordering on crime, on treason to the working class
That is why the attempts of certain “writers” and “historians” to smuggle disguised Trotskyist rubbish into our literature must meet with a determined rebuff from Bolsheviks.
That is why we cannot permit a literary discussion with the Trotskyist smugglers.
Such are the “highways and byways” of the Trotskyist smugglers.
You yourselves should realise that it is not the business of the editorial board of Proletarskaya Revolutsia to facilitate the smuggling activities of such “historians” by providing them with a forum for discussion.
The task of the editorial board is, in my opinion, to raise the questions concerning the history of Bolshevism to the proper level, to put the study of the history of our Party on scientific, Bolshevik lines, and to concentrate attention against the Trotskyist and all other falsifiers of the history of our Party, systematically tearing off their masks
That is all the more necessary since even some of our historians—I am speaking of historians without quotation marks, of Bolshevik historians of our Party— are not free from mistakes which bring grist to the mill of the Slutskys and Voloseviches. In this respect, even Comrade Yaroslavsky is not, unfortunately, an exception; his books on the history of the C.P.S.U.(B.), despite all their merits, contain a number of errors in matters of principle and history.
With communist greetings,
J. Stalin
The magazine Proletarskaya Revolutsia, No. 6 (113), 1931